Straight Dope Message Board > Main Phi Factoids.
 Register FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

#1
12-05-2001, 11:49 PM
 Hiyruu Guest Join Date: Aug 2001
Rather than revive my old debate thread, I will start a thread that merley gives you factoids about Phi, and how it is faster than light. I don't want to come off as a troll, I just want to share, some new information I came across.

Here is a connection to how Phi is connected to faster than light phenomenon.

Phi = (sqr5+1)/2 = 1.61803

And phi = (sqr5 - 1)/2 = 0.61803

As we can see Sqr5 is integral in generating the Phi power-series.

Now, 2.236067977 is THE SQUARE ROOT OF FIVE!!!

The square root of five is ITSELF a Tangent; the Tangent of 186234.09485. Which is the SPEED OF LIGHT IN AIR!!!

The speed of light in a vacuum is 186282.5894 miles per second, but when light travels through air, it is slowed down to 186234.09485 miles per second.

You see The Square root of Phive is connected to the speed of light.
#2
12-05-2001, 11:55 PM
 Hiyruu Guest Join Date: Aug 2001
^^ Your calculator must be in degree mode to do this.
#3
12-05-2001, 11:59 PM
 Hiyruu Guest Join Date: Aug 2001
Phi, curiously, can also be expressed all in phives as:

5 ^ .5 * .5 + .5 = Ø
#4
12-06-2001, 12:44 AM
 SPOOFE Guest Join Date: Apr 2000
Quote:
 the Tangent of 186234.09485. Which is the SPEED OF LIGHT IN AIR!!!
Not true. Not always true, anyway. The speed of light differs depending on the density and composition it is travelling through... and "air" isn't a constant. Thusly, your theory is fatally flawed (but we already knew that).
#5
12-06-2001, 01:05 AM
 MonkeyMensch Charter Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Encinitas Posts: 2,012
Quote:
Originally posted by SPOOFE
Quote:
 the Tangent of 186234.09485. Which is the SPEED OF LIGHT IN AIR!!!
Not true. Not always true, anyway. The speed of light differs depending on the density and composition it is travelling through... and "air" isn't a constant. Thusly, your theory is fatally flawed (but we already knew that).
I think Here-Are-You means the speed of light in extremely Phi-nly Phi-ltered air, if you could Phi-nd such a thing. Phi-re off a reply if you Phi-ll (alternative pronunciation) like it.

I do like the equivalent arithmetic derivation of phi:

***NEWS BREAK***
78 - 75 = 3 AND 1 + 2 = 3, too! Film at eleven!
#6
12-06-2001, 01:29 AM
 Hiyruu Guest Join Date: Aug 2001
It still shows that Phi is connected to the speed of light via the Sqr5.
#7
12-06-2001, 01:37 AM
 SPOOFE Guest Join Date: Apr 2000
Quote:
 It still shows that Phi is connected to the speed of light via the Sqr5.
So?
#8
12-06-2001, 02:05 AM
 DrMatrix Charter Member Charter Member Join Date: Nov 1999 Location: New York State of Mind Posts: 3,299
Quote:
 Originally posted by Hiyruu The speed of light in a vacuum is 186282.5894 miles per second, but when light travels through air, it is slowed down to 186234.09485 miles per second. You see The Square root of Phive is connected to the speed of light.
No, sqrt(5) and phi are dimensionless numbers. The numerical value of the speeed of light depends upon the units of measure (miles per sec). If you use units like seconds and light-seconds, you get 1 light-second per second. So, is 2 is twice as fast as light?
__________________
That's not a tau neutrino in my pocket; I've got a hadron.
#9
12-06-2001, 02:12 AM
 SPOOFE Guest Join Date: Apr 2000
I should also point out that scientific measurements are traditionally measured with with metric system, not the English system.

Tell me, Hiyruu, what happens if the speed of light is measured in, oh, kilometers per second? Or meters per second? Does PHI still add up?

Answer: No. It doesn't. In essence, you are reaching the conclusion you want by changing the numbers.
#10
12-06-2001, 02:14 AM
 Hiyruu Guest Join Date: Aug 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by DrMatrix
Quote:
 Originally posted by Hiyruu The speed of light in a vacuum is 186282.5894 miles per second, but when light travels through air, it is slowed down to 186234.09485 miles per second. You see The Square root of Phive is connected to the speed of light.
No, sqrt(5) and phi are dimensionless numbers. The numerical value of the speeed of light depends upon the units of measure (miles per sec). If you use units like seconds and light-seconds, you get 1 light-second per second. So, is 2 is twice as fast as light?
I am just saying that the numbers are connected.
#11
12-06-2001, 02:19 AM
 Hiyruu Guest Join Date: Aug 2001
Quote:
 Originally posted by SPOOFE I should also point out that scientific measurements are traditionally measured with with metric system, not the English system. Tell me, Hiyruu, what happens if the speed of light is measured in, oh, kilometers per second? Or meters per second? Does PHI still add up? Answer: No. It doesn't. In essence, you are reaching the conclusion you want by changing the numbers.
How am I changing anything? It isn't my fault that it works out in miles per second.
#12
12-06-2001, 02:23 AM
 Hiyruu Guest Join Date: Aug 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by SPOOFE
Quote:
 It still shows that Phi is connected to the speed of light via the Sqr5.
So?
Well, it is connected by a tangent, which is pretty significant in trigonometry.
#13
12-06-2001, 02:35 AM
 The Tim Guest Join Date: Oct 2000
What pythagoras wrought

Main title Numerology, by Underwood Dudley. Numbers aren't magical, you can't just claim reality works in a certain way because your nifty little numeric coincidences demand it. I can establish that 666 has to do with the speed of light (I will tomorrow when I'm not as tired). While this may make some sense it doesn't mean jack shit.
#14
12-06-2001, 02:36 AM
 Dijon Warlock Guest Join Date: Aug 2000
Quote:
 Originally posted by SPOOFE I should also point out that scientific measurements are traditionally measured with with metric system, not the English system. Tell me, Hiyruu, what happens if the speed of light is measured in, oh, kilometers per second? Or meters per second? Does PHI still add up? Answer: No. It doesn't. In essence, you are reaching the conclusion you want by changing the numbers.
No, YOU'RE reaching the conclusion YOU want by changing the units.

There's a reason why miles need to be the units used: that's how the numbers work. What our good friend hiyruu neglects to mention is that the square root of five is the product of the two numbers 3.077683537 and 0.726542528, which are tangental values of a particular set of numbers found in many ancient measuring systems. These numbers were named "gematrian" by researcher Carl Munck, who found the common tangents, and discovered the relationship to the square root of 5, and the fact that the tangent of that value does indeed approximate a slightly-less-than-vacumm velocity of light in miles per second. It's all here. Whether it means what he thinks it means is another question.
#15
12-06-2001, 02:40 AM
 SPOOFE Guest Join Date: Apr 2000
Quote:
 How am I changing anything? It isn't my fault that it works out in miles per second.
But - and here's the question that you have NEVER been able to answer - what relevance or significance does this have? The fact that two numbers coincidentally happen to be connected is an interesting bit of trivia, but nothing more.
#16
12-06-2001, 02:57 AM
 Hiyruu Guest Join Date: Aug 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by SPOOFE
Quote:
 How am I changing anything? It isn't my fault that it works out in miles per second.
But - and here's the question that you have NEVER been able to answer - what relevance or significance does this have? The fact that two numbers coincidentally happen to be connected is an interesting bit of trivia, but nothing more.
It shows that the speed of light is connected to Phi.
#17
12-06-2001, 03:06 AM
 Monster104 Guest Join Date: Apr 2000
Quote:
 It shows that the speed of light is connected to Phi.
Why, because they have the same number?

So, using this logic, does that mean that the tangent of the square root of the length of my penis could show that my penis is somehow connected to the speed of a car, as long as they're the same number and it's measured in miles per hour?
#18
12-06-2001, 03:07 AM
 Monster104 Guest Join Date: Apr 2000
In other words, you're comparing apples and oranges, just like I'm comparing the length of my penis to the speed of a car. They have absolutely nothing to do with each other.
#19
12-06-2001, 03:10 AM
 DrMatrix Charter Member Charter Member Join Date: Nov 1999 Location: New York State of Mind Posts: 3,299
Quote:
 Originally posted by Hiyruu I am just saying that the numbers are connected.
Only because of the units you are using. Also, the "connection" is approximate -- not exact.

This is silly. You could connect the speed of light to any number using functions like you are doing.
#20
12-06-2001, 03:15 AM
 Dijon Warlock Guest Join Date: Aug 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by Monster104
Quote:
 It shows that the speed of light is connected to Phi.
So, using this logic, does that mean that the tangent of the square root of the length of my penis could show that my penis is somehow connected to the speed of a car, as long as they're the same number and it's measured in miles per hour?

::d&r::
#21
12-06-2001, 03:17 AM
 Dijon Warlock Guest Join Date: Aug 2000
Quote:
 Originally posted by DrMatrix This is silly. You could connect the speed of light to any number using functions like you are doing.
That's why they call it the Law of Fives!

