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.

 

The Fingerprint of God; Divine Proportion, architecture of the Universe.

page: 2
20
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 05:14 PM
link   
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.


edit on 41728v2016Thursday by wisvol because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 05:29 PM
link   

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.


Very good.


Enjoy the show, and remember: the metallurgists of Jerusalem were incapable of producing an accurate circle,


Surely they knew how to draw and measure a circle though, no? And write up plans that were accurate? They understood fractions, and yet the plan written up still leads to pi having the value of 3. Clearly there is rounding being employed with these measurements.


and the book of numbers is not the part of the bible where one should look for insight about numbers.


?????!

Then why did you claim:


originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: spygeek

The book of Numbers is quite explicit about not rounding pi to three.


I am confused by your contradictory statements..



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 04:56 PM
link   

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.



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 10:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Rex282


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 .


Where did I state I had rejected it? I said a cursory look gave me the initial impression of reliance on numerology, but I would look more thoroughly and see what I could see..

Now that I have had a more in depth look, I can see that not only does it rely on numerology, it doesn't actually reveal the golden ratio at all.

I also notice that you seem to think the fibonacci sequence is a more accurate way of calculating Phi, which is ridiculous. The further you go along the sequence, the closer the ratio gets to Phi, but Phi itself is not "fluid" as you claim.

You have redefined a mathematical principle to suit your own purpose and justify your numerology. Your claim that "the fibonacci sequence calculates the same sum but is more precise because it is a progressive calculation and changes(grows)" is blatantly false.

The Fibonacci sequence converges with Phi, sure, but does not calculate the same thing and it is not a more accurate way of calculating Phi.

Phi is a static ratio, like Pi. The Fibonacci sequence is a number sequence. The two are completely separate principles.


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.


Again, i said myself it was a cursory look and an initial impression. Now that I have been through it more thoroughly, would you like to read my thoughts on it? Or would you prefer to continue to call me out repeatedly for only having a quick look over it?

The pattern is coincidental and expected, not unnatural or significant. There is no occurrence of Phi in any if your calculations.

The closest you get is 1.618243.... Phi is 1.6180339887498948482 and so on into infinity.


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.


Gematria is Kabbalahistic numerology, and is full of coincidental patterns and sequences. You can use 6th grade mathematics to add the values of names and words together and find almost anything. While sometimes interesting, it infers nothing, and your results depend on specifically which Gematria you are using.


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.


How exactly is gematria not numerology? How does basing your calculations on the numerological values of isopsephy and gematria make them any less numerological?


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 .


The strong law of small numbers disagrees with you here. The results are expected, and not unlikely or unusual.

Also, retroactively calling anything improbable ad hoc and after the event is fallacious. The odds are 100% that these names, attributed Gematria values and added together, would equal what they do. You demonstrated this with simple math.


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.


While the Gematria is indeed a man-made invention, it is not unexpected at all to find what you have found while playing with it. It most certainly is not impossible or unlikely to have found 1.666666 or 1.618243 or any other sequence or ratio.

You can find anything using the character names of any given novel or text using Gematria, Isopsephy, and arbitrary addition and division, it's not hard. If this were the books of lord of the rings, rather than the bible, would you still feel this strongly and respond so defensively?

Nowhere did your Gematria calculations "perfectly calculate phi-Phi" either, that claim is misleading and dishonest. You came kinda close, within a couple decimal places, but that doesn't imply anything. I'm not sure how you would go about applying a ratio to 12 people's names anyway.


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.


Very well. Here's some evidence, (I'm going to ignore that you ignored me qualifying that it was a cursory first impression I was describing, and that the video I shared in fact shows basically the same math leading to basically the same result):

The value of Phi is 1.6180339887498948482 and so on into infinity without repeating.

The values you found were 1.618243243243243243... and 1.6666666666666666666...

The fibonacci sequence does not calculate the same ratio as Phi, it is a number sequence that simply happens to converge with Phi. 1.666666.. is not Phi. 1.618243 is not Phi.

Gematria and Isopsephy are numerology, as are any "calculations" based on them or deriving meaning from them.

