I left something out of the first paragraph. It should read as follows: Do you, in fact, mean the Golden Section? If you do, it is a rectangle in which the ratio of the sum of the long and the short sides to the long side is equal to the ratio of the long side to the short side. In other terms, where a is the long side, (a+b)/a=a/b. That works out to a ratio of about 1.6:1.
Bill Potts, CMS Roseville, CA http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On >Behalf Of Bill Potts >Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 12:16 >To: U.S. Metric Association >Subject: [USMA:22368] Re: The Deceptive and Unnecessary Radian > > >Marcus Berger wrote: " just like the "golden rule" is the square root of >two," > >Huh? > >Do you, in fact, mean the Golden Section? If you do, it is a rectangle in >which the ratio of the sum of the long and the short sides is equal to the >ratio of the long side to the short side. In other terms, where a is the >long side, (a+b)/a=a/b. That works out to a ratio of about 1.6:1. > >The rationale for the Golden Section is subjective and esthetic (i.e., it's >based on the fact that it's a pleasing and attractive form). It's found in >most classical architecture, especially Greek (e.g., the rectangle >formed by >adjacent Doric columns). > >The square root of 2 is, of course, the ratio used in ISO A Series and B >Series paper, where its sole purpose is, as you know, uniform divisibility. > >Bill Potts, CMS >Roseville, CA >http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] >
