Jump to content

RoyalCraftiness

Members
  • Posts

    907
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    21

Posts posted by RoyalCraftiness

  1. Let’s assign prime numbers to each letter of the alphabet in order: A = 2, B = 3, C = 5, D = 7, E = 11, F = 13, G = 17, H = 19, I = 23, J = 29, K = 31, L = 37, M = 41, N = 43, O = 47, P = 53, Q = 59, R = 61, S = 67, T = 71, U = 73, V = 79, W = 83, X = 89, Y = 97, Z = 101.

    Using this sequence, the word “bacon” translates to: B = 3 A = 2 C = 5 O = 47 N = 43

    Now, we sum these prime numbers:

    3+2+5+47+43=100

    So, the sum of the word “bacon” when each letter is replaced with the corresponding prime number in the sequence is 100.

    Francis is 214. Together they are 314 which is pi without the decimal. Pi is of course TT, so what have I just proved using this formalism?

    if we use multiples of 3,  F. Bacon=123 which is compelling because 1+2+3=1x2x3=6

    If we do the same with Fibonacci numbers F. Bacon= 999

    If we do the same with the ordered even numbers, Bacon =70

    With the ordered uneven numbers , Bacon=65

    Together they are 135 which is the tonic, perfect 3rd and perfect fifth in the musical chord, so a very nice sounding tritone. 

    If we get very creative and use the ln2 equivalent of each position in the alphabet we find that N. Bacon equals 20 which is also TT.

    There is no shortage of very easy to define rules that can produce interesting suggestions when we are creatively hunting. There is no way to know which one, if any, one might be "concealing" by writing a word. They are all potentially there staring you in the face. All these worlds in which some assume these schemes are hatched are fictitious in the sense they are arbitrarily arrived to. One would have to be able to show what was known to have been used. This does not work to show that. One cannot bootstrap a likely method from elegance. Stating that is not being difficult, lol. Not wanting to hear it is being unreasonable. Trying to recruit with these schemes is deceptive. That is a charge brought against anyone who would try it. 

     

     

    • Thanks 1
  2. 9 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

    You are a bitter old man with real social issues about to be banned from this forum.

    You have offered some great resources and knowledge in the past, but it is clear your aim is to destroy and the only thing you are destroying is your privilege to be here. And that makes me a little sad, but we cannot destroy your obvious pain and suffering as you try to destroy our passions. Sorry, but that is a Truth.

    Who do I speak to for clemency John?

  3. 17 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

    You really believe you are a Savior and we are lost. Even if that is true nobody is soliciting a Savior in our forum to save us from whatever evil you imagine in your paranoid and very depressed mind. 😉

    Look CJ, you enjoy sharing your beliefs with us while basically calling us all crazy and foolish for what we believe. Are you not as confused as any of us, except maybe me? LOL

    I do hope, as a compassionate human being, that your infections will be cured. 😉

     

    I don't like that analogy. I am more like the destroyer of imaginary worlds, not the savior in one. I am the irritant who would potentially insult your savior.  I am like a Canaanite to an Israelite. I am not the "one", and "no thank you" for pushing me in the direction of wanting to start to believe that I could be.  I have no desire to believe. If you are happy in the Matrix, and I would rather destroy the Matrix you should not believe that I am intent on saving you. Stick to calling me the destroyer of fictitious worlds. One can neuter fiction by making it be understood to be fiction. That this might make you unhappy should not deter me.

    You are not that happy in this world so you retreat to your fictions. That's fine. It is the recruiting power of these fictions that is the threat to unborn highly suggestible minds. Ideas must be opposed because they persist long after the author of them is dead. The opposition must also exist on paper for it to persist. The Sonnets tell me so.

    Here there is a remnant of a fantasy world that was imagined by a young girl the mid 19th century. The infection that afflicted her came from ideas held by her parents who were Bacon fanatics in their own right before her. She ended up putting a lot of things on paper and influencing a lot of people because her family was wildly influential in the social and literary arena.  She could be compared to Alice who had wonderful adventures in Wonderland, and maybe she was the inspiration for Alice. It doesn't matter, because we know the type.

    The best way to have an inside track on what may have infected young Constance is to read what those close to her thought about her ideas. That lead me to her uncle who lived with the family a while and was quite astute indeed. He seems to have read the same things that the young girl read in Shakespeare and concluded that the whole thing was just a plea to believe in the Old Judge; nothing more, nothing less. I can see how he came to that conclusion. Bacon, it would seem, is only really interested in delivering you to his savior if he wrote Shakespeare. I don't think Haliburton tells us that he did. What he is telling us is that people can be lead astray with biases which they will look to prop up with wonderful new creations. The idea of the Old Judge (God) is itself an example of this. So we are caught in a meta world problem that is about fictions built upon fictions which we create using patterns like fractals. This is what Douglas Hofstatder wrote about so eloquently in his work Goedel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid. 

     

     

  4. 14 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

    And then there is having a good time for the pure sake of enjoying life.

    I suppose you enjoy the weird trip you are on, without drugs as you state. I have no understanding of that. Makes me happy I blew my reality walls away as a teenager. 😉

    Bacon did not teach me to suffer in ignorance afraid to think for myself. I'm not paranoid, not very much anyway. 🙂

    You need a chill pill. Trying to make us believe what you believe is not worth much value on a forum where we choose to be on for what we enjoy. Don't be a troll.

    That's exactly what scientifically inclined people do. They wake up every morning and try and rain on the parade of the  people who say things they claim should be accepted. This funny breed of people don't even have to be saying anything at all about what should be accepted, only that certain things shouldn't. The scientific method based in skepticism and the adversarial disproving of things irks believers or hedonists to no end. Believers, in their very dishonest ways, love to pretend to be scientists when they are marketing their ideas, though.

    Why not just be as blissful as cave men? I have very good indications that my neighbor has adopted this approach. Once beer was developed he needed no more progress. He has forsaken the razor and the bathtub to find his happiness. However, his children needed the discovery of cocaine in order that their business ventures could work.  One doesn't have to go back that far in history to find a state of mind and being that would suit him. Some are happy role playing the part of alchemists in a world where alchemy is now just a bad memory of simpler, more foolish thinking. There never was an alchemist who knew better than anyone today. Delusions of grandeur were more common in the past. We grow humbler now, or at least we should. The more we discover, the more we are shown that we did not know what we thought we knew. It's not that linear a relationship, but in general that is true. 

    You need the annoyance of people who will present things differently than you do. To me, you are an invitation to find the flaw in the thinking behind the presentation. One has to always search for that thing that someone has accepted that makes his position so unshakeable. 

    To be interested in Bacon is also to want to destroy the many myths about Bacon. One of the things I have come to realize is that he was a misguided scientist. He happened to err in the right direction, and this is why the development of science ended up producing the evidence against his beloved ideas of divinely created architecture.  It did not take that long after him for us to realize that randomness is what drives order. God should be equated to a chaotic principle. Destruction leads to new order. I am here only trying to be that Godly in my destruction. The chaos is good for you, but not necessarily for existing beliefs in places where they are championed.

    Also if you would like me to post less, make it rain less. I'd rather be outside working.

     

     

  5. 16 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

    I like that, "4 watch tau'er squares". Clever and I may kick that around in my infected mind. 🙂

    I know you can't believe that Dee or anybody else has ever actually tapped into past and future thoughts because that is outside your tiny bubble of reality, but what if that is possible? I bet you cannot even ask that without feeling you are vulnerable to anything science has yet to explain.

    I'd not want to be in your bubble, believe that. 🙂

    Funny, I was sending messages and visions back to Dee before I knew he was getting messages from Angels. I used to do it for prehistoric Shamans when looking for arrowheads. Just for fun.

     

    It is not our role to believe the outpourings of charlatans. About the only thing available to us is engineering things and reverse engineering things using what works well enough to understand relationships on our energy scales. There is every indication that what was engineered there is the product of individuals who are caught up in a numerological Judeo Christian game which is the product of speculations common in this period because esotericism was in vogue and totally exploitable. It is similar to the Victorian obsession of trying to read secret messages in texts using any rule imaginable.  Because there is an apparent design we know that it can only be the product of a designer, and since there is no God who has designed the world with number counting schemes the blame falls on the presenters. There's a long list of things you'd have to believe in for Dee's suggestion to be unconditionally accepted. I don't think you have even begun to examine all that you would have to accept a priori. You have a bias to accept Dee, because you have loaded expectations abut what "powers" he possessed. If Dee believed in magic he would have been susceptible of being manipulated by Kelley, or vice versa. 

    You are throwing out the word "time" like you know the word intimately and know that one can travel it like a highway. We don't happen to know that this is possible, so we should not claim we do. Just like the case of gravity being just the consequence of the curvature of spacetime we are not wise to think of time outside of being a relationship. I use spacetime because space and time are probably just the semblance of "things" which many assume are two distinct things. The clock may very well be a lie, but it is a very good piece of engineering that allows us to use the lie in a way that works for us. We can set the hands of the clock back to previous times, and this is not known to be possible about the order or arrangements of units of space. It would be like asking you to reorganize a dump truck of sand particles to their past order after they had been dumped. Doable in principle, but computationally irreducible in practice. To be able to do that you would need a pocket Universe to simulate it in (that much processing power). To say that we cannot do it may also be related to the processing order of any rule we might imagine governs things on the smallest scales. 

