Miles Mathis and the physics behind the golden ratio

.
Good find Cr6.

Surprised to see Tallbloke posted “Miles Mathis: The Physics behind the Golden Ratio” – Miles’ complete January 11, 2011 paper on Aug 26, 2013. The next day, Tallbloke posted “Miles Mathis: More on the Golden Ratio and the Fibonacci Series”. A year before we started posting here at Miles Mathis' Charge Field forum.

Tallbloke says:
August 26, 2013 at 12:41 pm
I read it through fully for the third time, and finally, I got it completely. Taking the time to learn the meaning of the variables so you can understand the meaning of the triangle segments and the equations as you read them to yourself is worth the effort.

Good advice. The discussion was lively alright. 8 individuals replied by the next day; some of which was positive. Tallbloke answered the replies succinctly and well. To misunderstandings he suggesting additional Mathis papers and he defended charge field ideas from the ever present naysayers and detractors. Reminded me of the Thunderbolts crowd. The discussion lasted to January. Tallbloke’s posting of Miles’ second Phi paper attracted more interest and better replies – ending on Aug 30.

On his about page, Tallbloke wrote. I’m a qualified engineer and a graduate of the History and Philosophy of Science. I’m interested in finding out how the solar system works and how Earth is affected by changes in it.

Tallbloke was (and still is) very interested in phi. Most of his readers know and share his interest. On February 13, 2013, Tallbloke posted his own short and easy to read paper – “Relations between the Fibonacci Series and Solar System Orbits”.
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2013/02/20/a-remarkable-discovery-all-solar-system-periods-fit-the-fibonacci-series-and-the-golden-ratio-why-phi/

Abstract
The linear recurrence equation: an = an-1 + an-2 with the starting conditions: a1 = a2 = 1 generates the familiar Fibonacci series: 1,1,2,3,5,8,13… This paper will use the first twenty terms of the sequence to demonstrate a close match between the Fibonacci series and the dynamic relationships between all the planets, and two dwarf planets in the Solar System. The average error across the twenty eight data points is demonstrated to be under 2.75%. The scientific implication of the result is discussed.

Tallbloke added an UPDATE 27-8-2013 to his paper, containing Miles’ phi2.pdf inverse square description.

Tallbloke added three Miles papers to his paper’s 8 item reference list:  

NEW PAPER 1/11/2011. The Physics behind the Golden Ratio. http://milesmathis.com/phi.html The Unified Field provides the mechanical constraints that cause the Golden Ratio in nature.

NEW PAPER, 3/16/2013. More on the Golden Ratio. http://milesmathis.com/phi2.pdf Showing the link between phi and the inverse square law.

NEW PAPER 12/1/2008. Unified Fields in Disguise. http://milesmathis.com/uft2.html The two unified fields we have had for centuries.

Of course I had to re-read those papers again. I definitely get the impression that Tallbloke and some of his readers ended up charge field believers.
.

.
I left a message at Tallbloke's site
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/portal/tt-admin-contact/

Message:

Ahoy Tallbloke.

Chromium6 recently alerted me to an old post of yours. https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2013/08/26/miles-mathis-the-physics-behind-the-golden-ratio/

I was happy to read your February 13 2013 ‘remarkable discovery’ paper, Relations between the Fibonacci Series and Solar System Orbits. How orbital periods and synodic conjunctions between adjacent planets closely follow “the Fibonacci series and it’s convergent ‘golden ratio’ of 1.618:1”. A simple example, proof that the solar system must be maintained through an active, dynamic feedback.

Since almost as long ago, I’ve been posting as LongtimeAirman at “Miles Mathis' Charge Field - This forum investigates the works of Miles Mathis at: milesmathis.com (Note: Sparky and David not welcome...and feed the web kitty!)”. https://milesmathis.forumotion.com/forum. Suffice to say, I’m a believer and proponent of the charge field.

With respect to Phi, I wonder if you’d ever heard of, or might be interested in phi-based-pi, PI_PHI.
PHI = (1 + sqrt(5)) / 2
PI_PHI = 4 / sqrt(PHI)
PI_PHI = 3.144605…

J F Meyer explains this very well in a long thread,
https://milesmathis.forumotion.com/t648-on-miles-mathis-claim-4-in-any-all-kinematic-situations

Hope you don’t mind me sharing,

Robert McBride
.