>Say we have a fractal tree branch type thing and I wanted to tell someone on another point of it how to reach my location, or to describe to them how I would get to theirs?

I'd imagine the same way you would give directions normally, 'first left, second left' ect.

>>4107
That's what I thought but I was being told it didn't work well enough and I should use oids instead which I can't make a lot of sense of.

>>4106
Turn your GPS on, and send them your location.

Like your picture? Any 2 points can be described by a series of left and rights - no need for 2nd left etc. Each junction has a left and right.

>>4110
Left and right are next to useless in mathematics or geometry. If you start going in another direction, or flip it upside down, everything switches around.

With numbered coordinates, you still have to start out with a way to define where "1" is, but once you've done that you can orientate it in any way and still get the same answer.

>>4111
But it's a binary tree. As long as the root node is defined, each node can be defined exactly by a series of left or rights from the root.

>>4112
I'm using this as a method, we assume that the directions always begin facing "up" towards the branch the one you began on is coming out of.

>>4112
Yes but you have to translate the directions every time you change the perspective of the observer, or otherwise pre-determine the direction in such a way that "left" is always the same direction.

Even if you pre-determine which direction is which, as humans we still have to mentally translate it to overcome our own programmed definitions of the words.

>>4114

Why not simply define forwards as being the direction between the starting point and the next intersection? Even if left and right aren't explicitly descriptive terms, in your given example they're differentiated by either [line continues straight] and [line diverts by 1.5pi radians] with the exception of the initial deviation from the line of 0.5pi radians.

>>4115
Does that still work if your starting point is not at any intersection but some way between them?

Why do I get the feeling that nobody in this thread including the OP understands what a fractal space is?

>>4117
Because you're a snob with nothing useful to offer to the conversation.

>>4118
I don't take any shame in not having anything to contribute to the conversation at a chimp's tea party.

>>4116
From an algorithmic standpoint there's no such thing. The length between intersections would be a fraction of the previous length.

To respond to the previous poster no, I have no expertise whatsoever with fractals but I'm winging it and I'm pretty sure I'm correct. A line of logic that wouldn't be out of place in the current Labour party amirite? Ba-dum-tssh!