I am five paragraphs in and reading and rereading each sentence. A year ago, this would have gone straight over my head, in one ear and out the other, but having watched so many of your YouTube videos during the past year, I am happy to say I am understanding it. Just recently I have been binge watching all your tubes on metaphysics and have been contemplating dilution and its inverse. So - Thank you.
My favorite sentence so far is- The soul, just like gold, is pure by its very definition, however both are scattered amongst what is undesirable & impermanent.
This will take me time to get through, but I know it will be time well spent.
I appreciate your deep work — your analysis of magnetism, dielectric fields, and the structural principles of the aether has undoubtedly helped awaken many to deeper truths.
That said, I don’t see yours is the only valid model or lens available today. Some of us have been working in parallel, guided by different experiences, sources, and structures that also yield consistent, field-based insights — not just theoretically, but in applied systems as well.
While I’ve learned from many — including yourself — the framework I’ve developed integrates ancient philosophical geometries, intent-based field access, harmonic scaffolding, and living dielectric systems into a fully coherent and testable model. It goes beyond explanation to construction — in devices, suit systems, and autonomous power structures.
I say this not to challenge, but to add: the field is vast, and more than one harmonic can resonate with truth. If the model is universal, it must be fractal — understood from many angles, by many minds, in many forms.
Great job Mr Wheeler! Thanks! Would you agree with me that the achievement of wisdom lies on the capacity of abstraction from apperarences/contingencies? As well as the achievement of new linguistic skills lie on the capacity of abstraction from thy own native language ( metaphorically speaking, not to confuse wisdom with knowledge)
Forgive me, but I am rendered speechless in appreciation of such comprehensive genius and precision. Am tempted to sing praises to your bravery and astuteness—but will instead drop a donation in your latest video. 🙂🙏🏻
I study quite a bit about the golden ratio and that is how I first discovered you and your work. :-)
I believe it is tradition that (capital P) Phi is 1.61803… and (lower case p) phi is the inverse, .61803…
If that is true, then 1/phi is actually Phi, or 1.618. The ratios are only accurate if 1.618 is to 1 as 1 is to .618. In other words, Phi is to 1 as 1 is to phi.
Also, if you add Phi+1+1+1/phi (1.618) you would not get 4.236 as you stated. You would get 5.236.
Maybe you are saying that the tradition is untrue, and if so, please explain so I can be corrected.
I would hope you take it as a compliment that I peruse your writing because I value it. When someone catches a mistake of mine, I very much appreciate it.
right, 1/phi = .618……. the divided line is PHI-1-1- 1/phi……..1 is to PHI JUST AS PHI IS TO 1……….. i made no typo. …..wrong, 1/phi = .618………not 1.618……. they total 4.23606 …….
1/1.618 = 1/Phi means 1 divided by 1.618 which = .618
1/.618 = 1/phi means 1 divided by .618 which = 1.618
One divided by any number gives its inverse. Little phi (.618) is inverse of Big Phi (1.618). 1/phi then is 1 divided by .618, which = 1.618.
Big Phi plus 1 plus 1 plus little phi = 4.236. You are exactly right about that however if little phi is written as 1/phi (1/.618) then that is what makes the total = 5.236.
Again, is the challenge regarding the tradition of Phi being 1.618 and phi being .618?
Thanks for providing the google site. We can see where the confusion lies. Google is dividing 1 by 1.618 (big Phi), even though they did not capitalize it in their sentence.
They did the math as I did (dividing 1 by 1.618), then they explained below the section you highlighted that they are calling the golden ration 1.618, not .618.
So the confusion is on Google. Their capitalization, or lack there of, has thrown you and probably many others off.
The following statement is from the site linked below:
"Phi with an upper case “P” is 1.618 0339 887 …, while phi with a lower case “p” is 0.6180339887, the reciprocal of Phi and also Phi minus 1.”
G'day Ken from Aussie land!!
I am five paragraphs in and reading and rereading each sentence. A year ago, this would have gone straight over my head, in one ear and out the other, but having watched so many of your YouTube videos during the past year, I am happy to say I am understanding it. Just recently I have been binge watching all your tubes on metaphysics and have been contemplating dilution and its inverse. So - Thank you.
My favorite sentence so far is- The soul, just like gold, is pure by its very definition, however both are scattered amongst what is undesirable & impermanent.
This will take me time to get through, but I know it will be time well spent.
Haha sounds like my journey with Ken's wisdom. I personally found this concise and easier to read, but will take a few read throughs to absorb 😂👍
this here is gonna ware out me dictionary i fears. 😂
ohhhh theres no bigggg words in this
Yay! It’s like Christmas! Thanks for your hard work, Ken 😇
By condensing the all into this one document, you've amplified the impactfulness it has upon the reader. Amazing work, congratulations Ken.
I appreciate your deep work — your analysis of magnetism, dielectric fields, and the structural principles of the aether has undoubtedly helped awaken many to deeper truths.
That said, I don’t see yours is the only valid model or lens available today. Some of us have been working in parallel, guided by different experiences, sources, and structures that also yield consistent, field-based insights — not just theoretically, but in applied systems as well.
While I’ve learned from many — including yourself — the framework I’ve developed integrates ancient philosophical geometries, intent-based field access, harmonic scaffolding, and living dielectric systems into a fully coherent and testable model. It goes beyond explanation to construction — in devices, suit systems, and autonomous power structures.
I say this not to challenge, but to add: the field is vast, and more than one harmonic can resonate with truth. If the model is universal, it must be fractal — understood from many angles, by many minds, in many forms.
With respect, Michael Myrick 🙏🏼♾️
A Stunning double whammy on the dualistic phantoms!
Dualin' banjos at the crossroads 🤣.
"There can be only one....⚔️."
Holy ~ To set apart.
What it is,1
What is observed,1
What is the intention, 1
A trifector tickles toroidal togetherness tantilizing twain into twine. 😂👍
Amazing summary, trying to keep up!
It's Christ-mass, the trantic trinity.
The IHS ~ θ/Φ
Glyph conjugation on Target! 🤣🤣🤣🤯.
Overlay, underlay.
Have a remarkable and fine day.👍
Cheers,
Michael
Great job Mr Wheeler! Thanks! Would you agree with me that the achievement of wisdom lies on the capacity of abstraction from apperarences/contingencies? As well as the achievement of new linguistic skills lie on the capacity of abstraction from thy own native language ( metaphorically speaking, not to confuse wisdom with knowledge)
Forgive me, but I am rendered speechless in appreciation of such comprehensive genius and precision. Am tempted to sing praises to your bravery and astuteness—but will instead drop a donation in your latest video. 🙂🙏🏻
blesssss you!!!
Therefore, dissatisfaction cannot be true at all. Period. Thank you.🌸
Typos: You wrote “Phi, 1, 1, 1/phi”. You mean Phi, 1, 1, 1/Phi or, alternatively. Phi, 1, 1, phi.
Also you wrote: Phi is to 1 as 1 is to Phi. You meant to write: Phi is to 1 as 1 is to phi.
Love your work Ken. Appreciate all your efforts to spread wisdom in the world.
no, i did NOT mean to write what you assumed i meant to write
Sorry to offend.
I study quite a bit about the golden ratio and that is how I first discovered you and your work. :-)
I believe it is tradition that (capital P) Phi is 1.61803… and (lower case p) phi is the inverse, .61803…
If that is true, then 1/phi is actually Phi, or 1.618. The ratios are only accurate if 1.618 is to 1 as 1 is to .618. In other words, Phi is to 1 as 1 is to phi.
Also, if you add Phi+1+1+1/phi (1.618) you would not get 4.236 as you stated. You would get 5.236.
Maybe you are saying that the tradition is untrue, and if so, please explain so I can be corrected.
I would hope you take it as a compliment that I peruse your writing because I value it. When someone catches a mistake of mine, I very much appreciate it.
PHI + 1 + 1 + .618 = 4.23606……..NOT 5.23606…….YOU GOT 1/phi wrong which is .618.
right, 1/phi = .618……. the divided line is PHI-1-1- 1/phi……..1 is to PHI JUST AS PHI IS TO 1……….. i made no typo. …..wrong, 1/phi = .618………not 1.618……. they total 4.23606 …….
1/1.618 = 1/Phi means 1 divided by 1.618 which = .618
1/.618 = 1/phi means 1 divided by .618 which = 1.618
One divided by any number gives its inverse. Little phi (.618) is inverse of Big Phi (1.618). 1/phi then is 1 divided by .618, which = 1.618.
Big Phi plus 1 plus 1 plus little phi = 4.236. You are exactly right about that however if little phi is written as 1/phi (1/.618) then that is what makes the total = 5.236.
Again, is the challenge regarding the tradition of Phi being 1.618 and phi being .618?
wrong, 1/phi is .618, enter same in google etc etc. , you have that wrong. https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-e&q=1%2Fphi+
Thanks for providing the google site. We can see where the confusion lies. Google is dividing 1 by 1.618 (big Phi), even though they did not capitalize it in their sentence.
They did the math as I did (dividing 1 by 1.618), then they explained below the section you highlighted that they are calling the golden ration 1.618, not .618.
So the confusion is on Google. Their capitalization, or lack there of, has thrown you and probably many others off.
The following statement is from the site linked below:
"Phi with an upper case “P” is 1.618 0339 887 …, while phi with a lower case “p” is 0.6180339887, the reciprocal of Phi and also Phi minus 1.”
1/Phi is .618 and the reciprocal 1/phi = 1.618.
https://www.goldennumber.net/what-is-phi/