• The Golden Ratio

    From dgb (David@21:1/5 to All on Mon Mar 4 09:04:58 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to dgb on Mon Mar 4 10:34:11 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Mathematics doesn't occur.
    It is.

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richmond@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Mon Mar 4 10:42:30 2024
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Mathematics doesn't occur.
    It is.


    If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because
    time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From dgb (David@21:1/5 to All on Mon Mar 4 10:31:23 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    On 4 Mar 2024 at 09:34:11 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Mathematics doesn't occur.
    It is.

    Jan

    Rather like this:- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_am_(biblical_term)

    David

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From dgb (David@21:1/5 to FromTheRafters on Mon Mar 4 10:33:17 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    On 4 Mar 2024 at 09:37:53 GMT, "FromTheRafters" <FTR@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    dgb (David) presented the following explanation :
    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Happenstance, like Pi.

    I don't believe that.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Richmond on Mon Mar 4 14:43:53 2024
    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Mathematics doesn't occur.
    It is.


    If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because
    time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.

    The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be
    is irrelevant for mathematics,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From T i m@21:1/5 to All on Mon Mar 4 16:01:15 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    On 04/03/2024 10:33, dgb (David) wrote:
    On 4 Mar 2024 at 09:37:53 GMT, "FromTheRafters" <FTR@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    dgb (David) presented the following explanation :
    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Happenstance, like Pi.

    I don't believe that.

    I have (and wear) one of these:

    https://www.geeksoutfit.com/products/science-doesnt-care-what-you-believe-t-shirt

    Cheers, T i m

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richmond@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Mon Mar 4 15:24:02 2024
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Mathematics doesn't occur. It is.


    If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before
    the beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin,
    because time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.

    The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be is irrelevant for mathematics,


    A bold statement. But what is the meaning of geometry without the
    physical world from which it was derived?

    And what do you know about physics, other than that which is expressed
    by the standard model, which is a mathematical model?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Mon Mar 4 09:30:26 2024
    On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 16:01:15 +0000, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by T i m <eternal@spaced.me.uk>:

    <Snip irrelevant site>

    On 04/03/2024 10:33, dgb (David) wrote:
    On 4 Mar 2024 at 09:37:53 GMT, "FromTheRafters" <FTR@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    dgb (David) presented the following explanation :
    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Happenstance, like Pi.

    I don't believe that.

    I have (and wear) one of these:

    https://www.geeksoutfit.com/products/science-doesnt-care-what-you-believe-t-shirt

    Too restrictive; the *universe* doesn't care what anyone
    believes.

    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Mon Mar 4 16:51:21 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 10:38:14 -0800, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by erik simpson
    <eastside.erik@gmail.com>:

    On 3/4/24 1:34 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Mathematics doesn't occur.
    It is.

    Jan


    Not sure about "occur". This may be a philosophical quibble, but I have >always regarded mathematics as a form of language, based primarily on >counting. And yes, humans aren't the only animals capable of that. That >said, if there are things to count and creatures to count them, there
    will be numbers. We (humans) are capable of finding interesting kinds
    of numbers (irrational, transcendental). So far as I know, there is no
    such thing as an "accidental" number.

    I believe his point is the math expresses existing
    relationships which existed prior to the invention of math,
    just like everything in nature.

    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Mon Mar 4 22:56:34 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 16:38:27 -0800, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by erik simpson
    <eastside.erik@gmail.com>:

    On 3/4/24 3:51 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 10:38:14 -0800, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by erik simpson
    <eastside.erik@gmail.com>:

    On 3/4/24 1:34 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Mathematics doesn't occur.
    It is.

    Jan


    Not sure about "occur". This may be a philosophical quibble, but I have >>> always regarded mathematics as a form of language, based primarily on
    counting. And yes, humans aren't the only animals capable of that. That >>> said, if there are things to count and creatures to count them, there
    will be numbers. We (humans) are capable of finding interesting kinds
    of numbers (irrational, transcendental). So far as I know, there is no
    such thing as an "accidental" number.

    I believe his point is the math expresses existing
    relationships which existed prior to the invention of math,
    just like everything in nature.

    That's it. In particular, the "Golden Ratio" isn't an accident or a
    design. It's just a definition. Now if there were a universe that
    contained nothing, or maybe just one thing, there wouldn't be any math.

    Pretty much the way I see it; the math results from the
    physical relationships.

    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Kalkidas@21:1/5 to david@nomail.afraid.org on Wed Mar 6 18:34:10 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratioOr by design?

    It will never be known.
    --


    ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From dgb (David@21:1/5 to Kalkidas on Thu Mar 7 08:03:19 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 01:34:10 GMT, "Kalkidas" <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    Have you ever studied, REALLY studied, nature?

    See:- https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/Mother_and_daughter.jpg

    Then look here:- https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/FibonacciChamomile.PNG

    The "nature" section here tells you more:- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibonacci_sequence

    =

    I KNOW it's not just an 'accident'! ;-)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Kalkidas on Thu Mar 7 10:38:23 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratioOr by
    design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From dgb (David@21:1/5 to All on Thu Mar 7 10:13:43 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D

    In my opinion, of course!

    --
    David

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mark Isaak@21:1/5 to All on Thu Mar 7 07:55:16 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    On 3/7/24 2:13 AM, dgb (David) wrote:
    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>> Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D

    In my opinion, of course!

    And how about the number 72287 & 9/11ths? Did it happen by accident?

    --
    Mark Isaak
    "Wisdom begins when you discover the difference between 'That
    doesn't make sense' and 'I don't understand.'" - Mary Doria Russell

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richmond@21:1/5 to Mark Isaak on Thu Mar 7 16:36:07 2024
    Mark Isaak <specimenNOSPAM@curioustaxon.omy.net> writes:

    On 3/7/24 2:13 AM, dgb (David) wrote:
    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>> Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan
    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident!
    :-D
    In my opinion, of course!

    And how about the number 72287 & 9/11ths? Did it happen by accident?

    One might ask if a rectange has four sides by accident. How could it be otherwise and still be a rectangle?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to dgb on Thu Mar 7 18:41:02 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>> Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D

    It hasn't happened at all.

    In my opinion, of course!

    Opinions are worthless,
    (yours in particular)

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From dgb (David@21:1/5 to All on Thu Mar 7 17:51:40 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>> Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D

    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    In my opinion, of course!

    Opinions are worthless,
    (yours in particular)

    Jan

    You'd do well to watch and listen here:-

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY

    --
    David

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From dgb (David@21:1/5 to Richmond on Thu Mar 7 19:11:15 2024
    On 7 Mar 2024 at 16:36:07 GMT, "Richmond" <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    Mark Isaak <specimenNOSPAM@curioustaxon.omy.net> writes:

    On 3/7/24 2:13 AM, dgb (David) wrote:
    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>> Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan
    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident!
    :-D
    In my opinion, of course!

    And how about the number 72287 & 9/11ths? Did it happen by accident?

    One might ask if a rectange has four sides by accident. How could it be otherwise and still be a rectangle?

    Do you have any idea what this Mark fellow is getting at?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Thu Mar 7 15:31:27 2024
    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>> Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D

    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    In my opinion, of course!

    Opinions are worthless,
    (yours in particular)

    Jan

    You'd do well to watch and listen here:-

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY
    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Thu Mar 7 15:27:57 2024
    On Thu, 07 Mar 2024 16:38:03 -0500, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by FromTheRafters
    <FTR@nomail.afraid.org>:

    dgb (David) explained :
    On 7 Mar 2024 at 16:36:07 GMT, "Richmond" <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    Mark Isaak <specimenNOSPAM@curioustaxon.omy.net> writes:

    On 3/7/24 2:13 AM, dgb (David) wrote:
    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>>>> Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan
    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident!
    :-D
    In my opinion, of course!

    And how about the number 72287 & 9/11ths? Did it happen by accident?

    One might ask if a rectange has four sides by accident. How could it be
    otherwise and still be a rectangle?

    Do you have any idea what this Mark fellow is getting at?

    He's two elevenths from getting at being 72288.

    Obviously, that couldn't *possibly* have happened by
    accident, so Mark must have occurred by Special Creation!

    And that pothole was obviously created; the water fills it
    so perfectly!

    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Athel Cornish-Bowden@21:1/5 to Bob Casanova on Fri Mar 8 11:19:33 2024
    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>>> Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >>>
    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    In my opinion, of course!

    Opinions are worthless,
    (yours in particular)

    Jan

    You'd do well to watch and listen here:-

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY


    --
    Athel cb

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Fri Mar 8 10:40:47 2024
    On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 11:19:33 +0100, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com>:

    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>>>> Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >>>>
    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    Disagree. The mathematical relationships describe physical
    reality, which would exist even if math had never been
    invented or if those physical relationships had never been
    noticed and given "cute" names. To put it another way, what
    is, is; math describes it.

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    In my opinion, of course!

    Opinions are worthless,
    (yours in particular)

    Jan

    You'd do well to watch and listen here:-

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY
    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Athel Cornish-Bowden on Wed Mar 13 13:39:38 2024
    Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >>>
    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
    incapable of abstraction and idealisation,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Bob Casanova on Wed Mar 13 13:39:37 2024
    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>> Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >>
    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    Down to the deepest depths of the cave with you.
    Go beat the chalk out of a hunderd blackboard erasers for punishment,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to dgb on Wed Mar 13 13:39:36 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>> Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D

    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Off course, always.
    On course, otoh...

    In my opinion, of course!

    Opinions are worthless,
    (yours in particular)

    Jan

    You'd do well to watch and listen here:-

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY

    Post arguments, not links,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From dgb (David@21:1/5 to All on Wed Mar 13 15:42:16 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    On 13 Mar 2024 at 12:39:36 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio >>>>>>> Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >>>
    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Off course, always.
    On course, otoh...

    I was trying to be kind to you. :-(

    In my opinion, of course!

    Opinions are worthless,
    (yours in particular)

    Jan

    You'd do well to watch and listen here:-

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY

    Post arguments, not links,

    Is this a case of you having deep pockets and short arms, Jan?

    --
    David

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Wed Mar 13 09:36:13 2024
    On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:37 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >> >>
    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    Down to the deepest depths of the cave with you.
    Go beat the chalk out of a hunderd blackboard erasers for punishment,

    OK, please explain the reason why my post was in error.

