Fibonacci sequence

yrammy · Sep 29, 2020

Saw this question on a facebook group page. It asks about geology , i wonder about speleology

Unusual question, but I know the Fibonacci sequence can be seen in nature in small things like pine cones, or flowers, but is it reflected in anything on a bigger scale in nature? When looking at a landscape, is there any sign of it?

Speleotron · Sep 29, 2020

I wouldn't read too much into the Fibonacci stuff it's a bit of a myth. People love drawing spirals on things and saying how that is the golden ratio etc. but it's largely a case of people finding something if they purposefully look for it, like how people see Jesus in a tomato etc.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/mathematicians-dispute-claims-golden-ratio-natural-blueprint-beauty-10204354.html

https://www.fastcompany.com/3044877/the-golden-ratio-designs-biggest-myth

https://www.maa.org/external_archive/devlin/devlin_05_07.html

Ian Ball · Sep 29, 2020

Sounds like a question for Drs Rutherford & Fry

Mrs Trellis · Sep 30, 2020

I'm afraid Dr. Rutherford is unwell at the moment.

Rob · Sep 30, 2020

Speleotron, how dare you question the underlying meaning of such an arbitrary number!

But seriously, after a quick scan, those links do not seem to challenge the existence of the sequence in nature (& science), only the higher level meaning of it in art and beauty.

Speleotron · Sep 30, 2020

Yes you're right they don't give any evidence against the sequence itself, but the resulting ratio has certainly been overused pretty much everywhere. My own opinion is that the sequence itself is also overused but this is hard to prove. Fibonacci came up with the sequence to model the population growth of animals but I think people fell into the trap (that traps many many scientists) of thinking 'that's neat, let's see where else it appears'. The problem with that is that it's like looking for faces in the clouds: you'll find them everywhere but they aren't actually faces.

kay · Sep 30, 2020

I think the problem may be more to do with thinking something is an underlying rule when it is merely an side effect of something else.['

ZombieCake · Sep 30, 2020

Some it sounds a bit like good old Pareidolia:

"...the tendency for incorrect perception of a stimulus as an object, pattern or meaning known to the observer, such as seeing shapes in clouds, seeing faces in inanimate objects or abstract patterns, or hearing hidden messages in music."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia#:~:text=Pareidolia%20(%2Fp%C3%A6r%C9%AA%CB%88,hearing%20hidden%20messages%20in%20music.

Trouble starts when people start adding 2 and 2 to make 5 and going off at tangents reinforcing what are essentially incorrect perceptions.

Speleotron · Sep 30, 2020

Yes, my maths teacher at school said that the number of petals of most flowers is a member of the Fibonacci sequence. I went out and counted petals and found, roughly, that the percentage of flowers which satisfied the 'rule' was about the same as the percentage of numbers which were in the Fibonacci sequence! I think confirmation bias plays a huge role. Somebody sees a Fibonacci spiral on a pine-cone and attaches significance to it, but not to the complete lack of Fibonacci-ness of a coconut or a leek.

2xw · Sep 30, 2020

I dunno if it's a myth so much as just not very important.
It happens in plants because it happens to be a very efficient way of arranging leaves. It's consequently a "choice" by said plant - but geology can't choose so I wouldn't expect to find it in geography apart from by coincidence

Speleotron · Sep 30, 2020

Is it really so efficient though and if so, why? It's something I heard from my maths teachers but they never showed me a source for that claim. It seems to me to be another urban myth, My un-scientific field work didn't find many Fibonacci flowers.

JoshW · Sep 30, 2020

Also see lots of people saying it's fibonacci spirals on things, when actually it's just any old spiral.

One I saw the other day was about whales blowing bubbles in a decreasing spiral to compress a school of fish, and it was just a normal spiral..

Speleotron · Sep 30, 2020

Look for something and you will find it, even if it's not there!

Speleotron · Sep 30, 2020

The petals thing is another Fibonacci myth, based on a very selective reporting, see this quote:

Wilson cites numbers of petals on flowers.

lily 3
violet 5
delphinium 8
mayweed 13
aster 21
pyrethrum 34
helenium 55
michelmas daisy 89

These examples associate with Fibonacci numbers. But Wilson neglects to mention these others:

many trees 0 This is a Fibonacci number. [3]
mustard, dames' rocket 4 Not a Fibonacci number.
tulip, hyacinth 6 Not a Fibonacci number.
starflower, eggplant 7 Not a Fibonacci number.
gardenia 8, 9 or 10 petals. 9 and 10 are not Fibonacci numbers.
Greek anemonie (various) 14 or 15 Not Fibonacci numbers.
black-eyed susan (some) 14 Not a Fibonacci number.
mountain laurel 10 Not a Fibonacci number.
gazania 16 Not a Fibonacci number.

https://www.lockhaven.edu/~dsimanek/pseudo/fibonacc.htm

mikem · Sep 30, 2020

Evolution doesn't work by making things perfect, the best solution for the current conditions, based on what was already there, is what wins through. & if a population is isolated then it can evolve independently to form a new species.

Seeing faces in things is a facet of the way our brain works for identifying each other.

Speleotron · Sep 30, 2020

OK, but nobody can tell me why the Fibonacci sequence is in any way optimal for plants or for nature in general, and there doesn't seem to be a statistically significant bias towards Fibonacci numbers in flowers etc. I think it's one of those things that is believed because it sounds good, and gets passed round as wisdom. Maths teachs seem to love it, probably because it sounds semi-inspiring to kids.

droid · Sep 30, 2020

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18jk2oRkyPc

mikem · Sep 30, 2020

& people like simple explanations (the theory of evolution is simple, but its products aren't)

grahams · Sep 30, 2020

I remember IF. They don't make 'em like that any more.

ChrisJC · Sep 30, 2020

Reminds me of this wazzock:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMq9he-5HUU
who thinks he's found the sound of Pi.
Really he's just adding harmony to a random sequence of numbers! Any random sequence of numbers would sound exactly the same, so there's nothing significant about the Pi part.

There are plenty of afibonacciados out there doing the same.

Chris.

Fibonacci sequence

Active member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Member

Member

Well-known member

Member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads