5 ms·

1 - phi. It's quite shocking to see how many places it turns up and how many constants can be derived from it.

nemothekid 12y ago
Is this from the article? I'm not sure how phi relates to the speed of light, Newton's G, Planks constant or the numerous other force & energy constants described in the article.
- meric 12y ago
  I suppose his answer might be more philosophical. All things in this universe are shards of the same one universe. Shards of this one universe thinking about what this universe is itself made of. As far as we know from the fact the constants cannot be derived from any other principle and must be measured directly, the universe is made of itself. The universe is one. Also an interesting read, if you're feeling philosophical about the number 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe EDIT: I'm tempted to give myself a downvote, totally missed phi was an actual constant in itself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - czbond 12y ago
    The one electron wiki entry literally blew my mind. I read the first sentence and thought "absolutely not". Then as I read into it thinking "give it a chance". My logic tells me this can't be the case ..... but man this is a wild theory to me.
    - darkmighty 12y ago
      The theory is more an amusement than anything, but as the article points out, it seems it led to a major impact with the exposition of CPT symmetry. It makes sense if you know of Feynman's earlier work with Wheeler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler%E2%80%93Feynman_absorber_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler%E2%80%93Feynman_absorbe...) which is actually a consistent theory of classical electrodynamics (i.e. half the electromagnetic interactions are "coming from the future").
- walrus 12y ago
  Planck's constant is almost exactly 10^-33/(phi-0.108843677). Coincidence? I think not.
  - typedweb 12y ago
    Obviously we haven't read the same books. You'd be suprized at how closely related to phi many of the low level physical constant are.
    - Chinjut 12y ago
      It doesn't mean anything to compare a constant to phi unless that constant is itself dimensionless. What low level physical constants (and relations between them and phi) do you have in mind?
      - gus_massa 12y ago
        [This is not to support the idea that phi is related to physics constants. This is only a technical comment about unitless constants.] It's usual to redefine the constants using other constants. The most well known case is the fine structure constant, aka alpha, aka almost 1/137. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-structure_constant#Definition http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-structure_constant#Definit... The idea is that in many particle physics calculations you don't use the charge of the electron alone. Every time it appears, it's multiplied by other constants like c or h, so you redefine it as a new constant that is the usual product you have to put in the calculations. The problem with constants with units is that they mix real physics with the arbitrary choose of the measurement units, like the time the Earth do a complete spin divided by 24 by 60 and by 60 and other complete arbitrary chooses. It's difficult to say if "e" the charge of the electron is big or small. But in many calculations you can use alpha that is clearly a small number (~=1/137) and try to use perturbation theory to get a good approximation of the actual result. (You can imagine this as a lot of Taylor approximations.) (There are a lot of technical details hidden in these calculations that can make a mathematician cry but a physicist happy.)
    - cozzyd 12y ago

Is this from the article? I'm not sure how phi relates to the speed of light, Newton's G, Planks constant or the numerous other force & energy constants described in the article.

meric 12y ago
I suppose his answer might be more philosophical. All things in this universe are shards of the same one universe. Shards of this one universe thinking about what this universe is itself made of. As far as we know from the fact the constants cannot be derived from any other principle and must be measured directly, the universe is made of itself. The universe is one. Also an interesting read, if you're feeling philosophical about the number 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe EDIT: I'm tempted to give myself a downvote, totally missed phi was an actual constant in itself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- czbond 12y ago
  The one electron wiki entry literally blew my mind. I read the first sentence and thought "absolutely not". Then as I read into it thinking "give it a chance". My logic tells me this can't be the case ..... but man this is a wild theory to me.
  - darkmighty 12y ago
    The theory is more an amusement than anything, but as the article points out, it seems it led to a major impact with the exposition of CPT symmetry. It makes sense if you know of Feynman's earlier work with Wheeler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler%E2%80%93Feynman_absorber_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler%E2%80%93Feynman_absorbe...) which is actually a consistent theory of classical electrodynamics (i.e. half the electromagnetic interactions are "coming from the future").
walrus 12y ago
Planck's constant is almost exactly 10^-33/(phi-0.108843677). Coincidence? I think not.
- typedweb 12y ago
  Obviously we haven't read the same books. You'd be suprized at how closely related to phi many of the low level physical constant are.
  - Chinjut 12y ago
    It doesn't mean anything to compare a constant to phi unless that constant is itself dimensionless. What low level physical constants (and relations between them and phi) do you have in mind?
    - gus_massa 12y ago
      [This is not to support the idea that phi is related to physics constants. This is only a technical comment about unitless constants.] It's usual to redefine the constants using other constants. The most well known case is the fine structure constant, aka alpha, aka almost 1/137. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-structure_constant#Definition http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-structure_constant#Definit... The idea is that in many particle physics calculations you don't use the charge of the electron alone. Every time it appears, it's multiplied by other constants like c or h, so you redefine it as a new constant that is the usual product you have to put in the calculations. The problem with constants with units is that they mix real physics with the arbitrary choose of the measurement units, like the time the Earth do a complete spin divided by 24 by 60 and by 60 and other complete arbitrary chooses. It's difficult to say if "e" the charge of the electron is big or small. But in many calculations you can use alpha that is clearly a small number (~=1/137) and try to use perturbation theory to get a good approximation of the actual result. (You can imagine this as a lot of Taylor approximations.) (There are a lot of technical details hidden in these calculations that can make a mathematician cry but a physicist happy.)
  - cozzyd 12y ago