Read in the Da Vinci Code that phi = 1.68

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jai6638
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Code Phi
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of the golden ratio, often denoted as phi (φ), and its representation in popular culture, specifically referencing "The Da Vinci Code." Participants explore the mathematical and physical implications of phi, its applications, and its presence in nature and art.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant claims that phi equals 1.68 and suggests it represents a universal proportion, citing personal measurements.
  • Another participant challenges the initial claim, reporting a different value of 1.53 based on their own measurements.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the idea that phi applies universally, suggesting that such claims are exaggerated or misleading.
  • There is mention of the "golden rectangle" and its properties, with one participant providing a mathematical derivation related to the ratio of its sides.
  • One participant discusses the occurrence of the divine proportion in nature, referencing spiral seashells and recursive structures, while another dismisses the relevance of phi to the human body as numerological trickery.
  • A participant shares a Java code snippet for calculating phi, indicating an interest in programming applications related to the concept.
  • Another participant suggests an alternative mathematical expression for phi that avoids square roots.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with some agreeing on the mathematical properties of phi while others contest its universal application and significance. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the validity of claims about phi's presence in nature and its implications.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the limitations of claims about phi, noting that interpretations may depend on selective examples and definitions. The mathematical derivation provided is not universally accepted as definitive, and there are unresolved questions about the relevance of phi in various contexts.

jai6638
Messages
263
Reaction score
0
Hey.. .i just read in the Da Vinci Code that phi = 1.68 and that everythin in thie universal has the same proportion.. and that its called the DIVINE Proportion... For example, if you divide the length between your head to ur toe by the length between your waist and toe ur going to get the value of phi, i.e. , 1.68..


Is this true?? In what context is phi used in mathematics or physics?

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For example, if you divide the length between your head to ur toe by the length between your waist and toe ur going to get the value of phi, i.e. , 1.68..

Hmm, I got 1.53...
 
Not "everything", definitely.

It's nice to say that there are all these mysterious properties attributed to phi, but that's mostly to keep you interested. There are some interesting things about the number phi, like the construction of rectangles within rectangles, and the limiting ratio of terms in a fibonacci sequence.

I really don't know of any real applications of phi in math or physics, nor do I suspect there would be any reason for it being particularly "appliable."
 
No, it is not true that "everythin in thie universal has the same proportionl" (and that is NOT said in "The DaVinci Code").

The "divide proportion" is connected to the "Golden Rectangle" which is mentioned in
"The DaVinci Code" (DaVinci's "Last Supper" is in the proportions of a golden rectangle): If you mark off a length on the longer length, equal to the width of the rectangle, you divide the rectangle into a square (the "width by width") and a rectangle (the remaining part). If the original rectangle is a "golden rectangle", then the new smaller rectangle will be also: in both the ratio of length to width is the same: the "divide proportion".

The calculation: Call the length of the original rectangle l and its width w. If we cut off a "w by w" square, we have left a rectangle with sides of length w and l-w. Now, w is the longer "length" so the ration of "length to width" is w/(l-w) which must be equal to the original l/w:
[tex]\frac{w}{l-w}= \frac{l}{w}[/tex]

Multiplying by w(l-w) gives w2= l(l-w)= l2- lw.

If we divide both sides of that by w2, we get
1= (l/w)2- (l/w). let x= l/w and we have 1= x2- x or
x2- x- 1= 0. Solving that by the quadratic formula,
[tex]x= \frac{1+\sqrt{5}}{2}[/tex]
is the "divine ratio".

It's interesting but it is NOT "divine"!
 
Um, 'Halls of Ivy' seems to have a cold. :) He keeps saying the "divide proportion".


The divine proportion is common in nature. Spiral seashells and other recursive structures exhibit properties based on it.

As far as the human body goes, that's nonsense. That is the trickery of numerology - you can always find numbers that fit your claim if you look hard enough, and are highly selective in your choices.

Someone once showed that the Statue of Liberty was of "obvious" extraterrestrial origin becasue its height in inches was exactly equal to the distance to Alpha Centauri minus the number of leap days since its construction - or some such silliness.
 
DaveC426913 said:
The divine proportion is common in nature. Spiral seashells and other recursive structures exhibit properties based on it.

For a debunking see:
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/pseudo/fibonacc.htm
 
Huh. I am guilty of having a simplistic view of this subject. I had always assumed that the golden ratio was a generalized set of curves, and the nautilus was just in that range.

I'll have to give that page a careful looksee and reflect deeply.

(This comes at a bad time. I am reading Crichton's book 'State of Fear'. The story, while fiction, does to Global Warming what this site did to my views on magic numbers in nature. Makes me question some of my basic and long-held beliefs, particularly the ones rooted in common- or "everybody knows"-knowledge.)
 
Last edited:
Wow. I really like HallsofIvy's response. I am so, like, very impressed. and I also like the "divide proportion". That is so very clever. Henceforth, I, too, shall refer to the "divide proportion". I love it! Thank you HallsofIvy. Hugs. -CeeAnne-
 
  • #10
DaveC426913 said:
Um, 'Halls of Ivy' seems to have a cold. :) He keeps saying the "divide proportion".


:smile: :smile: :smile:
 
  • #11
For the programmers amonst us:
Code:
	public double findPhi(int degree){
		double phi = 1.0;

		int n = 1;
		while ( n < degree + 1 ){
			phi = Math.sqrt( phi + 1 );
			n++;
		}
		return phi;
	}

This is some code I wrote a little while ago, in Java.
 
  • #12
Actually, you can do it without resorting the square roots in your loop. Use:

[tex]\phi = 1 + \frac {1}{\phi}[/tex]
 
  • #13
AAAAAChooo!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
90
Views
13K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
19K
Replies
15
Views
42K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 110 ·
4
Replies
110
Views
25K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K