Beautiful Mathematics

Ambrose Ackroyd said:
In the area of very large phenomena when the time period of each planet's revolution around the sun is compared in round numbers to the one adjacent to it, their fractions are Fibonacci numbers!

Beginning with Neptune and moving inward toward the sun, the ratios are 1/2, 1/3, 2/5, 3/8, 5/13, 8/21, 13/34.

These are the same as the spiral arrangement of leaves on plants !

I find that awesome and humbling ...... sounds to me like a part of an overall creation rather than a scientific accident.

God only knows !!!!!!

Literally .........:D
Click to expand...

God may know but not man who professes to know God.

When Galileo said Earth was not at centre of the universe he was condemned with heresy.




Expressing dynamic observations in numbers is like giving words to emotions.

Sometimes words are simply not enough. Pictures, music and literature helps along with chocolate and wine. If only numbers could also portray human senses and emotions what an amazing find that would be. :-0

My dentist is so good when having my wisdom tooth taken out - on a pain threshold of 1 to 10, 10 being highest I only came close to experiencing the number 2. :idea:
 
Every Natural Number can be Unambiguously Described in Fourteen Words or Less

1. Suppose there is some natural number (1, 2, 3, ...) which cannot be unambiguously described in fourteen words or less.

2. Then there must be a smallest such number. Let's call it n.

3. But now n is "the smallest natural number that cannot be unambiguously described in fourteen words or less".

4. This is a complete and unambiguous description of n in fourteen words, contradicting the fact that n was supposed not to have such a description!

5. Since the assumption (step 1) of the existence of a natural number that cannot be unambiguously described in fourteen words or less led to a contradiction, it must be an incorrect assumption.

6. Therefore, all natural numbers can be unambiguously described in fourteen words or less!
 
Ambrose Ackroyd said:
In the area of very large phenomena when the time period of each planet's revolution around the sun is compared in round numbers to the one adjacent to it, their fractions are Fibonacci numbers!

Beginning with Neptune and moving inward toward the sun, the ratios are 1/2, 1/3, 2/5, 3/8, 5/13, 8/21, 13/34.

These are the same as the spiral arrangement of leaves on plants !

I find that awesome and humbling ...... sounds to me like a part of an overall creation rather than a scientific accident.

God only knows !!!!!!

Literally .........:D
Click to expand...

Fibonacci rules mate, funny thing this timing lark, I was reading something on wiki a while back re. the arrangement of a pine cone corresponding to fibs.. also in other biological settings; branching of trees, leaves on stems, fruit spouts on pineapples, flowering of artichokes, uncurling fern..whoah...spooky 5hit..

If I ever have another Son he'd be called Lenny after my Dad, I could sneak in Fibonacci there too as the second name I reckon..;)
 
Black Swan said:
Fibonacci rules mate, funny thing this timing lark, I was reading something on wiki a while back re. the arrangement of a pine cone corresponding to fibs.. also in other biological settings; branching of trees, leaves on stems, fruit spouts on pineapples, flowering of artichokes, uncurling fern..whoah...spooky 5hit..

If I ever have another Son he'd be called Lenny after my Dad, I could sneak in Fibonacci there too as the second name I reckon..;)
Click to expand...

That's because the golden ratio and the Fibonacci sequence are intimately related.
6e93507ad67c0061d2dd0ee5004c9d56.png
 
Shakone said:
Every Natural Number can be Unambiguously Described in Fourteen Words or Less

1. Suppose there is some natural number (1, 2, 3, ...) which cannot be unambiguously described in fourteen words or less.

2. Then there must be a smallest such number. Let's call it n.

3. But now n is "the smallest natural number that cannot be unambiguously described in fourteen words or less".

4. This is a complete and unambiguous description of n in fourteen words, contradicting the fact that n was supposed not to have such a description!

5. Since the assumption (step 1) of the existence of a natural number that cannot be unambiguously described in fourteen words or less led to a contradiction, it must be an incorrect assumption.

6. Therefore, all natural numbers can be unambiguously described in fourteen words or less!
Click to expand...


What if your first supposition is incorrect?
 
Black Swan said:
Fibonacci rules mate, funny thing this timing lark, I was reading something on wiki a while back re. the arrangement of a pine cone corresponding to fibs.. also in other biological settings; branching of trees, leaves on stems, fruit spouts on pineapples, flowering of artichokes, uncurling fern..whoah...spooky 5hit..
Click to expand...

Its just a classic case of people being fooled by randomness.

A robust statistical analysis of those things shows its pretty much all bollox really (as are fibs on a chart).
 
the hare said:
Its just a classic case of people being fooled by randomness.

A robust statistical analysis of those things shows its pretty much all bollox really (as are fibs on a chart).
Click to expand...

You kidding right?

I assume you've read about the Black Swan and think it is a fantastic book?

Another mathematical genious...

If you can not distinguish between repeat patterns and randomness then you need to go an get your bollox sorted out... :cheesy:
 
Shakone said:
Every Natural Number can be Unambiguously Described in Fourteen Words or Less

1. Suppose there is some natural number (1, 2, 3, ...) which cannot be unambiguously described in fourteen words or less.

2. Then there must be a smallest such number. Let's call it n.

3. But now n is "the smallest natural number that cannot be unambiguously described in fourteen words or less".

4. This is a complete and unambiguous description of n in fourteen words, contradicting the fact that n was supposed not to have such a description!

5. Since the assumption (step 1) of the existence of a natural number that cannot be unambiguously described in fourteen words or less led to a contradiction, it must be an incorrect assumption.

6. Therefore, all natural numbers can be unambiguously described in fourteen words or less!
Click to expand...

nope, it just means your proof is whack and so you can draw no conclusions from it.

:)
 
How about Gabriel's Horn. It's something that has infinite surface area, but finite volume. So you could fill it up with a limited amount of paint. But you could never finish painting the outside.
 
Atilla said:
You kidding right?
I assume you've read about the Black Swan and think it is a fantastic book?
Click to expand...

No I'm not kidding. If T2W was a trading site rather than a lulz emporium I'd publish the stats to back up that claim. There is very weak statistical evidence to suggest that the 61.8% retracement level might be significant, but its not a tradable edge.

I can post you thousands of quite beautiful screen captures of situations where price bounces perfectly from a fib retracement, and then goes on to hit an extension level. I can post you thosusand of screen shots were you have confluence in fib levels that are respected perfectly.

The problem is, I can post an equal number of perfect examples where those price levels where selected at random.

FWIW i think the black swan is without a shadow of a doubt one ofthe finest trading books available.

Your comments are kind of ironic, because my whole trading methodology is based entrely on differentiating between the effects of random chance, and my trading edge. Thats one of the reasons I utililise random entries and exits !
 
the hare said:
No I'm not kidding. If T2W was a trading site rather than a lulz emporium I'd publish the stats to back up that claim. There is very weak statistical evidence to suggest that the 61.8% retracement level might be significant, but its not a tradable edge.

I can post you thousands of quite beautiful screen captures of situations where price bounces perfectly from a fib retracement, and then goes on to hit an extension level. I can post you thosusand of screen shots were you have confluence in fib levels that are respected perfectly.

The problem is, I can post an equal number of perfect examples where those price levels where selected at random.

FWIW i think the black swan is without a shadow of a doubt one ofthe finest trading books available.

Your comments are kind of ironic, because my whole trading methodology is based entrely on differentiating between the effects of random chance, and my trading edge. Thats one of the reasons I utililise random entries and exits !
Click to expand...


Why are you limiting your study of fib numbers to trading only?

I use Fibs to identify S&R regions and they are like sign posts for me.

If I apply random S&R regions I get random lines which may get hit but I'd be none the wiser.

What ever floats ones boat I guess. But I'd still get your bollox ultra sound checked... ;)

I started reading the Black Swan but failed to finish it - but i hear lots of good comments about it. Perhaps I'll give it another go when I have some spare time to murder.
 
Last edited:
If you're interested in whether Fibs apply in nature or trading, you'd have to specify some accuracy level, i.e. it has to bounce within x pips of the fib line, or the ratio of the length of this body part relative to another body part has it has to be within x mm of the golden ratio.

When you do apply this kind of accuracy level, you find that either you're covering such a large area, that many ratios, not just fib, would be equally as accurate/inaccurate, or you find that the ratio just doesn't apply. There are all kinds of ideas about fibs being in nature, but typically nature is far more variable, and while it is there sometimes, others it isnt' at all.
 
the hare said:
Its just a classic case of people being fooled by randomness.

A robust statistical analysis of those things shows its pretty much all bollox really (as are fibs on a chart).
Click to expand...

You did realise I'm not relating my Fibonacci admiration to trading, but maths..
 
Shakone said:
If you're interested in whether Fibs apply in nature or trading, you'd have to specify some accuracy level, i.e. it has to bounce within x pips of the fib line, or the ratio of the length of this body part relative to another body part has it has to be within x mm of the golden ratio.

When you do apply this kind of accuracy level, you find that either you're covering such a large area, that many ratios, not just fib, would be equally as accurate/inaccurate, or you find that the ratio just doesn't apply. There are all kinds of ideas about fibs being in nature, but typically nature is far more variable, and while it is there sometimes, others it isnt' at all.
Click to expand...


Randomness and Repeat Patterns are obviously in direct contradiction.

Big question is are they mutually exclusive or not. Randomness would say they are. Having repeat set patterns would rule the theory of randomness out.

How many repeat Fibonaci sequence or observations are required before such patterns are no longer considered random?


One only has to look at humans. All the same and all different.

Yet structure and proportion of humans are pretty constant.

Moreover, closer to fib ratios the more beautiful the structure. Where proportions deviate the form becomes less attractive or purely ugly to the human eye.


I only know and these superficially and never studied any to indepth detail. However, imho common sense tells me the lottery is random but much of life is not. Life and humanity conforms to scientific laws of nature.

At first these may be perceived as random because we do not know or are aware of the underlying causes. But behind random theory as applied to forms and structures there are reasons - there must be! Surely? I am not sure but I would guess yes. :cheesy:

I guess one can find enough examples in life and planet earth to emphasise their theories sufficiently to dilute and BS the living daylights out of us all. :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top