Nick Land Explains the Numogram

[Music] Theory has to have a priority.

Capitalism and artificial intelligence are the same thing.

The dimension of the future has disappeared.

[Music] [Music] [Music] There is no final resolution to contradiction.

Militant proletarian snake handling over a piece never gets much wilder than this.

Welcome to the dangerous maybe. I'm

Michael DS. My work focuses on the fault line in contemporary online theory between the CCRU and the Lubiana school.

I'm researching the differences and similarities between these two schools of thought, especially their different interpretations of desire, time, and capitalism. I'm the author of the

capitalism. I'm the author of the dangerous maybe blog on medium and Substack. and I am also the author of

Substack. and I am also the author of Capital Versus Time Energy, a Xiakian critique of Nick Land, which is soon to be republished in a new edition. In this

very special episode, I'm joined by Nick Land and my good friend and collaborator Nance. Be sure to check out Nance's

Nance. Be sure to check out Nance's YouTube channel and Substack, Three Billion Nances. He and I have been doing

Billion Nances. He and I have been doing a series of videos where we cover some of Nick Lan's essays in his book Xeno Systems as well as all topics related to

artificial intelligence. I also want to

artificial intelligence. I also want to thank my friend Christian Michael Pointer who just so happened to make the beat you are currently listening to.

Check out his music on Spotify and YouTube. I'll leave links down below. If

YouTube. I'll leave links down below. If

you like this video and want to support my work, you can do so by becoming a patron over on Patreon. I'll leave a link in the description. I also want to thank all my current patrons for their

support.

If you want to support the channel, please leave a like and subscribe. And

without any further ado, let's start the show.

All right, everybody. Welcome to the Dangerous Maybe. Uh we are here with a

Dangerous Maybe. Uh we are here with a very very special guest to discuss a very special topic. Uh today Nick Land

has joined us to discuss the numogram.

And for anybody who is familiar with Nick's work or the CCRU's work, you know that the Numogram is something

very central to the project of the CCRU.

And it's continued to be a huge influence on Nick's work ever since. And

yet much of the Numogram, what it is, what's its significance, very much is shrouded in mystery. And um it's been

that way for ever since the CCRU received it. But Nick is here to do

received it. But Nick is here to do something very special. He's going to uh unpack the numogram. He's going to give us a basic introduction to it and just

share some of the the core insights and meanings that he's gotten from it and ultimately what what the whole thing with the numogram is all about. So, it's

a very special conversation because there's a lot of people who are interested in the numogram and have been for a long time and have always wanted

to see Nick discuss it in detail. And

so, the wait is over. Here we are. And

so, Nick, thanks for joining us. Uh,

great to have you here, especially to talk about something that so many people have been fascinated with ever since it uh flooded into the world from the

outside. So, uh, okay. Yeah. Yes, it's

outside. So, uh, okay. Yeah. Yes, it's

great to be back.

Thank you guys for the invitation.

Um, and obviously my hope is that by the time we uh finish here, it doesn't seem

to you that I am hoarding some secret knowledge about the numogram and for perverse reasons

refusing to share. So I mean I expect you know any level of excruciating patient interrogation that you think uh

is required to avoid avoid that notion that there's something being held back here. I mean literally everything that I

here. I mean literally everything that I can say about it I I am hoping to say about it. Fantastic. N what are you thinking?

it. Fantastic. N what are you thinking?

I uh that's amazing. I mean, this this week, Mikey, um, we've been I, you know, studying and and getting prepared and and talking about, uh, it it is a joy

and a privilege, and I don't want to fang girl too much. Um, but we do take this seriously. Um, and Nick, you said

this seriously. Um, and Nick, you said before we were going, um, what is a philosophy of the outside or or what would it be to have a a connection with the outside? That question, I think, is

the outside? That question, I think, is a very serious question. Um

and and yeah, I think we're we're here to talk about that. Like it's not just um the madness that comes on when you've been staring at this diagram and the

whirls and the plexes and the gates. It

it does have a tendency to um to become opaque if you stare at it for for too long. So, I'm looking forward to

long. So, I'm looking forward to hopefully maybe not clarity, but maybe a little bit more uh familiarity with it all.

Okay, great. So, I think the best thing to do um is basically just start with the simplest of questions, Nick. What is the numogram?

questions, Nick. What is the numogram?

Uh what makes up its its core mathematical relations? And uh I guess

mathematical relations? And uh I guess we should start with that. Okay. Uh, so

I mean, as I was saying a little bit before we came on, I I've got two parallel sets of notes about this to try

and orchestrate things. And the most recent one, I think, is the most coherent. I'm going

to try and stick with it. And it's like my best attempt to go through this in an order that proceeds step by step in an

intelligible way. Uh

intelligible way. Uh uh I think that the sequence is as coherent as I kind of made it in terms

of the the topics. Um,

and actually I thought that the best starting point it will partly because it leaves a a number of paths shooting off that we're not going to be able to

follow all of them, but we're going to see where they come from.

uh is actually the uh very simple little diagram that the CCIU had deep down in the 1990s that we called the Barker

spiral.

