Numerical proportion considered to be an aesthetic ideal in classical design. It refers to the ratio of the base to the height of a rectangle or to the division of a line segment into two in such a way that the ratio of the shorter part to the longer is equal to that of the longer to the whole. It works out to about 1.61803:1. A rectangle constructed from golden sections (segments in this ratio) is called a golden rectangle.
Learn more about golden ratio with a free trial on Britannica.com.
In mathematics and the arts, two quantities are in the golden ratio if the ratio between the sum of those quantities and the larger one is the same as the ratio between the larger one and the smaller. The golden ratio is approximately 1.6180339887.
At least since the Renaissance, many artists and architects have proportioned their works to approximate the golden ratio—especially in the form of the golden rectangle, in which the ratio of the longer side to the shorter is the golden ratio—believing this proportion to be aesthetically pleasing. Mathematicians have studied the golden ratio because of its unique and interesting properties.
The golden ratio can be expressed as a mathematical constant, usually denoted by the Greek letter (phi). The figure of a golden section illustrates the geometric relationship that defines this constant. Expressed algebraically:
Other names frequently used for or closely related to the golden ratio are golden section (Latin: sectio aurea), golden mean, golden number, and the Greek letter phi (). Other terms encountered include extreme and mean ratio, medial section, divine proportion, divine section (Latin: sectio divina), golden proportion, golden cut, and mean of Phidias.
| List of numbers|
γ - ζ(3) - √2 - √3 - √5 - φ - α - e - π - δ
Two quantities (positive numbers) a and b are said to be in the golden ratio if
This equation unambiguously defines
The right equation shows that , which can be substituted in the left part, giving
Cancelling b yields
Multiplying both sides by and rearranging terms leads to:
The only positive solution to this quadratic equation is
Ancient Greek mathematicians first studied what we now call the golden ratio because of its frequent appearance in geometry. The ratio is important in the geometry of regular pentagrams and pentagons. The Greeks usually attributed discovery of the ratio to Pythagoras or his followers. The regular pentagram, which has a regular pentagon inscribed within it, was the Pythagoreans' symbol.
Euclid's Elements (Greek: Στοιχεῖα) provides the first known written definition of what is now called the golden ratio: "A straight line is said to have been cut in extreme and mean ratio when, as the whole line is to the greater segment, so is the greater to the less." Euclid explains a construction for cutting (sectioning) a line "in extreme and mean ratio", i.e. the golden ratio. Throughout the Elements, several propositions (theorems in modern terminology) and their proofs employ the golden ratio. Some of these propositions show that the golden ratio is an irrational number.
The name "extreme and mean ratio" was the principal term used from the 3rd century BC until about the 18th century.
The modern history of the golden ratio starts with Luca Pacioli's Divina Proportione of 1509, which captured the imagination of artists, architects, scientists, and mystics with the properties, mathematical and otherwise, of the golden ratio.
The first known approximation of the (inverse) golden ratio by a decimal fraction, stated as "about 0.6180340," was written in 1597 by Prof. Michael Maestlin of the University of Tübingen in a letter to his former student Johannes Kepler.
Since the twentieth century, the golden ratio has been represented by the Greek letter (phi, after Phidias, a sculptor who is said to have employed it) or less commonly by (tau, the first letter of the ancient Greek root τομή—meaning cut).
Timeline according to Priya Hemenway.
The first and most influential of these was De Divina Proportione by Luca Pacioli, a three-volume work published in 1509. Pacioli, a Franciscan friar, was known mostly as a mathematician, but he was also trained and keenly interested in art. De Divina Proportione explored the mathematics of the golden ratio. Though it is often said that Pacioli advocated the golden ratio's application to yield pleasing, harmonious proportions, Livio points out that that interpretation has been traced to an error in 1799, and that Pacioli actually advocated the Vitruvian system of rational proportions. Pacioli also saw Catholic religious significance in the ratio, which led to his work's title. Containing illustrations of regular solids by Leonardo Da Vinci, Pacioli's longtime friend and collaborator, De Divina Proportione was a major influence on generations of artists and architects alike.
Some studies of the Acropolis, including the Parthenon, conclude that many of its proportions approximate the golden ratio. The Parthenon's facade as well as elements of its facade and elsewhere can be circumscribed by golden rectangles. To the extent that classical buildings or their elements are proportioned according to the golden ratio, this might indicate that their architects were aware of the golden ratio and consciously employed it in their designs. Alternatively, it is possible that the architects used their own sense of good proportion, and that this led to some proportions that closely approximate the golden ratio. On the other hand, such retrospective analyses can always be questioned on the ground that the investigator chooses the points from which measurements are made or where to superimpose golden rectangles, and that these choices affect the proportions observed.
