# Talk:Attractor

WikiProject Mathematics (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Mathematics rating:
 C Class
 Mid Importance
Field: Mathematical physics
WikiProject Systems (Rated C-class, High-importance)
C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

## No Context

This article gives no context whatsoever. It would definitely be confusing to people who don't know what it's about. Can someone slap one of those "confusing" tags on it? --WikiDonn (talk) 06:47, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

The context is dynamical systems which is linked in the first sentence. Since attractors only make sense as a property of a dynamical system it's natural to assume the reader has some knowledge of them since it would be impractical to explain every concept from scratch.--RDBury (talk) 17:48, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes... absolutely. This is one of those articles which makes perfect sense if you know all about the topic already, but is otherwise meaningless gobbledegook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.96.58.212 (talk) 21:04, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

## Strange Attractors

Strange attractors are described in several ways in the article:

• "a complicated set with a fractal structure known as a strange attractor."
• "when these sets...cannot be easily described as simple combinations...then the attractor is called a strange attractor."
• "An attractor is called strange if it has non-integer dimension."

This last seems incorrect. Consider an initial variable point P in three-space, along with tetrahedron ABCD. If P is repeatedly moved half-way toward a randomly-chosen vertex (one of A, B, C, and D) the attractor is a Sierpinski tetrahedron, which has a dimension of 2 even though it is indeed a fractal. Consider replacing this sentence with the first description? "An attractor is called strange if it has a fractal structure." By linking "fractal" to the fractal article, the reader would be referred to a more accurate description: "A fractal is a mathematical set that has a fractal dimension that usually exceeds its topological dimension[1] and may fall between the integers.[2]" (This is my first edit, so I've posted my reasoning here before actually editing the article.] Scottsteketee (talk) 02:10, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

## x1 not a limit set

Maybe explain why x1 is not a limit set, (pendulum example), even though x0 is. Thanks, 71.139.161.36 (talk) 03:59, 21 May 2015 (UTC)