DOCSLIB.ORG

Fractal Dimensions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fractal Dimensions Fractal dimensions Bai-Lian Li Volume 2, pp 821–825 in Encyclopedia of Environmetrics (ISBN 0471 899976) Edited by Abdel H. El-Shaarawi and Walter W. Piegorsch John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, 2002 by a constant parameter D known as the fractal (or Fractal dimensions fractional) dimension. There are many fractal dimensions introduced in The term ‘fractal’ (from the Latin fractus, meaning mathematical and physical literature (e.g. [13], [16], ‘broken’), introduced by Benoit Mandelbrot about [19] and [22]). Fractal dimensions can be positive, 25 years ago, is used to characterize spatial and/or negative, complex, fuzzy, multifractal, etc. The two temporal phenomena that are continuous but not most commonly used are the Hausdorf dimension and differentiable. Geometrically, a fractal is a rough capacity. Hausdorf in 1919 introduced the definition or fragmented geometric shape that can be subdi- of the Hausdorf dimension based on a method of cov- vided into parts, each of which is (at least approx- ering. Let D>0andε>0 be real numbers. Cover imately) a reduced-size copy of the whole. Fractal asetE by countable spheres whose diameters are all geometry is the study of geometric shapes that seem smaller than ε. Denoting the radii of the spheres by chaotic or irregular when compared with those of r1,r2,...,rk,theD-dimensional Hausdorf measure standard geometry (line, square, sphere, etc.) but is defined by the following equation: exhibit extreme orderliness because they possess a D property of invariance under suitable contractions or MD E Á lim inf rk 1 ε!0 rk <ε dilations [13]. Fractal objects are highly nontrivial k representations of the two fundamental symmetries of For any given set E, this quantity is proved to vary nature, dilation (r ! ar) and translation (r ! r C b). from infinity to zero at a special value of D, denoted There are many mathematical structures that are frac- by D , which is the Hausdorf dimension. tals (e.g. Sierpinski gasket, Koch snowflake, Peano H Since a rigorous calculation of the Hausdorf curve, Mandelbrot set, and Lorenz attractor) and dimension is generally very difficult another fractal many examples of fractal-like objects in nature, such dimension, the capacity dimension, is more practi- as clouds, mountains, turbulence, coastlines, shells, cally useful. Kolmogorov introduced this dimension cauliflowers, and leaves, that do not correspond to in 1959 and like the Hausdorf dimension it is based simple, Euclidean geometric shapes. on the idea of covering. Let the considered shape be a Fractal properties include self-similarity or affin- bounded set in d-dimensional Euclidean space. Cover ity, scale symmetry, scale independence or invari- the set by d-dimensional spheres of identical radius ance, heterogeneity, complexity, and infinite length 1/ε. The capacity dimension is given by or detail. ‘Self-similar’ here has two meanings. One can understand ‘similar’ as a loose everyday syn- log N ε DC Á lim 2 onym of ‘analogous’. But there is also the strict ε!0 log 1/ε textbook sense of ‘contracting similarity’. It expresses that each part is a linear geometric reduction of the where N ε denotes the minimal number of spheres. whole, with the same reduction ratios in all directions. For example, consider a Koch snowflake curve Random fractals are self-similar only in a statistical formed by repeatedly replacing with ,where sense; to describe them it is more appropriate to use each of the four new lines is one-third the length the term ‘scale invariance’ than self-similarity. There of the old line. Blowing up the snowflake curve by are many different self-similar processes. However, a factor of three results in a snowflake curve four most studies have considered those that have a sta- times as large (one of the old snowflake curves can be tionary increment. More recent developments have placed on each of the four segments ,4D 3log3 4). extended, in particular, to include self-affine, in that So, the curve length has a dimension of log3 4 D the reductions are still linear but the reduction ratios log 4/ log 3 D 1.2618 . Since the dimension 1.261 is in different directions are different. Fractal structures larger than the dimension 1 of the lines making up do not have a single length scale, while fractal pro- the curve, the Koch curve is more complicated than a cesses (e.g. time series) cannot be characterized by line, but seems less complicated than the plane-filling a single time scale. Fractal theory offers methods for Peano curve. Another example is the Sierpinski gas- describing the inherent irregularity of natural objects. ket. This is perhaps the most studied two-dimensional In fractal analysis, the Euclidean concept of ‘length’ fractal structure because it can be regarded as a pro- is viewed as a process. This process is characterized totype of fractal lattices with an infinite hierarchy of 2 Fractal dimensions loops (see Figure 1). When constructing this fractal, εD,whereN ε is a number measure corre- three of the four equilateral triangles generated within sponding to squares with the side length scale the triangles obtained in the previous step are kept. unit ε and D is the fractal dimension); Since the linear size of the triangles is halved in every 2. using the fractal measure relations (i.e. peri- iteration, the fractal dimension of the resulting object meter/area/volume methods: L / S1/2 / V1/3 / is log 3/ log 2 D 1.5849. X1/D); Capacity dimension is a special case of the Haus- 3. using the correlation functions (i.e. autocorrela- dorf dimension with the restriction that the radii of tions, semivariograms, etc.); spheres are the same. This dimension often coin- 4. using the distribution functions (i.e. hyperbolic cides with the Hausdorf dimension but sometimes distribution, stable Levy distribution, etc.); and differs. Mathematically, we can prove the following 5. using the power spectrum (i.e. Fourier transfor- inequality for any shape: mation, filters, wavelets, etc.). For more informa- tion about estimating fractal dimensions, see [4], DC ½ DH 3 [5], [13], [19], [21] and [22]. Therefore, a fractal can be defined as a set for which Since the above-defined fractal dimensions are the Hausdorf dimension strictly exceeds the topo- scale-independent, they are only valid when N ε logical dimension [13]. Topological dimension is the follows an exact power law; therefore, they may ‘normal’ idea of dimension; a point has topological not be as useful for describing more complicated dimension 0, a line has topological dimension 1, a phenomena in nature with only one number [10, surface has topological dimension 2, etc. 19]. We need to extend the fractal dimension. Most These definitions of dimension are rigorous. How- important, we should be able to generalize the fractal ever, a basic difficulty arises when applying them dimension so as to depend on the scale of observation. to real problems. In both definitions dimensions are According to (2), it seems to be most natural to define defined in the limit ε ! 0, but length 0 is not a physi- a scale-dependent fractal dimension by the slope of cal concept as a consequence of the uncertainty prin- the graph of N ε , that is, the derivative of log N ε ciple. In addition to this ‘inner-length scale’ below with respect to log ε: which scale invariance breaks down, there is in each dlogN ε natural problem also an ‘outer-length scale’ above D ε D 4 which scale invariance does not hold. Thus, experi- dlogε mentally, there must be limitations on the observed Solving (4) inversely, we can have the following scaling range on both sides (e.g. [12] and [19]). expression: Many physically feasible methods of calculating fractal dimensions have been developed recently. We E D r can classify them into five categories: N E D N ε exp dr 5 ε r 1. changing coarse graining level (also called box- Equation (5) shows how the scale-dependent fractal counting methods) (i.e. the relationship N ε / dimension links observations of different scales. Another important extension is to introduce new quantities to describe spatial fluctuations of fractal dimensions in order to cope with objects the local fractal dimensions of which change from part to part. A generalized information dimension and multifractal or f–˛ spectra are introduced for the purpose [13, 19, 20, 22]. We will not discuss them further here. The concept and methodology of fractals have been used to study many multiscale ecological phe- nomena and provide us with a new insight on analyz- Figure 1 The first four steps in the construction of the ing and quantifying ecological patterns and dynam- Sierpinski gasket that has loops on all length scales ics [6–8, 10, 11, 15, 17, 18]. The fractal approach Fractal dimensions 3 is becoming mainstream in ecology because under- heterogeneity, and m and e are constant coefficients. standing the origins of fractal scaling can provide And ˇ0 >ˇis for limited growth of suitable habitat. valuable information about the origins of systems’ In equilibrium situations, both