 Google Ads

1. Hallo Frank! Originally Posted by Frank Colijn So 1 is the first triangular number, 3 the second, 6 the third, 10 the fourth and so on.....(I think we don't have a word for numbers that are not triangular)
Why should 1 be a triangular number if it cannot form a triangle like three?  Reply With Quote

2. Originally Posted by Geoffrey Hallo Frank!

Why should 1 be a triangular number if it cannot form a triangle like three?
The Number 1 is called a triangular number because it is the first number in the series of triangular numbers given by the forumula T(n) = n(n+1)/2:

1 = 1 = 1 x (1 + 1)/2
3 = 1 + 2 = 2 x (2 + 1)/2
6 = 1 + 2 + 3 = 3 x (3 + 1)/ 2
etc.

Likewise, 1 is the first square number because it is the first in the series generated by n^2 = n x n

1 = 1 x 1
4 = 2 x 2
9 = 3 x 3
etc.

In my book, its just a convention. You can choose to talk about Trinagular numbers starting at 1 or 3. All that matters is that you are clear in your definitions.

Richard  Reply With Quote

3. Hi Geoffrey,

The question you asked, I asked myself once and is not so easy to answer. That it is common accepted that one is the first triangular number will not do. Usually we use the circel as unit to make images to express numbers, allthough we could have chosen a triangle or square as unit. But maybe the bible writer wanted us to use the circle, for the number Pi is hidden in the first verse, and everything in creation is build up out of circels or balls. As you probably know the circel can be divided in six equal parts by its own radius. The six points on the circumference of the circel can become connected in several ways; the triangle is one of them. It is a theoretical possibility. It is also the starting point of Hexagons and Hexagrams and even squares, cubes, pentagons, pentagrams and many more mathematical figures can be drawn in the circel. All (or many) mathematical laws are already there. One is the potential starting point of nearly all sequences (not for the even numbers). One is the point that not yet has moved. The one will be what it will be. The one is the begining of all things. When 1 is eccepted as a prime then the factors of the CV of Gen.1:1 are 2701=1x37x73. The sum of those factors is 1+37+73=111, the CV of the word Aleph: 80+30+1=111. The aleph is the first letter of the alphabet with the number value 1. I will add an image as an attachment and I hope that you will understand why 1 is the first triangular number. More number information can be found on my website: http://members.home.nl/frankcolijn/frankcolijn/indexEN.htm

Frank  Reply With Quote

4. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn This makes in my opinion 1 as the first prime and 4 as the first composite. There is no reason to treat the one in a different way in the sequence of primes than in the sequence of triangular or odd numbers. And yes one is a very special nuber as a unity. But the three and the seven are also very special. You can see in the sequence of primes that the first three primes are equal to their numerical place; so in heaven, so on earth. That's why I call them Super Perfect Primes.
Hi Frank,

I don't understand the problem. If mathematicians want to define primes as being greater than 1, it doesn't matter because its just a definition. We are free to define mathematical sets too. So if the word "prime" is already taken by the mainstream mathematicians, we can follow Stephen's suggestion and define a set called "Irreducible Numbers" that is formed by the union of {1} with the primes. I called this set "Numerical Atoms."

Since its just a question of definition, why does it matter?

Richard  Reply With Quote

5. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn When 1 is eccepted as a prime then the factors of the CV of Gen.1:1 are 2701=1x37x73. The sum of those factors is 1+37+73=111, the CV of the word Aleph: 80+30+1=111. The aleph is the first letter of the alphabet with the number value 1.
Hey Frank,

I think it is a mistake to add the unit to the factors. There is no proper principle being displayed here. If you can add it once, you can add it any number of times.

