Phi Factoids.

[Dijon_Warlock]

*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]

[John_Kentzel-Griffin]

*Originally posted by ***Dijon Warlock **
And you thought they were joking.

I still think they are joking.

[Dijon_Warlock]

*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…)

[SPOOFE]

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?

[Dijon_Warlock]

You mean it’s really Bill Gates in that costume? I always suspected…

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.

[SPOOFE]

Hey, Dijon, Barney is already Satan… such other insults like yours belong in the Pit.

[Dijon_Warlock]

Awww, I figured I could hijack this into another PC/Mac debate…:eek:

[FlyingDragonFan]

*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.

[LindyHopper]

*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?

[Fledermaus]

Can someone explain this use of the word ‘tangent’ to me?

Per Dictionary.com (http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=tangent):

2. Irrelevant.

As in, this entire thread.

[MonkeyMensch]

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Dijon Warlock *
**

*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?!

[Tranquilis]

*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…

[John_Kentzel-Griffin]

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.

[UncleBeer]

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

And which phenomena would those be?

[zut]

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/(2phi) OR 1/(3phi) 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?

[Spritle]

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

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”:

*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.

[SPOOFE]

*Originally posted by UncleBeer *
**

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!!

[erislover]

*Originally posted by Dijon Warlock *
**

*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.

[The_Tim]

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.

[heresiarch]

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.