Phyllotaxis
the spirals are counted, not admired
Concept

Untested claim — where it appears

A statement in the literature or in this collection that nobody has yet put to a measurement. Naming them is deliberate: an argument that only lists what has been settled hides how much of the subject rests on repetition.

Named by 16 essays across 7 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

What a quarter-radius centre error costs a 3.2× spiral, against what the collection publishes. Root-mean-square error in the recovered growth factor when the assumed centre is displaced by a quarter of the innermost whorl's radius, against how much arc is measured. It is 4.56 per cent at two turns, 2.52 per cent at two and a half, 1.91 per cent at three and 1.34 per cent at three and a half. It first falls under one per cent at 4.25 turns — and at 4.25 turns at all six of the growth factors surveyed, so the span rather than the factor is what decides it.

What the centre costs

The fit that recovers a shell's growth factor needs a centre, and no shell has one marked. Displacing it by a quarter of the innermost whorl's radius moves the answer by 4.56 per cent at two turns, which is about five times the figure published earlier.

shells · Spiral fit The two trees this site draws, at 30° and 32° to a side, against the cost's 37.47° and 37.47°. Two trees of 63 segments each, 5 generations deep and 31 junctions apiece, with every junction's radii taken from r₀³ = r₁³ + r₂³ exactly and every junction's angle taken from a constant. Read as an exponent through cos(θ/2) = 2^(2/p − 1), the drawn angles say 2.5237 and 2.6239, in pictures whose widths are built at exactly 3. The cost that fixed those widths wants 37.47° and 37.47° at this daughter ratio, 74.93° in total, and the misses cost 0.573% and 0.292% of the network — which is why a fixed angle can sit in a figure about a minimisation and never look wrong.

The trees drawn at no angle

Two branching figures in these essays set every junction's radii from the cube law exactly and every junction's angle from a constant nobody derived. Read as exponents the drawn angles say 2.52 and 2.62, in pictures whose widths say exactly three — and at a lopsided fork the drawing puts a daughter thirty-four degrees from where the same cost puts it.

branching · Fork angle How far a shell growing from 2.8 to 3.6 a turn departs from the one spiral a fit gives it. The shell's logarithmic radius along its 4-turn arc, less the straight line a single growth factor fits. The fit returns 3.17490 a turn, which is the geometric mean of the two ends, 3.17490. The largest departure is 0.0836 in the logarithm against the 0.15 the collection refuses a spiral past, so the fit accepts this shell; a change that is steady in its rate leaves ln(W₁/W₀) × turns/12 = 0.0838.

One number for a shell that changes

An animal is under no obligation to grow at one rate from hatching to maturity, and the fit that recovers a shell's growth factor returns one number whatever it is given. Handed a shell whose expansion rises steadily from 2.8 to 3.6 a turn, it returns 3.17490 — the geometric mean of the two ends, exactly — with a residual it accepts. A change of sixty-four per cent over three and a half turns passes as one logarithmic spiral, and at the aperture, where contact is decided, the one number and the last whorl give opposite verdicts.

shells · Spiral fit A rule too long-ranged makes no pattern; every shorter one makes the same pattern. Each dot is 4 runs from a coarse start at one exponent, separated by 0.2° of placement noise. Below p ≈ 1.1 the divergence scatters by tens of degrees, which is what an arbitrary sequence gives. From p = 1.25 to p = 8 — a sixfold range — every run ends on 8/13 with the scatter between 0.75° and 1.06°.

The exponent that barely matters

An unchecked claim, repeated since the first essays, held that the repulsion's falloff exponent hardly changes the answer. It could not be tested, because the function that would have taken it never passed one down. Tested at last, it is true on a disc — by three and a half degrees across a sixteenfold range — and on a stem it decides whether there is a pattern at all.

emergence · Falloff exponent The two halves of a 3.2 spiral fitted about a centre 0.25 innermost radii off, towards 52°. A logarithmic spiral growing by 3.2 a turn over 4 turns, which does not change, split into an inner half and an outer half, each fitted about a centre displaced by 0.25 of the innermost radius towards 52°. The inner half returns 3.4193 and the outer half 3.2200, a split of −5.83 per cent. The panel on the right enlarges the first whorl, where the true centre and the assumed one can be told apart; across the whole spiral the displacement is 0.238 per cent of the outer radius.

A centre that invents a life history

The collection's advice for a shell that might have changed how it grew was to fit it twice, over different arcs, and compare. On a spiral that does not change at all, a centre displaced by a quarter of the innermost radius splits the two halves by 4.09 per cent — the split a genuine 8.35 per cent change from apex to aperture produces — in either sign, depending only on which way the centre is wrong. Point noise of the same size splits them by less than half as much, and averages away where the centre does not. The floor under the test is the centre, not the noise.

shells · Spiral fit The wander is in the disturbance and not in what a plant lets you measure. Each disturbance measured twice, in the same statistic. On the left, the variance of the block means of the disturbance's own deviates, over blocks of 100, as a multiple of what independent draws would give; on the right, the same quantity for the divergence sequence those deviates produce, over blocks of 128. The left column is what this site measured when it proposed a slow wander as a second observable. The right column is what a botanist would have: a divergence is the difference of two organs' errors, and differencing is exactly the operation that removes power at low frequencies. The disturbance inherited between touching organs goes from ×49.1 — the largest here — to 0.83, which is what independent errors give. The one with a memory in time keeps most of its own.

