*Something I wrote on Maher's site earlier(which attempts to patch up some flaws I had made in another thread there).

Anyway, for those of you who remember my ravings about the 'Messiah' number from the Kabbalah(and all that went down this past year),, you might( )
actually like this:

*The whole thing with that '358' number is about the '5'.
Those who saw the other thread(which I went off track on per usual,,,and ran the gamut...), may have understood the part about the '5th Turn'(as relates to the Golden Ratio, and Fibonacci system).

Thing is that 'Five' represents Regeneration(according to something said to me earlier today).
Still, 'Five Senses' = the 'Observor', and 'PI'(metaphorically equals this 'Observor', because of '1' full circle.

I've beaten this thing(in one form or another) for over a year or more(mostly failing in trying to convey this properly; but its very awkward trying to inter-relate how Sacred Geometry meets some Religious tenets, and how things can intersect/cross relate into things discussed in both Relativity Theory and Neurobiology.
[b]*But! If anyone here(and there are a few of you) have ever looked at Zero Gravity Research and the Autonomic Nervous System, and are actually aware of this 'Historically Known' tool of both Math, Geometry, and even Cosmology(the Divine Proportion/Golden Ratio), then you do know how 'seemingly' seperate Disciplines/Sciences, can cross-relate to one another.
Carl Jung really did make the Connection between 'Number' & the 'Collective Un-Conscious Mind' to what I mentioned in the above paragraph(I know some of the readers here know this).

*So what is the point of it all(since I keep yammering on and on about this to no avail)? Well, If you could imagine the kind of feeling one comes to encounter when they gain an insight to something that comes so close to binding life's mystery together under one Unified like 'Core' which could help explain so much about the course of history, and how things may even turn out in the future, I think you would be captivated too.

That '358' number that the Kabbalah calls the 'Messiah' number, is actually about 'cycles of time'(or Regeneration- because of the central '5').
My other thread which goes into 'chronobiology'(which I am new too, but exploring because of the Global Warming issue and a theory I'm trying to prove), touches on the important issue of 'Entrainment', and this 'Entrainment', has to do with 'Cycle Synchronization'.
*So the '358'(or 3,5,8), is really an Entrainment, and it has all to do with our Cycle of Time upon this Planet(but that cycle is dependent upon how we Lead our Lives in Co-Operation and Harmony with Each other,, and also with our Planet that was given to us to care for by 'G-d').

I know I come off 'different' with how I write things, but I hope people who have read me(when I was at 'my best'), will believe me with what I have been saying about how that '358' relates to things. It really is from sources outside myself, but I'm certain my understanding of it is precise.

*Later this week I will complete this thread with a comment about how 'number'(and everything I said above; about '5', PI, etc), can be tied directly into the Laws of Thermo-Dynamics, and the Cycles of the Heavens and 'Time' itself.
I think I mentioned on another thread how the Stonehinge Angle of '108', follows the Sri Yantra Mandala's 9 'x' 12 interlaced stars, and how many Yoga studio's now heat their rooms to '108' degrees.
*They are based upon the same thing.
In fact, All Sacred Geometry is based upon One Thing, and I mentioned it above.

You still haven't answered the question I posted on a couple of your other pathetic spamsthreads. So I'll ask it again you pathetic loser.

Have you shown your posts to your psychiatrist yet Imagination?

I've seen some 'wholistic' sites with similar things and though it's not impossible that various discrete numeric traits could be seen on scales larger than quantum units, other than some things like ratios between planetary orbits or possible fractal distributions to galaxies etc. it's hard to really believe that most of it isn't just rather arbitrary connections made between some observations that are just coincidental or leaps of faith.

But I've become more open to the possibilities that discrete relationships on small scales can have macroscopic effects that we could possibly observe in typical daily life, but for me, it appears the relationships would be very complex and I'd suggest that if you can't personally find some rather concrete reasons why those relationships should exist, then they probably won't.

Still, there was a site I saw quite a while ago that I remembered and I was recently working on some things very similar to it:

Quantum Arithmetic
http://www.svpvril.com/Quat.html

The forms of mathematics he's working on have a lot of similar characteristics to things I believe should exist (he's done a lot of development on it, though I don't understand why he picked some specific forms of representations), though I see these as being largely present on atomic levels, though for very large values they could possibly apply to macroscopic characteristics, but it's still hard to figure out exactly how these relationships would be observed.

Anyway, I haven't dug through all of that math and I don't know how well my ideas or those presented there would truly work out in being able to model real systems, but still there are a lot of logical reasons to believe that there should be merit to some of these (especially describing systems in terms of large numbers and interactions occuring between common factors between these, though it's a lot like wholistic references to views of resonance and wavelengths), but likely trying to encompass the physical properties in a speck of dust, would probably be descibed by some number 50 digits long (or even much more than that). Now that doesn't mean that some characteristics couldn't be detected that could be described in terms of smaller ratios, and there could be mechanisms that bias interactions toward preferring smaller ratios between their relationship, but they'd seem to only generally be weak correlations.

On the other hand, for something like the solar system, it's not very hard to understand why the planets orbit with certain periodicities related to each other as they'd naturally be biased into a state we could observe them as stably repeating (I'm certain some influences can be destabilizing as well, but I'm certain you get the point).

But I'm very skeptical that for example, knowing some orbitals follow some ratios relates to much beyond that, even though some influence here should be detectable, there wouldn't appear to be much of an ability to predict it nor would it have much influence (consider that the gavitational pull of a chair you might sit on is likely more than the gravitational force of the Moon on you ... I have no idea whether or not this is true without doing some math but it's likely the case).

Anyway, I've got an open mind in many respects, I'm curious and exploring and hoping to find some novel views of the universe, but I'm skeptical that either 1) such relationships are not very prominent and influencial but truly 2) more likely such relationships could be seen to exist and have a moderate influence on a persons day to day life, but that the effects are very complex, hard to predict and/or difficult to model. So there's probably something to more wholistic views but I doubt a few digits are going to tell much of the story.

Hey, that's just my opinion ... (ultimately, if it works for someone, then it works for them. It's just seems the odds of working are pretty low without some successful personal insights and verifications of them)

....

Then again, it appears to me there are things equivalent to particles in nature and laws of physics that appear to arise from logic itself. So I guess the real issue is that if you have an ability to construct a very accurate description of something then to whatever extent you can accurately model it, should be similar to the extent that you can find those equivalent particles and laws and that you should also be able to convert those into a more purely numeric format so that those particles and relationships are described by numbers and the interactions between them.

Maybe that clears it up some. The reason why I'm skeptical that such techniques would work in much of day to day or in various observations etc. is that it appears difficult to accurately create such descriptions and models with such precision. Planetary orbits are very regular and deterministic and mathematical and so these relationships naturally have a large influence ... but for most things occuring in daily life it doesn't appear nearly so easy to do this, unless you're just a really perceptive person who can reliably see such relationships and predict the influences etc.