Fractal Wrongness

[EvilBiker]

Ah, now I understand the Truther condition:


Fractal Wrongness

*noun*     \'frak-təl\ \'rông'nùss\

"The state of being wrong at every conceivable scale of resolution. That is, from a distance, a fractally wrong person's worldview is incorrect; and furthermore, if you zoom in on any small part of that person's worldview, that part is just as wrong as the whole worldview.

"Debating with a person who is fractally wrong leads to infinite regress, as every refutation you make of that person's opinions will lead to a rejoinder, full of half-truths, leaps of logic, and outright lies, that requires just as much refutation to debunk as the first one. It is as impossible to convince a fractally wrong person of anything as it is to walk around the edge of the Mandelbrot set in finite time.

"If you ever get embroiled in a discussion with a fractally wrong person on the Internet--in mailing lists, newsgroups, or website forums--your best bet is to say your piece once and ignore any replies, thus saving yourself
time."

[Kahalachan]

Lovely phrase. Applicable to 911 Truthers, Creationists, and Scientologists.

[HyJinX]

What the hell does "Fractally" mean?

[beachnut]

What the hell does "Fractally" mean?
The/their facts are wrong down to the smallest detail, and to the biggest big picture you can put together at ever level of detail in-between.

[R.Mackey]

"Fractal" means "self-similar." It refers to a construct (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal) (often mathematical) that has no sense of scale, but looks more or less the same no matter how much you zoom in or step back.

One example of this in nature is turbulence in fluids. Fluid motion dissipates on every scale, being essentially random, all the way down to the invidual molecules at which point motion becomes heat. If you could "see" turbulence with a microscope, you would not be able to tell what magnification you were at without looking at the dial.

[Kahalachan]

Let's push this internet meme :p

http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/391/fractalwrongnessgi4.jpg

http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/4461/siepinskitrianglewrongrv0.jpg

[steve s]

Ah, now I understand the Truther condition:

Love it. Did you coin this term?

And since we're on the subject of fractals...

(done in Ultrafractal.)

http://www.photochimps.com/pp/data/604/fract2.jpg

Steve S

[Redtail]

Let's push this internet meme :p

http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/391/fractalwrongnessgi4.jpg

http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/4461/siepinskitrianglewrongrv0.jpg

That sir, is beautiful.

[EvilBiker]

Love it. Did you coin this term?

Unfortunately, no - I'm trying to track down the origin.

ETA: seems like the origin is related to cs.washington.edu, author Keunwoo Lee:

http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/klee/misc/lexicon.html?#fractal_wrongness

[HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP]

That sir, is beautiful.
and priceless!

[orphia nay]

Great stuff, EB and Kahalachan. :)

[leftysergeant]

Yeah, that sure is a lot like a twoofer. It even gave me a migraine to look at the examples. Thanks a bunch, guys.

[1337m4n]

Let's push this internet meme :p

http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/391/fractalwrongnessgi4.jpg

http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/4461/siepinskitrianglewrongrv0.jpg

I never remember having to find the Triforce of Wrong in any of my Zelda games...

[Confuseling]

What the hell does "Fractally" mean?

Another example (similar to Kahalachan's second image)

Draw a large equilateral triangle. Draw three more equilateral triangles, each protruding from the centre third of one of the faces of the first triangle.

Draw six more equilateral triangles, sticking out of the centre thirds of the empty faces of the three triangles you just drew.

Keep going...

You have drawn a shape bounded in 2 dimensions; it has a finite area, tending towards a defined number. If you kept going, however, it would have an infinitely long outline. No matter how far you zoom in, there is more detail. It is therefore a fractal.

[The Doc]

It's a perfect definition. I like it :)

[Confuseling]

:blush: Aww, thanks.

My sister, who did a large part of her degree on fractal geometry, explained it to me once. It stuck because the idea of a shape with an infinite non self-intersecting outline and a bounded finite area seems so profoundly counter-intuitive.

Anyway, a quick wiki reveals this shape to be called a Koch snowflake, one of the first fractals described.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch_snowflake

ETA: Eek! Closer inspection reveals my explanation further up to not describe a Koch snowflake, but a kind of stunted form of one. The thing I described is still a fractal, but I think has a bounded length, while the Koch snowflake's length is infinite (maybe someone better at maths can explain), but follow the link to clear up the difference.

[fuelair]

http://techskeptic.blogspot.com/2008/02/fractal-wrongness.html

[Kahalachan]

Heh thanks everyone.

I don't think this will catch on as a meme cause what I noticed, and what we pretty much know based on people's acceptance of woo, is people like simple things. "Owned" or "Fail" got popular. Fractal wrongness is too intellectual. But as a JREF meme I like it. :)

To explain Fractals for the people that asked, I really like this TED Talks youtube and he does a really good job explaining it.

7n36qV4Lk94

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I guess one could also call it infinite wrongness recursion. Which has a nice, semi-alliteration, sort of sound to it.

[jhunter1163]

It's early here. I thought the thread title said "Erectile Wrongness."