Re: Numerics and Applied Apologetics

From: Vernon Jenkins (vernon.jenkins@virgin.net)
Date: Fri Apr 07 2000 - 18:48:21 EDT

  • Next message: dfsiemensjr@juno.com: "Re: Fw: theological question."

    Gordon:

    I greatly appreciate your latest observations!

    1) Concerning my claim re 91: you are, of course, correct. I had
    written, "That 91 is both sum and difference of a pair of cubes drawn
    from a sequence of four, marks it as being absolutely unique." (4/#2).

    [For the benefit of the general reader, the sequence referred to is
    ...3^3, 4^3, 5^3, 6^3,..., or ...27, 64, 125, 216,... It then followed
    that 27 + 64 = 91 = 216 - 125 ]

    However, in making that statement, I had overlooked the two other cases:
    27 + 125 = 152 = 216 - 64, and 64 + 125 = 189 = 216 - 27. Accordingly,
    I shall modify the statement to read, "That 91 is the sum and
    difference, respectively, of consecutive pairs of cubes, marks it as
    being absolutely unique."

    Thank you for pointing out the inadequacy of my original!

    2) You proceed to touch on the matter of what makes a number
    'interesting'. Now I can't agree that this is entirely a subjective
    thing; neither can I go along with the idea that given enough time, one
    could take any number, and from it extract features that would be likely
    to attract widespread attention. For the reasons offered on my page, I
    suggest 37 and 91 are in a class apart; in fact, very little time is
    needed to appreciate their unique threefold symmetries, or the
    possibilities they offer those interested in recreational mathematics. I
    repeat what I have said before: for many reasons, these particular
    numbers are without peer as attention-seekers!

    3) I am delighted to find that we are both agreed that the Gen.1:1
    phenomena are real - and of divine origin! [Surely, therefore, it is
    but a short step to believe also that the 37/91 matter - together with
    its associations - is intended to lead the rational mind to understand
    the significance of these phenomena!]That must surely raise the
    question, Why? One reason, in my view, is that God has chosen to reveal
    his being and sovereignty in our day in order to counter the atheism,
    widespread apostasy and confusion of which we are all too well aware! To
    bring us all 'back to earth', so to speak!

    Regarding your comment that the phenomena are largely concentrated in
    the first eight words (ie Gen.1:1 and following word): while this is
    undoubtedly contrary to human expectations*, might we not best regard it
    as a 'seal' - a confirmation that all that follows is also of the Lord!
    Our God-given intellect enables us to come to this obvious conclusion;
    the love of truth, alone, will enable us to accept it - and closely
    consider its logical consequences!

    Gordon, thanks again for writing!

    Regards,

    Vernon

    * Clearly, we are in no position to dictate the manner in which He has
    chosen to do things! We are simply observers - and, hopefully, learners!
    .
    http://homepage.virgin.net/vernon.jenkins/Symb.htm
       

    gordon brown wrote:
    >
    > Vernon,
    >
    > 91 is not the only positive integer that can be expressed as both the sum
    > and difference of two cubes drawn from a sequence of four. 152 and 189
    > also have this property.
    >
    > Many of the properties you cite concern sums or permutations of digits.
    > Thus they relate only to our modern numeration with its positional
    > notation.
    >
    > If one picks some number other than 37 or 91 and spends enough time
    > working on it, he can find a number of properties that someone will
    > consider to be interesting. Many of these will be similar to a number of
    > those that you found for these two numbers. The determination as to which
    > numbers are most interesting is subjective.
    >
    > How interesting the properties of these numbers are independent of what
    > you have found in Gen. 1:1 hardly seems relevant to what you want to claim
    > for that verse. Certainly whatever you find in Gen. 1:1 was deliberately
    > placed there by the Lord, but you can't very well make the case that you
    > have found a test for divine inspiration since it only works for one
    > verse.
    >
    > Gordon Brown
    > Department of Mathematics
    > University of Colorado
    > Boulder, CO 80309-0395



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 07 2000 - 18:57:11 EDT