Re: [asa] A case of non-biological ID

Hi, Rich,

Thank you for your reply, and the explanation of square-free numbers.
I'm also intrigued to know what a strobogrammatic prime is!

You said:

> And, you're absolutely right it is pretty arbitrary. But is it any more
> arbitrary about the largest rep-digit triangular numbers? You do get the
> gist of my argument that given any particular number you can come up with
> anything that makes it special.

Yes, I do agree in general. The famous Hardy/Ramanujan story of the
number 1729 illustrates this. I'm guessing that Ramanujan was such a
good mathematician that he could have come up with something
interesting about just about any taxi-cab number Hardy would have
named.

However, do you get the gist of my argument? For example, you could
take all the numbers in Vernon's list and list their arbitrary
properties and then I wouldn't say "Wow! That's amazing!". For
instance from Stetson's list we can get the properties of Vernon's
seven numbers:

913 has exactly the same digits in three different bases!!
203 is the 6th Bell number!!
86 is 222 in base 6!!!
401 is the number of connected planar Eulerian graphs with 9 vertices !!
395 is ... (um Stetson can't find anything interesting to say about
this number, which makes it pretty unusual and therefore intersting)!!
407 is a narcissistic number!! (Vernon does in fact mention this on
his website).
296 is the number of partitions of 30 into distinct parts!!

Now, do you see my point that these are all very different; in fact
the 401 property is one I couldn't say I appreciate as I don't know
what an Eulerian graph is?

By contrast, do you get my point that Vernon's findings (not just the
properties of 666), but the whole analysis of the seven values reveals
connected and coordinated symmetries, connected almost entirely with
triangular numbers and their properties? It's not that they are
triangular that makes them special, but the fact that there are so
many coordinated triangular numbers. (Though I agree that Vernon's
post here concentrated on 666, which leaves out all the context). But
if the seven were all related to, say Bell numbers or ternary square
words, and so forth, that again would indicate an interesting pattern.
 In other words it's not just about finding an arcane mathematical
property for each of the values.

In addition to this, I was showing that
> Vernon's argument was circular. Namely, 666 was the preferred variant
> because it was "special". But, it was "special" because the text was 666.

Yes, I tend to agree that Vernon prefers 666 to 616 probably because
he sees it as more interesting, and also because it is involved
heavily in the symmetries of the 2701 number. I don't see this as
reason to prefer one over the other - too often we prefer one
scientific conclusion to another because it gives us what we want to
see.

However, equally I've seen on this list a tendency to push the
alternative 616, and wonder if that is just motivated by a desire to
debunk Vernon's findings, rather than saying one has proper evidence
that this is the correct version. I accept that the image of the
manuscript you saw says 616 and it is the earliest available
manuscript. But that doesn't mean to say it's the original one, and
that the original one wasn't 666. It just doesn't follow either way,
and it's something I think we'll never resolve beyond doubt. Anyone
who advocates one or the other is probably doing it because it fits
with what they want to see.

When I was researching the use of numerology in music, I corresponded
with a history of Maths professor, Ivor Grattann-Guinness (IGG). I
was intrigued by the occurrence of the number 1003 in the "Catalogue
Aria" from "Don Giovanni". It is given as the number of women
supposedly seduced and abandoned by Don Giovanni in Spain. ( 'Ma in
Espana ... mille e tre'). As Mozart played many number games in his
personal letters, I wondered about this funny number. I speculated to
IGG that 1003, being 17x59 could be a Masonic reference - Mozart was a
freemason, and 1759 is an important date in Freemasonry, being the
date of opening of the first Masonic Lodge. To my surprise IGG
accepted my theory without question, perhaps because he was very
interested in Mozart's masonic connections. However, later I stumbled
on the other interesting fact that Pope Giovanni 17th was pope for a
few months in the year 1003! IGG didn't like this idea at all and
stuck with the 17x59 as the freemason reference. To my mind, both
"explanations" are speculative, and there is no reason to prefer one
over another.

Incidentally the whole sequence of numbers of women seduced given in
the aria contains two triangular numbers and a square - 640, 231,
91, 100, 1003, the total coming also to a multiple of 59. Now, the
explanation of the particular numbers is speculation, but the evidence
that Mozart riddled his personal letters with number quizzes of a
similar sort does lend support to the idea that this is deliberate.
However, this little sequence is nothing like as involved as Vernon's
Gen 1:1 sequence.

Regards,
Iain

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Jan 12 09:21:09 2008