END OF AN ERA, FRACTALFORUMS.COM IS CONTINUED ON FRACTALFORUMS.ORG

In reaction to the current active topics on records on zoom depth.

Since new calculation methods, zoom levels is not a direct indication of computing time. The effort goes into finding a minibrot location at deeper levels. This is true as long as we cannot predict the exact locations of minibrots (will a method arise?). So what is difficult in computing? Maybe think in amount of iterations instead of zoom depth. But that's also been dealt with somewhat.

Would there be a list or even some small collections of Mandelbrot location with the highest difference in required iterations? These location tend to break current methods of calculation, or at least throw in some obstacles.

Other views on possible records are welcome.

Interesting ideas but those are all unreachable limits if I understand correctly.

I would like to find a proper information on your 'inflection'-method at all, as the built in function seems to vary from the use on your recent post pictures and my head is running like crazy to get those properties linked together, also the used formulas with the several inflection points.

Maybe I'm the only slowpoke here, but that would really bring us forward, maybe some others have interesting ideas like claude here?

It doesn't have to be a long essay, maybe in 5-10 sentences what it's about and how to use the basics?

Yeah, this makes it wonderful to aim records at! 
(Zooming to the end of the Mandelbrot detail is also impossible)

Kalles, I'm not sure if I understand you correctly. You want to apply the inflection method, but instead of local (zoomed into a finite area) to the whole set (or at least larger surrounding set)? Wouldn't that defeat the whole point of doing inflection anyway? I mean, if you are going to apply it to the whole set with enough resolution, I think it would have the same "difficultness" compared to just zooming in and do the julia-morping the classic way.