2701 = 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 37 x 73

I agree that it would be "neat" if the factors added up to 111, but the reality is that they add to 110. And I think there is a reason for this. The average of the two factors yields the value of the generating triangle T(10):

(37 + 73)/ 2 = 110/2 = 55 = T(10)

This is because the Hex/Star pair 37/73 is generated by the self-intersection of the 10th triangular number. Here is a pic: I think your suggestion that we add the unit to the prime factorization exemplifies one of the reasons mathematicians define primes as > 1. As explained in a previous post, it is because of the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic:

Every positive integer greater than can be written uniquely as a product of primes, with the prime factors in the product written in order of nondecreasing size.

Mathematicians want everything exact. They don't want to be able to write 2701 = 1 x 37 x 73 and 2701 = 1 x 1 x 1 x 37 x 73. They want the unique factorization.

This is a real problem. We can't fix it by making an arbitrary rule like "you are only allowed to include the Prime Number once in any factorization" because then our mathematics would be inconsistent. For example, a prime number is then "factored" as 37 = 1 x 37. And 2701 is "factored" as

2701 = 1 x 37 x 73 = 1 x (1 x 37) x (1 x 73) = 1 x 1 x 1 x 37 x 73.

You see, the associative law demands that we can do this. So what then is the rule? If the number 1 is a prime and it is included in the definition of the prime factorization, how do we state the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic?

Richard  Reply With Quote

6. Hi Richard,

Till a certain level I agree with you. But again it depends on how things are defined. You can see 2701 as a multiplication of 37 and 73, and the sum of the multiplication factors (SMF) is 110, the number of 'mosad', foundation: 4+60+6+40=110 (Is.28:16). The prime factors of 2701 are (1^n)x(37^1)x(73^1) or 1x37x73. Sum of the prime factors (SPF) is 111. I see numbers raised to a power as a unit. If this is mathematical right I don't know, but it can be one of the many ways how things are coded. Take for instance: Spirit of God, ruach Elohim, 214+86=300. The factors are: (1^n)x(2^2)x(3^1)x(5^2)=1x4x3x25.......PFS 1+4+3+25=33. When Ian Mallett came up with the binairy notation I was playing with the binary calculator and this is what I found:

Word 300 is the first word of Gen.1:25: and made 300-70-10-6, anagram of Jesus, Joshua, sum 386 (You might say Jesus represents the Spirit of God, and according to the words of John 1:3 are all things made by him and made for him.)
--- word value 386, binary 110000010, reversed 010000011=131
--- word place 300, factors (1^n)x(2^2)x(3^1)x(5^2)=1x4x3x25.......PFS 1+4+3+25=33
--- prime number place of prime 131 (value) is 33 (place)..... P33=131 (this is only so when 1 is counted as the first prime)
Coincidence, my manipulation of numbers, or devine disign?

But it is even more complex. When we take the multiplication factors of 300 (Spirit of God) in the following way: the first and the last...and the factors in between: (4x3)x(1x25)=12x25.....MS 12+25=37. We have to wach the three and four carefully, for the word three is coded in Gen.1:1 starting on letter 4 and ending on letter 25 (with ELS 7, see chapter 9) Now we make prime jumps starting from the 12(3x4)....P12=31....P31=113....P113=613, three jumps and four numbers: 12-31-113-613. The third number is 113. (The third seed is the good seed) Word 113 is the 12th Elohim in the bible (Gen.1:10 word 10) The sum of the steps is 12+31+113=156.....1x2x2x3x13......first and last: (4x3)x(1x13)=12x13......MS 12+13=25. But we had four numbers from three steps, sum: 12+31+113+613=769. This is the 137th prime. Word 37 is the word 'the light' (Gen.1:4 word 10) and starts on the 137th letter of the bible. In verse four it is the 34th letter....P34=137! This is the place between light and darkness where Stephen found the alpha number from the fine structure constant. This road works only when 1 is seen as the first prime.

An other interesting observation with the four numbers 12-31-113-613 is that the sum of the first and the last number is: 12+613=625=25x25, and the sum of the numbers in between 31+113=144=12x12.

I don't know if you already read my website, but as you know Jesus calls himself the 'truth' and maybe you know that the sum of all dividers of 'truth', ameth, 441 is: 1 3 7 9 21 49 63 147.... SD 300. As you see 441 is not counted as a divider. This is probably done so otherwise there would be no Perfect Numbers.(6, 28, 496, 8128.....)

I think there is some more discussion needed to get our approach of numbers straight, Frank  Reply With Quote

7. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn Hi Richard,

Till a certain level I agree with you. But again it depends on how things are defined. You can see 2701 as a multiplication of 37 and 73, and the sum of the multiplication factors (SMF) is 110, the number of 'mosad', foundation: 4+60+6+40=110 (Is.28:16).
Hi Frank,

That's an excellent observation concerning mosad (foundation) = 110. It is very significant in relation to Genesis 1:1. I wrote about it in my article called "The Foundation of Creation." Originally Posted by Frank Colijn The prime factors of 2701 are (1^n)x(37^1)x(73^1) or 1x37x73. Sum of the prime factors (SPF) is 111. I see numbers raised to a power as a unit. If this is mathematical right I don't know, but it can be one of the many ways how things are coded. Take for instance: Spirit of God, ruach Elohim, 214+86=300. The factors are: (1^n)x(2^2)x(3^1)x(5^2)=1x4x3x25.......PFS 1+4+3+25=33.
OK - you have a rule. That is good. The rule for the Prime Factor Sum (SPF) is:

SPF (a^m) x (b^n) = 1 + (a^m) + (b^n) where a and b are primes > 1.

I think a big question now is "What is the meaning of the SPF function?" Why is it significant?

If I were to make up an SPF function, I think I would write it this way:

SPF (a^m) x (b^n) = (m x a) + (m x b)

I like this because its very well behaved mathematical function:

SPF(xy) = SPF(x) + SPF(y) for all x and y > 0

In other words, it acts like the log function:

Log(xy) = Log(x) + Log(y)

which is what you would want in a function that is somehow "measuring" the weight of the factors, correct?

As for your argument about 1 as a prime: I still think it is incorrect to say that "The prime factors of 2701 are (1^n)x(37^1)x(73^1)" because that seems inconsistent with a well-formed mathematics. All the extra units add no information, and the equation 2701 = 37 x 37 remains true without including the units, so the units seem completely superfluous. You are free to "add one" in your definitions of functions without messing with the definition of primes. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn When Ian Mallett came up with the binairy notation I was playing with the binary calculator and this is what I found:

Word 300 is the first word of Gen.1:25: and made 300-70-10-6, anagram of Jesus, Joshua, sum 386
Ahh .. you have brought forth one of my pet peeves. The proper name of Jesus in Hebrew is not Yeshua = 386, but Yehoshua = 391 = Yeshuah (Salvation). The evidence is overwhelming. Consider these identities:

My Holy Name (Shem Qadshi) = 754 = Jesus Christ (Yehoshuah HaMeshiach)