Some scholars deny that the Greeks had any aesthetic association with golden ratio. For example, Midhat J. Gazalé says, "It was not until Euclid, however, that the golden ratio's mathematical properties were studied. In the Elements (308 B.C.) the Greek mathematician merely regarded that number as an interesting irrational number, in connection with the middle and extreme ratios. Its occurrence in regular pentagons and decagons was duly observed, as well as in the dodecahedron (a regular polyhedron whose twelve faces are regular pentagons). It is indeed exemplary that the great Euclid, contrary to generations of mystics who followed, would soberly treat that number for what it is, without attaching to it other than its factual properties. And Keith Devlin says, "Certainly, the oft repeated assertion that the Parthenon in Athens is based on the golden ratio is not supported by actual measurements. In fact, the entire story about the Greeks and golden ratio seems to be without foundation. The one thing we know for sure is that Euclid, in his famous textbook Elements, written around 300 B.C., showed how to calculate its value. Near-contemporary sources like Vitruvius exclusively discuss proportions that can be expressed in whole numbers, i.e. commensurate as opposed to irrational proportions.
A geometrical analysis of the Great Mosque of Kairouan reveals a consistent application of the golden ratio throughout the design, according to Boussora and Mazouz. It is found in the overall proportion of the plan and in the dimensioning of the prayer space, the court, and the minaret. Boussora and Mazouz also examined earlier archaeological theories about the mosque, and demonstrate the geometric constructions based on the golden ratio by applying these constructions to the plan of the mosque to test their hypothesis.
The Swiss architect Le Corbusier, famous for his contributions to the modern international style, centered his design philosophy on systems of harmony and proportion. Le Corbusier's faith in the mathematical order of the universe was closely bound to the golden ratio and the Fibonacci series, which he described as "rhythms apparent to the eye and clear in their relations with one another. And these rhythms are at the very root of human activities. They resound in man by an organic inevitability, the same fine inevitability which causes the tracing out of the Golden Section by children, old men, savages and the learned.
Le Corbusier explicitly used the golden ratio in his Modulor system for the scale of architectural proportion. He saw this system as a continuation of the long tradition of Vitruvius, Leonardo da Vinci's "Vitruvian Man", the work of Leon Battista Alberti, and others who used the proportions of the human body to improve the appearance and function of architecture. In addition to the golden ratio, Le Corbusier based the system on human measurements, Fibonacci numbers, and the double unit. He took Leonardo's suggestion of the golden ratio in human proportions to an extreme: he sectioned his model human body's height at the navel with the two sections in golden ratio, then subdivided those sections in golden ratio at the knees and throat; he used these golden ratio proportions in the Modulor system. Le Corbusier's 1927 Villa Stein in Garches exemplified the Modulor system's application. The villa's rectangular ground plan, elevation, and inner structure closely approximate golden rectangles.
Another Swiss architect, Mario Botta, bases many of his designs on geometric figures. Several private houses he designed in Switzerland are composed of squares and circles, cubes and cylinders. In a house he designed in Origlio, the golden ratio is the proportion between the central section and the side sections of the house.
Leonardo da Vinci's illustrations in De Divina Proportione (On the Divine Proportion) and his views that some bodily proportions exhibit the golden ratio have led some scholars to speculate that he incorporated the golden ratio in his own paintings. Some suggest that his Mona Lisa, for example, employs the golden ratio in its geometric equivalents. Whether Leonardo proportioned his paintings according to the golden ratio has been the subject of intense debate. The secretive Leonardo seldom disclosed the bases of his art, and retrospective analysis of the proportions in his paintings can never be conclusive.
Salvador Dalí explicitly used the golden ratio in his masterpiece, The Sacrament of the Last Supper. The dimensions of the canvas are a golden rectangle. A huge dodecahedron, with edges in golden ratio to one another, is suspended above and behind Jesus and dominates the composition.
Mondrian used the golden section extensively in his geometrical paintings.
Side Note: Interestingly, a statistical study on 565 works of art of different great painters, performed in 1999, found that these artists had not used the golden ratio in the size of their canvases. The study concluded that the average ratio of the two sides of the paintings studied is 1.34, with averages for individual artists ranging from 1.04 (Goya) to 1.46 (Bellini).