There's your evidence and my case.
edit on 19-2-2016 by spygeek because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2016 @ 12:45 AM
link   

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




I dont have a source for what i said off the top of my head but ill describe what it means.
Information comes from information, it has never been observed in nature matter giving rise to information such as DNA and Cells, DNA is information because it can be read as a language and is basically a programming code.

Refer to this thread if you are having a hard time grasping what came first the chicken or the egg with the answer being the chicken,
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 20-2-2016 by Belcastro because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2016 @ 01:02 AM
link   
Chaos theory is the field of study in mathematics that studies the behavior and condition of dynamical systems that are highly sensitive to initial conditions—a response popularly referred to as the butterfly effect.

Let us look at the seemingly random Mandelbrot set and see if we can find the golden ratio at all.




I believe that God is like order out of chaos;"




edit on 20-2-2016 by Belcastro because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-2-2016 by Belcastro because: (no reason given)




edit on 20-2-2016 by Belcastro because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2016 @ 06:58 AM
link   
plasma in space youtu.be... , eng. title 4:01 looks like DNA



posted on Feb, 20 2016 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Interesting



posted on Feb, 20 2016 @ 06:37 PM
link   



posted on Feb, 20 2016 @ 08:58 PM
link   
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:



edit on 20-2-2016 by spygeek because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2016 @ 09:04 PM
link   

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:


sorry i do regret the other video i posted but i only used it to make a point about the mandelbrot set which is that we can find phi within in it, nothing more nothing less.



posted on Feb, 20 2016 @ 09:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Belcastro

Very good then.

But what can be inferred by our finding Phi in the Mandelbrot set?



posted on Feb, 20 2016 @ 09:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: spygeek
a reply to: Belcastro

Very good then.

But what can be inferred by our finding Phi in the Mandelbrot set?


Whell the mandelbrot set is said to be a representation of the universe. not necessarily saying the universe itself is a fractal but that the mandelrot set represents the structure of the universe. order out of chaos.... what if it wasnt as seemingly random as we thought?



posted on Feb, 21 2016 @ 02:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Belcastro

I'm not sure it actually is said that the Mandelbrot set is a representation of the universe's structure, outside of the concept of fractal cosmology, (now more or less discredited). It seems rather paradoxical to accept that the universe is not fractal, but then claim that the structure of it is..

In any case, the Mandelbrot set's demonstration of "order from chaos" is an example of the formation of complex structure from the application of a few simple rules to a deterministic chaotic system.

It may be advisable to properly and rigorously define our terms here, as I am currently (mistakenly?) under the impression you believe the universe is a chaotic system, and that chaos is the same as randomness.. It is important to make certain distinctions when you are talking about the definitions of empirical mathematical terms.

The universe itself is not a deterministic, chaotic system; it is a probabilistic, stochastic system. While these both may appear equivalent to an observer, they are not actually the same thing. One way to differentiate between these two kinds of systems is that in a deterministic system that is chaotic, randomness is an emergent feature, while in a stochastic system randomness is an inherent feature. Any chaotic system is indeed stochastic, but not all stochastic systems are chaotic; given a stability function, a chaotic system is unstable while a stochastic system is stable.

Randomness is not the same thing as chaos, either. Random behavior is non-deterministic: even if you knew everything that can be known about a system at a given time in perfect detail, you would still not be able to predict the state at a future time. Chaotic behavior on the other hand is fully deterministic if you know the initial state in perfect detail, but any imprecision in the initial state, no matter how small, will grow exponentially with time.

"Order from chaos" is simply the expected result of any chaotic system where the starting conditions are known. In a stochastic system such as the universe, order is a probabilistic tendency that does not follow the Mandelbrot function, it is governed by its own inherently probabilistic nature and solidified by fundamental physical law.

Basically, the universe is not a chaotic system, nor wholly random, and we do not think it is. It is stochastic, probabilistic, and governed by well understood fundamental laws. Any randomness is inherent to the system, and not an emergent feature of its processes. Chaos theory does not apply to the universe as a whole system; there is no "Chaos Cosmology".

The fact that we find Phi in the Mandelbrot set is the inevitable outcome of its function: f c(z) = z^2 + c. In much the same way as finding Fibonnaci in a pinecone, Phi in Mandelbrot is naturally expected.



new topics




 
20
<< 1   >>

log in

join