Click the link for many other powerful identities that settle the issue. I have long been mystified why "Messianic Jews" - who should know the Rabbinic tradition that says a missing letter is a sign of God's Judgment on a man - would popularize the nick-name "Y'shua" which is lacking note only the Divine Letter Hey, but also the Divine Name YAH! His name should be spelled Yod Hey Vav Shin Ayin - the first three letters being the same as YHVH. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn (You might say Jesus represents the Spirit of God, and according to the words of John 1:3 are all things made by him and made for him.)
--- word value 386, binary 110000010, reversed 010000011=131
--- word place 300, factors (1^n)x(2^2)x(3^1)x(5^2)=1x4x3x25.......PFS 1+4+3+25=33
--- prime number place of prime 131 (value) is 33 (place)..... P33=131 (this is only so when 1 is counted as the first prime)
Coincidence, my manipulation of numbers, or devine disign?
You ask "Coincidence, my manipulation of numbers, or devine disign?" I answer the first two. Sure, it is possible that God could have had something to do with that "coincidence" but it is so complicated, and so far removed from simple intuition as to be impossible to discern. We all know that God's Wisdom is beyond our "searching out." But if our "searching out" leads beyond what we can comprehend, what good is it? I prefer the main things that are the plain things. The patterns you are displaying here are not clear to me. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn But it is even more complex. When we take the multiplication factors of 300 (Spirit of God) in the following way: the first and the last...and the factors in between: (4x3)x(1x25)=12x25.....MS 12+25=37. We have to wach the three and four carefully, for the word three is coded in Gen.1:1 starting on letter 4 and ending on letter 25 (with ELS 7, see chapter 9)
I recommend folks click on your link. Your pic is great. The spacing of the letters Shin Lamed Shin Hey (that spell THREE) at an interval of every SEVEN letters is extremely intriguing, because the value of the verse is based on THREE and SEVEN because 2701 = 37 x 73. And we also the Greek value of the Word (Logos) by which God created all things is 373, a kind of compression of 37 x 73. And the large-scale structure of the Word follows the pattern of Three Cycles and Seven Divisions that form the Tri-radiant Halo. The pattern of 3-7 seems truly divine. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn Now we make prime jumps starting from the 12(3x4)....P12=31....P31=113....P113=613, three jumps and four numbers: 12-31-113-613. The third number is 113. (The third seed is the good seed) Word 113 is the 12th Elohim in the bible (Gen.1:10 word 10) The sum of the steps is 12+31+113=156.....1x2x2x3x13......first and last: (4x3)x(1x13)=12x13......MS 12+13=25. But we had four numbers from three steps, sum: 12+31+113+613=769. This is the 137th prime. Word 37 is the word 'the light' (Gen.1:4 word 10)
OK - now I read rather slowly and carefully, and I follow your logic, but I think you are moving in areas far too removed from normal intuition to discern between chance and design. I assume you know that the normal person will not ever be able to follow the trail you have laid down here, correct? Why not display the brilliant LIGHT of God's Word that will lead people to a deeper understanding? The "hopping" from one prime to the next via the index of the prime (especially when the index is contested because you see 1 as a prime) moves the conversation completely outside the realm of "light" for any normal reader. And on this point, I really would like to know how you personally discern between chance and design, Frank. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn and starts on the 137th letter of the bible. In verse four it is the 34th letter....P34=137! This is the place between light and darkness where Stephen found the alpha number from the fine structure constant. This road works only when 1 is seen as the first prime.
Actually, the "road" would work just fine if you let the mathematicians have their "primes" and you defined your own set as "irreducibles" or "numerical atoms." There is no need to fight a windmill here. Its just a matter of definition, and nothing more. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn An other interesting observation with the four numbers 12-31-113-613 is that the sum of the first and the last number is: 12+613=625=25x25, and the sum of the numbers in between 31+113=144=12x12.
That is interesting. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn I don't know if you already read my website, but as you know Jesus calls himself the 'truth' and maybe you know that the sum of all dividers of 'truth', ameth, 441 is: 1 3 7 9 21 49 63 147.... SD 300. As you see 441 is not counted as a divider. This is probably done so otherwise there would be no Perfect Numbers.(6, 28, 496, 8128.....)
But this leads to a huge question. The number of possible functions is unlimited. Why do you consider the sum of the proper divisors as significant? You have tossed out "hits" that are found using many different functions in this one email, but you have not shown any consistent patterns. And that's the key. The world of numbers is such that you can spend the rest of your life finding "interesting" coincidences, but if you can not show the meaning of those coincidences, what good are they? Originally Posted by Frank Colijn I think there is some more discussion needed to get our approach of numbers straight, Frank
Yes, I agree completely. I look forward to further discussion.

