It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
It is fact not opinion that the Hebrew alphabet does not use decimal numbers to represent letter characers. Not Aronofski nor his film suggest it does..
originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: spygeek
All right then.
It is fact not opinion that the Hebrew alphabet does not use decimal numbers to represent letter characers. Not Aronofski nor his film suggest it does..
If this is a fact, and not an opinion, then I have nothing more to say.
Enjoy the show, and remember: the metallurgists of Jerusalem were incapable of producing an accurate circle,
and the book of numbers is not the part of the bible where one should look for insight about numbers.
originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: spygeek
The book of Numbers is quite explicit about not rounding pi to three.
originally posted by: spygeek
……….
Please show me an example of the golden ratio appearing somewhere that it should not be expected to, providing mathematical proof that it shouldn't. Also explain what justifies the attribution of the ratio to a universal intelligence when it has been scientifically and mathematically verified to be simply an expected naturally occurring feature of reality. ……..
originally posted by: Rex282
originally posted by: spygeek
……….
Please show me an example of the golden ratio appearing somewhere that it should not be expected to, providing mathematical proof that it shouldn't. Also explain what justifies the attribution of the ratio to a universal intelligence when it has been scientifically and mathematically verified to be simply an expected naturally occurring feature of reality. ……..
You asked someone to show you where Phi should not be expected to appear and I did.Then you summarily rejected it because it doesn’t fit your confirmation bias.Please show me how the gematria of these mens names can calculate into precise sums phi-Phi is a natural occurrence in reality .
From what you wrote in response to me you are either or intellectually lazy(you took a cursory look) or intellectually dishonest(confirmation bias) or both because the patterns in the gematria of these names are clearly a very defined pattern that calculate phi-Phi and are not a natural occurrence in the reality.
I did not extrapolate these numbers by some gibberish junk math manipulations of sacred geometry.I simple calculated the names of the patriarchs of Israel using 6th grade arithmetic.The relationships of these names are clearly math not the mystic math of Kabbalah. If it was they Kabbalist would be propagating it however they aren’t.
Christianity won’t touch it (thank God) even though it would be a strong apologetic.. because of the same reason as you..the ignorant bias of numerology when in fact this is NOT numerology at all.
The odds of these numbers calculating so elegantly to something so precise and simple with zero manipulation are absurd(extreme high).If there was only one or even a few patterns they would have been a million to 1 odds but the patterns go on and on into very complicated math to absurd odds .
My point is the gematria of names is not a natural occurrence in nature.Even the namers of the patriarchs had no idea what they were doing.Hebrew Gematria as a system wasn’t developed for hundreds of years after the names of the patriarchs were given and to this day their progenitors taken ZERO serious interest in them.To further have these names sum the most known name in the history of the planet is absurd.To go a step further and have them perfectly calculate phi-Phi is utterly impossible.
I presented the facts of the numbers clearly and precisely just as you asked.It should be common reason that the gematria of names is not a natural occurrence in reality yet you believe the opposite and continue to propagate your ignorance with zero evidence or a cognizant case but instead provided a link to a mediocre movie(that has ZERO to do what I have presented) and a meme(phi woo) and conjecture.That is a very poor counter argument that has no validity in anyone's book .If my calculations are so common to reality please provide even a shred of evidence.
originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: Belcastro
Good post and interesting proposition, I haven't viewed the videos yet, but I am familiar with the subject.
And Sacred Geometry is a fascinating one!
Is it possible for you to provide evidence to back up the following statement though?
the laws of information with DNA stating that matter cannot give rise to information on its own
Sorry to quote you out of context, but I am particularly interested in the bit about matter not being able to give rise to information on its own.
Thanks
originally posted by: spygeek
a reply to: Belcastro
This video is blatantly wrong about many things, and propagates many common misconceptions about Phi and the Fibonacci sequence. It even goes so far as to claim a conspiracy against the widespread teaching of Phi...
The guy is no mathematician, his uneducated claims are ridiculous.
Phi and Fibonacci fakery, what it is and how to spot it.
The universe is not a fractal.
Very simple naturally selected rules can and do lead to structures which appear to occur in groups of Fibonacci (and other related) numbers, and appear to be well described by Phi:
originally posted by: spygeek
a reply to: Belcastro
Very good then.
But what can be inferred by our finding Phi in the Mandelbrot set?