Numerology

[Illyrius]

And one more question. Can you really, and i mean really grasp the concept, or notion if you prefer, of NOTHING?

Edited October 23, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[pallidin]

Just to be absolutely clear to everyone, the causation of "whatever happened" 14 billion years ago is a complete mystery.

It doesn't make any sense, at all.

How this unimaginable energy was created to eventually form all that is, well, it's the grandest mystery of all... nothing can account for it.

Edited October 23, 2017 by pallidin

[Illyrius]

The Universe itself is - my dear friend -and i know this is your favourite word - a complete MYSTERY.

Edited October 23, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[Illyrius]

1 hour ago, stereologist said:

The problem is that you make mistakes in the material you are using as a basis for your statements.

I respect your knowledge, and your intelligence too. I actually like you, believe it or not. And I would sincerely like for you to continue correcting me. It opens some new vistas for me. I find it useful in my investigation.

Edited October 23, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[Ozymandias]

7 hours ago, Mr. Argon said:

Now Number in its lower enumerative sense corresponds with the measurements  and movements of the outer surface of the sphere. 

The archetypal or universal aspect of the Number is analogous to the immobile, not manifested principle of the Axis.

I completely agree with Stereologists mathematical / scientific criticisms of the above post so will not labour them further.

But, in terms of language, what does the above waffle mean? You do understand, don't you, that clarity of thought and expression go hand in glove and that impenetrable obscurantist language often hides a lack of substance.

What you state above is not consistently logical because number in its 'enumerative sense' must also corresponds with all measurements regarding the axis of the sphere. How long is the axis? What is its inclination? Etc. 

Also, numerology only allows an occult character to a very restricted set of the natural numbers, namely 1 to 9 and 11 and 22. All other natural numbers are reduced to one of these by repeated simple addition of their component digits; e.g. 5738 = 5+7+3+8=23=2+3=5. Outside of this restricted set numerology has nothing to say about any other numbers, be they negative, rational, real, complex, imaginary, transcendental, etc. It doesn't even know that imaginary or transcendental numbers exist. Think of the mileage the ancient priest-inventors of numerology would have been able to get out of them!

 

 

[Illyrius]

4 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

Also, numerology only allows an occult character to a very restricted set of the natural numbers, namely 1 to 9 and 11 and 22.

I wouldn't really say so. There are various people trying to get Numerology right. So, in my own I must admit rather scarce knowing of the subject I encountered from my own subjective judgement on many poor materials, to very interesting material, some of this material is let's say close to your interpretation, but some is not. Not a clear picture at all, but I think it is potentialy very powerful, whatever you may think of such an opinion.

[Illyrius]

7 hours ago, stereologist said:

Science adjusts as new information arises.

Think about this sentence.

 

Then try to use the the same kind of approach and sharp critical tone to previous errors in your science as you are doing to mine. Play. But what is most important of all. When you criticise any blunder of your science. Please. Do deny your own science to the very root.

And enjoy in snickers.

Edited October 24, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[ChrLzs]

52 minutes ago, Mr. Argon said:

Quote

Science adjusts as new information arises.

Think about this sentence.

Yes, you should.  Science does change its position as new information arrives and new, better theories are constantly replacing old ones, as new observations add to our knowledgebase.  As an obvious example, that's how relativity became accepted by science - it comes from direct observations.  Newtonian physics is still valid for most everyday use, but relativistic effects must be considered as they are very, very real.  So science is a great way to get at the truth.  It is very much UNlike those who stick to their beliefs in spite of overwhelming evidence that those beliefs are wrong or unfounded.

Let's use Relativity as an example,. shall we?  I can point to several actual working examples of relativity in use - things like GPS satellite communications, the design of older cathode ray tube TV's, anything that uses a magnet, even the fact that gold is yellowish and tends not to react with anything... those are all at least partly due to relativity (look it up).

 

So, Mr Argon - SCIENCE WORKS.

Science embraces errors by learning from them, openly discussing them, and fixing them.

Now it's your turn - just post your best example of how numerology has worked, or can work for us... You can laugh at science when you show us how numerology works - by posting your best example.  No more word salad, no more excuses, just post the best example (including the actual numbers) that shows its usefulness.

 

I'm sick of hearing your excuses, and I think I can speak for most folks when I say that we know why are avoiding posting what you think is the best example.  (And may I say your fear is well-justified...)

 

[Illyrius]

8 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Now it's your turn - just post your best example of how numerology has worked, or can work for us...

Take a look at old gothic cathedrals. Are they beautiful? Most, if not all of them are built on the principles of sacred geometry. Or japanese old temples, or ancient Eyptian temples and art. And many more examples of ancient magnificent structures around the globe. I can prove all of this. Be asure of that.

Edited October 24, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[lost_shaman]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Argon said:

principles of sacred geometry

I probably should not jump into this, but by "sacred geometry" don't you actually mean just Math? 

