Originally posted by Maya432
reply to post by CoffinFeeder
you just proved to us that you sole purpose is to debunk..
just like fox news you start picking away at the little things and make them appear as important...its just sad
... and you have just completed my bunco sheet on general quacks. So thusly, I'm calling BS on you, sir.
Firstly, is there any proof here that 432 is
(quote)THE ONLY resonant frequency that is capable of natually reproducing what is called the "Pythagorian Musical Spiral" its the same sequence of
growth that all life follows. it utilizes the formula of "Phi" also know as the "Golden Mean" and is also found in the "Fibonnaci
without all the glitzy quote marks to make buzzwords sound important?
I think you're the musical spiral actually from the concept of the logarithmic spiral, which is based off of the Phi equation which is an integral
part of the Fibonnaci sequence, which is something even most fledgling math nerds would know. This would make sense because most things in nature are
more geometrically based than linear (think cell multiplation, aka exponential) The decibel system as well is on the exponential system.
So, can you show something here besides your "feeling" and "just know its right" that 440 throws this completely out of whack or is somehow
distinguishable from 432? Its my understanding that the spiral itself, which is a graph of a math formula is seen a lot in nature. For a quick and
dirty plotter for this function in excel I found an interesting link and spreadsheet utility at :
Interesting, no? Only insofar as its a common thing for people to try to link Fibonnaci, golden ratios and the spiral together to try to link math and
music. it just doesn't work. Even if you use base 60. (look that part up for some rather interesting reading)
I'll look into your mayan web video in a bit. I'm at work with no sound (yeah, bummer, eh?) but right off the bat, from the patterns I see, you get
pretty much the same standing wave patterns at all kinds of frequencies.
"If Joseph Goebels wanted it then it probably isn`t good.."
- do I even have to go there?
"Feeding computers perfect math" Oh buddy, your whole stance on this is so inaccurate, wrong and inane I could start a thread on it. Yo do know a
lot of this is numeric representation and not math representation, right? sorry, no golden spiral here to beat on. Do you even know how digital works,
as far as recording and sound reproduction? and no, it doesn't take a computer more or less time to interpret the sounds because they're tuned flat.
Numbers is numbers.
So, have you figured out that 432 is a number, and is not any magic sequence yet? do you even know what you're talking about yet?
Can you provide any links, reports, or proof that anything resonates at 432hz? I'm curious, since a quick search pretty much reveals just this thread
and some of the sites you mentioned. feel the information hungry masses please. What is the search term to use in google so I can find some of the
same information you have? Then all of us can benefit from your research and knowledge.
So, most people have trashed you so you switch tactics from 'oh, normal math can't handle it, but it fits lllllllllike a glove in quantum math".
what quantum math is this, can you provide it please to show us, or are you pulling fancy words out of your backside. And yes, I am rather versed in
quantum theory and string theory. Lets call it all a pet hobby of mine that I got into while getting my comp sci degree.
Can you produce any of these computations that are 'dead on' vs any other number in any significant way?