The document suggests generating ideas following the Fibonacci consequence of rabbits. If we treat ideas as living bodies then we may apply the simple rules of Fibonacci sequence to give ideas time to mature first and then to give birth of fresh ideas.

1. Birth of Ideas and Birth of Rabbits
Ali Anani, PhD
The Fibonacci sequence of rabbits inspired me with the thought that ideas may be
viewed as rabbits in their generation and growth. If so, will ideas have a Golden
Ratio? Is it best to generate ideas following the Fibonacci consequence?
The Fibonacci Consequence of Rabbits?
we start with a single New pair of rabbits in the field. Call this pair N for "new".
Month 0:
N
The following month, the M becomes "MN" since they have produced a new pair
(and the original pair also survives).
Month 0: 1: 2:
N M M
N

2. The M of month 2 becomes MN again and the N of month 2 has become M, so
month 3 is: "MNM"
Month 0: 1: 2: 3:
N - M - M - M
N
N - M
The next month it is "MNMMN".
The general rule is
replacing every M in one month by MN in the next and similarly replace every N by M.
Hence MNM goes to MN M MN .
See: http://www.maths.surrey.ac.uk/hosted-sites/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibrab.html
You may notice that we end up with number of rabbit pairs following the sequence:
0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 34 55 89
That is to say each number is the sum of the preceding two numbers. The next
figure shows the sequence up to Fibonacci Number 5.
You may also notice that by dividing each number by the subsequent one we end
roughly with 0.62 such as 34/59 = 0.62. This is the Golden Ratio.

3. The Rabbit-Like Ideas Generation
Will it then be best to generate ideas in emulation of rabbit sequence? This way we
have a self-organizing methodology of producing ideas and all the benefits of having
a Fibonacci-based approach?
Ideas need to mature before they may "give birth" to other ideas. Grasping of ideas
need time as well. Ideas need to survive if we think of them as living bodies.
Do we need to preserve the Golden Ratio of ideas generation?