Fibonacci

Fibonacci Numbers and the Golden Ratio
Emily Cookson
April 19, 2008

Abstract
The Fibonacci numbers have some interesting properties and applications.

This project begins by looking at some basic properties and moves on to
look at divisibility properties. The golden ratio and its relationship with
continued fractions and geometry is then discussed and some claims of
Fibonacci numbers in Architecture are investigated.
Contents
1 Introduction 5
1.1 Leonardo Pisano Fibonacci . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2 The Fibonacci and Lucas Sequences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.3 Binet’s Formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2 Basic Properties of Fibonacci Numbers 10

2.1 Negation Formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2 Cassini’s Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3 Catalan’s Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.4 Fibonacci and Lucas Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.5 Matrix Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3 Divisibility Properties 16
3.1 Divisibility Lemmas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.2 Greatest Common Divisor Theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.3 Divisibility Corollaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.4 Primes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4 The Golden Ratio and Continued Fractions 21

4.1 Limit of Consecutive Fibonacci Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.2 The Golden Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.3 Continued Fractions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.4 Q-polynomials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.5 Lamé’s Theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.6 Pell’s Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5 Golden Geometry 35
5.1 The Golden Rectangle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.2 The Golden Triangle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.3 Logarithmic Spirals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
5.4 The Pentagon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.5 The Pentagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
1
6 Fibonacci Numbers in Architecture 46
6.1 Ancient Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
6.2 Ancient Greece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
6.3 Medieval Islamic Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
6.4 Le Corbusier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
6.5 Inspired by Nature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
7 Conclusion 65
A The First 50 Fibonacci and Lucas Numbers 66
Bibliography 67
2
List of Figures
1.1 Leonardo of Pisa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1 Paradox gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.2 Paradox overlap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.1 Graph of limit τ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

4.2 Twist of Cassini’s identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4.3 The golden section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.1 Construction of a golden rectangle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

5.2 Inflation of the golden rectangle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.3 Inflation of the golden triangle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
5.4 Spiral with an expansion of τ in 90◦ turn . . . . . . . . . . . 40
5.5 Logarithmic spiral proper to the golden triangle . . . . . . . . 41
5.8 Spiral constructed from a sequence of golden rectangles . . . 42
5.9 Fibonacci Spiral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
5.10 Construction of a pentagon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.11 Pentagon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
5.12 Incommensurability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
6.1 Great Pyramid of Giza . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

6.2 Pyramid structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
6.3 Constructing the golden section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
6.4 The Parthenon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
6.5 Parthenon claims of τ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
6.6 Construction of Proposition 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
6.7 Complete set of girih tiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
6.8 Rhombus tiling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
6.9 Kite and Dart tiling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
6.10 Spandrel from the Darb-i-Imam shrine . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
6.11 Tile mappings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
6.12 Defect and correction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
6.13 Model male . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
3
6.14 Le Modulor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
6.15 Design for South-west façade of Governor’s Palace . . . . . . 61
6.16 Spiral Café . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
6.17 Radiograph of Nautilus pompilius shell . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
6.18 Eden Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
6.19 Core model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
6.20 Double spiral pattern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
6.21 Coneflower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
4
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Leonardo Pisano Fibonacci

Leonardo of Pisa, or Leonardo Pisano in Italian, is better known by his
nickname Fibonacci. Fibonacci is a contraction of the Latin “filius Bonacci”,
which means “the son of Bonaccio”. Fibonacci himself occasionally used the
name Bigollo, which means a traveller.
Figure 1.1: Leonardo of Pisa

[CR]
Leonardo of Pisa (1170-1250) was born in Pisa, Italy, but was educated
in North Africa. His father, Guilielmo Bonaccio, was a customs inspector in
Algeria. Fibonacci was taught mathematics in Bugia, a town on the Barbary
Coast which is now the Algerian port city of Bejaia, and travelled with his
father around the Mediterranean coast. He would have encountered several
different mathematical systems and recognised the advantages of the Hindu-
Arabic system over all the others. Around 1200, he ceased his travels, and
returned to Pisa.
Fibonacci wrote several mathematical texts after returning to Italy. In
his Liber Abaci (1202) he introduced the Hindu-Arabic numerical system
5
and Arabic mathematics to Europe. The Fibonacci numbers are named
after Fibonacci, whose Liber Abaci posed a rabbit problem which is the
basis of the Fibonacci sequence. [RK, CR]
1.2 The Fibonacci and Lucas Sequences

The Fibonacci numbers are 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, ... where, given the
two starting values, each number is the sum of the two preceding numbers.
The first 50 Fibonacci numbers are given in Appendix A. This sequence of
numbers is defined by the recurrence relation
Fn+1 = Fn + Fn−1 (1.1)
where F0 = 0, F1 = 1, and n ≥ 1.
The original problem that Fibonacci investigated in his Liber Abaci was
about breeding rabbits. According to Burton [DB], it read as follows:
A man put one pair of rabbits in a certain place entirely sur-
rounded by a wall. How many pairs of rabbits can be produced
from that pair in a year, if the nature of these rabbits is such that
every month each pair bears a new pair which from the second
month on becomes productive?
Assuming the original pair are an adult pair and defining adult and young
pairs to be rabbits older than and younger than one month old respectively,
we obtain the following table:
Table 1.1: Growth of Rabbit Colony [DB]

Months Adult Pairs Young Pairs Total
0 1 0 1
1 1 1 2
2 2 1 3
3 3 2 5
4 5 3 8
5 8 5 13
6 13 8 21
7 21 13 34
8 34 21 55
9 55 34 89
10 89 55 144
11 144 89 233
12 233 144 377
By solving this rabbit problem, Fibonacci calculated 13 consecutive

terms of the Fibonacci sequence:
6
1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377.
The recurrence relation was also deduced from the rabbit problem. If we
denote the total number of pairs at the end of month n by Tn and the
number of adult pairs at the end of month n by An , then clearly
Tn = Tn−1 + An−1 , (n ≥ 1).
As young pairs become adult pairs after a month, it is obvious that An =

Tn−1 . Hence
Tn = Tn−1 + Tn−2
where T0 = 1, T1 = 2, and n ≥ 2, which is comparable to the Fibonacci
sequence where Fn+2 = Tn .
The French mathematician, Edouard Lucas (1842-1891), discovered that
the sequence 2, 1, 3, 4, 7, 11, ... has lots of similar properties to, and
connections with, the Fibonacci numbers. These numbers are called Lucas
numbers, defined by
Ln+1 = Ln + Ln−1 (1.2)
where L0 = 2, L1 = 1, and n ≥ 1. The first 50 Lucas numbers are given in
Appendix A.
A generalised Fibonacci sequence is defined by
Gn+1 = Gn + Gn−1 (1.3)
where G0 = a and G1 = b, for any a, b ∈ Z, and n ≥ 1. The first two values,

a and b, are known as the seed. The Fibonacci sequence is a generalised Fi-
bonacci sequence where the seed values are given as 0 and 1. The generalised
Fibonacci sequence with seed values 2 and 1 is the Lucas sequence.
1.3 Binet’s Formula

We can work out any Fibonacci number using the recurrence relation (1.1)
but it takes a long time to work out Fn for large n as one would have to work
out all numbers in the sequence from the seed values up to Fn−1 . Fortu-
nately, there is a formula for Fn , called Binet’s formula, which involves only
n and does not need any other Fibonacci values. According to Knott [RK],
Binet’s formula was known to Euler and De Moivre and was rediscovered in
1843 by Jacques Binet (1786-1856). It is defined as follows:
√ !n √ !n !
1 1+ 5 1− 5
Fn = √ − . (1.4)
5 2 2
7
Proof. Let Fk = xk , where k ≥ 2. Using rule (1.1),
Fk+1 = Fk + Fk−1
⇒ xk+1 = xk + xk−1
Since xk−1 6= 0, dividing through by xk−1 gives us
x2 = x + 1
⇒ x2 − x − 1 = 0
√
1± 5
⇒ x=
2
√ √
Take 1+2 5 = τ , 1−2 5 = σ, say. Therefore the Fibonacci sequence must be
of the form Fn = ατ n + βσ n . Using the Fibonacci seed, we obtain
F0 = α + β = 0; F1 = ατ + βσ = 1.
Substitution gives
ατ − ασ = α(τ − σ) = 1.
Hence
1 1
α= =√ .
τ −σ 5
Therefore
1
Fn = ατ n + βσ n = ατ n − ασ n = √ (τ n − σ n ).
5
That is,
√ !n √ !n !
1 1+ 5 1− 5
Fn = √ −
5 2 2
−1
or, in terms of τ , noting σ = τ
n
1 −1
Fn = √ τn − .
5 τ
We can note from this proof that since all generalised Fibonacci se-
quences follow the same recurrence relation then any generalised Fibonacci
sequence must be of the form
Gn = ατ n + βσ n . (1.5)
Here are a few useful facts about τ and σ:
√
τ + σ = 1, τ − σ = 5, τ σ = −1, τ 2 = τ + 1, σ 2 = σ + 1. (1.6)
A similar formula to Binet’s Fibonacci Formula can be found for Lucas
numbers:
Ln = τ n + σ n (1.7)
8
Proof. √By (1.5), L√n = ατ n + βσ n where α, β are constants to be found and
τ = 1+2 5 , σ = 1−2 5 . Using the Lucas seed, we obtain
L0 = α + β = 2; L1 = ατ + βσ = 1.
Substitution gives
ατ + (2 − α)σ = α(τ − σ) + 2σ = 1.
Hence √
1 − 2σ 5
α= = √ = 1.
τ −σ 5
Therefore
Ln = ατ n + βσ n = ατ n + (2 − α)σ n = τ n + σ n .
9
Chapter 2
Basic Properties of Fibonacci

Numbers
2.1 Negation Formula

We previously only defined the Fibonacci sequence for n ≥ 1, given the seed
values, but there are in fact Fibonacci numbers for negative n too. The
recurrence relation (1.1) can be rearranged to Fn−1 = Fn+1 − Fn and can be
used to extend the sequence backwards, giving F−n as 1, −1, 2, −3, 5, −8, . . .
for n ≥ 1. The general formula is
F−n = (−1)n+1 Fn , n ≥ 1. (2.1)
Proof. F−1 = F1 − F0 = 1 = (−1)2 F1 and F−2 = F0 − F−1 = −1 = (−1)3 F2

are both true therefore the equation is true for n = 1 and n = 2. Assume it
is true for n ≤ k, then
F−k = (−1)k+1 Fk
and
F−(k−1) = (−1)k Fk−1 .
Subtracting one from the other gives
F−k+1 − F−k = (−1)k (Fk−1 + Fk ).
Using rule (1.1),

F−k−1 = (−1)k Fk+1
and hence
F−(k+1) = (−1)k+2 Fk+1 .
Therefore, by induction, property (2.1) is true for n ≥ 1.
10
This property (2.1) can also be proved using Binet’s formula. Similarly,
Binet’s formula can be used to prove that Lucas numbers for negative n can
be found using the following negation formula:
L−n = (−1)n Ln , n ≥ 1. (2.2)
Proof. Using Binet’s formula,
n
−n −n 1 1
L−n = τ + σ = n + (−τ )n = (−1)n − +τ n
τ τ
= (−1) (σ + τ ) = (−1)n Ln .
n n n
2.2 Cassini’s Identity

