Ok, I was reading space.com and came accross this great article. It is just amazing how the Golden Ratio even rules the shape of the galaxies! I think the Golden Ratio will be a great research project after I finish Time Travel and Black Holes..... It seems recently I have been hearing tons on the Golden Ratio. Wow ...

If one of you would like to disprove the other, can you please post a source? Also, what exactly is Phi? not the exact number of course, but what was it orginally calculated by? ---pineapple

Battle of the beasts is now solved. There is no clear winner...... YEAH, everyone can CHEER! Now, the ratio between each planet is as follows: Earth to Venus Ratio 1.38250 Earth to Mars Ratio 1.52353 So, in this way you are wrong....... But, do not fret! ...... Now, if you average all the ratios of the distances together of the planets in our solar system, they average out to 1.618. So, in many ways you are also right JS.

It was discovered by Euclid more than two thousand years ago. It was first found because of its crucial role in the construction of the pentagram as well as many other geometrical objects. From that point many things in nature started to show this extraordinary number.

yeah jcmin thats what i meant, i read it in the davinci code. but to be fair i didn't write it properly so i guess mizar was right on that one. also, the reason why 'the ventruvian man' by leonardo davinci was soo anatomically correct was because he knew about the bodly ratios of 1.618:1 (i knew that before reading the davinci code, lol)

I know this thread is old, but I just started posting here. Ok, you are saying that the distances from venus to the sun, and from earth to the sun are proportionate according to this ratio? How could that possibly be? Before I looked into this at all, I knew a few things, that I am sure you did as well. First off, The planets do not circle the sun. They move in ellipses. Secondly, the ellipses are not congruent, and they are not even on the same plane. Third, the circumference of all solar system orbits are changing constantly. Now I am sure you knew these things. What gets me is that they did not raise red flags when you read from the Davinci code and it said that. Now, after looking into it to be 100% sure, I came up with some numbers for you. Note that these are AVERAGE distances from the sun. Mercury is .39 AU. Venus is .72 AU. Earth of course is 1. Mars is 1.5. Jupiter is 5.2 AU. Saturn is 9.5 AU. Uranus is 19.2 AU. Neptune is 30.1 AU. Pluto is 39.8 AU. Though a couple of these come within 12% or so of the golden ration, not one is really even close. No where near close enough to make a statement such as there is a ratio to the distances. Oh, and just for info, an AU is an aeronautical unit, or the distance from the sun to the Earth. Or app. 149,598,000,000 meters. Moral of this story? Be skeptical of everything. Even of sources you trust, because you never know what sources that source trusted to give you that info. Question Everything! Even the book...."Davinci Code".

I think that maybe Jr Smith was talking about planetary resonance. Because if thats the case thoes numbers might perfectly fit. I do not know for sure. In the begining I did not know for sure and just jumped on Jr Smiths case witout evidence or info to back me up. I feel ignorant for doing it.

Phi is defined as the solution of the equation x^2 - x - 1 = 0. The solution of this equation is x = (1 + sqrt(5))/2. Another interesting definition is (where Fi(n) is the n-th Fibonacci number): Phi = lim(n->infinity) Fi(n+1)/Fi(n) . I'm a bit skeptical about phi in the universe as well. Ofcourse you'll find some approximations of phi if you look hard enough, but I doubt you can find phi within 1% accuracy in many ratio's. Maybe we should do a phi challenge. I think I can find as many times Amantine's ratio (2 + sqrt(12))/4 = 1.36602 in the universe as phi: Ratio of orbits of earth/venus = 1.3826 Ratio of orbits of pluto/neptune = 1.3142 Even if phi appears a lot in the universe, this doesn't prove a creator, Maybe a natural law causes the ratio to appear often. And if a creator is a required, it could also a mortal, evil, weak and pretty stupid creator, instead of a immortal, benevolent, omnipowerful, intelligent creator.

Amantine the ratio numbers you gave for venus/ earth and neptune/ pluto were thoes average distance ratios or average orbital time ratios? Also I would not be hard pressed to say it also that if you look hard enough you can see anything anywhere. Its just the way the human brain works. We look for paterns and try to make sense of what we dont understand. We see what we want to see and hear what we want to hear, we believe what we want to believe. Aside it all there is always the real truth. Its anyones game.

Ok, Looking further into this, I found a lot of interesting stuff.....most I have not yet been through. I need to say something though, before I go any further. Jr needs to clarify what he is talking about exactly, so that I can provide myself with definite answers on this subject. I found this website interesting as a start. http://www.spirasolaris.ca/sbb4b.html Apparently, the mean periods of planetary revoltion increase in a number that is close to PHI. For some reasons though, I need to look into this further, because it seems like this one is important. I do though feel, that when I get finished, PHI will not be a constant when it comes to mean planetary revolutions.

They are the ratio of the average distance to the sun. I got the information from my high-school table book, which gives the distances with a precision of four decimals.