Theos-Talk Archives (May 2000 Message tt00132)

Another interesting thing to consider is the nature of numbers.
In a somewhat hasty nutshell, we could say that ...

Real numbers measure things that physically exist, that are
tangible, and might be quantified. These include two types of
numbers. The rational numbers are like the domain of relationships.
Every rational number is a relationship between two integers, two
whole numbers. The other type of real numbers are the irrational,
like pi, which represent some intangible relationship, where some
being is related to "something higher," like pi, the golden mean,
or e (as in the bell-shaped curve and statistics.)

When we move to include the unmanifest, the realm of the potentially
existing in relationship to that which exists, we have complex
numbers. A complex number has a real number, the existing part, and
the imaginary number, the unmanifest, "subjective," aspect, somewhat
like an "astral prototype".

Here's a first cut at some preliminary thoughts on relating
types of numbers to the parts of a being:

complex number (a whole being)
. real number (a manifest being)
   . rational number (buddhic nature, active karmic relationships)
     . numerator (a particular being, which the other is measured 
       by, karmic effect)
     . denominator (how this other being appears in the first, karmic cause)
   -or-
   . irrational number (archetypal relationship between person and 
     something great)
     . e.g. two lines, a radius and a circumference, related by the ratio pi
. imaginary number (unmanifest being)
   . rational number (buddhic nature, latent karmic relationships)
     . numerator (a particular being, which the other is measured 
       by, karmic effect)
     . denominator (how this other being appears in the first, karmic cause)
   -or-
   . irrational number (archetypal relationship between person and 
     something great)
     . e.g. two lines, a radius and a circumference, related by the ratio pi

-- Eldon Tucker

At 03:26 PM 5/16/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Was taught once that what we apparently see as, ... -1, 0, 1, ... is actually
>an illusion
>and what may actually be happening is more akin to 0, 1, 0 as visually
>demonstrated
>by the Tibetan dorje.
>
>Spencer


-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.