Bring4th

Full Version: Q'uo Dec 2, 1990 - "Numbering System"
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Hello

Quo mentioned:

"Look at as suspect any prophesying and as very suspect any prophesying which has to do with your numbering system, for we have always confessed to you the difficulty, which approaches impossibility, of dealing with your local geometry, arithmetic and numbering system. It is indeed an artifact of human observation, quite relative and quite local as you shall undoubtedly discover when, and if, you are able to plumb the deeper riches of space as you see it"

Pg. 177, "Light/Lines: The first 25 years"

I found this to be very interesting and wondered if anyone has any additional material on this topic of alternative mathematical / numbering systems? I am assuming that Quo was referring to the Arabic numeral system of mathematics.

Guang
The first thing that comes to mind is the concept of base numbers in any numerical system. Arabic is simply base10, while binary is base2. 11 means Eleven to us because we use base10, but to an extraterrestrial who thought in binary (base2) would know this number to mean Three. I'm not sure this covers what they're speaking about in the quote, as converting from different bases shouldn't be difficult for these higher-density beings.

Makes me wonder though what the practical benefits of a base 7 numerical system would be, considering TLOO posits this number to be integral to the foundation of our reality. True there are seven colours, seven notes on the heptatonic musical scale, and seven levels of energy density within our table of elements. These are supposedly a part of a wider creation in which their are seven primary energy densities, sometimes referred to as dimensions.

Quote: the difficulty, which approaches impossibility, of dealing with your local geometry, arithmetic and numbering system.

Does this imply that higher densities actually contain additional euclidean dimensions? This would correlate with mystical experiences in which the participant reports "impossible geometry" which they cannot properly recall once they are back to their usual reality. I actually have a good friend who claims to have held a pleasant conversation with a hypercube after ingesting dimethyltryptamine.

Interesting thread. I would love to be able to link some of the concepts in TLOO with existing human knowledge of space and time.

Some more thoughts on base7: The counting would go 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20... etc. in which 10 would be known as seven, and 20 something like twoseven, which would equate to fourteen in base10. Now I think about it, converting from different bases, as well understanding and integrating the language and the symbols of the the different cultures on a cosmic scale would actually be an immense task. What a mess. Base7 would be incredibly impractical for mental arithmetic as seven is a prime number, and as such doesn't divide by anything but itself and one. 10/2 in base7 ( which is 7/2 in base10) = 3.5 in base10, but just fries my brain in base7 (edit: the answer is actually 3.333 recurring, which is obvious in retrospect).

Interesting is to look at the numbers in base7 counting and think about Ra's descriptions of the densities. For the first six densities, we have our numbers 123456, but then at the seventh density, the number becomes 10 in base7, correlating with the transitional nature of the density, then the eighth density begins a new octave, symbolised by 11.

Thus in base7 the the creation we're part of could be abstractly represented by an infinite chains of 1s, the number approximating infinity in the sense that it represents a number comprised of sevens within sevens within sevens. This is true of any base, and Ra says there are creations which are founded upon different base numbers, but apparently base7 gives the best experiences. Perhaps this is due the aforementioned difficulty which seven creates as a base number, leading to possibilities which other base numbers can not give. Base5 and Base3 have potential, because they too are prime numbers, as well as base11. Maybe these suffer from some setback due to their relative sizes.

Also check out this neat pdf which lists our planets historical numerical system. You can see an overwhelming affinity to base10 from all the developed peoples as well as some quirky systems from more primitive times.
http://www.math.chalmers.se/Math/Grundutb/GU/MAN250/S04/Number_Systems.pdf
Mmmm, number speak.

I love numbers, say more lol Smile

You actually inspire me with that base7 realization.  3.333, how synchronistic.  Thank you so much.
(11-06-2017, 10:40 AM)Guang 光 Wrote: [ -> ]Hello

Quo mentioned:

"Look at as suspect any prophesying and as very suspect any prophesying which has to do with your numbering system, for we have always confessed to you the difficulty, which approaches impossibility, of dealing with your local geometry, arithmetic and numbering system. It is indeed an artifact of human observation, quite relative and quite local as you shall undoubtedly discover when, and if, you are able to plumb the deeper riches of space as you see it"

Pg. 177, "Light/Lines: The first 25 years"

I found this to be very interesting and wondered if anyone has any additional material on this topic of alternative mathematical / numbering systems? I am assuming that Quo was referring to the Arabic numeral system of mathematics.

Guang
Welcome to the forum, enjoy Cool 
Perhaps there could be more, check out this if you havent already https://www.bring4th.org/forums/showthread.php?tid=14481
it has the link to PDF of all the L/L Research Transcripts(theres a lot!) may have some information there too.
Quote:the difficulty, which approaches impossibility, of dealing with your local geometry, arithmetic and numbering system.

The arithmetic and math in whole is very foundational for me and my psyche. I perceive it as a direct connection with the Creator overcoming any medium therefore the place of objective truth where I can't be tricked. I'm a bit conserned that Q'uo distinguishes arithmetic form numbering system. The last one is clearly base10 system which makes almost no sense for me comparing to base2 or base12 (or base7 maybe if it has great metaphysical potential) but hey, we have 10 fingers, so...
What could be wrong with arithmetic itself? Are our basic axioms wrong somehow?
Or does Q'uo say 'arithmetic and numbering system' as a single concept?
(01-16-2018, 03:07 PM)Signifyz Wrote: [ -> ]
Quote:the difficulty, which approaches impossibility, of dealing with your local geometry, arithmetic and numbering system.

The arithmetic and math in whole is very foundational for me and my psyche. I perceive it as a direct connection with the Creator overcoming any medium therefore the place of objective truth where I can't be tricked. I'm a bit conserned that Q'uo distinguishes arithmetic form numbering system. The last one is clearly base10 system which makes almost no sense for me comparing to base2 or base12 (or base7 maybe if it has great metaphysical potential) but hey, we have 10 fingers, so...
What could be wrong with arithmetic itself? Are our basic axioms wrong somehow?
Or does Q'uo say 'arithmetic and numbering system' as a single concept?

The numbering system here is based on linear calculations. The math they use is multidimensional in itself.
Imagine trying to pin point a specific time or place based on are calculations, would be totally different from how they base time, and space.
For example we base years on revolution around the sun, they may calculate what they term a year or w.e by the entire galaxy doing a revolution. Its not that there not congruent in use, just far from each other in terms of placement, ratio, a pure bias towards a given measurement system.