From: L' Ermit (lhermit@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Jan 04 2002 - 09:05:37 MST
Here is how I did the calculation on the number of possible "sentences"
provided by the alleged "Hindu Code" as previously explained - but pasted
entirely the wrong result to the clipboard. Fortunately it doesn't alter the
meaning - it simply makes it more likely that the claim is pure codswallop.
The number of possible "sentences," most of which will probably be as
meaningful as anything in the Bible or Qur'an (i.e. not at all sensible*) is
calculated by replacing each digit of the first 32 digits of PI by the
number of possible permutations allowed by the alleged "Hindu Code" for that
digit and multiplying them together.
Digit Permutations for this digit
3 4
.
1 4
4 4
1 4
5 4
9 2
2 4
6 3
5 4
3 4
5 4
8 3
9 2
7 3
9 2
3 4
2 4
3 4
8 3
4 4
6 3
2 4
6 3
4 4
3 4
3 4
8 3
3 4
2 4
7 3
9 2
5 4
Product (i.e. Number of possible "sentences"): 2.88556E+16
Worth considering that even if only 1 in ten million of these "potential
sentences" were to be meaningful, it would still mean that almost three
billion (American 10^9) "meaningful sentences" could be formed containing
the encoding for the first 32 digits of PI. Of course, given the ability to
insert semantic nulls, the number of possibilities is very much higher even
than this.
It also explains why it is possible to "construct" a "gematria" on these
principles to contain any value desired - at least if you are able to define
the symbols to be used to decode it. This points to the primary reason why,
unless you have a key, it is pointless engaging in "decoding" the unknown -
it is an exercise in futility as you can find anything you might care to
look for, given a large enough source...
Hermit
======
*Bill, regarding your comment on the OT vs the Qur'an (I was pleased to hear
that you had read it - difficult though the task is), I am assuming that you
have not read the Old Testament recently, as your comparison does not match
mine. While the Qur'an is a nasty, confused and boring piece of work of
dubious authenticity, the Old Testament is, in almost all aspects, just as
bad when it is not being worse. My reading is that the Arabs of the 9th
century were vastly more advanced (ethically and socially) than the Hill
Gods of Judea, but both are unacceptable even by the most barberous modern
societies.
I suspect that most Western raised people prefer the babble, not because of
what is written in it, but because they have had it "interpreted" to them by
others, in the light of modern society. A "non-initiate" reading the bible
(as attempted by the PhinMaid at my suggestion), will find the mish-mash of
malicious and confused concepts completely incomprehensible without
"explanations" which are completely subjective and interpretive. I would
suggest that if this were done for other <em>wholly</em> fictitious works,
they would end up looking better to a Westerner than a raw reading of the
words conveys - just as the babble usually does.
As I mentioned a while back in a post addressing something said by Richard
(and I remember correctly), the worst thing about religions is that they
freeze the development of ethics. The most inevitable thing about religions
is that they tend to reflect the society that create and follow them to them
- and as societies are creatures of the enviroment - so too are religions.
To this let me add that the one thing that all the major religions I am
familiar with share, is that their "sacred writings" all provide books of
intensely opaque "cold-readings" - which mean only what their followers
assert them to mean - presumably even when the followers contradict
one-another's interpretations. How else could the same book be used to
justify and oppose - simultaneously - e.g. slavery, abortion or capital
punishment.
If these books were written by gods, these gods would have to receive a
failing grade in "effective communications." As it is, this "honor" goes to
their followers.
Regards
Hermit
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:38 MDT