Tired of waiting?
Click here to disable ads!
You are not logged in. If you sign up for an account,
you can gain additional voting power over time, allowing your vote to have an even
greater impact on submission scores!
NEW LESSONS EVERY MONDAY!
This week, we dive back into the Sacred Geometry pool to talk about spirals and sequences that all life strives towards, and at the end we look at the 2nd informational unraveling of the Fruit of Life.
Links and Sources (Remove the Spaces)
Twitter - @itsJordanD
Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/p ages/Spirit-Science/21023 8862349944
Face on Mars
http://www.bibliotecapley ades.net/esp_autor_hoagla nd.htm
Geometry of Music
http://www.sciencedaily.c om/releases/2008/04/08041 7142454.htm
It'd be nice to have a pause button so we could stop and take a better look at the images. I guess while you're at it, a back and forward button wouldn't be too hard. Maybe it just skips back 100 frames with each click or something.
Originally I was intending to give you a 10, since I wasn't familiar with all the information you presented here. It was highly informative, albeit slightly sloppy.
The reason I'm subtracting those 3 points though is due to the failed attempt to link nature's harmony with god.
But good job nonetheless.
Is it possible that for this to make sense, our understanding of god must change?
I'm not sure
Being a mathematically though unreligious person, I follow your logic but as some have mentioned, not the conclusions. I think you make a few jumps that are a bit unrealistic, and as many have explained sometimes life just imitates math because of optimization. Math and sequences lead to very wasteless patterns, which nature through darwinism and advancement strives toward.
Still, it is a creative premise, you present you points well despite my disagreeing with them, and the video as a whole is enjoyable to watch.
There's something wrong in the begining
It is something really simple....
"Phi is matematical sequence."
No, it is a irrational number.
"Is the only sequence that need's two numbers to be calculated".
If we think Phi is a irrational constant, them the argument is wrong because Pi needs only 2 numbers, and Euler number needs only 1.
Euler number is better than Phi?
The way you describe Phi with formula isn't good. A better way is:
(a+b)/a = a/b = Phi => (a+b) = a*Phi or a = b*Phi
The same way nobody can prove with 100% sure that everything you said is not true, you can not prove that is true.
Overall good series.... I hope that you do not make other mistakes.
What I find interesting is you're digging into knowledge we've known for a long time, but since it was generally figured out by scholars (who were typically of a religious caste), it was branded as "religious" or "sacred". The universe is a constant cycle of chaos and order overtaking each other, and in biology we're taught basic shapes nature evolved to min/max space usage (eg: branchings on trees, crystaline structures, etc.)
However, I'm not quite sure I buy what you're selling on all of this being some finger pointing towards evidence of intelligent design or higher planes of being (which I'm still unsure on whether you're pointing towards that, b/c you jump around A LOT during your presentations). But, it is interesting what you've put together. I think some of it is just noticing patterns in nature. Natural laws, like physics, etc, will determine that things like fingers with equi-length digits are fail compared to phi digits, because leverage would cause increased stress fractures, and plus the fingers would not be able to fold / curl up as they do in our hand to form a grasping fist for tool manipulation.
I agree that there is basic mathematics (well, not so basic depending on how much math a person has had) which dictates how things have evolved. Nature and the universe are dictated by physics and math, so obviously we're going to notice patterns in how life evolved, given that all life had the same universal rules to evolve with (chemical reactions, physics, so forth).
I'm still not sure how this leads to higher planes of existence. I guess I'm still on the fence. You sort of sound like one of those folks that dug up a lot of scientific mathmatical info in order to sound like you know what you're talking about ("see, all of this is pure science and math, which cannot be disputed!"), and then overlaying and drawing corollaries to theories you want to believe in ("and thus, it cannot be disputed that we can be psychics and travel interdimensionally with just our minds!") No offense, but there's a lot of crack-pots out there that know an awful lot about science to support their bunk theories (eg: infinite perpetual motion/energy engines).
I keep waiting for the part where you ask folks to send you $19.99 + s&h to buy two magnetic rings which folks can wear to be "immortal". EG: Kevin Trudeau was pushing a lot of factually-based diet and nutrition information in some books a while back, but also loaded them down with a lot of bunk, like Alex Chiu's immortal magnet rings. Of course, he turned out to just be some get-rich-quick person that just lumped a bunch of info into a book to make money. Most of what he pulled was actual science, but then he dipped into Homeopathy and some other questionable quackery. So, pardon me if I'm wary of folks pushing science for their own agendas.
The first instalment in a new Wildlife Documentary Series
First episode of 2 ants 1 president
Rej displays his twirling talents
newgrounds.com — Your #1 online entertainment & artist community! All your base are belong to us.