"Sacred Geometry"
Inspiring as a belief system.. gaining momentum as part of a new paradigm of extended empiricism

..but it should never become a leeway to junk science..
http://www.trigunamedia.com/private/sacred-geometry-not-a-leeway-to-junk-science

by: Frank van den Bovenkamp, May 20, 2011



Below is an excerpt - copy-pasted in its entirety, and scaled down a bit - from http://www.fractalfield.com/fractalphotosynthesis/


What is it about:
Dan Winter tries to prove his most recent "discovery" of an accurate (!) Planck length based Golden Ratio progression in the free chlorophyll (type a) absorbtion spectrum, but fails to provide any evidence.


Reason for my comments
:
- Dan Winter abuses in what looks like the same article (same page, at least) the Geometric origin of color to "prove" his point (with no proper reference and the original header with reference shamelessly clipped off)
- To preserve the field of sacred geometry in general - especially as a science - from being disgraced by such unfounded claims and associated junk science.
- To show the correct, less than 0.5% resp. 2% accurate, (close to) Golden Ratio progressions in free chlorophyll-a and bacteriochlorophyll-c absorbtion spectra.


Results:
The literature values for the absorbtion peaks of non-free (i.e. in solution) chlorophyll extracted from graphs are within about a percent unambiguous. There were no graphs, only numerical values found for free chlorophyll. Rather than listing all resources, just a Google search on "chlorophyll absorbtion peaks" yields the following values:


Chl-a in solution; literature
free Chl-a; literature*
Dan Winter
Chlorophyll a, low
~430 nm
465 nm
427 nm
Chlorophyll a, high
~662 nm
665 nm
692 nm

*) numerical values extracted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorophyll;
note: these values are not referenced (Wiki: "citation needed")

Clearly, Dan Winter's values compared with free chlorophyll are not merely "inaccurate", they are totally out of league. The absolute wavelengths are 8.2 % (low) resp. 3.8 % (high) different from the Chl-a peaks. More critically, the true ratio which constitutes the central claim of Dan Winter, is inaccurate by 100 x (Phi - (665 / 465)) / Phi = 11.6 % [Phi = 1.618].

The accurately plotted Dan Winter values in the graph for Chl-a in solution (!) are as follows:


Discussion:
For the lower chlorophyll absorbtion peak Dan Winter appears to have used, not that of free Clorophyll, but in polar organic solution (diethyl ether). This is a different value (~430 nm). This is flawed for two reasons:

  • On this planet, plants grow in the air, not in diethyl ether. So the natural absorbtion spectra are those of free Chlorophyll;
  • It is still just one (the low) absorbtion peak in diethyl ether which matches Dan Winter's value. One peak does not make a "harmonic cascade", as Dan Winter tries to prove. Even whether two matching peaks would validate a harmonic cascade is not sure.

Unfortunately, the Wiki values are uncited, and no other direct sources could be found. However the spectral comparison for bacterial chlorophyll c (BChl-c) in aquateous vs. methanol solution is known [http://www.bio.ku.dk/nuf/resources/scitab/chlabs/index.htm + well referenced].

The absorbtion peaks of BChl-c in aquatic solution, where the molecular function remains intact as in free BChl-c, are around 458 nm and 744 nm. From below graph and table it follows that bacterial chlorophyll c (BChl-c) and plant chlorophyll a (Chl-a) have quite accurately corresponding absorbtion spectra, especially in the lower frequencies (bold in table).

Pigment Chl-a Chl-b BChl-a BChl-b BChl-c BChl-d BChl-e
Color in graph black red magenta orange cyan blue green
Absorption maxima (nm) 430, 663 463, 648 364, 770 373, 795 434,666 427,655 469, 654
Original graph and table (clipped): http://www.bio.ku.dk/nuf/resources/scitab/chlabs/index.htm


If two complex spectra are virtually equal in one shared condition, they are most likely to be equal in another. Therefore, either with or without a small BChl - Chl correction, the Wiki values for the free chlorophyll-a low and high absorbtion peaks appear accurate within less than a percent (in fact, this could serve as a citation for the Wiki on free chlorophyll spectra).

