Joe Sperling
Guest


« Reply #15 on: September 23, 2003, 04:40:07 am » 

Phillipe
Thank you so much for your input. I am standing next to the retrofit multiplexer at this moment and have turned it on and it is nearing arculus. Per your instructions I have multiplied by the spherical volume occupied by the coaxial fusion distortion. So far so good. I am attempting to compensate for the brownian motion of the deutrium isotopes and their corresponding isomers. Wait a minute, by following your instructions I am beginning to see a fantastic overload in the isolation matrix. It's getting louderI think it's the cycloalkene tower. I was told not to calculate dheavy water vapor to theavy water vapor, but figured you might know what you were talking about. Man, it's really starting to get loud. The pressure gauges have reached nucleatic arculastis!!! I'd better run or


« Last Edit: September 23, 2003, 04:48:24 am by Joe Sperling »

Logged




Tony
Guest


« Reply #16 on: September 23, 2003, 05:07:15 am » 

Phillipe
Thank you so much for your input. I am standing next to the retrofit multiplexer at this moment and have turned it on and it is nearing arculus. Per your instructions I have multiplied by the spherical volume occupied by the coaxial fusion distortion. So far so good. I am attempting to compensate for the brownian motion of the deutrium isotopes and their corresponding isomers. Wait a minute, by following your instructions I am beginning to see a fantastic overload in the isolation matrix. It's getting louderI think it's the cycloalkene tower. I was told not to calculate dheavy water vapor to theavy water vapor, but figured you might know what you were talking about. Man, it's really starting to get loud. The pressure gauges have reached nucleatic arculastis!!! I'd better run or
It's obviously too late for poor ol' Joe. But, for any others who are faced with this, might I recommend a plunger!



Logged




M2
Guest


« Reply #17 on: September 23, 2003, 06:54:33 am » 

Phillipe
Thank you so much for your input. I am standing next to the retrofit multiplexer at this moment and have turned it on and it is nearing arculus. Per your instructions I have multiplied by the spherical volume occupied by the coaxial fusion distortion. So far so good. I am attempting to compensate for the brownian motion of the deutrium isotopes and their corresponding isomers. Wait a minute, by following your instructions I am beginning to see a fantastic overload in the isolation matrix. It's getting louderI think it's the cycloalkene tower. I was told not to calculate dheavy water vapor to theavy water vapor, but figured you might know what you were talking about. Man, it's really starting to get loud. The pressure gauges have reached nucleatic arculastis!!! I'd better run or
Kids don't try this at home. I warned you about the 92, 93 and 95 models. This is what you amateurs get for meddling in the affairs of science. "Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup". Philippe



Logged




sfortescue
Guest


« Reply #18 on: September 23, 2003, 07:23:24 am » 

I've got a question perhaps someone could answer for me since you are speaking of science and math:
At work, while operating our retrofit multiplexer, what would you consider optimal speed (nonsequential and ultragyroscopic of course), when coaxial fusion is thermopulsating near arculus (in a nonstatic, ferrodynamic environment)? Retrograde may be analytical, so consider humidity when figuring logarithmic flashpoint.
Please give the answer in a nonsequential series, as the photonic gradient is not mutually exclusive in neutrionic, noncombustive utilities.
Thanks.
The internet is a great resource for learning about the things that Joe asked about. I searched for arculus and found that it is an arc shaped crossvein in dragonfly wings. In the beautiful picture in the following website, the first three large longitudinal veins on the fromt edge of each wing are crossed by a number of short crossveins. Between the third and fourth longitudinal veins, crossveins are absent near the body. The crossvein nearest to the body is arc shaped (sort of) and is the origin of more longitudinal veins. http://stephenville.tamu.edu/~fmitchel/dragonfly/Aeshnidae/am2ta.htmJoe's equipment must contain something of a similar sort. I haven't found a definition for "neutrionic", but I found the other terms after correcting some spelling errors. (This stuff is way over my head.)



Logged




vernecarty
Guest


« Reply #19 on: September 23, 2003, 08:41:21 am » 

My! What erudition has erupted on this thread! I wonder if Will will come back and join the fun... But semiseriously, the talk about Fibonacci numbers and the golden ratio is mega cool. This is the kind of stuff people who are really interested in looking at cosmology with a view to Divine plan and purpose can really sink their teeth into. For those a little dazed by some of the spectacular displays of technical erudition, a brief summary: The golden ratio, often represented by the Greek letter phi, (the 21st letter of the Greek alphabet, not pi, the sixteenth letter) is a number that is used many times over in nature and human construction during the creation of bodies, and is in very close relation to the sequence.(Fibonacci) First discovered by Greek Mathematicians, it has been used many times over throughout history and has been a source of inspiration to mathematicians, considered to be the key to the construction of aesthetically pleasing creations, and thus is seen in nature, a true piece of art, often repeated. Roughly, it is the ratio of "1.618034…" to "1" but finding a more exact answer can quite a challenge to the impatient! The Fibonacci sequence consists of the numbers 0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34... which are derived by adding together the last 2 numbers in sequence. The relation of the Fibonacci sequence to the golden mean, is that if you take any 2 numbers in sequence and divide the greater by the less, you will get a number that is somewhat close to the golden mean. In fact, the larger the numbers used in the Fibonacci sequence, the closer you will get to a number that is equal to that of the golden mean. For example: 2/1 = 2 3/2 = 1.5 5/3 = 1.6666... 8/5 = 1.6 13/8 = 1.625 21/13=1.615 34/21=1.619 Notice anything interesting about the the series' asymptotic approach to the golden ratio? Although the numbers are not perfectly exact to the golden mean, they are very close, and the higher you go, the closer it seems to get...there is good reason to believe that the golden ratio, phi, is the true universal constant and not the Fibonacci series... Verne p.s. Next thing you know we will all be waxing eloquent about Mandelbrot sets! Philippe, stay out of you dad's workshop! Verne


« Last Edit: September 23, 2003, 06:21:33 pm by vernecarty »

Logged




M2
Guest


« Reply #20 on: September 24, 2003, 12:35:55 am » 

Roughly, it is the ratio of "1.618034…" to "1" but finding a more exact answer can quite a challenge to the impatient!
If one calculates phi using Fibonacci numbers, by the time you divide the 32nd by the 31st you get as many digits as you can get out of a PC (using double precision floating point arithmetic). Here is a table of successive Fibonacci numbers and the corresponding approximations to phi. Fibonacci Approximation of Number the Golden Ratio 1 1 2 1 1.000000000000 3 2 2.000000000000 4 3 1.500000000000 5 5 1.666666666667 6 8 1.600000000000 7 13 1.625000000000 8 21 1.615384615385 9 34 1.619047619048 10 55 1.617647058824 11 89 1.618181818182 12 144 1.617977528090 13 233 1.618055555556 14 377 1.618025751073 15 610 1.618037135279 16 987 1.618032786885 17 1597 1.618034447822 18 2584 1.618033813400 19 4181 1.618034055728 20 6765 1.618033963167 21 10946 1.618033998522 22 17711 1.618033985017 23 28657 1.618033990176 24 46368 1.618033988205 25 75025 1.618033988958 26 121393 1.618033988670 27 196418 1.618033988780 28 317811 1.618033988738 29 514229 1.618033988754 30 832040 1.618033988748 31 1346269 1.618033988751 32 2178309 1.618033988750 33 3524578 1.618033988750 Another neat thing about phi is that phi = 1 / phi + 1 Using the MS Windows SuperCalculator2, I get 1 / 1.618033988749895 = 0.618033988749895 Next thing you know we will all be waxing eloquent about Mandelbrot sets!
Now you're talking. They are beautiful and incredibly complex. Enlarging sections produces more details. Some have speculated that God uses fractals (the Mandelbrot set is a fractal) to encode some of the patterns for living things like alveola in lungs. Claude



Logged




vernecarty
Guest


« Reply #21 on: September 24, 2003, 01:23:09 am » 

If one calculates phi using Fibonacci numbers, by the time you divide the 32nd by the 31st you get as many digits as you can get out of a PC (using double precision floating point arithmetic). Here is a table of successive Fibonacci numbers and the corresponding approximations to phi.
Fibonacci Approximation of Number the Golden Ratio 1 1 2 1 1.000000000000 3 2 2.000000000000 4 3 1.500000000000 5 5 1.666666666667 6 8 1.600000000000 7 13 1.625000000000 8 21 1.615384615385 9 34 1.619047619048 10 55 1.617647058824 11 89 1.618181818182 12 144 1.617977528090 13 233 1.618055555556 14 377 1.618025751073 15 610 1.618037135279 16 987 1.618032786885 17 1597 1.618034447822 18 2584 1.618033813400 19 4181 1.618034055728 20 6765 1.618033963167 21 10946 1.618033998522 22 17711 1.618033985017 23 28657 1.618033990176 24 46368 1.618033988205 25 75025 1.618033988958 26 121393 1.618033988670 27 196418 1.618033988780 28 317811 1.618033988738 29 514229 1.618033988754 30 832040 1.618033988748 31 1346269 1.618033988751 32 2178309 1.618033988750 33 3524578 1.618033988750
Another neat thing about phi is that
phi = 1 / phi + 1
Using the MS Windows SuperCalculator2, I get
1 / 1.618033988749895 = 0.618033988749895
Claude Eeeeegad! Verne


« Last Edit: September 24, 2003, 01:28:22 am by vernecarty »

Logged




sfortescue
Guest


« Reply #22 on: September 24, 2003, 01:36:22 am » 

The first few digits of the golden mean are:
1. 6180339887 4989484820 4586834365 6381177203 0917980576 2862135448 6227052604 6281890244 9707207204 1893911374 8475408807 5386891752 1266338622 2353693179 3180060766 7263544333 8908659593 9582905638 3226613199 2829026788 0675208766 8925017116 9620703222 1043216269 5486262963 1361443814 9758701220 3408058879 5445474924 6185695364 8644492410 4432077134 ...
It is more efficient to use Newtons approximation method to get more accuracy. Then the number of digits accuracy doubles with each iteration.
to solve f(x)=0, start with an estimated solution and compute a more accurate estimate using the formula:
xnew = xold  f(x)/f'(x), where f'(x) is the slope of f(x).
For the golden ratio, f(x) = x^2  x  1, and f'(x) = 2*x  1.
So, xnew = xold  (x^2  x  1) / (2*x  1).
Here are successive estimates of the solution: 1 2 1.6666666666666666666666666666667 1.6190476190476190476190476190476 1.6180344478216818642350557244174 1.6180339887499890970472967792907 1.6180339887498948482045868383382 1.6180339887498948482045868343656



Logged




vernecarty
Guest


« Reply #23 on: September 24, 2003, 02:50:23 am » 

The first few digits of the golden mean are:
1. 6180339887 4989484820 4586834365 6381177203 0917980576 2862135448 6227052604 6281890244 9707207204 1893911374 8475408807 5386891752 1266338622 2353693179 3180060766 7263544333 8908659593 9582905638 3226613199 2829026788 0675208766 8925017116 9620703222 1043216269 5486262963 1361443814 9758701220 3408058879 5445474924 6185695364 8644492410 4432077134 ...
It is more efficient to use Newtons approximation method to get more accuracy. Then the number of digits accuracy doubles with each iteration.
to solve f(x)=0, start with an estimated solution and compute a more accurate estimate using the formula:
xnew = xold  f(x)/f'(x), where f'(x) is the slope of f(x).
For the golden ratio, f(x) = x^2  x  1, and f'(x) = 2*x  1.
So, xnew = xold  (x^2  x  1) / (2*x  1).
Here are successive estimates of the solution: 1 2 1.6666666666666666666666666666667 1.6190476190476190476190476190476 1.6180344478216818642350557244174 1.6180339887499890970472967792907 1.6180339887498948482045868383382 1.6180339887498948482045868343656
DOUBLE EeeeGAD!!... ...first few indeed...!


« Last Edit: September 24, 2003, 02:51:33 am by vernecarty »

Logged




Scott McCumber
Guest


« Reply #24 on: September 24, 2003, 02:53:49 am » 

You guys are just making it harder for me to understand how you ended up following GG! You probably each have about 40 IQ points on him! And a good 75 over DG! Scott



Logged




vernecarty
Guest


« Reply #25 on: September 24, 2003, 02:58:31 am » 

Interesting Facts About The Bible The Bible is the life and tree of knowledge which contains: * 66 books * 1,189 chapters * 31,173 verses * 810,697 words * and 3,566,480 letters. * The longest chapter is Psalm 119. * The middle verse is Psalm 118.8. * The longest name is in Isaiah 8. * The word "and " occurs 46,627 times. * The word "Lord" 1,855 times. * 2 Kings 19 and Isaiah 37 are almost alike. * The longest verse is Esther 8:9 with 90 words and 426 letters. * The shortest verse is John 11:35; "Jesus wept". * Ezra 7:21 contains all the letters of the alphabet except 2. * Ezra the scribe was the first to preach from a pulpit. * The words "boy" and "girl" "chapel" "coffin" "eternity" and "reverend" are only mentioned once  read on until you find them. * The finest piece of reading is said to be in Acts 26. * The name of God is not once mentioned in Esther, although it contains so much holiness, knowledge, love, and wisdom.
Read the Bible diligently in preference to the trash of the present day. All who may doubt these words and figures, count them for yourselves.
The above wonderful calculations occupied much time, devotion, study and perseverance to complete the work, and it is said to have originated from either an afflicted invalid lady or from a convict long confined in prison, thus enabling him to help pass away the solitary hours, and who must have been blessed with the patience of Job to complete the task.
The book of Isaiah is constructed much like the entire Bible.
**Bible: 66 books. **Isaiah: 66 chapters.
**Bible: First 39 books mainly concern Isreal. **Isaiah: First 39 chapters mainly concern Isreal.
**Bible: Last 27 books concern the life and coming of Jesus Christ. **Isaiah: Last 27 chapters concern the life and coming of Jesus Christ.
Verne


« Last Edit: September 24, 2003, 03:04:11 am by vernecarty »

Logged




sfortescue
Guest


« Reply #26 on: September 24, 2003, 03:20:17 am » 

You guys are just making it harder for me to understand how you ended up following GG! You probably each have about 40 IQ points on him! And a good 75 over DG! Scott In general, I find it easier to solve Math problems than to figure out whether someone is telling me the truth or not. I like Math because it's honest and straightforward. I have a hard time understanding people, but I have to try.



Logged




Joe Sperling
Guest


« Reply #27 on: September 24, 2003, 03:24:13 am » 

Verne Thanks for those statistics. But you know, the guy I have to say that I truly admire, having no computers to work with etc. was John Strong, author of "Strongs Exhaustive Concordance". That whole work was done literally by hand. He did not do it alone, doling out some of the work to others, but he did a large majority of it by himself. Can you imagine the labor involved in putting that massive work together? And if he could see what we are able to do now with computers he would probably fall down and cry thinking of all the hours he missed out on where he could have been fishing instead.(just kidding).
joe



Logged




Arthur
Guest


« Reply #28 on: September 24, 2003, 05:53:01 am » 

The first few digits of the golden mean are:
1. 6180339887 4989484820 4586834365 6381177203 0917980576 2862135448 6227052604 6281890244 9707207204 1893911374 8475408807 5386891752 1266338622 2353693179 3180060766 7263544333 8908659593 9582905638 3226613199 2829026788 0675208766 8925017116 9620703222 1043216269 5486262963 1361443814 9758701220 3408058879 5445474924 6185695364 8644492410 4432077134 ...
It is more efficient to use Newtons approximation method to get more accuracy. Then the number of digits accuracy doubles with each iteration.
to solve f(x)=0, start with an estimated solution and compute a more accurate estimate using the formula:
xnew = xold  f(x)/f'(x), where f'(x) is the slope of f(x).
For the golden ratio, f(x) = x^2  x  1, and f'(x) = 2*x  1.
So, xnew = xold  (x^2  x  1) / (2*x  1).
Here are successive estimates of the solution: 1 2 1.6666666666666666666666666666667 1.6190476190476190476190476190476 1.6180344478216818642350557244174 1.6180339887499890970472967792907 1.6180339887498948482045868383382 1.6180339887498948482045868343656
Hey Steve, have you ever heard of a program called FRACTINT? Your mention of Newton's aproximation reminded me of it. Here's a pic from it:



Logged




wmathews
Guest


« Reply #29 on: September 24, 2003, 08:08:33 am » 

Fibonacci's sequence can be applied to numerous natural phenomena:
Medieval mathematician and businessman Fibonacci (Leonardo Pisano) posed the following problem in his treatise Liber Abaci (pub. 1202): How many pairs of rabbits will be produced in a year, beginning with a single pair, if in every month each pair bears a new pair which becomes productive from the second month on? It is easy to see that 1 pair will be produced the first month, and 1 pair also in the second month (since the new pair produced in the first month is not yet mature), and in the third month 2 pairs will be produced, one by the original pair and one by the pair which was produced in the first month. In the fourth month 3 pairs will be produced, and in the fifth month 5 pairs. After this things expand rapidly, and we get the following sequence of numbers:
1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, ...
This is an example of a recursive sequence, obeying the simple rule that to calculate the next term one simply sums the preceding two:
F(1) = 1 F(2) = 1 F(n) = F(n – 1) + F(n – 2)
Thus 1 and 1 are 2, 1 and 2 are 3, 2 and 3 are 5, and so on. This simple, seemingly unremarkable recursive sequence has fascinated mathematicians for centuries. Its properties illuminate an array of surprising topics, from the aesthetic doctrines of the ancient Greeks to the growth patterns of plants (not to mention populations of rabbits!). What a creative mathematician is our God!



Logged




