The Dongola Times

(Anachronistic) Dispatches from the Kingdom of Makuria.
19th of July, 2014

Telling Fibs About Nature

Fibonacci

http://io9.com/5985588/15-uncanny-examples-of-the-golden-ratio-in-nature
http://io9.com/5768696/the-fibonacci-series-when-math-turns-golden

And isn’t funny how they say “As selected by the Darwinian process,” as though they don’t realise that golden ratios in nature are decreasing since the design is getting damaged by entropy. Most humans today are actually no longer possessed of all the “golden ratio” proportions that they should have. If Darwin were right, we would be getting prettier and better-designed. What you see, however, is that the correct formula has been damaged by mutations in many body parts of many people. The fact that entropy increases in the direction of time implies (as a logical conclusion based on physics) that whatever selection we have is limited to retaining decayed stuff out of the decayed stuff it has been given in the first place; similarly, the results of selection are necessarily ≥-decayed than the original, since time passes during selection, and entropy happens; and even the systems in nature that slow down entropy (cross-pollination, out-breeding, selection, DNA repair) are themselves breaking down very fast. Here is the clincher: even the rate of increase of entropy is itself increasing.
So Darwin wasn’t even wrong; he was speaking of a fantasy World that not only does not exist, but actually cannot even exist.

And all this time, people could have just written “As designed by the Creator.” Apparently culture is in entropy, too.
Teeth are supposed to follow the golden ratio! (Haha. Good luck finding that working on nearly any modern-diet human being. By the way, diet effects are inherited up to four generations down, so yeah, Darwin was a chimp. He denied epigenetics—inheritance being influenced by the environment, for example—which we have found to be absolutely pervasive and central to inheritance.)

Over the last few months he has measured the uteruses of 5,000 women using ultrasound and drawn up a table of the average ratio of a uterus's length to its width for different age bands.
The data shows that this ratio is about 2 at birth and then it steadily decreases through a woman's life to 1.46 when she is in old age.
Dr Verguts was thrilled to discover that when women are at their most fertile, between the ages of 16 and 20, the ratio of length to width of a uterus is 1.6 – a very good approximation to the golden ratio.
“This is the first time anyone has looked at this, so I am pleased it turned out so nicely,” he said.
I think that ratio seriously influences pregnancy outcomes, even the beauty of the kids.