According to Jan Tschichold, "There was a time when deviations from the truly beautiful page proportions 2:3, 1:√3, and the Golden Section were rare. Many books produced between 1550 and 1770 show these proportions exactly, to within half a millimetre."
Studies by psychologists, starting with Fechner, have been devised to test the idea that the golden ratio plays a role in human perception of beauty. While Fechner found a preference for rectangle ratios centered on the golden ratio, later attempts to carefully test such a hypothesis have been, at best, inconclusive.
James Tenney reconceived his piece For Ann (rising), which consists of up to twelve computer-generated upwardly glissandoing tones (see Shepard tone), as having each tone start so it is the golden ratio (in between an equal tempered minor and major sixth) below the previous tone, so that the combination tones produced by all consecutive tones are a lower or higher pitch already, or soon to be, produced.
Ernő Lendvai analyzes Béla Bartók's works as being based on two opposing systems, that of the golden ratio and the acoustic scale, though other music scholars reject that analysis. In Bartok's Music for Strings, Percussion and Celesta the xylophone progression occurs at the intervals 1:2:3:5:8:5:3:2:1. French composer Erik Satie used the golden ratio in several of his pieces, including Sonneries de la Rose+Croix. His use of the ratio gave his music an otherworldly symmetry.
The golden ratio is also apparent in the organisation of the sections in the music of Debussy's Image, Reflections in Water, in which "the sequence of keys is marked out by the intervals 34, 21, 13 and 8, and the main climax sits at the phi position."
The musicologist Roy Howat has observed that the formal boundaries of La Mer correspond exactly to the golden section. Trezise finds the intrinsic evidence "remarkable," but cautions that no written or reported evidence suggests that Debussy consciously sought such proportions. Also, many works of Chopin, mainly Etudes (studies) and Nocturnes, are formally based on the golden ratio. This results in the biggest climax of both musical expression and technical difficulty after about 2/3 of the piece.
This Binary Universe, an experimental album by Brian Transeau (aka BT), includes a track entitled "1.618" in homage to the golden ratio. The track features musical versions of the ratio and the accompanying video displays various animated versions of the golden mean.
Pearl Drums positions the air vents on its Masters Premium models based on the golden ratio. The company claims that this arrangement improves bass response and has applied for a patent on this innovation.
In the opinion of author Leon Harkleroad, "Some of the most misguided attempts to link music and mathematics have involved Fibonacci numbers and the related golden ratio.
The negative root of the quadratic equation for φ (the "conjugate root") is . The absolute value of this quantity (≈ 0.618) corresponds to the length ratio taken in reverse order (shorter segment length over longer segment length, b/a), and is sometimes referred to as the golden ratio conjugate. It is denoted here by the capital Phi ():
Alternatively, can be expressed as
This illustrates the unique property of the golden ratio among positive numbers, that
or its inverse:
Irrationality of the golden ratio is immediate from the properties of the Euclidean algorithm to compute the greatest common divisor of a pair of positive integers.
In its original form, that algorithm repeatedly replaces that larger of the two numbers by their difference, until the numbers become equal, which must happen after finitely many steps. The only property needed will be that this number of steps for an initial pair (a,b) only depends on the ratio a : b. This is because, if both numbers are multiplied by a common positive factor λ so as to obtain another pair (λa,λb) with the same ratio, then this factor does not affect the comparison: say if a > b then also λa > λb; moreover the difference λa − λb=λ(a − b) is also multiplied by the same factor. Therefore comparing the algorithm applied to (a,b) and to (λa,λb) after one step, the pairs will still have the same ratio, and this relation will persist until the algorithm terminates.
Now suppose the golden ratio were a rational number, that is, one has positive integers a, b with
Another way to express this argument is as follows: the formulation of the Euclidean algorithm does not require the operands to be integer numbers; they could be real numbers or indeed any pair of quantities that can be compared and subtracted. For instance one could operate on lengths in a geometric figure (without requiring a unit of measure to express everything in numbers); in fact this is a point of view already familiar to the ancient Greeks. In this setting however there is no longer a guarantee that the algorithm will terminate as it will for integer numbers (which cannot descend further than the number 1). One does retain the property mentioned above that pairs having the same ratio will behave similarly throughout the algorithm (even if it should go on forever), which is directly related to the algorithm not requiring any unit of measure. Now examples can be given of ratios for which this form of the algorithm will never terminate, and the golden ratio is the simplest possible such example: by construction a pair with the golden ratio will give another pair with the same ratio after just one step, so that it will go on similarly forever.
Note that apart from the Euclidean algorithm, this proof does not require any number theoretic facts, such as prime factorisation or even the fact that any fraction can be expressed in lowest terms.