    If I was to believe Stephen Wolfram, space is akin to the basic unit and time is the processing order of rules in the ruliad.  But I should not believe it unconditionally. It is because it allows us to engineer certain things that we ought to suspect that this is in the right line of thinking. The clue is in what we can do with a suggestion. If all we can do is demand that it be accepted then we have nothing.

    Belief, in the hands of people who take pride in the freedom to believe anything, is possible of all sorts of consequences.  I maintain that such a dynamic will work against the advancement of learning because it comes with a great inertia. "You can't make me not believe" is common enough of a refrain today. "You need to believe this or else" comes bothering you at your door often enough.

    Peace is to know that you do not know and that there is not necessarily a way to know. 

  6. 1 hour ago, Light-of-Truth said:

    So you are like a Church preaching that everything we believe is wrong and you offer a better way. Ultimately your religion is that we should accept that Willy Shaks was the author of the works and we should just believe it because it is not worth our attention?

    I am infected with joy and pleasure in seeking my favorite candidate’s possible claim to the Authorship. 

    Without my “hobby” I might not be as happy as I am. Where does a person find the passion that feeds their life? Wish I could help my 89 year old dad and my wife find something to spark their interest besides watching TV.

    Imagine how dull this forum would be if we all gave up our passion and said, “Forget it, we are all lost souls manipulating each other and only CJ is wise.” Yikes! How sad that would be. Lol

    That's not the case I would be satisfied to not know and to not be told that we know when we don't know. The fact there has been infection and contagion is what draws one in to perform a diagnostic on the patients. Show me your symptoms so I may better know the thing infecting you. I have hope that mild infections can be cured, leaving the world in a wonderful state of uncertainty. 

    • Confused 1
  7. 37 minutes ago, Light-of-Truth said:

    So you are like a Church preaching that everything we believe is wrong and you offer a better way. Ultimately your religion is that we should accept that Willy Shaks was the author of the works and we should just believe it because it is not worth our attention?

    I am infected with joy and pleasure in seeking my favorite candidate’s possible claim to the Authorship. 

    Without my “hobby” I might not be as happy as I am. Where does a person find the passion that feeds their life? Wish I could help my 89 year old dad and my wife find something to spark their interest besides watching TV.

    Imagine how dull this forum would be if we all gave up our passion and said, “Forget it, we are all lost souls manipulating each other and only CJ is wise.” Yikes! How sad that would be. Lol

    This place would be like the non existent empty skeptic forums of red pill takers. It would be dull and uninteresting, but logically sound. Take the blue pill and have fun in the Matrix. Your energies will serve some unknown purpose there that is not tied to your joy. The fact you live is a very beneficial economic claim on resources for those who have built up the Matrix of ideas around us.  The blue pill is about resignation to belief in someone's plan. If you refuse to believe in anything your life is a constant battle against the encroaching sentinels.  The Matrix is a great story that allows our attitudes to be explored. There are some people who are not happy seeing other people being happy being gullible. I have no understanding of why that is. That the gullible would be angry at the prospects of there being individuals against fake happiness is perplexing too.  Should we have games like the stock market that play us more than we play them? It may be that some do not like to have to coexist with fictions because they long for the truth that no one wants to believe in. 

    • Confused 1
  8. 2 hours ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

    "...many writers have noted that it’s impossible to prove that the reception of the Enochian language or system was a fraud."

    This is true of leprechauns and Sasquatches. How does one prove that someone's creative imagination is fraudulent? Those who truly believe do so with legitimate conviction. We know this from watching Derren Browne videos involving highly suggestible individuals. Suggestible minds at a séance are capable of experiencing things that non suggestible minds are not, informing us that experience means nothing when it comes to determining what truly happened in the case of it being filmed. It is a mistake to assume fraud in the case of such individuals. Their experiences are real, but their realties are fraudulent in the sense that they are manufactured from within the brain from biases that make their way into minds by suggestion. You would first have to possess a belief which says that séances would allow communication with spirits. The same thing is true of a religious experience. There can be none if there isn't first a belief that one is possible. It is possible to condition for the acceptance of this suggestion. 

    The danger in this sort of magic is that one can introduce just about anything and have it operate on some people. We are all susceptible to this to some degree, hence the opportunity for AIs and LLMs to work on us as conditioning vectors which can be profited from. The angel AVE can be compared to a large language model. What can sink us with "AI" is the belief in intelligence when there is none. This parlor game that was created by Kelley and Dee reminds me of John Searle's Chinese room problem where the translation rule is mistaken for the power to know the meaning of symbols which requires intelligence. You can never imply that the method knows anything. What you think you know comes out of belief and bias.

    Interestingly, the 12x13 is reminiscent of the 25 character grid in which we can fit in the Latin alphabet.  4 times that many characters give 24 x 26= 624 which is 24. 98 squared, so close to what one would want to create to account for a grid of 25 x 25. 624 is 6 less than a number divided by 7 and 3 less than a number divided by 11. It would appear that Dee and Kelley worked out something that would contain at least a letter count that would accommodate a numerology using 7 and 11 by injecting other characters within a cross. The Sonnets for example are numbered 154 which is divisible by 7 and 11 exactly. 12x13 is 156 so that sort of gridding was going to have to be fudged, which is why we probably get the cross with empty character spaces.

    Just for the heck of it I've modified my own bit of letter gridding magic to produce a larger grid with a black cross which contains four watchtowers that I have called 4 instances of T. Mine are watch"tau"ers. I have decided to use Neil Young's version of "Four Strong Winds" as its theme song (subject to his approval).

    I could accommodate the desired numerology by making he cross as wide as I wanted and by including blank spaces. This was not revealed to me by any angel. It has slowly come out of only reverse engineering the 24 character alphabet. The end result is identical to a cross and four pellet suggestion. It is possibel to show how similar this is to Masonic compass and square geometry in some intersting ways. 

    1r260N9.jpg

    If you consider how many squares of any size one can make out of all these squares shown there are 25 squares in total, not considering the 4 watch"tau"er squares that are just ornaments. 25 squared is 625, one less than 4 x 12x 13=624.

     

    • Like 1
  9. 22 minutes ago, Light-of-Truth said:

    Alfred Dodd was a person with a passion, like many of us. Sharing one's viewpoint or ideas does not mean you are mentally ill or manipulative. Having an audience does not mean you have a following.

    Dodd was a Freemason, he does not hide that. His take on the Sonnets reflects his point of view. Agree or not with his arrangement of the Sonnets, I don't feel as if he was creating a Cult of Dodd trying to manipulate my mind.

    But maybe you would claim that all sharing of ideas is manipulating each other's minds?

    Hmmm, are you trying to manipulate my mind, CJ? LOL

    BTW, depression and paranoia are considered mental illness.

    Of course I am. In a way that will make you more skeptical, of course...If you can start  to identify what has infected you then that is a victory for you which I can have no part in.  I rarely will encourage anyone to establish beliefs in the merit of old ideas. What has to come is better new ones.

     

    I

    • Haha 1
  10. 1 hour ago, Christie Waldman said:

    It's easy to throw around the word "bias." But did you even read the book? Do you even know why he put these personal, private poems in the order he did? Because in that order, they made sense to him as telling Francis Bacon's life story. He explains his belief that the 1609 date printed as date of publication is false, that the true date is 1625. 1609 was only the date the sonnets were filed with the Stationers Register. Printers then would print whatever date you told them to print, Dodd writes. The change in the order of the sonnets for publication was so it would not be obvious that the sonnets were telling Bacon's life story, to bypass the censors which sometimes dealt very harshly with offenders. The Queen had ordered no one was to speak of the Succession. Doing so had cost Richard Stubbes his right hand. Dodd says these poems were Bacon's way of talking to his mother, Queen Elizabeth. See Alfred Dodd, The Personal Poems of Francis Bacon: Shake-speare's Sonnet Diary, Alfred Dodd Edition (Liverpool: Daily Post Printers, 1938), 198-204. That makes sense to me. I think it would not be bias but a conviction to telling the truth that would make a man go to the trouble of publishing a 304 page book on a topic such as this at his own expense. If you read the entire book and still think you see "bias" on Dodd's part, then, please would you explain your theory.

    "Nullius in Verba" is my motto. It is not so easy to throw in bias that some would start by assuming one is always at play. We are formed and acted upon by spells cast in symbolic language. This invites, among other things, authors of "spells" to try their luck at publishing things they dream up.

    You are dealing with professional confidence men here, one whom was likely mentally ill and very manipulative, but who can really know to what degree? There is no such thing as magic. Magic is being in control of narratives if it is anything. Our confidence in money is magic. What there is amounts to the suggestibility of the human mind that is at anyone's disposal to work with. If it were not for that there would never have been a history of initiatory schemes to achieve transformation of minds.