the species number complexity, and also the driving mechanisms inherent and suitable habitat area (as well as the total sampled to these systems with their intricate dynamical struc- area A) become ture [1, 7]. As a property of fractals, self-similarity – ln d/c repeating in time and/or space – can also substan- ln S D and 0 tially simplify the mathematical modeling of the 6 phenomena themselves [2]. In ecology, there are sev- ln e/m ln aO D / ln A eral widely accepted fractal scaling relations, espe- ˇ ˇ0 cially in size–abundance spectra or distributions, species–area curves, allometric scaling [23], life his- Combining equations (6), and ln S / z ln A,wehave tory invariants [3], self-thinning processes [9], and so ln d/c on.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Using Fractal Dimension for Target Detection in Clutter
    KIM T. CONSTANTIKES USING FRACTAL DIMENSION FOR TARGET DETECTION IN CLUTTER The detection of targets in natural backgrounds requires that we be able to compute some characteristic of target that is distinct from background clutter. We assume that natural objects are fractals and that the irregularity or roughness of the natural objects can be characterized with fractal dimension estimates. Since man-made objects such as aircraft or ships are comparatively regular and smooth in shape, fractal dimension estimates may be used to distinguish natural from man-made objects. INTRODUCTION Image processing associated with weapons systems is fractal. Falconer1 defines fractals as objects with some or often concerned with methods to distinguish natural ob­ all of the following properties: fine structure (i.e., detail jects from man-made objects. Infrared seekers in clut­ on arbitrarily small scales) too irregular to be described tered environments need to distinguish the clutter of with Euclidean geometry; self-similar structure, with clouds or solar sea glint from the signature of the intend­ fractal dimension greater than its topological dimension; ed target of the weapon. The discrimination of target and recursively defined. This definition extends fractal from clutter falls into a category of methods generally into a more physical and intuitive domain than the orig­ called segmentation, which derives localized parameters inal Mandelbrot definition whereby a fractal was a set (e.g.,texture) from the observed image intensity in order whose "Hausdorff-Besicovitch dimension strictly exceeds to discriminate objects from background. Essentially, one its topological dimension.,,2 The fine, irregular, and self­ wants these parameters to be insensitive, or invariant, to similar structure of fractals can be experienced firsthand the kinds of variation that the objects and background by looking at the Mandelbrot set at several locations and might naturally undergo because of changes in how they magnifications.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fractal Dimension of Islamic and Persian Four-Folding Gardens
    Edinburgh Research Explorer The fractal dimension of Islamic and Persian four-folding gardens Citation for published version: Patuano, A & Lima, MF 2021, 'The fractal dimension of Islamic and Persian four-folding gardens', Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, vol. 8, 86. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00766-1 Digital Object Identifier (DOI): 10.1057/s41599-021-00766-1 Link: Link to publication record in Edinburgh Research Explorer Document Version: Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Published In: Humanities and Social Sciences Communications General rights Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Edinburgh Research Explorer is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy The University of Edinburgh has made every reasonable effort to ensure that Edinburgh Research Explorer content complies with UK legislation. If you believe that the public display of this file breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 06. Oct. 2021 ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00766-1 OPEN The fractal dimension of Islamic and Persian four- folding gardens ✉ Agnès Patuano 1 & M. Francisca Lima 2 Since Benoit Mandelbrot (1924–2010) coined the term “fractal” in 1975, mathematical the- ories of fractal geometry have deeply influenced the fields of landscape perception, archi- tecture, and technology. Indeed, their ability to describe complex forms nested within each fi 1234567890():,; other, and repeated towards in nity, has allowed the modeling of chaotic phenomena such as weather patterns or plant growth.