One may observe, when looking at the first few Fibonacci numbers, that the
square of any Fibonacci number appears to be one integer away from the
product of the preceding and succeeding numbers. For example, looking at
n = 4, 32 = 9 and 2 × 5 = 10. This actually applies to all Fibonacci numbers
and is called Cassini’s identity:
Fn+1 Fn−1 − Fn2 = (−1)n . (2.3)
Proof. F2 F0 − F12 = 0 − 1 = −1 = (−1)1 is true therefore the equation is
true for n = 1. Assume it is true for n = k, then
Fk+1 Fk−1 − Fk2 = (−1)k .
Using (1.1),
Fk+1 (Fk+1 − Fk ) − Fk (Fk+2 − Fk+1 ) = (−1)k
2
⇒ Fk+1 − Fk Fk+2 = (−1)k
2
⇒ Fk+2 Fk − Fk+1 = −(−1)k = (−1)k+1 .
Similarly,
(Fk + Fk−1 )Fk−1 − Fk (Fk−1 + Fk−2 ) = (−1)k
2
⇒ Fk−1 − Fk Fk−2 = (−1)k
2
⇒ Fk Fk−2 − Fk−1 = −(−1)k = (−1)k−1 .
Therefore, by induction, property (2.3) is true for all n, where Fn is a Fi-
bonacci number.
Paradox
It follows from Cassini’s identity that if you divide an Fn × Fn square into
pieces as in Figure 2.1 and rearrange the pieces into a rectangle of sides Fn−1
and Fn+1 then the areas of the square and of the rectangle will differ by 1,
whatever the side of the original square.
11
Figure 2.1: Paradox gap
[TK]
When n is even we get a gap, as in Figure 2.1, whereas when n is odd

we get an overlap, as in Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.2: Paradox overlap

[TK]
Because the gap, or overlap, always has an area of 1 it will be less visible
as n increases. The paradox is that a diagram can appear to prove that
Fn−1 Fn+1 = Fn2 for some n as, for large n, the gap, or overlap, is so narrow
that it is imperceptible to the eye. F6 = 8 is often used as an example where
the gap is hardly noticeable.
2.3 Catalan’s Identity

From closer study of the first few numbers of the Fibonacci sequence, it
appears that there is a relationship between the square of a Fibonacci num-
ber and the product of any two numbers equidistant from that Fibonacci
number. One may observe that the difference is always a square number.
12
Example 2.3.1. Consider n = 3. Cassini’s identity tells us that the square
of F3 is ±1 from the product of the preceding and succeeding numbers. Let
us now consider the product of the numbers that are 0 ≤ r ≤ 7 either side
of F3 in the Fibonacci sequence and the difference from the square of F3 .
Table 2.1: Difference between the product F3−r F3+r and the square of F3
r F3−r F3+r Fr F32 − F3−r F3+r
0 2×2=4 0 0
1 1×3=3 1 -1
2 1×5=5 1 1
3 0×8=0 2 -4
4 1 × 13 = 13 3 9
5 −1 × 21 = −21 5 -25
6 2 × 34 = 68 8 64
7 −3 × 55 = −165 13 -169
Observe that the difference between the product F3−r F3+r and the square
of F3 for 0 ≤ r ≤ 7 is ±Fr2 .
The result from this example can actually be extended to all r and n.
Letting r = 1 gives Cassini’s identity. The general case is called Catalan’s
identity:
Fn2 − Fn+r Fn−r = (−1)n−r Fr2 . (2.4)
Proof. Using Binet’s formula,

2
1 n 1 1
Fn2 − Fn+r Fn−r = √ (τ − σ ) − √ (τ n+r − σ n+r ) √ (τ n−r − σ n−r )
n
5 5 5
1
(τ n − σ n )2 − (τ n+r − σ n+r )(τ n−r − σ n−r )

=
5
1
(τ 2n − 2τ n σ n + σ 2n ) − (τ 2n − τ n+r σ n−r − τ n−r σ n+r + σ 2n )

=
5
1 n+r n−r
= (τ σ − 2τ n σ n + τ n−r σ n+r )
5
1
= (τ n−r σ n−r (τ r − σ r )2 )
5
(τ r − σ r )2
= (τ σ)n−r
5
= (−1)n−r Fr2 .
13
2.4 Fibonacci and Lucas Relationships
We have seen that the Fibonacci and Lucas sequences are both generalised
Fibonacci sequences. The Lucas numbers have lots of properties that are
similar to those of Fibonacci numbers. The two sequences are, in fact, even
more intimately connected. Two formulae relating Fibonacci and Lucas
numbers are
Ln = Fn−1 + Fn+1 (2.5)
and
5Fn = Ln−1 + Ln+1 (2.6)
for all integers n.
We can use Binet’s formula to prove property (2.5) as follows:
Proof.
1
Fn+1 + Fn−1 = √ (τ n+1 − σ n+1 ) + (τ n−1 − σ n−1 )

5
1
= √ τ n−1 (τ 2 + 1) − σ n−1 (σ 2 + 1)

5
1
= √ τ n−1 (τ (τ − σ)) − σ n−1 (σ(τ − σ))

5
1 n−1 √ √
=√ τ ( 5τ ) − σ n−1 (− 5σ)
5
= τ + σn
n
= Ln .
Property (2.6) can be proved by induction as follows:
Proof. 5F0 = 0 = −1 + 1 = L−1 + L1 and 5F1 = 5 = 2 + 3 = L0 + L2 are

both true therefore the equation is true for n = 0 and n = 1. Assume it is
true for n ≤ k, then
5Fk = Lk−1 + Lk+1
and
5Fk−1 = Lk−2 + Lk .
Adding the two together gives
5Fk + 5Fk−1 = Lk−1 + Lk+1 + Lk−2 + Lk .
Using rules (1.1) and (1.2),
5Fk+1 = (Lk−1 + Lk−2 ) + (Lk+1 + Lk ) = Lk + Lk+2 .
14
Therefore rule (2.6) is true for n ≥ 0. Using rules (2.1) and (2.2), we can
prove (2.6) for n = −k, k ≥ 1 as follows:
5F−k = (−1)k+1 (Lk−1 + Lk+1 )
= (−1)k+1 ((−1)−(k−1) L−(k−1) + (−1)−(k+1) L−(k+1) )
= L−(k+1) + L−(k−1) .
Therefore, by induction, 5Fn = Ln−1 + Ln+1 for all integers n.
2.5 Matrix Theory

We can express the recurrence relation (1.1) in terms of 2 × 2 matrices using
the Fibonacci Q-matrix. The following property is taken from [RJ]. Rule
(1.1) becomes

Fn+1 Fn 1 1
=Q where Q≡ .
Fn Fn−1 1 0
Recall Fn = 0, 1, 1 for n = 0, 1, 2. Then, from the recurrence relation, we
have

Fn+1 n−1 1
=Q
Fn 1
and

Fn n−1 1
=Q
Fn−1 0
which gives us
n Fn+1 Fn
Q = , n ≥ 1. (2.7)
Fn Fn−1
Many properties can be derived using matrix properties.
Example 2.5.1. Using the fact that An Am = Am+n for any square matrix
A, one can derive
Fn2 + Fn−1
2
= F2n−1 . (2.8)
Proof. Q2n = Qn Qn

F2n+1 F2n Fn+1 Fn Fn+1 Fn
⇒ =
F2n F2n−1 Fn Fn−1 Fn Fn−1
2 2

Fn+1 + Fn Fn+1 Fn + Fn Fn−1
= .
Fn Fn+1 + Fn−1 Fn Fn2 + Fn−1
2
15
Chapter 3
Divisibility Properties
Considering that the Fibonacci numbers are based on a recurrence relation,

one does not expect the numbers to have any particular divisibility proper-
ties. However, there are actually several associated divisibility properties.
In this chapter, I will prove the greatest common divisor theorem using [FS]
and Chapter 6 of [SV] as guides. I will be using the notation (a, b) to denote
the greatest common divisor of a and b.
3.1 Divisibility Lemmas

The proof of the greatest common divisor theorem requires knowledge of the
following three Lemmas.
Lemma 3.1.1.
Gn+m = Fm−1 Gn + Fm Gn+1 (3.1)
where G1 , G2 , ... is any generalised Fibonacci sequence.
Proof. Gn+1 = F0 Gn +F1 Gn+1 and Gn+2 = F1 Gn +F2 Gn+1 are true because
F0 = 0 and F1 = F2 = 1, and therefore the equation is true for m = 1 and
m = 2. Assume it is true for m ≤ k, then
Gn+k = Fk−1 Gn + Fk Gn+1
and
Gn+(k−1) = Fk−2 Gn + Fk−1 Gn+1 .
By addition,
Gn+(k−1) +Gn+k = (Fk−2 +Fk−1 )Gn +(Fk−1 +Fk )Gn+1 = Fk Gn +Fk+1 Gn+1 = Gn+(k+1) .
We know this is true from the definition of a generalised Fibonacci sequence

(1.3) so the equation holds for m = k + 1. Therefore, by induction, rule
(3.1) is true for all integers m, n ≥ 1.
16
Taking Gi = Fi , we obtain
Fn+m = Fm−1 Fn + Fm Fn+1 (3.2)
and
F2n = Fn−1 Fn + Fn Fn+1 = Fn (Fn−1 + Fn+1 ) = Fn Ln . (3.3)
Lemma 3.1.2. If m is divisible by n, then Fm is divisible by Fn :
n | m ⇒ Fn | Fm . (3.4)
Proof. Let m = rn, r ∈ Z. It follows from rule (3.3) that F2n is divisible by
Fn so the statement holds for r = 2. Assume it is true for r = k. It follows
from rule (3.2) that if Fkn is divisible by Fn , then so is F(k+1)n since
F(k+1)n = Fkn+n = Fn−1 Fkn + Fn Fkn+1 .
Therefore, by induction, Frn is divisible by Fn for all integers r ≥ 2.
Lemma 3.1.3. Fn and Fn+1 are relatively prime:

(Fn , Fn+1 ) = 1, ∀n. (3.5)
A simple proof for Lemma 3.1.3 uses the Euclidean algorithm. The
following algorithm is taken from [DK].
Definition 3.1.1 (The Modern Euclidean Algorithm). Given nonnegative
integers u and v, this algorithm finds their greatest
common divisor.
A1: [v = 0?] If v = 0, the algorithm terminates with u as the answer.
A2: [Take u mod v.] Set r ← u mod v, u ← v, v ← r, and return to A1.
(3.6)
The following proof of Lemma 3.1.3 is based on a proof in Chapter 9 of
[TK].
Proof. Consider u = Fn+1 , v = Fn . Using the Euclidean Algorithm (3.6) to

find (u, v), we have:
Fn+1 = 1 · Fn + Fn−1
Fn = 1 · Fn−1 + Fn−2
..
.
F4 = 1 · F3 + F2 = 1 · 2 + 1 = 3
F3 = 1 · F2 + F1 = 1 · 1 + 1 = 2
F2 = 1 · F1 + F0 = 1 · 1 + 0 = 1.
The algorithm terminates here as v = 0. So we take u = F1 = 1 as the
answer.
17
3.2 Greatest Common Divisor Theorem
Theorem 3.2.1.
(Fm , Fn ) = F(m,n) (3.7)
Proof. Let m > n. Applying the Euclidean algorithm (3.6) to m and n gives
us:
m = np0 + r1
n = r1 p1 + r2
r1 = r2 p2 + r3
.. (3.8)
.
rt−2 = rt−1 pt−1 + rt
rt−1 = rt pt
where rt = (m, n).
We can see from the first line that m = np0 + r1 , so
(Fm , Fn ) = (Fnp0 +r1 , Fn )
which, by (3.2), gives us
(Fm , Fn ) = (Fnp0 −1 Fr1 + Fnp0 Fr1 +1 , Fn ).
Because Fn | Fnp0 by (3.4), this becomes
(Fm , Fn ) = (Fnp0 −1 Fr1 , Fn ).
Using (3.5) we can see that (Fnp0 −1 , Fnp0 ) = 1. By (3.4) we know that Fn
is a factor of Fnp0 . Therefore, since Fnp0 −1 and Fnp0 are relatively prime,
Fnp0 −1 and Fn are also relatively prime. Hence we obtain
(Fm , Fn ) = (Fr1 , Fn ).
Now, by returning to the equations generated in (3.8) and repeatedly sub-
stituting these equations into the last expression, we can similarly prove
that
(Fm , Fn ) = (Frt−1 , Frt ).
From (3.8) we know that rt−1 = rt pt , so
(Frt−1 , Frt ) = Frt
and hence
(Fm , Fn ) = Frt .
Therefore, as rt = (m, n), we find that
(Fm , Fn ) = F(m,n) .
18
3.3 Divisibility Corollaries
The following corollary is an interesting corollary of Theorem 3.2.1.
Corollary 3.3.1. If (m, n) = 1, 2 or 5, then Fmn is divisible by Fm Fn .
Proof. If (m, n) = 1 or (m, n) = 2 then (Fm , Fn ) = 1 by Theorem 3.2.1.

