Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Divine Proportion: Does It Have a Materialistic Explaination?
JasonChin 
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 49 (148033)
10-07-2004 7:58 AM


Hey, I was wondering if anybody here knows of any naturalistic theorioes as to why the number Phi, also known as the Divine Proportion or the Golden Section, appears so freakishly often in nature. If there's no possible materialistic explaination for it......and I've never heard or thought of any.......then wouldn't it be irrefutable proof of a creator?

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Adminnemooseus, posted 10-07-2004 1:51 PM JasonChin has not replied
 Message 3 by JasonChin, posted 10-08-2004 8:20 AM JasonChin has replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 2 of 49 (148114)
10-07-2004 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by JasonChin
10-07-2004 7:58 AM


Phi was the theme of a previous topic (Phi = God?).
There was a bit of good stuff there, but the topic largely degenerated into sillyness.
You may wish to consult that topic, and expand the content of your message 1 some. As is, the content is pretty thin.
Please submit any revised version of an opening message as a new message. That new message can be advanced as message 1 of a new topic.
Adminnemooseus

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to
Change in Moderation?
or
Thread Reopen Requests
or
Considerations of topic promotions from the Proposed New Topics forum

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by JasonChin, posted 10-07-2004 7:58 AM JasonChin has not replied

  
JasonChin 
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 49 (148274)
10-08-2004 8:20 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by JasonChin
10-07-2004 7:58 AM


Gotcha, I'll see what I can do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by JasonChin, posted 10-07-2004 7:58 AM JasonChin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by JasonChin, posted 10-08-2004 9:07 AM JasonChin has replied

  
JasonChin 
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 49 (148280)
10-08-2004 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by JasonChin
10-08-2004 8:20 AM


The Divine Proportion: Does It Have a Materialistic Explaination?
Hey, I was wondering if anybody here knows of any naturalistic theorioes as to why the number Phi, also known as the Divine Proportion or the Golden Section, appears so freakishly often in nature. There are millions upon millions of ways you can derive Phi from the proportions of nature (hence the name "Divine Proportion). For instance, a nautalis sea shell is in spirals. The circumference of one ring to another = 1.618. Sunflower seeds circumference divided by the one below it = 1.618. The circumference of a pine cone ring divided by the one above it = phi. The circumference of the rings on a tree divided by the one before it = 1.618. Your head to your toes divided by your navel to your toes. Your hip to toes divided by your knee to your toes = 1.618. Your shoulder to your finger tips, divided by your elbow to your fingertips = 1.618. Those are just a few examples look it up online for more. BUT the one I find the most interesting is this. In any Honey bee colony in the world, ANY ONE, The number of female bees divided by the number of male bees = 1.618
If there's no possible materialistic explaination for it......and I've never heard or thought of any.......then wouldn't it be irrefutable proof of a creator?
This message has been edited by JasonChin, 10-08-2004 08:12 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by JasonChin, posted 10-08-2004 8:20 AM JasonChin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by JasonChin, posted 10-08-2004 9:16 AM JasonChin has not replied
 Message 7 by NosyNed, posted 10-08-2004 12:01 PM JasonChin has not replied
 Message 8 by crashfrog, posted 10-08-2004 12:08 PM JasonChin has replied
 Message 10 by coffee_addict, posted 10-08-2004 12:30 PM JasonChin has not replied
 Message 20 by Coragyps, posted 10-10-2004 11:32 AM JasonChin has not replied
 Message 21 by sidelined, posted 10-10-2004 12:51 PM JasonChin has not replied
 Message 23 by Coragyps, posted 10-10-2004 3:03 PM JasonChin has not replied
 Message 25 by Dr Jack, posted 10-11-2004 6:12 AM JasonChin has replied

  
JasonChin 
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 49 (148283)
10-08-2004 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by JasonChin
10-08-2004 9:07 AM


