Fractal fun with four circles.
![[figure 8.1]](../_misc/pearl_fig_8_1_thumb.jpg) 
        
        This is one long investigation into the fascinating geometric
          patterns that occur when a group of transformations called Möbius
          maps are iteratively applied to some initial special starting circles
          (known as Schottky disks). The underlying mathematics is explained,
          starting simple, and gradually building up (see for example figure 8.1
          reproduced on the right; click
            to embiggen). It all started with Felix Klein's  extension of
          the concept of geometry:
         pp1-2.
          Klein proposed viewing geometry as 'the
          study of the properties of a space which are invariant under a given
          group of transformations'. To study geometry, he said, one needed not
          only objects (triangles, circles, icosahedra, or much wilder things
          like the fractal pictures in this book), but also movements. In the
          classical Euclidean regime which had been around for over two
          millennia, these movements had always been rigid motions: pick up a
          figure and place an identical copy down in a new place. Klein's
          radical idea was that other movements, which might stretch or twist
          the objects quite drastically, could be thought of geometrical
          movements too. 
        
        What's different, and nice, here is that algorithms and pseudocode
          for drawing the figures are also given and explained, including their
          limitations and when they fail. I don't have the time to play with
          these, but I wish I did, particularly to watch the serpentine tracing
          out of some of the fractals as continuous curves. Given the greater
          compute power available today than when this was written, I expect
          quite spectacular results can be achieved quite readily.
        
        The progression is typical of mathematics: start with a concept,
          then generalise, then generalise again. The fractals start out relatively
          simple, but by the end are quite stunning in their intricate
          complexity, while clearly all being  members of a family. And along
          the way, some surprising relationships with other fields appear,
          mainly because  [p62]
          Möbius maps ... do for the Riemann
          sphere what the affine maps ... do for the complex plane (and
          we are used to the effect of iterating affine maps from
          Barnsley's Iterated Function
          Systems). In particular, a connection between the (convergent) limit
          sets generated here and the (divergent) behaviour of the chaotic IFS
          algorithm is demonstrated: 
         p133.
          Independence of starting point is
          actually the flip side of the famous butterfly effect in chaos
          theory ... The point of this analogy is to explain the feature of
          chaos called sensitive dependence on initial conditions (alias
          starting points). In our context, we can explain the butterfly effect
          like this. If P and Q are nearby limit points, then
          their infinite words begin with a long common string W =
          aBBaBABABaaa say. Now apply in order the maps A, b,
          b, steadily unravelling W. The pairs of points A(P),
          A(Q); bA(P), bA(Q);
          and so on will get steadily further apart (because their common
          strings are shorter and shorter), until eventually we reach the pair
          W-1(P) and W-1(Q)
          which must be in different initial Schottky disks ..., because they
          have no common string at all. In other words, no matter how close P
          is to Q, if we run the above process for long enough it will
          be completely unpredictable where we end up. Limit sets, it seems, are
          closely connected to chaos.  
        
        
         p140.
          the limit set is what is sometimes known
          as a 'strange attractor' for the group's dynamics, because as we
          continue to iterate our maps, then ... the orbit of any point will get
          sucked in ever closer to the limit set. A point in the limit set, on
          the other hand, hops around chaotically under the dynamics of the
          group 
        
        Not easy reading, but not dry, and certainly worth the effort, with
          plenty of projects to try out.