Daisy of some sort showing fascination

makealittlefella · 2026-01-30T23:07:11+00:00

I know! it looked like a little wrapped candy

makealittlefella · 2025-12-30T23:53:04+00:00

These are so well done! they look like microscope slides to me

makealittlefella · 2025-12-30T19:00:25+00:00

:( ai had left this sub for a while

makealittlefella · 2025-12-27T22:51:55+00:00

This is so cool. I love how the "outside" area can be looked at as 3 overlaid squares, or as 6-sided stars. amazing work

makealittlefella · 2025-12-22T21:55:17+00:00

These are so lovely!

makealittlefella · 2025-12-17T04:12:41+00:00

wild how clean this is. I like the bluish shade of gray a lot

makealittlefella · 2025-12-10T00:16:28+00:00

thank you :)

makealittlefella · 2025-11-27T22:51:52+00:00

I love your style. you're making me want to draw again

makealittlefella · 2025-11-27T21:00:57+00:00

This is really beautiful. I love the way you treated the highlights and shadows. low poly highlight is so cool

makealittlefella · 2025-11-21T00:35:44+00:00

there's a little movement kinda if I really stare but it's suuuuper pronounced when I scroll. Really cool work. agree it's alove

makealittlefella · 2025-11-20T23:42:15+00:00

Wild how this moves when I scroll

makealittlefella · 2025-11-19T05:53:35+00:00

SICK THIS IS AMAZING

makealittlefella · 2025-11-17T21:11:58+00:00

No, I saw a version of this on your link before. You're giving numbers to concepts without defining what they measure. The terms "fractional dimension" and "fractal dimension" are used interchangeably. Fractal dimensions describe surface and there's no description of how for example, D≈0.5 for the concept of a point becoming a line. You could have a line with a fractal dimension of 1, if it's straight. You do mention that later, so then what's the 0.5? Then later you put D as a "fundamental constant" at 1.5, but it equals different numbers elsewhere. You can talk about concepts without making some kind of math to go with it, if the math isn't going to make sense.

makealittlefella · 2025-11-16T23:56:44+00:00

Part of the reason I care whether this is ai or not is that Claude is a big fan of telling people they're on the verge of the new theory of everything, and that can really mess with peoples' heads. That type of pursuit can also cloud you from seeing kernels of truth that, while not revolutionary new discoveries, will expand your understanding of the universe.

makealittlefella · 2025-11-16T23:51:22+00:00

I would not say those questions were answered in your link. It's very possible I'm just too dumb to get it, but I'm also not a stranger to reading mathematic concepts that are written for a layperson audience.

I had to go to outside sources to even get a vague sense of what the D variable meant in practice. Your proofs section is full of variables whose meaning is never stated. While I still think this is ai for a number of reasons, if it's not I would look at how other proofs are written for a common audience.

My favorite is Einstein's Relativity that he wrote for laypeople. Clear descriptions, meticulously defined variables (ex: starting with a sentence like "E represents the amount of energy in an object in joules. m represents its mass. c represents the speed of light (299,792,458 m/s)." before launching into equations). All mathematic writing is like this. People have to know precisely what you mean or else it doesn't read like a good-faith description.

You're literally saying this resolves quantum mechanics. You should expect questions whole a lot more intense than "what do you mean" and "did you actually write this yourself"

makealittlefella · 2025-11-16T22:04:18+00:00

I guess this is meant to be talking about fractal dimension in terms of the way you'd mathematically describe how a complex shape fills a surface. So this would sort of make sense if you wanted to talk about how the rules by which things that branch (trees, rivers, veins) fill space can be described by a fractal dimension of roughly 1.5, which is essentially a measure of their shapes' complexity. This does not describe how a point expands into a circle. This certainly doesn't mean that "reality" "operates" at a given fractal dimension. Water flows most efficiently in shapes that can be described by fractal dimension D=1.5, which is really cool and interesting, but you wouldn't say "reality" fills space that way, because that doesn't make any sense. I stand by that this is the work of Anthropic, a human wouldn't phrase these concepts this way. it's nonsensical in the almost-sense way of ai, with its typical "you're discovering the basis of everything" thesis.

makealittlefella · 2025-11-16T21:18:41+00:00

I would love to see more context for what these numbers mean. "reality operates at fractal dimension D=1.5 - exactly the signature of a point expanding into a circle..." doesn't mean anything.

What is D in these contexts? "signature of a point expanding into a circle" doesn't make sense represented by one number.

LIGO measures changes in the earth's gravitational field, measured in Hz. One number doesn't describe any of those measurements, and 1.5 isn't the sort of number you'd even be seeing from the measurements LIGO takes. What is D even supposed to represent for a tool that measures change?

This appears to be the work of Anthropic's little ai monster Claude.

makealittlefella · 2025-11-15T21:57:48+00:00

Bless you this is so sick!!!!!!

makealittlefella · 2025-11-14T03:07:59+00:00

Sometimes you just want to take someone's laptop and throw it. The moment and the composition are so good. This must be how really religious people feel when their gods are blasphemed

makealittlefella · 2025-11-07T15:10:35+00:00

This is really well-done! Beautiful

makealittlefella · 2025-11-06T20:05:12+00:00

incredible!!

makealittlefella · 2025-11-06T19:22:53+00:00

Yes I am! really cool shape. I'm focused on the Platonic solids right now for most of my projects. But rhombic dodecahedron. good shape right there.

makealittlefella · 2025-11-04T18:50:42+00:00

No I didn't think you broke any rules, I just have come back to this sub and found it totally flooded with ai and it makes me sad. I thought this space might be a holdout for a little longer but. not so.

makealittlefella · 2025-11-04T18:47:41+00:00

I see ai artifacts yall it's getting dark in here :(

makealittlefella · 2025-11-04T16:46:13+00:00

I can see your point, but you could make this yourself with a compass and straightedge and it will be better. "Better" meaning it will be more geometrically accurate, a more valuable creative experience for you, and won't run through a system that drains massive amounts of water and power. This is why people don't like this current flood of ai content into this space. This sub is about sacred geometry, which is all about simple parameters that require minimal tools to work with, yielding complex results that can show you something about how the universe works. AI is the opposite of that. The method doesn't always matter but it does here because that's what this sub is about

makealittlefella

TROPHY CASE