Rabbit Population
Submitted 1 month ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://mander.xyz/pictrs/image/cd9c8025-005c-4cf0-bd23-01e67886abee.jpeg
Comments
Rubisco@slrpnk.net 1 month ago
TragicNotCute@lemmy.world 1 month ago
It’s going well
thesporkeffect@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Is this indicating the triple point of a rabbit?
turnipjs@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
more like the triple point of two rabbits
Binette@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
And the best part in this is that it all aligns with the Mandelbrot set, for some reason
fossilesque@mander.xyz 1 month ago
Life is just fractals tbh
shneancy@lemmy.world 1 month ago
funny how you can come to the same conclusions if you’re - a) doing science b) doing Buddhism c) doing drugs
bsolos@lemm.ee 1 month ago
It doesn’t, the one that aligns is the bifurcation diagram of the Mandelbrot function (the one used to make the set, f(z)=z^2+c), which is different from the rabbit one (the logistic map, f(x)=rx(1-x)).
Collatz_problem@hexbear.net 1 month ago
They easily map to each other via linear transformation.
Binette@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
Oh I never knew that!
match@pawb.social 1 month ago
that’s meaningless because every bifurcation map looks the same
SwordInStone@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Thorry84@feddit.nl 1 month ago
As so often with anything related to maths, pi pops out at the most unexpected places.
criitz@reddthat.com 1 month ago
If you look hard enough, everything has a circle in it somewhere
Chuymatt@beehaw.org 1 month ago
Nah. 4.669
Hupf@feddit.org 1 month ago
Yes.
shasta@lemm.ee 1 month ago
Yeah, “what” is right. Wtf is this?
njaard@lemmy.world 1 month ago
It’s making reference to logistic curves and how rabbit populations, which can grow exponentially, will oscillate between a low and high population size.
In short, it explains why some years there are a shit ton of rabbits, and other years, very few.
Eheran@lemmy.world 1 month ago
But there is no oscillation visible here, just aliasing of the lines that make it appear as if there are suddenly none. Note the “none” instead of few. Also it would still not make sense since 1 can not split into 2? And why should the generational succession get faster and faster? 9 woman get 1 child every month kind of math or what?