Can you talk more about stipulation. Is that basically the axiological equivalent of “it is because I say it is” and you have to agree if you want to play?
You can stipulate whichever two numbers you like to start, but anything that doesn’t get you to two and three won’t begin the specific sequence that we name after Fibonacci (it’s worth mentioning that Fibonacci himself started with one and two, not zero and one). According to the linked discussion, apparently interesting things happen when you choose numbers other than zero and one, so it’s not like you absolutely have to choose those two numbers as a starting point or anything.
That’s beyond my ability to authoritatively answer. You’d have to check out the linked thread above or ask a mathematician. I’m interested to hear the answer if anyone perusing the comments can speak to it.
Can you talk more about stipulation. Is that basically the axiological equivalent of “it is because I say it is” and you have to agree if you want to play?
You can stipulate whichever two numbers you like to start, but anything that doesn’t get you to two and three won’t begin the specific sequence that we name after Fibonacci (it’s worth mentioning that Fibonacci himself started with one and two, not zero and one). According to the linked discussion, apparently interesting things happen when you choose numbers other than zero and one, so it’s not like you absolutely have to choose those two numbers as a starting point or anything.
Does using non 1 or 0 starts fundamentally alter the proportions/ratios or whatver, like the overall shapes
That’s beyond my ability to authoritatively answer. You’d have to check out the linked thread above or ask a mathematician. I’m interested to hear the answer if anyone perusing the comments can speak to it.
I wonder too if you use a negative