actually I did use 3! I had a third number set to number one plus 2, then shifted them all down, and set phi to 2/1. That makes it four.........but hey, it looks cool!
Cool! If you run this online version for a few minutes, it errors out with a NaN (Not a Number)! Must have exceeded the size of the number or something.
These are both great methods for approximating Phi, I love them! I just thought you would want to know that there is an exact expression (that it is pretty easy to derive with algebra). I have long had a fascination with the Golden Ratio as well. Did you know if you take the reciprical of Phi you get Phi -1? Pretty cool!
This method of approximating PHI uses the Fibonacci sequence, which adds the current number and past number to each other, making the next number. PHI is determined by one number divided by the previous number, getting more accurate as it goes. This method is more reliable than the distance method.
Comments
You need to be logged in to post comments
Add a Comment
Ah, so this is how you do it, I tried doing my phi project with three variables representing Fibonacci numbers, but I guess you only need two!
(view all replies)Comment Reply
actually I did use 3! I had a third number set to number one plus 2, then shifted them all down, and set phi to 2/1. That makes it four.........but hey, it looks cool!
(view all replies)Comment Reply
Cool! If you run this online version for a few minutes, it errors out with a NaN (Not a Number)! Must have exceeded the size of the number or something.
(view all replies)Comment Reply
These are both great methods for approximating Phi, I love them! I just thought you would want to know that there is an exact expression (that it is pretty easy to derive with algebra). I have long had a fascination with the Golden Ratio as well. Did you know if you take the reciprical of Phi you get Phi -1? Pretty cool!
(view all replies)Comment Reply
.....????
(view all replies)Comment Reply