    The incremental approach to modifying behavior is part of a long game that has been played by cultures. Those who survive have very grand arching narratives that are well defended are carefully crafted to accommodate human biases regrading safety. We get a sense of it as soon as we step into a Church where we discover that there is an approach that is scheduled to play on the individual from cradle to grave. It is certainly not love that is behind it. It is a desire to have cooperative schemes that can ensure internal safety within factions, I would argue. Ideas are settled upon and they are embellished in the direction of not being rejected. Ove time there are always movements to return to previous versions of ideas that sprout up. Enochian magic is older than Dee.

    Here there is a community of suggestible minds who operate on various older suggestions that people love to quote from as the gospel. Very few seem interested in finding the nugget that has infected the minds of our predecessors.

    Nothing ever gets explained by quoting people. To truly understand our history we have to know how our minds work, and we don't. It's a mystery that has defied scientific inquiry so far. It is highly unlikely that animals have ethics. It is why one must train an animal to be what he is not by natural inclination. We are fortunate that fortune alone allows for "good" character traits to have surfaced in he right blend to allow for some offspring to be trained to be cooperative by mimetic mechanisms. 

    Skepticism and ejection of suggestions which is at the basis of the scientific method is adversarial. It may be why so many detest the sciences today. It is threatening to a host of beliefs that would rather persist and which demand the freedom to condition for in the world. Who will stand in the way of anyone's religion? It has become a safe place for believing in anything.

    If you read Bacon it is clear that he was highly infected with religious ideas, probably to the point of being hopelessly incapable of excluding magical thinking. We are so far beyond that today. No one should read Dee and Kelly seriously. These are case studies in how the mind can work when it is armed with novel ideas.

    Trust people at your own risk. No one deserves to have his word taken at face value.

  11. 16 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

    Many doorknockers have stuck them in my mailbox or in the door. LOL

    I think it was AVE who described the four Watchtowers to Dee.

    http://www.jwmt.org/v2n18/tablets.html

    Let’s return to 1584.   Less than a month after Dee transcribed the Angelic Governors, his accomplice Edward Kelley, on the summer solstice, dreamed of four gigantic Watchtowers which (by his description) ruled the “World.”  We’ll see later that this “World” Kelley dreamed of might mean something other than our day-to-day physical reality:  again, not knowing when or how to “translate” terms in and out of their Renaissance mythological viewpoint has been a stumbling block for many of us who work with Enochian materials.  

    By June 25, these Watchtowers are communicated as four 12 x 13 grids filled with Enochian letters and joined by a Black Cross.   This is the material Dee calls the “Great Table,” which we might think of as the great central operating system that builds upon all components that have been received before, and through which the operator can run particular linguistic strings, like the Enochian calls.  On June 26, 1584, via his scryer Kelley, Dee records the angel AVE telling him the “purpose” for these four Watchtowers:[16]

    Ave:  Now to the purpose.  Rest, for the place is Holy.  First, generally what this Tablet Containeth. 

    1. All human knowledge.

    2. Out of it springeth Physick.

    3. The knowledge of the Elemental Creatures among you.  How many kinds there are, and for what use they were created.  Those that live in the air, by themselves.  Those that live in the waters, by themselves.  Those that live in the earth, by themselves.  The property of fire—which is the secret life of all things. 

    4. The knowledge, finding, and use of Metals.  The virtues of them.  The congelations and virtues of Stones.  They [these preceding three things] are all of one matter.

    5. The conjoining and knitting together of Natures.  The destruction of Nature, and of things that may perish.

    6. Moving from place to place (as into this Country, of that Country at pleasure.]

    7. The knowledge of all crafts Mechanical.

    8. Transmutatio formalis, sed non essentialis [formal alchemical transmutation.]

    9. [Dee’s note in margin:] The ninth chapter may be added, and is of the secrets of men knowing, whereof there is a particular table.

    Now I need to look in my box of old envelopes stuffed with Bacon info and find the Xerox copy of the Dee book, or maybe only a chapter, that was sent to me on that day when I was looking at four watchtowers near a town that starts with the letters "Ave..." while I was consciously trying to send Dee a message from his future. Funny how these things happen. I wondered if I was AVE, but hardly an angel! LOL

    <--1881-->

     

     

     

    "...many writers have noted that it’s impossible to prove that the reception of the Enochian language or system was a fraud."

    This is true of leprechauns and Sasquatches. How does one prove that someone's creative imagination is fraudulent? Those who truly believe do so with legitimate conviction. We know this from watching Derren Browne videos involving highly suggestible individuals. Suggestible minds at a séance are capable of experiencing things that non suggestible minds are not, informing us that experience means nothing when it comes to determining what truly happened in the case of it being filmed. It is a mistake to assume fraud in the case of such individuals. Their experiences are real, but their realties are fraudulent in the sense that they are manufactured from within the brain from biases that make their way into minds by suggestion. You would first have to possess a belief which says that séances would allow communication with spirits. The same thing is true of a religious experience. There can be none if there isn't first a belief that one is possible. It is possible to condition for the acceptance of this suggestion. 

    The danger in this sort of magic is that one can introduce just about anything and have it operate on some people. We are all susceptible to this to some degree, hence the opportunity for AIs and LLMs to work on us as conditioning vectors which can be profited from. The angel AVE can be compared to a large language model. What can sink us with "AI" is the belief in intelligence when there is none. This parlor game that was created by Kelley and Dee reminds me of John Searle's Chinese room problem where the translation rule is mistaken for the power to know the meaning of symbols which requires intelligence. You can never imply that the method knows anything. What you think you know comes out of belief and bias.

    Interestingly, the 12x13 is reminiscent of the 25 character grid in which we can fit in the Latin alphabet.  4 times that many characters give 24 x 26= 624 which is 24. 98 squared, so close to what one would want to create to account for a grid of 25 x 25. 624 is 6 less than a number divided by 7 and 3 less than a number divided by 11. It would appear that Dee and Kelley worked out something that would contain at least a letter count that would accommodate a numerology using 7 and 11 by injecting other characters within a cross. The Sonnets for example are numbered 154 which is divisible by 7 and 11 exactly. 12x13 is 156 so that sort of gridding was going to have to be fudged, which is why we probably get the cross with empty character spaces.

    Just for the heck of it I've modified my own bit of letter gridding magic to produce a larger grid with a black cross which contains four watchtowers that I have called 4 instances of T. Mine are watch"tau"ers. I have decided to use Neil Young's version of "Four Strong Winds" as its theme song (subject to his approval).

    I could accommodate the desired numerology by making he cross as wide as I wanted and by including blank spaces. This was not revealed to me by any angel. It has slowly come out of only reverse engineering the 24 character alphabet. The end result is identical to a cross and four pellet suggestion. It is possibel to show how similar this is to Masonic compass and square geometry in some intersting ways. 

    1r260N9.jpg

    • Like 1
  12. On 5/29/2024 at 3:44 PM, Light-of-Truth said:

    There must be some kind of way outta here. 😉

    One of my top few synchronicity events in my entire life involved a John Dee book and some Watchtowers in my view. It was on a day when I was trying to send messages back to Dee using 1881, and a book was handed to me as a surprise. Who else connects Dee to the Watchtowers?

    image.png.ea3be4b1c2d408a89609ffccf9c98c42.png

     

    If someone passed you a copy of the Watchtower you were given Jehovah Witness literature. lol It's published in no less than 444 languages. 

    • Haha 2
  13. On 5/26/2024 at 11:09 PM, Light-of-Truth said:

    Two easy ways to think of the Sonnets design are as a clock and a compass.

    12:00 AM, Midnight with the compass pointing North the Sonnets begin with:

    FRom fairest creatures we desire increase,

    Line 1, Day 1, Sonnet 1. The cycle begins...

    12:00 AM on my clock the hands points up, or North. For me, Midnight points North by default, both hands.

    The end of Sonnet 77 is the Middle of the Sonnets it just came up in this thread. 77 Sonnets and then 77 more Sonnets to make 154. Easy math.

    The last line of the first half of the Sonnets is the last Line of Sonnet 77 which is Line 1,078 of the Sonnets:

    Shall profit thee,and much inrich thy booke.

    So this Line is at the 6:00 place on a clock (5:59 and 59 seconds) and due South on a compass. Both hands down. I've yet to understand why this line is here, but may not need to.

    The "Middle" of the first half is easy to find. On a clock I'd look for 3:00 O'clock or East on a compass. 

    The Sonnets Pyramid design has 364 Days synced with the 154 Sonnets. The first half of the Sonnets has 182 Days and 77 Sonnets. The second half of the Sonnets has the same numbers. The 182 Days of each half can be divided in half to end up with 91 Days in each quarter.

    The last Line of Day 91, ending the first quarter of the Sonnets is:

    That by this seperation I may giue:

    We'll revisit that, but what is the Line at 9:00 and West on the compass?

    It is the star to euery wandring barke,

    This is a very important Line (1618) in the Sonnets in a very important Sonnet (116).

