reply to post by ErroneousDylan
Stop right there -- I have a whole long thread devoted to the very error
you are making in logic.
The ratio 2:3 is very different than 3:2 in regards to the Fibonacci Sequence -- not a series by the way. A series assumes it converges to the
The Golden Ratio relies on reversing the order of infinity
so that there is a "one to one" correspondence between geometry and number. The
same occurs for Western music use of the Perfect Fifth as 2:3 converted to 3:2.
O.K. so the Harmonic Series is like the Fibonacci Series -- both are actually sequences. The Harmonic Series diverges
and so it starts with C
and then goes an octave to C and then to G -- so that is 2:3 as the Perfect Fifth.
To get the Perfect Fourth music ratio then the subharmonic
of the Perfect Fifth is taken in reverse time
so that it is going in the
opposite direction. So you have C to C to F as 2:3 perfect fifth ratio -- only since it is to the geometric symbol F
then it is
and does not apply to any Golden Ratio or closed form series solution.
What did Western music do? Took the C to F as 2:3 and then doubled
it to C to F as 4:3. Voila
You have the Perfect Fourth as 4:3 and
then the Perfect Fifth as 3:2 using C to G -- assuming a commutative relation of one
O.K. you have dared to refer to Pythagoras and here is where you've made a grave mistake. The Law of Pythagoras states that wavelength as time is the
inverse of frequency. Easy right? So 1 to 2 is one wavelength. The octave is one half wavelength or 1/2 -- so you get twice the frequency with half
of the wavelength -- inverse relation.
Now check out the Perfect Fourth -- it's actually the subharmonic
of the Perfect Fifth. In other words what is the inverse of the 3/2
frequency as the Perfect Fifth? It is 2/3 as the wavelength. But 2/3 is the frequency of the Perfect Fifth in the reverse time
which is then geometrically
the Perfect Fourth.
So C to G as 3/2 is the Perfect Fifth and C to F in reverse time
is 2/3 as the Perfect Fifth. That is non-commutative
The Golden Ratio assumes a logarithmic commutative solution.
All the math that you are relying on for orbits, etc. relies on commutative logarithmic mathematics.
Music theory in its basic form of the harmonic series and the Perfect Fifth is non-commutative
O.K. so you can't claim you are not using the Golden Ratio and also you can't claim you're not just repeating the work of Richard Merrick.
If you post information that is exactly
the same as Richard Merrick it doesn't matter if you didn't
know of Richard Merrick.
The fact is you now
know of Richard Merrick. To pretend you don't know of Richard Merrick is intellectually dishonest.
You never gave a source for your claim that the Venus/Earth alignment is the Perfect Fifth music ratio.
You wanted to ignore me and then continue thanking people for your
OP. It's not your
OP -- you're just repeating the New Age bunk of
Richard Merrick -- whether you had the intention to do so or not is not the issue.
You have a responsibility and requirement to give credit to the source of an idea -- and you never gave any source for your claim of the Perfect Fifth
music ratio for the Fibonacci Series orbit pentagram of Venus/Earth.
O.K. so the choice is yours - you have used the Golden Ratio in your other replies to people in discussion of other planets. You have relied on
science that is based on logarithmic math that assumes the Golden Ratio.
Are you now disowning
the Golden Ratio as a closed solution?
Do you know the implications of this if you are? Kepler was against the closed form of the Golden Ratio -- because the Fibonacci Series is composed
of male and female
numbers. For the closed solution of the Golden Ratio the order of infinity
has to be reversed as I stated.
So originally the Fibonacci Series was A is to B as B is to (A plus B). In the continued fraction form this means 1 plus 1 divided by 1
This is why the Fibonacci sequence is so common -- it's the slowest converging irrational number -- if it is considered to converge.
In order for the Fibonacci Sequence to converge to the Golden Ratio then the above solution has to be reversed
to A is to B as B is to (A minus
O.K. see the difference? The question is about how the geometric symbols line up with the numbers relying on commutative quadratic mathematics.
Again for the Perfect Fifth they do not line up. Richard Merrick does not realize this.
Pythagoras realized that the Perfect Fifth does not line up with commutative mathematics -- this is the secret of real alchemy.
Quantum math is also non-commutative as the infinite potential.
edit on 26-5-2012 by fulllotusqigong because: (no reason
edit on 26-5-2012 by fulllotusqigong because: (no reason given)