    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Wed Mar 13 09:39:17 2024
    On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D

    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
    incapable of abstraction and idealisation,

    Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which are
    abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
    PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.

    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to dgb on Wed Mar 13 22:16:12 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    dgb <david@nomale.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 13 Mar 2024 at 12:39:36 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >>>
    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Off course, always.
    On course, otoh...

    I was trying to be kind to you. :-(

    In my opinion, of course!

    Opinions are worthless,
    (yours in particular)

    Jan

    You'd do well to watch and listen here:-

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY

    Post arguments, not links,

    Is this a case of you having deep pockets and short arms, Jan?

    Nope, just not allowing you to waste my time.
    If there is some cogent argument in there that you want us to know about
    you summarise it, and you post it,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From dgb (David@21:1/5 to All on Wed Mar 13 21:40:51 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    On 13 Mar 2024 at 21:16:12 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomale.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 13 Mar 2024 at 12:39:36 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >>>>>>
    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! :-D >>>>>
    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Off course, always.
    On course, otoh...

    I was trying to be kind to you. :-(

    In my opinion, of course!

    Opinions are worthless,
    (yours in particular)

    Jan

    You'd do well to watch and listen here:-

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGHQcplhpYY

    Post arguments, not links,

    Is this a case of you having deep pockets and short arms, Jan?

    Nope, just not allowing you to waste my time.
    If there is some cogent argument in there that you want us to know about
    you summarise it, and you post it,

    It's a message from an exemplary citizen, the holder of an OBE, who spent the last 18 years of his life (which ended 10 days ago) fighting for the benefit
    of ALL men with Prostate cancer.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From T i m@21:1/5 to All on Thu Mar 14 07:51:41 2024
    XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    On 13/03/2024 21:40, dgb (David) wrote:
    <snip>

    It's a message from an exemplary citizen, the holder of an OBE, who spent the last 18 years of his life (which ended 10 days ago) fighting for the benefit of ALL men with Prostate cancer.


    You push him forward in the hope that people will LISTEN and DO
    SOMETHING about it?

    You push him forward as being a 'good person' for campaigning for people
    who are ill (and in the case of PC, often lived a reasonable life), but
    ignore those other 'good people' who try to stop the unnecessary and *intentional* exploitation, suffering and death, often done to YOUNG and HEALTHY animals?

    Is it simply because they aren't your species that means you simply
    don't care?

    What if we bred, killed and ate apes in the UK, would you pay to have
    them exploited, suffer and die as easily as you do calves or young sheep?

    Did you eat your dog when they died?, after all, they were made of meat
    and were already dead? If not, why not?

    Cheers, T i m

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Bob Casanova on Thu Mar 14 13:58:30 2024
    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >> >>>>
    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ra
    tio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! >> >>>
    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
    incapable of abstraction and idealisation,

    Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which are
    abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
    PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.

    So the integers are a property of your football scores?
    "No more, and no less", like you say,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Thu Mar 14 09:56:05 2024
    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >> >> >>>>
    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ra
    tio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! >> >> >>>
    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
    incapable of abstraction and idealisation,

    Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which are
    abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
    PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.

    So the integers are a property of your football scores?
    "No more, and no less", like you say,

    Overgeneralizations and "football scores" aside...

    If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
    describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
    those relationships? OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
    what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
    and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
    leaving:

    "...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
    relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
    property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
    describes such physical relationship."

    Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
    imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...
    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Bob Casanova on Thu Mar 14 19:21:00 2024
    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >> >> >>
    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden
    _ra
    tio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident!

    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
    incapable of abstraction and idealisation,

    Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which are
    abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
    PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.

    So the integers are a property of your football scores?
    "No more, and no less", like you say,

    Overgeneralizations and "football scores" aside...

    If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
    describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
    those relationships?

    Mathematical relationships are mathematical.
    They have nothing to do with any reality at all.

    OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
    what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
    and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
    leaving:

    "...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
    relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
    property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
    describes such physical relationship."

    Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
    imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...

    Still completely irrelevant,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to erik simpson on Thu Mar 14 22:40:39 2024
    erik simpson <eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:

    On 3/14/24 9:56 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:
    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >>>>>>>
    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r >>>>>>>>>>>> Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_
    ra
    tio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! >>>>>>>>
    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
    incapable of abstraction and idealisation,

    Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which are
    abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
    PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.

    So the integers are a property of your football scores?
    "No more, and no less", like you say,

    Overgeneralizations and "football scores" aside...

    If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
    describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
    those relationships? OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
    what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
    and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
    leaving:

    "...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
    relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
    property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
    describes such physical relationship."

    Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
    imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...

    The golden ratio a/b == (a+b)/a. Observed phenomena may approximate
    that number, but the mathematical interest since antiquity has little to
    do with that. In mathematics it appears in all kinds of surprising
    contexts. Wikipedia presents many of them.

    And it is not really a ratio of anything.
    It is traditionally called a ratio because to the ancient Greeks
    all numbers except the integers could only be represented as ratios.
    It is just a number.
    Best defined, as a number, purely arithmetically,
    as the simplest possible continued fraction.
    (just my preference)
    No need to invoked more complicated concepts,
    like square roots, solving quadratic equations, etc.,
    or even number systems to some base,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Burkhard@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Thu Mar 14 21:14:58 2024
    J. J. Lodder wrote:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Mathematics doesn't occur.
    It is.


    If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the
    beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because
    time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.

    The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be
    is irrelevant for mathematics,

    Jan

    a) yes, I'm back-ish - blame Lawyer Dagget, who put temptation in my path, and directed me to an interface that I can use without going through the hassle of signing up with yet another server :o) Though I'm likely to keep a lower profile than in the
    past due to work

    b) While I'd agree personally, there have been some interesting ideas by reasonably serious people who've argued that there is a closer connection than one might think. Most high-profile arguably Eugene Wigner and his famous paper "The Unreasonable
    Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences" from 1960. Essentially a mathematics version of the "no miracle" argument for scientific realism.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Burkhard on Thu Mar 14 23:18:46 2024
    Burkhard <b.schafer@ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    J. J. Lodder wrote:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Mathematics doesn't occur.
    It is.


    If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the
    beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because
    time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.

    The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be
    is irrelevant for mathematics,

    Jan

    a) yes, I'm back-ish - blame Lawyer Dagget, who put temptation in my path, and directed me to an interface that I can use without going through the hassle of signing up with yet another server :o) Though I'm likely to keep
    a lower profile than in the past due to work

    Very good. Very good indeed. Just curious:
    Is your new toy capable of wrapping lines to a reasonable length?

    b) While I'd agree personally, there have been some interesting ideas by reasonably serious people who've argued that there is a closer connection than one might think. Most high-profile arguably Eugene Wigner and his
    famous paper "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences" from 1960. Essentially a mathematics version of the "no miracle" argument for scientific realism.

    Yes, I know, but this is hardly news.
    Plato was already inspired by the unreasonable effectiveness of
    mathematics. (as he knew it)

    As for Wigner,
    I guess he would feel like committing intellectual suicide
    when seeing the present state of Math and Phys.
    Could he really bring himself to believe
    that "uggly theories are good!"?
    Or that Einstein with his ideas of natural beauty had it all wrong?

    He might agree that the state of math and string theory is demonstation
    of the incredible uselessness of mathematics on a truly incredible
    scale. (worse than ever seen before)

    We now have 10^500 mathematical theories and universes,
    give or take a few, and not a single prediction.
    The argumnt from design can only be beaten down
    with natural selection of universes and anthropic principles.

    Is it possible to do worse? I guess that not even Dr Pangloss
    can comfort us with some good words about it,

    Jan

    --
    Aber warum 137? (Wolfgang Pauli)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Fri Mar 15 09:36:21 2024
    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 11:29:51 -0700, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson
    <eastside.erik@gmail.com>:

    On 3/14/24 9:56 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:
    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >>>>>>>>
    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r >>>>>>>>>>>>> Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ra
    tio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident! >>>>>>>>>
    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
    incapable of abstraction and idealisation,

    Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which are
    abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
    PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.

    So the integers are a property of your football scores?
    "No more, and no less", like you say,

    Overgeneralizations and "football scores" aside...

    If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
    describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
    those relationships? OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
    what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
    and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
    leaving:

    "...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
    relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
    property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
    describes such physical relationship."

    Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
    imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...

    The golden ratio a/b == (a+b)/a. Observed phenomena may approximate
    that number, but the mathematical interest since antiquity has little to
    do with that. In mathematics it appears in all kinds of surprising
    contexts. Wikipedia presents many of them.

    I've seen several of the physical representations; the one I
    remember best (unless I'm misremembering/conflating
    unrelated subjects; it's been many decades) involves the
    chambers in the chambered nautilus. I believe snail shells
    follow the same pattern.

    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Fri Mar 15 09:37:46 2024
    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 19:21:00 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >> >> >> >>
    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden
    _ra
    tio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident!

    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
    incapable of abstraction and idealisation,

    Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which are
    abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
    PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.

    So the integers are a property of your football scores?
    "No more, and no less", like you say,

    Overgeneralizations and "football scores" aside...

    If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
    describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
    those relationships?

    Mathematical relationships are mathematical.
    They have nothing to do with any reality at all.

    Whatever you say, Jan; math has no relationship, descriptive
    or otherwise, to reality. Got it.

    OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
    what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
    and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
    leaving:

    "...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
    relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
    property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
    describes such physical relationship."

    Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
    imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...

    Still completely irrelevant,

    Jan
    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to erik simpson on Sat Mar 16 21:49:06 2024
    erik simpson <eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:

    On 3/14/24 3:18 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    Burkhard <b.schafer@ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    J. J. Lodder wrote:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Mathematics doesn't occur.
    It is.


    If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the >>>> beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because >>>> time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.

    The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be
    is irrelevant for mathematics,

    Jan

    a) yes, I'm back-ish - blame Lawyer Dagget, who put temptation in my path, >> and directed me to an interface that I can use without going through the >> hassle of signing up with yet another server :o) Though I'm likely to keep >> a lower profile than in the past due to work

    Very good. Very good indeed. Just curious:
    Is your new toy capable of wrapping lines to a reasonable length?

    b) While I'd agree personally, there have been some interesting ideas by >> reasonably serious people who've argued that there is a closer connection >> than one might think. Most high-profile arguably Eugene Wigner and his
    famous paper "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural >> Sciences" from 1960. Essentially a mathematics version of the "no miracle" >> argument for scientific realism.

