Running head: GOLDEN RATIO

Golden Ratio Emily Journey Taft College, Statistics 1510 May 9, 2012

GOLDEN RATIO Abstract

The Golden Ratio is an irrational number believed by some to be a key factor in all living things as well as man-made products; as this divine proportion is thought to be the most eye-appealing to the majority of people. The true question is does this ratio really exist? To help answer this question, a random sample of living participants' body parts were measured and analyzed. In addition, pinecones were gathered and analyzed to determine if the Golden Ratio is prevalent in nature as well. After the data collecting was complete and the statistical tools were applied to the raw data, it was split down the middle; the ratio was strong and evident among the pinecones but was found to be larger in the human measurements. This discovery supports my stand in that yes, the ratio exists but it is not necessarily a key component needed to live.

GOLDEN RATIO The Golden Ratio is one of those topics that ignites debate; the main question focus' on existence in general, the how and the why? For those who believe in the Golden Ratio, also known as Divine Proportion, they believe that a special ratio occurs within all things and thus is the reason for existence. The Golden Ratio is an irrational number represented in ratio form as 1:1.618...Just as the number itself holds an innite number of decimal places, so does its

applicable uses. Architecture and even works of art are thought to be based upon this ratio as it is believed to be more aesthetically pleasing to the eye. Believers of this ratio think that it exists within the human makeup from arms and legs down to eyes and teeth! Another aspect of the Golden Ratio is Fibonacci Numbers, these swirls and spirals are believed to be found in pinecones, owers, and even fruit. In the beginning stages of this project, my initial gut reaction was "this is silly"; if someone wouldn't have given this proportion such great attention would we even recognize this, could we be more aesthetically drawn to other shapes and sizes? So for me, I feel that this ratio is simply "man-made" and derived and not something that MUST take place in order for me to exist. Method Participants The participants for this particular analysis came in two completely different forms; in regards to the Golden ratio, I chose a random sample of my close family and friends. These human participants were both male and female and covered a vast array of age groups. The second set of participants I chose to examine regarding the Fibonacci numbers were a random sampling of pinecones I collected from various locations.

GOLDEN RATIO Design Within this analysis, there were a number of different variables. The human participants

themselves are of course independent variables in regards to their gender and age, as well as their overall physical makeup. The pinecones used are also independent of one another because no two are the same, and they were collected from varying locations, meaning that they all didnt come from the same tree. Another factor that had an effect on the pinecones was how "fresh" they were. My sample was gathered from fallen pinecones so the length at which they had been unattached from the tree, I believe created a variable I hadn't given much thought to until I was in the midst of my analysis. Measures/Materials The materials I used for this analysis were a tape measure, for measuring the different lengths of my participants limbs; an array of fallen and gathered pinecones, which I then painted using red and pink paint in order to make the Fibonacci spiral more noticeable. The iPad app, TC Stats was utilized in each case as a means of organizing and computing the data I had collected. Procedure I began this project by heading out on a pinecone gathering mission because through my research, pinecones are supposedly one (of many) naturally occurring items to have a visible Fibonacci spiral; also, I found this route to be a much more affordable option. I chose to start my gathering mission on an OHV road, known as "Freeway ridge". I gathered the pinecones at random intervals along the trail and only gathered pinecones that had already fallen off of the

GOLDEN RATIO

tree. Once my pinecones made it home, I then randomly organized them into three rows of seven and began by labeling them in order numerically. After they were labeled I went and found whatever paint I had on hand, which happened to be pink and red. With those two colors, I then began painting the naturally occurring spiral pattern within the pinecone(s), alternating the colors as I went. I found it easiest to identify the spiral at the base (where the pinecone had at one point been attached to the tree) so for the most part, that is where I began painting each individual pinecone; I repeated this process for the 21 pinecones gathered. For my human participants, I chose to measure those closest to me, my family and friends. I chose to explore two different ratios (four separate measurements) on each of them individually; the rst set measurements were of their "hand" (tip of middle nger to wrist) and their "forearm" (tip of middle nger to elbow). The second set of measurements I refer to in my analysis as "knee" (foot to kneecap) and "navel" (foot to navel). As I gathered my data from my 19 participants, I kept a hand-written log of their measurements and once I had all of my information I then transferred that into TC Stats for data organization and analysis.

Right: top view of painted pinecone

Left: base view of painted pinecone

GOLDEN RATIO Results

Looking at the data I gathered, it seems to be split down the middle as far as nding the Golden Ratio. For my pinecone data, it is very apparent that there most denitely is a specic spiral pattern that encompasses the cone, and it does indeed follow the Fibonacci number sequence; virtually all of the pinecone data falls within the 1.618 guidelines (see right). A glimpse of the summary statistics also conrms the pinecone ndings found above. As you can see, all aspects of the 5Number summary are shown to represent reasonably close to that "magical" number, 1.618. The data for the human component of this analysis was quite contrary to everything the Golden Ratio and Fibonacci Number(s) stand for. As you can see from this set of summary statistics, the 5-Number summary shows that nearly all of the ratios are double; so larger than the anticipated ratio of 1:1.618. Rather than displaying

GOLDEN RATIO a relative frequency distribution table as with the pinecones, the human data, can best be shown with a box and whisker plot because there are so many different numbers we are dealing with. This graphical display simply illustrates that most of the data ratios fall above the number two

which is obviously a larger number than what we were hoping to nd. If this picture represented the Golden Ratio with more accuracy we would basically want to reverse the positions to allow it to fall within the appropriate parameters.

