(October 3, 2014 at 10:51 pm)Jenny A Wrote:

(October 3, 2014 at 10:38 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: http://www.livescience.com/34132-what-ma...ecial.html

Of course it makes sense since pi describes the relation between the circumference and the diameter of a circle. Anything described by pi will by definition have to do with that ratio. The Fibonacci sequence describes a curve. All examples it involve that curve. So, your point is?

The Fibonacci sequence doesn't describe curves per se it describes a spiral, rectangle, triangle and so on..

Smart people tend to think alike. Christians are each idiotic in his own way.

(October 3, 2014 at 11:13 pm)Chuck Wrote: Smart people tend to think alike. Christians are each idiotic in his own way.

Yeah, each one has his own best guess as to when the rupture will come. But many tend to feel we're getting close to end-times, shit's gonna hit the fan soon .. ooooh.

(October 3, 2014 at 7:40 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Pi and PHI are not ratios in the mathematical sense because ratio means rational number and they are not rational numbers, but because they both are used in geometry, they are called ratios because they are referencing the proportions of whatever shape, hence the golden ratio is aka as the divine proportion.

You are wrong and you contradict yourself. Ratio does not mean rational number.

---

(October 3, 2014 at 8:29 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(October 3, 2014 at 8:01 pm)Surgenator Wrote: You are fundamentally wrong. A ratio is comparing two similiar things. A distance vs another distance in our case.

exactly, as in "the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter", answer me this, where else is Pi used other than in relation to circles or spheres?

(October 3, 2014 at 8:01 pm)Surgenator Wrote: I'll use short simple sentences and maybe you'll understand.

The distance between repeating twist in DNA is 34 A. You also claimed 34 A. We agree on that. The diameter of DNA is 23.7 A. You claim it was 21 A. We disagree here. With your numbers, you get the ratio 34 A vs 21 A. So you claim the fibonacci sequence is in DNA. The actual ratio is 34 A vs 23.7 A. This is not the follow fibonacci sequence. Therefore, your claim is wrong!

you are correct! that is not the fibonacci sequence, the fibonacci sequence is a sequence of numbers ( 1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55)

What you're talking about is the golden ratio (1.61) 34 divided by 21 = 1.61

you cant take the length and width and call it a ratio, that is the dimensions.

Take the earth for example, the circumference is 40,075 km and diameter is 12,742 km, the ratio of these two numbers are not 40,075 vs 12,742, it is 3.14 therefore "34 A vs 23.7 A." is not a ratio.

Pi is used in far more than that. Do you even math?

Trigonometry, complex analysis, Monte Carlo methods, number theory, ...

(October 3, 2014 at 11:08 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(October 3, 2014 at 10:51 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Of course it makes sense since pi describes the relation between the circumference and the diameter of a circle. Anything described by pi will by definition have to do with that ratio. The Fibonacci sequence describes a curve. All examples it involve that curve. So, your point is?

The Fibonacci sequence doesn't describe curves per se it describes a spiral, rectangle, triangle and so on..

Ah but you are missing the point (or the curve):

Quote:In the differential geometry of curves, an involute (also known as evolvent) is a curve obtained from another given curve by attaching an imaginary taut string to the given curve and tracing its free end as it is wound onto that given curve; or in reverse, unwound. It is a roulette wherein the rolling curve is a straight line containing the generating point. For example, an involute approximates the path followed by a tetherball as the connecting tether is wound around the center pole. If the center pole has a circular cross-section, then the curve is an involute of a circle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involute

Thus circle is both a curve and a spiral. Spirals are both curves and spirals.

(October 3, 2014 at 11:08 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(October 3, 2014 at 10:51 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Of course it makes sense since pi describes the relation between the circumference and the diameter of a circle. Anything described by pi will by definition have to do with that ratio. The Fibonacci sequence describes a curve. All examples it involve that curve. So, your point is?

The Fibonacci sequence doesn't describe curves per se it describes a spiral, rectangle, triangle and so on..

Oh, for fuck's sake - a spiral is a curve.

(October 3, 2014 at 11:53 pm)Chas Wrote:

(October 3, 2014 at 7:40 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Pi and PHI are not ratios in the mathematical sense because ratio means rational number and they are not rational numbers, but because they both are used in geometry, they are called ratios because they are referencing the proportions of whatever shape, hence the golden ratio is aka as the divine proportion.

You are wrong and you contradict yourself. Ratio does not mean rational number.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_number
The term rational in reference to the set Q refers to the fact that a rational number represents a ratio of two integers.

Now what?

(October 3, 2014 at 11:58 pm)Chas Wrote:

(October 3, 2014 at 11:08 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: The Fibonacci sequence doesn't describe curves per se it describes a spiral, rectangle, triangle and so on..

Oh, for fuck's sake - a spiral is a curve.

In relation to the Fibonacci sequence, it is known as the "Golden Spiral, not "Golden Curve"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_spiral
In geometry, a golden spiral is a logarithmic spiral whose growth factor is φ, the golden ratio.[1] That is, a golden spiral gets wider (or further from its origin) by a factor of φ for every quarter turn it makes

The idiocy is starting to run rampant, Don't know how much more of this I can take.

(October 4, 2014 at 1:07 am)Huggy74 Wrote: The idiocy is starting to run rampant, Don't know how much more of this I can take.

How can you not be thoroughly use to such an integral part of yourself, of which you are so proud and which you so relish displaying in public?

(October 4, 2014 at 1:17 am)Chuck Wrote:

(October 4, 2014 at 1:07 am)Huggy74 Wrote: The idiocy is starting to run rampant, Don't know how much more of this I can take.

How can you not be thoroughly use to such an integral part of yourself, of which you are so proud and which you so relish displaying in public?

Which is pretty much the reason I've given up on this particular portion of the conversation. When Huggy's digging up months old- potentially longer- posts from me, it's clear that he's way more invested in winning at any cost than in conducting an honest conversation. It just gets a bit sad when you're arguing with someone willing to go "aha! You say X now, but last August you said Y..."

So... congrats, Huggy. You are officially too derpy and vaguely crazy to argue with.

(October 4, 2014 at 1:50 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(October 4, 2014 at 1:17 am)Chuck Wrote: How can you not be thoroughly use to such an integral part of yourself, of which you are so proud and which you so relish displaying in public?

Which is pretty much the reason I've given up on this particular portion of the conversation. When Huggy's digging up months old- potentially longer- posts from me, it's clear that he's way more invested in winning at any cost than in conducting an honest conversation. It just gets a bit sad when you're arguing with someone willing to go "aha! You say X now, but last August you said Y..."

So... congrats, Huggy. You are officially too derpy and vaguely crazy to argue with.

Spin it however you like...