Phyllotaxis
the spirals are counted, not admired
Concept

Closed form — where it appears

An exact expression for a quantity, as against a number a solver converged on. Two results here have one — the rises at which a cylindrical lattice is equilateral, and the fork angle a branching cost chooses — and both were found by inspecting a numerical answer that turned out to be rational.

Named by 5 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The boundary located at 481 expansions, against D = 1/W. 481 expansions log-spaced across the range, each boundary found by bisecting the two drawn circles to two hundred steps rather than read off a grid. The hyperbola D = 1/W lies on the located curve to 2.220e-16 over the whole of it — the last bit of a double — so the textbook line is the boundary and not an approximation of it. The closed form and the bisection agree to 2.81e-15 at worst over all 3,200 located boundaries, which is what makes a residual of zero a reading.

The line was already exact

The boundary between shells whose whorls run into one another and shells whose whorls run free is quoted everywhere as D = 1/W, and a survey designed to measure how far off it sits found that it is not off at all. Located by bisecting the drawn circles at 481 expansions, the residual is 2.2 × 10⁻¹⁶ — the last bit a double holds, over the whole range.

shells · Morphospace The plane of stems: divergence across, rise up. Each shade is one parastichy pair. The marked points are the lattices where three families are equally short — the forks — and the Fibonacci ones run up the middle towards 137.51°.

The forks are exact

Where a stem's pattern has to choose between two futures, three spiral families are equally short and the lattice is exactly equilateral. A numerical solver found those points; the numbers it returned turned out to be rational, and chasing that gave a closed form — including the fact that every fork sits at a rational divergence, and the golden angle at none of them.

cylinder · Forks The fork the cost chooses at a daughter ratio of 1: 37.47 and 37.47 degrees. Three ends held fixed, three weights fixed by the radii, and the branch point put where the total cost is least. At the optimal radius the pumping term is exactly half the upkeep term, so a segment's weight is its own cross-section and the three weights here are 1.5874, 1.0000, 1.0000. Minimising directly over the position — a 41×41 grid re-centred and shrunk 220 times, told nothing about any formula — puts the daughters at 37.4673° and 37.4673° from the parent's own forward direction, against the closed form's 37.4673° and 37.4673°.

The angle the cost chooses

Murray's exponent falls out of minimising a cost over the radius of a tube. The same cost minimised over the position of the branch point instead fixes both fork angles, and 281 networks minimised on a grid told nothing about any formula agree with the closed form to under two ten-thousandths of a degree.

branching · Fork angle The three weights at an exponent of 2 and 3: one closes a triangle and one is a straight line. A branch point minimising a weighted sum of three lengths has an interior solution only when the three weights close a triangle, and the weight on a segment here is its own cross-section. At an exponent of 3 the three areas clear that condition by 0.4126, and the triangle they close is what the two fork angles are read off. At an exponent of 2 the parent's area is exactly the daughters' areas summed — that is what area conservation says — so the slack is -4.44e-16, the triangle collapses onto a line, and the fork closes to 0.0000 degrees. Leonardo's rule does not predict a different angle here; it predicts no angle.

A rule that predicts everything

Leonardo's rule says a fork conserves cross-section, and cross-section is exactly the weight the branch point is minimised against. So the three weights land on the boundary of the triangle inequality, the cosine comes out at one to the last bit, and the rule predicts no angle at all — and the free constant its own derivation leaves behind then walks the prediction across every angle a fork could have.

branching · Fork angle A stem is a thread at six rises of the sweep, a ribbon at 23 and a surface at 111. The 140 rises of the sweep, split by how many index families the tessellation carries. On 6 rises above 0.5010 a node has 2 walls and the strip is a thread; on 23 between 0.2187 and 0.4833 it has 4 and is a ribbon; on 111 below 0.2109 it has 6 and is a surface. The comparison means something different in each: two families leave 33.333 per cent in dispute on the surface and 0.00 on the ribbon, and three families leave 0.000 and 33.333.

The third family

On a seed head no threshold makes the counted contacts and the shared cell walls the same relation. On a stem they are the same relation exactly, at every one of a hundred and eleven rises and to three decimal places of nothing, provided the contact cut keeps three families where a count keeps two.

tissue · Neighbour definition

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Branch pointCylinderDiscretisationFork angleHonest limitsLadderMurray's lawOptimisationRiseWeight triangleArea conservationBisection

All concepts