    Yes, I know, but this is hardly news.
    Plato was already inspired by the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics. (as he knew it)

    As for Wigner,
    I guess he would feel like committing intellectual suicide
    when seeing the present state of Math and Phys.
    Could he really bring himself to believe
    that "uggly theories are good!"?
    Or that Einstein with his ideas of natural beauty had it all wrong?

    He might agree that the state of math and string theory is demonstation
    of the incredible uselessness of mathematics on a truly incredible
    scale. (worse than ever seen before)

    We now have 10^500 mathematical theories and universes,
    give or take a few, and not a single prediction.
    The argumnt from design can only be beaten down
    with natural selection of universes and anthropic principles.

    Is it possible to do worse? I guess that not even Dr Pangloss
    can comfort us with some good words about it,

    Jan

    With 10^500 universes, what could go wrong? No matter what craziness
    we could propose, there'd be a universe where it worked.

    Sure, with 10^500 rationals to choose from,
    one of them must equal \sqrt2, surely?

    Or my favorite Pauliism: that's not even wrong!

    "Aber das ist Falsch!" "Sogar ganz Falsch!!"

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Bob Casanova on Sat Mar 16 21:49:09 2024
    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 11:29:51 -0700, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson
    <eastside.erik@gmail.com>:

    On 3/14/24 9:56 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:
    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >>>>>>>>
    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r >>>>>>>>>>>>> Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden
    _ra
    tio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident!

    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
    incapable of abstraction and idealisation,

    Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which are
    abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
    PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.

    So the integers are a property of your football scores?
    "No more, and no less", like you say,

    Overgeneralizations and "football scores" aside...

    If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
    describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
    those relationships? OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
    what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
    and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
    leaving:

    "...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
    relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
    property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
    describes such physical relationship."

    Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
    imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...

    The golden ratio a/b == (a+b)/a. Observed phenomena may approximate
    that number, but the mathematical interest since antiquity has little to
    do with that. In mathematics it appears in all kinds of surprising >contexts. Wikipedia presents many of them.

    I've seen several of the physical representations; the one I
    remember best (unless I'm misremembering/conflating
    unrelated subjects; it's been many decades) involves the
    chambers in the chambered nautilus. I believe snail shells
    follow the same pattern.

    More muddled thinking on your part.
    But do look it up. You'll find many pictures of nautilus shells,
    and many pictures of logarithmic spirals, but very few
    of nautilus shells with logarithmic spirals superposed.
    (hint, it is only an approximation)

    But tp placate your engineering soul: do look up 'nautilus gears'.
    If that doesnt convince you that god is a mathematician
    nothing will,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Sat Mar 16 21:29:04 2024
    On Sat, 16 Mar 2024 21:49:09 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 11:29:51 -0700, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson
    <eastside.erik@gmail.com>:

    On 3/14/24 9:56 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:
    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>
    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden
    _ra
    tio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accident!

    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
    incapable of abstraction and idealisation,

    Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which are
    abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
    PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.

    So the integers are a property of your football scores?
    "No more, and no less", like you say,

    Overgeneralizations and "football scores" aside...

    If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
    describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
    those relationships? OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
    what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
    and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
    leaving:

    "...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
    relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
    property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
    describes such physical relationship."

    Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
    imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...

    The golden ratio a/b == (a+b)/a. Observed phenomena may approximate
    that number, but the mathematical interest since antiquity has little to
    do with that. In mathematics it appears in all kinds of surprising
    contexts. Wikipedia presents many of them.

    I've seen several of the physical representations; the one I
    remember best (unless I'm misremembering/conflating
    unrelated subjects; it's been many decades) involves the
    chambers in the chambered nautilus. I believe snail shells
    follow the same pattern.

    More muddled thinking on your part.
    But do look it up. You'll find many pictures of nautilus shells,
    and many pictures of logarithmic spirals, but very few
    of nautilus shells with logarithmic spirals superposed.
    (hint, it is only an approximation)

    But tp placate your engineering soul: do look up 'nautilus gears'.
    If that doesnt convince you that god is a mathematician
    nothing will,


    No need; you've convinced me that math is irrelevant to
    reality, making it the equivalent of navel-gazing.

    Have a nice day.


    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Bob Casanova on Sun Mar 17 12:45:51 2024
    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Sat, 16 Mar 2024 21:49:09 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 11:29:51 -0700, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson
    <eastside.erik@gmail.com>:

    On 3/14/24 9:56 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:
    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder>:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder>: >> >>>>>>>>>>
    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gol
    den
    _ra
    tio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by
    accident!

    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like
    all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
    incapable of abstraction and idealisation,

    Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which are
    abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
    PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.

    So the integers are a property of your football scores?
    "No more, and no less", like you say,

    Overgeneralizations and "football scores" aside...

    If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
    describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
    those relationships? OK. Maybe the word "properties" is
    what's causing you grief? Or maybe it's the phrase "no more
    and no less; if that's the case consider it removed,
    leaving:

    "...the so-called Golden Ratio, like all mathematical
    relationships which describe observed phenomena, is a
    property of physical reality in the sense that it precisely
    describes such physical relationship."

    Better? Clumsy, of course, but since hyperbole and/or
    imprecision in general discussion is apparently verboten...

    The golden ratio a/b == (a+b)/a. Observed phenomena may approximate
    that number, but the mathematical interest since antiquity has little to >> >do with that. In mathematics it appears in all kinds of surprising
    contexts. Wikipedia presents many of them.

    I've seen several of the physical representations; the one I
    remember best (unless I'm misremembering/conflating
    unrelated subjects; it's been many decades) involves the
    chambers in the chambered nautilus. I believe snail shells
    follow the same pattern.

    More muddled thinking on your part.
    But do look it up. You'll find many pictures of nautilus shells,
    and many pictures of logarithmic spirals, but very few
    of nautilus shells with logarithmic spirals superposed.
    (hint, it is only an approximation)

    But tp placate your engineering soul: do look up 'nautilus gears'.
    If that doesnt convince you that god is a mathematician
    nothing will,


    No need; you've convinced me that math is irrelevant to
    reality, making it the equivalent of navel-gazing.

    Have a nice day.

    You'll never get it, I guess.
    It is just the other way round:
    reality (whatever that may be) is irrelevant to math.

    And while I am it it,
    it is also quite independent of anyone gazing his navel,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to erik simpson on Sun Mar 17 14:08:24 2024
    erik simpson <eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:

    On 3/16/24 1:49 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 19:21:00 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wrote
    :

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder" <J. J. Lodder> wro
    te:

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org> Wrote in message:r >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gol
    den
    _ra
    tio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accide
    nt!

    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like >>>>>>>>> all mathematical relationships which describe observed
    phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist,
    incapable of abstraction and idealisation,

    Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which are
    abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
    PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.

    So the integers are a property of your football scores?
    "No more, and no less", like you say,

    Overgeneralizations and "football scores" aside...

    If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
    describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
    those relationships?

    Mathematical relationships are mathematical.
    They have nothing to do with any reality at all.

    Whatever you say, Jan; math has no relationship, descriptive
    or otherwise, to reality. Got it.

    Good to see that you finally got it.
    You may move up one level in the cave,
    and forget about beating the chalk out of those blackboard erasers,

    Jan

    I just went back and read wigner's excellent essay on"Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics", which I'd never read before. I love his
    last paragraph

    "Let me end on a more cheerful note. The miracle of the appropriateness
    of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of
    physics is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor deserve. We should be grateful for it and hope that it will remain valid in future research and that it will extend, for better or for worse, to our
    pleasure, even though perhaps also to our bafflement, to wide branches
    of learning."

    It's a gift that's tricky. The Lamb shift, the positron were
    "predicted" by the math, but to make the electric and magnetic fields of classical electrodynamics symmetrical, we'd need a "magnetron". No such beast. Even without that chimera, time advanced potentials as solutions
    are unphysical, but the proposed reasons are uneasy. Particularly
    applying this to quantum electrodynamics has (I think) not yet been explained.

    Wigner wrote at would I would call a 'Lord Kelvin moment'.
    As you know, Kelvin wrote at the end of the 19th century
    that all problems in physics had been solved,
    except for two 'little black clouds on the horizon'.
    And indeed, mathematical physics, to which he had contributed so much,
    had been succesful beyond expectations.

    The 'small black clouds' on Kelvin's horizon
    were tackled almost at once, by Planck and Einstein,
    with two major scientific revolutions as a result,
    and a whole century of new physics.

    Wigner likewise stood at such a high point.
    Quantum field theory was being unreasonably succesful,
    the extraordinary accuracy to ten decimal places or so
    hadn't been foreseen by anyone,
    and the remaining problems (weak and strong interactions)
    looked like they would be wrapped up soon in the same way.
    There were only two small black clouds on the horizon...
    (quantum gravity and explaining those dimensionless numbers)

    Wigner has been less lucky.
    The 'black clouds on his horizon' have expanded to fill the whole sky,
    they have only grown blacker, and there is no solution in sight.

    So we get plenty of books about 'The Crisis in Physics' instead,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Burkhard@21:1/5 to erik simpson on Sun Mar 17 15:08:24 2024
    erik simpson wrote:

    On 3/14/24 3:18 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    Burkhard <b.schafer@ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    J. J. Lodder wrote:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Mathematics doesn't occur.
    It is.


    If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the >>>>> beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because >>>>> time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.

    The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be
    is irrelevant for mathematics,

    Jan

    a) yes, I'm back-ish - blame Lawyer Dagget, who put temptation in my path, >>> and directed me to an interface that I can use without going through the >>> hassle of signing up with yet another server :o) Though I'm likely to keep >>> a lower profile than in the past due to work

    Very good. Very good indeed. Just curious:
    Is your new toy capable of wrapping lines to a reasonable length?