Your brother in Christ our Lord,

Richard  Reply With Quote

8. Hi Richard,

Let me tell you how I see the bible text. For me it's a kind of gobelin, woven with all kind of colors making up the images on the tapestry. That is the surface of the text that we read. But in Is.46:9-10 God states: Declaring the end from the beginning, and from old times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure;
Where can we read the end in the beginning? Well God had to compress that information. With codes. It are the threads on the backside of the gobelin connecting the colors and images. They connect the letters, words, verses, chapters, books and the information that is written like we read it. And there are as many codes as flowers in the field. Some flowers have 5 leaves and are pentagonal based, and some flowers have six leaves and are hexagonal based. The bible is created with the same elements as the Creation. But we can't always use the same coding (or decoding) on different places.(All roses are flowers, but not all flowers are roses) I try to be consistent as possible when I pick up a thread, for each thread has its own character. (for instance the first and last of the prime factors as I showed in my last post) And yes many people will have difficulties in understanding in what I have written, but that is on this very moment not my greatest concern, in time we will understand it better and we will be able to learn all this to our children like we do now with mathematics. For the moment it's more important that we have a more consistant approach of numbers in the research of the codes. I do not want to fight windmills with mathematicians but for the reseach it is imporant that we recognize 1 as the first prime, for I think that's the way things are coded. On this subject I agree with Ian Mallett although we have also our differences.

About 386 vs 391 for the name Jesus. The list of other 'good' phrases with the number value 754 equal to the value of Yehoshuah haMeshiach does not prove that the spelling is right (nor that it is wrong) The numbervalue 363 for the word haMeshiach 8-10-300-40-5, can also mean haNachas, the snake, 300-8-50-5. Jesus the snake? Even the number of the beast, 666, is also the number of the corner stone which is Jesus.The phrase Jesus messiah does not occur in the O.T.
Yehoshuah 70-300-6-5-10 (391), is the name of the sixth book and is always translated as Joshua, never as Jesus. The form 70-6-300-10 (386) appears in Ezra 2:2 for the first time and becomes translated as Jeshua, which is already closer to the word Jesus. The 386 form can be found coded in the first chapter of Genesis with ELS 22. The 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet are the building blocks of the Word, which is Jesus. The letterplaces of this code are 625(jod)-603(shien)-581(vav)-559(ajin). The sum of these letterplaces is 625+603+581+559=2368 which is the CV of the Greek form of Jesus Christ. As you know Christ is the light of man (John 1:4). This is expressed in the multiplication factors 64x37 of 2368. Word 64 is and made, and word 37 is the light. (I just discovered a moment ago that the form 358+386=744 is coded in Ps.22:1-12 with ELS 45, the number of man, adam) Please read this chapter of my website. There are more lines that prove that this code is right.

I don't think I have answered all your questions but I am expecting some people so I have to go for now. W'll talk later.

Regards, Frank
Last edited by Frank Colijn; 08-09-2007 at 06:49 AM.  Reply With Quote

9. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn Hi Richard,

Let me tell you how I see the bible text. For me it's a kind of gobelin, woven with all kind of colors making up the images on the tapestry. That is the surface of the text that we read. But in Is.46:9-10 God states: Declaring the end from the beginning, and from old times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure;
Where can we read the end in the beginning? Well God had to compress that information. With codes. It are the threads on the backside of the gobelin connecting the colors and images. They connect the letters, words, verses, chapters, books and the information that is written like we read it. And there are as many codes as flowers in the field. Some flowers have 5 leaves and are pentagonal based, and some flowers have six leaves and are hexagonal based. The bible is created with the same elements as the Creation. But we can't always use the same coding (or decoding) on different places.(All roses are flowers, but not all flowers are roses) I try to be consistent as possible when I pick up a thread, for each thread has its own character. (for instance the first and last of the prime factors as I showed in my last post) And yes many people will have difficulties in understanding in what I have written, but that is on this very moment not my greatest concern, in time we will understand it better and we will be able to learn all this to our children like we do now with mathematics. For the moment it's more important that we have a more consistant approach of numbers in the research of the codes. I do not want to fight windmills with mathematicians but for the reseach it is imporant that we recognize 1 as the first prime, for I think that's the way things are coded. On this subject I agree with Ian Mallett although we have also our differences.
Hello my friend!

