Human evolution Intelligent Design Mathematics

Researchers: The Golden Ratio is found in human skulls but not other animal skulls

Spread the love

From ScienceDaily:

The Golden Ratio, described by Leonardo da Vinci and Luca Pacioli as the Divine Proportion, is an infinite number often found in nature, art and mathematics. It’s a pattern in pinecones, seashells, galaxies and hurricanes.

In a new study investigating whether skull shape follows the Golden Ratio (1.618 ā€¦ ), Johns Hopkins researchers compared 100 human skulls to 70 skulls from six other animals, and found that the human skull dimensions followed the Golden Ratio. The skulls of less related species such as dogs, two kinds of monkeys, rabbits, lions and tigers, however, diverged from this ratio.

“The other mammals we surveyed actually have unique ratios that approach the Golden Ratio with increased species sophistication,” says Rafael Tamargo, M.D., professor of neurosurgery at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. “We believe that this finding may have important anthropological and evolutionary implications.” Paper. (open access) ā€“ Rafael J. Tamargo, Jonathan A. Pindrik. Mammalian Skull Dimensions and the Golden Ratio (Ī¦). Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, 2019; 30 (6): 1750 DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000005610 More.

Skull shape might help explain why we discovered the golden ratio in the first place. Faces are something we pay attention to.

See also: Why early humans preferred the golden ratio

Golden ratio in guitar solos

and

Does The Golden Ratio, 1.618, Unify Science?

5 Replies to “Researchers: The Golden Ratio is found in human skulls but not other animal skulls

  1. 1
    rhampton7 says:

    Neanderthal skulls have different proportions than homo sapien sapiens, so I wonder how close to the golden ratio their skulls are.

  2. 2
    Bob O'H says:

    OMG, they’ve found a number which is somewhat close to another number! And in 6 other species it isn’t!

    As you can guess, I’m not terribly impressed. It’s about as silly as Bible code stuff.

  3. 3
    ET says:

    LoL! @ Bob O’H- at least it isn’t as silly stupid as materialism or blind watchmaker evolution. For anyone not as dull as Bob, take a look:

    https://www.livescience.com/37704-phi-golden-ratio.html

  4. 4
    vmahuna says:

    Peace and joy! There ain’t any reason to chuck rocks (throw stones?) over this.
    If the Designer, or the Designer’s product development team, spent any time on detailed design and marketing, a “pretty” face” would have “accidentally” resulted in the Golden Ratio.
    Lo! these many years ago, I remember someone with time on their hands conducted a survey of normal folks by showing them photos of human faces. And the faces that were considered the most “beautiful” were also the most symmetric: the left side of the face is a mirror image of the right side of the face. And so “ugly” is a case where the left side of the face is NOT a copy of the right side. I think the article also included a series of photos where: 1) normal, no editing face, 2) the face has been optically divided and the right side is replaced by a flipped copy of the left side, 3) the face has been optically divided and the left side is a flipped copy of the right side.
    In many cases (I think they might have used the Beatles…) there are significant differences in the left and right NOSES (i.e., the real nose is NOT symmetrical).
    The fake symmetrical faces were clearly more attractive in all cases. So again, in Art, beauty is symmetry.

  5. 5
    DATCG says:

    did our tax dollars pay for this?

    Oh well, not as bad as paying Darwinist to make up Macro Fairy Tales of blind events.
    From “bear” to a “whale” of a tale, is all Darwinism is.

    How many millions or even billions around the world have been spent on this Blind bear to whale of a tale story?
    I’m telling ya… it was this (_____________________) big! The missing link that got away šŸ˜‰

    https://evolutionnews.org/2018/07/from-bears-to-whales-a-difficult-transition/

    … swimming for hours with widely open mouth, thus catching, like a whale, insects in the water. Even in so extreme a case as this, if the supply of insects were constant, and if better adapted competitors did not already exist in the country, I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale.

    Ha! Now that’s a whale of a tale!

Leave a Reply