And you thought they were joking.

fixed quote

[Edited by DrMatrix on 12-06-2001 at 03:25 AM]
#22
12-06-2001, 03:25 AM
 DrMatrix Charter Member Charter Member Join Date: Nov 1999 Location: New York State of Mind Posts: 3,299
Quote:
 Originally posted by Dijon Warlock And you thought they were joking.
I still think they are joking.
#23
12-06-2001, 03:28 AM
 Dijon Warlock Guest Join Date: Aug 2000
Quote:
 Originally posted by DrMatrix I still think they are joking.
Ah, but that's what they want you to think. (Thanks for the fix, btw. One time I don't preview...)
#24
12-06-2001, 04:20 AM
 SPOOFE Guest Join Date: Apr 2000
Quote:
 It shows that the speed of light is connected to Phi.
So? The connection is convoluted, at best.

It is akin to the old joke that proves Barney the Purple Dinosaur to be Satan, through a convoluted trick that finds the number 666 in his name.

Another way to put this... I can use another series of equations that shows that PHI has absolutely NO connection to the speed of light. Why are the equations you used THE magic equations?
#25
12-06-2001, 05:00 AM
 Dijon Warlock Guest Join Date: Aug 2000
You mean it's really Bill Gates in that costume? I always suspected...
Quote:
 Originally posted by hiyruu: It shows that the speed of light is connected to Phi.
Actually, what it shows is that the speed of light is connected to Phi if you measure it in the right units. That's not quite as significant as you're making it out to be. Besides which, calling the speed of light through the air 186234.09485 miles per second is ridiculous, anyway. "Speed of light through air" encompasses so many variables that trying to calculate it out to five decimal places is meaningless. You've got to figure air density, moisture content, pollution, altitude, maybe even temperature into the mix. THERE IS NO ACCURATE FIVE DECIMAL PLACE NUMBER FOR THE VELOCITY OF LIGHT THROUGH AIR, PERIOD. In fact, if you measure the velocity of light in the proper units, it comes out to be 666 farfnoggles per second, thus proving that Barney is an airhead.
#26
12-06-2001, 05:32 AM
 SPOOFE Guest Join Date: Apr 2000
Hey, Dijon, Barney is already Satan... such other insults like yours belong in the Pit.

#27
12-06-2001, 05:42 AM
 Dijon Warlock Guest Join Date: Aug 2000
Awww, I figured I could hijack this into another PC/Mac debate....
#28
12-06-2001, 08:27 AM
 FlyingDragonFan Guest Join Date: Jan 2001
Quote:
 Originally posted by Hiyruu The square root of five is ITSELF a Tangent; the Tangent of 186234.09485.
Can someone explain this use of the word 'tangent' to me? Is this a mathematical use that I'm not aware of? I understood it to mean a line that crosses a circle at only one point. How can one unitless number be a tangent of another?

Oh, and Dijon?

Macs rule.
__________________
"A nothing will serve just as well as a something about which nothing could be said." — Ludwig Wittgenstein
#29
12-06-2001, 10:20 AM
 LindyHopper Guest Join Date: Mar 2001
Quote:
 Originally posted by Hiyruu Phi = (sqr5+1)/2 = 1.61803 And phi = (sqr5 - 1)/2 = 0.61803 Now, 2.236067977 is THE SQUARE ROOT OF FIVE!!!

Um...

Did he just derive (sqrt(5) + 1)/2 + (sqrt(5) - 1)/2 = sqrt(5)?

Um, do the algebra, genius. You've just derived sqrt(5) = sqrt(5).

And I'm with SPOOFE; even if it is true that these two quantities are somehow "connected" (whatever the hell that means), so what? What exactly does that prove?

And if you say "It shows that the speed of light is connected to Phi" again, I'm going to smother you with your own tinfoil hat.

All you've "shown" here is that one number is the tangent of another number. Just by the by, tangents of huge angles like 186000 (or whatever) aren't terribly meaningful. The tangent of 65.9 degrees is also the square root of 5. Does that mean that phi and 65.9 are connected? And if so, what the hell does that prove?
#30
12-06-2001, 10:27 AM
 Fledermaus Guest Join Date: Nov 2001
Quote:
 Can someone explain this use of the word 'tangent' to me?
Per Dictionary.com (http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=tangent):
Quote:
 2. Irrelevant.
#31
12-06-2001, 11:55 AM
 MonkeyMensch Charter Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Encinitas Posts: 2,012
[quote]Originally posted by Dijon Warlock
Quote:
 Originally posted by SPOOFE There's a reason why miles need to be the units used: that's how the numbers work. What our good friend hiyruu neglects to mention is that the square root of five is the product of the two numbers 3.077683537 and 0.726542528, which are tangental values of a particular set of numbers found in many ancient measuring systems. These numbers were named "gematrian" by researcher Carl Munck, who found the common tangents, and discovered the relationship to the square root of 5, and the fact that the tangent of that value does indeed approximate a slightly-less-than-vacumm velocity of light in miles per second. It's all here. Whether it means what he thinks it means is another question.

I was reading the material in that link but fell off my chair when the author pointed out the coincidence of a nautical mile being exactly equal to a degree of latitude! How can this be?!
#32
12-06-2001, 12:21 PM
 Tranquilis Guest Join Date: Dec 2000
Ex-squid here...

Quote:
 Originally posted by MonkeyMensch I was reading the material in that link but fell off my chair when the author pointed out the coincidence of a nautical mile being exactly equal to a degree of latitude! How can this be?!
So? Then it's true that the Illuminated Ones are controlling the movement of the world's navies? D*mn, and here I thought that it was just a dirty rumor...
#33
12-06-2001, 12:25 PM
 DrMatrix Charter Member Charter Member Join Date: Nov 1999 Location: New York State of Mind Posts: 3,299
I didn't get what he meant by tangent in the OP either.

The connection between phi and the speed of light is Mundane and Pointless and apparently something that Hiyruu feels he Must Share. So, at least he chose the correct forum this time.
#34
12-06-2001, 12:48 PM
 UncleBeer Guest Join Date: May 1999
Quote:
 Here is a connection to how Phi is connected to faster than light phenomenon.
And which phenomena would those be?
#35
12-06-2001, 01:03 PM
 zut Charter Member Join Date: Apr 2000 Location: Detroit, MI Posts: 3,569
Tangent = Sine/Cosine

According to the OP, Tangent(186234.09485) = 2.236067977 = sqrt(5) when 186234.09485 is in degrees.

Actually, Tangent(186234.09485) = -2.236067977, and Tangent(-186234.09485) = 2.236067977, so I guess this relation only applies when light is going backwards.

Actually, as Dijon Warlock said, getting the speed of light in air to the given amount af accuracy is silly. Another reference I consulted gave the speed of light as 186233.55 miles/sec in air. Pretty close, but Tan(186233.55 ) = -2.294365, significantly off from -Sqrt(5).

The kind of reasoning in the OP is like the guy who saw all sorts of mathematical significance in the placement of natural structures on the Mars: there's just so many permutations of functions and numbers that something's bound to show up if you try enough times. For example:

1. Measure the speed of light in a vacuum OR in air OR in water.
2. Change units to miles per hour OR miles per second OR miles per minute OR meters per hour OR meters per second OR meters per minute OR kilometers per hour OR kilometers per second OR kilometers per minute etc.
3. Stick the number in a sin function OR a cosine OR tangent OR secant OR cosecant OR cotangent.
5. Calculate, and you get a number that is (usually) somewhere near one.
6. Compare the resulting number to phi, OR 1/phi, OR phi/2, OR 1/(2*phi) OR 1/(3*phi) OR pi/phi OR phi/pi OR sqrt(5) OR 1-sqrt(5) OR sqrt(5)/2, etc.
7. If it's close, fudge the number in step one by 1 mph or so and recalculate.

Is it any wonder that one of these thousands of possible combinations works?
__________________
Glaring directly down towards her was the stoney, cycloptic face of the bloated diety. Gaping from its single obling socket was scintillating, many fauceted scarlet emerald, a brilliant gem seeming to possess a life all of its own. A priceless gleaming stone, capable of domineering the wealth of conquering empires...the eye of Argon.
#36
12-06-2001, 01:33 PM
 Spritle Guest Join Date: Nov 2000
Hi-why-are-you-you,

I read this thread and was immediately reminded of those math games in books for elementary school kids where you are told to pick any number then double it, add five, subtract 1/2 the original number, etc. and you "magically" end up with your original number or whatever.

The difference here is two-fold.
1) Math is math and science is science. I don't want to piss off mathematicians here, but math is a tool used to do science. Math is pure while science is the application. There is a big difference.

One quick way to tell is to look for units in the numbers.
60 - math
60 m/s - science
Notice the units. They are not arbitrary. They are not decorative. They are not just important to the measurement or number, they are important in defining the value as scientific and not mathematical.

