RE: Where did the universe come from? Atheistic origin science has no answer.
September 30, 2014 at 11:50 am
(This post was last modified: September 30, 2014 at 11:57 am by Huggy Bear.)
(September 30, 2014 at 11:14 am)Alex K Wrote: So Huggy74, even if that were all true, what is the conclusion you draw from this, and how do you justify this conclusion? Let's assume for the sake of argument that there are anomalously many (more than random) things in nature which have something close to the golden ratio, a fact which you have not proven, a fact I would find mildly interesting, but not terribly shocking. So what? There are surprisingly many things in the world which have this strange ratio 3.14159265358979323...., where I come from we call them balls. Balls do not prove god either, (even if some macho men disagree). What do you deduce from that and how?
Pi is defined as the ratio of the Circumference to the Diameter of a Circle.
so yes, you will find Pi in all circles.
Also as i said before, you guys act like I'm the one that came up with this concept when it's existed for thousands of years, how are you guys any different from people that deny evolution?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
Quote:Some of the greatest mathematical minds of all ages, from Pythagoras and Euclid in ancient Greece, through the medieval Italian mathematician Leonardo of Pisa and the Renaissance astronomer Johannes Kepler, to present-day scientific figures such as Oxford physicist Roger Penrose, have spent endless hours over this simple ratio and its properties. But the fascination with the Golden Ratio is not confined just to mathematicians. Biologists, artists, musicians, historians, architects, psychologists, and even mystics have pondered and debated the basis of its ubiquity and appeal. In fact, it is probably fair to say that the Golden Ratio has inspired thinkers of all disciplines like no other number in the history of mathematics.
(September 30, 2014 at 11:46 am)Surgenator Wrote:(September 30, 2014 at 1:45 am)Huggy74 Wrote: Ok this is the part where I get to
you muppet, even by your article, the first measurement is still 34/20, with the second measurement starting at 22, I think we can safely stick with 34/21.
The updated measurement was 22-26. Read more carefully. The mean value 24 will result in 34/24 that does NOT equal the golden ratio.
Um, no.
Once again muppet, the exact quote is "According to another study, when measured in a particular solution, the DNA chain measured 22 to 26 ångströms wide (2.2 to 2.6 nanometres), and one nucleotide unit measured 3.3 Å (0.33 nm) long."
So in other words, in some other study (not mentioned) under special circumstances you get a different measurement. Nowhere does it state that this is the standard measurement.