[Illyrius]

1 minute ago, lost_shaman said:

I probably should not jump into this, but by "sacred geometry" don't you actually mean just Math? 

This is not illegitimate question. But later I will explain the main difference. I tried a several times already, but it looks i will need to be more detailed.

[Illyrius]

14 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

I'm sick of hearing your excuses

You don't have to be. Walk away. And by the way I never excuse to anyone. Find me one example of that. I admited some of my mistakes, yes. But excuses? Are you serious?

[ChrLzs]

8 minutes ago, Mr. Argon said:

Take a look at old gothic cathedrals. Are they beautiful? Most, if not all of them are built on the principles of sacred geometry. Or japanese old temples, or ancient Eyptian temples and art. And many more examples of ancient magnificent structures around the globe. I can prove all of this. Be asure of that.

Wow.  What a handwave.  Show the numbers and point out the 'magic' of numerology at work there.

May I remind you of the words in your first post:

Quote

... there is suggestion that numbers are somehow linked or intertwined with symbols, with frequencies and with words also. It is suggested that each letter is connected with a certain number. That profane or vulgar words carry in themselves a certain disharmony while words which are lofty posess a harmonious aspect and beautiful harmony. 

I presume the bolded part is what you are alluding to - so give us the actual examples - the numbers and the links and intertwining...  You keep saying you can prove it, so just stop procrastinating and do it.

[Illyrius]

21 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

so just stop procrastinating and do it

You won't tell me what to do Sir. As I said; if you don't like the thread - WALK AWAY.

Edited October 24, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[lost_shaman]

3 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

I presume the bolded part is what you are alluding to - so give us the actual examples - the numbers and the links and intertwining...  You keep saying you can prove it, so just stop procrastinating and do it.

I don't mean to interject in this discussion but I can not help but do so as I also think there is a relationship between discussions in forum threads and Pi. I have a simple equation that seems to show the ratio of views to replies in vigorous discussions have a relationship to Pi. 

[Illyrius]

6 minutes ago, lost_shaman said:

I don't mean to interject in this discussion but I can not help but do so as I also think there is a relationship between discussions in forum threads and Pi. I have a simple equation that seems to show the ratio of views to replies in vigorous discussions have a relationship to Pi. 

Phi is just one of the elements of sacred geometry. But it is a prominent one, yes.

Edited October 24, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[ChrLzs]

Circling a little longer...  and without looking it up may I say 3.141259565359...  pi has a nice ring to it, at 12 sig figs.  I think I can still do e too - 2.718281828459 ?

 

[lost_shaman]

That's wrong! But way closer than I'd get at 12 sig figs! lol 

[Illyrius]

1 minute ago, ChrLzs said:

Circling a little longer...  and without looking it up may I say 3.141259565359...  pi has a nice ring to it, at 12 sig figs.  I think I can still do e too - 2.718281828459 ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio

[Illyrius]

I thought you were talking about golden ratio. Misunderstanding. Not that important. And by the way i thought to say "Excuse me". So I do excuse sometimes. But only to kind, well mannered people. Shaman seems to be OK, so i excuse to him.

Edited October 24, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[Timothy]

51 minutes ago, Mr. Argon said:

Take a look at old gothic cathedrals. Are they beautiful? Most, if not all of them are built on the principles of sacred geometry. Or japanese old temples, or ancient Eyptian temples and art. And many more examples of ancient magnificent structures around the globe. I can prove all of this. Be asure of that.

That’s just because geometry can be very beautiful.

Symmetry, pretty patterns etc. is all it is. There’s not really anything ‘sacred’ about it.

[lost_shaman]

So my equation "Values" threads via a ratio of replies to views and shows that discussions near a Value of 1 which matches Pi are optimal. This thread has a Value of 0.82. This is a negative value and thus is highly unhealthy. 

[Illyrius]

7 minutes ago, Timonthy said:

That’s just because geometry can be very beautiful.

Symmetry, pretty patterns etc. is all it is. There’s not really anything ‘sacred’ about it.

Interesting proposition. I guess I will have to make a pretty clear distinction between sacred and profane, which will not be an easy task. So this is interesting point for discussion. Thanks for bringing this up.

Edited October 24, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[lost_shaman]

5 minutes ago, lost_shaman said:

So my equation "Values" threads via a ratio of replies to views and shows that discussions near a Value of 1 which matches Pi are optimal. This thread has a Value of 0.82. This is a negative value and thus is highly unhealthy. 

The algorithm here on UM says this is a "hot" thread but my Pval = 0.82 suggests this is not a "hot" thread. 

[Timothy]

14 minutes ago, Mr. Argon said:

Interesting proposition. I guess I will have to make a pretty clear distinction between sacred and profane, which will not be an easy task. So this is interesting point for discussion. Thanks for bringing this up.

The term ‘sacred geometry’ has been used to describe what you’re talking about. But I just think that if you want to build something grand and to worship something then you would want it to look good. (Modern day not so much, it’s harder with democracies)