Principia Discordia

Principia Discordia => Techmology and Scientism => Topic started by: Telarus on June 27, 2012, 08:02:44 AM

Title: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Telarus on June 27, 2012, 08:02:44 AM
Very interesting. I remember 17 being called out in Illuminatus! as having a connection to the 5/23 current. Does anyone remember where that is? I guess I can text-search it.

http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2007/02/05/is-17-the-most-random-number/

http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2007/02/09/randomness-wrapup/
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on June 27, 2012, 08:40:34 AM
Quote from: Telarus on June 27, 2012, 08:02:44 AM
Very interesting. I remember 17 being called out in Illuminatus! as having a connection to the 5/23 current. Does anyone remember where that is? I guess I can text-search it.

http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2007/02/05/is-17-the-most-random-number/

http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2007/02/09/randomness-wrapup/

I lost my copy when I moved from Westie, which was unfortunate since I started rereading it and making margin notes.

This however benefits you.

Someone in the novel, and I think this was the main 17 reference, expected to see something on chromosome 23, but instead kept finding what he was looking for, or some anomaly, or some mirror anomaly, on chromosome 17. There was also some mention that 23 and 17 are the "same thing" which they probably didn't say but was the idea. That where 23 was absent, 17 could be found.

I do recall trying to figure out what the link between 23 and 17 could be (from a literary perspective) and could find nothing other than that they were both prime numbers, and rather overlooked ones at that.

Hope that helps.
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on June 27, 2012, 08:43:32 AM
23+17=40, which is a fairly important number in several cultures, including both Abrahamic and Gardneric religions.

23-17=6... which if you factor is 2 and 3. Ah. Ok. That's law of fivesing but there you go.
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on June 27, 2012, 08:46:10 AM
Quote from: Iron Twiddleton on June 27, 2012, 08:43:32 AM
23+17=40, which is a fairly important number in several cultures, including both Abrahamic and Gardneric religions.

23-17=6... which if you factor is 2 and 3. Ah. Ok. That's law of fivesing but there you go.

Which you can law of fives further and say that the plus is the Aneristic Illusion, which leads you to a false conclusion, and that the minus is the Eristic Illusion, which leads to the more interesting (in)correct interpretation, since it leads back to Lo5.

Also, Maiden+Postgaming=wild speculation that may be valid or invalid.


I hafta pee.
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Faust on June 27, 2012, 09:16:19 AM
It played  a large role in illuminatus because of the 1776 date.
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on June 27, 2012, 10:01:24 AM
Quote from: Faust on June 27, 2012, 09:16:19 AM
It played  a large role in illuminatus because of the 1776 date.

What about the --76 bit though? Based on that any date between 1700 and 1799 are somehow significant, unless I'm missing something or intentionally downplaying the US/formation of the Illuminati.
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Faust on June 27, 2012, 10:09:51 AM
Quote from: Iron Twiddleton on June 27, 2012, 10:01:24 AM
Quote from: Faust on June 27, 2012, 09:16:19 AM
It played  a large role in illuminatus because of the 1776 date.

What about the --76 bit though? Based on that any date between 1700 and 1799 are somehow significant, unless I'm missing something or intentionally downplaying the US/formation of the Illuminati.

The declaration of independence was a big thing in the book, There was illuminati stuff too, not sure if that was the year AW replaced GW.
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on June 27, 2012, 10:13:21 AM
Quote from: Faust on June 27, 2012, 10:09:51 AM
Quote from: Iron Twiddleton on June 27, 2012, 10:01:24 AM
Quote from: Faust on June 27, 2012, 09:16:19 AM
It played  a large role in illuminatus because of the 1776 date.

What about the --76 bit though? Based on that any date between 1700 and 1799 are somehow significant, unless I'm missing something or intentionally downplaying the US/formation of the Illuminati.

The declaration of independence was a big thing in the book, There was illuminati stuff too, not sure if that was the year AW replaced GW.

It seems like a bit of a stretch... which is the point of Lo5 anyway.