    Tbh, I don't remember how I did it, first post and all. It has some features that look better than Google, but the display needs some getting used to. Let's see how this one works, I just keep on typing and see how it will be displayed after posting.


    b) While I'd agree personally, there have been some interesting ideas by >>> reasonably serious people who've argued that there is a closer connection >>> than one might think. Most high-profile arguably Eugene Wigner and his
    famous paper "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural >>> Sciences" from 1960. Essentially a mathematics version of the "no miracle" >>> argument for scientific realism.

    Yes, I know, but this is hardly news.
    Plato was already inspired by the unreasonable effectiveness of
    mathematics. (as he knew it)

    As for Wigner,
    I guess he would feel like committing intellectual suicide
    when seeing the present state of Math and Phys.
    Could he really bring himself to believe
    that "uggly theories are good!"?
    Or that Einstein with his ideas of natural beauty had it all wrong?

    He might agree that the state of math and string theory is demonstation
    of the incredible uselessness of mathematics on a truly incredible
    scale. (worse than ever seen before)

    We now have 10^500 mathematical theories and universes,
    give or take a few, and not a single prediction.
    The argumnt from design can only be beaten down
    with natural selection of universes and anthropic principles.

    Is it possible to do worse? I guess that not even Dr Pangloss
    can comfort us with some good words about it,

    Jan

    With 10^500 universes, what could go wrong? No matter what craziness
    we could propose, there'd be a universe where it worked. Or my favorite Pauliism: that's not even wrong!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richmond@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Sun Mar 17 19:46:57 2024
    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:

    Mathematical relationships are mathematical. They have nothing to do
    with any reality at all.


    Mathematics is abstract thought. But how can there be abstract thought
    if there is no one around to think it?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Burkhard on Sun Mar 17 20:58:04 2024
    Burkhard <b.schafer@ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    erik simpson wrote:

    On 3/14/24 3:18 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    Burkhard <b.schafer@ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    J. J. Lodder wrote:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Mathematics doesn't occur.
    It is.


    If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the >>>>> beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because >>>>> time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.

    The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be
    is irrelevant for mathematics,

    Jan

    a) yes, I'm back-ish - blame Lawyer Dagget, who put temptation in my path,
    and directed me to an interface that I can use without going through the >>> hassle of signing up with yet another server :o) Though I'm likely to keep
    a lower profile than in the past due to work

    Very good. Very good indeed. Just curious:
    Is your new toy capable of wrapping lines to a reasonable length?

    [rewrapped for clarity]
    Tbh, I don't remember how I did it, first post and all. It has some
    features that look better than Google, but the display needs some getting used to. Let's see how this one works, I just keep on typing and see how
    it will be displayed after posting.

    It fits on Turing's tape....

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to erik simpson on Sun Mar 17 20:58:03 2024
    erik simpson <eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:

    On 3/17/24 6:08 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    erik simpson <eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:

    On 3/16/24 1:49 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 19:21:00 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:58:30 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:

    On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:39:38 +0100, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
    Lodder):

    Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> wrote:

    On 2024-03-07 22:31:27 +0000, Bob Casanova said:

    On 7 Mar 2024 17:51:40 GMT, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by dgb (David)
    <david@nomail.afraid.org>:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 17:41:02 GMT, "J. J. Lodder":

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    On 7 Mar 2024 at 09:38:23 GMT, "J. J. Lodder":

    Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    dgb (David) <david@nomail.afraid.org>
    Does this occur by accident?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go
    l
    den
    _ra
    tio
    Or by design?

    It will never be known.

    There is nothing to know there,

    Jan

    The thing to know, Jan, is that it hasn't all happened by accid
    e
    nt!

    It hasn't happened at all.

    You are, of course, mistaken.

    Wrong. Nothing "happened"; the so-called Golden Ratio, like >>>>>>>>>>> all mathematical relationships which describe observed >>>>>>>>>>> phenomena, is a property of physical

    mathematical

    reality, no more. And,
    of course, no less.

    You are wasting your breath. Bob is an incurable materialist, >>>>>>>>> incapable of abstraction and idealisation,

    Ummm, I didn't say that there are no parts of math which are >>>>>>>> abstract, only that all math relationships WHICH DESCRIBE
    PHYSICAL PHENOMENA are properties of those phenomena.

    So the integers are a property of your football scores?
    "No more, and no less", like you say,

    Overgeneralizations and "football scores" aside...

    If I understand you, the mathematical relationships which
    describe observed physical relationships do *not* describe
    those relationships?

    Mathematical relationships are mathematical.
    They have nothing to do with any reality at all.

    Whatever you say, Jan; math has no relationship, descriptive
    or otherwise, to reality. Got it.

    Good to see that you finally got it.
    You may move up one level in the cave,
    and forget about beating the chalk out of those blackboard erasers,

    Jan

    I just went back and read wigner's excellent essay on"Unreasonable
    Effectiveness of Mathematics", which I'd never read before. I love his
    last paragraph

    "Let me end on a more cheerful note. The miracle of the appropriateness
    of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of
    physics is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor deserve. We
    should be grateful for it and hope that it will remain valid in future
    research and that it will extend, for better or for worse, to our
    pleasure, even though perhaps also to our bafflement, to wide branches
    of learning."

    It's a gift that's tricky. The Lamb shift, the positron were
    "predicted" by the math, but to make the electric and magnetic fields of >> classical electrodynamics symmetrical, we'd need a "magnetron". No such >> beast. Even without that chimera, time advanced potentials as solutions >> are unphysical, but the proposed reasons are uneasy. Particularly
    applying this to quantum electrodynamics has (I think) not yet been
    explained.

    Wigner wrote at would I would call a 'Lord Kelvin moment'.
    As you know, Kelvin wrote at the end of the 19th century
    that all problems in physics had been solved,
    except for two 'little black clouds on the horizon'.
    And indeed, mathematical physics, to which he had contributed so much,
    had been succesful beyond expectations.

    The 'small black clouds' on Kelvin's horizon
    were tackled almost at once, by Planck and Einstein,
    with two major scientific revolutions as a result,
    and a whole century of new physics.

    Wigner likewise stood at such a high point.
    Quantum field theory was being unreasonably succesful,
    the extraordinary accuracy to ten decimal places or so
    hadn't been foreseen by anyone,
    and the remaining problems (weak and strong interactions)
    looked like they would be wrapped up soon in the same way.
    There were only two small black clouds on the horizon...
    (quantum gravity and explaining those dimensionless numbers)

    Wigner has been less lucky.
    The 'black clouds on his horizon' have expanded to fill the whole sky,
    they have only grown blacker, and there is no solution in sight.

    So we get plenty of books about 'The Crisis in Physics' instead,

    Jan

    All too true. We've seen the "End of Physics" before, and we've seen
    the abyss before. Something always seems to show up that we didn't
    expect.

    Godot will put it all right?

    It's turtles all the way down.

    More than 137 of them?

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Burkhard@21:1/5 to Burkhard on Sun Mar 17 20:51:43 2024
    Burkhard wrote:

    erik simpson wrote:

    On 3/14/24 3:18 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    Burkhard <b.schafer@ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    J. J. Lodder wrote:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) writes:

    dgb <david@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

    Does this occur by accident?

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

    Or by design?

    Mathematics doesn't occur.
    It is.


    If it didn't occur then it is, and always was. But was it so before the >>>>>> beginning of the universe? or maybe the universe didn't begin, because >>>>>> time and space are not fundamental properties of nature.

    The universe, whatever it is, or was, or may be
    is irrelevant for mathematics,

    Jan

    a) yes, I'm back-ish - blame Lawyer Dagget, who put temptation in my path, >>>> and directed me to an interface that I can use without going through the >>>> hassle of signing up with yet another server :o) Though I'm likely to keep >>>> a lower profile than in the past due to work

    Very good. Very good indeed. Just curious:
    Is your new toy capable of wrapping lines to a reasonable length?

    Tbh, I don't remember how I did it, first post and all. It has some features that look better than Google, but the display needs some getting used to. Let's see how this one works, I just keep on typing and see how it will be displayed after posting.


    OK, so that's not good - looks totally different
    before posting, when i forced the first line break
    after "some " - so may have to do it manually again,
    like this - let's see how this one works


    b) While I'd agree personally, there have been some interesting ideas by >>>> reasonably serious people who've argued that there is a closer connection >>>> than one might think. Most high-profile arguably Eugene Wigner and his >>>> famous paper "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural >>>> Sciences" from 1960. Essentially a mathematics version of the "no miracle" >>>> argument for scientific realism.

    Yes, I know, but this is hardly news.
    Plato was already inspired by the unreasonable effectiveness of
    mathematics. (as he knew it)

    As for Wigner,
    I guess he would feel like committing intellectual suicide
    when seeing the present state of Math and Phys.
    Could he really bring himself to believe
    that "uggly theories are good!"?
    Or that Einstein with his ideas of natural beauty had it all wrong?

    He might agree that the state of math and string theory is demonstation
    of the incredible uselessness of mathematics on a truly incredible
    scale. (worse than ever seen before)

    We now have 10^500 mathematical theories and universes,
    give or take a few, and not a single prediction.
    The argumnt from design can only be beaten down
    with natural selection of universes and anthropic principles.

    Is it possible to do worse? I guess that not even Dr Pangloss
    can comfort us with some good words about it,

    Jan

    With 10^500 universes, what could go wrong? No matter what craziness
    we could propose, there'd be a universe where it worked. Or my favorite
    Pauliism: that's not even wrong!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Burkhard on Sun Mar 17 23:45:36 2024
    Burkhard <b.schafer@ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    Burkhard wrote:

    erik simpson wrote:

    On 3/14/24 3:18 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
    [-]
    Very good. Very good indeed. Just curious:
    Is your new toy capable of wrapping lines to a reasonable length?

    Tbh, I don't remember how I did it, first post and all. It has some features that look better than Google, but the display needs some
    getting used to. Let's see how this one works, I just keep on typing and see how it will be displayed after posting.
    [hard rewrapped because MacSoup forces that]

    OK, so that's not good - looks totally different
    before posting, when i forced the first line break
    after "some " - so may have to do it manually again,
    like this - let's see how this one works

    This one is fine.
    Do as I do, I have been doing it forever.
    My lines are always shorter than 72 chars,
    because I always break them manually to about 50.

    It makes the whole posting look more structured,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)