I was able to take the data I collected and produce condence intervals on all of the ratios for all three categories, "navel/knee", "forearm/hand", and "base/top". It is with 95% certainty that I am able to say that the true mean of the navel/knee ratio is between 2.0474 and 2.1695, the ratio of the forearm/hand data is between 2.1522 and 2.3885. These condence intervals at 95% make a very solid case showing that these measurements (on my participants) is greater than that of the Golden number, 1.618; and thereby proving my hypothesis that the golden ratio is not necessary in order for us to physically exist. My pinecone data provided with even greater certainty that the case for Fibonacci numbers is present within their physical makeup. My condence interval I calculated at 95% actually showed with a 97.3% certainty that the mean of the base/top ratio of my collected pinecones was between 1.6000 and 1.6000; this interval pretty much nails the golden ratio of 1.618 square on the head. After seeing this result, out of curiosity, I bumped the

GOLDEN RATIO

condence interval up to 99% and produced a result at 99.3% of 1.6000 and 1.6250-clearly, fully encompassing the the 1.618 ratio. Discussion From the onset of this analytical experiment, I was a bit skeptical of the "Golden Ratio" and it's place within the physical makeup of humans and naturally occurring objects. I believe my research as done two things-I have great condence that I have shown that this ratio does in fact exist but it isn't a requirement for existence. The pinecone data I was able produce from my sample of 21, which is a suitable number for a project of this nature, clearly shows a distinct link to the golden ratio as it was nearly spot on. Surely there are some variables that could be expanded upon, like for example, "fresh" pinecones (ones that are still attached to the tree during the collection process) vs. the "fallen" pinecones I used. Also, I would be curious to see if the different types of pinecones (from different species of trees) yielded the same ratio? Regardless of the different hypothetical variables, I am beyond condent that the results from my pinecone data and analysis shows that the golden ratio does in fact exist. The results from my human data is proof to me, that this ratio is in fact not a necessity for existence. Clearly based on my analysis, all of the people I measured have a ratio that exceeds that of the golden ratio; and not so surprisingly, all of them are alive and healthy. I believe that my sample of 19 was of a sufcient size for a project of this nature, however, the degree of variability that played a role in each of my (independent) participants plays a role in this analysis. The physical and genetic makeup of each person measured is a huge variable and also the degree of error while I measured could have played a role; meaning, for example that I couldn't have possibly measured each

GOLDEN RATIO

individual's kneecap in exactly the same spot on all 19 participants. Overall, through my research and analysis process I believe was able to clearly and concisely validate my original thought process that the Golden Ratio does in fact exist but is most denitely not a requirement for existence.

GOLDEN RATIO Bibliography

10

Narain, D. 2001. The Golden Ratio. Retrieved February 25, 2012. (http://cuip.uchicago.edu/ ~dlnarain/golden/).

GOLDEN RATIO Appendix Pinecone Raw Data:

11

GOLDEN RATIO Human Participants, Raw Data:

12

GOLDEN RATIO Forearm/Hand normal plot

13

*justication of reasonable normality--since the sample size is only 19, the CLT doesn't apply. t-test alpha: .05 NULL: mu = 1.6 ALT: mu > 1.6 p-value: 2.805E-10 (approx 0) value of t: 11.9213

95% Condence Interval: (2.1522, 2.3885) Decision: Reject NULL-- There is sufcient evidence to suggest that the mean ratio of the Forearm/Hand is greater than the Golden ratio value of 1.618 Navel/Knee normal plot *justication of reasonable normality--sample size is only 19, therefore the CLT is not applicable t-test alpha: .05 NULL: mu = 1.6 ALT: mu > 1.6

p-value: 4.4747E-13 (approx. 0) value of t: 17.5036 95% Condence Interval: (2.0474, 2.1695) Decision: Reject NULL-- There is sufcient evidence to suggest that the mean ratio of the Navel/Knee is greater than the Golden Ratio value of 1.618.

GOLDEN RATIO Pinecone normal plot (Base/Top)

14

*normal plot clearly indicates a violation of normality Since the data is dependent a Sign Test is the appropriate measurement alpha: .05 NULL: theta = 1 ALT: theta > 1 p-value: 9.537E-07 (approx 0) Condence Interval: 95% = 97.3%: (1.6000, 1.6000) Condence Interval: 99% = 99.3%: (1.6000, 1.6250) Decision: Reject NULL-- There is sufcient evidence to suggest that the mean ratios of the pinecones Base/Top is greater than 1.

GOLDEN RATIO
PHASE 1

15

Golden Ratio Emily Journey Taft College, Statistics 1510

Abstract This section is currently in progress.