    OK, so let's think about this. To me the "star" should point North. So if we accept "That by this seperation I may give:" with the colon in the original and rotate the clock/compass by 90 degrees we have the "It is the star to euery wandring barke," at 11:59:59 PM on Day 364 to be the final Line of the Sonnets with both hands up and pointing true North.

    That means the line, "Shall profit thee,and much inrich thy booke" would be at 9:00 (8:59:59) and pointing West.

    Let me say this, I have explored four variations and they all work. It's like your can turn the clock and compass by 90 degrees and each arrangement has special surprises.

    If we end the Sonnets with "Shall profit thee,and much inrich thy booke" at 11:59:59 PM, which fits into one scenario, then, "It is the star to euery wandring barke," is at 3:00 pointing East. I feel like Freemasons might like that idea. The Sun is a star, right? 😉

    The Sonnets design is so amazing, even knowing what I know it blows my mind. I believe it is a lot older than Bacon and Shakespeare.

     

     

    By definition the Sun is the Great Oriental (Eastern) star. It is called that because of where it is found on the horizon when the Sun rises. The Western star could be thought of as the same Sun setting on the horizon (as in death). The occidental star guides our ships (lives). Death is the signpost that guides you to the afterlife. Go this way...

    When Haliburton wrote of the star that guides the sailors' barques he used the Stella Maria (Polaris). This has the connotation of the star that guides all other stars as all stars revolve around the Northern Star in our sky. That works too. 

    Geographically speaking the East has long been equated with Jerusalem (it once was treated as a pole atop the world in earlier times), so it is reasonable to think that the meaning of going West is to tail it in the opposite direction (in the direction of the setting Sun), perhaps through the Pillars of Hercules. Traditionally, the sailors sailed West by following the great Northern Constellations which were visible at or near their latitudes.  For Northern Europe that was around 40-45 degrees latitude. This is where you can inject the Summer triangle and Cygnus in the narrative because of their utmost prominence. They come and add another geometric component to the story with the triangular asterism. The Eastern triangular asterism is Triangulum. On this line pointing West we can imagine a symbolic journey towards the completion of some preordained journey. To Bacon and company, heading West was promoted as that sort of God ordained plan for England. 

    Going 100 degrees (for completion) West from Jerusalem gets you to a longitude of 66.6 W of Paris. The third and the two thirds are involved in this journey through the Paris longitude. There is something very musical about involving the perfect third with the perfect fifth when they are attached to the tonic. It recalls an idea of a harmony of the spheres upon the globe treated as a sphere. 

     

    • Like 1
    • Wow! 1
  14. On 5/26/2024 at 2:58 PM, Allisnum2er said:

    Hi C.J,

    My research led me to this passage few years ago.

    At that time, I did not imagine that some messages could eventually be concealed in the middle of some passages.

    However, I quickly realized that there were some differences between the text in the First Folio (1623) and the one in the first (1603) and second (1604) Quatro.

    https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/BL_Q2_Ham/38/index.html%3fzoom=750.html

    image.png.6952b3ccb0be34f997b2e5333db76856.png

    Notice that in the Quatros, there is no mention of Hercules and his load and that in the passage of Hamlet we have "twenty, fortie, fifty, a hundred". Moreover, "s'bloud" is missing in the First Folio.

    In my view, the missing "fifty" could be explained by the importance of the sum 20 + 40 + 100 = 160

    It could be a clue, an indication, suggesting to take a closer look at the pages of the First Folio related with 160.

    At that time, my idea was strenghtened by another one , a cipher that I found  that gave interesting results and that I called the K1 cipher.

    1373672045_2022-12-07(1).png.5fe8dab7585c35a74d7c410ad2e96a8b.png

    I shared a part of my ideas/suggestions on pages 160 of the First Folio by the past.

    Here is something that I did not share before.

    The first page 160 of the First Folio in " A Midsummer Night's Dream" is the 177th page of the Book by counting from Ben Jonson's poem "To the Reader".

    https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/SLNSW_F1/178/index.html%3fzoom=1275.html

    177 is WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE simple cipher.

    If we consider that Ben Jonson's poem is on page 2, this page 160 is the 178th page of the First Folio.

    Interestingly, 178 is the Kay Cipher of WILL TUDOR.

    On this page , a simple message was conceal'd with a simple  instruction to follow in order to find it.

    And the message was concealed ... IN THE MIDDLE !

    "Make periods in the midst of sentences"

    "To shew our simple skill"

    image.png.498f7850ceb8780c436d3682ef8bd9fa.png

    Notice that the Prologue tells us all we need to know in order to find this simple message.

    WILL IS HERE.

    "That is the true beginning of our end"

    The letters A and T may refer to Aleph and Tav , the Beginning and the End.

    Now, WHO IS THIS "WILL" ?

    WILL(IAM) SHAKESPEARE or WILL TUDOR or both of them ? 🙂

     I underlined "but all disordered" because I wonder if it could be an anagram concealing "tudor".

     

    Back to the passage in Hamlet that you mentioned.

    I think that you could be right with your idea of "FORTUNA".

    Once again, I share ideas/ suggestions/( But maybe should I use now the word "infections" ? 😄)

    This passage could have been modified between 1604 and 1623 in order to conceal more messages.

    image.png.a56c67ec3078ca0a4ec847b6abf4efae.png

    One of the loads of Hercules was the weight of the WORLD.

    Right under "carry it" the word "Lord" and the "w" of "would" form the word WORLD.

    And fortuna could , indeed, be a possibility that make sense.

    Now, why Hercules and not Atlas instead ?

    Could it be because of a link between Hercules and Fortuna that does not exist between Atlas and Fortuna ?

    https://www.antiquarius.it/en/xvii-xviii-century-dutch-school/9457-vertu-mesure-du-bon-heur-hercules-fortuna.html

    image.png.263ccf0944007dc16fe4fbbf9cdcb89d.png

    I do not say that this is what was intended but a possibility, I share my thoughts.

    Another important load of Hercules was the Two Pillars, the "Twin T".

    https://collections.artsmia.org/art/124314/hercules-carrying-the-columns-of-gaza-sebald-beham

    Could it be an invitation to find the two pillars (T.T.) ?

    image.png.2fb0e7a24fd96180b77292f1dca49252.png

    T.T. W. TUDOR -  Little Porke (Hamlet)

    There is something in this (minus the fifty) that is more than natural. If only philosophy could find out. Philosophy is most certainly science here as we can conclude that there is a play with natural philosophy (what became science to us). There's no way to pierce the mystery of death with science.

    I am interested in the symbolic meaning attributed to 100 in the Bible. It is given as completion. I assume this comes from Hellenism and the idea of the squaring of 10. The cubing of 10 gives us the glorious reign of Christ in 1000 years, for example. 

    There seems to be no doubt about 20 and 40. They are carriers of the death and resurrection idea. It may very well be that all is imagined to rest on the twin pillars that are life and afterlife. In this life you are merely standing on one leg, and it is one leg in the journey. The other leg of the journey is going to take you to the undiscovered country. 

    20/100 is the perfect fifth. With the third and the tonic completes the musical chord (tritone). 40 is of the dimension 5x8 which is used to depict the cross with a midway point on its stem that forms an angle of 40 degrees with the end points of the arms. There something "scientificky" in this that echoes the supernatural beliefs in numbers. To me, at least, this gives an insight into how the propagandizing of patterns in numbers was exploited to attempt to strengthen religious beliefs. 

    There is certainly an idea of the "will" of God being behind it since we are constantly being presented with the idea of an architect with a plan.  

    Symbols get borrowed a lot. I came across the TT symbolism again this morning in a not too surprising place:

    spacer.png

    We can immediately see how the 18 and the 40 were also incorporated into the symbolic package which includes the starting crescent (symbol of the rebirth) and the white horse and the dark horse (who is carrying away the white female figure). Nice bridge into the K cipher scheme...

    Anyway, it is also a good reminder that people who use these symbols can be up to no good. What hides behind a symbol is not always true to the ideal. This is true of Christianity and of Protestantism. 

    • Like 2
  15. On 5/26/2024 at 2:23 PM, Christie Waldman said:

    I don't know if this has been mentioned, but Alfred Dodd in The Personal Poems of Francis Bacon: Shakespeare's Sonnet Diary (Liverpool: Daily Post Printers, 1938) puts the Sonnets in a different order and explains his reasons for doing so. It might be interesting to view things in that order at some point, as well.

    The reason would be his bias, and it would be good to see what is biasing him.  This particular Sonnet is known to be  related to others in the work, so it may be that one can start to imagine a certain skip sequencing.  It is all up for grabs. The skip may in fact be a known mathematical series. I believe Lewis Carroll exploited this. He would have been aware of what people were suggesting/seeing in his time that he could have used to give an example of in his own works.

    • Like 1
  16. On 5/29/2024 at 6:00 PM, Allisnum2er said:

    Hi CJ,

    I would say that in "Quote me : I am a dwarf." you used 3 times the letter "a" (two too many) and that at that time "dwarfe" was spelled with a final letter "e".

    But thanks to you I learned a new word in English : dwarfish, that fit perfectly into the "fish" theme ! 😄

    And I would say that if bacon was a dwarf he was a gyant dwarfe.