Fmn is divisible by Fm and Fn by Lemma 3.1.2. It follows that Fmn is also
divisible by the product Fm Fn as Fm and Fn are relatively prime. Consider
(m, n) = 5 with m = 5a, n = 5k b, and (5, a) = (5, b) = (a, b) = 1. By
Theorem 3.2.1,
(Fm , Fn ) = F(m,n) = 5.
By Lemma 3.1.2, Fmn is divisible by Fm , Fn , and 5k+1 . Hence Fmn is also
divisible by the product Fm Fn .
Conversely, it can be proved that
Corollary 3.3.2. If Fmn is divisible by Fm Fn , then (m, n) = 1, 2 or 5.
A proof can be found in [SV].
3.4 Primes
Dunlap [RD] comments that “the problem of divisibility of a set of numbers
also raises the question of prime factors.” Previously we found that if m is
divisible by n then Fm is divisible by Fn . It appears to imply that if m is a
prime then Fm is a prime.
Corollary 3.4.1. If m is not a prime then Fm is not a prime unless m = 4.
Proof. Let m be divisible by v, and let v be divisible by w. Then, by Lemma

3.1.2, Fm is divisible by Fv and Fw . Therefore, if m is not a prime, then Fm
is a prime if and only if Fv = Fw = 1. As this only occurs when both v and
w can only be 1 or 2, then m can only be 1, 2 or 4. Hence F4 = 3 is the only
case where m is not prime and Fm is prime.
However, the converse is not always true.
Example 3.4.1. 19 is a prime but F19 is not a prime because F19 = 4181 =
113 × 37.
19
An interesting theorem also related to primes, which appears in [RK], is
Carmichael’s theorem.
Theorem 3.4.1 (Carmichael’s Theorem). Fn has at least one prime factor

that is not a factor of any earlier Fibonacci number for all Fn , with the
exception of the following special cases:
1. F1 = 1, which has no prime factors;
2. F2 = 1, which has no prime factors;
3. F6 = 8, which only has a prime factor of 2 (which is F3 ); and
4. F12 = 144, which only has 2 and 3 as prime factors (which are F3 and
F4 respectively).
20
Chapter 4
The Golden Ratio and

Continued Fractions
4.1 Limit of Consecutive Fibonacci Numbers

The sequence of ratios of consecutive Fibonacci numbers converges to a limit
τ:
Fn+1
τ = lim
n→∞ Fn
Fn + Fn−1
= lim
n→∞ Fn
Fn−1
= lim 1 + lim
n→∞ n→∞ Fn
1
=1+
Fn
lim
n→∞ Fn−1
1
=1+ .
τ
It follows that the limit τ satisfies the equation
τ2 − τ − 1 = 0 (4.1)
√ √
which has roots 1+2 5 and 1−2 5 . One may note we have seen these before
in the proof of Binet’s formula (1.4). Taking the positive root gives us
√
1+ 5
τ= = 1.618 . . . .
2
We will later prove that this is the golden ratio.
21
Figure 4.1: Graph of limit τ
One may observe that if the ratio of consecutive Fibonacci numbers

converges to a limit then one must also find that

Fn+1 Fn
lim − = 0.
n→∞ Fn Fn−1
This observation is related to Cassini’s identity (2.3). It follows from the
Figure 4.2: Twist of Cassini’s identity
identity that, for n > 1,
Fn+1 Fn (−1)n
− =
Fn Fn−1 Fn Fn−1
which converges quickly to zero, sign oscillating, as n tends to infinity.
22
4.2 The Golden Ratio
Two quantities are in the golden ratio if the ratio between the sum of those
quantities and the larger quantity is the same as the ratio between the larger
quantity and the smaller quantity.
Definition 4.2.1. The golden section is a line divided into two segments
according to the golden ratio.
Figure 4.3: The golden section
This can be expressed as follows:

a+b a
= = τ, where a > b.
a b
Rearranging gives us a = bτ , so substitution gives us:
bτ + b τ +1
=τ ⇒ = τ.
bτ τ
Hence one can see that
τ2 = τ + 1 (4.2)
and
1
τ =1+ . (4.3)
τ
As equation (4.2) and equation (4.1) are the same, this proves the remarkable
√
result that the golden ratio τ is the same as the limit τ , where τ = 1+2 5 =
1.618 . . . .
Definition 4.2.2. The golden ratio is the ratio τ : 1.
The golden ratio is often denoted by the Greek letter φ, named after the
Greek sculptor Phidias. It is said that Phidias widely used the golden ratio
in his works of sculpture, although there is little evidence to show this.
23
4.3 Continued Fractions
Definition 4.3.1. A finite simple continued fraction is a fraction of the
form:
1
x = a0 + . (4.4)
1
a1 +
1
a2 +
..
.
1
an−1 +
an
where a0 , a1 , . . . , an are integers, all of which are positive, except possibly a0 .
This definition is taken from [DB]. It is convention to denote a simple
continued fraction by a symbol which displays its partial quotients:
[a0 ; a1 , a2 , a3 , . . . , an ].
Theorem 4.3.1. Any rational number can be written as a finite simple
continued fraction.
Proof. Let ab , where b > 0 be any rational number. The Euclidean algorithm
(3.6) gives us the equations:
a = ba0 + r1
b = r1 a1 + r2
r1 = r2 a2 + r3
.. (4.5)
.
an−2 = rn−1 an−1 + rn
rn−1 = rn an
where 0 < rn < rn−1 < · · · < r3 < r2 < r1 < b. Note that since each rk is
a positive integer then the coefficients a1 , . . . , an are positive. Rearranging
the equations (4.5) gives us:
a r1 1
= a0 + = a0 + b
b b r 1
b r2 1
= a1 + = a1 + r1
r1 r1 r2
r1 r3 1
= a2 + = a2 + r2
r2 r2 r3 (4.6)
..
.
rn−2 rn 1
= an−1 + = an−1 + rn−1
rn−1 rn−1 rn
rn−1
= an .
rn
24
If we substitute the second equation in (4.6) into the first, then
a 1
= a0 + 1 .
b a1 + r1
r2
Continuing in this way, by repeatedly substituting, we find that

a 1
= a0 + .
b 1
a1 +
1
a2 +
1
a3 +
..
.
1
an−1 +
an
It follows from this proof, based on [DB], that the partial denominators
a0 , . . . , an are the same as the quotients that occur when the Euclidean
algorithm (3.6) is applied to a and b.
This explains how one can discover how a rational number ab , where
a < b, can be expressed as a simple continued fraction by forming a rectangle
with height a and width b and dividing it firstly into a1 squares of width
a, then dividing the remainder into a2 squares, and repeatedly dividing
remainders into ak squares until there is no remainder. This method is
shown in the next two examples and can be used as a simple pictorial way
to find the partial quotients a1 , . . . , an of a rational number if n is small.
Example 4.3.1.
7
= [0; 1, 1, 6]
13
13
6
Example 4.3.2.
9
= [0; 5, 2, 4]
49
25
49
4
Any number x ∈ R can, in fact, be expressed as a simple continued

fraction as irrational numbers can be expressed as infinite simple continued
fractions of the form:
1
x = a0 + . (4.7)
1
a1 +
1
a2 +
..
.
Every irrational number has a unique representation as an infinite con-
tinued fraction. Burton proves this in [DB]. However, if x is rational, the
representation [a0 ; a1 , a2 , ..., an ] is unique if and only if an 6= 1, as in this
case x = [a0 ; a1 , a2 , ..., an−1 + 1] as well.
3
Example 4.3.3. Representations of 10 :
1 1
[0; 3, 2, 1] = = = [0; 3, 3]
1 1
3+ 3+
1 3
2+
1
The golden ratio, τ , is an irrational number and so can be expressed as
an infinite simple continued fraction. By repeatedly substituting τ into the
denominator in equation (4.3) we find
1 1 1
τ =1+ =1+ = ··· = 1 +
τ 1 1
1+ 1+
τ 1
1+
1
1+
1
1+
1
1+
..
.
which shows us that the continued fraction representation of τ is
τ = [1; 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, . . . ]. (4.8)
It appears to follow that there does not exist another number which is further
from a simple rational approximation than the golden ratio. It is for this
reason that some consider τ to be the ‘most irrational’ number. However,
26
by definition, a number is either rational or irrational and cannot be more
or less so.
In Chapter 3, we found that the Euclidean algorithm for Fn+1 and Fn
produces the equations:
Fn+1 = 1 · Fn + Fn−1
Fn + = 1 · Fn−1 + Fn−2
..
.
F4 = 1 · F3 + F2 = 1 · 2 + 1 = 3
F3 = 1 · F2 + F1 = 1 · 1 + 1 = 2
F2 = 1 · F1 + F0 = 1 · 1 + 0 = 1.
So, we may write

Fn+1
= [1; 1, . . . , 1]
Fn
where there are n partial denominators all equal to 1. Hence, a continued
fraction representation of the ratio of consecutive Fibonacci numbers is
Fn+1
= [1; 1, . . . , 1] . (4.9)
Fn | {z }
n digits
Note that this is not a unique representation and we may also write
Fn+1
= [1; 1, . . . , 1, 2] . (4.10)
Fn | {z }
n−1 digits
4.4 Q-polynomials
The Q-polynomials are intimately related to continued fractions. We need to
introduce Q-polynomials and develop some of their properties to further our
investigation into continued fractions and their connections with Fibonacci
numbers. This section is based on section 4.5.3 of [DK].
Definition 4.4.1. The polynomials Qn (x1 , . . . , xn ) of n variables, for n ≥ 0,

are called ‘continuants’, and are defined by the rule

1,
 if n = 0
Qn (x1 , . . . , xn ) = x1 , if n = 1

x1 Qn−1 (x2 , . . . , xn ) + Qn−2 (x3 , . . . , xn ), if n > 1.

(4.11)
27
Consider ab where a < b. The following lemma shows that Q-polynomials
are connected to such fractions. As a0 = 0, for simplicity let us define
1
[x1 , . . . , xn ] = . (4.12)
1
x1 +
1
x2 +
..
.
1
xn−1 +
xn
Note that if n = 0 then [x1 , . . . , xn ] is taken to be 0.
Lemma 4.4.1. The basic property of the Q-polynomials is that
Qn−1 (x2 , . . . , xn )
[x1 , . . . , xn ] = , n ≥ 1. (4.13)
Qn (x1 , . . . , xn )
Proof. For n = 1,
1 Qn−1 (x2 , . . . , xn )
[x1 , . . . , xn ] = = .
x1 Qn (x1 , . . . , xn )
Assuming that the statement is true for n = k,
Qk−1 (x2 , . . . , xk )
x0 + [x1 , . . . , xk ] = x0 + by (4.11)
Qk (x1 , . . . , xk )
Qk−1 (x2 , . . . , xk ) + x0 Qk (x1 , . . . , xk )
=
Qk (x1 , . . . , xk )
Qk+1 (x0 , . . . , xk )
= .
Qk (x1 , . . . , xk )
Thus
1
[x0 , . . . , xk ] =
x0 + [x1 , . . . , xk ]
1
=
Qk+1 (x0 , . . . , xk )
Qk (x1 , . . . , xk )
Qk (x1 , . . . , xk )
=
Qk+1 (x0 , . . . , xk )
which, by renumbering the indices of the x values, gives us
Qk (x2 , . . . , xk+1 )
[x1 , . . . , xk+1 ] = .
Qk+1 (x1 , . . . , xk+1 )
Therefore, by induction, the initial statement (4.13) is true.
28
According to Knuth [DK], Euler made the following surprising observa-
tion which curiously connects Q-polynomials with Fibonacci numbers:
In general, Qn (x1 , . . . , xn ) is the sum of all terms obtainable by
starting with x1 x2 . . . xn and deleting zero or more non-overlapping
pairs of consecutive variables xj xj+1 ; there are Fn+1 such terms.
The following lemma follows from this observation made by Euler:
Lemma 4.4.2. The Q-polynomials are symmetrical:
Qn (x1 , . . . , xn ) = Qn (xn , . . . , x1 ). (4.14)
By combining Definition 4.4.1 and Lemma 4.4.2 we obtain the following

lemma:
Lemma 4.4.3.
Qn (x1 , . . . , xn ) = xn Qn−1 (x1 , . . . , xn−1 ) + Qn−2 (x1 , . . . , xn−2 ), n > 1.