    [Show full text]
  • The Implications of Fractal Fluency for Biophilic Architecture
    JBU Manuscript TEMPLATE The Implications of Fractal Fluency for Biophilic Architecture a b b a c b R.P. Taylor, A.W. Juliani, A. J. Bies, C. Boydston, B. Spehar and M.E. Sereno aDepartment of Physics, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, USA bDepartment of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, USA cSchool of Psychology, UNSW Australia, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia Abstract Fractals are prevalent throughout natural scenery. Examples include trees, clouds and coastlines. Their repetition of patterns at different size scales generates a rich visual complexity. Fractals with mid-range complexity are particularly prevalent. Consequently, the ‘fractal fluency’ model of the human visual system states that it has adapted to these mid-range fractals through exposure and can process their visual characteristics with relative ease. We first review examples of fractal art and architecture. Then we review fractal fluency and its optimization of observers’ capabilities, focusing on our recent experiments which have important practical consequences for architectural design. We describe how people can navigate easily through environments featuring mid-range fractals. Viewing these patterns also generates an aesthetic experience accompanied by a reduction in the observer’s physiological stress-levels. These two favorable responses to fractals can be exploited by incorporating these natural patterns into buildings, representing a highly practical example of biophilic design Keywords: Fractals, biophilia, architecture, stress-reduction,
    [Show full text]
  • Fractal Curves and Complexity
    Perception & Psychophysics 1987, 42 (4), 365-370 Fractal curves and complexity JAMES E. CUTI'ING and JEFFREY J. GARVIN Cornell University, Ithaca, New York Fractal curves were generated on square initiators and rated in terms of complexity by eight viewers. The stimuli differed in fractional dimension, recursion, and number of segments in their generators. Across six stimulus sets, recursion accounted for most of the variance in complexity judgments, but among stimuli with the most recursive depth, fractal dimension was a respect­ able predictor. Six variables from previous psychophysical literature known to effect complexity judgments were compared with these fractal variables: symmetry, moments of spatial distribu­ tion, angular variance, number of sides, P2/A, and Leeuwenberg codes. The latter three provided reliable predictive value and were highly correlated with recursive depth, fractal dimension, and number of segments in the generator, respectively. Thus, the measures from the previous litera­ ture and those of fractal parameters provide equal predictive value in judgments of these stimuli. Fractals are mathematicalobjectsthat have recently cap­ determine the fractional dimension by dividing the loga­ tured the imaginations of artists, computer graphics en­ rithm of the number of unit lengths in the generator by gineers, and psychologists. Synthesized and popularized the logarithm of the number of unit lengths across the ini­ by Mandelbrot (1977, 1983), with ever-widening appeal tiator. Since there are five segments in this generator and (e.g., Peitgen & Richter, 1986), fractals have many curi­ three unit lengths across the initiator, the fractionaldimen­ ous and fascinating properties. Consider four. sion is log(5)/log(3), or about 1.47.
    [Show full text]
  • Harmonic and Fractal Image Analysis (2001), Pp. 3 - 5 3
    O. Zmeskal et al. / HarFA - Harmonic and Fractal Image Analysis (2001), pp. 3 - 5 3 Fractal Analysis of Image Structures Oldřich Zmeškal, Michal Veselý, Martin Nežádal, Miroslav Buchníček Institute of Physical and Applied Chemistry, Brno University of Technology Purkynova 118, 612 00 Brno, Czech Republic [email protected] Introduction of terms Fractals − Fractals are of rough or fragmented geometric shape that can be subdivided in parts, each of which is (at least approximately) a reduced copy of the whole. − They are crinkly objects that defy conventional measures, such as length and are most often characterised by their fractal dimension − They are mathematical sets with a high degree of geometrical complexity that can model many natural phenomena. Almost all natural objects can be observed as fractals (coastlines, trees, mountains, and clouds). − Their fractal dimension strictly exceeds topological dimension Fractal dimension − The number, very often non-integer, often the only one measure of fractals − It measures the degree of fractal boundary fragmentation or irregularity over multiple scales − It determines how fractal differs from Euclidean objects (point, line, plane, circle etc.) Monofractals / Multifractals − Just a small group of fractals have one certain fractal dimension, which is scale invariant. These fractals are monofractals − The most of natural fractals have different fractal dimensions depending on the scale. They are composed of many fractals with the different fractal dimension. They are called „multifractals“ − To characterise set of multifractals (e.g. set of the different coastlines) we do not have to establish all their fractal dimensions, it is enough to evaluate their fractal dimension at the same scale Self-similarity/ Semi-self similarity − Fractal is strictly self-similar if it can be expressed as a union of sets, each of which is an exactly reduced copy (is geometrically similar to) of the full set (Sierpinski triangle, Koch flake).
    [Show full text]
  • Analyse D'un Modèle De Représentations En N Dimensions De
    Analyse d’un modèle de représentations en n dimensions de l’ensemble de Mandelbrot, exploration de formes fractales particulières en architecture. Jean-Baptiste Hardy 1 Département d’architecture de l’INSA Strasbourg ont contribués à la réalisation de ce mémoire Pierre Pellegrino Directeur de mémoire Emmanuelle P. Jeanneret Docteur en architecture Francis Le Guen Fractaliste, journaliste, explorateur Serge Salat Directeur du laboratoire des morphologies urbaines Novembre 2013 2 Sommaire Avant-propos .................................................................................................. 4 Introduction .................................................................................................... 5 1 Introduction aux fractales : .................................................... 6 1-1 Présentation des fractales �������������������������������������������������������������������� 6 1-1-1 Les fractales en architecture ������������������������������������������������������������� 7 1-1-2 Les fractales déterministes ................................................................ 8 1-2 Benoit Mandelbrot .................................................................................. 8 1-2-1 L’ensemble de Mandelbrot ................................................................ 8 1-2-2 Mandelbrot en architecture .............................................................. 9 Illustrations ................................................................................................... 10 2 Un modèle en n dimensions :
    [Show full text]
  • Fractal Dimension of Self-Affine Sets: Some Examples
    FRACTAL DIMENSION OF SELF-AFFINE SETS: SOME EXAMPLES G. A. EDGAR One of the most common mathematical ways to construct a fractal is as a \self-similar" set. A similarity in Rd is a function f : Rd ! Rd satisfying kf(x) − f(y)k = r kx − yk for some constant r. We call r the ratio of the map f. If f1; f2; ··· ; fn is a finite list of similarities, then the invariant set or attractor of the iterated function system is the compact nonempty set K satisfying K = f1[K] [ f2[K] [···[ fn[K]: The set K obtained in this way is said to be self-similar. If fi has ratio ri < 1, then there is a unique attractor K. The similarity dimension of the attractor K is the solution s of the equation n X s (1) ri = 1: i=1 This theory is due to Hausdorff [13], Moran [16], and Hutchinson [14]. The similarity dimension defined by (1) is the Hausdorff dimension of K, provided there is not \too much" overlap, as specified by Moran's open set condition. See [14], [6], [10]. REPRINT From: Measure Theory, Oberwolfach 1990, in Supplemento ai Rendiconti del Circolo Matematico di Palermo, Serie II, numero 28, anno 1992, pp. 341{358. This research was supported in part by National Science Foundation grant DMS 87-01120. Typeset by AMS-TEX. G. A. EDGAR I will be interested here in a generalization of self-similar sets, called self-affine sets. In particular, I will be interested in the computation of the Hausdorff dimension of such sets.
