Physics equations with the mathematical constant Phi?

Click For Summary
Phi, the golden ratio, is often associated with exponential growth and appears in biological contexts, such as the Fibonacci sequence and natural patterns like sunflower florets. However, its direct role in fundamental physics phenomena is less clear compared to Pi. Some discussions suggest that while Phi may not be involved in exponential growth itself, it can replace certain numerical values in mathematical expressions. The conversation highlights the intersection of mathematics and nature, emphasizing Phi's aesthetic and structural significance. Overall, the exploration of Phi in physics remains a topic of interest but lacks definitive applications in fundamental physics equations.
ole cram
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Does the math constant Phi (Φ = 1.618) or its inverse appear in "fundamental" physics formulae?
I know Phi appears often when modelling exponential growth and, probably because of that, also in Biology/Ecology. But does it appear spontaneously in the mathematical description of some fundamental physics phenomenon at all? (As does Pi, the ubiquitous irrational number)
Hope I'm posting on the right forum. Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ole cram said:
I know Phi appears often when modelling exponential growth and, probably because of that, also in Biology/Ecology.
As far as I recall, phi doesn't play a role in exponential growth, but it does play a role in such things as the Fibonacci sequence and the spiral arrangement of the scales on pine cones, the florets on a sunflower, and other examples - https://awkwardbotany.com/2019/12/25/pine-cones-and-the-fibonacci-sequence/.
 
Any time the number 5 comes up you can replace it by (2Φ-1)2.
 
Reply
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes nasu, fresh_42, Mondayman and 1 other person
Moderator's note: An unacceptable reference has been deleted.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50, weirdoguy and renormalize

Thread 'Why would an atmosphere without greenhouse gasses be colder than with them?'

Quick question that I haven't been able to find the answer to. Greenhouse gasses both warm and cool the atmosphere by slowing heat loss to space. But what would happen without GHGs? I read that the earth would be colder (though still relatively warm), but why? Without GHGs the atmosphere would still be a similar mass and still warmed by conduction from the surface, yet without a means to radiate that heat to space. Why wouldn't the atmosphere accumulate heat over time, becoming warmer? How...
View full post »

Similar threads

A Mathematical Connection between Cosmic Expansion and Exponential Growth
Replies
24
Views
2K
I Mathematical disagreement with inverse square law?
Replies
33
Views
3K
B The values of the fundamental constants
Replies
12
Views
2K
Is mathematics invented or discovered?
Replies
2
Views
232
Programs What subject is better for an aspiring experimental physicist?
Replies
19
Views
4K
A The physical constants: relationship to mathematics?
Replies
4
Views
2K
I Three questions regarding QG theories
Replies
12
Views
3K
B New hypothesis of continuous wave function collapse
Replies
5
Views
3K
A Comment on Nicolas Gisin "Intuitionistic Mathematics"?
Replies
1
Views
2K
A Finding a suitable form factor for a given set of conditions
Replies
1
Views
2K