Re: The Divine Proportion: Does It Have a Materialistic Explaination?
How's that?
BTW, I was aware of that past thread on Phi, but the thread was created as a statement and not really a question and, frankly, it wasn't even a well-stated statement. Therefore, people who didn't believe it just kind of made fun of it. I want this thread to be dedicated to people attempting to make a REAL argument against it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by JasonChin, posted 10-08-2004 9:07 AM JasonChin has not replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 6 of 49 (148347)
10-08-2004 11:56 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 7 of 49 (148350)
10-08-2004 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by JasonChin
10-08-2004 9:07 AM


Re: The Divine Proportion: Does It Have a Materialistic Explaination?
In any Honey bee colony in the world, ANY ONE, The number of female bees divided by the number of male bees = 1.618
I don't even have to look anything up. This is wrong. Totally.
There are a few 10's of thousands of bees in a hive. Most of them are workers (sterile females). There are 10's or hundreds of males.
The ratio is never Phi.
This message has been edited by NosyNed, 10-08-2004 11:02 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by JasonChin, posted 10-08-2004 9:07 AM JasonChin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Wounded King, posted 10-11-2004 10:32 AM NosyNed has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 8 of 49 (148352)
10-08-2004 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by JasonChin
10-08-2004 9:07 AM


Hey, I was wondering if anybody here knows of any naturalistic theorioes as to why the number Phi, also known as the Divine Proportion or the Golden Section, appears so freakishly often in nature.
It's funny that there's enough numbers in the universe that, if you look hard enough, you'll "find" the number that you're looking for, over and over again. Like, 42, or the Law of Fives:
quote:
The Law of Fives states simply that: ALL THINGS HAPPEN IN FIVES, OR ARE DIVISIBLE BY OR ARE MULTIPLES OF FIVE, OR ARE SOMEHOW DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY RELATED TO FIVE. THE LAW OF FIVES IS NEVER WRONG. In the Erisian Archives is an old memo from Omar to Mal-2: "I find the Law of Fives to be more and more manifest the harder I look."
Instead of wondering why it is that you find what you are looking for, you should ask the question: "What is it about the human brain and human psychology that leads me to believe this is significant?" It's called "confirmation bias." You've just forgotten or downplayed every time you've looked for phi and failed to find it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by JasonChin, posted 10-08-2004 9:07 AM JasonChin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by JasonChin, posted 10-09-2004 4:31 AM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 9 of 49 (148358)
10-08-2004 12:26 PM


Another reason you might find Phi a lot in plants, etc, is because it's the natural result of the localized way living systems have to organize themselves. From Wikipedia:
quote:
The golden ratio turns up in nature as a result of the dynamics of some systems - for instance, in the angular spacing of trees around a trunk, or sunflower seeds. In both cases, the problem is "wedge this next one into the biggest available space".
It's a good heuristic for any computational problem of the form "we have an arbitrary number of things and we want to put them down without overlapping". Eg: shell sizes in shell sort, inserting items into hash tables and computation of fibonacci numbers.
Yeah. I just don't see the significance here. It's a natural result of the way living systems have to organize themselves, where each individual unit has no knowledge of the whole, only what's around itself.

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by JasonChin, posted 10-09-2004 4:38 AM crashfrog has replied

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 10 of 49 (148359)
10-08-2004 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by JasonChin
10-08-2004 9:07 AM


Re: The Divine Proportion: Does It Have a Materialistic Explaination?
For a starter, you can start considering all the different things in this world that doesn't have phi in it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by JasonChin, posted 10-08-2004 9:07 AM JasonChin has not replied

  
JasonChin 
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 49 (148609)
10-09-2004 4:31 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by crashfrog
10-08-2004 12:08 PM


It's funny that there's enough numbers in the universe that, if you look hard enough, you'll "find" the number that you're looking for, over and over again. Like, 42, or the Law of Fives:>>
But Phi appears far more often than these numbers........and always in the same context, I.E. proportions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by crashfrog, posted 10-08-2004 12:08 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Rrhain, posted 10-09-2004 5:26 AM JasonChin has not replied
 Message 15 by crashfrog, posted 10-09-2004 12:36 PM JasonChin has not replied

  
JasonChin 
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 49 (148610)
10-09-2004 4:38 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by crashfrog
10-08-2004 12:26 PM


Yeah. I just don't see the significance here. It's a natural result of the way living systems have to organize themselves, where each individual unit has no knowledge of the whole, only what's around itself.>>
1.618 etc. is a VERY specific number. You mean to tell me the human body wouldn't operate if the length of......uh.......whatever it was divided by whatever it was (it's late, brain no work good) was 1.619 instead of 1.618?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by crashfrog, posted 10-08-2004 12:26 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by PaulK, posted 10-09-2004 5:08 AM JasonChin has not replied
 Message 16 by crashfrog, posted 10-09-2004 12:38 PM JasonChin has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 13 of 49 (148615)
10-09-2004 5:08 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by JasonChin
10-09-2004 4:38 AM


You're right - 1.618 IS a very specific number - that is why it ISN'T found in the proportions of most human bodies.
Is phi a mystical number as claimed in The Da Vinci Code? - The Straight Dope
quote:
Your height divided by the distance from your belly button to the floor = phi. Get out. Behold the line segment in the drawing. The only people of height AC with their belly buttons at point B are named Igor. On me the ratio is about 1.7, not 1.618+.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by JasonChin, posted 10-09-2004 4:38 AM JasonChin has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 14 of 49 (148619)
10-09-2004 5:26 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by JasonChin
10-09-2004 4:31 AM


JasonChin writes:
quote:
But Phi appears far more often than these numbers
No, it doesn't. It certainly doesn't appear more often than pi or e.
Quick question: Suppose you have a bunch of parallel, straight lines, each one unit apart. You have a bunch of toothpicks, each one unit long. You drop them onto the lines. What are the odds that the pick will cross a line?
That's right...pi/4.
Now think about it...why might pi have something to do with this?
quote:
and always in the same context, I.E. proportions.
Let me see if I understand this correctly: You're amazed that a number that is calculated from proportions tends to pop up when dealing with proportions?
That's like being amazed that pi comes up when talking about circles (that's a big hint to my question above.)
The golden ratio can be approximated by dividing the n+1th and nth terms of the Fibonacci series as n goes to infinity.
Now, the Fibonacci series comes up a lot in nature simply due to its intrinsic physical qualities: Add the previous two. That's a very simple thing to do biologically. Want to visualize a Nautilus shell? You can make it with a Fibonacci series:
Start with two 1x1 squares side by side. You thus have a 2x1 rectangle. To add another square to the long edge, you need a square that is the sum of the two previous ones: 2x2. Well, now you have a 2x3 rectangle. To add another square to the long edge, you need a square that is the sum of the two previous ones, 3x3. Well, now you have a 3x5 rectangle. As you keep spiraling around and around, you're adding squares that follow the Fibonacci series. And if you draw a quarter circle in each square so that the pathway lines up, that's the spiral of the Nautilus shell.
But notice what you did: You calculated the golden ratio simply by adding squares together in a spiral pattern, each one the size of the big side of what you had before.
There is nothing mysterious about this. It's a simple necessity of mathematics. There's no other way it could be.

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by JasonChin, posted 10-09-2004 4:31 AM JasonChin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by crashfrog, posted 10-09-2004 12:39 PM Rrhain has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 15 of 49 (148663)
10-09-2004 12:36 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by JasonChin
10-09-2004 4:31 AM


But Phi appears far more often than these numbers.
No way, dude. Didn't you read the Law?
Everything is related, directly or indirectly, to five. If you find something that doesn't appear to be, then you haven't looked hard enough yet. It's always true, you just have to look harder.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by JasonChin, posted 10-09-2004 4:31 AM JasonChin has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024