For the higher absorbtion peak, Dan Winter refers to the low resolution graph, instead of using the readily known numerical value from literature. This is also flawed for two reasons:

  • Still this is the spectrum of chlorophyll in solution, i.e. not free chlorophyll
  • Dan Winter does not actually interpolate the proper value, he instead plugs his own hypothized value

Even if the chlorophyll absorbtion peaks would not have been mentioned in literature numerically, the interpolation to extract accurate values from, or introduce values into the spectrum graph is so simple, that any school kid could have done it. The accuracy of this interpolation is in any case far greater than that of Dan Winter's plugged value.

Clearly there must be another reason for this glaring discrepancy between the true and the Dan Winter values, which is obviously not mathematical or physical in nature, but psychological. This may be explained through "modus ponens". In short, this means doing science by trying to find observations confirming an existing hypothesis ("ponere"). For example, looking for evidence of a Higgs particle. This is modus ponens, which may or may not yield result. Or, when Isaac Newton plugged "Indigo" as a primary spectrum color, he allegedly did so to satisfy the religious belief that the spectrum of light should match the musical scale, as was required by the Church [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigo]. This is less likely to yield result, as there is no physical evidence and no mature scientific theory either. The opposite is "modus tollens " - developing a theory based on actual observations. For example, how Albert Einstein developed relativity based on the Michelson-Morley experiment with light speed. Or, the theory of the geometric origin of all primary colors, based on the known wavelengths of those colors.

In the case of Newtons "Indigo" there is no true discovery, because there is no real theory and no physical evidence. Likewise, in Dan Winter's case of "Planck - Golden Mean - chlorophyll absorbtion peaks", there is also hardly any trace of a theory and no physical evidence. In fact, unlike in Newton's case, there is negative evidence. In such case, if an idea is nurtured against all odds, "modus tollens" becomes little more than a euphemism for wishful thinking, if not a religious belief in a pet theory, in this case something along the lines of the omnipotence of Golden Ratio. Moreover, the fact that the glaring mismatch here was nevertheless presented as a an "accurate multiplication of Planck length with a Phi cascade" is akin to pure deception - clearly, to make lay people belief in the omnipotence of Golden Ratio Dan Winter has obviously completely identified himself with. It doesn't take an Isaac Newton or Albert Einstein to understand why Dan Winter did not mention the numerical values from litarature and only showed a low-resolution graph, trusting that his typical readers and audience will swallow his latest "discovery" ad hominem.

These sort of willful distortions should be avoided, to preserve the intrinsic beauty and integrity of Sacred Geometry, if not as a science, then at least as a belief system, and just to keep the fun in science.


Additional notes:
A true theory on absorbtion lines of chlorophyll should ideally provide a solution for both a and b types, or at least discuss the differences.

The spectrum line of minimal BChl-c (resp. Chl-a) absorbtion in aquateous solution is in fact much closer to the retinal (photopic) peak sensitivity (yellow-green) than to green. In other words, the color least appreciated by plants, is the color most appreciated by the eye. This value is accurately known in literature (555 nm) and was also accurately (less than 0.2%) found by the geometric origin of color (556 nm). Source: http://science.trigunamedia.com/

The theory of the geometrical origin of color in fact (first time) verifyably disproves Newton's hypothesis of "Indigo" as a primary color, because for the "Indigo" wavelength there exists no exclusive geometrical cause.within the formula predicting all other primary colors plús the retinal peak sensitivity.

 


The Bacteriochlorophyll BChl-c absorbtion lines in aquateous solution (i.e. with intact funtion) and therefore also the free plant chlorophyll Chl-a seem to be around Golden Ratio, however unrelated to any currently known larger cascade, and unrelated to Planck length:



Note: the lower Golden Ratio accuracy for BChl-e could be caused by the less distinct lower peak
as a result of a secondary maximum around 530 nm.

Complete Dan Winter plagiarism summary on Casa Khuan - www.casakhuan.org


© All rights reserved, TrigunaMedia, 2011