|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
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. |
| Advertisements | |
|
|
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
^^ Your calculator must be in degree mode to do this.
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Phi, curiously, can also be expressed all in phives as:
5 ^ .5 * .5 + .5 = Ø |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I do like the equivalent arithmetic derivation of phi: ***NEWS BREAK*** 78 - 75 = 3 AND 1 + 2 = 3, too! Film at eleven! |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
It still shows that Phi is connected to the speed of light via the Sqr5.
|
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
That's not a tau neutrino in my pocket; I've got a hadron. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
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
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
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
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
No, YOU'RE reaching the conclusion YOU want by changing the units. ![]() [/Devil's Advocate] 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
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
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
|
|||
|
|||
|
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
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
This is silly. You could connect the speed of light to any number using functions like you are doing. |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
::d&r:: |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
And you thought they were joking. fixed quote [Edited by DrMatrix on 12-06-2001 at 03:25 AM] |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
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
|
|||
|
|||
|
You mean it's really Bill Gates in that costume? I always suspected...
Quote:
|
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hey, Dijon, Barney is already Satan... such other insults like yours belong in the Pit.
|
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
Awww, I figured I could hijack this into another PC/Mac debate....
|
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Oh, and Dijon? Macs rule.
__________________
"A nothing will serve just as well as a something about which nothing could be said." — Ludwig Wittgenstein |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
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
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
[quote]Originally posted by Dijon Warlock
Quote:
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
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ex-squid here...
Quote:
|
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
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
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
|
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. 4. Interpret the number as radians OR degrees OR gradients. 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
|
|||
|
|||
|
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:
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 Correlation does not mean causation. Please consider these two points before believing such stuff. |
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
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
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Sheesh. |
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
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
|
|||
|
|||
|
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
|
|||
|
|||
|
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
|
|||
|
|||
|
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)
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|