What I don't understand is why you keep posting a Star of David.

I thought we were done trolling howler?

You can get a star of david out of a tetrahedron and its dual rotated into the correct point of view, but what it means to howler? Who knows. Maybe he's jewish?

god.

Hrm. This claim doesn't make sense: "all life exists infinitely" What does this mean exactly? Everything lives forever, or there is an infinite amount of life in the universe, or somethin else? Nevermind the fact that there's no logical link between the amount of irrational numbers and amount of life in the world, let's sort out the claim first.
All approximations, for one thing. Second, it's not like every living organism in the world grows that way. Third, why is this geometry sacred? Does someone worship it?
How is this relevant? There are an infinite amount of numbers between 0 and 1, we know this. Or between any 2 numbers, for that matter. Are you proposing that there's some infinite-mass black-hole in space whose structure is comprised of the golden ratio?

Well, that's quite a claim. Little bit early to say, don't you think?
Aside from that, Howler's point was that if atoms are composed of something, then whatever composes the atoms are composed by something smaller and smaller, on and on and on into infinity. What he doesn't realize, is that it doesn't matter, because the edge of a leaf or branch or whatever else he's talking about will be the boundary of the finitely-sized atoms which make it up, and all the quarks and gluons and whatever else are within the boundary of the atom, so don't matter when it comes to the length of the boundary. Since it's the atoms on the boundary, we're still dealing with finite sizes and therefore any ratio between some number of these atoms will only be an approximation of an irrational ratio like the golden ratio, since an irrational number cannot be represented as a fraction of two integers.

I would also like to point out the fact that the opening picture does not have any tetrahedrons in it, just equilateral triangles. I don't think anyone said this yet.

Awesome art Howler, you are entirely right. Don't let those who don't understand get you down.

They'll say, "I don't believe, I'm freeee!"

In reality they're not taking the time to understand it and will never have what you have until they do. What you have is a creative notion, jest and attitude can NEVER make up for that!

Well done! You are being you, and others around you are freaking OUT! This is what always happens!

Crazy? Sure, but only because your mind is limited.

To be blunt, your points still don't make sense.

The smallest boundary of a leaf or crystal or whatever will be the edge of the atoms that comprise it, not the particles which atoms are made of. To be even more technical, the edge of the leaf or coral or whatever doesn't even exist in the modern understanding of the electron cloud, since the electron field extends theoretically forever. The only way for a leaf to be in a perfect fractal would be if somehow it was miraculously frozen completely in space and time such that the atoms within it remained perfectly still, and force was applied such that the distances between the atoms was perfect. As you've noted, there are infinitely many numbers between any two other numbers, so lets find the probability of a given perfect fractal (lets take the golden ratio for example), 1.61803399. So, we have two atoms on the boundary of our leaf or whatever, and they can naturally be between 1 and 2 atomic units apart. So, the probability of an event occuring is the number of events in our case, which in this case happens to be 1 since we are looking for an exact value, divided by the number of possible events in the sample space, and there are infinitely many events in our sample space, since there are infinitely many lengths between 1 and 2 atomic units. Therefore, P(golden ratio) = 1/infinity = 0.

I'll sum up Howler's argument, and why it is impossible to prove him wrong (in his own mind).

I brush aside your argument because I know more than you do. Your mind is simply to shallow to comprehend what I'm saying. I won't bother with a real, logical rebuttal because you don't enough. Rather, I'll resort to flowery language and smug superiority.

You can't convince him other wise because he has abandoned reason. He'll never seriously contemplate anything that differs from his point of view.

Fractals don't have to be "frozen", in fact that's not how they work at all.

Adding plus signs isn't creative.