From what you have written, it seems that we view the divine design of the Holy Bible in much the same way.

The more I read your work, the more impressed I become. I hope you understand that when I said that some of your results were "so complicated, and so far removed from simple intuition as to be impossible to discern" if they were chance or not, I most certainly was not talking about all, or even most, of your results! I was just answering your question concerning that one point of SPFs. In general, your web pages are well presented and very deep. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn About 386 vs 391 for the name Jesus. The list of other 'good' phrases with the number value 754 equal to the value of Yehoshuah haMeshiach does not prove that the spelling is right (nor that it is wrong) The numbervalue 363 for the word haMeshiach 8-10-300-40-5, can also mean haNachas, the snake, 300-8-50-5. Jesus the snake? Even the number of the beast, 666, is also the number of the corner stone which is Jesus.
You are absolutely correct that a "good" or "bad" identity here or there does not prove a spelling correct or incorrect. There are other principles that must be considered when determining the correct spelling an values of words. We must begin, of course, with the words are written in Scripture. In the case of the Hebrew name of Jesus, the most common is Yehoshua (Joshua) = 391. The name "Yeshua" is a relatively rare variation of that name that appears only in the later books of the OT. And the form Yeshua is missing the divine Name Yahu (YHV) which reduces its theological significance.

So how then do we discern which one is "correct"? Which did God intend? Perhaps both? I'll write more on this below. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn The phrase Jesus messiah does not occur in the O.T.
Of course not. We wouldn't expect it to. But Yehoshua HaMeshiach = 754 is perfectly correct Hebrew, and its exactly what we would have expected if the phrase were written in the OT. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn Yehoshuah 70-300-6-5-10 (391), is the name of the sixth book and is always translated as Joshua, never as Jesus.
Actually that is not quite accurate. When translated into Greek, the name Yehoshua (Joshua) is always translated as IHSOUS (Jesus). We even see this in the Greek NT in Hebrews 4:8 where Joshua (the Son of Nun) is translated as "Jesus." All modern versions correct this and write "Joshua" or "Y'hoshua." In the two Hebrew versions of the NT that I checked, one translated the Greek IHSOUS into Yehoshua, and the other into Yeshua. Note also that in the Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate, the sixth book is called the Book of Jesus Son of Naue. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn The form 70-6-300-10 (386) appears in Ezra 2:2 for the first time and becomes translated as Jeshua, which is already closer to the word Jesus.
It is closer to the "Jesus" in English, but that does not mean that it is closer to the correct name. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn The 386 form can be found coded in the first chapter of Genesis with ELS 22. The 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet are the building blocks of the Word, which is Jesus. The letterplaces of this code are 625(jod)-603(shien)-581(vav)-559(ajin). The sum of these letterplaces is 625+603+581+559=2368 which is the CV of the Greek form of Jesus Christ. As you know Christ is the light of man (John 1:4). This is expressed in the multiplication factors 64x37 of 2368. Word 64 is and made, and word 37 is the light. (I just discovered a moment ago that the form 358+386=744 is coded in Ps.22:1-12 with ELS 45, the number of man, adam) Please read this chapter of my website. There are more lines that prove that this code is right.
I think that ELS of 22 in Genesis 1, with the place values summing to 2368 is astounding. It seems to confirm the validity of the 386 form of the name. But I know that the 391 is also part of a large set of confirming identities, so it makes me think that both values are "confirmed." Unfortunately, I don't know what to make of this ambiguity yet. Originally Posted by Frank Colijn I don't think I have answered all your questions but I am expecting some people so I have to go for now. W'll talk later.

Regards, Frank
Yes, I look forward to discussing these things further with you Frank.  Reply With Quote

10. Member
Join Date
Feb 2008
Location
Ottawa, Ontario - Canada
Posts
70

prime

prime = 61 (english gematria)
= 19th prime If you rotate 19 180 degrees you get 61  Reply With Quote