Answers multiply questions,
a metaquestion emerges
what is multiplying?

Stars, galaxies, metagalaxies, etc. towards the golden section?

Dear Reader!

Help me to explain the following observations.

Be attentive to modulations in figures. Is this juggling, just digital manipulations and nothing else?

The stars Acrux, Spica and Regulus relating in number in the list of 21 brightest stars as 12 : 16 : 21 relate in apparent magnitude also as 3/4 : 1 : 4/3 (literally as 0.76 : 0.98 : 1.35), with Acrux being a visual binary with component magnitudes 4/3 and 7/4 (literally 1.33 and 1.73) relating also as 3 : 4. Read the paragraph once again, the primer of the page.

Thanks for any hasty explanation - for I know that even the bisection is a golden section, only very crude.

The stars Castor & Pollux (permuted) and Mizar relate in magnitude also as 1.2 : 1.6 : 2.1, with Mizar being a visual binary with magnitudes 2.3 and 4.0, or 4 and 7 times 4/7, or 4 : 7 simply. Of 271 bearing star names the three are closest in angle to the galaxy superclusters with Einasto catalogue numbers - imagine - 75 and 133, or 300/4 and 400/3 relating as 4 : 7 as well, along with their equatorial coordinates (121, +35) and (204, +57) - in degrees as usual, cf. in (day, radian)s.

Both the superclusters are pairs of galaxy clusters (with Abell catalogue numbers 612 & 618 in the 75th supercluster and 1767 & 1783 in the 133th) relating in galaxy count (within those clusters but permuted) both times as 30-49 to 50-79, or 4-7 to 7~11, let 4 to 7 as well. And both superclusters have two-cluster partners relative to the supercluster we dwell in, those with Einasto catalogue numbers - imagine - 176 and 57, or 700/4 and 400/7. Moreover, the very Einasto supercluster catalogue with its 220 members (with one missed, guess which one?!) doubles its earlier version with 130 members printed in MNRAS.269.301, with 130/220 ~ 4/7 as well, and doubling in turn the alternative catalogue with 76 members printed in ApJ.407.470 (a volume and a page, no misprint!), with 76/130 ~ 4/7 as well.

And so on.

I refuse to believe in pure accident because I am accurate in what is an occurrence (like the print 407.470 indicated or like the appearance of 102, 0.12 & 120 in one place) and what is not the case.

Is all this related with sensitivity of the eye in/to the band 0.4-0.75 mkm (taking into account the Universe colour)? Or with estimation of the Hubble constant, equal formerly to 3/4 of 100 km/sec/Mpc unit, then 4/7 and now 0.65 - the geometric mean of 3/4 and 4/7? And what is the status of the golden section 0.618... in the cosmos, if you say that 3/4, 4/7, 7/11, ... tends eventually to it? (And why do the Lucas numbers 3, 4, 7, 11, ... figure here rather than the Fibonacci ones?)

Thank you very much.
Bobylev V.N.
bobyl@ccas.ru

P.S. See also my Questionnaire addressed to experts and a guide; as well as KwMap.com - browse the keyword map of cosmicqueries.freehomepage.com. As regards answers, ask The AnswerSleuth™ where to see. As a last resort (as the cosmos seems soiled), consult Cosmic oilers of mine.