    [Show full text]
  • Fractal Geometry and Applications in Forest Science
    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Egolfs V. Bakuzis, Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota, College of Natural Resources, collected most of the information upon which this review is based. We express our sincere appreciation for his investment of time and energy in collecting these articles and books, in organizing the diverse material collected, and in sacrificing his personal research time to have weekly meetings with one of us (N.L.) to discuss the relevance and importance of each refer- enced paper and many not included here. Besides his interdisciplinary ap- proach to the scientific literature, his extensive knowledge of forest ecosystems and his early interest in nonlinear dynamics have helped us greatly. We express appreciation to Kevin Nimerfro for generating Diagrams 1, 3, 4, 5, and the cover using the programming package Mathematica. Craig Loehle and Boris Zeide provided review comments that significantly improved the paper. Funded by cooperative agreement #23-91-21, USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, Minnesota. Yg._. t NAVE A THREE--PART QUE_.gTION,, F_-ACHPARToF:WHICH HA# "THREEPAP,T_.<.,EACFi PART" Of:: F_.AC.HPART oF wHIct4 HA.5 __ "1t4REE MORE PARTS... t_! c_4a EL o. EP-.ACTAL G EOPAgTI_YCoh_FERENCE I G;:_.4-A.-Ti_E AT THB Reprinted courtesy of Omni magazine, June 1994. VoL 16, No. 9. CONTENTS i_ Introduction ....................................................................................................... I 2° Description of Fractals ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • An Investigation of Fractals and Fractal Dimension
    An Investigation of Fractals and Fractal Dimension Student: Ian Friesen Advisor: Dr. Andrew J. Dean April 10, 2018 Contents 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Fractals in Nature . 2 1.2 Mathematically Constructed Fractals . 2 1.3 Motivation and Method . 3 2 Basic Topology 5 2.1 Metric Spaces . 5 2.2 String Spaces . 7 2.3 Hausdorff Metric . 8 3 Topological Dimension 9 3.1 Refinement . 9 3.2 Zero-dimensional Spaces . 9 3.3 Covering Dimension . 10 4 Measure Theory 12 4.1 Outer/Inner Lebesgue Measure . 12 4.2 Carath´eodory Measurability . 13 4.3 Two dimensional Lebesgue Measure . 14 5 Self-similarity 14 5.1 Ratios . 14 5.2 Examples and Calculations . 15 5.3 Chaos Game . 17 6 Fractal Dimension 18 6.1 Hausdorff Measure . 18 6.2 Packing Measure . 21 6.3 Fractal Definition . 24 7 Fractals and the Complex Plane 25 7.1 Julia Sets . 25 7.2 Mandelbrot Set . 26 8 Conclusion 27 1 1 Introduction 1.1 Fractals in Nature There are many fractals in nature. Most of these have some level of self-similarity, and are called self-similar objects. Basic examples of these include the surface of cauliflower, the pat- tern of a fern, or the edge of a snowflake. Benoit Mandelbrot (considered to be the father of frac- tals) thought to measure the coastline of Britain and concluded that using smaller units of mea- surement led to larger perimeter measurements. Mathematically, as the unit of measurement de- creases in length and becomes more precise, the perimeter increases in length.
    [Show full text]
  • Fractals Lindenmayer Systems
    FRACTALS LINDENMAYER SYSTEMS November 22, 2013 Rolf Pfeifer Rudolf M. Füchslin RECAP HIDDEN MARKOV MODELS What Letter Is Written Here? What Letter Is Written Here? What Letter Is Written Here? The Idea Behind Hidden Markov Models First letter: Maybe „a“, maybe „q“ Second letter: Maybe „r“ or „v“ or „u“ Take the most probable combination as a guess! Hidden Markov Models Sometimes, you don‘t see the states, but only a mapping of the states. A main task is then to derive, from the visible mapped sequence of states, the actual underlying sequence of „hidden“ states. HMM: A Fundamental Question What you see are the observables. But what are the actual states behind the observables? What is the most probable sequence of states leading to a given sequence of observations? The Viterbi-Algorithm We are looking for indices M1,M2,...MT, such that P(qM1,...qMT) = Pmax,T is maximal. 1. Initialization ()ib 1 i i k1 1(i ) 0 2. Recursion (1 t T-1) t1(j ) max( t ( i ) a i j ) b j k i t1 t1(j ) i : t ( i ) a i j max. 3. Termination Pimax,TT max( ( )) qmax,T q i: T ( i ) max. 4. Backtracking MMt t11() t Efficiency of the Viterbi Algorithm • The brute force approach takes O(TNT) steps. This is even for N = 2 and T = 100 difficult to do. • The Viterbi – algorithm in contrast takes only O(TN2) which is easy to do with todays computational means. Applications of HMM • Analysis of handwriting. • Speech analysis. • Construction of models for prediction.
