Jump to content

Coincidence


GeneralDadmission

Recommended Posts

Is the '6 points of separation' theorem definable as conforming to the phi ratio? Is '6' a geometrical reference to the nature of phi?


Is the way the brain evaluates data relevant to a conversation regulated through pi equations that resemble that of the Golden Rectangle?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio

Edited by GeneralDadmission
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your questions are essentially meaningless without defining some terms.

 

How can a theorem be conforming to pi? How do you think 6 is geometrically related to pi? What are pi equations? Apart from both being transcendental, I am not sure how you think pi resembles the golden ratio.

 

Please clarify exactly what you mean by all these terms, and maybe your questions can be answered. But right now, I have no idea what you're asking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your questions are essentially meaningless without defining some terms.

 

How can a theorem be conforming to pi? How do you think 6 is geometrically related to pi? What are pi equations? Apart from both being transcendental, I am not sure how you think pi resembles the golden ratio.

 

Please clarify exactly what you mean by all these terms, and maybe your questions can be answered. But right now, I have no idea what you're asking.

 

Your questions are essentially meaningless without defining some terms.

 

How can a theorem be conforming to pi? How do you think 6 is geometrically related to pi? What are pi equations? Apart from both being transcendental, I am not sure how you think pi resembles the golden ratio.

 

Please clarify exactly what you mean by all these terms, and maybe your questions can be answered. But right now, I have no idea what you're asking.

 

My mistake. I have edited my spelling to indicate my intended question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

!

Moderator Note

 

Moved to Speculations. Whilst maths may be axiomatic rather than purely empirical there still needs to be some basis for the initial assertions - at present I am seeing nothing other than word salad which lumps two disparate concepts together. Please tie these ideas together, at least in outline, so that a sensible discussion may ensue.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

!

Moderator Note

 

Moved to Speculations. Whilst maths may be axiomatic rather than purely empirical there still needs to be some basis for the initial assertions - at present I am seeing nothing other than word salad which lumps two disparate concepts together. Please tie these ideas together, at least in outline, so that a sensible discussion may ensue.

 

 

I don't know a substantial amount regarding the golden ratio. The way a conversation I was having evolved reminded me of the term '6 points of separation' and the golden rectangle. The simple question is "Is synchronicity and coincidence governed by phi?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The simple question is "Is synchronicity and coincidence governed by phi?"

Again, without defining what you mean here, this is pretty much meaningless. How can something be governed by a number?

 

unless you clarify -- much, much more than just spelling (because your edit didn't fix anything in the OP)-- define what you mean by these words, please -- the answer isn't, yes, no, or anything. Your question has no meaning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For example, coincidence has a wide range of meanings related to things happening at the same time.

 

In electronics, you can have a coincidence counter that just increments whenever both inputs are '1'. This may be a regular and deterministic event.

 

On the other hand, it might be a coincidence to meet a friend you haven't seen for years when you are on holiday in Hong Kong.

 

Neither of these appear to have any connection to, or be "governed by" phi, pi or any other number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough comments. I didn't try to speculate because I thought analysts may have already studied the subject and I was seeking that information. As far as six points of separation, this sounds like a geometric analogy that involves a ratio, to me. I am not speculating but asking where this term comes from and whether it is related to the golden ratio and if so how. I don't have homework only an idle inquiry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as six points of separation, this sounds like a geometric analogy that involves a ratio, to me. I am not speculating but asking where this term comes from and whether it is related to the golden ratio and if so how.

 

Apparently (well, I was surprised) there has been a lot of reasonably serious research into social networks. The average path length between two people does seem to be around 5 or 6, fairly consistently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small-world_experiment

 

But no reason to associate this with the golden mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Apparently (well, I was surprised) there has been a lot of reasonably serious research into social networks. The average path length between two people does seem to be around 5 or 6, fairly consistently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small-world_experiment

 

But no reason to associate this with the golden mean.

 

The way the conversation evolved reminded me of that and how cutting the square out of the golden rectangle can be done indefinitely. The conversation follows a topic that gets squared off and then it evolves to a subject that is more like the rectangle that needs the square cut out of it again.

I guess I'm wondering if phi is a confining factor in mental evolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The way the conversation evolved reminded me of that and how cutting the square out of the golden rectangle can be done indefinitely. The conversation follows a topic that gets squared off and then it evolves to a subject that is more like the rectangle that needs the square cut out of it again.

I guess I'm wondering if phi is a confining factor in mental evolution.

 

I think you are superimposing a pattern you are familiar with on something where it isn't relevant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophenia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think you are superimposing a pattern you are familiar with on something where it isn't relevant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophenia

 

Possibly. What about the brains tendency to seek idealisms? ie; a rectangle can be of any dimension the individual requires but on the group level the golden rectangle is universally ideal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Possibly. What about the brains tendency to seek idealisms? ie; a rectangle can be of any dimension the individual requires but on the group level the golden rectangle is universally ideal?

 

If that is true (and there is no strong evidence that it is, as far as I know) then that may just reflect that it is a pattern that occurs in nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If that is true (and there is no strong evidence that it is, as far as I know) then that may just reflect that it is a pattern that occurs in nature.

 

I believe this is what I am thinking. Any factor that has a common link can only be separated to a maximum degree. The human mind can comprehend the parameters of a subject but before it has been applied to practical familiarisation with the subjects greater content it will superimpose (golden/ideal)rationalisation from the introducting factor to the broader field to be studied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.