RLG
Yygdrasilian said:
You are misrepresenting my position here. It is obvious that if someone wanted to encode planetary cycles, they would have to know the values of those cycles ahead of time. Duh!
But... if someone did not know the values, and wanted to discover them by using your alleged encoding via the tarot cards, they would have no way of doing so, because there is no algorithm to your 'ciphertext'.
Let me say this in another way so that it is perfectly clear -- if you don't already know the value of Mercury's orbital period, you cannot figure it out by using the tarot cards, because there is no methodical way to find the answer.
You, the creator of this theory, found the answer because you knew it already.
Now let's say I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to astronomy, and I have no idea of the orbital period of Mars. I decide to figure it out by using tarot cards. I come up with lots of numbers. But which one/s is/are correct?
Let's see; the sun card = 19, and the zodiac cards sum to 127 = 73, and the elements reduce to 32 = 5.
19 x 73 x 5 = 6935.
Let's see, is that the orbital period of Mars? Well, I'm not sure. But it must be significant of something. Is it the Metonic cycle. I'm not sure, (actually it's not, but it's close). In fact, I don't even know what the Metonic cycle is, since I'm ignorant of astronomy. Is this cycle even hidden in the tarot? I'm not sure, but now I'm told it correlates the sun and the moon cycles, so naturally I look at the numbers for the sun and the moon cards, but combining them in all sorts of ways, with and without other cards, I can't figure it out. At least I don't think I have figured it out, but then, since I don't know what the answer actually is, I have no way of knowing if I ever arrive at it in the first place. Maybe I'm better off looking for the value of the speed of light...but I'm not sure if I should use meters or feet, kilometers or miles. It's a real quandary.
There are some other problems with your theory, (particularly the fact that it is not really based on the tarot), but I've spent enough of my time on it already, (and you've spent none of your time addressing those critiques). I only post this to clarify a position of mine that you either did not understand or are accidentally misrepresenting. But since I don't plan on discussing this any more, I will summarize my main disagreements with you:
your 'ciphertext' has no algorithm to unambiguously reveal the numbers it allegedly hides
your theory is based on the Hebrew kabbalistic correspondences, and is only tangentially related to tarot. these correspondences have never been demonstrated to display any 'ordinal' numeration, which is vital for your theory to make any sense.
you answer the first objection by saying that of course the puzzle is to be figured out via lateral thinking. but the fact remains that no one can know if it has been figured out unless they know the correct answer from another source, which vitiates the need for a puzzle in the first place.
you insist on conflating the tarot and the hebrew correspondences, and then answer the second objection by saying that your numbers show that the tarot was encoded with this information. your evidence is in the numbers only and nothing else. so your conclusion becomes your premise. this begs the question.
I don't see how you expect your theory to be accepted without any evidence that it is actually true. you need to have evidence that there is an algorithm in the pattern of numbers found in the tarot, and that there was a deliberate plan to create the tarot trump numbers based on hebrew letter correspondences.
you wanted people to think about your theory? well, i did you the courtesy of thinking about it, and that's my response.
hase shift sinusoidal wave unison-octave