Multiplying both sides by leads to:
Subtracting ab from both sides and factoring out a gives:
Finally, dividing both sides by yields:
This last equation indicates that could be further reduced to , where is still positive, which is an equivalent fraction with smaller numerator and denominator. But since was already given in lowest terms, this is a contradiction. Thus this number cannot be so written, and is therefore irrational.
and its reciprocal:
The equation likewise produces the continued square root form:
These correspond to the fact that the length of the diagonal of a regular pentagon is φ times the length of its side, and similar relations in a pentagram.
If x agrees with to n decimal places, then agrees with it to 2n decimal places.
An equation derived in 1994 connects the golden ratio to the Number of the Beast (666):
There is no known general algorithm to arrange a given number of nodes evenly on a sphere, for any of several definitions of even distribution (see, for example, Thomson problem). However, a useful approximation results from dividing the sphere into parallel bands of equal area and placing one node in each band at longitudes spaced by a golden section of the circle, i.e. 360°/φ ≅ 222.5°. This method was used to arrange the 1500 mirrors of the student-participatory satellite Starshine-3..
If angle BCX = α, then XCA = α because of the bisection, and CAB = α because of the similar triangles; ABC = 2α from the original isosceles symmetry, and BXC = 2α by similarity. The angles in a triangle add up to 180°, so 5α = 180, giving α = 36°. So the angles of the golden triangle are thus 36°-72°-72°. The angles of the remaining obtuse isosceles triangle AXC (sometimes called the golden gnomon) are 36°-36°-108°.
Suppose XB has length 1, and we call BC length φ. Because of the isosceles triangles BC=XC and XC=XA, so these are also length φ. Length AC = AB, therefore equals φ+1. But triangle ABC is similar to triangle CXB, so AC/BC = BC/BX, and so AC also equals φ2. Thus φ2 = φ+1, confirming that φ is indeed the golden ratio.
The pentagram includes ten isosceles triangles: five acute and five obtuse isosceles triangles. In all of them, the ratio of the longer side to the shorter side is φ. The acute triangles are golden triangles. The obtuse isosceles triangles are golden gnomon.
Consider a triangle with sides of lengths a, b, and c in decreasing order. Define the "scalenity" of the triangle to be the smaller of the two ratios a/b and b/c. The scalenity is always less than φ and can be made as close as desired to φ.
The mathematics of the golden ratio and of the Fibonacci sequence are intimately interconnected. The Fibonacci sequence is:
The closed-form expression for the Fibonacci sequence involves the golden ratio:
The golden ratio is the limit of the ratios of successive terms of the Fibonacci sequence (or any Fibonacci-like sequence):
Therefore, if a Fibonacci number is divided by its immediate predecessor in the sequence, the quotient approximates φ; e.g., 987/610 ≈ 1.6180327868852. These approximations are alternately lower and higher than φ, and converge on φ as the Fibonacci numbers increase, and:
Furthermore, the successive powers of φ obey the Fibonacci recurrence:
This identity allows any polynomial in φ to be reduced to a linear expression. For example:
The defining quadratic polynomial and the conjugate relationship lead to decimal values that have their fractional part in common with φ:
The sequence of powers of φ contains these values 0.618..., 1.0, 1.618..., 2.618...; more generally, any power of φ is equal to the sum of the two immediately preceding powers:
As a result, one can easily decompose any power of φ into a multiple of φ and a constant. The multiple and the constant are always adjacent Fibonacci numbers. This leads to another property of the positive powers of φ:
If , then:
When the golden ratio is used as the base of a numeral system (see Golden ratio base, sometimes dubbed phinary or φ-nary), every integer has a terminating representation, despite φ being irrational, but every fraction has a non-terminating representation.
for n = 1, 2, 3, ..., until the difference between xn and xn−1 becomes zero, to the desired number of digits.
The Babylonian algorithm for √5 is equivalent to Newton's method for solving the equation x2 − 5 = 0. In its more general form, Newton's method can be applied directly to any algebraic equation, including the equation x2 − x − 1 = 0 that defines the golden ratio. This gives an iteration that converges to the golden ratio itself,
for an appropriate initial estimate x1 such as x1 = 1. A slightly faster method is to rewrite the equation as x − 1 − 1/x = 0, in which case the Newton iteration becomes
These iterations all converge quadratically; that is, each step roughly doubles the number of correct digits. The golden ratio is therefore relatively easy to compute with arbitrary precision. The time needed to compute n digits of the golden ratio is proportional to the time needed to divide two n-digit numbers. This is considerably faster than known algorithms for the transcendental numbers π and e.
An easily programmed alternative using only integer arithmetic is to calculate two large consecutive Fibonacci numbers and divide them. The ratio of Fibonacci numbers F25001 and F25000, each over 5000 digits, yields over 10,000 significant digits of the golden ratio.
Millions of digits of φ are available . See the web page of Alexis Irlande for the 17,000,000,000 first digits.
Both Egyptian pyramids and those mathematical regular square pyramids that resemble them can be analyzed with respect to the golden ratio and other ratios.
A pyramid in which the apothem (slant height along the bisector of a face) is equal to φ times the semi-base (half the base width) is sometimes called a golden pyramid. The isosceles triangle that is the face of such a pyramid can be constructed from the two halves of a diagonally split golden rectangle (of size semi-base by apothem), joining the medium-length edges to make the apothem. The height of this pyramid is times the semi-base (that is, the slope of the face is ); the square of the height is equal to the area of a face, φ times the square of the semi-base.
The medial right triangle of this "golden" pyramid (see diagram), with sides is interesting in its own right, demonstrating via the Pythagorean theorem the relationship or . This "Kepler triangle is the only right triangle proportion with edge lengths in geometric progression, just as the 3–4–5 triangle is the only right triangle proportion with edge lengths in arithmetic progression. The angle with tangent corresponds to the angle that the side of the pyramid makes with respect to the ground, 51.827... degrees (51° 49' 38").
A nearly similar pyramid shape, but with rational proportions, is described in the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus (the source of a large part of modern knowledge of ancient Egyptian mathematics), based on the 3:4:5 triangle; the face slope corresponding to the angle with tangent 4/3 is 53.13 degrees (53 degrees and 8 minutes). The slant height or apothem is 5/3 or 1.666... times the semi-base. The Rhind papyrus has another pyramid problem as well, again with rational slope (expressed as run over rise). Egyptian mathematics did not include the notion of irrational numbers, and the rational inverse slope (run/rise, multiplied by a factor of 7 to convert to their conventional units of palms per cubit) was used in the building of pyramids.
Another mathematical pyramid with proportions almost identical to the "golden" one is the one with perimeter equal to 2π times the height, or h:b = 4:π. This triangle has a face angle of 51.854° (51°51'), very close to the 51.827° of the golden triangle. This pyramid relationship corresponds to the coincidental relationship .
Egyptian pyramids very close in proportion to these mathematical pyramids are known.
One Egyptian pyramid is remarkably close to a "golden pyramid" – the Great Pyramid of Giza (also known as the Pyramid of Cheops or Khufu). Its slope of 51° 52' is extremely close to the "golden" pyramid inclination of 51° 50' and the π-based pyramid inclination of 51° 51'; other pyramids at Giza (Chephren, 52° 20', and Mycerinus, 50° 47') are also quite close. Whether the relationship to the golden ratio in these pyramids is by design or by accident remains controversial. Several other Egyptian pyramids are very close to the rational 3:4:5 shape.
Michael Rice asserts that principal authorities on the history of Egyptian architecture have argued that the Egyptians were well acquainted with the golden ratio and that it is part of mathematics of the Pyramids, citing Giedon (1957). Some recent historians of science have denied that the Egyptians had any such knowledge, contending rather that its appearance in an Egyptian building is the result of chance.
In 1859, the Pyramidologist John Taylor (1781-1864) claimed that in the Great Pyramid of Giza the golden ratio is represented by the ratio of the length of the face (the slope height), inclined at an angle θ to the ground, to half the length of the side of the square base, equivalent to the secant of the angle θ. The above two lengths were about 186.4 and 115.2 meters respectively. The ratio of these lengths is the golden ratio, accurate to more digits than either of the original measurements. Similarly, Howard Vyse, according to Matila Ghyka, reported the great pyramid height 148.2 m, and half-base 116.4 m, yielding 1.6189 for the ratio of slant height to half-base, again more accurate than the data variability.
Adding fuel to controversy over the architectural authorship of the Great Pyramid, Eric Temple Bell, mathematician and historian, claims that Egyptian mathematics would not have supported the ability to calculate the slant height of the pyramids, or the ratio to the height, except in the case of the 3:4:5 pyramid, since the 3:4:5 triangle was the only right triangle known to the Egyptians and they did not know the Pythagorean theorem nor any way to reason about irrationals such as π or φ.
Examples of disputed observations of the golden ratio include the following: