It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

Help ATS via PayPal:

# Fibonacci Numbers, Phi, and the Venus/Earth Relation

page: 7
58
share:

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 12:33 PM

In order to express divinity through mathematics, we assume that we have the mathematical understanding to both invent and incorporate such concepts on an algorithmic or equational structure...

And the truth is, we simply don't have that broad of an understanding in mathematics yet. The sheer infinite nature of what we're trying to express, in and of itself, indicates that we don't have the number of factors necessary to even partially express the divinity...

And if we do, it will always be incomplete.

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 12:42 PM

An excellent thread my friend, that I may add was posted in the perfect forum for the subject matter so don't worry about one or two people who refuse to open there mind to possibilities. I found it to be thought provoking, well written and really quite honestly beautiful.

I find the way the universe works when described by math and geometry to be astounding and this thread for me was a brilliant read, thanks again for sharing.

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 01:03 PM

As one of those "one or two" people -- I'm going to continue my point about the OP saying the Perfect Fifth ratio as 3/2 is the Fibonacci series but not the Golden Ratio. Then the OP says in reply that it's either 2/3 or 3/2.

My point is this "commutative" or symmetric relation does not hold for the Perfect Fifth while it does hold for the Fibonacci Series. The problem again is applying this continued fraction relation to geometric symbols for commutative math. I realize the OP isn't really up to analyzing this as it's probably too much math and also the OP doesn't want to acknowledge just repeating Richard Merrick's work stating that the Venus/Earth alignment is the Perfect Fifth music interval as the Golden Ratio.

2/3 or 3/2 it does not matter for the Fibonacci Series but it does matter for the Perfect Fifth music ratio

The Golden Ratio has the unique property that its reciprocal always produces the same decimal and the reciprocal of the decimal will always produce the integer 1. This means that the continued fraction can be constructed without bothering with a calculator! The continued fraction uniquely only has 1's in it. This also means that the successive fractions can be generated without consulting the diagram. For each fraction, we add 1 and then flip it over (make the reciprocal) for each new fraction. Thus, the first number is 1, producing the fraction 1/1. That is its own reciprocal. To this is added 1 (1/1), resulting in the fraction 2/1. The reciprocal of that is 1/2, our second fraction. To that is added 1 again (now 2/2), resulting in the fraction 3/2. The reciprocal of that is 2/3, our third fraction. To that is added 1 again (now 3/3), resulting in the fraction 5/3. The reciprocal of that is 3/5, our fourth fraction. As this continues, we might notice that the procedure generates fractions that all consist of successive Fibonacci Numbers! This is why ratios of Fibonacci numbers approximate the Golden Ratio, they are all solutions to the unique continued fraction for the Golden Ratio!

So here's the reversing the order of infinity that I was talking about.

So it's A is to B as B is to A plus B. That's the Fibonacci Sequence.

Now take that sequence as the closed solution proof for the Golden Ratio:

Recall that: the whole is the longer part plus the shorter part; the whole is to the longer part as the longer part is to the shorter part. If we call the whole n and the longer part m, then the second statement above becomes n is to m as m is to n − m,

So you have N is to M as M is to N minus M.

Instead of N is to M as M is to N plus M. We may take n/m to be in lowest terms and n and m to be positive. But if n/m is in lowest terms, then the identity labeled (*) above says m/(n − m) is in still lower terms. That is a contradiction that follows from the assumption that φ is rational.

Notice the difference? Why? Because the first one as a sequence is just numbers and the second one as a closed solution is materialist geometry -- parts

O.K. music as the Perfect Fifth is numbers and harmony -- it does not need geometry. So the above proof allows the Fibonacci Series to be 2/3 or 3/2 just as you have stated -- it's the same as the Golden Ratio and has to be the same since it assumes a commutative, irrational value for the sequence as a closed series. The Perfect Fifth can only be 3/2 by also assuming an irrational commutative value -- but this does not apply to the Perfect Fifth used in the harmonic series in nonwestern cultures and in Nature (bird songs for example).

That's the error in your logic (and the logic of Western science in general by using logarithmic tuning for Western music).

O.K. the Golden Ratio is one of the earliest irrational numbers of Western science. It's right there with the square root of two. Both came out of nonwestern music theory. I go into detail about this in my book.

You want to avoid the issue by saying the Venus Earth orbit is not the Golden Ratio but then you use the Golden Ratio for other parts of your OP.

You have referenced Pythagoras. Again my claim is real Pythagorean philosophy does not use the Golden Ratio or the irrational number.

Am I alone in this view? Nope - -the scholars have a term called "orthodox Pythagoreans" that proves my point. But there's been a huge conspiratorial cover-up about real Pythagorean philosophy.

Instead we get fake New Age bunk philosophy.

Did the Greeks Discover the Irrationals? Philip Hugly and Charles Sayward Abstract A popular view is that the great discovery of Pythagoras was that there are irrational numbers, e.g., the positive square root of two. Against this it is argued that mathematics and geometry, together with their applications, do not show that there are irrational numbers or compel assent to that proposition.

O.K. so here you have Philosophy Journal 1999 Spring issue -- Professors Sayward and Hugly

What's the basis of their argument -- geometric length is not the same arithmetic distance. Stephen Hawking points out this same difference in his book God Created the Integers.

edit on 26-5-2012 by fulllotusqigong because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-5-2012 by fulllotusqigong because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-5-2012 by fulllotusqigong because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 01:53 PM

Originally posted by Pinkorchid
01001000 01001001 00100000 01000111 01010101 01011001 01010011 00101100 00001101 00001010 01001001 00100000 01001101 01000001 01011001 00100000 01001110 01001111 01010100 00100000 01000010 01000101 00100000 01001001 01001110 00100000 01010100 01001000 01000101 00100000 01001101 01000001 01000111 01001001 01000011 01000001 01001100 00100000 00110001 00110000 00100000 01000010 01010101 01010100 00100000 01001001 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001110 00100000 01010100 01001000 01001001 01001110 01001011 00100000 01001100 01000001 01010100 01000101 01010010 01000001 01001100 01001100 01011001 00100000 01000001 01001110 01000100 00100000 01000010 01001111 01011001 00100000 01001001 01010011 00100000 01010100 01001000 01000101 00100000 01001001 01001110 01010100 01000101 01010010 01001110 01000101 01010100 00100000 01010101 01010011 01000101 01000110 01010101 01001100 01001100 00100000 01001100 01001111 01001100

In the interests of full disclosure here is the link for deciphering above.
home.paulschou.net...

LOL but that takes all the fun out of it!!

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 02:24 PM

The pentagram was only made an evil symbol in the 20th century. Before that it was always a symbol of protection and was not associated with evil.
I think the first Wolfman movies from the 40's with Lon Chaney was were the pentagram enclosed within a circle making it a pentical was first associated with evil in the minds of the American public. It was the mark of the werewolf or the mark of the beast according to the Gypsy queen.

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 02:30 PM

Originally posted by fulllotusqigong

There was no Golden Ratio in Egyptian mathematics. That's an error of Western projection onto a nonwestern culture.

You aren't correct.. the Golden Ratio is found in the pyramids! Did you watch the video I posted on page 2?

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 03:11 PM

Yep -- you mean Corrina Rossi isn't correct?

You better read her book like I have done. Yeah sorry to burst your CIA mind controlled bubble.

Text

[PDF] Architecture and Mathematics in Ancient Egypt by Corinna Rossi ... www.ircps.org/publications/aestimatio/pdf/.../2005-02-01_Symons.p... File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat by S Symons - Related articles Aestimatio 2 (2005) 11--15. Architecture and Mathematics in Ancient Egypt by Corinna Rossi. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2004.Pp. xxii + 280. ISBN ...

Her book is online as a pdf.

Here you go. Pdf of a book on Egyptian mathematics disproving they use the Golden Ratio -- read it and weep.

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 03:19 PM

No no, sir. You are misinterpreting what I have said. I only stated the "3:2 or 2:3" to cover in case I had written it like that previously. You could make a ratio of Venus Day / Earth Year and create any order you want in it. VenusDay:EarthYear or EarthYear:VenusDay. It just so happens that if you order it in one way it is "3:2". I am well aware that a perfect fifth is 3:2 and not 2:3.

Furthermore, I will not accept any allegiance to this Merrick person.

You are continually cherry-picking my responses and and OP. The fact that you have exhibited a one-track mind determined only to look at one small aspect of my post (being the harmony part), disregarded the rest, and shown a true obsession with this Mr. Merrick, gives me a poor impression of you and the information you provide. Your innate ramblings about everyone being mind controlled by the CIA and all this information to be Freemasonry New Age junk suggest that you have poor priorities and very well could be misguided.

You keep giving claim to Merrick as being the one who originated this orbital resonance ratio statement. Yet you did not answer me about the Music of the Spheres. Did it exist long before Merrick? The answer is yes.
edit on 26-5-2012 by ErroneousDylan because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 03:26 PM

Originally posted by Helious

An excellent thread my friend, that I may add was posted in the perfect forum for the subject matter so don't worry about one or two people who refuse to open there mind to possibilities. I found it to be thought provoking, well written and really quite honestly beautiful.

I find the way the universe works when described by math and geometry to be astounding and this thread for me was a brilliant read, thanks again for sharing.

Thank you for your kind words. I am glad you enjoyed it!

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 03:26 PM

Originally posted by karen61057

The pentagram was only made an evil symbol in the 20th century. Before that it was always a symbol of protection and was not associated with evil.
I think the first Wolfman movies from the 40's with Lon Chaney was were the pentagram enclosed within a circle making it a pentical was first associated with evil in the minds of the American public. It was the mark of the werewolf or the mark of the beast according to the Gypsy queen.

Thank you for the information. I have always regarded the pentagram and pentacle as being more benevolent but I know there is some taboo associated with it.

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 03:28 PM

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

In order to express divinity through mathematics, we assume that we have the mathematical understanding to both invent and incorporate such concepts on an algorithmic or equational structure...

And the truth is, we simply don't have that broad of an understanding in mathematics yet. The sheer infinite nature of what we're trying to express, in and of itself, indicates that we don't have the number of factors necessary to even partially express the divinity...

And if we do, it will always be incomplete.

Agreed. The Universe is un-describable and not even a number can contain the great unlimitedness of it. However, we can try to understand aspects of life and their messages with numbers, however futile it may be.

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 04:41 PM

Originally posted by fulllotusqigong

Yep -- you mean Corrina Rossi isn't correct?

You better read her book like I have done. Yeah sorry to burst your CIA mind controlled bubble.

You think the CIA made that documentary? LOL..

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 04:47 PM

Originally posted by fulllotusqigong

Her book is online as a pdf.

Here you go. Pdf of a book on Egyptian mathematics disproving they use the Golden Ratio -- read it and weep.

I read the PDF and she doesn't even talk about the Golden Ratio.. nice try.
edit on 5/26/2012 by Morpheas because: (no reason given)

edit on 5/26/2012 by Morpheas because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 04:53 PM

Corinna Rossi’s book Architecture and mathematics in ancient Egypt (Cambridge
University Press, 2004) documents that, contrary to the New Age propaganda, there was no
Freemasonic Golden Ratio use in Egypt – again the Golden Ratio is a product of the Greek
Miracle with the “containment of infinity” using the concept of alogon and Babylonian algebra:

First of all, it is essential to mention that there is no direct evidence in any ancient Egyptian written mathematical source of any arithmetic calculation or geometrical construction which could be classified as the Golden Section….It might even be suggested that they would not have liked the concept of the convergence to a number they could not reach, since the mathematical sources seem to indicate that the Egyptians were particularly fond of completion to the unity.509

509 Corinna Rossi, Architecture and mathematics in ancient Egypt (Cambridge University Press, 2004),
pp. 67-8.

Yep that's from my book.

So either you're lying or you don't realize that the whole subject of her book is on whether the Golden Ratio can be found in Egyptian mathematics or not. I'm guessing the first one.

The Golden Section - the Number and Its Geometry www.maths.surrey.ac.uk/hosted-sites/R.Knott/Fibonacci/phi.html Jump to What is the Golden Ratio (or Phi)?‎: What is the golden section (or Phi)? Also called the golden ratio or the golden mean, what is the value of the ..

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 05:05 PM

I read the PDF and what you quoted is not in it.. sorry you fail.

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 05:17 PM

Originally posted by ErroneousDylan

No no, sir. You are misinterpreting what I have said. I only stated the "3:2 or 2:3" to cover in case I had written it like that previously. You could make a ratio of Venus Day / Earth Year and create any order you want in it. VenusDay:EarthYear or EarthYear:VenusDay. It just so happens that if you order it in one way it is "3:2". I am well aware that a perfect fifth is 3:2 and not 2:3.

Before you go into any furthermores try to understand what I wrote -- I know it's a bit complicated for your rehashed New Age agit-prop puff-piece.

O.K. let me repeat this real simple for you and the other simpletons.

You have stated it can be either 2:3 or 3:2 and I am saying that your declaration of such is admittance that you are using the Golden Ratio aka the Fibonacci Series. You have then stated you are aware that the Perfect Fifth is 3:2 and not 2:3 and I am saying you are wrong -- the Perfect Fifth is non-commutative which means that for 2/3 is it C to F and for 3/2 is it C to G.

O.K. commutative math is the basis for all Western symmetric math. Try reading math professor Ian Stewart's book -- Why Beauty is Truth: A History of Symmetry. O.K. quantum physics -- the foundation -- is non-commutative but it has to be converted back to symmetric commutative math using the Poisson Bracket as Stewart explains.

So you don't realize the doo doo you've stepped in. Thanks for clarifying just how ignorant you are of these issues. I have provided the information. You can read it again and study it -- you can go to the Devil's Chord thread for more information.

