Derek Willis Posted August 20, 2015 #51 Share Posted August 20, 2015 did you reply without reading my comment directly above yours? No, I read your comment. I was specifically pointing out the way dates are written in the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmk1245 Posted August 20, 2015 #52 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Still on? Whats next? Finding answer to ultimate question of everything by counting pubic hair? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kranwan Posted August 20, 2015 Author #53 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Not that I am supporting this numerology, but as I am sure you know, in the UK 9/11 is the 9th of November. I don't know what systems are used elsewhere in Europe. sorry! to be honest, in the course of the "debate" i did read yours as if it only reproduced the other comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Willis Posted August 20, 2015 #54 Share Posted August 20, 2015 There is a great deal of confusion due to the different way dates are written down on opposite sides of the Atlantic. I once saw an episode of Murder She Wrote in which the N.Y.P.D. were trying to decipher what the number 271284 meant. Jessica, being a smart ass, realised the number was a date written down by an Englishman - i.e. 27th December 1984. That never would have occurred to an American who had never travelled to the UK. (How the hell was that program on air for so long?!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kranwan Posted August 21, 2015 Author #55 Share Posted August 21, 2015 ? repost, since it's page 4 and the original question is left unaddressed: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmk1245 Posted August 21, 2015 #56 Share Posted August 21, 2015 ? repost, since it's page 4 and the original question is left unaddressed: *snip* Whats here to address, when you can't answer very simple questions? Maybe you have some comprehension problems? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sepulchrave Posted August 21, 2015 #57 Share Posted August 21, 2015 repost, since it's page 4 and the original question is left unaddressed: In the figure you repeatedly post, I can see: 8 long decimal numbers in white boxes, 9 grey circles encompassing portions of those decimal numbers, one of which spans the decimal point of its number, 3 grey circles which encompass portions of two adjacent decimal numbers, 4 dates written as ddmmyyyy, then the sum ddmm + yyyy written in brackets, 3 ``numerical names'', one of which has a second and seemingly unrelated integer following it in brackets, and 1 five-digit ``postal code'' followed with a five-digit phone number in brackets. What I cannot determine is the relationship between the 8 long decimal numbers in the white boxes, the 12 grey circles, and the remaining biographical numbers. The long decimal numbers are presumably the result of two ``geometrical ring calculations'', but you have not explained what they mean. Are they: Ratios? Radii? Areas? Are they the outputs or the inputs of the calculation? Only in a very few cases does the grey circle correspond to a biographical number, in most cases the biographical number has to be formed by judiciously rearranging some of the digits encompassed by the circle. What are the allowed methods for rearranging one of the decimal numbers to obtain a biographical number? Decimal numbers 1, 2, 5, and 6 (counting down from the top-most) have 17 digits, decimal number 3, 7, and 8 have 16 digits, and decimal number 4 has 15 digits. Are these numbers all reported to full precision? *************** I think everyone is as confused by your posts as I am. If you cannot explain your procedure and reasoning in simple terms, there is nothing here to discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kranwan Posted August 21, 2015 Author #58 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) the image is that self-explainig that any comment with your length (regarding the image itself) seems quite out of place. Edited August 21, 2015 by kranwan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmk1245 Posted August 21, 2015 #59 Share Posted August 21, 2015 the image is that self-explainig that any comment with your length (regarding the image itself) seems quite out of place. I have sneaking suspicion, this was your last post on UM. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Wellington Posted August 21, 2015 #60 Share Posted August 21, 2015 image: simple geometrical ring calculations with 4 gregorian (birth)dates in 2 "formattings" each: february 20th 1988 = 202 1988 (202 + 1988 = 2190) october 15th 1982 = 1510 1982 (1510 + 1982 = 3492) september 4th 1982 = 409 1981 (409 + 1981 = 2390) april 9th 1980 = 904 1980 (904 + 1980 = 2884) how could the gregorian calendar be "linked" with geometry, given that geometry calculations clearly display gregorian dates? Not another one, where does UM find these people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Wellington Posted August 21, 2015 #61 Share Posted August 21, 2015 The problem isn't that it is difficult to view. The problem is that we have no idea what you are trying to tell us. Its hard to respond to what frankly just looks like random numbers. Maybe you could try to explain what it is we are supposed to see in those numbers ? ROLF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kranwan Posted August 21, 2015 Author #62 Share Posted August 21, 2015 I have sneaking suspicion, this was your last post on UM. your comment already contains the answer why this topic is spread over so many boards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toast Posted August 21, 2015 #63 Share Posted August 21, 2015 your comment already contains the answer why this topic is spread over so many boards. Its called spam. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmk1245 Posted August 21, 2015 #64 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) your comment already contains the answer why this topic is spread over so many boards. You are lucky UM is more tolerant for bs you are spreading all over the forums. No wonder you've been suspended on thescienceforum, and you completely failed on other forums.In case you missed, its science corner, while your hokey-pokey belongs in bizzare news, at best... Edited August 21, 2015 by bmk1245 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Wellington Posted August 21, 2015 #65 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) your comment already contains the answer why this topic is spread over so many boards. I have read through everything and do you know what? I still don't know what the hell you're going on about. Your posts are incoherent rabblings derived from a set of inaccurate calculations sprinkled with a touch of fantasy on top. Edited August 21, 2015 by RabidMongoose 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kranwan Posted August 22, 2015 Author #66 Share Posted August 22, 2015 then you should probably view the image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Wellington Posted August 22, 2015 #67 Share Posted August 22, 2015 then you should probably view the image. No thanks. I won't be brushed off that easy by a sentence implying that there is some logical rational argument to be gained by looking at an image when there isn't. Stop evading and explain rationally what in Gods name you're going on about? If what you posted seriously makes sense to you (and you aren't just trolling) then you've got issues going on. I say that because absolutely every other single person looking at it has no clue as to: 1. What your saying. 2. What your argument to support it is supposed to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kranwan Posted August 22, 2015 Author #68 Share Posted August 22, 2015 you missed it, re-read the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmk1245 Posted August 22, 2015 #69 Share Posted August 22, 2015 No thanks. I won't be brushed off that easy by a sentence implying that there is some logical rational argument to be gained by looking at an image when there isn't. Stop evading and explain rationally what in Gods name you're going on about? If what you posted seriously makes sense to you (and you aren't just trolling) then you've got issues going on. I say that because absolutely every other single person looking at it has no clue as to: 1. What your saying. 2. What your argument to support it is supposed to be. Good luck getting answers from a guy who has been blacklisted as forum spammer... Heck, you would have more success by asking doorknob... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kranwan Posted August 22, 2015 Author #70 Share Posted August 22, 2015 rabidmongoose? i don't really need more answers from him. why this thread is spread over so many boards (god is that tiring): read above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toast Posted August 22, 2015 #71 Share Posted August 22, 2015 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Wellington Posted August 22, 2015 #72 Share Posted August 22, 2015 you missed it, re-read the thread. I did again, and again. And I'm not going to do it yet again out of your hope it will make me go away or somehow convince me I missed the rational argument or what you're talking about. Stop evading and tell us step by step what you're going on about in a way everybody can understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kranwan Posted August 22, 2015 Author #73 Share Posted August 22, 2015 (edited) view the image, look for gregorian calendar dates. if you can't find any (with the formatting i provided) re-post your comment. Edited August 22, 2015 by kranwan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilly Posted August 22, 2015 #74 Share Posted August 22, 2015 view the image, look for gregorian calendar dates. if you can't find any (with the formatting i provided) re-post your comment. Seriously, people are confused and need a bit more than that. Exactly what (be specific) do you desire to discuss (give examples)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonardo Posted August 22, 2015 #75 Share Posted August 22, 2015 view the image, look for gregorian calendar dates. if you can't find any (with the formatting i provided) re-post your comment. Here is a random sequence of numbers... 1078056397235984607234 All I did was, without looking at my keyboard, press some keys above the alphabetical ones. Now, within that random sequence of numbers I'm sure one could find a sequence that corresponds to a date on the Gregorian calendar - but so what? Does that date mean anything, or is the finding of it just a coincidence of the sequence of numbers? You say there is some kind of link between geometry, specifically some numbers derived from some equation based on the circumferences of the inner and outer edges of a ring, and dates on the Gregorian calendar - but what meaning do those dates have? If those dates have no meaning then all you have done is produced a number-salad that coincidentally happens to incorporate a sequence which corresponds to a date on the Gregorian calendar. There is nothing even interesting about that, let alone meaningful. If you cannot demonstrate the meaning behind this 'link' between the dates and the calculations due to some difficulty you have with communication, then I understand and you have my sympathy but people will not be able to appreciate whatever you are trying to convey unless you work out how to communicate that to them. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts