Difference between revisions of "Talk:Golden Ratio"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I removed the bit about paper because √2 is the length/width ratio, not phi [[User:JamesK|JamesK]] 19:48, 17 March 2007 (EDT) | I removed the bit about paper because √2 is the length/width ratio, not phi [[User:JamesK|JamesK]] 19:48, 17 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Correct. European standard paper sizes have that ratio so that you can cut them in half and end up with two pieces of paper of similar shape to the original. | ||
| + | |||
| + | A piece of paper whose sides are in the ratio of the Golden Section has the much less useful property that if you cut in two unequal pieces such that one of them is perfectly ''square,'' the remaining piece has a shape similar to the original. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:56, 17 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 23:56, March 17, 2007
I removed the bit about paper because √2 is the length/width ratio, not phi JamesK 19:48, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
Correct. European standard paper sizes have that ratio so that you can cut them in half and end up with two pieces of paper of similar shape to the original.
A piece of paper whose sides are in the ratio of the Golden Section has the much less useful property that if you cut in two unequal pieces such that one of them is perfectly square, the remaining piece has a shape similar to the original. Dpbsmith 19:56, 17 March 2007 (EDT)