Replies

Thank you for your reply!

The ELS theory as an abstract concept is benign. But to apply it, one (a human) must decide what to 'look for' using the ELS algorithms. Someone decides "Hey, let's look for "Assassin" or let's look for "Begin" (Menachem)". Man has contaminated the methodology by choosing what to seek, and choosing after the fact - after Begin was assassinated. We don't know what to look for (using ELS) in advance, do we.

You are speaking to the same objection that the actual mathematicians who discovered the ELS raised. The ELS must never be used for prophesy. But if they query the 2 dimensional matrix of Genesis for all the rabbis over an extended period of time, the presence of their birth dates and death dates in close proximity establishes a unique quality to the underlying structure of the Torah. The significance is in the statistical probability.

To take it further than that one risks entering ego into the equation as you observe - and it will surely fail. People tend to be self-fulfilling prophesies.

Yes, our pursuit of math, physics, science, organizations and orders, etc all may reveal some truth about God's creation, and hence His 'signature'. But that signature is in what God created, not our textbooks or periodic charts, etc that help us see His order (signature). God's signature is in the order, that such order and design even exists, but not in the equations that describe that order.

Indeed, but the equations are the language whereby we communicate our awe - why pi, Madelbrot set, Riemmanian geometry, the beginning, information in biological systems (Shannon - successful communications), dimensionality, duality in physics, mathematical structures in higher dimensionality and so on.

But if they query the 2 dimensional matrix of Genesis for all the rabbis over an extended period of time, the presence of their birth dates and death dates in close proximity establishes a unique quality to the underlying structure of the Torah. The significance is in the statistical probability.

Statistically significant yes but inevitably so IMO, because again man has chosen what to decode - rabbi's birth & death dates in this instance as well as having found them. It is man's choosing, that IMO contaminates the method of validation, regardless of what is chosen to be decoded.

To take it further than that one risks entering ego into the equation as you observe - and it will surely fail. People tend to be self-fulfilling prophesies.

My quibble again is not with ego so much as it is the moment man chooses what to decode, man has entered upon a self-fulfilling and invalid endeavor (albeit however decodable). If some other method were posited whereby God told us what to decode instead of us guessing what to decode, that method I would support rather than quibble.

Agreed, they are the means by which we communicate our awe, but our awe is not the same as God's signature.

BTW, I always appreciate your very gracious 'Thank you for your reply!' and did not want you think they went unnoticed or that I was not appreciative of your efforts to reply to me in kind. Thank you as well :-)