Let's say I propose that 100 = 62. Mathematically, this is incredibly wrong. It isn't just a little bit wrong; it is as wrong as it could possibly be. Scientifically, I could argue that this is true, if one considers units. See, 100 km/hr does, in fact, equal 62 mi/hr. Notice that the units did not just make the numbers "equal", it defined the entire relm of discussion as scientific.

Units are not just important, they are crucial. If you are talking science and speed of light and what not, you had better include units in all cases.

2) Correlation is not causation. You say things like
Quote:
 It shows that the speed of light is connected to phi.
, but you seem to be missing just how useless a statement that is. We all have heard about the "correlation" between the stock market and skirt length from 1950 to 1990, but nobody believes that if the entire female population in America started dressing like Ali McBeall we'd be wealthy beyond our wildest dreams. I have an interesting graphic that shows an excellent regression of the money made by Demi Moore films as "determined" by the length of her hair. Here are the "data":
Code:
```Ghost - \$217.6 million - top of ear length
A Few Good Men - \$141.3 million - lower ear length
Indecent Proposal - \$106.6 million - below chin length
Disclosure - \$83 million - collar length
The Butcher's Wife - \$9.3 million - shoulder length
The Scarlet Letter - \$8.9 million - shoulder blade length```
Now, plotting this all out, we can "predict" what her next film will make. What was her next film? GI Jane. Oops.
Correlation does not mean causation.

Please consider these two points before believing such stuff.
#37
12-06-2001, 03:43 PM
 SPOOFE Guest Join Date: Apr 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by UncleBeer
Quote:
 Here is a connection to how Phi is connected to faster than light phenomenon.
And which phenomena would those be?
I'VE FIGURED IT OUT!!!

Hiyruu is referring to Cherenkov Radiation whenever he mentions Phi!

It's not that his theories are crackpot, he's just using different terminology!!!

It all makes sense now!!
#38
12-06-2001, 07:10 PM
 erislover Guest Join Date: Nov 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by Dijon Warlock
Quote:
 Originally posted by DrMatrix I still think they are joking.
Ah, but that's what they want you to think.
You know, you have a principle which is so ubiquitous and people ignore it. Now we know why the Illuminati are so successful.

Sheesh.
#39
12-06-2001, 07:25 PM
 The Tim Guest Join Date: Oct 2000
The promised proof

186282.5894 (from the OP) is the speed of light in a vaccum.
Split the number into 186282 and .5894, do this because of the duality of light so it makes sense. The first number represents the completeness of light (particle nature) and the second number represents the more fuzzy nature of it (wave nature). Rejoin them by multiplication (yielding 109794.6108). This must be done more times to get down to 177.818. Since this is 6th time you've done the transformation you ofcourse subtract 177 from 818 to get 641.

This is 25 lower than 666, 25 is 5 x 5. The first two digits total 5, and the first and last digits have a difference of 5. Clearly you can then add 25 to get to 666.

Simple numerology.
#40
12-06-2001, 07:41 PM
 heresiarch Guest Join Date: Jul 2001
Hiyruu, I'm curious about something. Is there any significance to your username? Is it related to your real-life name? Is it an acronym?

I was involved with an organization called YRUU which stands for Young Religious Unitarian-Universalists (and incorporates the play on words "Why are you, you?") That's why I'm curious.
#41
12-06-2001, 11:39 PM
 KarlGauss An old man in a dry month Charter Member Join Date: Mar 2000 Location: Between pole and tropic Posts: 5,908
You are all missing the most mysterious of all. Consider:

6([sym]p[/sym])5 = 1836.12 which is the ratio of the masses of the proton and electron.

But what of the Phi analog to that 'mathephysical' expression?
Well, 6([sym]f[/sym])5 = 66.54 and ...

66.54 just happens to equal 6*(186234/16771), i.e. six times the speed of light in air divided by Hiyruu's user number at the SDMB!

Coincidence? I think not.
#42
12-07-2001, 12:09 AM
 saepiroth Guest Join Date: Mar 2001
obviously, if you look at the math CORRECTLY, then this is OBVIOUSLY a proof that
Code:
` if (pecan phi >= cherry phi) then (peach phi /= apple cross phi)`
you fools.

 Bookmarks

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is Off HTML code is Off
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Main     About This Message Board     Comments on Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports     Straight Dope Chicago     General Questions     Great Debates     Elections     Cafe Society     The Game Room     In My Humble Opinion (IMHO)     Mundane Pointless Stuff I Must Share (MPSIMS)     Marketplace     The BBQ Pit Side Conversations     The Barn House

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:00 PM.