I always took 1776 to be a date to imply connection with Illuminati/United States and, of course, Washington/Weishaupt. I don't think that was the year AW replaced GW, I just figured that was meant to make them either foils or doppelgangers.
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on June 27, 2012, 10:15:16 AM
I could also be wrong. It was a confusing book that I read once after already hearing about Discordia which demands both a closer look and a a skeptical eye.
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Pæs on June 27, 2012, 11:31:51 AM
QuoteThe Internal Revenue Service knows this much about Robert Putney Drake: during the last fiscal year, he earned $23,000,005 on stocks and bonds in various defense corporations, $17,000,523 from the three banks he controlled...

QuoteThe Law of Fives is all the farther that Weishaupt ever got, and Hagbard and John aren't much interested in any further speculations along those lines. The 23/17 phenomenon is entirely my discovery, except that William S. Burroughs has noted the 23 without coming to any conclusions about it.

QuoteIn the act of conception, of course, the father contributes 23 chromosomes and the mother contributes another 23. In the / Ching, hexagram 23 has connotations of "sinking" or "breaking apart," shades of the unfortunate Captain Clarks. . . .

Another woman just came by, collecting for the Mothers March against Muscular Dystrophy. I gave her a quarter. Where was I? Oh, yes: James Joyce had five letters in both his front name and his hind name, so he was worth looking into. A Portrait of the Artist has five chapters, all well and good, but Ulysses has 18 chapters, a stumper, until I remembered that 5 + 18 = 23. How about Finnegans Wake? Alas, that has 17 chapters, and I was bogged down for a while.

Trying another angle, I wondered if Frank Sullivan, the poor cluck who got shot instead of John at the Biograph Theatre that night, could have lingered until after midnight, dying on July 23 instead of July

22 as usually stated. I looked it up in Toland's book, The Dillinger Days. Poor Frank, sad to say, died before midnight, but Toland included an interesting detail, which I told you that night at the Seminary bar:

23 people died of heat prostration that day in Chicago. He added something else: 17 people had died of heat prostration the day before. Why did he mention that? I'm sure he doesn't know— but there it was again, 23 and 17. Maybe something important is going to happen in the year 2317? I couldn't check that, of course (you can't navigate precisely in the Morgensheutegesternwelt), so I went back to 1723, and struck golden apples. That was the year Adam Smith and Adam Weishaupt were both born (and Smith published The Wealth of Nations the same year Weishaupt revived the Illuminati: 1776.)

Well, 2 + 3 = 5, fitting the Law of Fives, but 1+7 = 8, fitting nothing. Where did that leave me? Eight, I reflected, is the number of letters in Kallisti, back to the golden apple again, and 8 is also 23, hot damn. Naturally, it came as no surprise when the 8 defendants in the Chicago Conspiracy Trial, which grew out of our little Convention Week Carnival, were tried on the 23rd floor of the Federal Building, amid a flurry of synchronicity- a Hoffman among the defendants, a Hoffman as judge; the Illuminati pyramid, or Great Seal of the U.S. right inside the door of the building, and a Scale getting worse abuse than the other defendants; five-letter names and proliferating—Abbie, Davis, Foran, Scale, Jerry Rubin (twice), and the clincher, Clark (Ramsey, not Captain) who was torpedoed and sunk by the judge before he could testify.

I got interested in Dutch Shultz because he died on October 23. A cluster of synchronicity, that man: he ordered the shooting of Vincent "Mad Dog" Coll (remember Mad Dog, Texas); Coll was shot on 23rd Street, when he was 23 years old; and Charlie Workman, who allegedly shot Schultz, served 23 years in prison for it (although rumor has it that Mendy Weiss— two five-letter names, again— did the real shooting.) Does 17 come in? You bet Shultz was first sentenced to prison at the age of 17.

Around this time I bought Robert Heinlein's The Puppet Masters, thinking the plot might parallel some Illuminati operations. Imagine how I felt when Chapter Two began, "23 hours and 17 minutes ago, a flying saucer landed in Iowa . . ."

QuoteWhere was I? I meant to add, in relation to the Dutch Shultz shooting that Marty Krompier, who ran the policy racket in Harlem, was also shot on October 23, 1935. The police asked him if there was a connection with phlegmatic Flegenheimer's demise and he said, "It's got to be one of them coincidences." I wonder how he emphasized that— "one of them coincidences" or "one of them coincidences"? How much did he know?

That brings me to the 40 enigma. As pointed out, 1 + 7 = 8, the number of letters in Kallisti. 8 x 5 = 40.

