| Topic List | Page List: 1 |
|---|---|
| Topic | do you agree, with SCIENCE, that Robert Pattinson is the handsomest guy in the.. |
| treewojima 02/05/20 8:21:34 AM #20: | https://amp.businessinsider.com/the-golden-ratio-really-has-nothing-to-do-with-beauty-2016-7 De Silva's website describes him as a "facial cosmetic surgeon who specializes in the eyes, nose, face and neck areas only." He offers women his formula for calculating their own beauty, based on the "golden" ratio of 1.62. But is his golden ratio method scientifically sound? And can it dictate who we find attractive or unattractive? John Allen Paulos, a Temple University research mathematician and author of books like "Innumeracy: Mathematical Illiteracy and its Consequences," doesn't think so. "There's no evidence for most of these claims," he said in a call with Tech Insider. "And when there is, it's merely descriptive. Yes, okay, that ratio is approximately 1.62, but so what? There's lots of other rectangles with ratios like 1.8 and 1.5." "It's not such an unusual ratio," he added. "It's a common rectangle." A 5x3 index card, for example, meets the Golden Ratio standard. "There's no scientific discovery that's ever followed from any kind of scientific application of the 'Golden Ratio,'" he said. "It doesn't predict anything. It isn't at the base of any sort of argument that has some kind of scientific content." ... Copied to Clipboard! |
| Topic List | Page List: 1 |