Does it matter if the artist is aware of the math? Perhaps the question should be why there is an irrational number that approximates a parameter for the human visual system: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2009/dec/28/golden-ratio-us-academi... But I don't think anything beyond the tenths place matters, visually. Helaman Ferguson's sculptures are the most masterful combinations of art and math that I've seen. Complete awareness. Ruth McDowell created a superb Fibonacci quilt: https://www.internationalquiltmuseum.org/quilt/20080400227 She has many other quilts with mathematical themes. The artistic representation of phi is one of the persistent themes of Gathering for Gardner. I would like to see (hear, taste, feel) more art that represents math, even at the expense of the artistic aesthetic. I'd like to have the balance point shifted towards math. Some artists working early in the twentienth century felt influenced by developments in physics, allegedly. I never understood that in any way other than a feeling of being free to investigate radically new ideas. It would have been more interesting if the physicists had felt free to express their research in art, rather than the other way round.
Furthermore, many (if not most) of the supposed findings of phi (the Golden ratio) in art are spurious coincidences, without any shred of evidence that the artist knew anything about golden ratios.
A big problem is finding images/sculptures/animations that are both interesting/fun to look at, but also provide interesting/fun mathematical/geometric insights.
Hilarie