>.........The Dimension Code.........<

Another way to look at it is that they are containers of information.

If I see ripples on the surface of a pond, i am merely looking at displaced water molecules. There is no more water in the pond before the ripples than after, yet i can see the presence of something else. information has entered into the medium of the pond.

Likewise numbers and letters may be representational...but their geometry is the indicator of information, something we can not see except through a medium of communication, yet we can recognize its presence.

Information is more real than even the physical nature that serves to convey its presence. In that sense, numbers are indeed real things.

An intelligent being relays their messages clearly without much speaking. He who boastfully speaks much but says little is lost in their own context along with those that listen.

It is like telling a poor soul in the desert you will give them water but only after they jump through your hoops designed to control their thought processes. No one person owns knowledge, but it is shared freely earning it's value exponentially.

If you have a message to relate, don't dilute it with a bunch of psycho babble which in the end dumbs it down and therefore gets lost in translation. If only a few at the top actually "get" your message how are you any different than the elite spewing hypocracy?
Done to be done...





Last Edited by Imagine That on 03/16/2012 06:56 PM

what is wrong with 'dumbing it down' ??

specifically....

So far I've busted three of these threads.

The Marko Rodan thread. (a few months ago)
The 3 6 9 thread. (today)
This thread. (today)

All similar, though Marko Rodan's thread required me to come up with a result involving multiplication of the digital roots so it was a little harder. I needed to get the result about addition first, then apply it iteratively to get the result about multiplication. Having done that thread, it was downhill from there.

And it continues downhill, now there's a guy here in this thread who is trying to argue in favor of dividing equations by zero. Whatever.

I hope someone else debunks the next one.

YOU ain't done nothing but spew useless garbage out of your arrogant mouth

Dumbing it down does not mean simplifying. It could mean simplifying with distortion. Here it seems to mean complexifying.

But it would have been fine imho if OP had just said "see here are some pretty patterns, I wonder why numbers work this way!" Then he would have claimed no more than he showed.

who said it did ??

Does this only work with our number system? For example you couldn't pull off this chart with Roman numerals. Maybe we just invented our number system based on this, we created it and that's it. It wouldn't exsist without us. Yeah?

Patterns are interesting and perhaps they have some meaning and perhaps not.

Now the fractal geometries of many botanical species are really interesting, but merely a single attribute of the complexities of GOD's creation.

It is fun to play with these number games. I especially like the inverse of 7.

Oh good. You're here. Thought that NOW was about the right moment.

I will review your post OP.... and see you.

How is it you don't apply your own words to that of the ankh?

"Back channel dimensional lemotiv"

Indeed!


Infinitely NOW!

0

P.s. you should give them an example of the code in apla bet! For base point ref. Since most do not think in tems of math but associate/assimilated more with symbols called "let" ers.

Ill put it this way...

"Unfortuneately,no one can be told what the matrix is, you have to see it for yourself" - morpheus

I gave an example earlier of a 3d being communicating with a 2d being.

Mr. 3d sees everything...mr. 2d doesnt even know mr. 3d exists...now mr. 3d wants to communicate with mr. 2d...so he begins by "drawing" a square onto his plane of existance.

Mr. 3d can see the square in its entirety, and comprehend its fullness. Mr. 2d can not, he only sees 1 side of it.

However...mr. 2d can still gain the knowledge of the square by following a path around it and observing every side. Once hes completed his journey he can conclude the existance of the square...or he might simply dismiss it as a coincidence of walls that happened to intersect accidentally to create the illusion of a square...the choice to recognize it or not is a matter of the will at the end of the day.

But as far as the comprehension of the facts...mr. 2d could not connect the dots to follow the path if he first didnt have the faith to see the roadmap before him...nor could he get the big picture without following the whole path.

Therein lays the problem...there really truly is no way for me to show you the fullness of this, the best i can do is lay out clues and reveal paths...if you even see them as such.

At best we can only see its shadow...like a tesseract.

So to repeat the quote above....unfortuneately no one can can be told what the matrix is, you have to see it for yourself...and theres no way to see it in its entirety without looking at it fron other perspectives and different points of view...

Having said that, your free to believe whatever you choose to believe...Im merely presenting information...you may choose to see it however you like....

ok

we have a correct answer

both correct is: 2 = 1


further proof of the feasibility of division by zero

The gnomon is the triangular blade in a sundial

The gnomon is the part of a sundial that casts the shadow.

Gnomon is an ancient Greek word meaning "indicator", "one who discerns," or "that which reveals."

It has come to be used for a variety of purposes in mathematics and other fields




G = gnomon = division by zero

It doesn't depend on how you write the numerals, as long as you have numerals and place value. The Romans didn't really have place value, so it's not even clear what an analogous problem would be in that system.

