A Second Channel of Communication?

blue triangle

Muse
B
Joined
Apr 2, 2016
Messages
529
I've attached a document that displays some of the many fascinating properties of the figurate number 2701 and asserts that the number may have been used as a means of communicating with us. I'd be grateful if any of you who are interested could read it and comment.

http://www.whatabeginning.com/Misc/Miracle_2701.pdf

I'll be on holiday until Saturday, so if I don't reply right away, that's why.
 
The 2701 technology is somewhat outmoded.

You can find out more here:

chrome://fireftp/content/fireftp.xul#account=bitsavers.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de

:w2:
 
If you put an equilateral triangle on an inverted equilateral triangle, you get a Star of David. Therefore there must be a Christian God.

It's a load of numerology rubbish, with some pretty pictures thrown in, mainly involving Stars of David. Also the initial stages of Sierpinski's triangle, which I have some fondness for (and take around with me literally everywhere I go).

"What do you get if you multiply six by nine"?
 
Last edited:
Thought it sounded familiar, Gord. I stopped paying attention to big iron before the 2702 came out.
 
dropzone said:
Thought it sounded familiar, Gord. I stopped paying attention to big iron before the 2702 came out.
Click to expand...

You had to love electronic communication technology that used an electric motor connected by a rubber belt for synchronization. :thumbsup:
 
I haven't dared open that link, but I bet the fact that 2701 = 37 * 73 makes an appearance.

Fred
 
Nothing in the contrived dribbling of the OP's quoted pdf provides any evidence of "a second channel". How disappointment.
 
gypsyjackson said:
If you put an equilateral triangle on an inverted equilateral triangle, you get a Star of David. Therefore there must be a Christian God.
Click to expand...

If you throw together some random numbers they are unlikely to sum to one as interesting as 2701, and yet there it is, in the first verse of scripture. If you read on you'll find important features of its internal structure in there too.

gypsyjackson said:
It's a load of numerology rubbish, with some pretty pictures thrown in, mainly involving Stars of David. Also the initial stages of Sierpinski's triangle, which I have some fondness for (and take around with me literally everywhere I go).
Click to expand...

Not exactly. Every numerical triangle can be divided into a core triangle (inverted to fit precisely within the larger figure) and three satellite triangles. He points out that the final two words in the verse sum to 703, which is that core triangle.

Every third numerical triangle can self-intersect to give a hexagram, which is the first stage in the Koch snowflake. Highlighting the superimposed counters suggests the Star of David and highlighting triangle 703 within triangle 2701 suggests the first stage of the Sierpinski triangle.
 
At first glance it looks like the usual numerological data mining.

Even if this number does have more unusual properties than most, so what? There are bound to be such numbers. Exactly what is this supposed to be communicating, and by whom?
 
fagin said:
Communicate what and by whom?
Click to expand...

I think it may be evidence for the existence of a force that has worked through the unconscious minds of the writers (and any subsequent editors) of that verse to encode mathematics.

Or in religious terms it is evidence for the divine inspiration of scripture.
 
Pixel42 said:
At first glance it looks like the usual numerological data mining.

Even if this number does have more unusual properties than most, so what? There are bound to be such numbers. Exactly what is this supposed to be communicating, and by whom?
Click to expand...

I think it's better to first of all convince yourself it's real before asking why it's there. He has plenty more, and recommends reading this page first.

http://www.whatabeginning.com/Misc/Wonders/P.htm

Here's evidence of pi and e in scripture.

http://homepage.virgin.net/vernon.jenkins/First_Princs.htm
 
blue triangle said:
I'm not defending the 'bible code'. This is something different.
Click to expand...
Looks very similar to me, and with the same root cause: a failure to understand that just because you see a pattern, it doesn't mean it's deliberate/meaningful. If you look hard enough and long enough you are bound to find patterns.

Anyway, weren't you going to look at this with a 'neutral mind'?
Click to expand...
Yes. That means looking at what you present without a pre-determined conclusion. It doesn't mean looking at what you present whilst suppressing my memory of the law of truly large numbers.
 
blue triangle said:
I'm not defending the 'bible code'. This is something different.

Anyway, weren't you going to look at this with a 'neutral mind'?
Click to expand...

A neutral mind says that with an infinite sequence of numbers, all sorts of funny things will occur.

However, let's take it the other way around:

Numbers is one of the most factual things we have. 3 is three, no matter how we count it or what kind of things we use it to denote. 4 is 3+2, 2 is 3-2. ... bear with me a few seconds more...

So we start counting things, say pepples. 1, 2, 3, .... 1000, 1001, .... 2699, 2700, ... and what comes next? 2701. It HAS to be there. It was not inserted by some intelligence, it is simply needed in the sequence, how else would we count to 2702?

Hans
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom