Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mandelbrot zoom

Mandelbrot zoom animation

 * Reason:Simply an epic animation and a fantastic representation of the multiple layers of complexity and chaos that make up the Mandelbrot set. The user Slaunger suggested that a scaled up version of an earlier animation, made by user Zom-B would probably be worthy of being a featured image. The full Java library (-colouring) is available here.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Mandelbrot set
 * Creator:Simpsons contributor


 * Support as nominator --Simpsons contributor (talk) 19:47, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. Something weird seems to happen at the end of the animation. The frame sort of jerks back and forth for a second. Any idea what's happening there? Kaldari (talk) 20:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I left that part in intentionally. That's were it starts to break down due to lack of precision (caused by the limited amount of information that can be stored using the DoubleDouble object). I can remove this part if you think it looks unsightly. --Simpsons contributor (talk) 20:27, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


 * support per nominator. Just a little criticism. It could have ended in the same image if the point were one of those where the set is zoom-self-similar but maybe I am wrong and the reason why it doesn't is that too much precision would have been required or too many images. I don't know.  franklin   20:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sure that would have been possible, but I think that zoom is best because it follows, and leads on from, the set of featured images already on the page. --Simpsons contributor (talk) 20:27, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment: I have NO idea what's going on here, so I'm not going to vote. However, I would like to say it is very pretty. :) J Milburn (talk) 21:11, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Check the Mandelbrot set article. --Simpsons contributor (talk) 21:41, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Support. The image has remained in the article for almost a month. On the basis that it's a reasonable size WP:Math article, that for me constitutes a vote of support in favour of its accuracy as a representation - something I am in no position to do directly. Mostlyharmless (talk) 23:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Durova  403 05:40, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Nice :) -- Herby talk thyme 12:55, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support.--Garrondo (talk) 17:32, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support - oooh, trippy... -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:24, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Excellent illustration of the subject.  Jujutacular  T · C 23:01, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. per nom.  Awesome image.  -  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 23:47, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support I only seldom voice my opinion here, but passing by by coincidence tonight and seeing again this very well made animation, which very nicely illustrates the subject, I simply had to vote. I think this animation is a powerful presentation of the beauty of mathematics. Personally I think it is a good idea to keep the end as it is showing how the numerical precision breaks down. I get nostalgic seeing this, recalling how I in a period of my life in 1990, where I was incredibly bored programmed the recursion algorithm on my HP-42S pocket calculator (only the initial picture) in B&W divided into two stacked 131x16 pixel images printed out on the HP-82240B Infrared printer. The calculation took 24 hours and consumed one set of batteries. The algorithm I used was hopeless. The one used here is much more sophisticated and optimized. ;-) --Slaunger (talk) 00:05, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Excellent Picture Enti342 (talk) 05:35, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I think it would be a good idea to move this to Commons such that other Wikimedia projects could use this nice animation as well. If you do, I'll nominate it at COM:FPC as well. --Slaunger (talk) 11:26, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * How do you move it to Wikimedia Commons? --Simpsons contributor (talk) 18:44, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I have no idea as Commons is my home wiki and the place I always upload media, but surely another reviewer here provide a link to some guide? --Slaunger (talk) 21:09, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Anybody can re-upload this at commons with the same name and license and then put this one here up for deletion --Muhammad (talk) 11:09, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I think this is getting a bit complicated now. I think it'll be OK if we just leave it on Wikipedia. I certainly don't want it deleted now. --Simpsons contributor (talk) 11:54, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Seems like uploaded it to Commons, and that the en version may be speedy deleted. But don't worry!. It does not affect your nomnation (it shouldn't, at least). When the en version is delected, the commons version with the same name simply takes presedence. --Slaunger (talk) 18:55, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Support I'm becoming drowsy. Need to stay awake to watch cool... (head hits desk) Buggie111 (talk) 14:07, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support - I also have absolutely no idea what is going on here (and reading the article didn't help at all, it just made my head hurt) but this looks excellent -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:39, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

— Mae din \talk 07:38, 5 February 2010 (UTC)