Patrons of the Sacred Art

Can't log in? Contact Us

OPEN TO REGISTER: Click HERE if you want to join Alchemy Forums!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: 72

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Quote Originally Posted by dev View Post
    Good point, but why I find the algorithm perspective interesting is that if we for a moment forget our own theories about Nature as code-land and look at it as an organic living thing (which it is)... so basically an algorithm is not dead.
    Being probably more simple-minded than Andro, I can discard a lot of discussions (if the Universe is demiurgic or not, if it's valuable or not... and even the discussion of qualitative vs. quantitative maths).

    Me objection (or doubt or question) was by far easier, but I notice that I didn't explain it quite well... Your theory is that the Universe has an Order, a mathematical Order and that this Order is based on an algorithm... which is a specific type of function.

    My question is WHY an algorithm and NOT any other type of function... or why not several types of functions working at once? I don't have an answer to those questions.

    A very short tale I like a lot is The Library of Babel: https://maskofreason.files.wordpress...uis-borges.pdf

    In this tale the universe is a "Library" made of infinite Hexagons... and "There are five shelves for each of the hexagon's walls; each shelf contains thirty-five books of uniform format; each book is of four hundred and ten pages; each page, of forty lines, each line, of some eighty letters which are black in color. There are also letters on the spine of each book; these letters do not indicate or prefigure what the pages will say".

    The "books" of this Universe created by Borges have a specific size and a specific amount of letters, but they ALL contain random permutations of 25 elements (22 letters, the period, the comma, and the space)... some of the books contain a permutation that makes sense. I.e, a book can contain an accurate biography of Napoleon, simply because it's the result of one of the possible permutations of letters... other books look a bit more like "sdrtvjhsy ry ryvetve,.,ert. etohoetrohetohnbvch .,...ewrhwet" and don't seem to make any sense.

    So the narrator of the tale dwells all over the library with the hope of finding the sense, your "algorithm"... And the tale finishes with a marvelous paragraph:

    "I have just written the word “infinite”.' I have not interpolated this adjective out of rhetorical habit; I say that it is not illogical to think that the world is infinite. Those who judge it to be limited postulate that in remote places the corridors and stairways and hexagons can conceivably come to an end -- which is absurd. Those who imagine it to be without limit forget that the possible number of books does have such a limit. I venture to suggest this solution to the ancient problem: The Library is unlimited and cyclical. If an eternal traveler were to cross it in any direction, after centuries he would see that the same volumes were repeated in the same disorder (which, thus repeated, would be an order: the Order). My solitude is gladdened by this elegant hope."

    I love the last sentence... we hope that the chaotic Universe follows a pattern... and that its disorder conceals an Order. I do not know if this "Order" can be expressed by an Algorithm, and even less I can assume that the number 72 is relevant in this algorithm.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    In the moment...
    Blog Entries
    I am only speaking from the limited perspective of a talking monkey man.

    To us it might appear as order, algortihm or chaos. The real truth of the matter is far more complex to such a degree that eventually - if understood in all its glory - is so damn simple that we would not even believe it.

    But till that day the monkey needs to be able to locate the best bananas. And if understanding the algorithm of how to do this then why not give it a go.

    Why algorithm? Well I just think it is a good allegory for what I am trying to communicate...

    I am not uttering a finished knowing or truth here. I have no end point, the ending is wide open.

    But you are right. 72 on its own has nothing to do with an algorithm per se. But it does hint at the cycles of life in our bodies and in the cosmos. What is true in the life of a galaxy is true in the life of a cell.

    Last edited by Awani; 09-29-2016 at 07:15 PM.
    Don’t let the delusion of reality confuse you regarding the reality of the illusion.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Isaac Newton was one of the first to identify, in his History of Ancient Kingdoms, that Rhea won a 1/72nd part of each day of the year when Hermes played at dice (or draughts as you put) with Luna that produced Osiris, Typhon (or Set), Nepthys, Horus, and Isis.

    I find 72 interesting because the same number, when written in base-6, would be 200 (when you count up to 5 the next number is 10 in base-6 mathematics). There were 200 conspirators in the book of Enoch. There were 72 conspirators in the sinking of Osiris in the leaded coffin

+ Reply to Thread

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts