0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

No, it's not Phractality

But the succession of structural scales tends to be about five orders of magnitude apart. Atoms 5 orders bigger than nuclei, galaxies 5 orders bigger than solar systems, etc. The Hubble limit is only about two or three orders of magnitude larger than the median bubble size of the cosmic foam, so if there is a larger structure, it's probably way beyond what can be seen.

Quote from: Phractality on 29/09/2012 06:57:00But the succession of structural scales tends to be about five orders of magnitude apart. Atoms 5 orders bigger than nuclei, galaxies 5 orders bigger than solar systems, etc. The Hubble limit is only about two or three orders of magnitude larger than the median bubble size of the cosmic foam, so if there is a larger structure, it's probably way beyond what can be seen. I remember a post on this forum about the golden ratio and how it arises out of a requirement of efficient packing in space. As fractals grow in space, wouldn't they also be subject to this requirement? I wonder then if the order of five that you mention is the same five in the golden ratio: (1+sqrt(5))/2

The study you refer to seem to assume that if we find a even distribution of matter it can't be a fractal. Where is the support for that definition of a fractal. To me a fractal pack it self up into a (self) likeness of itself, at all scales measurable? But it does not state that there need to be a randomness to it? If we assume that a fractal is random we also lose the properties we expect making fractal behavior interesting for explaining how the very small can 'compress' information of the very big. And you have a point in saying that we can't guarantee what the non visible part of the universe might look as. But the homogeneity and isotropy of space is assumed to exist at all levels, just as we assume that all physics experiments will behave the same even outside our observational field. And as that proposition is more likely built on what so far have learned about the universe we can see their point there, can't we? So the question, to me, becomes if there is a demand for a fractal not to, ever, be evenly distributed at some scale, although uneven in some other for example? If that is a mathematical fact then they are possibly correct, but if you can have 'layers on layers' mathematically in where some present a homogeneity whilst other permutations differ from that then? They should need to be more careful in their statement.