The golden Ratio is an irrational number: it can not be expressed, ever. It is a non repeating decimal. Thus can not be in anything. It isn’t true. It is a concept, a mathematical model.
It isn’t in any of the classical things people will first mention. No music, no buildings (besides modern artificial round ups inspired by the myth), nothing in Greece (excluding mathematics itself), no painting, not pyramids, not people, nothing to do with da Vinci at all. Nothing. It wasn’t even called the golden anything until the early to mid 20th century.
Artificial post hoc applications of shapes on odd places of half destroyed buildings and works, it is almost appalling how obvious it becomes. Why didn’t I just see this, ask these questions? It really isn’t that difficult to spot. Although I don’t think you need to go past the first line, since it can’t be expressed. At best I could say I am very suspicious. Of everything, of course, but it sucks to loose this.
It is in the platonic solids, possibly (I am still looking into some aspects), and it is in fractals: but it is the explanatory mathematics, there is no reason to believe it is more or less amazing than any other explanatory math of some other cool thing expressed visually as a colorful graph to distort meaning. Not unlike fMRI imaging.
Plus our math changes.
We just like patterns, we’re like babies. Especially considering the known limits of our vision, for example, it starts to feel like forced meaning again very quickly, like everything. An older version of misrepresented science trying to join with religion to gain power over people and sell books. An early version of pop quantum mechanics that people love to not understand so fervently.
It is nice and existential I suppose. Selective. I bet there are plenty of better numbers as well, depending on ones criteria at a given place in a space time event.
It is related to growth though, as far as I can tell. Maybe. At least in relation to optimizing photosynthesis potential without being blocked by a partner plant of the same species. And it rounds up too (ie Fibonacci numbers).
This is what is seen in fractal images, essentially a graph of this particular common model of a growth effect. This is my symbol (phi), which adds a feeling of losing sacred geometry. Or was it? It is a symbol in my head, maybe more like small phi, maybe it is the rising sun: we are so desperate for meaning. How about maybe babies like round things cause they look like faces and it is an early memory of an extension neuro-artifact of that intrinsic survival phenomenon.
But it is all goal dependent and limitation dependent, all of it. I don’t think it is enough.
This is another step forward anyway. Or since there is probably no forward, it is a step. I’ll take that.
It isn’t even really seen in that shell.
First Edition J Chronicle Ltt. Sci. 25(10)12