The Golden Ratio is one of those topics that ignites debate; the main question focus' on existence in general, the how and the why? For those who believe in the Golden Ratio, also known as Divine Proportion, they believe that a special ratio lies within all things and thus is the reason for existence. The Golden Ratio is an irrational number represented in ratio form is 1:1.618...Just as the number itself holds an innite number of decimal places, so does its applicable uses. Architecture and even works of art are thought to be based upon this ratio as it is thought to be more aesthetically pleasing to the eye. Believers of this ratio think that it exists within the human makeup from arms and legs down to eyes and teeth! Another aspect of the Golden Ratio is Fibonacci Numbers, these swirls and spirals are believed to be found in pinecones, owers, and even fruit. In the beginning stages of this project, my initial gut reaction was this is silly; if someone wouldn't have given this proportion such great attention would we even recognize this,

GOLDEN RATIO

16

could we be more aesthetically drawn to other shapes and sizes. So for me, I feel that this ratio is simply "man-made" and derived and not something that MUST take place in order for me to exist. Method Participants The participants for this particular analysis came in two completely different forms; in regards to the Golden ratio, I chose a random sampling from close family and friends. These human participants were both male and female and covered a vast array of age groups. The second set of participants I chose to examine regarding the Fibonacci numbers were a random sampling of pinecones I collected from various locations along freeway ridge. Design Within this analysis, there were a number of different variables. The human participants themselves are of course independent variables in regards to their gender and age, as well as their overall physical makeup. The pinecones used are also independent variables because no two are the same, and they were also collected from varying locations, meaning that they all didnt come from the same tree. Another factor that had an effect on the pinecones was how "fresh" they were. My sample was gathered from fallen pinecones so the length at which they had been unattached from the tree, I believe created a variable I hadn't given much thought to until I was in the midst of my analysis. Measures/Materials

GOLDEN RATIO

17

The materials I used for this analysis were a tape measure, for measuring the different lengths of my participants limbs; an array of fallen and gathered pinecones, which I then painted using red and pink paint in order to make the Fibonacci spiral more noticeable. The iPad app, TC Stats was utilized in each case as a means of organizing and computing the data I had collected. Procedure I began this project by heading out on a pinecone gathering mission because through my research, pinecones are supposedly one (of many) naturally occurring items to have a visible Fibonacci spiral; also, I found this route to be a much more affordable option. I chose to start my gathering mission on an OHV road, known as "Freeway ridge". I gathered the pinecones at random intervals along the trail and only gathered pinecones that had already fallen off of the tree. Once my pinecones made it home, I then randomly organized them into three rows of seven and began by labeling them in order numerically. After they were labeled and I went and found whatever paint I had on hand, which happened to be pink and red. With those two colors, I then began painting the naturally occurring spiral pattern within the pinecone(s), alternating the colors as I went. I found it easiest to identify the spiral at the base (where the pinecone had at one point been attached to the tree) so for the most part, that is where I began painting each individual pinecone; I repeated this process for the 21 pinecones gathered. For my human participants, I chose to measure those closest to me, my family and friends. I chose to explore two different ratios (four separate measurements) on each of them individually; the measurements were of their "hand" (tip of middle nger to wrist) and their "forearm" (tip of middle nger to elbow). The second set of measurements I refer to in my analysis as "knee" (foot to kneecap) and "navel"

GOLDEN RATIO

18

(foot to navel). As I gathered my data from my 19 participants, I kept a hand-written log of their measurements and once I had all of my information I then transferred that into TC Stats for data organization and analysis.

Right: top view of painted pinecone

Left: base view of painted pinecone

Preliminary Results Preliminarily looking at the data I gathered, it seems to be split down the middle as far as nding the Golden Ratio. For my pinecone data, it is very apparent that there most denitely is specic spiral pattern that encompasses the cone, and it does indeed follow the Fibonacci number sequence; virtually all of the pinecone data falls within the 1.618 guidelines (see right). A glimpse of the summary statistics also conrms the pinecone ndings found

GOLDEN RATIO

19

above. As you can see, all aspects of the 5-Number summary are shown to represent reasonably close to that "magical" number, 1.618. The data for the human component of this analysis was quite contrary to everything the Golden Ratio and Fibonacci Number(s) stand for. As you can see from this set of summary statistics, the 5-Number summary shows that nearly all of the ratios are double; so larger than the anticipated ratio of 1:1.618.

Rather than displaying a relative frequency distribution table as with the pinecones, this data, because there is so much and so many different numbers can best be shown with a box and whisker plot. This graphical display simply illustrates that most of the data ratios fall above the number two which is obviously a larger number than what we were hoping to nd. If this picture represented the Golden Ratio with more accuracy we would basically want to reverse the positions to allow it to fall within the necessary guidelines. Bibliography Narain, D. 2001. The Golden Ratio. Retrieved February 25, 2012. (http://cuip.uchicago.edu/ ~dlnarain/golden/).

GOLDEN RATIO Appendix Pinecone Raw Data:

20

Human Participants, Raw Data:

GOLDEN RATIO

21