An update on the case for mathematics

 "He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense"  John McCarthy

We all know the math doesn't work for a lot of us. However, Arithmetic works for all of us (add, subtract, multiply and divide) and yet the reluctance to even count was something I was not prepared for. Hence instead of attempting to understand, the natural reaction of most is to either ignore evidence at hand or try and dismiss it. Then there are those who keep on going on about proof without a clue as to what they want. When you ask them what kind of proof do you have in mind, the same old; you show me first, in this case, it's akin to proving 1+1=2, just as a point of interest if you don't already know it, the last time somebody attempted it, Bertrand Russell and Alfred North Whitehead to be exact, they had a go and 378 pages later, they almost proved that 1+1=2. In fact, they only figured out how it could be done if they first proved some other stuff, like; what is addition.

So before jumping to prove this or prove that my humble advice, please do some homework, more precisely what kind of proof will satisfy your believability threshold instead of show me first and then I will decide if it is what I want or not. Because frankly if you cannot define it, there is a very good chance you will not recognize it when you see it.

The questions raised so far forces me to state a few obvious facts. The Quranic patterns are not about proof but verification and unless and until one is able to understand this very simple notion might as well stop right now because neither this discussion nor any discussion, for that matter any discussion on any subject, will go anywhere. Welcome to the world of PROOF :)

The actual processes of verification are pretty straightforward, observe a phenomenon, irrespective of whether you were made aware of it or stumbled upon it. The next step is to gather data, the third step is to analyze the data, fourth step is to form hypotheses and test it with scientifically sound consistent methodologies and final step is to draw a conclusion (s).

Now since these patterns are observable and both mere chance and manmade possibilities are discounted beyond doubt, again simple math, my question to you is; where did they come from?

I will draw your attention to a single example at the end of my note that encompasses both 7 and 19, both numbers clearly indicated in the Quran and hereto remained unexplained in the relevant verses Quran 15:87 and 74:30. Every time you add a similar example the complexity grows geometrically and there are hundreds of similar examples all intertwined in the Quran. Please observe the following observable facts;

1. Number of letters it is based on is 19 (total number in Bismillah, the opening verse )
2. The length of the number below is a monstrous 114 digits long
3. The opening verse itself is repeated 114 times in the Quran which is a multiple of 19
4. The number below itself is divisible by 7
5. The reverse of this number is also divisible by 7, what are the odds on just this alone
6. The number itself mirrors the occurrences of Bismillah in the Quran chapter by chapter. 1 denotes one time 2 twice and 0 none.
7. Each natural number (1,3,5,7,8 in the quotient is repeated 19 times each exactly, that is mind blowing
8. And if there are still undecided, here is something that brings it all home. The number 15873 is staring at us in the quotient multiple times, please verify for yourself, the 15th Chapter, verse number eighty-seven, third word, nonother than seven (سَبْعًا)

Have fun explaining that one away :) And as God says in the Quran bring another example like it and you may ask all the humans and Jinns to form a team and have till the Day of Judgment to do it in.

Here is the number and the calculations;

111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111211111111111111111011111111 =

15873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873015887301587301587301573015873 x 7

When read from right to left, we have:

111111110111111111111111112111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 =
15873015730158730158730158873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873015873 x 7

And it's all about Seven, the often repeating. Quran 15:87 with 19 thrown in as well, confirming the two major indicators. And even the sum of the chapter and verse number is perfectly in sync and 15:87 renders to 1+5+8+7=21=7 +7+7=7 x 3

One thing more, the number 88 happens to be at 88th position counting from the longer end in both the above sequences. I haven't yet figured out its significance but everything in the Quran has significance, any help would be appreciated.

That is not the end of it, it seems a lot more research is needed to fully appreciate this remarkable sequence of numbers. 

The way I see it, the kind of naysaying on display in the face of "in your face" facts was described by the celebrated Stanford University psychologist Leon Festinger 

"A MAN WITH A CONVICTION is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point." 

If one is shown a clearly observable pattern and that pattern cannot be explained away as a coincidence or manmade then all questions that have to do with the improbability of its existence  becomes irrelevant, more to the point, the questions are relevant if one has to decide on their basis whether to pursue a certain line of thinking or investigate certain markers. If on the other hand one leapfrogs the whole process of the investigation because either one is made aware of their existence or one stumble upon a clearly visible and verifiable set of facts then what is the point of keep on raising or answering the now redundant questions?Especially if the questions are been raised with the objective of disproving the existence of the already discovered facts?

Most don’t want to look at the big pink elephant in the middle of the room, they tend to go on about how pink elephants don’t exist and getting themselves bogged down in the size of the door and how it appears to be not possible that an elephant can get through it. Others keep going on about how it cannot be found in the elephant manual, how nobody emailed them with detailed dimensions of the elephant and its presence in the room onward of a certain date, some keep on insisting as to why somebody didn’t spot it earlier. Whenever attention is drawn to their illogical position of not even looking at the pink elephant, they still insist that you must answer their questions before they will even look. When pointed out to them that an hour or two of verification is a game changer, they resort to demanding proof as long as they don't have to look at the elephant. Then there are those that actually bring themselves to look at the elephant and promptly decide that it is not pink and it is not an elephant.

Any logical attempts to disprove the notion that there are no mathematical patterns now that they are discovered in the Quran must include the direct refutation or falsification of the facts on the table and this process of verification should not be conveniently restricted to a single incidence of data falsification by Rashad Khalifa and use it as an excuse to trash this mind-boggling phenomenon. In the words of Bertrand Russell on Godel's ontological proof: "The argument does not, to a modern mind, seem very convincing, but it is easier to feel convinced that it must be fallacious than it is to find out precisely where the fallacy lies."

The plethora of discovered and easily verifiable facts should be the focus. No amount of beating around the bush will make these facts render themselves back to undiscovered. Hence it doesn't matter that in your opinion there is/are no reference (s) to it in the Quran, which clearly there are, or at least debatable. It also doesn't matter anymore why earlier generations hadn't made the discovery or the connection to the relevant verses. The correct answer is the lack of tools, what matters is the patterns themselves and how it is tied to the layout of the text. One cannot pretend it is not there and even if some choose to do so their pretense will not prevent others from clearly seeing them and drawing conclusions. The elephant is already in the room. Deal with it. 

You are welcome to explore the so far discovered patterns here http://lifecheat.blogspot.com/2010/12/short-intro-to-four-serious-attempts-at.html