The Voice of Time wrote:
/facepalm
Mathematics is not the same as numerology. And vice versa. Mathematics is the study of patterns of patterns... in the sense that it's not just about patterns... not patterns you find out there in the real world, but how those patterns are in turn patterned in the way of our thoughts.
3 apples is a pattern. The pattern of that pattern is the act of counting, 1 + 1 + 1 = 3. The logic going on in your brain (in this case algebra plays a significant role). Numerology sees patterns and think they have meaning, including shallow looks at mathematics thinking those patterns have special meaning attached to the outside world. But they only have meaning within their environment, which is the logic rule system in the case of mathematics. Take it outside the environment, like numerology does by blending numbers with all kinds of stuff, and it stops having meaning (take for instance somebody who reads bird signs and says that 6 geez heading north means it'll be a hot summer... now, besides the total lack accuracy... let's entertain it was a full-fledged study. What is lacking is an environment in which this can be true, a set of rules which describes why this is true and which can predict other truths from it... the rules would explain the causal nature, and that's why in turn numerology does not have any meaningful causal nature to it).
What must be understood is that in the case of for instance physics and the mathematics used there... the mathematics in physics works because you extract only the patterns of the real world, that is, the numbers, and then you divorce it from its place in physics and treat it purely as maths, no longer connected with physics. THEN you can play around with it inside the mathematical environment. You cannot keep the link however, because then you pollute mathematics and you get pseudo-mathematics (or numerology, in your context you can speak of those two terms interchangeably). The same way goes the other way, you can take a number, extract it from mathematics, and give it to physics, and say to physics "do something with this", and physics finds a place for it (an assigned value to a property for instance, like momentum), but you can't keep the link! Truths in mathematics are not truths in physics! Extracting an important number from an equation usually leaves the number completely unimportant to physics, because it's just a random thing, it's not part of the same environment, the importance of the number is not transferred, only the pure fact of being a number remains (in an assignment to a random property in physics), in that case, you'd need physics to figure out what the number means, and in the case of momentum, a very large number, coupled with physics providing a medium sized physical object and a measurement unit that doesn't require a big number for big effect, would lead to a huge visible effect. However, take a huge object, and suddenly it seems totally normal or even abnormally low effect...
Summarizing to the fact that in mathematics... mathematics decides the importance of any number. In physics... physics decides the importance of any number... you can't combine them without totally switching from the one to the other, completely divorcing the reference each time you switch it, and then totally committing again to the new environment...
Damn, I should've written this explanation out to a philosophical journal x) I'm pretty good.
I do not think that numerology in any way is useless patterns, or just prescribing random meanings to the numbers. Here are some examples that I will show you.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 = 1
12 = 1 + 2 = 3
13 = 1 + 3 = 4
14 = 1 + 4 = 5
15 = 1 + 5 = 6
16 = 1 + 6 = 7
17 = 1 + 7 = 8
18 = 1 + 8 = 9
19 = 1 + 9 = 10 = 1
... and so on.
Notice how the double-digit numbers can be reduced to the same single-digit numbers (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0), using the numerological "doubling" (adding the numbers within the numbers). As I have said, there are mathematical patterns within the structures of all orderly things, as demonstrated here when looking at these patterns. The reason why there are patterns, in let's say architecture, is because we are subconsciously (and/or unconsciously) attracted to them. So the reason why we should explore the reason for patterns is simple: because it occurs within possibly all levels of consciousness/unconsciousness.
By the way, before you start repeating that my work is just "mere numerology", let me say that I am just trying to connect esoteric disciplines with some accepted mathematical proofs. Your repeating of the word "numerology" tells me that you hardly know anything of what I'm talking about.
Now let's get into the prescribed meanings of such particular numbers. In the Bible, for example, there are certain numbers that repeatedly pop up in many of the books and writings of said book (such as: 40, 7, 666, 12, 24, 6, 10, 4, etc) that are prescribed with meanings. As I will get deeper into these findings, and as I post them here under the banner "The Metaphysical Papers", we will see that these numbers have a meaning prescribed to those numbers. The reason why meanings are prescribed to certain numbers, the way I'm exploring it, is because of how its structured in the mathematical and geometrical patterns that we often see. I have still yet to explore much deeply into this, and so it will come when I continually use mathematics and read more on the occult and spirituality to connect it all.
ADDENDUM
Let's further explore what you've said.
The Voice of Time wrote:
Mathematics is not the same as numerology. And vice versa. Mathematics is the study of patterns of patterns... in the sense that it's not just about patterns... not patterns you find out there in the real world, but how those patterns are in turn patterned in the way of our thoughts.
The thoughts that are made up in our heads can often be archetypes, and when used properly with instinct, can actually predict the future. Thoughts are at times separated from reality, but it can be connected with reality when tuned with synchronicity.
The Voice of Time wrote:
3 apples is a pattern. The pattern of that pattern is the act of counting, 1 + 1 + 1 = 3. The logic going on in your brain (in this case algebra plays a significant role). Numerology sees patterns and think they have meaning, including shallow looks at mathematics thinking those patterns have special meaning attached to the outside world. But they only have meaning within their environment, which is the logic rule system in the case of mathematics. Take it outside the environment, like numerology does by blending numbers with all kinds of stuff, and it stops having meaning (take for instance somebody who reads bird signs and says that 6 geez heading north means it'll be a hot summer... now, besides the total lack accuracy... let's entertain it was a full-fledged study. What is lacking is an environment in which this can be true, a set of rules which describes why this is true and which can predict other truths from it... the rules would explain the causal nature, and that's why in turn numerology does not have any meaningful causal nature to it).
I am getting the idea that you are mainly an empiricist, who thinks that this reality that we live in is the only true reality. Mathematics, which is limitless and has infinite and still undiscovered boundaries, may say different, which is why I, and many others before me, are exploring it. Mathematics is a lot like exploring the infinite levels of consciousness (or unconsciousness), and to this day, because of the current state of academia being influenced by Newtonian principles and full-blown materialism, mathematics and the brain have yet to be completely explored. This is pretty much the reason why I'm here at this forum; to bring something truly profound to the table, and for people who maybe seek into this path (and explore beyond what I'm doing), as well.
The Voice of Time wrote:
What must be understood is that in the case of for instance physics and the mathematics used there... the mathematics in physics works because you extract only the patterns of the real world, that is, the numbers, and then you divorce it from its place in physics and treat it purely as maths, no longer connected with physics. THEN you can play around with it inside the mathematical environment. You cannot keep the link however, because then you pollute mathematics and you get pseudo-mathematics (or numerology, in your context you can speak of those two terms interchangeably). The same way goes the other way, you can take a number, extract it from mathematics, and give it to physics, and say to physics "do something with this", and physics finds a place for it (an assigned value to a property for instance, like momentum), but you can't keep the link! Truths in mathematics are not truths in physics! Extracting an important number from an equation usually leaves the number completely unimportant to physics, because it's just a random thing, it's not part of the same environment, the importance of the number is not transferred, only the pure fact of being a number remains (in an assignment to a random property in physics), in that case, you'd need physics to figure out what the number means, and in the case of momentum, a very large number, coupled with physics providing a medium sized physical object and a measurement unit that doesn't require a big number for big effect, would lead to a huge visible effect. However, take a huge object, and suddenly it seems totally normal or even abnormally low effect...
I am not trying to put things in a separate context; I am trying to connect Philosophy, Mysticism/Occultism, Physics, etc. to bring about truth. Saying that truths in mathematics are not true in physics would mean that we would have to take out one or the other; however, both of these disciplines are there, so let's not separate the two.
As I have said, numbers and mathematical structures are present in all orderly patterns. If there's something that seems to be unlimited, as in the study of mathematics, then maybe we should explore it more and try to connect with physics. If some of the equations in mathematics does not work in physics, then maybe we should test physics from a different perspective (ie. question and put to the test the Newtonian physics that has, and continues to shape the scientific and academic world).