Testing Dan Winter´s equation: Tp x Phi^N

[Wangha]

Hi All

Greeting to everyone, everywhere, everytime 8-)

I have been reading about the nice implications of Dan Winter´s claims, and the mathematical proofs of the unique properties of the Phi (golden proportion) power series. "Addition and multiplication of powers of phi, always equal another power of phi". That is a nice property, thinking in non-linear systems and inter-modulation products (heterodining):
http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Heterodining_and_Powers_of_Phi.pdf

Dan also claim: Plack-time x Phi^N  (For N = [0, 1, 2, 3 ... til infinit]) will result in very interesting frequencies, like: "Earth year, Venus year, Craneo-Sacral tide waves, Schumann resonances... " And ultimately, the Phi power series becomes a frequency signature for: Bliss, Consciousness, Perception, Gravity... and every negentropic process.

I did make a excell sheet to look at the frequencies from Dan Winter´s formula:
Tp x Phi^n

I used
Phi = 1.6180339887499 and
Tp = 1.35125 x 10^-43  (I found that Tp value on Dan´s book, and in other different references in the net. However, I also found many references indicating Tp = 5.39 x 10^-44  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_time) Any help on why I seem to find two different plank-time values? What Im missing here?

Unfortunatelly, when making the calculations in xcell, I do not get the Schumann resonances (or very close) as predicted by Dan Winter (2.78 ; 4.5 ; 7.29 ; 11.79 ; 19.08 ...)[attached figure from Dan´s book/webpage]

Instead I get: 2.46 ; 3.98 ; 6.44 ; 10.42 ; 16.87 ; 27.29 ... which does not get close to the Schumann harmonics.

I also tried using Tp = 5.39x10^-44, and or using more decimal in Phi, but does not work either.

The formula is quite simple, so Im not sure what must be the difference with Dan´s calculations.
Any Help????????

Big thanks for all of you
Wangha

P.S.: I tried to attach the xcell file (.xclx), but unfortunately is not allowed. I did attached instead, the pdf version of the xcell sheet.

[Chillheimer]

to be honest, whenever the name Dan Winter pops up I am extremely sceptical upfront.
I believe that people like him do the worst harm to real fractal research.

Why? just look at his page http://www.fractalfield.com/ this guy tries to sell you the who is who of esoteric crackpottery.
-Rejuvenation Plasma Healing
-The Superimploder (magnetic water treatment for better plant growth)
-fractal clothing, based on the bioactive field
-or my personal favourit, this description of a 2016 interview with Winter:
Alien bloodlines, plasma beings, the Anunnaki, Reptilians, and Grays are just the starting point in this exploration of galactic history with Dan Winter. From the roots of life on Earth, to the cloning of humans by Enki and the modern day effects of our alien roots, we learn how to activate the human soul through bliss and evolve the species closer to transcending death

do I need to post more?

That he seems to use a wrong Planck-time in his book tells a lot.
If you actually used his "new equations" and the results are different/wrong, or don't show what Winter claims, then you might actually have proven him wrong.
Which is a good thing in my opinion.


Dan Winter is much worse than El Naschie who also did a lot of damage to the progress of fractals.
These people are the cause why mainstream science doesn't take fractals serious.
And that is so bad on such a scale for humanity and overall science, I don't have words for it. It actually hurts me when I think of it.  


edit: even if some of his claims should be true - by mingling them with all those other esoteric questionable areas and trying to sell them to you he discredits himself.
fractals and their potential implications are awesome as they are. there is absolutely no need to add all this crap on top of it without any scientific foundation (or pseudo-science)
the only reason I can imagine why one would do such a thing is to a) stand out of the crowd or b) because you want to sell stuff to gullible people. or c) you are stupid.
I guess it's a biit of a) and mostly b)


so much for my rant, had to get this of my chest.
sorry for not contributing to any of the actual calculations you did. If they turn out to prove him wrong Winter should be publicly confronted with this.

[claude]

Any help on why I seem to find two different plank-time values?

Sometimes the Planck constant has a factor of absorbed into it to convert from cycles-per-second ("h") to radians-per-second ("h-bar"), see:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_constant

This gives a factor of in Planck time constant. corresponding to the two values you gave.   I'm not sure which version is "better", possibly it depends on the context.