    This is a reference to "Love's Labor's Lost".

    https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/Bran_F1/147/index.html%3fzoom=1200.html

    Looking for the spelling of "dwarf" used by Shakespeare in the First Folio, I noticed an error in "gyant drawfe".

    I like to think that this is not an error but an invitation to "draw" something but what ? Maybe a constellation ! 🙂 

    Then, I noticed the word half vertically.

    Interestingly , there are many ways to form the name "BACON".

    Rob, one synchronicity for you, notice "dee" right above "night-watch". 😉

    image.png.a74162da9cb16eeeb97176344f821e6c.png

    And talking about the "Fish" theme, I noticed "Cod", peeces or piscis ?, "Sole".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sole_(fish)

    Is there another fishes in disguise in this scene ?

    image.png.eb82afb8a6c4132adeafacba6e136884.png

    "Gardon" that stands for "guerden" meaning "reward" is also the French name of a Fish, the Roach. 🙂 

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_roach

    I wonder whether Shakespeare used  "Gardon" instead of Guerden in order to hide "Don Gar".

    That could explain why he talks about "Don Cupid", to put us on the path, "Don" meaning Lord.

    image.png.9718033d3e9e6afc37278e6b379a55ee.png

    And I remind you that Gar, meaning "spear" is the 33rd and last rune of the Anglo-saxon Futhark.

    Gardon -> Don Gar -> Lord 33 (Spear) -> Lord Bacon (Spear) ?

    Thus, the message concealed by the clown could be ...

    Francis Bacon (33) - Lord Bacon (Spear)

    The item referred to is the codpiece, that "armor" of the male genitalia. He's using King of codpeeces to mock in the fashion that many mocked Henry VIII for modelling some rather large codpieces on his tiny frame. It's a way to laugh at someone's vanity. Is Bacon mocking the original Tudor son here?

    You reply does support the point I am making. Whatever word cue I might send your way I am confident that you could extract it from the text in a way that is supportive of some preexisting idea. This is what is so troubling about the many possibilities that exist.

    This isn't synchronicity. It's what comes out of the laws of large numbers in probability. Flip a coin often enough and it is not rare at all to have 50 tails come in a row. It must happen at some point. This is why it is so useful to know what domain of possibility we are playing with when we are fishing out letters in a large text. Millions of letters read in millions of ways means anything should there to be found which looks improbable to a passerby. 

    • Haha 1
  17. 12 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

    I suspect it was Dee who manipulated Bacon's story being born of a Virgin totally Sealed with Elizabeth's Seal numbers (huh?) of 157 and 287. But I have no proof, just an opinion poking around here for a few years.

    Religion is something that kind of turns me off. All the control, the rules and the rulers, guilt and blame, the lies and hypocrisy, so on. Yet I cannot deny that Bacon's life may have been an orchestrated living Virgin Birth to Queen Elizabeth fable. Perhaps not just Bacon, who was an amazing person, but an entire collection of English minds were rewriting the bible as they were to do one day to actually rewrite the KJV. Shakespeare is the product of that play.

    In Bacon's lifetime his friends hinted and joked about among themselves and in public in print. Then it was forgotten for decades. Now we are starting to understand more about Bacon's life and how tragic it is he was born into a story he had so little control over.

     

    How do you know he was an amazing person? Notoriety? Do you credit the works of Shakespeare and others to him to come to that conclusion? What was he if he did not write those? What I assume endeared him to his closest buddies, like Rawley, was his flawless Christian faith and tolerance. But did he live by what he preached? If you do not see value in religion then what did Bacon ever do to earn his accolades? It's his vision as a statesman that seems to have been apart from that of others. He wasn't an experimentalist in the natural sciences, but he seems to have collected many observations from others. 

    Such a man, if he was to show up and run for politics today, ought not be too well supported. No one would tolerate to be governed by a Christian ideologue except for the far right who keep strange bedfellows to the point of being openly dissonant. The science and technology people would generally not have his back, and he'd be called reactionary in his ways. No one would agree that he was amazing or not.

    At the surface there is no obvious influence between Dee and Bacon. Dee and Elizabeth were a matched pair (a master of suggestion + a highly suggestible individual). It appears that Brahe and Kepler had more of an influence on him than Dee did when it comes to the planets and cosmology. Bacon doesn't appear to be a fan of Enochian magic, does he? 

    We can imagine anything. Our imagination is guided only by our biases which are informed by the public relations sciences. Bacon was not an alchemist. He was in the line of Paracelsus who more or less mocked lesser alchemists for their con artistry. What there does appear to be traces of in the structure of the Sonnets is the Christian flavor of early astronomy influenced by German mysticism. 

    Nevertheless, he is considered a great statesman and an important philosopher. Are these the contributions you measure him by? I'm not a big fan of English Philosophy. It delivered us modern economic thinking which is a disaster. It treats the world as a God given gift to man for him to exploit for his pursuit of happiness. It's the philosophy of irresponsibility towards nature and blind faith in a divine plan which accommodates our complete ruin and almost invites an end times. We fail today to the degree that we are stuck in these old ways of thinking.  For his expansionist views, those who try and send us to the heavenly bodies to live there might have an ally. I would assume the crew of the USS Enterprise would agree. Keep going West young man. Find the great Occidental star and set your bearing to it. Head to the stars and return to the father.  Can you not see how we are all stuck in this grand arching narrative? How do we escape it?

    Bacon was no Alan Watts, lol.

    • Like 1
  18. 11 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

    I believe he actually was clinging onto hope that he would become King of England. It was who he was born, in my opinion. Read the Sonnets and that is the story being told with emotion.

    Elizabeth kept enough hope alive in Bacon that he never dared to have a child. Yet in the Sonnets it is clear he wanted to "print more". Edward de Weird did not have that kind of personal restraint, at all. I can't imagine how Bacon maintained his public image as anyone but Shakespeare and the Tudor Prince of England.

    Can a philosopher be a King? Can a King be a philosopher? Heir or not, he wasn't cut out of the right cloth to be a King of England. What is required of one is the propensity for deception, manipulation, callousness and overall power lust. Kings must have their enemies executed before they strike. The ends justify the means. It would seem Bacon was too much of an idealist and a reformer of people to have been a strong leader.

    Look at the rabble in the US today. Do they not salivate for a strong leader with blood lust? Do they seek the intellectual with moderate ways to lead them? They turn to the great liars and spreaders of deception and intolerance.  Bacon would have been like Jimmy Carter, a kind man of faith detested by his own faction for his willingness to want to change their ways. Besides, he supported King James. Men like Bacon prefer to have their heads in books, wouldn't you say? As a supporting statesman he was in a good role.

    • Like 1
  19. 7 hours ago, Allisnum2er said:

    Hi Rob,

    I did not have this Sonnet in mind when I composed my poem, but facing the Sonnet 6 (3+3 or 2+1+3) with the word "heire" at the end, and most of all with several "ten" echoing "The Alchemical (con)Quest", I wondered if the secret identity of this "heire" could have been concealed using Mediocria (The Middle way).

    image.png.968ebfa7b3e84dfcae6a2971e5555c77.png

    I noticed some interesting things from an arithmetical point of view ...

    image.png.264ca16d8e64a58bf6d879df09a908ac.png

    F.BAC.

    "ten" + "ten" + "one" + "ten" + "ten" + "ten" = 51

    The 51th word of the poem is "breed", almost in the center, and its simple cipher is ... 33 !

    And by counting "self-wild" as one word, there are 62 words from "breed" to "heire".

    62 # F.B. (for Francis Bacon)

    Then, I noticed the anagram of "worme" vertically, next to "breed".

    Always the same principle (repetition) ...

    "worme" (like 'dorade' previously or "heyre" in Sonnet 1) provides us with a vertical guiding line to follow.

    image.png.e71ed5cdc99f90d8b2a18738e3434bf5.png

    And here is what I found ... THE HEIRE ! 😊

    image.png.53f95e4d32735c10697d2a187ec9fa72.png

    "Quote me: I am a dwarf".  A small star maybe?

    Was Bacon 51 inches tall when he was a fair youth of 6? 51 mm is almost exactly 2 inches, so maybe we are talking about composting worms here? 1.5 inches to 3 inches is the average adult male red wiggler.

    The AI tells me that we reach the height of 4 feet 3 inches around the age of 6-7 for boys. Too coincidental to not be what is being referred to, wouldn't you say?

    If Bacon is preaching to not let death's conquest make the worms one's heirs why did he die without children? Do as a I say, and not as a I do? He must have died feeling he was a failure. That is if I am unaware of the ten children he had with his ten mistresses across Europe in his many parallel lives. 

    Geometrically speaking, The 51-gon is constructible by compass and square, because it is made up of two Fermat primes. This means that cos (pi/51) is expressible as a ratio in an expression containing the square root of an integer (like a triangle of side 1, 1 has a hypothenuse of sqrt (2)

    It is a pentagonal number, additionally a centered pentagonal number (has a dot in the middle which is the monad center whose associated number is 6).