Um and I've been been promised that this this will appear and be graphically evident

to people, but I'll still try and just talk through a little bit. Um because

what uh what is important about the bark spiral

is the fact that it joins together two sides uh two various attempts to

compute decimal numerousy and back in the CCU days very much I We went on a particular slightly

schlocky narrative with this that I think's been quite influential and which I've stepped back a little bit

because one side of the barker spiral which connects the decimal numerals

to to sum on each side to 10 is what we called Atlantean. And I'll say a little

called Atlantean. And I'll say a little bit more about that in a second. And the

other side which uh sums the decimal numerals to make nine we called lamura

and I think that what's going on in that option there's this is this it's a certain attempt a very crude I think attempt is maybe not right because at

the time it's something much hazier than that to to try and just get a very clear diagrammatic sense of a crisis of

adoption of decimal numerousy in Europe and and we'll come back to that. So

there's these two things, you know, Atlantis and Leamura Al. I think that's Crowley's AL and AL is the kind of um

his great cabalistic key. It's constant

between Hebrew, Greek, and then the uh CCU and Glossic Cabala in each case it

adds to 31.

Um, okay. I'm going to definitely try to

okay. I'm going to definitely try to engineer a pause in just one more stage just before really running with it. So,

I just very little bit about the Atlantean side of this.

So on the Atlantean side as I say all the numbers uh are connected to make 10 each time the because of the fact that

if you have even numbers it's not neat.

It's much neater as we'll see generally much neater on the Lan side. You have a dot in the middle which is five and five. Five and five makes 10 obviously,

five. Five and five makes 10 obviously, but it doesn't give you anything neat.

If you turn it on its side, it's very much the the same. Um,

sorry, just one second. Just do a little uh Sorry about this interruption. Yes.

Yeah, that it's it's the same shape as a monoa, i.e. you know, you have a central candle

i.e. you know, you have a central candle and then you have a set of expanding rings each like leading to two points which are candles on this. There's so so

actually there's quite a lot of Jewish uh sort of esoteric symbolism that will echo at certain points in this. This is

definitely one of them. Um, if you have a put a mirror down the center of the bark spiral, so you mirror the Atlantean

side, you get a series of concentric circles with a dot in the center.

Um now the concentric cycle circles are extremely interesting for a number of reasons. Um, I'm going to be like fast

reasons. Um, I'm going to be like fast forwarding us to the Renaissance where everything really gets started. And just

recently I've been like on a amazing Italy tour seeing a lot of uh Renaissance art and

seeing this repeated uh visual icon of Renaissance or medieval cosmogyny

which is a vast set of concentric circles. You know the whole notion of

circles. You know the whole notion of the universe which was obviously is geocentric relatively small structure by our modern

terms was conceived as a set of concentric circles. Um earth in the

concentric circles. Um earth in the middle then you go through the elements it goes water air fire then you're on to the planets. So it goes moon mercury

the planets. So it goes moon mercury Venus boom boom boom through to Saturn at the end. then the zodiac the as the

the fixed stars the celestial spheres and you're in then these emperian realms of of religious thought. So that

is the basic diagram of the kind of scholastic tradition of the of the old tradition that is feeding into the Renaissance and that is the that is the

mode of thinking that even in this in a very hazy cloudy way even back in the 1990s the CCU was trying to capture

in its notion of what is Atlantan what is uh what is the architectonic border of the escaton.

It's a it's a series of concentric circles radiating out from a central point.

And it's Atlantan because it's the model play in Plato's critias which is by far the richest source of

Atlantan material feeding into the western tradition.

This is how Atlantis is conceived. It's

conceived as a concentric system basically or it's primary the primary description of it is

a centric system consisting of perfect circular canals and uh bits of land between them and a central and a central

point in in Atlantis on a central island. And even more significantly

island. And even more significantly um we have it begins with a marriage of

Poseidon and Clato and it says of Poseidon at the Genesis he begot five pairs of male twins

brought them up and divided the island of Atlantis into 10 parts which he distributed between them.

So this is the Atlantean decimal source in our tradition and it's to do with five pairs. So, and and as

we've seen, even though there's a peculiarity about the central point in this, it's like slightly messy in that way.

Conceiving decimal as a set of twins is how you get rolling with this thing is how you both sides of the barker

spiral do that. The Atlantan side, as I say, they add to 10. Um,

to 10. Um, and I think on that note, I know I'll just say one tiny little thing that's a kind of a footnote type of thing to that,

which is just to say, you know, um, I I'm I really I really badly miss

having an AOE education. I mean, in my Twilight years, you know, I sort of think we we obviously were just like, you

know, Leam Moran punks in the 1990s. The

AOE was just a punching bag. It was just it was everything to do with tradition and authority and whatever was being put

in that slot and just abused. Um whereas

you know I think you know it's ultimately ultimately I would say my sympathies are still Luran

but I wish I was saying that as a dissident as an occult dissident of an based on a very solid AOE education

you know classical languages uh all of this stuff you know soaked in Plato read biblically

as this occult um authority. And so part of definitely

um authority. And so part of definitely where I am now is to definitely it's sort of too late to do everything out of the AOE. You know, that was so much not

the AOE. You know, that was so much not what was happening before. But that's

kind of what I'm trying more and more to do because in a way that I think we have to talk about a little bit more later,

the AOE represents the actual European occult tradition, the hermetic

tradition. you know, it's the Knights

tradition. you know, it's the Knights Templars, it's the Masons, it's the, you know, it's Pico and Fino and all the

Italian Renaissance um philosophers or cultists. It's John D going right through to uh the Rossian,

the the Golden Dawn, Crowley and the Otto. It's basically the the foundations

Otto. It's basically the the foundations of all of that. I hope I said the Masons. the Masons most of all. That's,

Masons. the Masons most of all. That's,

you know, that's what they built. That's

their cathedral. Um, and even if you're going to find weird stuff coming out of the walls, you know, even if you're going to be on some strange Lamuran drug

watching weird stuff coming out of places it shouldn't come in that cathedral. It's like that's the

cathedral. It's like that's the cathedral. That's the that's the edifice

cathedral. That's the that's the edifice uh in which you know capture.

Yeah. Well, may capture too, but but but but more than that, production, you know, it's like it's it's built this.

Um, so I don't think it's just I think this attempt to just negativize it. It's incomplete. The Barker Spir

it. It's incomplete. The Barker Spir says it's incomplete, but also it's necessary. You only get the spiral if

necessary. You only get the spiral if you get both the the Atlantean Lamuran side together make a spiral. Leamuranism on its own

isn't a spiral at all. I don't even if you just mirror that side, I guess you just also get a cassette of concentric circles. It's not, you know, you you

circles. It's not, you know, you you don't get escape. You don't get anything exciting. The spiral comes out of this

exciting. The spiral comes out of this Lumuro Atlantan convergence and the tension and that that comes out of that. You also say the

friction between them.

Yes. Okay.

So like one of the questions that comes to mind because with Plato where he's talking talking about the Atlantean set of twins are males. I've noticed in the

CCR you all the lemurs are always referred to as her. Is that in response to that's that's limarianism again? I

mean, you know what I mean? It's like

punk limarianism.

I mean, I'm not going to completely whatever it blot it out. um

at all, but yeah, that's that's what it that's so you can mentally compensate.

Okay. So, I think it's with where we're at, I think this is probably a good time to kind of run through those basics. So,

the numogram is a time map, a time maze.

And the question is if somebody looks at it for the first time, uh it's very perplexing. They don't know what they're

perplexing. They don't know what they're looking at. Uh so it's kind of I think

looking at. Uh so it's kind of I think essential to to go through the basic components of it. And so I'll just I

mean it's comprised of five sizzes that run from you know based on the decimal system of 0 to 9 and out of the sizzes

we get currents we get gates and each gate has a channel and this whole thing is based on mathematical relations of

culminating and plexing. I wonder if you could just kind of take a second and walk us through these mathematical relations and yeah share share what you

how how you think of the these basic operations.

Yes. Okay. This is great. I mean a second might be slightly optimistic.

Okay.

I'll get as much time as you want actually. Now there's different ways.

actually. Now there's different ways.

One natural way which I think I will shelf be under time pressure but maybe we can come come back to to do this is actually to start off with the tree of

life you know which everyone interested in western occultism is very familiar with it also is a series of 10 zones the

sepharat and paths between those zones and is seen as a basic cosmic map. So

there's a certain sense where these things are inevitably in some kind of communication.

Um and I would say even perhaps a competitive relationship

in some in some way and the tree of life is emanationist.

uh that's to say uh it arises it's or it's based on stuff that arises

in the early centuries of the Christian era. Um

era. Um uh it's a it's a kind of as all these things are there's an

element of uh hermetic theological innovation going on there that wants to present itself as very traditional. So

it has a kind of complicated type of time that will become I think even more intense when we get to the release. So I

again I kind of kick that a little bit um up the road and its mode of decimal is definitely

inclined to the Atlantan which is to say while there is a zero introduced later you know and it's kind of off the

top of the tree of life the tree of life begins with one and It goes down

past 9 10 Malcolm right at the bottom, you know, just suspended after you've zigzagged across these three columns of

the tree of life. You reach Malcus at the end. Um, and Malc is what kind of

the end. Um, and Malc is what kind of one repeated like you've basically done a circle. Um, some people have, I think,

circle. Um, some people have, I think, quite traditionally, I don't think this is a just a kind of weird modernist trick, have have just represented the tree of life as just this endless

sequence that you get to Malcus, which is 10 in the previous tree of life and becomes one in the new one and then down you go another 10 and another 10 like this, you know, as a as a repeating

decimal pattern. Um, and we're going to

decimal pattern. Um, and we're going to see that echoed in the normally received

um, Pythagorean tetrus which is a which is also 10 and is also has a in its normal

representation that an Atlantean uh, numerical operation in the sense that it basically is counting

from 1 to can um and you know that's the well we we have to come back to the tactus anyway so maybe I won't get lost

in this but I I'll just say though these very familiar systems have an Atlantean numerical orientation it's very specifically identifiable in the sense

that there's no zero actually intrinsic to the uh numbers being worked with Um uh and uh and the philos philosophical

basis of it is this emanationist philosophy that comes in basically that finds its philosophical expression with the neo neoplate nests. Pieri I think

most uh in its most kind of rigorous and fully expanded with Platinus who who gives this full emanationist philosophy

of everything coming out of the one.

The one takes on this this you know Platinus isn't a Christian he's like he's br he's brought into Christian

affinity. He's not a Jew either. Um he's

affinity. He's not a Jew either. Um he's

not an Abra part of Abrahamic theology but the one his god is the one and the one takes on this um you know

theological strongly theological flavor mystical theological flavor.

It's already that basically your philosophy, your religion and your philosophy of arithmetic are

the same.

It's like what it, you know, what a religion really is at this point. Now,

when you're drawing something like this, when you're writing something like a neoplatonic philosophy, what a religion is is a philosophy of arithmetic. It's an

understanding of numbers. It's a

numeracy. It's it's basically veneration in these terms, veneration of the one.

Um, and this will be complicated in the later cabalistic Jewish cabalistic stuff with the uh tree of life, but I think at this in this period, it's it's really

very strong and very clear that that's uh what's happening.

Um, yes. So you know what happens then

yes. So you know what happens then to to when you go what's the basic thing that's happening when you're moving onto the numogram when you're moving and what

the numogram is is a leorian map that seems to have the same agenda that's got it's dealing with the 10 uh

zones as we as as they are in the numogram sephot as they are in the tree of Not the same in the sense that obviously

go from 0 to 9 in the gram not 1 to 10 but the same in the sense that it's decimal numerousy given this cardographic

occult uh representation.

And what happens is we if we go back to the bark spiral momentarily is that um everything is adding up to nine is not

adding up to 10 and 10 as we've seen in this emanationist philosophy to add up to 10 is to add up to one. Malchath is

just keter recycled.

So the the veneration of the one and a form of decimal numeracy that sees 10 as its

culmination that counts from 1 to 10.

They are the same. You know 10 10 is the vehicle of the uh the valorization of unity.

Nine is not bad. Nine is not bad.

Um, okay. I we haven't actually started

okay. I we haven't actually started quite constructing the yet, but okay.

Okay. I now have a set of little episodes or or a set of little topics organized under the master theme of what

I call Masonic arithmetic.

And I think that by the time we've done Masonic arithmetic, the numogram just falls into existence with just

perfect spontaneity. Okay. Um, so C

perfect spontaneity. Okay. Um, so C maybe I can I know I am saying what I was worried of doing of just falling into monologue pedagogic monologue. My

Yeah, maybe you should interrupt this bit before I'll just say so I think one thing and I don't want to because I I want you to go down this line of notes

that you have. Uh but it is important to stress though that I think the introduction of zero into the Lamuran

time map is quite significant and zero isn't just a a decimal early on in your your thinking and thirst for annihilation there's always

these refer uh references to zero and I always took it like you're not just talking about a decimal zero also is and I think to put it in later Duzo

Guutarian terms, correct me if I'm wrong, zero is also somewhat of another way of talking about the full body without organs. It's full potentiality.

without organs. It's full potentiality.

It's not nothing in the sense of like just absolute nothing whatsoever. It's

uh it's the fullness of virtuality. Is

that maybe a a way of thinking about what you mean by zero?

Well, I think uh we're going to stick to this a lot. Okay. Frankly, I come at it from several different angles because I

mean my ultimate answer is just as it is for unity which we will have to come to is like you know rather than having a philosophical answer to this like what

what do I make of unity what do I make of zero is to say well let's look at the

numogram and what is that telling us about unity and telling us about zero, how is this positioning them? How do

they work? How do they what kind of paths do they open up? Um

what relations do they open up? Um but

also they're going to zero is going to come in a lot in in the next sort of raft of discussion which is which as I say

Masonic arithmetic because um Europe zero after sort of vadic the

vadic numerals zero after traveling out of India slowly through the Arab world

Persian and and Arab world meeting much resistance in various places catalyzing important things along the

way arrives most importantly in northern Italy in at some period blurily it's not a

clear moment it's a it's a it's a field of intensities in northern Italy round about the early Renaissance or at least it's

you know that what the Renaissance I want to say my strong claim here is that the Renaissance ultimately there's lots of things going on there but what it

ultimately is is the incorporation of zero the adoption of zero that is what

fundamentally it is and you know people have said before you know that's not only arithmetic Okay, it's not only in all the forms of you know scientific

calculation um bookkeeping and economic and financial accounting banking it's also

in uh Renaissance art visual art perspective it's the vanishing point the zero is is the convergence of all your p

perspective lines so it organizes a visual pictorial revolution as well as a financial revolution, a wider commercial revolution, a scientific and technical

revolution. Zero is in all of that. You

revolution. Zero is in all of that. You

know, it's really modernity is zero doing its stuff in Europe initially. And

of course, we can then ask, well, you know, why is the why is its impact in Europe so much greater than it has been previously on this path it's taken? I

think, you know, if that is fine with you, Bill, that's something I'd probably bracket at the moment. I think it's an important question, but I think we could

take that as a separate thing. Okay.

Well, then, so when I say Yeah. Go, N,

what what are you thinking?

I just I uh I don't want to get ahead, but um I keep coming back to kind of Cantor and this and the the empty set and I'm relating that to zero, especially talking about the Barker

Spiral and Barker Speaks and and this and that. And I'm just wondering if if

and that. And I'm just wondering if if this zero is matching up with that, like the infinite production of the empty set itself, and that's why zero is

significant.

Well, I mean there can be no doubt that when we get set theory,

which is I think not until late in the 19th century, you know, zero has been doing its stuff and and I think that

that moment that you're pointing to is maybe better understood as a kind of, you know, celebration within mathematics

of what zero has done than an inaugural moment because don't forget zero has also been the thing that's earlier

catalyzed calculus. you know, the the

catalyzed calculus. you know, the the the ability to think the van the uh infinite decimal uh and and the uh use

of the infinite as the as the reciprocal of zero in formulating calculus has has already blown up that

entire mathematical revolution and that's not even the first thing it does.

So yeah, um I'm hugely sympathetic, but but I I think that's not going to uh put a boundary around what it's done. It's

rather just cap what it's been doing. Quilt it maybe for from our perspective. Yeah.

Retroactively give meaning to it. Yes.

Okay. Well, what how about obviously interesting because he is he's makes these references to Jewish mysticism and so he he obviously I think it's very

hard often to to to read his stuff when it isn't hard mathematics which was of course completely beyond me. I'm not pretending to to sit there with a pen or paper and

just nod along to it or whatever. But in

his in his commentary, in his attendant work, it's very hard for hit to not see him having a a tree of life in his

in his mind, you know. And as I say, there's there's these the aimoth there's three levels of of zero that are put

above catair. I I think relatively late

above catair. I I think relatively late in the Jewish cabalistic tradition. I

think this is actually a renaissance thing that is being retro archaized but but it for sure is I think feeding

into canour's mathematics. Um you know he calls he

mathematics. Um you know he calls he talks about alf for a reason you know it's like um it's a serious reference I think.

Um, so how about So you have this series of notes um that are going to build up to the numogram. So I how about we go in that direction? Yeah. Yeah. Let's let's

that direction? Yeah. Yeah. Let's let's

do another little jog through that. So

So okay, so Masonic what is Masonic arithmetic? Masonic arithmetic is

arithmetic? Masonic arithmetic is basically what the western hermetic tradition has understood as the foundational

numerical operations.

And it's very simple actually because there's only two um and they're both extremely interesting.

And the first one of these operations is what we know as digital reduction.

And digital reduction is something that like I think lots of people do it a lot anyway. Mark Fisher used to say to me,

anyway. Mark Fisher used to say to me, "Oh, you know, I was a kid doing digital reduction. You know, I would just like

reduction. You know, I would just like have phone numbers and I'd digitally reduce them." I had no idea why I was

reduce them." I had no idea why I was doing it, but it was just like something to do. Um,

to do. Um, it it simply involves you've got a string of modern numerals, but I'll say I'll say to talk about modern numerals,

I just say I'll say vadic numerals. How about that?

So you've got a string of numerals 0 to 9 making up a number with place value

and you simply ignore the place value and treat it as a sequential addition.

So say you've got the numbers 20 25 rather than saying oh you know there's first of all a thousands hundreds tens whatever. So we've got two in a th00and

whatever. So we've got two in a th00and zero no hundreds two tens and five. So

that's 2,25.

Rather than doing that uh you simply say it's 2 + 0 + 2 + 5 = 9.

Um so what's going on there? You know

it's like okay it's a very everyone involved in any kind of numerology does this all together. Even

the most like what's the equivalent of pop astrology? there's a pop numerology

pop astrology? there's a pop numerology and they will for sure be fully competent in digital reduction. So you

have to ask well what what is happening when someone does digital reduction and I think there's really no serious

question about the fact that what is happening there is a collision between the ancient numerical order and the modern numerical order. It's

something that can only happen on that cusp because the ancient numerical order whether it's whether it's the Hebrew alphabetical numerals, the Greek uh

alphabetical numerals or which for our purposes right now work just as well, the Roman alphabetical numerals.

Um, it's completely sound. If I can just bracket off that weird negative function, that shorthand in in in Roman

numerals where you you know, you write four as I v rather than I I I uh that is a

that's a very degraded sort of numerical operation. is convenient but very

operation. is convenient but very degraded and people systematically throw it out again like you know looking at Roman numerals in

uh Italy I noticed a lot of times they they would be done in a way that was mistaken by those standards you know we're taught at school that if you're writing for in Roman numerals you have

to do IV lots of times it's I I I actually when you see these ancient inscriptions it makes much more sense It's much more coherent. It's has much

more numerical integrity because the principle of all these ancient numeral systems is exactly that you can do that operation that we've just looked at in

digital reduction and it will make perfect numerical sense. If you've got an a Roman number that is um

mm xxxv, uh you can just say it's m + m plus x +

x + v uh 1,000 + 1,000 + 10 + 10 + 5 20 25. It's completely normal and natural

25. It's completely normal and natural to do that. Every time you're using those numbers, that's what you're doing.

you're doing you're you're simply adding them up. Um, you know, and as I say,

them up. Um, you know, and as I say, that's the same for the for the Hebrew alphabetical numerals, the Greek alphabetical numerals. The most

alphabetical numerals. The most typical and popular obviously in in Europe throughout its history to this point are the are the Roman numerals.

But this is what you're doing. You're

just adding them up.

This makes this is not this is not sound.

Once you have place value, once you have the modern values, you write 2025.

You do not mean nine.

You do not mean nine. You mean 2025. If

you're doing if this is business accounts that matters a lot, you know, if someone like does digital reductions before repaying the loan, you know.

Yeah. $9,999.

Oh, yeah. Here's the $36 I owe you.

That's a problem, you know. Um, so, uh, it's it's obviously quite reasonable to treat this as just a mistake. Um, you

know, in the Montals, it's a mistake.

