reiku,

Answer I have a two part question for you to respond to, if you will, please. I have a purpose here, which is to determine, a clue at least, what your basic scientific interest, thrust, or intentions are, generally.

Your must answer either A or B to the first question.
question 1.
Question :Comparing, (A) the mathematics and scientific value of your biblical codes with (B) the mathematics and scientific value of the 'CRC Standard Mathematical Tables and Formulae 30th Edition' or thereabouts,
which do you find more valuable?
A.
or
B.

2nd question.

Does your bible source contain any information that the 'God' that is referred to you by partially coded biblical reference, assumed the God of the Hebrews, is not just one of a crew of space travelers, relatively advanced to be sure, that found it convenient to spend a few thousand years on Terra Firma; and with some his, God's, crew, or colleagues, were exploiting some of Earth's mineral deposits, for whatever purpose they may have had; that the creation of man, "by God", assumed a fact, was not just a simple DNA critical manufacturing process for the purpose of providing the visitors with an efficient and effective labor union free (no strikes), obedient and trainable, labor force?

For instance when jehovah is quoted in Genesis: "Let us make man in our image?",
or perhaps another Genesis reference that Adam and Eve were brought to the garden [of Eden] to "tend it", could this be any information tending to establish the 'alien visitor' were 'making a work force' interpretation of the story book you reading to us, the legitimacy of which, as a generally accurate historical representation, I do not challenge?

Perhaps you can establish a credible explanation of who is jehovah talking to , that is, the "our" in the "our image"?

Perhaps you can establish a credible explanation of who is jehovah talking to , that is, the "our" in the "our image"?

This is unlikely, as Reiku is no longer with us.

giest---

we can re-title this thread and move it somewhere, or I can lock it.

It might be fun to find a willing sparring parnter and make this a ``formal debate''.

You might want to split off the second part of the question into language. If I am not mistaken, the 'us' is simply the royal we. I'm not certain whether it was inserted when the bible was translated into english, or if the original language had something similar.

hmmmm... your choice. But it will probably die here

The value of various esoteric number theories is given by their ability to predict new testable phenomena - or at least to serve for development of the theories, which can do so. By AWT the scope of applicability of formal calculus remains somewhat limited though, because it's restricted to the phenomena driven by casual gradients (like the differential calculus) and/or to countable units (i.e. the fermions). By such way, every number theory is somewhat biased view of reality, which remains chaotic by its true nature. Furthemore, the discrete and diferential maths are of somewhat dual nature, so they doesn't play well together.