100,000 digits of pi

**Darkness** · 11-22-2004

I don't think anybody ever said that it's perfectly accurate for all people (in my post above, I said "While lucky's example isn't necessarily right for ALL people it's actually the most basic idea of where the golden ratio comes from."). It's just kind of neat that these ratios, on average, are very close to the golden ratio.

The other examples in the book are actually kind of, almost, spooky, because there are all sorts of places where the golden ratio surfaces, and is *exactly* equal to the golden ratio. Plus, tied with other sequences (the fibonacci series) this particular number has some properties which math dorks find interesting.

**PJYelton** · 11-22-2004

Yeah, like Darkness says, its not perfect by any means, just that the majority of the people have ratios that are similar to the phi.

Now when that website uses phi to prove gods existance, well, thats when it lost me...

**axon** · 11-22-2004

yeah, I think I should remove that link....I just kinda glanced at the first part of it and posted....oh well, at least its "entertaining".

**vasanth** · 11-23-2004

Originally Posted by axon

>> That'll be great; it's really a fantastic book.

you gotta be kidding me. Dan Brown is such a mediocre author. The idea was pretty cool, but Brown can't write worth sh!t.

yea rite...it was on the best seller list for a long time for nothing.. without haveing read it i dont think you are in a position to comment if its sh!t or not...

**vasanth** · 11-23-2004

Originally Posted by gcn_zelda

I dunno if that's true. I'm a hardcore Christian, and I loved the book. It's fiction, so it's not a big deal.

though it was a fiction some or shal i say more than some of the stuff there are facts.. for exmaple its an historical fact that Constantine the Great made christianity the state religion and he ordered the making of the Bible that would reinforce the decision to make Jesus the divine Son of God...

Though this is still disputed by many..

**Govtcheez** · 11-23-2004

> it was on the best seller list for a long time for nothing..

Just because it's popular doesn't make it any good.

**vasanth** · 11-23-2004

Originally Posted by Govtcheez

> it was on the best seller list for a long time for nothing..

Just because it's popular doesn't make it any good.

I agree.. but its an Indication its can be good if you read it

**Govtcheez** · 11-23-2004

Originally Posted by PJYelton

Yeah, like Darkness says, its not perfect by any means, just that the majority of the people have ratios that are similar to the phi.

They're also similar to some other arbitrary number, like 1.6 or 1.7 or 1.5 or anywhere in between. I've got an idea, let's add to the mysticism and the idea that we're all united by some common number and use pi/2 instead! Wouldn't that just blow your mind?!

When you divide the circumference of a circle by its diameter, you get pi. Exactly pi, every time. When you divide some arbitrary measurements of some people's bodies you get something generally close to some number, but nothing exact. I don't see how this is even a debate.

**vasanth** · 11-23-2004

Originally Posted by Govtcheez

They're also similar to some other arbitrary number, like 1.6 or 1.7 or 1.5 or anywhere in between. I've got an idea, let's add to the mysticism and the idea that we're all united by some common number and use pi/2 instead! Wouldn't that just blow your mind?!

When you divide the circumference of a circle by its diameter, you get pi. Exactly pi, every time. When you divide some arbitrary measurements of some people's bodies you get something generally close to some number, but nothing exact. I don't see how this is even a debate.

I agree with this...all the mysticism created around this is sh!t... I would just say that PHI is one of the special numbers like many others...

**Govtcheez** · 11-23-2004

> I would just say that PHI is one of the special numbers like many others...

Haven't really seen a convincing reason why yet, but ok.

**vasanth** · 11-23-2004

Originally Posted by Govtcheez

> I would just say that PHI is one of the special numbers like many others...

Haven't really seen a convincing reason why yet, but ok.

hahahha looks like for the first time in a thread like this ppl with two differnt view have agrred to compromise on some aspects agreeable to both parties...

**axon** · 11-23-2004

>>yea rite...it was on the best seller list for a long time for nothing.. without haveing read it i dont think you are in a position to comment if its sh!t or not...<<

This is the silliest thing I've read in this thread. Think about how many things, in a multitude of genres, become bestsellers: movies, music, etc. Brown is a laughing stock within the literary community - I don't doubt that some of it is fueled by envy (of selling so much), but anyone who is serious about reading/writting agrees on the fact that Brown is a very lousy author with brilliant ideas.

**vasanth** · 11-23-2004

Originally Posted by axon

Brown is a very lousy author with brilliant ideas.

ok I agree with you and the rest of your post... Looks like the compromise has worked for the seccond time it this thread

**LuckY** · 11-23-2004

>> That'll be great; it's really a fantastic book.

you gotta be kidding me. Dan Brown is such a mediocre author. The idea was pretty cool, but Brown can't write worth sh!t.

Well, geez, what a stupid fool I am for thinking it was a good book. No, I am not kidding you. It was a very enjoyable book regardless of how much you are unable to contain your disgust. The idea is very cool, but Brown can write "worth sh!t." Of course, this is a simple matter of opinion that cannot be argued over, but at the very least let me state that my opinion of you is that you are probably one of these folks who wants to be more "highbrow" than those around and attempts to demonstrate it by bashing everything overwhelmingly successful in popular media.
Honestly, to say the book is bad is one thing, but to say the guy can't write at all? The premise, plot, and characters were very well developed and I cannot see any valid reason for such comments based on just this book. Eh.

Brown is a laughing stock within the literary community

Out of curiosity, do you spend a lot of time "within the literary community" or is this just what you read by others who can write "worth sh!t?" Just curious.

**PJYelton** · 11-23-2004

They're also similar to some other arbitrary number, like 1.6 or 1.7 or 1.5 or anywhere in between. I've got an idea, let's add to the mysticism and the idea that we're all united by some common number and use pi/2 instead! Wouldn't that just blow your mind?!

When you divide the circumference of a circle by its diameter, you get pi. Exactly pi, every time. When you divide some arbitrary measurements of some people's bodies you get something generally close to some number, but nothing exact. I don't see how this is even a debate.

Actually I agree with you in a way. I don't think its mystical at all, I was just stating that most of those stated bodies ratios come close to phi for most people. I really don't think it means anything though. In fact, considering how many body parts a person has, I think it would be impossible NOT to find many ratios close to phi. For example, if you take the height of a person vs the height of a body part from the ground while that person is standing, think of how many choices you have. Moving upwards you have the knees, the groin, the waist, the belly button, the tip of the fingers, the wrist, the elbow, the shoulders, the chest, and probably more. Of course ONE of those will hit phi, and the mystics or whatever would just use that as an example for their proof. I think phi has many interesting examples in nature, but I wouldn't necessarily count the human body as one of them.

Axon, sorry bud but I gotta call you on this, how can you be so harsh on the Davinci Code yet defend National Treasure? They are essentially the exact same story written the exact same way.