Why Reverse Ordinal? Because when we first saw this appear early this year they have been beating it to death claiming greater number matching. More numbers to play with. More matches. Duh. Since the values of individual letters are reversed a word now has a different value that, of course, you aren't required to use, but MAY use or ignore as you deem fit. It's easy to dismiss words of matching value that gave no meaningful connection. But now I have another numbering system to search for antonyms.
How the process works:
This is going to be long and involved. And yes, there is math. Also, in preparation for my upcoming book on debunking the pseudoscience of Gematria this will be an entire chapter. My usual mocking, sarcasm and potty mouth will be curbed.
Some argument can be made on whether some words are true antonym pairs. But many are very plain. Before Reverse Ordinal OPEN and CLOSED did not match. Now you can "synch" them with the two different systems. They both equal 58. The thought that some mysterious elite group of people or vague cosmic entity would allow direct contradictions be "synched" in our vocabulary is ludicrous. They are simply words.
In addition to just trial and error searches for matches there is another way. There are certain prefixes that negate the root word, as well as adding the word NOT in a phrase. That is true /That is not true. The gematria has changed by addition of one word. The meaning is a direct contradiction. But it has no chance at all of changing a phrase from a given value in ordinal to the same value in reverse ordinal.
Let's start with a prefix that does work and why. UN. There is no doubt that GROUP/UNGROUP and WOUND/UNWOUND are direct antonyms and they do have the same gematria, one in reverse and one in the regular system. This will always be the case when the root word, like GROUP, has an odd number of letters and addition of UN negates it by adding an even number of letters. In Simple numbering UN is 35 and in Reverse it's 19. A difference of 16. The root word GROUP has a Simple value of 77, 19 larger than the reverse value of 58. 19+16=35, the total value of the additional UN. This holds true for any root number value of 77 with 5 letters. It also works for other values of 77 +/- 27. Each pair of letters adds 27 to the new UN word. Again, the thought that vague powerful forces have coded such contradictions in to our language is ludicrous.
Why an odd number of letters in the root word? Because if you add a pair letters you end up with an even multiple of 27 when you sum reverse and simple values together. There's no way for reverse to "catch up" to the spread between the two systems. The prefix needs to be an even number of letters. The book will go into more detail, that's enough about UN for now.
NOT does not work because of the odd number of letters. The only time it does match is when simple and reverse already equal each other, which means a root word of an even number of letters.
But grammatically there are other ways to change the meaning of a phrase that mathematically produce the same gematria values. AND vs. OR can work mathematically as long as you have the right number of letters and proper value for the root words. These tend to be awkward sounding unless you use people's names. Xxxx and Yyyyy vs. Xxxx or Yyyyy. Not a contradiction but certainly convey a different meaning. More details and actual examples will be in the book.
But with verb tenses I have an even greater example of using math and achieving the same result as the addition if a prefix.
Stan is interesting. Or maybe he isn't. Because Stan WAS interesting has the same value. If you are going to change the verb tense to alter the phrase this was you have to have the right verb total value and the noun, Stan, is palindromic equaling 54 in both simple and reverse. Then the mathematical difference in the values of IS and WAS takes care of the rest of the contradiction. Other verbs this works with are following, authoring and flowing.
Now what about past tense of plural nouns? And this is aimed at those who would try to be critical of me being critical. This is important to objectively analyze the entire idea of Gematria.
When dealing with a plural noun, grammatically the present tense is ARE. Past tense is WERE. They are interesting. They were interesting...both have the same value in reverse! Any verb. Any plural noun. This always works because the values of ARE and WERE are both 57 in reverse.
Concerned parent of kidnapped children: What about my children?
Kidnapper: They were alive.
Parents: Sob, boo hoo hoo.
Perfectly reasonable phrasing. They are/were something has undoubtedly appeared in news articles somewhere and is even worthy of a headline.
The odds that some force has guided our language to the point that such a simple variation in phrasing totally changes the meaning is preposterous.
No comments:
Post a Comment