A difference forgets a drift

This collection proposed a second observable and priced it as free: if a plant's errors are inherited between touching organs, the divergence sequence should carry a slow wander as well as a comb. The disturbance with the largest wander of any built here leaves none at all in the sequence, because a divergence is a difference and differencing is what removes a drift.

mechanism · Noise transport Three cut-offs at the same nominal width of 3 spacings. The weight the interaction is multiplied by, against distance. They halve at 2.08 (exponential), 2.50 (gaussian), 3.00 (hard) spacings — so a rule described as "cut off at 3 spacings" is three different rules until the falloff is named. Every later figure is read in half-weight radii for that reason.

A neighbourhood is a hypothesis

Every simulation of this kind stops summing somewhere. The earlier work found that where it stops decides what pattern comes out — so the stopping place is not a detail of the program but a claim about how far a primordium's influence reaches, and it should be written down as one.

emergence · The range of the interaction What a 200-organ window allows against what the offset ceiling allows. Two settings decide what the counter can return, and at this window the offset ceiling is the tighter of them. A window of 200 organs holds a family of at most 194, since the counter scores an offset only where it has 6 hops of it inside the band; the largest offset it looks at is 60, a factor of 3.2 between them. The ticks are the rungs of the two ladders this collection is built on, and the largest counted number anywhere in the settling table is 19 — inside both bounds, which is what makes the table inert.

A plateau the instrument should have had

The counting window decides nothing on the settling table, and it has two bounds that decide everything outside it. A window one organ too narrow returns the previous rung of the same ladder, a family past the offset ceiling is reported as a coarser rung at every width there is, and neither failure produces a refusal, noise or a wide error bar.

lattices · Read window A shell expanding by 3.2 a turn, divided by 13 septa to a whorl. A shell expanding by 3.2 a turn at axis distance 0.1, seen down its coiling axis, with 13 septa to a whorl, 27.7° apart; the last whorl's chambers are shaded. Each chamber is the one before it turned and scaled about the apex by 3.2^(1/13), so a length grows by ×1.0936 from one chamber to the next, an area by ×1.1960 and a volume by ×1.307896. Integrated over the tube's own rings, successive chamber volumes grow by 1.307896 to 1.307896, and a chamber and the one a whorl out differ by 32.7680, which is 3.2³ = 32.7680.

What the septa count

A nautilus's chambers are each a scaled copy of the last, and an earlier essay gave their ratio as about 1.3 — what a growth factor of 3.2 gives over a third of a turn. It does not: a third of a turn at 3.2 is 1.474 in length. A ratio of 1.3 is 4.43 septa a whorl as a length, 8.87 as an area and 13.30 as a volume, so the dimension decides the count threefold. And the count is an exponent in any reading of the growth factor taken from one chamber to the next: one septum miscounted at thirteen moves it by 9.14 per cent. A chamber and the one a whorl out give W³ with no count at all.

shells · Nautilus Every way a growth factor read off a section can be wrong, against the gap it has to clear. Each bar is a worst case computed by the library that measured it. dividers 278.2%, span 22.4%, septum 9.14%, ontogeny 8.99%, centre 6.88%, clock 4.06%, oblique 2.95%. The line is the gap the golden claim asks the measurement to resolve: 6.854 against 3.2 is 114.2 per cent. Added without cancellation the 7 sources come to 332.6%, which is outside that gap — so the claim is NOT refused by a section read carelessly.

The error budget for a nautilus

Every way a growth factor read off a shell section can be wrong has been priced here, one essay at a time. Added up they come to 332.6 per cent in the worst case and 279.6 in quadrature, against a golden-spiral claim that is 114.2 per cent away — so the budget does not refuse the claim at all. One entry decides it: the dividers, at 278.2 per cent on their own, and the dividers are the historical method and the only route measured that pushes a nautilus towards a golden spiral. Set them aside and the budget falls to 54.4 per cent and the claim is refused twice over. What the same budget cannot settle is anything smaller than half: 3.2 against 3.4 is inside it, and stays inside it until six of the seven sources are controlled.

shells · Nautilus The disturbance with the largest wander leaves none in the sequence. How much of a divergence sequence's variance survives being averaged over blocks, on kinematic lattices. The vertical quantity is B² times the variance of the block means divided by the variance of the sequence, which is one at every block size for independent errors — the arithmetic is normalised for a differenced stream, since a divergence is the difference of two organs' errors. A line that climbs is a sequence with power at frequencies below one per block. The disturbances that remember the last error climb to 32 at a block of 128. The ones inherited between touching organs do not climb at all — 1.06 and 0.83 at the same block — although their own deviates carry ×5 and ×49 an independent stream's variance in exactly this statistic. What they do instead is dig a hole: at block sizes of 8 and 13, which are the offsets they couple at, the statistic falls to 0.22 and 0.21.

