Volume 17 Number 92
Produced: Fri Jan 13 14:41:55 1995
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Codes
[Meylekh Viswanath ]
Codes in Torah
[Stan Tenen]
The "codes" in the Torah
[Akiva Miller]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Meylekh Viswanath <PVISWANA@...>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 15:11:52 EST5EDT
Subject: Codes
I received email from Prof. Gans regarding some code-related questions
that I had raised in mail-jewish. I tried to reply to the email with some
follow-up questions, but my mail was sent back to me. Hence, I am
posting my follow-up queries, with pretty much all of Prof. Gans reply
to me, in mj, since the subject should be of interest to all mj subscribers,
and also in the hope of being able to contact Prof. Gans indirectly in this
fashion. Being unable to contact him directly, I don't see an option to
this indirect method.
Meylekh Viswanath
_____________________________________
Prof. Gans:
Thanks for your responses. I have some follow-up questions, if you
don't mind responding.
You said:
1. The normalization is done by comparing and ranking the proximity
measure for a pair of ELS's (equidistant letter sequences) with the
proximity measures of 124 pairs of perturbed ELS's of the same words.
A perturbed ELS is the same as a real ELS except some of the letters are
displaced one or two places so that the distance between letters is not
exactly equal. This ranking thus produces a number which is very close
to a true probability.
My question:
I presume that the analysis could have been conducted without this
normalization. The point is perhaps clear to a statistician, but I was not,
off hand, able to think of the impact of this normalization on the
computed probability of chance occurrence. From the language of the
paper, it seemed that it was being suggested that the normalization biased
the test in favor of the null hypothesis, but I couldn't see that. For
example, what is the effect of elimination of those word pairs, for which
m(w,w') < 10 (Appendix A.2. in the paper)? How many such word
pairs were eliminated, on average, per perturbation? Was the pattern of
elimination different for the perturbation omega sup (0,0,0) as opposed
to the other perturbations?
You said:
2. The questioner asks: What is the claim? The claim is that the
probability that all of these names and dates are found in such close
proximity by pure chance is 0.000016 - nothing more and nothing less.
The alternative to pure chance is that it was put in on purpose - at
least 2,000 years ago. Any further implications are outside of the realm
of mathematics.
My question:
I understand that in a published paper in Statistical Science, you don't
want to make supernatural claims. However, even respecting that desire,
it would help to know the theoretical reasoning behind the claim of
non-randomness. For example, it has been suggested to me that the
underlying 'theory' is that Moshe Rabeynu was given the torah in exactly
the form in which we have it. If so, then, one would expect to find the
same patterns in every book of the khumesh (except perhaps dvorim,
according to some meforshim). That would also explain the choice of
isaiah as an alternative control text. Is this claim correct? Or is the
underlying theory something specific to bereishis? Even if by rejecting
the null hypothesis, one is to accept that the names were put in the text
on purpose, there are many interpretations that would be consistent with
that interpretation. The one I have above is one such. Then again, is the
underlying 'theory' that there is something special about the rabbis in the
encyclopaedia selected? Although anything to the contrary would be
'unscientific' extrapolation from the limited experiment conducted by the
authors of the study, as individuals who expect to make some use of the
results of the study (i.e. decision makers), it would be useful to know
what the additional claims are (and presumably, other more wide-ranging
tests of these theories have been conducted.
You explained:
3. The questioner also questions the nature of the null hypothesis. The
null hypothesis is not, as the questioner implies, that the text of
Genesis is random. The null hypothesis is that the proximity between the
equidistant encoding of rabbis' names and their dates of birth and death
is as random as expected given the particular names, dates, and text
used. That is why the final randomization analysis is critical: It
effectively factors in all nonrandomness in the names, dates and text.
Thanks for the clarification.
Meylekh Viswanath
P.V. Viswanath, Rutgers University
Graduate School of Management, 92 New St, Newark NJ 07102
Tel: (201) 648-5899 Fax: (201) 648-1233 email: <pviswana@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Stan Tenen <meru1@...>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 15:15:58 -0800
Subject: Codes in Torah
An early version of this essay was written about 10-years ago - before
we had identified the generating form for the Hebrew letters and before
we had any knowledge of the "Codes in Torah". I was not observant at
that time and I had very little knowledge of traditional Jewish
teachings. This shows. Please allow for 10-years of learning. Some
parenthetical notes and remarks have been added.
RHYTHMIC TRAVERSE
Our working hypothesis that the our sages were as knowledgeable and
wise as ourselves leads us to consider that our traditions are still
meaningful and effective. If we examine traditional Jewish practice in
the light of our speculations about the structure of the Genesis text,
it may be possible to identify the functional elements and rediscover
the original and intended meaning.
It is our conjecture that the Masoretic Genesis text at the letter
level is a linear unfoldment of a 4-D window in our 3-D space. It
consists of a kind of volumetric (hyper-)"hologram" carried by
2-reference beams with a phase offset; one carrying the spatial
(space-like) 3-D image and the other carrying the temporal (time-like)
evolution of the image. The Genesis letter string is in the same form as
DNA - 2-helices (Fuller's tetrahelix) intertwined, carrying, strung
between them in triplets, structural and evolutional information. [Note:
We have now confirmed this DNA-like structure is actually in Torah.] In
this hyper-hologram, a flower, for example, could be viewed IN SPATIAL
PERSPECTIVE as a 3-D object AND also IN TIME through its evolvement from
seed to new seed.
How are 3-D creatures such as ourselves to read a volumetric
"hologram?" Consider an analogy with "flatland." ["Flatland" is Edwin A.
Abbott's famous parody of 2-dimensional politics and aristocracy in turn
of the century England. There is a current Dover edition, I believe.]
If there are creatures that live confined in a 2-D reality, we
might seem as transcendent to them as G-d seems to us. Since there is
"room" in our 3-spatial dimensions for an infinite number of flatlands,
and we could view them all simultaneously - and we could see "inside" of
the flatlanders as well as "outside" of them.
If we could, what would we say to these flatlanders, and how would
we say it? [In other words, what might Torah be?]
The most unique and fundamental message we could send them would be
to somehow _show_ them there is a reality transcendent to their own -
ours. One of the few known ways to "draw" a 3-D "window" in a 2-D
flatland is to enfold on it, as an interference pattern, a hologram of a
3-D scene.
To "see" this holographic image would seem to require a reference
beam and a point of view outside of the plane of the image (outside of
"flatland"). Clearly, if the flatlander could step out of flatland to
use a reference beam, all of the following would be unnecessary. The
only way that our flatlanders could "see" the 3-D view in the 2-D window
in his plane would be to make themselves the reference beam. They can do
this by "rhythmically traversing" the hologram area: that is, by
"walking" in a regular cadence, by a regular coordinate system, through
the crests and valleys of the waves of the maze-like interference
pattern. [This might be the origin of some of the maze legends of
antiquity. Note also, the codes in Torah are part of this lattice-like
interference pattern.]
If our flatlander repeatedly reads/maps into their cortex, in a
regular, clocked, and counted way, the on/off wave texture of the
interference pattern, they will eventually model the holographic window
in their holographic mind (see the works of Karl Pribram and others on
holographic brain function). When they "let go", from an appropriate
mental perspective, they might then see-experience as a "flash of
enlightenment" the higher dimensional reality. When this happens to us,
we call this experience enlightenment/initiation, a kundalini "flash",
an out of body experience, a near-death or ego-death experience, or
"seeing the face of G-d." If Genesis is in fact a hyper-hologram opening
to the next dimension, we might achieve this transcendental contact by
rhythmically traversing the text: that is, by REGULARLY AND RHYTHMICALLY
CHANTING OR SINGING THE TEXT. Chanted recitation of the Torah text
could be a traditional - and effective - door to a repeatable personal
experience of the reality of a transcendent universe built on the
Eternal Unity of G-d.
I am not suggesting that every chanted prayer or Torah reading is
effective in this technical sense, only that it is plausible that the
reason for the tenacity of traditional religious practice in the face of
scientific "rationalism" is likely genuine personal experience by
sensitive persistent individuals today. Chanting Torah with the deepest
intensity and concentration in a yearly cycle over a lifetime would be a
good way to engage and experience (whether fully consciously or not) the
transcendent reality in Torah. (Can anyone deny the special feeling they
get from chanting Torah?)
In some instances it may be that unconscious fear of death drives
the uneducated into superficial religiosity, as the psychologists
scornfully claim, and it may be that religion can sometimes become the
"opiate of the masses", but that cannot be the whole truth. Is it not
more likely that the tenacious roots of our heritage and tradition are
still EXPERIENCED by the genuinely wise amongst us? If this is true,
then reality is far richer and broader than many of us - secular and
religious - have dared to guess.
Note: It is possible to see "the whole" and its parts in this
"holographic" way. For example, Arturo Toscanini was able to instantly
recall a particular note of a symphony on an individual musician's
score, and he was able to achieve his rapid and precise tempo by holding
in his mind the whole interwoven image of the symphony as one
totality. This achievement of concentration may even be comparable to
that of Moshe and of our sages.
B'Shalom,
Stan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <Keeves@...> (Akiva Miller)
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 14:34:03 -0500
Subject: The "codes" in the Torah
There has been considerable discussion recently about the various codes
which have been found in the Torah by counting the letters, etc. I get
the impression that certain individuals and groups have been using these
discoveries as a means of "proving" to Torah to be true and
God-given. Some seem to have a reverential feeling towards them,
capitalizing the word ("Codes"), and defending the codes from various
attacks.
I am worried. The tone of their postings is frightening, and reminds me
of only a few decades ago, when people said "See! The Torah tells us to
stay away from pork, because, among other reasons, it causes
trichinosis!", or when they said "See! The position a woman is in when
she immerses in the mikvah cleans out her inside very well! The Torah is
very concerned about our health!"
The reason we believe in God is one and one alone. As the Kuzari said:
"I am HaShem your God Who took you out of Egypt." -- We believe because
*we*were*there*. The Torah was not made up by an individual who
convinced his friends. The whole nation experienced it. What a shame
that we need these scientific discoveries to reinforce our emuna
(faith).
If some or many people have returned to Torah from these discoveries,
that is good in the short-term. But for long-term success, what will
happen if (chalila) we *do* find codes in one of the other works which
are being checked as test cases. Or what happens if the codes spell out
something obviously incorrect? Imagine for a moment, that a certain
string of letters is found to spell, in perfect Hebrew, that "The
seventh Rabbi of Lubavitch died in 5754. He was born in Honolulu and had
seven children. His name was Rabbi Menachem Schneerson of Brooklyn."
What would happen if such a statement would be found? Would the
discoverers say that "It is just a random sequence of letters, and the
proof that it is random is that it is not true?" Or will they say, "I
think we've been on a wild goose chase here, folks."
With all due respect (and I mean that sincerely) don't impress me with
all the wonderful things you have found. It's a house of cards.
Akiva Miller
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 17 Issue 92