(4.15)
Let qn = Qn (x1 , . . . , xn ) and pn = Qn−1 (x2 , . . . , xn ). By combining
Definition 4.4.1 and Lemma 4.4.3 we can express qn and pn as follows:
Definition 4.4.2.

1,
 if n = 0
qn = x 1 , if n = 1

xn qn−1 + qn−2 , if n > 1.

Definition 4.4.3.

0,
 if n = 0
pn = 1, if n = 1

xn pn−1 + pn−2 , if n > 1.

The Q-polynomials also satisfy the following important lemma:

Lemma 4.4.4.
Qn (x1 , . . . , xn )Qn (x2 , . . . , xn+1 )−Qn+1 (x1 , . . . , xn+1 )Qn−1 (x2 , . . . , xn ) = (−1)n , n ≥ 1.
(4.16)
Proof. Using Definitions 4.4.2 and 4.4.3, we can express the statement as
qn pn+1 − qn+1 pn = (−1)n , n ≥ 1.
The statement is true for n=1 as
q1 p2 − q2 p1 = x1 x2 − (x2 x1 + 1) = −1 = (−1)1 .
29
Assuming that the statement is true for n = k, we consider the case where
n = k + 1:
qk+1 p(k+1)+1 − q(k+1)+1 pk+1

= qk+1 pk+2 − qk+2 pk+1
= qk+1 (xk+2 pk+1 + pk ) − (xk+2 qk+1 + qk )pk+1
= qk+1 pk − qk pk+1
= −(qk pk+1 − qk+1 pk )
= −(−1)k
= (−1)k+1 .
Therefore, by induction, the initial statement (4.16) is true.
4.5 Lamé’s Theorem

An interesting theorem relating to Fibonacci numbers and the Euclidean
algorithm was proved by Lamé around 1845. The execution time of the
Euclidean algorithm (3.6) depends on the number of times A2 is performed.
When applying the Euclidean algorithm to two integers one may observe
that the worst case for the number of steps required is when the each quotient
ak is 1. From (4.9) we can see that this is when the inputs are consecutive
Fibonacci numbers. The following theorem and proof are taken from section
4.5.3 of [DK]. Knuth [DK] states that:
This theorem has the historical claim of being the first practical
application of the Fibonacci sequence; since then many other
applications of Fibonacci numbers to algorithms and to the study
of algorithms have been discovered.
Theorem 4.5.1. For n ≥ 1, let u and v be integers with u > v > 0 such
that Euclid’s algorithm applied to u and v requires exactly n division steps,
and such that u is as small as possible satisfying these conditions. Then
u = Fn+2 and v = Fn+1 .
Proof. We found previously that the positive partial denominators a0 , . . . , an

of a simple continued fraction are the same as the quotients that occur when
the Euclidean algorithm (3.6) is applied to u and v. We also found that
considering only cases with an ≥ 2 and n ≥ 1 is the same as considering
all rational numbers as the case where an = 1 is not unique. Note that as
u > v > 0 then for uv we find a0 = 0. If the partial quotients obtained when
using the Euclidean algorithm are a1 , a2 , . . . , an , then we have, by (4.13),
v Qn−1 (a2 , . . . , an )
= [a1 , a2 , . . . , an ] = . (4.17)
u Qn (a1 , a2 , . . . , an )
30
By (4.16), Qn−1 (a2 , . . . , an ) and Qn (a1 , a2 , . . . , an ) are relatively prime. This
tells us that and the fraction on the right-hand side of (4.17) is in lowest
terms. Therefore
u = Qn (a1 , a2 , . . . , an )d and v = Qn−1 (a2 , . . . , an )d, (4.18)
where d = (u, v). By (4.18), we must have u = Qn (a1 , . . . , an )d, where

a1 , a2 , . . . , an , and d are positive integers and an ≥ 2. Since, by Defini-
tion 4.4.1, Qn (a1 , . . . , an ) is a polynomial with positive coefficients, involv-
ing all of the variables, the minimum value is achieved only when a1 =
1, . . . , an−1 = 1, an = 2, d = 1. Hence, u is as small as possible when
u = Qn (1, . . . , 1, 2). By Definition 4.4.1,
| {z }
n digits



2, if n = 1

3, if n = 2
Qn (1, . . . , 1, 2) =
| {z } 
Qn−1 (1, . . . , 1, 2) + Qn−2 (1, . . . , 1, 2), if n > 2.
n digits

 | {z } | {z }
n−1 digits n−2 digits

So, by letting u = un , we find


2,
 if n = 1
u = un = 3, if n = 2

un−1 + un−2 , if n > 2.

By comparing this result to the Fibonacci recurrence relation (1.1) one can
see that u = Fn+2 . When u is as small as possible,
v = Qn−1 (1, . . . , 1, 2) = un−1 = F(n−1)+2 .

| {z }
n−1 digits
Therefore, for n ≥ 1, u = Fn+2 and v = Fn+1 .
The following corollary, takem from [DK], follows from Theorem 4.5.1.
Corollary 4.5.1. If 0 ≤ u, v < N , the number of division steps required
when the
√ modern
euclidean algorithm is applied to u and v is at most
logτ ( 5N ) − 2.
Proof. By Lamé’s Theorem (Theorem 4.5.1), the maximum number of steps,
n, occurs when u = Fn and v = Fn+1 , where n is as large as possible with
σn
Fn+1 < N . Recall Fn = √15 (τ n − σ n ) but √ 5
is always small enough, since
τn
n ≥ 0, so that we have Fn = rounded to the nearest integer. Since
√
5
n+1
σ√
√
Fn+1 < N , we have < N , and hence n + 1 < logτ ( 5N ). Thus
5
√ √
n < logτ ( 5N ) − 1 or n ≤ logτ ( 5N ) − 2.
31
The following corollary, taken from [TK], is a corollary of Theorem 4.5.1
which is also sometimes referred to as Lamé’s Theorem.
Corollary 4.5.2. The number of divisions needed to compute (u, v) by the
Euclidean algorithm is no more than five times the number of decimal digits
in v, where u ≥ v ≥ 2.
One can see that this is true as follows:
By Theorem 4.5.1, Fn+1 ≤ v < N . Using log rules observe that:
√
√ log10 ( 5v)
logτ ( 5v) =
log10 (τ )
√
log10 5 + log10 v
=
log10 (τ )
√
≈ 4.785 · log10 ( 5) + log10 (v)
≈ 4.785 · log10 v + 1.672.
√
Now consider Corollary 4.5.1 where Fn+1 ≤ v < N . Then n ≤ logτ ( 5v) −
1 < 5 · log10 v + 1. Define d as the number of decimal digits in v. Observe
d − 1 ≤ log10 v < d and thus n < 5d + 1 or n ≤ 5d.
A full proof of the bound using the Euclidean algorithm can be found in
[TK].
4.6 Pell’s Equation

Pell’s equation, named after John Pell (1611-1685), is a Diophantine equa-
tion of the form x2 − Dy 2 = N , where x, y, and N are integers and D > 0
is a non-square natural number. The most common case is when N = ±1.
Recall Definition 4.3.1 and note that
[x0 ; x1 , . . . , xn ] = x0 + [x1 , . . . , xn ].
pn
We previously observed that qn = [x1 , . . . , xn ]. So, by letting
rn = x0 qn + pn ,
we obtain
rn pn
= x0 + = [x0 ; x1 , . . . , xn ].
qn qn
Clearly, by substitution and induction, we can define rn as follows:
Definition 4.6.1.

x0 ,
 if n = 0
rn = x0 x1 + 1, if n = 1

xn rn−1 + rn−2 , if n > 1.

32
By combining Lemma 4.4.4 and Definition 4.6.1 we obtain the following
Lemma.
Lemma 4.6.1.
rn qn−1 − rn−1 qn = (−1)n−1 . (4.19)
Proof. Recall rn = x0 qn + pn . By (4.16),
qn−1 pn − qn pn−1 = (−1)n−1 .
Hence
(−1)n−1 = x0 qn qn−1 + qn−1 pn − x0 qn qn−1 − qn pn−1

= (x0 qn + pn )qn−1 − (x0 qn−1 + pn−1 )qn
= rn qn−1 − rn−1 qn .
The following theorems and lemma have been taken from Burton [DB].
The proofs have been omitted in the interest of brevity and may be found
in Chapter 13 of [DB].
Theorem 4.6.1. The kth convergent of the simple continued fraction
[x0 ; x1 , . . . , xn ] has the value rqkk (0 ≤ k ≤ n).
Theorem 4.6.2. If qr is a convergent of the continued fraction expansion
√
of D, then x = r, y = q is a solution of one of the equations
x2 − Dy 2 = c,
√
where |k| < 1 + 2 D.
Lemma
√ 4.6.2. Let the convergents of the continued fraction
√ expansion of
rk
D be qk . If m is length of the period of expansion of D, then
2 2
rkm−1 − Dqkm−1 = (−1)km , (k = 1, 2, 3, . . . ).
Lemma 4.6.2 relies on the knowledge that the continued fraction of a

quadratic surd always becomes periodic at some term xk+1 , where xk+1 =
2x0 , so √
D = [x0 ; x1 , . . . , xk , 2x0 ].
It follows from these theorems and this lemma that one can find solutions
to equations of the form
x2 − Dy 2 = ±1
√
using the convergent rqkk and the continued fraction expansion of D. There-
fore one can solve Pell’s equation by finding an appropriate continued frac-
tion.
33
Example 4.6.1. √
5 = [2; 4]
so m = 1 and, by Lemma 4.6.2, x = rk , y = qk , k = 1, 2, 3, . . . , are solutions
of
x2 − 5y 2 = ±1.
We can see this is true for the first few convergents:
9/4 : 92 − 5(42 ) = 1,
38/17 : 382 − 5(172 ) = −1,
161/72 : 1612 − 5(722 ) = 1.
Special case
There is a relationship between Fibonacci numbers and a special case of
Pell’s equation where D = 5 and N = ±4. The following theorems are
taken from Chapter 27 of [TK].
Theorem 4.6.3. The Pell’s equation x2 − 5y 2 = 4 is solvable in positive

integers if and only if x = L2n and y = F2n , where n ≥ 1.
Theorem 4.6.4. The Pell’s equation x2 − 5y 2 = −4 is solvable in positive

integers if and only if x = L2n−1 and y = F2n−1 , where n ≥ 1.
Using substitution and Binet’s formula one can see that x = Ln , y = Fn

is a solution of x2 − 5y 2 = ±4 for all n ≥ 1:
2
2 2 n n 2 1 n n
x − 5y = (τ + σ ) − 5 √ (τ − σ )
5
= τ 2n + 2τ n σ n + σ 2n − (τ 2n − 2τ n σ n + σ 2n )
= 4(τ σ)n
= 4(−1)n
(
4 if n = even,
=
−4 if n = odd.
It can be proved using number theory that the Fibonacci and Lucas
numbers are the only integer solutions to these equation.
34
Chapter 5
Golden Geometry
In this chapter we explore some of the two-dimensional geometry related to

the golden ratio. The chapter is based on Chapter 13 of [SV] and Chapter
3 of [RD].
5.1 The Golden Rectangle

Definition 5.1.1. A golden rectangle is a rectangle where the lengths of the
adjacent sides are in the golden ratio.
Constructing a Golden Rectangle

One can construct a golden rectangle as follows:
1. Construct a square ABCD;
2. Bisect AB and label the midpoint E;
3. Use a compass to draw an arc radius EC with centre E from C to

baseline level;
4. Extend the baseline to meet the arc and label the intersection F ;
5. Extend the top line of the square, draw a line perpendicular to the
baseline at F , and label the intersection G.
35
Figure 5.1: Construction of a golden rectangle
[RD]
The rectangle AF GD is a golden rectangle as AF : AD = τ : 1.
Proof. From the first three steps we know AB = BC = CD = AD; AE =

EB = 21 AB; and EF = EC. So, using Pythagoras theorem, we can see that
EC 2 = EB 2 + BC 2
2
1
= AB + AB 2
2
1
= AB 2 + AB 2
4
5
= AB 2
4
√ √ √
Therefore, EC = 25 AB. Hence, EF = 25 AD, AF = 12 (1+ 5)AD = τ AD,
√
and BF = − 21 (1 − 5)AD = −σAD = τ1 AD.
Inflation
Consider the golden rectangle ABCD in Figure 5.2. Divide the rectangle
into a square whose sides have length AD and a smaller golden rectangle.
Repeatedly dividing the smaller rectangle into another square and rectangle
finds smaller golden rectangles. The successively smaller golden rectangles
converge to O. Note that, by Definition 4.2.1,
AD AE
= =τ
EB EB
36
and
(AB)(AD) : (BC)(EB) = (AB)(AD) : (AD)(EB)

= AB : EB
AB EB
= :
AD AD
1
=τ :
τ
= τ 2 : 1.
Clearly, the inflation of one golden rectangle to the smaller golden rectangle
means a reduction in the linear dimensions of the rectangle by a factor of τ
and a reduction in the area by a factor of τ 2 .
Figure 5.2: Inflation of the golden rectangle
The golden rectangle is the only rectangle with the property that taking
a square from it leaves a similar rectangle. The diagonals of alternating
golden rectangles in the inflation process are perpendicular, always either in
line with the diagonal of the original rectangle or the diagonal of the smaller
rectangle. Dunlap [RD] states that the point O where the diagonals of the
golden rectangles meet was named the Eye of God by the mathematician
Clifford A Pickover.
5.2 The Golden Triangle

Definition 5.2.1. The golden triangle is an isosceles triangle such that the
lengths of the equal sides and the base are in the golden ratio.
Inflation
AD
Consider the golden triangle ACD in Figure 5.3. By Definition 5.2.1, CD =
AD Ab
τ . Divide AD such that Ab and bD are in the golden ratio, i.e. Ab = bD = τ.
So,
AD
= τ 2.
bD
37
Hence
CD CD AD 1
= = (τ 2 ) = τ.
bD AD bD τ
Therefore, CbD is clearly similar to ACD and therefore is also a golden
triangle.
Figure 5.3: Inflation of the golden triangle

[SV]
The procedure can be repeated to find smaller golden triangles, i.e. Dba,
bap, and so on. The successively smaller, similar triangles converge to O.
Note that
AC : CD = AD : CD = τ
and
1 1
(AC)(CD) : (CD)(bD) = AC : bD = AD : bD = τ 2 .
2 2
Clearly, the inflation of a golden triangle to a smaller golden triangle means
a reduction in the linear dimensions of the golden triangle by a factor of τ
and a reduction in the area of the golden triangle by a factor of τ 2 .
In Figure 5.3, Vajda [SV] shows that the median from D in the triangle
ADC, the median from b in triangle CbD, and the median from a in the
triangle Dab, and so on, all meet at O.
Note that the shape AbC that joins onto the smaller triangle to complete
the larger triangle is called the golden gnomon and has the same inflation
relationship as the golden triangle.
38
Trigonometric Formula for Fn
In Figure 5.3, ∠DAC is 36◦ , which is π5 radians. This angle is closely related
to τ as the angles involved in a regular pentagon and in the golden triangle
and gnomon are all multiples of π5 . In addition, we find that cos π5 = τ2 . The
following proof is based on Chapter 25 of [TK].
π
Proof. Let θ = Then 2θ + 3θ = π2 , so
10 .
π π π
sin(2θ) = sin − 3θ = − cos − 3θ + = cos(3θ).
2 2 2
Note that cos(θ) 6= 0. Hence
sin(2θ) = cos(3θ)
⇒ 2 sin(θ) cos(θ) = 4 cos3 (θ) − 3 cos(θ)
⇒ 4 cos2 (θ) − 2 sin(θ) − 3 = 0
⇒ 4 sin2 (θ) + 2 sin(θ) − 1 = 0
√
−1 ± 5
⇒ sin(θ) = .
4
Since sin(θ) > 0, it follows that
σ 1
sin(θ) = − =
2 2τ.
Therefore
2
π
2
π σ 2 − σ2 2 − (1 + σ) 1−σ τ
cos = 1−2 sin = 1−2 = = = = .
5 10 4 2 2 2 2
Using the formulae (1.6) in chapter 1, we find

3π π π τ 3 τ
cos = 4 cos3 − 3 cos =4 −3
5 5 5 2 2
2
τ (τ − 3) τ (τ − 2) 1−τ σ
= = = = .
2 2 2 2
Using these results, a trigonometric formula for Fn can be found:
n cosn π − cosn 3π

1 n 2
Fn = √ (τ − σ n ) = 5√ 5
. (5.1)
5 5
39
5.3 Logarithmic Spirals
Definition 5.3.1. Logarithmic spirals are given by the polar equation:
r = aebθ , −∞ < θ < ∞, (5.2)
where a and b are arbitrary positive constants.
Logarithmic spirals are also known as equiangular spirals because each

ray from the origin cuts the spiral in a constant angle α, where b = cot α.
Loeb [AL] notes that a logarithmic spiral can be drawn through suc-
cessive dynamically related points. By connecting the opposite vertices of
the squares in a progression of golden rectangles (DEF GHIJ . . . in Figure
5.2) one can indeed construct a logarithmic spiral. This spiral is sometimes
called the golden spiral.
From any point on the golden spiral to another point on the spiral,
lengths are affected by a scaling factor of τ for every rotation of 90◦ , which
is π2 radians. As Knott [RK] notes, it follows that the polar coordinates
change from (r, θ) to (rτ, θ + π2 ). Therefore, by setting one point as (1, 0),
the points on the spiral are summarised by:
τ
r = τn and θ=n .
2
Hence we obtain the single equation
2θ
r=τ π
which is a logarithmic spiral where a = 1 and b = π2 log τ .

By converting into Cartesian coordinates (x = r cos θ, y = r sin θ), I
have adapted Knott’s excel spreadsheet [RK] in the section called ‘Two-
dimensional Geometry and the Golden section’ to produce a plot of this
spiral where −14.5 ≤ θ ≤ 6.25 (Figure 5.4).
Figure 5.4: Spiral with an expansion of τ in 90◦ turn
40
Similarly, by connecting the acute vertices of the golden triangles in a
progression of inflated triangles (ACDbap . . . in Figure 5.3) one can con-
struct a logarithmic spiral as in Figure 5.5. Loeb [AL] states that for the
golden triangle, every rotation of 108◦ , which is 3π
5 radians, is accompanied
by a scaling factor of τ . So, we obtain the equation
5θ
r = τ 3π
5
which is a logarithmic spiral where a = 1 and b = 3π log τ (Figure 5.6).
Figure 5.5: Logarithmic spiral Figure 5.6: Spiral with an expan-

proper to the golden triangle sion of τ in 108◦ turn
[RD]
One may observe in a similar way that a spiral where every full turn
(rotation of 360◦ or 2π radians) is accompanied by a scaling factor of τ has
the equation
θ
r = τ 2π
1
which is a logarithmic spiral where a = 1 and b = 2π log τ (Figure 5.7).
Knott [RK] calls this spiral the Phi Spiral.
Figure 5.7: Spiral with an expansion of τ in 360◦ turn
41
Approximations of the golden spiral
By connecting the opposite vertices of the squares in a progression of golden
rectangles (DEF GHIJ . . . in Figure 5.2) with circular arcs one can con-
struct a spiral as in Figure 5.8 which is a very close approximation to the
golden spiral (Figure 5.4). This spiral is not a logarithmic spiral as the angle
α at which a ray cuts the spiral is not constant.
Figure 5.8: Spiral constructed from a sequence of golden rectangles

[RD]
A Fibonacci spiral is created by connecting the opposite vertices of Fi-

bonacci squares as in Figure 5.9. The spiral is not a logarithmic spiral as, for
every 90◦ turn, a Fibonacci spiral does not expand by a constant factor but
by a changing factor related to the ratios of consecutive Fibonacci terms.
However, since the limit of ratios of consecutive Fibonacci terms is τ , the
Fibonacci spiral is a good approximation to the golden spiral.
Figure 5.9: Fibonacci Spiral
42
5.4 The Pentagon
Constructing a Pentagon
The construction of a regular pentagon relies upon the construction of two
line segments in the golden ratio. The following method is based on Ap-
pendix 1 of [RD]:
1. Construct a square ABCD;
2. Bisect AB and label the midpoint E;
3. Use a compass to draw arc 1 as in Figure 5.10 with radius EC and

centre E;
4. Extend the baseline to meet arc 1 and label the intersection F ;
5. Use a compass to draw an arc 2 with radius AB and centre A;
6. Use a compass to draw an arc 3 with radius AB and centre F and

label the intersection of arcs 2 and 3 as G;
7. Use a compass to draw an arc 4 with radius AF and centre G, label

the intersection of arcs 2 and 4 as H, and label the intersection of arcs
3 and 4 as I;
8. Connect points AGF IH to form a regular pentagon.
Figure 5.10: Construction of a pentagon

[RD]
43
5.5 The Pentagram
The diagonals of the pentagon form a pentagram. Vajda [SV] states that
the diagonals and the sides of the pentagon are in the golden ratio.
Proof. Consider regular pentagon ABCDE in Figure 5.11. Note that all
interior angles in a regular pentagon are 3π
5 radians and all interior angles
in a triangle sum to π radians.
Figure 5.11: Pentagon

[SV]
Clearly, ADE ∼
= CAB and Ad = dB. Therefore
3π π 3π
∠AED = ⇒ ∠EAD = ⇒ ∠AdB = .
5 5 5
Hence
∠cAd = ∠EAB − ∠EAc − ∠dAB

= ∠EAB − ∠EAD − ∠CAB
3π π
= −2
5 5
π
= .
5
DAC is an isosceles triangle, so
2π
∠ADC = ∠ACD = .
5
By five-fold symmetry, bCD ∼
= eDC and ∠bCd = ∠cAd. So, ∠bCD = π5
and bCD and eDC are isosceles triangles similar to ADC. Noting similar
triangles,
AC : DC = DC : eC.
44
Letting ABCDE be a unit pentagon
AC : 1 = 1 : (AC − 1)
so AC = τ and eC = τ − 1 = τ1 . Therefore, in general, AC : DC = τ : 1.
However, further analysis shows even more golden ratios in Figure 5.11.
Note that the isosceles triangles mentioned are golden triangles. Therefore,
by five-fold symmetry, it is clear that each diagonal is crossed by two other
diagonals and that these crossing points mark the golden section of the line.
In fact, ADC is a golden triangle with CbD and CeD as its smaller golden
triangles and aDb and aCe as their smaller golden triangles. It is then
obvious that all of the segments in the pentagram are related by the golden
ratio.
Figure 5.12: Incommensurability
By repeating this process for the inner pentagon, we can see that each
coloured line in Figure 5.12 is in the golden ratio with the ones sharing a
vertex with it. By repeating this process ad infinitum we have a geometric
proof that the golden ratio is incommensurable.
45
Chapter 6
Fibonacci Numbers in
Architecture
There are appears to be two kinds of so-called ‘Golden’ architecture to con-

sider when looking at Fibonacci numbers and the golden ratio in architec-
ture. Firstly, there is architecture with an alleged link to Fibonacci numbers
and the golden ratio. Secondly, there is modern architecture that was de-
signed using Fibonacci numbers and the golden ratio. In this chapter, several
claims of ‘Golden’ architecture will be investigated in chronological order of
build, looking at the mathematics behind the claims.
6.1 Ancient Egypt

