Options

# f57v Summation of sequences

• #### Index

• f57v Summation of sequences
• ### f57v Summation of sequences

R. Sale > 10-04-2018, 10:51 PM

VMs f 57v  Summation of sequences

As discussed previously, in the 4 x 17 symbol sequence, the symbol in position five (EVA = ‘v’) has several different potential interpretations. The actual glyph is written as an inverted “V” and therefore is more similar to the Greek letter ‘lambda’ in upper case or to the medieval form of the numeral seven as seen in various places such as Typus Arithmetica. A third interpretation is that it is an inverted representation of the Roman numeral ‘V’ or five, given that it sits in the fifth position. In other words, this is an interpretation that is confirmed (to some extent) by placement or location, not wholly by appearance.
Positional confirmation can also be demonstrated for the first two examples. In the Greek interpretation of lambda in position five, there is also omicron in positions one, which is correctly spaced at the same distance as in the Greek alphabet. Likewise in the system of medieval numerals, the interpretation as the number ‘7’ is the proper distance from the second symbol which is a clear representation of a medieval numeral ‘four.’ Once again visual interpretation / appearance confirmed by positional relationships when compared with known traditions.

These are three well-know sequences of symbols, and it is possible to overlay each of those systems unambiguously onto the VMs sequence with the information presented above. The Roman and medieval sequences are numerical. The Greek alphabet is actually alpha-numeric. (And it has a few quirks to accommodate. The one most relevant here is the insertion of a non-alphabetical symbol, digamma, in the sixth position.)

So, in the Greek numerical sequence, lambda equals thirty. While in the Roman sequence the value of this symbol is five. And the medieval value is seven. And if we go back to omicron, at the beginning, the Greek value is seventy, the Roman value is one and the medieval value is three.

Values in each sequence: (Roman value = symbol position)
Greek         70   60   50   40   30   20   10    9    8     7     6    5     4    3    2     1   < >
Roman         1     2     3    4     5     6    7     8    9    10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17
Medieval       3    4     5      6    7      8    9   10   11  12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19

Sum:          74   66   58   50   42   34   26   27   28   29  30   31   32   33   34  35   36

Now if we subject each sum to numerological reduction:
7 + 4 = 11; 1 + 1 =2
6 + 6 = 12; 1 + 2 = 3
5 + 8 = 13; 1 + 3 = 4
5 + 0 = 5
4 + 2 = 6
3 + 4 = 7
2 + 6 = 8
2 + 7 = 9
2 + 8 = 10; 1 + 0 = 1
2+ 9 = 11; 1 + 1 = 2
3 + 0 = 3
3 + 1 = 4
ETC.

And this continues till we get to the Greek alpha equals one, which (if we include the digamma in position six) gives us a symbol sequence consisting of sixteen symbols where the VMs sequence has seventeen symbols.

When we look at the values for the seventeen symbol, the Roman value is 17, the medieval value is nineteen. The total of these two is thirty-six, and 3 + 6 = 9. Nine is the proper sequential value, so the Greek value can not make any numerical contribution - if the pattern holds true.

The final numerological sequence is simple: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 1, 2 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,

What could this be? Does it have a meaning or some use?

If we consider the choice sequences and their arrangement in relation to each other - doesn't this have to be an intentional construction?
• ### RE: f57v Summation of sequences

ReneZ > 11-04-2018, 07:25 AM

Summation of the digits of a number is equivalent with taking the remainder while dividing by 9.
In mathematical terms, the number, and the sum of its digits are the same, modulo 9.

Example: 147 = 16 x 9 + 3,  so the remainder is 3.
1+4+7= 12; 1+2 = 3.

When adding three series of numbers, of which one goes down by one (modulo 9) and the other two go up by one, the result is a series going up by one (always modulo 9).
Therefore, nothing surprising happened.
• ### RE: f57v Summation of sequences

R. Sale > 12-04-2018, 11:03 PM

Rene,

An interesting explanation - and as you say, the results are automatic, simply mathematical. The surprise is not in the fact that the constructed system functions. The surprise is that this whole system, which functions as we can see, has been subtly built into the the seventeen symbol sequence at all.

We have three traditional systems, Greek, Roman and medieval. Each of them is suggested by a possible interpretation of the symbol in the fifth position. Each interpretation is given additional confirmation by specific spatial relationships. Then the three systems are combined so that the net value of the remainder increases by one for each calculation. If the Greek system started with alpha and read from left to right, then this clearly would not work the same way. So the Greek system was turned in the opposite direction, which is still a valid direction for Greek to be written. And as a result, the final, numerological sequence comes out the way it does.  So, as I see it, that means it was planned in advance.

I can't say that this has a direct application. Perhaps it has no application. Or perhaps it has an application that I don't see, but someone else can. If the presence of the whole construction is or might be intentional, then shouldn't it be investigated. This is certainly more of a physical reality in the text than various other topics of investigation.

My view of the VMs is that it is an intentionally 'strange' creation in which certain traditional and historical information has been hidden. In You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. that information consists of the three traditional symbol sequences: Greek, Roman and medieval numerals. In f68v, it is a cosmos of contrasting appearance, built on the same highly unusual, if not unique structure as the Oresme representation of BNF Fr. 565. And in the VMs zodiac section, it is the institution of pairing, the disguised references to heraldry, both generally and specifically in the origins of the Catholic tradition of the red galero, and further into the positional confirmations by which the Fieschi identification is repeatedly affirmed. The problem seems to be that the papelonny pun will not function when the investigator is unfamiliar with the essential terminology and its references. This seem to be a situation with an increasing number of examples.