But it would work whenever you have place-value. If you did octal (numerals 0 thru 7) or hexadecimal (0 thru F) or any other numbering base. Notice that the results of taking roots would be a bit different if the place-value is different (say 8 or 16 rather than 10) and so the contents of the rows and columns would change, but the results symmetries (symmetry about nw-se axis, reversing, cross pattern, etc.) would work out the same. The logic of the proof for why they work would be unchanged.

No.

I've shown myself to be a 3 dimensional being in this story, by revealing at least a part of the pattern. I think I've seen enough to assert that there is no more. You have not disagreed in any credible way.

Now you say there's no way you could explain it. But I just explained it. If you had known that explanation, you could have provided it in your original post.

Can you post something that you've created, an original design that either contributes beauty, substance, or meaning?

more evidence supporting division by zero can found with sound waves

Tritone Paradox

The basic pattern that produces the this illusion consists of two computer- produced tones that are related by a half-octave. (This interval is called a tritone).

When one tone of a pair is played, followed by the second, some people hear an ascending pattern. But other people, on listening to the identical pair of tones, hear a descending pattern instead....

2 = 1

....The tritone paradox has another curious feature. In general, when a melody is played in one key, and it is then transposed to a different key, the perceived relations between the tones are unchanged.

The notion that a melody might change shape when it is transposed from one key to another seems as paradoxical as the notion that a circle might turn into a square when it is shifted to a different position in space.

[link to deutsch.ucsd.edu]

Actually Id be curious to find that out too...I've never looked into it.

What I did discover however was the theres an english matrix and a hebrew one at the very least...but what I was suprised to discover was that the hebrew matrix spelled it with english vowels, which was not what I was expecting at all..because biblical hebrew does not use vowels.

So for example, I was expecting to see the word THWM but instead it spelled it TOHUWM. Strange indeed.

ah, finally you are getting to the heart of the matter


ever heard of Rational Trig ??


Instead of distance and angle, the ancient Greeks believed that area is the fundamental quantity in planar geometry. To measure the separation of two lines, they measured the area of a square built on that line segment, a process called quadrature.

A new theory of trigonometry, called rational trigonometry, was developed in 2005 by N. J. Wildberger (UNSW) in Divine Proportions: Rational Trigonometry to Universal Geometry

[link to www.cut-the-knot.org]


Rational Trig is basically Pythagorus' Tetrachord

Fascinating. I'm going to work on this a bit. Math is not my forte, I'm more of a philosophic type. But... until you learn everything, nothing is superfluous!

Apparently you think that mathematical proofs are devoid of beauty, substance and meaning, or at least that mine in this thread are, since you think I have contributed none of those in this thread.

I disagree. I think I've already done as you ask.

Something of beauty...you mean something like this?

That is my phone number and my geographical address. Do not call or I will respond appropriately.

I'm a little puzzled by the meanings of the numbers they are supposedly playing. Since pi is irrational its decimal representation is non-repeating, although there could be some temporary repetitions. But the melody playing in the video repeats over and over.

The major scale includes two half-steps. The order of whole and half steps is what gives rise to the circle of fifths, which is how one derives key signatures corresponding to major scales starting on given notes. None of this seems to have much to do with the music in the video, which isn't really to my taste.

I prefer the Devil's Trill Sonata by Tartini, but I sure can't play the violin solo part in it.

Well yes obviously he only went to a certain decimal place and started again at the beginning...still cool tho :)

The clues you have provided, the comments made from others - fascinating...

Let's see if we can bring to light something visual from this :)

Good old pen, paper, colours... then some photo-shopping.

Since about 6PM (gmt+1) been non stop thinking, pondering and messing around on paper and excel. The end is not in sight, there are so many output possibilities! WHY IS THIS NOT IN SCHOOL EDUCATION?! Would have had me hooked back then!

(I can fathom why it's not in schools, such a shame :( - just like with sacred geometry stuff that's had me hooked since 6 months or so ago... this stuff feels absolutely connected, as per comments too...)

I'm sorry but it has to be said, same as your original post. Obvious after I pointed out the reason.

And to each his own musical taste. Isn't this nicer?

[link to www.youtube.com]

wholes and halfs

0 5 10 15 20 -- 20 10 5 2.5 1.75 ....unable to return to origin

that is why PI with integers is irrational

Another clue:


1/7=0.142857142....
2/7=0.285714285....
3/7=0.428571428....
4/7=0.571428571....
5/7=0.714285714....
6/7=0.857142857....
7/7=1

Notice how the answers are all repeating versions of 143857...the only thing that changes is a shift in position...

positions are very important. Imagine you are at the center point of a circle and these repeating numbers are around you, as you turn to face a new path, the start number in front of you shifts...indeed the whole circle shifts like the turning of a dial.

Also notice how everything is a multiple of seven and 14...except when you get above 50...then you add 1. (above .5 you round up not down).

so... 14285714...
14...42...28...85 (84+1)...57 (56+1)...71 (70+1)...and back to 14...

all multiples of 7 and 14 (with some +1)

there are 7 numbers before returning to 14.

what numbers are missing?

369