Pi & Pythagorean Numerology f70r1 found

[stellar]

Stellar wrote: Four adds up to a 6 in English using numerology,  6+6+3+9=12+12=3+3=6!


This isn't the way it's usually done. Usually all the numbers are added singly, and then, if it's more than ten, the individual digits are added again. You don't usually pair up the numbers in the process of adding them as you have done in the above example.

If you are using a different system from usual (and from what you implied earlier), then you should explain it before posting all these sums.


In his article on Celtic numerology, Mike Nichols added them the same way I added them and this is the system I saw in numerology books I read years ago. As you can see, it doesn't jive with the way you are now saying you do it:



So, if you are using a different system, then clearly explain it before posting the numbers and state your sources for using a less conventional system.



I notice you have created another youtube video on this.

I really don't care whether your ideas are right or wrong, you're entitled to your opinions, except for the fact that you have commercial ambitions and are promoting books, in which case you have a responsibility to your buyers that I'm not sure you are honoring.

I only created one youtube video and can you please post it here.  Also I'm using Pythagorean numerology.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

You told us you were using Welsh numerology, not someone else's Pythagorean numerology calculator. I thought you had actually done some research (real research) on Welsh numerology.

So you are using a Pythagorean numerology calculator programmed by someone else (are you even sure of the algorithm being used?) and then applying Welsh words to the result?

JKP Source on Celtic Numerology:

By now, some of my more thoughtful readers may think they see some
         inconsistency in my approach.  Why have I gone to so much trouble to
         point up the flaws in traditional systems of numerology (even going so
         far  as to  suggest an  entirely  new system),  only to  fall back  on
         interpretations of  the numbers  that are  strictly traditional?   The
         reason is this:   all of my  objections thus far have  been limited to
         METHODOLOGY.    When  it comes  to  interpreting  the  meaning of  the
         numbers, I have no  quarrel with the traditional approach,  since here
         we enter the field of universal symbolism.  All systems of
         numerology, be  they Hebrew,  modern, Oriental,  or whatever,  tend to
         attach the same  interpretive meaning to the numbers.   When Three Dog
         Night sings, 'One is  the loneliest number that you'll  ever know...',
         it  is a statement which is  immediately understood and agreed upon by
         people from  widely diverse cultures.  And the same holds true for all
         other numbers, for we are here dealing with archetypal symbols.

             It is worth repeating that, although I believe this system to have
         a firm theoretical basis, it is still in an embryonic state -- highly
         tentative, highly speculative.   To the  best of my  knowledge, it  is
         also  an original contribution to the field of numerology.  While some
         writers (notably Robert Graves in 'The White Goddess') have dealt with
         the numerical values  of Ogham letters, I believe this  article is the
         first instance of employing it specifically as a system of numerology.
         I have spent many long hours working with Celtic numerology -- putting
         abstract  theory  to use  in practical  application  -- but  much work
         remains to be  done.  For this  reason, I would be happy  to hear from
         readers who are interested in the subject and who would like to
         share their own experiences and thoughts.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.