Defining limits is a perpetual problem. It's often said that
"there is no perfect map of an island" because the edges are
constantly eroding and exhibit fractal-like patterns.
In fact, fractals have been best for modeling edges of islands..
or continents.
Of course the *root* of the problem is math itself. Math is not
robust enough to compress EVERY SINGLE point in time that
someone _might_ ask the question, "How far around this is
Island, accurately?" or "What is the exact outline of this
island?"
Also, there's a always a part of the real world that doesn't
compress into patterns at all, as nothing in the Universe is
fixed - again, due to time.
We get cocky about the power of math because it's GREAT with
big, gross, large items and simplifications that a
kindergartener could draw on a piece of paper somewhat.
But any level of complexity beyond line drawing output and math
starts to have trouble. Number line doesn't have enough
dimensions to compress all of reality into, just extreme
simplifications.
Algorithms stand a better chance or perhaps lazy evaluation
[where the question is answered at the nearest possible point to
reality as possible]... but even then... might as well throw out
the map once you're done using it, because it's already wrong
again. In my way of thinking, in short:
If you're trying to compress a four dimensional reality onto
something flat like a piece of paper, it's already "not quite
right".
If you're trying to compress a three dimensional reality onto
something flat like a piece of paper, it's already "not quite
right".
That's why immersive, experiential environments are better
because they DO have enough dimensions to make the attempt.
With virtual reality, our imagination can fill in the necessary
gaps up to a point; you can add: Experience (perspective), a
form of 3D (thanks to our suspension of disbelief in virtual
reality environments) and Time, plus the social aspect which
allows multiple perspecives - like many spotlights shining at
the same problem from different viewpoints.