    There are 51 ways to draw non intersecting chords between any 6 points on a circle. 

    Interestingly 51 is an 18-gonal number which is sandwiched in between 18 and 100 (18 and 100 being of interest to me).

    51's digital sum is 6. 

    51 in hexadecimal is 33 which is of course the number we attribute to Brahe which I see clustered next to worme there.

    The 6th planet from the Sun is Saturn.

    A Great Conjunction (rarest of the visible planets) occurs when Saturn an Mars appear together. That happens approximately every 20 years. The last very precise Great Conjunction (which are quite rare) occurred in the year 2020. Fine year for a pandemic it was, lol. 

    In terms of the zodiac, successive Great Conjunctions reoccur approximately 1/3 of the cycle apart. This was appreciated by Brahe, Kepler and Galileo. 

    Kepler's Great Trigon illustration scheme from De Stella Nova, published in 1606:

    LfwAZyz.jpg

    The one corresponding to the date 1603 is highlighted with a star (extinguishing of the Nova of 1600). We can see the movement of the GC in the sky in periods of about 20 years. The other date that is signaled here (unsure about the associated symbols) is the last one shown, 1763.  This, for what it is worth is the date which is the beginning of the Oak Island story (arrival of the Rhode island Planters that will start off the new British colonial era/cycle in North America). 40 years after this was the alleged discovery of the stone which was the omen of the end times which was foretold to occur 40 years after that in 1843 (became the Great Disappointment, lol). The date would appear on this illustration if it had gone into the next Great Trigon. A Great Trigon is ten Great Conjunctions. The one shown started off in Pisces and ended in Aries. Kepler fancied himself as God's personal astronomer, so there was much conjecture amount the meaning of these celestial events. Roger Bacon wrote about the Great Conjunctions. 

    If the Sonnets are to have an alchemical meaning one would have to assume they would be attuned with the currents of astronomical thinking that existed around 1609. It might explain why the Sonnets is given structurally in terms of a great cycle of time symbolized by 365 days. It might be of interest to see what is found associated with thirds of the cycle. Ten thirds is 10/3 or 3.33333...The symbolic significance of the 3 is probably what underpinned the length of the Great Trigon (duration=220 years). If Brahe is 33 then there are ten tens (thirds) in his name indeed. 

     

     

    • Like 1
  20. 5 hours ago, Allisnum2er said:

    Hi Rob,

    I did not have this Sonnet in mind when I composed my poem, but facing the Sonnet 6 (3+3 or 2+1+3) with the word "heire" at the end, and most of all with several "ten" echoing "The Alchemical (con)Quest", I wondered if the secret identity of this "heire" could have been concealed using Mediocria (The Middle way).

    image.png.968ebfa7b3e84dfcae6a2971e5555c77.png

    I noticed some interesting things from an arithmetical point of view ...

    image.png.264ca16d8e64a58bf6d879df09a908ac.png

    F.BAC.

    "ten" + "ten" + "one" + "ten" + "ten" + "ten" = 51

    The 51th word of the poem is "breed", almost in the center, and its simple cipher is ... 33 !

    And by counting "self-wild" as one word, there are 62 words from "breed" to "heire".

    62 # F.B. (for Francis Bacon)

    Then, I noticed the anagram of "worme" vertically, next to "breed".

    Always the same principle (repetition) ...

    "worme" (like 'dorade' previously or "heyre" in Sonnet 1) provides us with a vertical guiding line to follow.

    image.png.e71ed5cdc99f90d8b2a18738e3434bf5.png

    And here is what I found ... THE HEIRE ! 😊

    image.png.53f95e4d32735c10697d2a187ec9fa72.png

    The lost heir is also you, so don't forget to write yourself in. The lost inheritance awaits you in heaven. Follow John the Baptist in birth to the Cross in death.  Remember your coming death.  Mind the straight and narrow path (the middle way) on which angels travel. Take Herge's word for it if you like presented mysteries. This is the main theme of the TT mystery.  We are all princes and princesses. The King is God. His son who was mistreated and not given his rightful title while living was Christ. Your quest is the pilgrim's progress. 

    The Tudors are famous for having reinvented God to fit their worldviews for all the variations it has spawned. We still have to contend with it. It brought the old Testament back to the forefront to offer an opposing view to the edicts of the Roman Church who put all its stock in the New Testament which excluded the Jews (and perhaps even scapegoated them for having killed Christ).  How is not everything we keep finding not making allusion to this? How could we discount this in favor of thinking that all the religious symbolism we encounter is actually telling us who wrote Shakespeare?

    Your not so secret code given in terms of cod fish at times informs you about how to get to heaven. You will be fished like mackerel just like the lambs were brought home by the almighty shepherd in Arcadia. There were many proponents of this who could have conspired to pass on this message to you. There were not many who knew Bacon was Shakespeare as the cat would have been out of the bag a long time ago, presumably. The fury in exposing this would have been strong in early times when more people would have driven the intrigue. We know it only really took off as a suggestion in the 19th century at teh same time the craze for "discovering" things in texts also appeared. It does not compute. What computes is that someone like Bacon may have been esteemed for his faith towards God and England. 

     

    • Like 1
  21. 11 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

    Who would search Wiki for ciphertexts or anything other than surface fluff?

    CJ, I thank you for how I have learned to share my ideas a little better. Your challenges when I have stated something as a fact you pick apart. So now I share my opinions or perspectives as such without rules. Kate was challenging us on "facts" before you, BTW.

    Huh? I feel free and comfortable to follow my mind wherever it goes. 🙂

    I like that you are sharing your belief. We understand. Try to maybe phrase your beliefs as what you feel or what is your opinion on a given day when you post? That's what you preach to us, isn't it? 😉

    Did you one time mention "rhetoric"? Is that what we are doing? I have no clue.

    Whatever...back to the topic...

    The Middle Way and The Alchemical Quest.

    My turf is the Sonnets. The Middle of the Sonnets is at the end of Sonnet 77. There are are 154 Sonnets, so 77 x 2 is how they divide. First half contains Sonnets 1 through 77, the next half is Sonnets 78 through 154.

    The way the Sonnets Pyramid Design works is that 364 Days are split in half with 182 Days in Sonnets 1 through 77, and another 182 Days from Sonnets 78 through 154.

    Sonnet 77 ends with these two lines:

    These offices, so oft as thou wilt looke,
    Shall profit thee, and much inrich thy booke.

     

    What a finale to the first half of Bacon's Sonnets!

    SHA to make sure <--1881--> is there for Eternity.

    182 Days?

    ONE EIGHTY TWO is 157 Simple and 287 Kaye cipher to seal the Middle of the Sonnets on both sides.

    https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/UC_Q1_Son/33/?zoom=500

    2024-05-25_21-00-57.jpg.310572e263cb52bfa5a0ca4e2b0e83a2.jpg

    Nice coincidence the Middle of the Sonnets is on the 33rd page. Its also a great coincidence that the first half and second half are sealed with 157 and 287. How cool! What an amazing coincidence.

    "Middle" and "way" appear in Sonnet 7.

    LOe in the Orient when the gracious light,
    Lifts vp his burning head, each vnder eye
    Doth homage to his new appearing sight,
    Seruing with lookes his sacred maiesty,
    And hauing climb'd the steepe vp heauenly hill,
    Resembling strong youth in his middle age,
    Yet mortall lookes adore his beauty still,
    Attending on his goulden pilgrimage:

    But when from high-most pich with wery car,
    Like feeble age he reeleth from the day,
    The eyes (fore dutious) now conuerted are
    From his low tract and looke an other way:
       So thou, thy selfe out-going in thy noon:
       Vnlok'd on diest vnlesse thou get a sonne.

     

    Sonnet 7 shares some of Bacon's secrets. "Hey Mom, if you don't acknowledge your son we die."

    In the 1609 edition this Sonnets is split onto two pages:

    https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/UC_Q1_Son/3/index.html%3Fzoom=500.html

    image.png.1092adb3e489ad1e3f61a2f7b65d8380.png

    The next page is interesting.

    image.png.c53a45acf1fbcb19e269aee9ac8ea418.png

    We see "heire" and "sonne" with the words "middle" and "way" contained. FR BACON is easy to see, and the first letters on the second page are LTFSV:

    74 Simple, 51 Reverse, 20 Short, and 100 Kaye.

    image.png.cb449062871ee51ea6e142f7c3da0ef6.png

    image.png.cc3a8682c0b1707e14bb9ebff51f651b.png

    I wonder what Yann could see?

     

     

     

     

     

     

    The halfway mark of the 154 Sonnets is noted on Wikipedia, and it does have a history of being acknowledged as that. Even numbers do have the property of being divisible by two. As such, each represents the half perfect Ashlar (rectangle of 13.5 x 27) which is the mid point in you completion because it corresponds with your death. Also, as I have previously mentioned, 13.5 x 27=364.5 which is at least correctly rounded off to 365 to make your life correspond with a yearly cycle.

    Low and behold we see that this Sonnet starts off with looking into a mirror which involves the concept of reflection and chirality. Just like you right hand is opposed by your left hand, so is the life with the afterlife. There are recommendations in this Sonnet for what to do with your ideas (put them down onto paper while you are living). The lines on your face should remind you of the open mouth of fresh graves (remember death) and the clock should remind you that you have eternity at stake while you are living.

    77 is itself a number composed of mirrored sevens. It is one minute plus 17 seconds in terms of time. That is 1 + 17/60. If you go even 1 second beyond this time you are into the afterlife. This we can express as 1+ 18/60. The latter is just on on one side of being equal to 77/100 when you take its reciprocal, aka its inverse (where 100 has the Biblical meaning of completion?), the former just on the other side of it. There will be time in between your life and afterlife where 0.77 will be traversed even if there is an infinity of decimal points needing to be traversed. 

    I'm just doing this to show how creative one can be in building up a story from numeric details. 77 has a time component to it, one could say. So does 7, as it is time that is given for the creation (what we call a week). 4 x 7 is the 28 of the lunar month. The lunar months traverse the entire calendar and back in 33 years, which is the page number I think you are referring us to. 33 is half of 66, and 66 and 77 do have a similar mirror look to them. 6x7=42 (forty two) which is Carroll's favorite way of signaling the two 40 halves. 

    The point of writing things down is that they will outlive memories. It is a roundabout way of saying one can cheat death by leaving his ideas behind. A reader can then access what even the author may not have remembered at the time of his death. 

    I keep noticing that we do not interpret the texts the same way.  You are looking for confirmation of things you are interested in. I keep seeing Masonic ideas being expressed. I would argue that the Sonnets are put together in a way that reminds me of the Masonic geometry's interest in the square and the rectangle. You think a pyramid face (a triangle) is staring at you.  Can one square the triangle? Interestingly, yes.  I would expect that whoever wrote the Sonnets was attuned to geometric ideas of deity. That makes it at lest possible that it could have been Bacon rather than Shakespeare. But it does not allow us to know. In the spirit of these ideas one must go to his grave before one has these things revealed to him. In our lives these things are locked up in an impenetrable vault. This may in fact be why we are not given a very explicit cryptographic laying out of the facts. You should look forward to your death and the treasure to be found there. In that way you will mind the way you live in order to gain eternity. 

    Perhaps, if we claim to know what is in the vault we are excluded from knowing what is in the vault. It's hard to know what these folks were thinking of. The philosophies in play here are not ours. To them it may very be that 20, 40 and 100 have supernatural meaning which is attested to by the way our bodies are made up and how the Universe functions. Today we do not accept these ideas, so we must try and think like these people to make sense of it. 

    • Like 1
  22. 19 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

    I’m on my iPhone on the road and have been too busy to jump in, but I hope I’ll have time later today. 
     

    Quickly typing with my fat finger I’ll suggest Yann is not cheating but demonstrating his keen eye and real experience. I may be able to add to and support his findings. I’ll reach into my limited knowledge and won’t cheat, but our rules are for we who can pierce the veil that is Hanging to prevent the profane. 🙂

     

     

    He's not cheating. His method is cheating. That's the point of doing sleight of hand too. If a magician moved slowly and explained in great detail what he was doing or how your attention was being misdirected the end result would not be as convincing, necessarily. In matters of trying to get to points of knowledge we have a duty to go slow and to explain in great detail why what we are doing in order that things might not just be assumed to be legit because they are made very interesting. By the sheer number of occasions of "findings"  one would have to conclude that there seems to be an unlimited number of Easter eggs to be found. That's super problematic, because it is consistent with what one would expect to find by chance if anything is possible as a trigger of interest. Something much for faithful must exist that would settle the question. The realization about the need for clarity in ciphering schemes existed in that time. 

    I will continue to state that you can do the exact same thing using the exact same methods on any large text and produce enough interest in it to launch a suggestion that there is a code in it. You'd rather not deal with that, but would rather jump in and state that Yann is a great guy who is doing no wrong because he is just a great observer. The people behind the modern Bible code theories are also great observers. It is never about throwing shade on the person or defending the person. All minds are suggestible minds. Some more than others. External confirmation tends to come from those who accept the suggestions. There has to be a way of knowing that one is seeing more than a mirage. That way cannot be your gut feelings about it. How are we ever going to falsify theories if we cannot find the way to attack them in the first place? Finding the weakness is paramount. 

    • Like 1
  23. 2 hours ago, Allisnum2er said:

    Hi CJ,

    The goal of cryptography is to hide a message.

    Let's imagine that in one edition of Thrilling Cities (1963) by Ian Flemming you discover at one page numbered 007 instead of 7, on the seventh line of that page, the following sentence "What's your name?"

    Personally, I would think : "My name is Bond, James Bond !" and then, "What if a nod to James Bond was concealed?"

    And if I find the following imperfect alignement in the middle ...

    image.png.26363185ae8b42252413dce0cb558322.png

    ... it would make my day ! 😄

    A good means to hide a message in the middle (without being obvious about it) is to mix the letters and precisely to avoid a perfect alignment.

    I also disagree with you regarding the use of gematria.

    In my view, it strenghtens the end suggestion.

    As an example, I shared a part of my take on page 196 of the First Folio.

    https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/SLNSW_F1/214/index.html%3fzoom=1275.html

    196 = VVILLIAM SHAKESPEARE (simple cipher)

    image.png.95c3bead133e30da7b3853dacef0f85c.png

    Here we have a group of 33 words with "this conceal'd man" that adds to 33.

     In the sentence  "Wine comes out of  a narrow-mouth'd bottle" we have 33 letters.

    And the Roman God of Wine was BACCO.

    When Shakespeare writes "either too much at once, or none at all" there is, for me, a good reason.

    He used many stratagems to tell us who really is " this conceal'd man".

    On the same page Shakespeare/Bacon makes a reference to ... the myth of Odin ! (See the creation of the runes).

    image.png.aa3f550060a1046ebb6636d3122aefeb.png

    But , instead of being hanged on Ygddrasil, Bacon is hang'd on a Palme Tree also called the Phoenix Tree.

    And I talked to you about the importance of the "repetition".

    image.png.76214e039a1e9938579ac1ed4f38c14a.png

    Mediocra firma

    This principle was used on page 196. We have this Conceal'd man / a man hid.

    It seems to indicate that a king is conceal'd in the middle.

    Could "The king WIlliam Tudor or Tidder or Tiddor" be concealed ?

     

    Here is TUDOR ...

    image.png.59ba0da82859a10a319f0a4655d76714.png

    And here is WILLIAM ...

    image.png.ec0c1573364ac8311fcf36ffa7135a36.png

    This conceal'd man (33) KING WILLIAM TUDOR

    H (The Queen Mother of Consonants)

    The type setter can do what he wants. If he is trying for a middle alignment he can produce it. I know from what you show that you are much more proud of what you find when there is that added level of undeniable elegance. 

    The difference between what you show with Fleming and what you are dealing with in Shakespeare is that Fleming was the author. If the author intends it because it is part of the story then that is demanded of the typesetter. Things that appear only in the First Folio which have no relation to the text cannot be assumed to have been intended by the author as part of generation long story plot which has developed. That means they are free to also appear by chance and to have their meaning invented. 

    None of this is cryptography. Cryptography requires a formalism. With cryptography the intent is to hide the cipher text and then to leave no possibility or error in the decryption of it.  To this date there are no known ciphertexts in the First Folio.

    If you do a search on Wikipedia for known historical ciphertexts there are only a few that come up.  Some of them that come up are indeed found in literary works, and in some instances they are solved in the story.  I know from my personal experience of looking into Lewis Carroll's puzzles that the inspiration for doing this type of Easter egg hunt was faddish and related to a common misguided belief that was circulating at the time which alleged the presence of these things in many older works.  Carroll gave the reader what they truly wanted. In a sense he is parodying what is going on at the time in his stories that are also parodies. In his case he went as far as to tell readers how many instances of puzzles were in his works.

    We do not have the freedom to have an opinion about things which can be shown to be bad formal suggestions. Oprah Winfrey is not free to have the opinion that there is a working Bible code hidden in the text that is not a "code" at all. To claim freedom of opinion is to claim precious little. The statistician that is trying to inform her folly is not dealing in his opinion. He is showing the result of a formal approach to settle the question. 

    When the slight of hand requires skip sequences,  reading vertically and reading horizontally that effort is trying to exploit chance. In that instance it is also very common for there to not be any clear meaning in what is found because the Easter egg hunter is looking for recognizable cues only. With Gematria there is that added gift given where there is so much leeway in what one can fish from to get to his word sums that almost anything can come and add the required meaning. Gematria is pointless as a formal system. It becomes even weaker a suggestion when one adds additional methods to the pool because one isn't as convincing.

    You are free to keep doing what you are doing if that is your intention. This was high fashion in the 19th century and it shows no sign of letting up. Who gets snagged by this are the highly suggestible among us. What is not arguable is that it will never amount to a proof of anything because it resides well within the boundaries of what I describe as gameplay.

    What I would be careful to point out is that you are not typically hanging your hat on the discovery of vertical words only. You, by instinct, head to gematria, to word count and to other things to give a subjective take. If you limited to just dealing with what you find without the added benefit of Gematria you would struggle to know why a typesetter might want to signal his interest in Bacon's preference for the middle way. You go where you must in order to make it speak the way you wish. That is the bias. Excuse me for saying it, but that is cheating and reaching.  Much better would be to find the ciphertext that just tells you unequivocally what the message is. That is the only thing which comes with a built in proof. It's not a lot to ask for, as it was doable at the time.

    Blaise de Vigenere's work is in ciphering with the use of key words. His formalism is very strong. So strong is it that one can turn to numeric methods for solving them. They offer hope at discovery. There aren't any ciphertexts in the First Folio that are decodable by his method. Using Bacon's bilateral cipher would also work very well. Again, there has been no success in finding ciphertext in the Shakespearean work. What keep getting found are eggs of the sort one expects should pop up by coincidence when there is a bias.

    At stake here is your own life if you are pouring yourself into this with all your available free time. Bacon and others would have wanted you to not be distracted in your life pursuits down the straight and narrow path. The onus is on you to be very critical of what you are doing since it is taking so much from you.  I would urge you to consider how closely your methods are to those that are employed by various coded text enthusiasts who aren't even implying Bacon in their creations. History has shown us that the effort spent in those pursuits will produce results that will only work to convince the enthusiast that he is doing more than just mining coincidences. By getting into it one risks performing magic on one's self. 

    Consider this from Hamlet:

    spacer.png

    The last line is clever, and it tells us a bit about the mindset of the writer. More than natural is supernatural. For the supernatural we have only our philosophies to turn to. In our religious philosophies there may be a point to 20 and 40.  What is there in 20, 40 and 100 that is capable of transcending the meaning or mere numbers? Nothing that isn't a mind creation, that's for sure. If we are Christians we might see death, resurrection and completion in that trinity of numbers.

    If I was to play your game I could coax out "fortuna" in the middle here. Did the Boyes carry a fortune away? And Hercules' load was the globe, was it not? Did they carry a fortune across a globe and flavor the whole thing with the added meaning of 20, 40 and 100? Or was it that they, like us, just tried their luck in life and that Fortuna favored the brave?

    About the only person who could infer this would be me with my own biases which served me to locate this bit of text. By sharing it I might infect you with my biases. You might not be willing to accept it at face value (hopefully not), but the end result might still be that there would grow in you some idea that 20, 40 and 100 are possible reoccurring themes. What each and every one of us represents is an infected person. This is part of the tragedy of life. I wish I knew how to escape it. What is most desirable on this globe is that we be infected with certain suggestions.

    But really, what is forty? Why extend it into the supernatural? Isn't it because people poked around and saw the bits and pieces of countable evidence that surely pointed to 40 having meaning? Is God really well symbolized by a pentagon circumscribed by a circle? At what point do we cease and desist with these lines of thinking if we are critical?

     

    • Wow! 1
  24. On 5/23/2024 at 2:02 PM, Allisnum2er said:

    The Alchemical Quest

    - THE KEY -

    Initially, I had planned to end the Alchemical Quest with the reference to Chapter XXVII of Bacon's Essays.

    It was not my intention to unveil my name and my pseudonym hidden in the middle of the poem.

    But facing the discoveries I made last week-end I had no other choice.

    Today, I will share with you one if not the most beautiful exemple of the Magical aspect of my research since 7 years.

     I swear that one week ago, I did not know !!!

    Last week-end, facing my poem, my mind was in conflict facing my name concealed in the middle.

    Indeed, my Intellect told me that it was not perfect because of the remaining letter "t" of "the Elixir" that was unused, and my Intuition told me ALL IS PERFECT this "t" is at the right place, you only have missed the point.

    When I create something, I always take a closer look and see if I can find something that was not planned but is meaningful and can help me.

    One could say (I hear you CJ 😄) that this is just me trying to give a meaning to something that is meaningless, and to make it fit in a Story confirming a preconceived idea.

    Anyway ...

    image.png.3826cae2e1641d2efa7a68f64e6ced19.png

    The question I asked myself was : " What if allisnum2er pointing to this letter "t" was important ?"

    One important point :

    Keep in mind that my real name , LE MERLUS, is the name of a fish.

    Facing "allisnum2er" and "t" my first thought was T = 19.

    I immediatly thought about THE TEMPEST, the most alchemical of all Shakespeare's plays.

    Indeed, I had in mind that the first page of The Tempest was the 19th page of the First Folio and the last page of the play was page number 19.

    image.png.dbb64da5298ea4b66ce5cf9f43963141.png

    image.png.1f3f8a7700f8892ebd271e25b27aca24.png

    Both the beginning and the end of The Tempest are linked to number 19 and 19 - 19 is  T.T.

    Then I thought about mediocria firma and I realized that I had, in my mind, never explored the middle of the play.

    What would be the middle of a play with 19 pages ?

    The pages 9 and 10.

    In fact, I already knew page TEN and its link with MEDIOCRIA FIRMA ( See my video Filum Labyrinthi) ...

    image.png.c542eb906fa3e43049e185ea1ff8c344.png

    But from memory, before last week-end, I had never take a closer look at page 9 ( 3x3 ) that is  ...

    The 27th (3^3) page of the First Folio ! 🙂 

    https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/facsimile/book/SLNSW_F1/27/index.html%3Fzoom=850.html

    image.png.530cd01b64f4798e36f45baa6f802155.png

    The very first things that I noticed are the possible "F. BACON" in acrostic and the word "SALT".

    Talking about Alchemy, I wondered if "Salt" with the word "fire" not so far could be a reference to one of the book of Blaise de Vigenère : https://archive.org/details/discovrseoffires00vige/page/n3/mode/2up

    image.png.87ad9a2009465414773bcce248002b92.png

    Then I discovered, in English, the monologue of Trinculo ...

    image.png.ecf7ca624e868b9f5ca96a14ce04e861.png

    No way , could it be even possible ? 😅

    Trinculo tells us that Caliban is " a kind of (fish), not of the newest poore-John : a strange fish".

    As I did not know what poore-John meant, I took a look on internet ...

    image.png.b7239ca5fbaf392313b12c1e1d1a8a36.png

    A SALTED  and dried HAKE

    But I did not know what was a HAKE ?

    IMAGINE MY SURPRISE !😄

    image.png.8343249436665e1e819be97f5867a6a3.png

    The HAKE is the English word for Le MERLU ( spelled LE MERLUS in the 16th century) !!!

    image.png.6f7ac5682f6d67842c28c423c090f525.png

    Notice that " a strange fish : " is right in the middle of this passage.

    And Shakespeare tells us that "not a holiday-foole there but would give a peece of silver".

    Could it mean that "A wise man there but would give a peece of Gold" ?

    image.png.35fb96bcbf82dd4945f000779ce4b320.png

    I found the name of another fish hidden in the Middle.

    DORADE also called Golden

    It was my ELDORADO !!! 😉 

    https://www.google.fr/books/edition/A_Dictionarie_of_the_French_and_English/_iYNTgBYhFAC?hl=fr&gbpv=1&dq=dorade+gold&pg=PP323&printsec=frontcover

    image.png.353973504d0929a05f7698c60d1b53d8.png

    Finally, who is this Golden fish ?

    image.png.30c8fc2ed5b9aa580c7924b184db32f4.png

    WILLIAM TIDDOR

    https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?cc=eebo;c=eebo;idno=a47111.0001.001;node=A47111.0001.001:4.3;seq=212;view=text;rgn=div2

    guuv7vj727uq.jpg

    The Hand of the Philosopher.

    To be continued ...

    Cod riddles again. Le Capitaine Haddock vous salut.

    I see "And his finnes like arms..."  there.  How many fins have a cod? The answer to the question posed by the title of chapter II in TCH's "The Old Judge" is eight.  fin (5) x fins (8)=40. Alternatively, "Forty Years Ago". 

    How many fingers on a hand? How many toes on a foot? How many lobes in the heart? How many lobes to a brain? How many senses? How many stigmata? How many digits in all? "Twin T" if I count correctly. If man is made in the image of God how do we incorporate five into to a geometric conception of God where is monad? With an inscribed pentagon? If we do we will notice that the shoulder of the five pointed star within the unit circle is given by a length of Phi units for which 5:8 is the fifth approximation (golden mean).

    Of course, the son of God was a fisher of men who went by the fish symbol in the story. It is this geometric fish in the Vesica Piscis that presents us with the sacred number 153 which is given in the story of the miraculous catch of the fishes.

    TT, the twin T or twenty is 20. In TOJ the chapter title employing TT is given on page 100 where 100/20=5.  20 itself is divisible by 5, 4 times. You have two 4 letter words (8 in total) in SALT and FIRE which might serve us to preserve the flesh. 

    In the Bible salt is mentioned a total of 40 times. SALT is the symbol for the Covenant,  and it is used by JC to describe men as "the salt of the Earth". FIRE is the symbol for the wrath of judgment of God.

     

     

     

    spacer.png

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...