this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2023
167 points (97.7% liked)

Asklemmy

43963 readers
1270 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I just learned the mind palace technique to memorize stuff and wanna put it to use.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DoctorWhookah@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Wait, is this true until its not or is it true forever as you go higher in the sequence?

[–] snek_boi@lemmy.ml 45 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I think the way to formally prove this is to find the difference between the Fibonacci approximation and the usual conversion, and then to find whether that series is convergent or not. Someone who has taken the appropriate pre-calculus or calculus course could actually carry it out :P

However, I got curious about graphing it for distances "small enough" like from Earth to the sun (150 million km). Turns out, there's always an error, but the error doesn't seem to be growing. In other words, except for the first few terms, the Fibonacci approximation works!

This graph grabs each "Fibonacci mile" and converts it to kilometers either with the usual conversion or the Fibonacci-approximation conversion. I also plotted a straight line to see if the points deviated.

Edit: Here's another graph

So it turns out:

  • Fibonacci-approximated kilometers are always higher than the usual-conversion kilometers
  • At most, the difference between both is 25%. That happens early on in the terms.
  • After that, the percentage difference oscillates around a value and comes closer to it.
  • When talking about more than 100 miles, the percentage change approximates 0.54.

TL;DR:

  • Yes, the Fibonacci trick is true forever as you go higher in the sequence if you're willing to accept a 0.54% error.
[–] snek_boi@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If someone wants to play around with the code, here it is.

Note that you need RStudio and the Tidyverse package.

[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 7 points 1 year ago

You just did the math!

[–] klemptor@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)
[–] snek_boi@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Checked it out and love that package! Thanks for the recommendation :)

[–] kogasa@programming.dev 14 points 1 year ago

The ratio of consecutive terms of the Fibonacci sequence is approximately the golden ratio phi = ~1.618. This approximation gets more accurate as the sequence advances. One mile is ~1.609km. So technically for large enough numbers of miles, you will be off by about half a percent.

[–] liam_galt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's true forever. The Fibonacci sequence used in this way converges on the golden ratio, which is close to the conversion of km and mi.

[–] kakes@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

Someone already replied with a graph, but I also got curious and checked for some higher numbers. Sure enough, it held up.

For example:
832,040mi => 1,346,269km (actual: 1,339,039km)

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So are you telling me that the inventors of the mile were using the golden ratio?

[–] Maya@lemmy.fmhy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

We wish they were that cool, the inventors of the modern mile were more concerned about land measurements. A square mile is 640 acres. Which neatly can be cut into quarters 3 times. 160, 40, 10.

[–] arthur@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago

Just a neat coincidence

[–] masochismworld@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Conversion factor of miles to kilometers is about 1.609 and golden ratio is about 1.618, it will be pretty accurate for quite a while...

[–] abejfehr@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

It’s always true because the ratio of miles to km is really close to the golden ratio.

If you do it for a zillion miles you’ll be off by a lot of km, but proportionally the same amount as for 1 mile