But what you're doing with digital reduction is you're deliberately deliberately doing that mistake. you're

deliberately treating the modern numerals how the traditional the ancient numerals were was treated. And so when we do it today

in a certain sense we are engaged in this uh this deep retrogression 500 years to

a point in which people were still adjusting to the fact you can't do the things with the new fangled numbers that

we always knew you had to do with the old fangled numbers. Like you just can't do that. It's a mistake, you know, and

do that. It's a mistake, you know, and it's the schools are obviously taking it now as the responsibility to tell people to you don't do that. You you treat the old numerals, you treat the Roman

numerals as a special quaint case that have different rules of operation. The

modern ones are not like that. They have

place value. You can't just you can't just add up all the numerals and expect them to make sense.

Um, so yeah, like in my little I I'm going to give I'm pause in one second. Um,

just to say, okay, so that's half of the whole of Masonic rhythmic. Why don't you do dismal reduction? That's you've got half of it already. Okay. Um and

um yeah, I think that there's a historical point to make about this that is like this can only happen this thing that's

essential. Western her medicine as I say

essential. Western her medicine as I say it it requires Masonic arithmetic masonic arithmetic requires digital

reduction. Digital reduction can only

reduction. Digital reduction can only happen when you have a collision of two fundamentally different number systems.

That's to say it only really happens in the Renaissance.

Western herdicism is in this sense is is a renaissance phenomenon. When it

happens today, we're we're rehearsing or reactivating renaissance, a renaissance topic, which is the the newness, the

innovation of the the new numerals. And

um when we talk about ancient hermeticism going far back before the renaissance,

we are engaged in an interesting process of kind of retrop projection because the core of actual esoteric

hermetic intellection does not make any sense before the renaissance.

Renaissance Italy, Renaissance hermeticism is the first time her in history the only time in history that

hermetic intellection actually makes sense actually works. You know whenever it's when people say as we get the word

hermetic from the discovery of the this great book this massively influential book of extremely weird you

know we might say Cciu influence people might say hypitional book um sorry I'm just going to have to just

yeah the uh the corpus hermetic come this text that is supposedly written by Hermes Trismagustus

and it was supposedly written in such deep antiquity that it mutually

influenced Moses and Plato.

Moses and Plato are are according to this what became relatively mainstream Italian hermetic interpretation of of

history. Moses and Plato are both

history. Moses and Plato are both students.

You know they that's to say they're not necessarily overlapping but they are they are uh taught by ultimately Hermesistus. He's the common he's the

Hermesistus. He's the common he's the common intellectual source of the Abrahamic religious tradition

and of uh Greek philosophy.

Um and so you know we're putting his dates far back before the birth of

Christ. like I I'm not I probably have a

Christ. like I I'm not I probably have a date somewhere for it, but I'm just going to say it's it's distant distant antiquity. And the point I'm trying to

antiquity. And the point I'm trying to make here is that is you know everyone knows but this is why

that is bogus is because there is no hermetic intellectual capability before the renaissance.

It's all retro protection. It's all

retropure, you know. It's that there are texts and whatever. It's I'm not to say there was nothing written. I mean,

we've, as we've already said, there's like neoplatonism. There's there's

like neoplatonism. There's there's there's influential stuff. Plato has

written the critias. You know, it's not that that these texts don't exist, but the fundamental conceptual operator of the hermetic

intellect does not exist until modern and ancient numerals collide, allowing you to do digital reduction.

In in the ancient numerals, there's no reduction. In the modern numerals, you

reduction. In the modern numerals, you simply can't do that operation. You

simply cannot treat them. You can add them together in different place value.

Digital reaction crosses. It's a

diagonal line between those two different numerical systems. And it only happened to that point in history. And

before then, therefore, hermetic intelligence does not exist except as something retro projected out of the

Renaissance or later. Um, so I know I'm banging on about this a lot, but I think this is a really

crucial point. Um,

crucial point. Um, and it may maybe I should like yeah do another little uh hesitation now before I go on to the other side of Masonic

arithmetic. But no, I mean, I think this

arithmetic. But no, I mean, I think this is this is a great example of, you know, retrocausality uh plays such an important role in the

CCRU. And so for you, even the the the

CCRU. And so for you, even the the the the emergence of the occult tradition really is a retroactive event, right?

Yes, it has to be. It has to be once once you understand how it thinks you know at least what the basic methods are those methods are

incomprehensible before this particular catastrophic event that initiates

modern history. Um so we don't have

modern history. Um so we don't have hermetic antiquity until we have modernity happening.

It's not at all the model that there's ancient there's ancient hermetic wisdom that then in some way transitions into

modernity. No, that's not it at all.

modernity. No, that's not it at all.

There's there's a moment that modernity and ancient hermeticism are reciprocally produced from the same event. You know,

which for the sake of convenience I we're calling the Renaissance renaissance of medicine all and which is this basically event in the history of

numerical systems. Yeah. And it's like it's like once the

Yeah. And it's like it's like once the event happens that retroactively opens up that space of meaning uh then it's like everything was leading up to

that event. But it's only on the basis

that event. But it's only on the basis of that event that we can see it that way. Yes. Now, now when we read Critius,

way. Yes. Now, now when we read Critius, the five twins mean something to us.

Um, and you know to say, well, did they mean the same at any level to Plato? I'm

not just going to say no because this is a question. Well, what level of

a question. Well, what level of retrocausal retrochronic action are we talking about? You know what I mean? I you you

about? You know what I mean? I you you can have many different levels from a relatively trivial one which everyone accepts and so there's a whole

historical tradition about how the Renaissance invented the hermetic tradition and you know you can't read about the history of Hermes tramstus

without that because everyone knows that Hermes tramistas the writings probably again date from this Alexandrian period the early

centuries AD. Um,

centuries AD. Um, and so the fact that there's they're pushed back and there's this movement to create antiquity,

to imaginatively create antiquity is actually not controversial. You know,

it's like all the historians of this totally accept that that is true.

Whether you then go on to say that, you know, forms of zeno intelligence

actually are able to retrochronically inject cognitive material into

ancient cultures is a more controversial is a more controversial suggesture. But

you've already started at least thinking of that possibility once once you're here. I think you know it's like the question is not how much

retrochronic activity is there. It's

just how deep does it go and what is the actual extent of this? Like is it completely overwhelming or is it actually something that we can manage as

part of a kind of sensible historical narrative about the past? Because look

there there definitely is levels to this. I mean so one of the things that I

this. I mean so one of the things that I do think Lon was really great on was emphasizing so his term for whatever fixes the meaning of something

retroactively called the quilting point point cap. And so on people it's almost

point cap. And so on people it's almost lost on people but every sentence the meaning of the sentence is fixed by the

ending that whether you put a period or a question mark or whatever I mean the it's even at the level of just a a basic sentence there's retrochronic

uh temporality at work in it and then but it it is this expansive thing where you know for CCRU it's also like uh super intelligence, you know, it's the

way you guys would talk it's pulling itself into the, you know, it arrives from the future and you were always playing with this retrochronic thing where

just like this this event in uh in relation to number how it retroactively fixed the history that came before it. It's like once

especially you know super intelligence is here if we stick around for any amount of time it will see the whole history of capitalism at that moment as

seen like it was inevitably leading to this emergence of super intelligence.

Sure. Right.

I mean that's not that's not uncontroversial but that was definitely long the tend CU tendency for for sure.

Yeah. Yeah. Nance, what are you thinking right now?

I'm actually So, as you're talking about digital reduction, um I I kind of had a a dawning moment of realization that the same thing that um happened with

numerals and numerousy where there's uh a tension between the old way and and this new way. And the new way is convenient for capital. The the new way

uh is convenient for the ledgers. And if

if you make these mistakes, there will be big problems. The same thing happened with type setting in the keyboard. Um,

and I I wonder if like as you were talking, I I kind of fantasized about a person who took the the quarterty keyboard layout as as the

alphabet and what would that do to a person? We know the alphabet as

person? We know the alphabet as alphabetical ABC. But say there's a

alphabetical ABC. But say there's a child who's born today and and they think the alphabet is Q U E like if if we could harness that. Um or maybe our

descendants will will recognize modern type setting as as a kind of alphabetical reduction moment where something else becomes uh becomes

emergent or imminent. Um

cuz it's it it's meaning it's it's it's how the meaning is is determined and uh previously it was because it was useful

to count in this way and then you know conditions happened and and arrived just so that uh capital found it more useful

to number things in a different fashion.

Um and that that tension I think is it's interesting.

Well that your example of certy is is great and very germanine actually. I

mean there's a there's a resource that everyone who's engaged in a lot of this

kind of cabalistic calculation uses that's just called ciphers news with a y

um ciphers do news and uh they've added relatively recently I mean I'm in a slow timeline so by relatively recently I

mean several months ago they in two different querty ciphers.

So there is now a kind of you know there's a formal resource that can be used to sort of explore your insight there you know where you can

compare an an alpha numeric and a and a and a and a quiddy cipher and and see what's uh going on there. So I think this is

extremely germanine and and I'm sure is going to be productively explored by people. Um

Okay. So

you want you want to go into this ne next line of notes and Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Um so the next the next one uh is uh triangular numbers. That's the only other thing you need. I mean there's

some standard there's a little bit in a new standard arithmetical operation extremely simple of just uh I guess it's not just addition but

summation I mean adding to nine twinning you know what that that that operation I guess is just addition and then subtraction you know the as you were

talking about the currents that you have to be able to take one number from another so those are just standard arithmetical operations. But the the

arithmetical operations. But the the other um masonic operation which which is not very

which is a bit less edgy in terms of formal math because formal math totally accepts there are these things triangular and numbers. So it's not like you're doing anything particularly dissident with it. And that is just to

say I I saw it at one point described as theosophical multiplication.

Uh so that was like claiming it as a hermetic operation and and the point is it it is a crucial operation and that's just simply that you just add

consecutive numbers together. So you

know one is I guess nominally a triangle but if you add one and two that's gives you the tri number three which is a triangle then you add three six is a triangle fourth triangle add four that's

10 now you've got the tetractus because you know the Pythagorean thing you're into these questions about decimal and the question about decimal is tied up with

triangles. So there's a lot of

triangles. So there's a lot of interesting triangles um and uh they appear all the time uh in various sort

of hermetic operations. It's a kind of one of the basic things people do with numbers. Um it's this the thing that you

numbers. Um it's this the thing that you need to do for sure to be able to construct a numogram as well as digital reduction

and these very simple additional addition and subtraction operations. you

also need to do this triangulation function finding the trons. Um

the other Atlantis book of Plato's which it is there's much less rich content on Atlantis is the teas

which is also a book hugely obsessed with triangles. I mean basically Plato

with triangles. I mean basically Plato thinks the universe is made out of triangles. I mean it's tri absolute

triangles. I mean it's tri absolute triangle uh obsession.

