Talk:Minkowski–Bouligand dimension
Physics Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Hmmm ... there should be a page on this, but the initial one consisted of nothing but (interesting-looking) references. Charles Matthews 18:10, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
- I've added in a definition, but am not so familiar with the fractals side of things and so it still needs more work. Also one may need to set up a whole bunch of redirects... Terry 17:59, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Ack. I've discovered that there is a lot of overlap between what I just wrote here and the article on box-counting dimension. Now we need to merge... sigh Terry 18:05, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
merged from Talk:Box-counting dimension:
Box-counting dimension is not identical with Hausdorff dimension; this redirect is inappropriate, therefore.Charles Matthews 18:01, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- It is, however, identical with Minkowski-Bouligand dimension, which also goes under a variety of other names... we should probably merge these two articles now. Terry 18:09, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I would like to add that the packing dimension is different from the Minkowski dimension, I refer you to chapter 3.4 of Falconers "Fractal Geometry; Mathematical Foundations and Applications". I will edit this tommorow if I have the time. Andy
Category: Entropy?
Removing from category:Entropy. Unlike fractal dimension, this article doesn't even mention Renyi entropy. -- Jheald 15:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Packing dimension
Packing dimension is not the same as Minkowski dimension. Packing dimension of a set A is the infimum of all numbers s for which P(A,ε)εs converges to zero where P(A,ε) is the packing number. For general sets, the Hausdorff dimension is at most the Minkowski dimension which is at most the packing dimension, but no two have to be equal for any set. For self-similar sets, they are identical, I believe, but I'll need to check a reference. Jazzam 16:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC)