# Thread: What if 360 was not an arbitrary number?

1. I discovered this back in 05 when looking into the two symbols known as the triquetra and the pentagram.

Reminds me of a quote...""According to Greek mythology, humans were originally created with 4 arms, 4 legs, and a head with 2 faces. Fearing their power, Zues split them into two seperate parts, condemning them to spend the rest of their lives searching for their other halves." - plato

In the religous relms there is usually a heaven and a hell and a spokesperson for each. God, other wise known as the holy trinity, and Lucifer, the angel of light. God is now associated with the symbol the triquetra which is far older then the Catholic church. This symbol has three contact points on it which are connected in a pattern consisting of curved lines. Lucifer is represented with the pentagram. A circle, much like the triquetra, though with five contact points. (The Pentagram appears as a sign (UB) in the earliest form of Sumerian pictographic writing (c. 3000 BCE). Although such pictographs do not have a unique meaning, the general sense seems to be "heavenly body." By the cuneiform period (say, after 2600 BCE) the pentagram means "region," "heavenly quarter" or "direction" (Forward Backward Left Right) and is generally used with the number 4. )

Back in 05 I was bored and began to ponder why these symbols have so much energy surrounding them. I found that they actually belong side by side as part of a very interesting arrangement.

The triquetra is much like the mercedes sign as a circle with three distinct points evenly spaced in a circle. If we were to start at any one of these points and continue around the circumference stopping every TWO points we pass, we will touch every line once and in doing so we will go around the circle exactly TWICE.

So im thinking, ok thats cool does the pentagram do this in any way. Is there any balance to it? I find out it does. If we were to start at any one of these points in the pentagram and continue around the circumference stopping every THREE points we pass, we will touch every line once and in doing so we will go around the circle exactly THRICE.

A circle with one radi obviously has one point so travelling ONE space at a time we will go exactly ONE revolution. I asked my self how far does this go. then I began to draw a ridiculous amount of circles, would you like to know what I found next?

These are the circles we have so far

• Lines....... Spaces Traveled.... Rotations...... Position of circle in code
1......................... 1......................1........................ 1
3......................... 2...................... 2....................... 2
5..........................3...................... .3........................3

Here is a list of the rest in the first cycle. Will get to the holy grail part in a sec.........1,3,5,9,12,13,16,19,20,23,27,29,31

• ‎1(+2=), 3(+2=), 5(+4=),9(+3=),12(+1=),13(+3=),16(+3=),19(+1=),20(+ 3=),23(+4=),27(+2=),29(+2=),31

What is the symmetry of the lines we need to add to form are first stage of the code?

• .......... 2, 2, 4, 3, 1, 3, .....3, 1, 3, 4, 2, 2

Chris Seekins
This is the beginning of the creation. Two halfs a perfect symmetry. Now math is the universal language and would be the foundation of most anything. Remind me of the double helix way later.

• Grail comes from the latin word "gradual" (ha duel/nevermind) which means in stages, by degree

• I must diverge briefly into the grail legends. Originally from Scotland (http://scottishrite.org/) that was not originally the cup of Christ. Originally it was referred to as a bowl in which the elements were mixed in though we can continue on this later. Two quick notes....31st degree mason (highest masonic level), 33rd degree is the "new birth" or Illuminati (will get to later). (Somalian temple/ Knights Templar coming later/1098/King of Jerusalem) The grail became the cup of Christ with the king Aurthur legends. You know the 12 knights of the round table and the extra chair for the king.Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, S.J., U.S.A.

scottishrite.orgWelcome to the official web site of the Supreme Council, 33°, Southern Jurisdiction, U.S.A., founded 1801.

• Any how every stage in this code except the first has 12 circles in it. A stage being the circles that complete the 2,2,4,3,1,3,3,1,3,4,2,2, symmetry

• Know to save time lets add up all the lines in the 12 circles of the first cycle starting with the triquetra. 23+5+9+12+13+16+19+20+23+27+29+31 = 207

• ‎13 is also a major masonic number. Our 13th circle has 31 lines in it. If we want to know how many lines in a circle we would need to go exactly 14 spaces at a time, touch each line exactly once and go exactly 14 revolutions we only need to look at the 2,2,4,3,1,3,3,1,3,4,2,2. we add 2 to 31 and get the start of our next stage 33 lines ·

• Now the fun part. I asked recently on numerous physics forums why there are 360 degress in a circle. I was told because there is, dont know and its an arbitrary number.

• Lets add up all the lines in our second stage 33,35,39,42,43,46,49,50,53,57,59,61 = 567

• ‎567 minus all the lines in the first stage equals what? Yes 360

• This code is infinite. and every stages lines in every circle minus the same of the stage before is 360. does not matter if it is the 2nd minus the first stage or the 999 minus the 998. When I say I drew alot of circles I drew alot of circles.

• Getting the degree of the circles with circles? Quackery it was called and I was kicked off the forums in under two minutes for life for posting a picture of this you can find here. I would post a link though do not want to give a reason to kick me off.

Shall we continue this is only the begining?

2.

3. Originally Posted by Galileo
Grail comes from the latin word "gradual" (ha duel/nevermind) which means in stages, by degree
No it doesn't. It comes from the medieval Latin for bowl; probably cognate with crater.

I asked recently on numerous physics forums why there are 360 degress in a circle.
Maybe you should have asked on a history forum.

It is because they used a base-60 number system in Mesopotamia. The reason is probably because it make division easy (it has a very large number of divisors).
Babylonian numerals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

4. I have heard this before. Thanks for your response, I greatly appreciate it. I will focus on the math part first and am researching the Latin part more thoroughly now.

Have you seen this code before anywhere?

5. I don't understand why you are using that series of numbers. Why 1, 3, 5, 9, 12 ...? Why not 1,2,3,4,... or 1,3,5,7,9, ... or 1,3,7,21,36 ...

6. The goal is to have the spaces traveled around the circle equal exactly to the rotations around the circle when every line is touched exactly once.

1, 3, 5, 9, 12 ... represent the amount of lines in a circle for the spaces traveled and rotations to count consecutively 1,2,3,4,..ect.

7. Sounds like you just came up with a bunch of nonsense to reach the number 360. Assuming that your math is correct. 360 degrees in a circle was most likely derived from the amount of time it takes to orbit the sun.

8. Originally Posted by Galileo
The goal is to have the spaces traveled around the circle equal exactly to the rotations around the circle when every line is touched exactly once.

1, 3, 5, 9, 12 ... represent the amount of lines in a circle for the spaces traveled and rotations to count consecutively 1,2,3,4,..ect.
I don't really understand that. If you go round the circle touching every line once, you will traverse n (or perhaps, n-1) spaces between the lines. Perhaps you need to draw a diagram of "spaces travelled" or something. In your diagram with lots of circles, your red arrow just seems to traverse some random subset of the lines rather than going all the way round the circle. And what determines the order of the lines in each circle.

From this, I can't help thinking you have just played around with the numbers and the ordering until it just happens to show some pattern.

And what is the point of the element names under each circle?

9. Well if you line up the elements starting with Helium and go twelve elements per row you get a table much like this. It just puts things in balance. I just had to add three elements and tweek a couple minor things.

10. Is this clearer? (the one with the black bar on top is a bit clearer)

11. Originally Posted by Strange

From this, I can't help thinking you have just played around with the numbers and the ordering until it just happens to show some pattern.
ya basically

12. Waste of time kid. The orbit theory makes the most sense.

13. Originally Posted by Galileo
Is this clearer? (the one with the black bar on top is a bit clearer)
Not really. Take the first circle. What are the three different dotted lines supposed to show? You seem to be going round 2/3rds of the the circle three times: 2/3 * 3 = 2. Is that right?

And then on the next one, you go round 3/5ths of the circle 5 times; 3/5 * 5 = 3.

But why 3/5ths, why not 3/7ths? I think you'll get the same result.

Do you see why it begins to look like numerology?

14. Right essentially.

Because with seven lines you can not travel around the perimeter of the circle, travering a set number of lines, having that set number touch each line exactly once and travel around the circle (total revolutions) equal the amount of lines traversed.

15. Ah, I see.

You do realise you have wrapped your lines around where it becomes a multiple of 30 (after 12 items). 12 * 30 = 360. Still sounds like numerology/coincidence to me ...

16. Originally Posted by Strange
Ah, I see.You do realise you have wrapped your lines around where it becomes a multiple of 30 (after 12 items). 12 * 30 = 360. Still sounds like numerology/coincidence to me ...
Yes there are 30 more lines every 12 circles. Is numerology based on balance?

17. Originally Posted by Galileo
Is numerology based on balance?
No, it is seeing significance in patterns when there really isn't any

18. I see. Would certain things that show up over and over at set rates and at exact episode lengths infinitely be considered patterns? What if those patterns are actually able to lay foundations for other infinately repeating patterns? I am headed to work though would love to continue this discussion later.

I fear I may need to define what a pattern is.

19. well, there may be something to these ratios; they vaguely reminded me of the Leibniz series for Pi: Leibniz formula for

20. How so because it starts with odd numbers?

21. I asked recently on numerous physics forums why there are 360 degress in a circle. I was told because there is, dont know and its an arbitrary number.
360 has 24 divisors, including every integer from 1 to 10 excepting 7. If you're going to play games with adding and subtracting numbers, yes, you will inevitably get to 360.