More interestingly, without invoking the mystic 5, we still arrive at 40 by adding 17 + 23. What, then, is the significance of 40? I've run through various associations—Jesus had his 40 days in the desert, Ali Baba had his 40 thieves, Buddhists have their 40 meditations, the solar system is almost exactly 40 astronomical units in radius (Pluto yo-yos a bit)—but I have no definite theory yet . . .

QuoteThe Discordians made their own sardonic commentary on the legal and scientific basis of law V order by using a 17-step pyramid—17 being a number with virtually no interesting geometric, arithmetic or mystic properties, outside of Java, where it was the basis of a particularly weird musical scale— and topping it with the Apple of Discord, symbol of the un-rational, un-geometrical, and thoroughly disorderly spontaneity of the vegetable world of creative evolution.

QuoteBurroughs, incidentally, although he discovered the 23 synchronicity principle, is unaware of the correlation with 17. This makes it even more interesting that his date for the invasion of earth by the Nova Mob (in Nova Express) is September 17, 1899. When I asked him how he picked that date, he said it just came to him out of the air.
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Telarus on June 27, 2012, 04:29:45 PM
Thanks guys, that was helpful.   :fnord::1fap:


Aaaah, yes. "17" & "Red&White" are both Hashisim/Illuminati codes for Cannabis/Hashish.

Incidentally, seventeen states plus the District of Columbia now allow medicinal cannabis.
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on June 27, 2012, 08:39:39 PM
Leaving 33 states which is the number of degrees in scottish rite freemasonry and which of course is 3+3=6 which is also 2x3. ;)
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: E.O.T. on June 27, 2012, 08:55:44 PM


THE WHOLE REASON

          that 17 is vital and always will be, is because my birthday is march 17th, which, here in the states, is the one day of the year everybody gets wasted drunk, the power of which, causes universal bliss to occur, connecting all living things to their true origin.
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Triple Zero on June 28, 2012, 05:09:48 PM
33 - 22 = 23

23 + 32 = 17


---

also I'm going to have to read those articles, I thought 67 was scientifically found to be ... no wait that was the one people were least likely to remember in a sequence. anyway cool
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: BabylonHoruv on June 28, 2012, 06:20:11 PM
1+7 = 8

23 = 8

7-1 = 6

2 X 3 = 6

17 is the 7th prime number

After 17, 7 is the most commonly picked number between 1 and 20 in the link in the OP.
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on June 28, 2012, 06:28:57 PM
It says on page 12 of this that when told to pick a random number between 10-100 with different even digits, people will almost always pick 68.
http://www.oocities.org/tennislasalle/blaine.pdf
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: E.O.T. on June 28, 2012, 06:35:33 PM
Quote from: TEXAS FAIRIES FOR ALL YOU SPAGS on June 28, 2012, 06:28:57 PM
It says on page 12 of this that when told to pick a random number between 10-100 with different even digits, people will almost always pick 68.
http://www.oocities.org/tennislasalle/blaine.pdf

PERHAPS

          it's a sublime mental step away from 69?
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on June 28, 2012, 06:38:52 PM
The conventional wisdom surrounding 68 is "you eat me and I'll owe ya one".
Heard it in a bar so it must be true.  :lol:
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: E.O.T. on June 28, 2012, 06:44:59 PM
Quote from: TEXAS FAIRIES FOR ALL YOU SPAGS on June 28, 2012, 06:38:52 PM
The conventional wisdom surrounding 68 is "you eat me and I'll owe ya one".
Heard it in a bar so it must be true.  :lol:

HA HA

          what does one get for a 17?
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: LMNO on June 28, 2012, 06:48:10 PM
It gets you arrested for statuatory rape.
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: Triple Zero on June 28, 2012, 06:57:34 PM
BTW a little while back I came across a new explanation for the Law of Fives. It's tangentially related to pattern recognition like our usual interpretation, but a different approach on the fundamental mathematical side:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_Law_of_Small_Numbers

It also doesn't lend itself as easily to philosophical insights. At least, none that I've been able to discover so far.
Title: Re: 17, the "most random" number.
Post by: LMNO on June 28, 2012, 06:59:01 PM
That's also covered in the book I'm (still) reading, "Thinking Fast and Slow".  I have to go to a meeting, but while there may not be philisophical implications, there are certainly pragmatic ones.