    [Show full text]
  • Fractal Analysis of the Vascular Tree in the Human Retina
    3 Jun 2004 22:39 AR AR220-BE06-17.tex AR220-BE06-17.sgm LaTeX2e(2002/01/18) P1: IKH 10.1146/annurev.bioeng.6.040803.140100 Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2004. 6:427–52 doi: 10.1146/annurev.bioeng.6.040803.140100 Copyright c 2004 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved First published online as a Review in Advance on April 13, 2004 FRACTAL ANALYSIS OF THE VASCULAR TREE IN THE HUMAN RETINA BarryR.Masters Formerly, Gast Professor, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland; email: [email protected] Key Words fractals, fractal structures, eye, bronchial tree, retinal circulation, retinal blood vessel patterns, Murray Principle, optimal vascular tree, human lung, human bronchial tree I Abstract The retinal circulation of the normal human retinal vasculature is statis- tically self-similar and fractal. Studies from several groups present strong evidence that the fractal dimension of the blood vessels in the normal human retina is approximately 1.7. This is the same fractal dimension that is found for a diffusion-limited growth process, and it may have implications for the embryological development of the retinal vascular system. The methods of determining the fractal dimension for branching trees are reviewed together with proposed models for the optimal formation (Murray Princi- ple) of the branching vascular tree in the human retina and the branching pattern of the human bronchial tree. The limitations of fractal analysis of branching biological struc- tures are evaluated. Understanding the design principles of branching vascular systems and the human bronchial tree may find applications in tissue and organ engineering, i.e., bioartificial organs for both liver and kidney.
    [Show full text]
  • Math Morphing Proximate and Evolutionary Mechanisms
    Curriculum Units by Fellows of the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute 2009 Volume V: Evolutionary Medicine Math Morphing Proximate and Evolutionary Mechanisms Curriculum Unit 09.05.09 by Kenneth William Spinka Introduction Background Essential Questions Lesson Plans Website Student Resources Glossary Of Terms Bibliography Appendix Introduction An important theoretical development was Nikolaas Tinbergen's distinction made originally in ethology between evolutionary and proximate mechanisms; Randolph M. Nesse and George C. Williams summarize its relevance to medicine: All biological traits need two kinds of explanation: proximate and evolutionary. The proximate explanation for a disease describes what is wrong in the bodily mechanism of individuals affected Curriculum Unit 09.05.09 1 of 27 by it. An evolutionary explanation is completely different. Instead of explaining why people are different, it explains why we are all the same in ways that leave us vulnerable to disease. Why do we all have wisdom teeth, an appendix, and cells that if triggered can rampantly multiply out of control? [1] A fractal is generally "a rough or fragmented geometric shape that can be split into parts, each of which is (at least approximately) a reduced-size copy of the whole," a property called self-similarity. The term was coined by Beno?t Mandelbrot in 1975 and was derived from the Latin fractus meaning "broken" or "fractured." A mathematical fractal is based on an equation that undergoes iteration, a form of feedback based on recursion. http://www.kwsi.com/ynhti2009/image01.html A fractal often has the following features: 1. It has a fine structure at arbitrarily small scales.
    [Show full text]