[Chillheimer]

Ok, I'll try to do sth productive here as well

I used
Phi = 1.6180339887499 and

Maybe this is where the problem is rooted. If you go over +44 magnitudes of order then it becomes important how many digits you use in your input values.
If you try Phi with a loooot more digits (more than 44 I suggest) then the results might be more accurate.

here's a few more digits of Phi - 100.000 to be precise
http://www.goldennumber.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Phi-To-100000-Places.txt

[zebastian]

Code:

Hi guys,

@chillheimer totally agree, this esoterism is pure populism.
@wangha The used phi in dan winters paper is the same you used:
phi = (1.0 + sqrt(5.0))  / 2.0 ~ 1.6180339887499 (its the same ratio change in the consecutive sequence)
The inpreciseness of phi does not cause the big change (when you add a small delta to phi, the outcome is almost the same, try to add 0.000001)
The only question is, which Tp has been used (Probably the one, which proves the desired outcome   )

here is a testscript:

Code:

#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>

int main()
{
	double phi = (1.0 + sqrt(5.0))  / 2.0;
	double Tp = 1.35125e-43; // ????
	int n = 0;

	for(;;){
		n++;
		double v = Tp * pow(phi, n);
		printf("n: %d --> %f\n", n, v);
		if(v > 100) break;
	}
	return 0;
}

[Wangha]

Hi All

Thank you all for your nice informative answers 8-)

You are actually all right:
@Claude, thanks for the info on the Plank-time (that was really bugging me)
@Zebastian, you r totally right, extending the number of decimals in phi makes minimal changes.

According to the own statements of Dan Winter, in his equation he is using Tp=1.35125 x 10^-43
But, this is fake (experimentally tested). The series Tp x phi^n does not result in Schumann harmonics.
The closes this series gets is: 2.46 ; 3.98 ; 6.44 ; 10.42 ; 16.87 ; 27.29 ... (which is far from the Schumann harmonic sequence). If using Tp=5.39x10^-44 the results did not improve either: 1.59 ; 2.57 ; 4.16 ; 6.73 ; 10.88 ; 17.62 ...non-sense.
Which bring us to the conclusions in the first reply from @Chillheimer 8-) Totally right, and now experimentally proven too 8-)
I agree with your concerns about the moral intentions of Mr. D.Winter. However, I know miss-informers typically likes to hide the "best truths" among misleading-lies, and the "worst lies" hidden within the very nice truths 8-)
So the only way to find out is the verification of each individual fact, without attaching expectations-deceptions in other surrounding facts, just one by one. That way we do not extend the fakeness of individual facts to the great possibilities of fractal sciences. And I thank you all for your great help with the verification this one, you kill it!!!
I hope I can bring you something more fulfilling next time 8-)

Greating to all !!!



 

[DarkBeam]

But hey... I have an alien bloodline too! 

[Wangha]

Hi all

I finally found the problem about the Dan Winter formula for the "series of frequencies", here is the correct one:

(1/Tp)*(1/Phi^N) [Hz]

With this one, the results are as Mr. Winter claimed: 2.78 ; 4.5 ; 7.29 ; 11.79 ; 19.08 ; (with N= [203 ; 202 ; 201 ; 200 ;199])
Which is a close approximation of the Shumman harmonics. At least 7.29 (7.83) and 19.08 (20.08), then 11.79 (14.3) seems close enough. I could not find any reference of Shumman harmonics below 7.83 Hz. Does anyone has a nice link to a trusty measurement of the actual Shumman frequencies?    

That way the units also fit: (1/Tp)*(1/Phi^N) = (1/[sec])*(scalar)=[Hz]

The previous formula I used was: Tp*(Phi^N) ==> [sec]*(scalar)=[sec]
So the dimensionality was wrong 8-) it was a "series of periods" instead of "series of frequencies". Ups! 8-)

The other formula from Dan Winter is a "series of wavelengths":

Lp*(Phi^N) [m]

With this one you get the wavelength of green-photosynthesis 427 nm [N=136] and 691 nm [N=137] (or "within the range" of green-photosynthesis, since every plant uses a slightly different spectrum/signature within this range). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthetically_active_radiation

Attached you can find the calculation of both formulas.
Yes, there are true facts among the mysticism. My apologies for the confusion.
Peace


 

[youhn]

Do not panic.

It's just the jet stream fluctuation in our core.

"scientists have discovered a jet stream deep below Earth’s surface – and it’s speeding up."

Source: http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Swarm/There_s_a_jet_stream_in_our_core

[Alef]

DarkBeam:
Nice avatar.

Sorry for offtop. But I think he is right. All the politicians are alien reptiloids. It is the only good explanation of what they are doing