The second statistic was the first

The experiment this collection has been specifying was priced as two readings off one sequence, the second of them free. The two readings turn out to be one function looked at twice, so the specification loses a statistic — and gains a cheaper one, a warning about how observables get priced, and a question it could not previously ask.

wrong · Survey spec Read as whorls, the three jugacies fall on one line. The rate at which a stem seeded on the Lucas lattice gives that ladder up, against how long the seed is, for one, two and three organs a whorl. The three lie on top of each other at every seed length: 15 whorls gives 30.80, 30.80, 30.80; 20 whorls gives 42.35, 42.35, 40.42; 30 whorls gives 63.52, 63.52, 63.52; 40 whorls gives 85.66, 87.58, 85.66. Every departure is one or two steps of the grain the edge is bisected to, which is two whorls of rate — 1.925 whorls a rung at every jugacy and every edge drawn.

A seed measured in whorls

A Lucas seed's length counts whorls, and the number published earlier for the rate edge counts nothing at all. Grown from seeds of fifteen to eighty whorls at one, two and three organs a whorl, stems of every jugacy lose the seed at the same rate in whorls a rung for the same seed length in whorls — 30.80 at fifteen, 63.52 at thirty, identically across the three — and at the same seed length in organs they differ by a factor of 3.24. So the seed is measured in whorls, as the edge is. The other half is worse for the earlier reading: the edge is not a constant but 2.24 times the seed less three, straight to within 2.7 whorls a rung over a fivefold range, so the eighty-seven whorls a rung reported everywhere is a property of the forty-whorl seed nobody varied.

lattices · Jugate limit Hold the neighbourhood and the denominator stops mattering. The equivalent width of the disorder dip — the area of the deficit divided by its own depth — for seven fractions whose nearest neighbours sit at the same distance and whose denominators run from 19 to 47. Each is measured at a head size chosen so that all of them share one scaled unit, which makes a window in scaled units the same window in degrees and the same fraction of the way to the neighbour for every member. At a window of 25 the seven widths are 38.8, 38.8, 39.0, 39.0, 38.7, 39.0, 39.0 — a spread of ×1.010 across a factor of 2.47 in denominator. The lines separate as the window widens, to ×1.147 at 200, and when they do they order by denominator rather than by crowding. So the residual this thread carried was the window: hold it and there is nothing left that belongs to the fraction.

The residual was the window

After the depth and the q over n squared scale are taken out of a disorder dip, something looked left over and looked ordered by how crowded the fraction's neighbourhood is. Measured on fractions whose neighbourhoods are identical by construction, seven widths across a factor of two and a half in denominator agree to one per cent. There is no residual; there was a comparison made at different effective windows.

wrong · Second statistic Which lag survives, at every lattice and every offset. A row for each of twelve lattices and a column for each offset an organ is removed at, with the lag whose hop survived written in the cell. 30 cells never repair. The lag left standing is one of the two contact families at 29 of them, and at 17 it is the second shortest step on the lattice rather than the shortest, which is what refuses the reading that a rule holds its nearest neighbours. The ringed cells are the five the offset rule gets wrong. Two lattices carry no cells at all because no single removal wrecks them.

Not the shorter of the two

If a damaged stem keeps one contact family standing, the obvious guess is that it keeps the nearer one. Across thirty wrecked offsets that is true twelve times and false seventeen, and on one lattice the two steps differ by a quarter of a per cent — where the words shorter and longer are doing no work at all.

emergence · Ablation The 17 rows of the exchange table, gathered by the lag they kept. One bar per surviving lag, its length the number of rows the table holds at that lag, with the hop that lag's stems keep written beside it. The hop is nearly constant inside a lag, so a correction fitted over 17 rows is fitted over four hops — which is the denominator that matters and is much smaller than the row count suggests. Adding a lag to the table is worth more than adding rows at a lag already in it.

A family that is a multiple

When a wrecked cut keeps a family that is not one of the lattice's counted pair, the first case looked like a rule: it was half of one of them. The second case is four times the other, which makes the rule a coincidence and leaves a weaker statement that is probably the true one.

cylinder · Rung interior The 125 steps of the golden 8/13 band, in units of the grid they are rounded to. The sweep's rises are held to five decimal places, so every step it takes is a whole number of units of that fifth place. Each bar is how many of this band's 125 steps are that many units: 99 of 1, 26 of 2. One unit is 1.653 parts per thousand of the rise at the handover of 0.00605, against a nominal step of 2.00, so a sweep asked for at one part in a thousand would land on the same rise twice and the finer grid has to be laid at 7 places instead.

The last unmoved setting

Halving a band sweep's step is only a halving if the sweep steps where it says it does, and this one does not: its rises are rounded to five decimal places, so at one handover the grain is 1.65 parts per thousand against a nominal step of two. Moving the last setting nobody had moved found the setting was never what it was called.

cylinder · Sweep resolution

Named alongside it

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

Honest limitsClaim testingNegative resultMeasurement errorMeasurementSelf-correctionSummary statisticGrowth factorRiseArtefactModel scopeNoise

All concepts