Discussion » 1.618

This is a read-only copy. The forum ran on iamcal.com from 2000 until its database was lost in 2016, and this topic was rebuilt from copies saved by the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. Some replies may be missing, and its dates are approximate.
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 25th October 2005:
 
?
Posted by Sul_DUPE1, around 25th October 2005:
 
Havent we discussed phi before?
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 25th October 2005:
 
That's 3.142 not 1.618 PAW PAW! (and it's pi)
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 25th October 2005:
 
Oh, you meant PHI, sorry I am a PAW PAW!
Posted by Alfie_DUPE1, around 25th October 2005:
 
hahaha
Posted by Saltation_DUPE1, around 25th October 2005:
 
looks like a random discussion forum. am i missing something?
Posted by WarHead, around 25th October 2005:
 
Like, something better to do, for heggsample?
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 25th October 2005:
 
Sul knows more about PHI than me...
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 25th October 2005:
 
maybe it’s this. The Golden Ratio
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 25th October 2005:
 
Many things that we see as 'beautiful' have a ratio of 1.618
Posted by Sul_DUPE1, around 25th October 2005:
 
I dont know loads.

This should bring you up to speed: goldennumber.net
Posted by Sul_DUPE1, around 25th October 2005:
 
It's the reason chicks dig the Clooney
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 25th October 2005:
 
Ja, Clooney is beautiful, but Damon is better :)
Posted by Sul_DUPE1, around 28th October 2005:
 
Does it work in music or is it a purely visual thing? Hmmm