22. Would there not be a difference between getting 360 inevitably and getting 360 infinitely? I was not aware about the every integer besides 7 and 24 divisors though find that quite interesting, thanks. The seventh circle gives the balance of the symmetry in the circle code. It has 16 lines
Which is 360 divided by 24.

I wonder if the feng shui compass was designed on 360 because some one lost a bet or if they actually incorporated math behind it?

23. "Reminds me of a quote...""According to Greek mythology, humans were originally created with 4 arms, 4 legs, and a head with 2 faces. Fearing their power, Zues split them into two seperate parts, condemning them to spend the rest of their lives searching for their other halves." - plato"

Plato never signed anything. He wrote under the pen name of Socrates.

24. Originally Posted by Ots
Plato never signed anything. He wrote under the pen name of Socrates.
Plato and Socrates are two separate individuals. Plato's Socratic Dialogues are understood to be from his pen as Socrates' amanuensis.

Would there not be a difference between getting 360 inevitably and getting 360 infinitely?
This sentence doesn't make sense. You'd have to demonstrate infinite recursion with a proof, not mean 'infinite' to mean 'when I get tired of playing with numbers'.

The number 360 is used because 360 is useful because of its divisbility and its approximation to the number of days in the solar year. Really, you can divide a circle into as many portions as you like, we use 360 because of tradition in navigation, cartography, and astronomy. Another way of dividing it is by pi (or tau) and expressing the fraction in radians. Humans tend to relate to degrees a little more intuitively, so they are still used.

In sum: There's nothing special about 360, except for its symbolism.

25. Originally Posted by Wintermute
Originally Posted by Ots
Plato never signed anything. He wrote under the pen name of Socrates.
Plato and Socrates are two separate individuals. Plato's Socratic Dialogues are understood to be from his pen as Socrates' amanuensis.
Yes they were two seperate individuals but it would be a mistake to think that Plato was just writing what Socrates said.

26. Originally Posted by Ots
Originally Posted by Wintermute
Originally Posted by Ots
Plato never signed anything. He wrote under the pen name of Socrates.
Plato and Socrates are two separate individuals. Plato's Socratic Dialogues are understood to be from his pen as Socrates' amanuensis.
Yes they were two seperate individuals but it would be a mistake to think that Plato was just writing what Socrates said.
This is a backpedalling from your earlier assertation. What mistakes would be present in thinking that Plato wrote down the gist of Socrates' dialogues or that Socrates did not have a hand in the editing process?

27. [QUOTE=Wintermute;310524]s.
Would there not be a difference between getting 360 inevitably and getting 360 infinitely?
This sentence doesn't make sense. You'd have to demonstrate infinite recursion with a proof, not mean 'infinite' to mean 'when I get tired of playing with numbers'.QUOTE

Perhaps you are not seeing the manifestations that this code can sustain do to its balance. Where is It you think this pattern ends?

So we agree that 360 is the most balanced. I agree we get this from history though I think you should look again at what may have been lost.

28. [QUOTE=Galileo;310547]
Originally Posted by Wintermute
Perhaps you are not seeing the manifestations that this code can sustain do to its balance. Where is It you think this pattern ends?
I have yet to see a pattern, probably because I'm particularly dense and shorthand patterns into mathematical formulas.

So we agree that 360 is the most balanced. I agree we get this from history though I think you should look again at what may have been lost.
I didn't say it was balanced, I said it appears to be 'friendly' with human intuition when in fact it is arbitrary.

29. It's difficult to know what you are seeing and what you are not, thanks for the input though.

30. Any thing is arbitrary to a certain standard. When precision is needed they fall short as they are inefficient. Nothing is arbitrary when it can not be any more efficient., its more some people will still tend to use what will only bring them to a certain point for either lack of refinement needed or lack of caring about instilling proper foundations. The problem comes when we need those foundations to support more then they were refined for.

31. The number of degrees in a circle is mathematically arbitrary, just like the number of ounces in a pound, or how many are in a dozen.

32. Originally Posted by Galileo
Any thing is arbitrary to a certain standard.
Radians and Pi are not arbitrary though, but 360 definitely seems to be arbitrary ignoring any real world connections.

33. Or the 360 based on days/year was just close enough...much like the Greeks used 22/7 for pi...good enough for most non-precise calculations.

34. slicing a pie twice gives you 4 90 degree angles.

35. Originally Posted by curious mind
slicing a pie twice gives you 4 90 degree angles.
Well, it depends on how accurate your slices are

36. Originally Posted by MeteorWayne
Originally Posted by curious mind
slicing a pie twice gives you 4 90 degree angles.
Well, it depends on how accurate your slices are
with a kid awaiting his masterpiece, i can't guarantee

 Bookmarks
##### Bookmarks
 Posting Permissions
 You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts   BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On [VIDEO] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are Off Pingbacks are Off Refbacks are On Terms of Use Agreement