The Great Pyramid
The golden ratio allegedly appears in the ratio of dimensions of the Great
Pyramid of Giza, which was built around 2500BC. According to Livio [ML],
the lengths of sides of the base of the Great Pyramid vary from 755.43 feet
to 756.08 feet. Livio states that the average of the lengths is 755.79 feet and
the height of the pyramid is 481.4 feet. In Figure 6.2, h represents height,
b is half the base, and a is the slant height of the Great Pyramid. Using
Pythagoras’ theorem, we find that a = 612.05 feet. This gives a ratio of
a 612.05
= = 1.62,
b 377.90
which differs from the golden ratio by approximately 0.1 percent. Note that
an approximation to τ is the best that an architect can achieve since τ is an
irrational number. Therefore the golden ratio does seem to appear in the
ratio of dimensions of the Great Pyramid. The question that comes to mind
is whether this is just a coincidence.
There is no original documentary evidence to support any claims that
the golden ratio was used in any of the Egyptian’s designs. Several texts
46
Figure 6.1: Great Pyramid of Giza Figure 6.2: Pyramid structure
[NT] [TK]
use Herodotus’ statement as supporting historical documentation of the in-

tentions of the designers to claim that the golden ratio is present in the
Great Pyramid by design even though Herodotus lived around 485-425 BC.
According to Markowsky [GM], David Burton, author of one such book,
writes:
Herodotus related in one passage that the Egyptian priests told
him that the dimensions of the Great Pyramid were so chosen
that the area of a square whose side was the height of the great
pyramid equaled the area of a face triangle.
If the passage is true then, assuming Herodotus had reliable primary
sources, Herodotus’ statement may be used to support the claim as the
passage implies that the ratio of the slant height of a face to half the length
of the base is the golden ratio.
Proof. In Figure 6.2, if the area of a square whose side is equal to h is equal
to the area of a triangular face, then h2 = ab. Using Pythagoras’ theorem,
we have a2 = h2 + b2 . So, by substitution, we obtain a2 = ab + b2 . Dividing
through by b2 we get
a 2 a
= + 1.
b b
Let x = ab . We obtain the quadratic equation

x2 − x − 1 = 0,
which we previously discovered has the golden ratio as its only positive root.
Therefore a : b = τ : 1.
Livio and Markowsky [ML, GM] both note this proof and challenge the
claim by looking at translations of Herodotus’s original text. Livio [ML]
states that the translation reads as follows:
It is a square, eight hundred feet each way, and the height the
same.
47
This passage does not imply that the ratio of the slant height of a face to half
the length of the base is the golden ratio. Furthermore, the Great Pyramid is
nowhere near 800 feet high and the side 2b is significantly less than 800 feet.
Therefore, Herodotus’ statement cannot be used as supporting historical
documentation of the intentions of the designers. Hence, I conclude that
there is no evidence to suggest that the golden ratio is present in the Great
Pyramid by design.
There is no original documentary evidence that the Egyptians knew
about the golden ratio. However, one may still ask whether the Egyptians
could have known about the golden ratio and constructed the Pyramid using
it. The Egyptians could have constructed the golden ratio using the follow-
ing basic method using the basic tools they had but there is no evidence
that they knew about this method.
Constructing the Golden section
Figure 6.3: Constructing the golden section

[RK]
One may construct the golden section as in Figure 6.3 in the following
manner using only a marker and a compass or some string:
1. Draw a line of length 12 AB at right angles to AB vertically from B to
a new point T;
2. Draw a line from A to T;
3. Draw an arc with centre T from B to AT and mark the intersection

V;
4. Draw an arc with centre A from V to AB and mark the intersection

G.
The point G divides the original line AB into the golden section, where the
ratio of AB to AG is the golden ratio.
In the case of the pyramid, it is the ratio of the slant height and half
the base that is in the golden ratio so they would have had to combine the
method above with Pythagoras’ theorem to work out how high to build the
48
pyramid or with trigonometry to work out the angle at which to slant to
give a right-angled triangle. However, the Egyptians did not know about
Pythagoras’ theorem or trigonometry. The Egyptians may have been able
to construct the golden ratio with this method but it does not necessarily
follow that they were therefore able to build the Great Pyramid with this
method.
With this method the Egyptians may have been able to construct the
golden section but this does not mean that they knew the value of τ . To
determine whether they could have known the value of τ , one has to look
at Egyptian mathematics.
Egyptian Fractions
Most of what we know about Egyptian mathematics is taken from the Rhind
Papyrus. The papyrus tells us that the Egyptians used integers and unit
fractions and were familiar with addition, subtraction, and geometric and
arithmetic progression.
The Egyptians are likely to only have discovered the value of τ if they
had discovered the limit of the sequence of ratios of consecutive Fibonacci
numbers, in which case they would have to know about the Fibonacci num-
bers. Rossi and Tout [RT] note that there is no evidence that the Egyptians
knew about the Fibonacci numbers but conclude that, considering how fa-
miliar the ancient Egyptian scribes were with numerical series, it is not
inconceivable for the Egyptians to have discovered the Fibonacci series. As-
suming they knew about the Fibonacci numbers, one then wonders whether
they could have, firstly, found the ratios of consecutive numbers and, sec-
ondly, discovered the limit τ . To attempt to answer this, one has to look at
Egyptian fractions.
The Egyptians appear to have used a number system based on unit
fractions (fractions with one in the numerator). The only exception was 23 .
An Egyptian fraction is a fraction written as a sum of distinct unit fractions.
Example 6.1.1. Example from the Rhind Papyrus [FG]:

2 1 1 1 1
= + + + .
61 40 244 488 610
49
The first few ratios of consecutive Fibonacci numbers can be expressed
using Egyptian fractions as follows:
1 1
=
2 2
2 1 1
= +
3 2 6
3 1 1
= +
5 2 10
5 1 1 1
= + +
8 2 10 40
8 1 1 1
= + +
13 2 10 65
13 1 1 1 1
= + + +
21 2 10 65 273
Rossi and Tout [RT] noted the following pattern. Starting with 12 , by
adding a unit fraction whose denominator is a product of discontinuous pairs
of terms we obtain 21 , 35 , 13
8
, . . . , and the intermediate values can be calculated
by adding to the previous ratio a unit fraction whose denominator is given
by the multiplication of the two terms of the ratio. This can be written in
mathematical terms as follows:
Theorem 6.1.1. The ratios of consecutive Fibonacci numbers can be ex-

pressed as:
 n
2

X 1

 if n is even
F F

Fn 
i=1 2i−1 2i+1
= n−1
Fn+1  2
 X 1 1
+ if n is odd



 F2i−1 F2i+1 Fn Fn+1
i=1
where n > 1.
Proof. Firstly, consider when n is even. Let n = 2k; k ∈ Z+ . Using

Cassini’s identity,
2
F2k+1 F2k−1 − F2k = (−1)2k
F2k−1 F2k (−1)2k
⇒ − =
F2k F2k+1 F2k F2k+1
F2k F2k−1 (−1)2k
⇒ = − .
F2k+1 F2k F2k F2k+1
Hence
F2k F2k−1 1
= − . (6.1)
F2k+1 F2k F2k F2k+1
50
Now consider when n is odd. Let n = 2k + 1, k ∈ Z+ . Similarly, by
using Catalan’s identity, we find
F2k+1 F2k 1
= + . (6.2)
F2k+2 F2k+1 F2k+1 F2k+2
Assuming Theorem 6.1.1 is true for n = 2k,
k
F2k+1 X 1 1
= + . (6.3)
F2k+2 F2i−1 F2i+1 F2k+1 F2k+2
i=1
Therefore if the statement is true for n is even then it is true for n is odd.
Consider the case where n = 2k + 2. Using (6.1) and (6.2) We find:
F2k+2 F2k+1 1
= −
F2k+3 F2k+2 F2k+2 F2k+3
F2k 1 1
= + −
F2k+1 F2k+1 F2k+2 F2k+2 F2k+3
F2k F2k+3 − F2k+1
= +
F2k+1 F2k+1 F2k+2 F2k+3
F2k 1
= + by (1.1).
F2k+1 F2k+1 F2k+3
Assuming Theorem 6.1.1 is true for n = 2k,
k
F2k+2 X 1 1
= + .
F2k+3 F2i−1 F2i+1 F2k+1 F2k+3
i=1
Hence
k+1
F2(k+1) X 1
= .
F2(k+1)+1 F2i−1 F2i+1
i=1
The statement is true for n = 2 as
F2 1 1
= = .
F3 2 F1 F3
So, by induction, the statement is true for n is even. Therefore, by (6.3),
the statement is true for all integers n > 1.
By Theorem 6.1.1, all the ratios of consecutive Fibonacci numbers can
be expressed in Egyptian fractions. However, even if the Egyptians did
discover the pattern, it is not obvious from this pattern that the sequence
of ratios will converge. There is also no evidence that the Egyptians knew
about limits or irrational numbers. So, it is unlikely that they would have
found the limit τ . Therefore, I conclude it is unlikely that the Egyptians
knew about the value of τ .
I do not believe that the Egyptians knew about the golden ratio or used
it intentionally in their designs. I agree with G. S. Toomer’s comment [FG]
that:
51
The truth is that Egyptian mathematics remained at much too
low a level to be able to contribute anything of value. The sheer
difficulties of calculation with such a crude numerical system and
primitive methods effectively prevented any advance or interest
in developing science for its own sake.
6.2 Ancient Greece

The Parthenon
It is said that the golden ratio was used in the building of the Parthenon,
built at Athens in the 5th century BC. Several texts claim that the original
dimensions of the Parthenon fitted almost precisely into a golden rectangle.
To support this claim a figure similar to Figure 6.5 is often included. Huntley
[HH] writes:
While its triangular pediment was still intact, its dimensions

could be fitted almost exactly into a Golden Rectangle,. . . . It
stands therefore as another example of the aesthetic value of this
particular shape.
Markowsky [GM] points out that parts of the Parthenon actually fall outside
the golden rectangle.
Figure 6.4: The Parthenon Figure 6.5: Parthenon claims of τ

[RK]
Two main weaknesses, as noted by Livio [ML], of claims about the pres-
ence of the golden ratio in architecture on the basis of dimensions alone
are:
1. They may involve number juggling;
2. They may overlook inaccuracies in measurements.
52
These weaknesses are apparent when investigating the claim that many
dimensions of the Parthenon are related to the golden ratio as in Figure 6.5.
Markowsky [GM] comments:
The dimensions of the Parthenon vary from source to source

probably because different authors are measuring between dif-
ferent points. With so many numbers available a golden ratio
enthusiast could choose whatever numbers gave the best result.
He goes on to give an example of quoted measurements which give ratios far

from the golden ratio. One also has to note that the triangular pediment is
not intact and the base is slightly curved so the measures are all approximate,
which leaves them open to inaccuracies and number juggling.
Huntley [HH] comments that “the proportions of the well-known Parthenon
bear witness to the influence exerted by the golden rectangle on Greek ar-
chitecture”. However, there is no original documentary evidence that the
ratio was used by the Greeks in Art or Architecture and we have noted that
dimensions alone are not sufficient evidence. Therefore, I do not agree with
Huntley.
There is not enough evidence in the dimensions to prove or disprove the
claim previously mentioned. However, one may still look at the likeliness of
truth in the claim. One may question if the Greeks knew about the golden
ratio and if they could, or would, have used it in their architecture.
Euclid
We know that the Greeks knew about the Golden ratio around 300 BC be-
cause it first appeared in Euclid’s Elements around that time. The following
definitions and propositions are taken from [FG]. In Book V I, Euclid gives
the following definition.
Definition 6.2.1. 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 calls the golden ratio the extreme and mean ratio. In Book V I,
Euclid also proposes a method of constructing the golden ratio.
Proposition 6.2.1 (Proposition 30). To cut a given finite straight line in

extreme and mean ratio
Euclid begins the proposition by constructing a figure which he also used

in Proposition 11, Book II.
Proposition 6.2.2 (Proposition 11). To cut a given straight line so that

the rectangle contained by the whole and one of the segments is equal to the
square on the remaining segment.
53
Figure 6.6: Construction of Proposition 11
[FG]
Euclid’s proof of Proposition 11 can be found in [FG].

In Proposition 30, Euclid proves Proposition 11 slightly differently to his
original proof. He uses the result that the square AG is equal in area to the
rectangle BK in Figure 6.6 to prove that this construction cuts the line AB
in the golden ratio. Euclid reasons that since AG and BK are equal in area
and equiangular, then the sides about the equal angles in these shapes are
reciprocally proportional. Hence KH AH
HG = HB . As KH = AB and HG = AH
then
AB AH
= , where AB > AH > HB.
AH HB
Therefore, the straight line AB has been cut in the golden ratio at H.
We have seen that Euclid knew about the golden ratio and knew a
method to construct it. The Greeks may have had the knowledge to use
either Euclid’s method or the method that the Egyptians may have used
to construct the golden ratio, so one may conclude that it is possible that
the Greeks could have used the golden ratio in their architectural designs.
However, Euclid’s coverage of the topic is brief and does not in any way
imply either that the golden ratio is of any significant importance or that it
should have an application in architecture.
The Parthenon was built before Euclid’s time and although Euclid’s
Elements collected existing mathematical knowledge there is no evidence
that this particular knowledge was known about or considered anything
more than a mathematical definition and proposition when the Parthenon
was built. However, as they had the mathematical knowledge to deduce the
method of dividing a line using a compass and a string, even if they did
54
not about Euclid’s method in the 5th century BC it is still possible that
the Greeks may have had the knowledge to construct the Parthenon with
dimensions in the golden ratio. It is difficult to conclude whether or not the
Greeks would have constructed the Parthenon using the ratio.
6.3 Medieval Islamic Architecture

Girih Tiling
In February 2007, the journal Science published an article [PL] claiming
that by AD 1200 Islamic girih line patterns were reconceived as decorated
tessellations using a set of five equilateral polygons, which the authors of
the article call Girih tiles.
Figure 6.7: Complete set of girih tiles

[PL]
The tiles are a decagon, a pentagon, a hexagon, a bowtie, and a rhombus

(see Figure 6.7). Every edge of each polygon has the same length and two
girih lines intersect the midpoint of every edge at 72◦ and 108◦ angles. Girih
lines are lines which decorate the tiles. The decoration may differ slightly
from pattern to pattern and not all the tiles are necessarily used in each
pattern. In most patterns, the girih and decoration are visible but the
boundaries of the tiles are not usually shown.
Most girih tilings in Islamic architecture were periodic. There are no
known examples of girth tilings which when extended would be non-periodic
over the entire plane. However, the article claims that a non-periodic girih
tiling could be possible. It is this non-periodic girih tiling that is of interest
to us. The article [PL] states that
. . . [an] innovation arising from the application of girih tiles was

the use of self-similarity transformation (the subdivision of large
girih tiles into smaller ones) to create overlapping patterns at
55
two different length scales, in which each pattern is generated by
the same girih tile shapes.
It goes on to say that
a subdivision rule, combined with decagonal symmetry, is suffi-

cient to construct perfect quasi-crystalline tilings – patterns with
infinite perfect quasi-periodic translational order and crystallo-
graphically forbidden rotational symmetries, such as pentagonal
or decagonal. . . .
Quasi-periodic order means that tile shapes repeat with incommensurate

frequencies. Quasi-periodic tiling may exhibit local periodicity under some
transformations but the entire tiling is non-periodic.
Penrose Tiling
Penrose tiling is an example of quasi-crystalline tiling named after Roger
Penrose, who investigated the topic in the 1970s. Penrose tiles are an ape-
riodic set of tiles which give only non-periodic tilings. One type of Penrose
tiling is the Rhombus tiling made up of oblate and prolate rhombus tiles
(Figure 6.8).
Figure 6.8: Rhombus tiling

[RD]
A second type of Penrose tiling is the Kite and Dart tiling (Figure 6.9).
Figure 6.9: Kite and Dart tiling

[RD]
56
Both the oblate rhombus and the dart can be divided into two golden
gnomons (obtuse isosceles triangles with base to side ratio of τ : 1). Both
the prolate rhombus and the kite can be divided into two golden triangles
(isosceles triangles with side to base ratio of τ : 1). The ratio of the numbers
of the two different tile shapes in each type of tiling mentioned tends to the
golden ratio as N → ∞, where N is the total number of tiles. Hence, both
tilings mentioned are intimately connected to the golden ratio.
Penrose tilings can be constructed by matching rules, where only certain
edges can join together, or self-similar subdivisions. Penrose tilings can be
rescaled while still maintaining the correct ratio of tile shapes to produce
a Penrose tiling. The tilings can be repeatedly rescaled indefinitely. This
form of subdivision follows from the fact that the tile shapes are composed of
golden triangles and gnomons. Recall from Chapter 5 that golden triangles
and gnomons can be dissected into smaller triangles that are golden gnomons
and golden triangles.
The authors of the article [PL] discovered a possible link between Kite
and Dart Penrose tiling and some girih tiling in medieval Islamic architec-
ture. This link interests us because Penrose tiling is closely related to the
golden ratio. Note that the potential relationship between girih tiling and
the golden ratio is due to the properties of the shapes chosen for tiling and
that the Islamic architects are unlikely to have known about this indirect
relationship.
Darb-i-Imam Shrine
The most relevant architectural example in the article [PL] is the Darb-i
Imam shrine in Isfahan in Iran, built in 1453. The tiling uses the decagon,
hexagon, and bowtie tile shapes. Self-similar subdivision constructs an ar-
bitrarily large Darb-i Imam pattern. The authors claim that both the large
and small girih tile patterns on the Darb-i Imam can be mapped completely
into Penrose tiling (figure 6.11). Since Penrose tilings are closely related to
the golden ratio this implies that the Drab-i Imam patterns are related to
the golden ratio. Also, the ratio of hexagons to bowties tends to the golden
ratio as N → ∞, where N is the number of tiles. Hence, the pattern is
intimately connected to the golden ratio.
57
Figure 6.10: Spandrel from the Darb-i-Imam shrine
[PL]
Figure 6.11: Tile mappings

[PL]
58
The Darb-i Imam pattern shows us that the Islamic architects had all the
elements needed to construct perfect quasi-crystalline patterns. However,
there are problems with the Darb-i Imam pattern which shows that they
did not have a complete understanding of the elements when they made the
pattern. The problems are:
1. There are 11 mismatches out of 3700 Penrose tiles;
2. There is no evidence that they developed the matching rule method;
3. A small arrangement of large tiles that does not appear in the subdi-
vided pattern was used to start construction, instead of a single girih
tile, and so the tiling is not strictly self-similar.
The mismatches are all of the form shown in Figure 6.12 which can be
easily corrected by rearranging a few tiles. This mistake would not have been
made if they had combined the matching rule and subdivision methods.
Figure 6.12: Defect and correction

[PL]
Further research needs to be done to see whether any perfect quasi-

crystalline tilings exist, whether there are more patterns with a strong link
with Penrose tilings and the golden ratio, and whether Penrose tiling was,
in fact, discovered in the 13th century.
6.4 Le Corbusier
Charles-Edouard Jeanneret-Gris (1887-1965) was a Swiss-born architect. He
adopted the name Le Corbusier in the early 1920s. He introduced a new
system of proportioning called the Modulor which was based on human
measurements, Fibonacci numbers, and the golden ratio.
The perfect human body is considered in some texts to be associated to
the golden ratio. In Figure 6.13,
AE CE
≈τ ≈
CE AC
59
so the navel divides the height into the golden section. According to Koshy,
Figure 6.13 is based on model male proportions.
Figure 6.13: Model male

[TK]
Le Modulor
Le Corbusier used this supposed relationship between human measurements
and the golden ratio to develop two series of measurements based on a six-
foot (1.83m) man. The séries rouge
4, 6, 10, 16, 27, 43, 70, 113, 183, 296,. . .
is based on the height of the navel (1.13m), and the séries bleue
13, 20, 33, 53, 86, 140, 226, 366, 592,. . .
is based on the height of the tip of the upraised fingers (2.26m). The red
and blue series were created from 113 and 226 respectively by repeatedly
dividing and multiplying by the golden ratio and rounding to integers in an
attempt to make the series satisfy the generalised Fibonacci equation.
Example 6.4.1. Taking the height of the navel as 113cm and repeatedly
dividing by the golden ratio gives
113
= 69.8378407 . . . ≈ 70,
τ
113
τ
= 43.1621592 . . . ≈ 43,
τ
113
τ
τ
= 26.6756814 . . . ≈ 27.
τ
60
In Figure 6.14, Le Corbusier shows how consecutive séries rouge numbers
27, 43, 70, 113, and 183, and consecutive séries bleue numbers 86, 140, and
226, are supposedly connected to the human stature.
Figure 6.14: Le Modulor

[KF]
The Modulor system was based on human proportions and the golden
ratio because Le Corbusier wanted to create a proportion system that was
related to natural creation. According to Livio [ML], Le Corbusier proposed
that the Modulor could be used to give harmonious proportions to every-
thing and provide the model for standardisation. The Modulor system was
Figure 6.15: Design for South-west façade of Governor’s Palace

[KF]
put into practice in many of Le Corbusiers architectural designs and projects.