Again if you are using the Perfect Fifth as 3:2 then you are assuming a logarithmic measurement of music ratios which goes against all the nonwestern music in existence that does not rely on logarithmic tuning.

Surely you acknowledge that music exists outside Western cultures right? The most common music intervals found in all human cultures are the Perfect Fifth and Perfect Fourth and Octave -- the 1-4-5 music intervals.

Again those intervals are non-commutative based on the Harmonic Series. In order to have Western music tuning then there has to be an irrational commutative or symmetric tuning system - and this goes against the Harmonic Series. O.K. so you are using 13:8 as your ratios -- these are natural number ratios but you are assuming they are converted to a logarithmic form because you are using the Perfect Fifth as 3/2 and not 2/3.

If you use the Perfect Fifth as 2/3 then it is not commutative -- so if you only use the Perfect Fifth as 3/2 then it is commutative. The Fibonacci Series as the Golden Ratio can be both 2/3 or 3/2 while the Fibonacci Sequence like the Harmonic Series diverges so by reversing the order then you reverse the order of infinity.

This is how Euler proved that the value 1 equals the value zero -- by reversing the order of the Harmonic Sequence -- in other words it's non-commutative. This is allowed in quantum physics with the infinite potential - just check out the Quantum Zeno Effect. In other words this is called

time-frequency uncertainty because time as the wavelength is not just the inverse of the frequency -- they can not be contained by a symmetric equation.

So for example again time is the inverse to wavelength by the Law of Pythagoras but in relativity as the frequency of energy increases then time slows down and this goes against the Law of Pythagoras. The only way this paradox was solved by quantum physicist Louis de Broglie is to create what he called the Law of Phase Harmony -- so that there is infinite phase as consciousness when the frequency is zero.

This can never be measured using technology because again the infinite phase has to be squared as amplitude probability -- but de Broglie argued the infinite phase was a real wave form guiding the photon or subatomic particle - guiding it faster than the speed of light. So this is the quantum entanglement - and so if the waveform as the Schrodinger Equation is detected at 1 million times per second then the collapse or decoherence of the waveform is delayed from say a femtosecond to a nanosecond. This means that the infinite phase guides the photon or electron, etc.

O.K. so that is time-frequency uncertainty in action -- it's very different than using a logarithmic measurement. For example the logarithmic or exponential decay rate of radiation can be slowed down or sped up by using the Quantum Zeno Effect.

So quantum physics is non-commutative unlike the New Age classical Golden Ratio bunk that the CIA promotes as Freemasonic religion.

Quantum physics is also the foundation of science - so unless people understand quantum physics then they don't understand the limitations of the Golden Ratio/Fibonacci Series.
edit on 26-5-2012 by fulllotusqigong because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 05:17 PM

no direct evidence in any ancient Egyptian written mathematical source

No WRITTEN source.. doesn't mean it wasn't used by the Egyptians and the proof it was used are the pyramids.

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 05:32 PM

Originally posted by fulllotusqigong
You have stated it can be either 2:3 or 3:2 and I am saying that your declaration of such is admittance that you are using the Golden Ratio aka the Fibonacci Series. You have then stated you are aware that the Perfect Fifth is 3:2 and not 2:3 and I am saying you are wrong -- the Perfect Fifth is non-commutative which means that for 2/3 is it C to F and for 3/2 is it C to G.

You need to take a breather and read what I said. I said the RATIO between VenusDay/EarthYear can be written either as 2:3 or 3:2 depending on how you word it. It is completely irrelevant to the fact that a perfect is 3:2 in just intonation. You do not have to explain music theory to me. Doing so is a waste of time.

You will acknowledge the fact that what I am saying is that you can write a ratio as X:Y or Y:X depending on how you word it. This is semantics, not relative to any of the facts in the OP. That is all I was saying.

You will answer me on whether or not orbital harmonic resonance frequencies existed in literature much before the time of Merrick.

Failure to do so will get you ignored as I have to assume you are just a "MIND CONTROLLED CIA FREEMASON MEMBER".

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 05:35 PM

Architecture and Mathematics in Ancient Egypt - Google Books Result books.google.com/books?isbn=0521829542...Corinna Rossi - 2004 - Architecture - 280 pages Finally. let us go back to the problem of 4i and the Golden Section. First of all. it is essential to mention that there is no direct evidence in any ancient Egyptian written mathematical source of any arithmetic calculation or geometrical construction which could be classified as the Golden Section.

Just put the quote in google search and you get the quote from the book.

Duh.

So you haven't read the pdf obviously.

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 06:02 PM

I did read the PDF.. the PDF is not the book.. obviously you haven't read the PDF.

new topics

top topics

58