For example, Le Corbusier designed the urban layout of Chandigarh in India
using the Modulor system. According to Livio [ML], Le Corbusier wrote:
In the general section of the building which involves providing
shelter from the sun for the offices and courts, the Modulor will
61
bring textural unity in all places. In the design of the frontages,
the Modulor (texturique) will apply its red and blue series within
the spaces already furnished by the frames.
Le Corbusier designed The Governor’s Palace (Figure 6.15) in 1953 for the
Chandigarh project. According to Frampton [KF], Le Corbusier designed
the building using the Modulor and then “drastically reduced [it] in size by
the application of different Modulor dimensions in the following year when
it was found to be grossly overblown”.
6.5 Inspired by Nature

Logarithmic spirals, which we met previously in Chapter 5, are common in
nature. These natural spirals have inspired many artists and architects. The
following two designs have been designed using logarithmic spirals, Fibonacci
numbers and the golden ratio.
Spiral Café
The Spiral Café, built in 2004 at the Bullring in Birmingham, was designed
by Marks Barfield Architects. On their website [MB], Marks Barfield Ar-
Figure 6.16: Spiral Café

[MB]
chitects say:
The building form is inspired by the 13th century mathemati-

cian Leonardo Fibonacci who identified the natural patterns of
growth found throughout the universe, from the shapes of sea
shells and pine cones to fractal patterns within galaxies. Illus-
trated graphically, the sequence forms a graceful spiral. The
shape of the Café was derived from extruding this golden spiral
62
along a tilting axis to form a simple curved enclosure. Like a
shell, the exterior of the café is rough, rugged and durable pati-
nated copper, whereas the inside is smooth and precious and lit
by pearl-like glass spheres.
This passage implies that building was designed using the Fibonacci
spiral as a close approximation to the golden spiral proper to the golden
rectangle, which is a logarithmic spiral. The building was made to look like
a shell as many creatures create shells which are logarithmic spirals. One
of particular interest to us is the chambered nautilus sea shell. According
to Knott [RK], the shell of the Nautilus pompilius (Figure 6.17) grows by a
factor of the golden ratio in one turn.
Figure 6.17: Radiograph of Nautilus pompilius shell

[HH]
The Core
The Core, built in 2005 at Eden Project in Cornwall, was designed by
Grimshaw Architects. On their website [EP], Eden Project Ltd say:
An exhibit in its own right, the Core takes its inspiration from the
tree, incorporating a central trunk and canopy roof that shades
the ground and harvests the sun. The design is based on the Fi-
bonacci code, Nature’s fundamental growth blueprint, in which
opposing spirals follow the sequence 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21,
34... where every number is the sum of the previous two.
The passage and pictures imply that the building was designed using
a pattern similar to the seed arrangement in a sunflower. The seeds in
63
Figure 6.18: Eden Project Figure 6.19: Core model
[EP] [FT]
the head of a sunflower form two sets of oppositely directed logarithmic

spirals as in Figure 6.20. The number of spirals are, astonishingly, consec-
utive Fibonacci numbers: generally 55 clockwise and 34 counterclockwise.
Comparable arrangements occur in pineapples, pinecones, cauliflowers, and
coneflowers (Figure 6.21).
Figure 6.20: Double spiral pattern Figure 6.21: Coneflower

[HH] [RK]
We saw in Chapter 4 that the ratios of consecutive Fibonacci numbers are

the convergents of the golden ratio. Hence, many believe this phenomenon
is related to the golden ratio. As discussed previously, the golden ratio
is an irrational number which may be considered the most irrational as it
is the furthest away from a rational number approximation. It has been
suggested that this allows for an optimal packing of seeds as seeds separated
in this way fall into spirals and not regular lines. Knott [RK] explains these
arrangements in more detail and looks at the relationship between the golden
ratio and the leaf arrangement in plants, called phyllotaxis.
64
Chapter 7
Conclusion
The Fibonacci numbers form a fascinating sequence which is intimately

linked to a wide range of material. As we have seen, there are many prop-
erties associated with the Fibonacci sequence, and related sequences, and
many theorems and results involving these properties, which surprisingly
cover topics such as divisibility, the golden ratio, and continued fractions.
There are still many more interesting properties, theorems and results which
I have not covered here. For example, one may consider the sequence under
various moduli.
We have looked at two-dimensional geometry related to the golden ratio
and how some of this geometry is potentially linked to architecture. The
golden ratio may have appeared in architecture before the 20th century but
this is unlikely to have been intentional and cannot be proved by dimen-
sions alone. In the 20th century, architects have been inspired by, and have
designed using, the Fibonacci numbers and the golden ratio.
There are several other topics to explore, which I have not covered here,
that are linked to the golden ratio. Three-dimensional geometry and quasi-
crystallography are possible extensions of the concepts discussed in Chapters
5 and 6. I have only briefly touched upon the links to nature and this topic
is open to further exploration. Claims have also been made suggesting that
the golden ratio has been used in art and music and that it is the most
aesthetically pleasing ratio. However, there is little evidence to suggest that
this is the case.
Fibonacci numbers and the golden ratio have interested mathematicians
for centuries. In doing this project, I have discovered for myself the great
mathematical significance and interest of the sequence and have found this
broad topic very intriguing.
65
Appendix A
The First 50 Fibonacci and

Lucas Numbers
n Fn Ln n Fn Ln
0 0 2 25 75025 167761
1 1 1 26 121393 271443
2 1 3 27 196418 439204
3 2 4 28 317811 710647
4 3 7 29 514229 1149851
5 5 11 30 832040 1860498
6 8 18 31 1346269 3010349
7 13 29 32 2178309 4870847
8 21 47 33 3524578 7881196
9 34 76 34 5702887 12752043
10 55 123 35 9227465 20633239
11 89 199 36 14930352 33385282
12 144 322 37 24157817 54018521
13 233 521 38 39088169 87403803
14 377 843 39 63245986 141422324
15 610 1364 40 102334155 228826127
16 987 2207 41 165580141 370248451
17 1597 3571 42 267914296 599074578
18 2584 5778 43 433494437 969323029
19 4181 9349 44 701408733 1568397607
20 6765 15127 45 1134903170 2537720636
21 10946 24476 46 1836311903 4106118243
22 17711 39603 47 2971215073 6643838879
23 28657 64079 48 4807526976 10749957122
24 46368 103682 49 7778742049 17393796001
66
Bibliography
[AL] A L Loeb, Concepts and Images: Visual Mathematics, Birkhäuser,

1993
(ISBN 081763620X).
[CR] J J O’Connor and E F Robertson, Leonardo Pisano Fibonacci,

1998
c
(http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Fibonacci.html).
[DB] D M Burton, Elementary Number Theory, Wm. C. Brown, 1988

c
(ISBN 069706896X).
[DK] D E Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming, Volume 2: Seminu-

merical Algorithms (2nd Edition), Addison-Wesley, 1981
c
(ISBN 0201038226).
[EP] Eden Project Ltd, The Core, 2007

c
(http://www.edenproject.com/horticulture/1118.html).
[EW] E W Weisstein, Pell Equation, MathWorld–A Wolfram Web Resource

(http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PellEquation.html).
[FG] J Fauvel and J Gray, The History of Mathematics: A Reader,

Macmillan Press Ltd, 1988
(ISBN 0333427912).
[FS] F E Su, et al., Fibonacci GCD’s, please., Mudd Math Fun Facts
(http://www.math.hmc.edu/funfacts).
[FT] M Freiberger and R Thomas,

Bridges: mathematical connections in art and music, Millennium
Mathematics Project, University of Cambridge, 1997-2004
c
(http://plus.maths.org/latestnews/may-aug06/bridges/).
[GM] G Markowsky, Misconceptions about the Golden Ratio, The College

Mathematics Journal, Vol. 23, No. 1. (Jan., 1992), pp. 2-19
(http://www.jstor.org/).
67
[HH] H E Huntley, The Divine Proportion: a Study in Mathematical
Beauty, Dover Publications, Inc., 1970
c
(ISBN 0486222543).
[KF] K Frampton, Le Corbusier, Thames & Hudson, 2001
c
(ISBN 0500203415).
[MB] Marks Barfield Architects, Spiral Café, 2005
c
(http://www.marksbarfield.com/project.php?projectid=11).
[ML] M Livio,
The Golden Ratio : The Story of Phi, the Extraordinary Number of
Nature, Art and Beauty, Review, 2002
c
(ISBN 0747249881).
[NT] Nina Aldin Thune, Kheops pyramid, 2005
c
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kheops-Pyramid.jpg).
[PL] P J Lu, et al., Decagonal and quasi-crystalline tilings in medieval
Islamic architecture, Science 315, 1106 (2007)
(http://www.sciencemag.org/).
[RD] R A Dunlap, The Golden Ratio and Fibonacci Numbers,
World Scientific, 1997
c
(ISBN 9810232640).
[RJ] R C Johnson, Matrix methods for Fibonacci and related sequences,
2007
(http://www.dur.ac.uk/bob.johnson/fibonacci/).
[RK] R Knott, Fibonacci Numbers and the Golden Section, 1996-2008
c
(http://www.mcs.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fib.html).
[RT] C Rossi and C A Tout,
Were the Fibonacci Series and the Golden Section Known in Ancient
Egypt?, Historia Mathematica, Volume 29, Issue 2, 2002
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/).
[SV] S Vajda,
Fibonacci and Lucas Numbers, and the Golden Section: Theory
and Applications, Ellis Horwood Ltd, 1989
(ISBN 0745807151).
[TK] T Koshy, Fibonacci and Lucas Numbers with Applications,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2001
c
(ISBN 0471399698).
Prepared in LATEX 2ε by EWSC
68

Fibonacci

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fibonacci

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fibonacci Numbers and the Golden Ratio

April 19, 2008

The Fibonacci numbers have some interesting properties and applications.

2 Basic Properties of Fibonacci Numbers 10

4 The Golden Ratio and Continued Fractions 21

A The First 50 Fibonacci and Lucas Numbers 66

1.1 Leonardo of Pisa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2.1 Paradox gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

4.1 Graph of limit τ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

5.1 Construction of a golden rectangle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

6.1 Great Pyramid of Giza . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

1.1 Leonardo Pisano Fibonacci

Figure 1.1: Leonardo of Pisa

1.2 The Fibonacci and Lucas Sequences

Table 1.1: Growth of Rabbit Colony [DB]

By solving this rabbit problem, Fibonacci calculated 13 consecutive

Tn = Tn−1 + An−1 , (n ≥ 1).

As young pairs become adult pairs after a month, it is obvious that An =

Gn+1 = Gn + Gn−1 (1.3)

where G0 = a and G1 = b, for any a, b ∈ Z, and n ≥ 1. The first two values,

1.3 Binet’s Formula

Basic Properties of Fibonacci

2.1 Negation Formula

F−n = (−1)n+1 Fn , n ≥ 1. (2.1)

Proof. F−1 = F1 − F0 = 1 = (−1)2 F1 and F−2 = F0 − F−1 = −1 = (−1)3 F2

F−k+1 − F−k = (−1)k (Fk−1 + Fk ).

Using rule (1.1),

2.2 Cassini’s Identity

When n is even we get a gap, as in Figure 2.1, whereas when n is odd

Figure 2.2: Paradox overlap

2.3 Catalan’s Identity

Proof. Using Binet’s formula,

Property (2.6) can be proved by induction as follows:

Proof. 5F0 = 0 = −1 + 1 = L−1 + L1 and 5F1 = 5 = 2 + 3 = L0 + L2 are

5Fk + 5Fk−1 = Lk−1 + Lk+1 + Lk−2 + Lk .

Using rules (1.1) and (1.2),

5Fk+1 = (Lk−1 + Lk−2 ) + (Lk+1 + Lk ) = Lk + Lk+2 .

2.5 Matrix Theory

Considering that the Fibonacci numbers are based on a recurrence relation,

3.1 Divisibility Lemmas

Gn+k = Fk−1 Gn + Fk Gn+1

We know this is true from the definition of a generalised Fibonacci sequence

Lemma 3.1.3. Fn and Fn+1 are relatively prime:

Proof. Consider u = Fn+1 , v = Fn . Using the Euclidean Algorithm (3.6) to

Corollary 3.3.1. If (m, n) = 1, 2 or 5, then Fmn is divisible by Fm Fn .

Proof. If (m, n) = 1 or (m, n) = 2 then (Fm , Fn ) = 1 by Theorem 3.2.1.

Conversely, it can be proved that

Corollary 3.3.2. If Fmn is divisible by Fm Fn , then (m, n) = 1, 2 or 5.

A proof can be found in [SV].

Corollary 3.4.1. If m is not a prime then Fm is not a prime unless m = 4.

Proof. Let m be divisible by v, and let v be divisible by w. Then, by Lemma

However, the converse is not always true.

Theorem 3.4.1 (Carmichael’s Theorem). Fn has at least one prime factor

1. F1 = 1, which has no prime factors;

2. F2 = 1, which has no prime factors;

3. F6 = 8, which only has a prime factor of 2 (which is F3 ); and

The Golden Ratio and

4.1 Limit of Consecutive Fibonacci Numbers

One may observe that if the ratio of consecutive Fibonacci numbers

This observation is related to Cassini’s identity (2.3). It follows from the

Figure 4.2: Twist of Cassini’s identity

identity that, for n > 1,

which converges quickly to zero, sign oscillating, as n tends to infinity.