Um so so what do I have need to say about triangles other than that other than that you need them? I think that one thing and I'll just briefly say well if someone says well why not you know

squares and pentagons there's all these other types of more obscure um sort of geometric numbers. Um, and it's

worth it's interesting to just try with squares because if you try doing a new where you have squares rather than triangles, it just does nothing. It

dies. You know, you you can't get out of the the the time circuit. It's like it's interestingly dead. So, it's an experiment worth doing

dead. So, it's an experiment worth doing of just of just the demonstrative superiority of the triangle in this uh

in this context. Um

yes, hang on. I've I've slightly my order I think of of this I'm just going to rearrange slightly which is just to say so once you've got

these two operations digital reduction and uh triangulation you're in a position to explore the decimal numerals

um and the numogram will basically fall out of it but it's might might be informative if you do it without any reference to the num pretend You don't know anything about the numogram. You're definitely

not heading toward the water. You're

just playing around with decimal.

You're taking it that this is Masonic arithmetic. Your question is, well, what

arithmetic. Your question is, well, what does Masonic arithmetic tell us about the 10

modern decimal numerals 0 to 9, the Vadic numerals?

And the rules of a little game that you can do here is that you're just allowed to do any combination of these two operations.

You can produce, you can triangulate and you can do digital reduction as many times as you like in any direction with these numbers. See what happens.

these numbers. See what happens.

So, you know, I think it's worth seeing seeing what happens. You know, you start with zero.

Uh zero as you can imagine is kind of going to be uh obstinate you know um you can't obviously can't dig really reduce

any single digit. So we can't start with digital reduction of any of them. You

can't get a triangle out of zero. What's

the what's this triangle of zero? Um the

zeroth triangle is zero. There's no

you're not going nowhere. So you just goes zero. Zero goes to zero. Zero is on

goes zero. Zero goes to zero. Zero is on its own.

Move on.

Not I'll get through all of them if people can bear it, but I won't go in the right order. I'll go in an order that's much more convenient. Okay. So

I'll go in order people have it in the back of their mind but it's not necessary that you think of it like this. This is complete set of

like this. This is complete set of operations in itself. It doesn't require the numograph but but the but it helps for what we're going where we're going.

If you just imagine the numogram in the background and we're starting at the bottom zero is the absolute last uh

number in the numog. We've done it. It's

on its own. We know that we can draw a line separating our like it's a separate face.

We now go to the next. What's the next number up? The next number up is nine.

number up? The next number up is nine.

Nine we can do things with. You can

triangulate nine. The ninth triangle is 45.

Um four and five make nine.

um that I haven't got the 45th triangle on me and I'm afraid I don't have it memorized, but I can assure you that you can if you wanted to triangulate up a

lot first and then digitally reduce down, you're still going to get the same result, which is 9 goes to 9. So it's

sort of a bit zeroish in that way except except uh there's more steps and we'll

see if you do eight which is going up one more on the on the numog 8 the the

eighth trion is 36 3 and six is nine eight also goes to nine um and actually those are the only numbers that go to nine

So, we draw another line. We've done one face that's just got zero in it. We've

got another face that's got two numbers in it now. Eight and nine. We're

sticking with the It's actually It's graphically consistent with the numocrat.

Now, going up a little higher, we've got one just about eight and we've got four as the bottom side on the left. and

seven on the bottom side of the right.

Okay, one just behaves very like zero.

You can't, you know, the the first the first trigon is just one. It doesn't go anywhere. Digitally reduce one is one.

anywhere. Digitally reduce one is one.

It's just one. Four goes to 10. We've

already seen in our little preliminary thing about the um

about the tractus that 10 10 is one. One

and zero is one. So that's goes to 1 2 7 28 2 and 8 goes to one. So 1, four, and seven. We've got three now. We had zero,

seven. We've got three now. We had zero, that's one. We had 9 and 8, that's two.

that's one. We had 9 and 8, that's two.

We had 1, four, and seven. This is

three. Now go all to one.

Um, finally, I'll just try and do this quick. I mean,

two, the second triangle is three, so it goes to three. We'll deal with it there.

Five, 15 goes to six. We'll deal with that there. three. Uh, the third

that there. three. Uh, the third triangle is six. So, we're flipped over to six. But six, the sixth triangle is

to six. But six, the sixth triangle is 21. That goes back to three. So, we're

21. That goes back to three. So, we're

looping between three and six here. Five

and two go into that zone. And then

three and six just loops. So, we've got a fourth basin. We've got there. There

are therefore only four decimal basins that you get from this these two operations of Masonic arithmetic. If you

just do any succession you like of uh triangulations and digital reductions, you get four phases. Just a zero, an

eight and a nine, two numbers. 1 4 and 7, three numbers. Five, two, six and

three, four numbers. 1 2 3 4.

That is therefore the esoteric tetraus.

When you when you hear the tetractus, you know, the normal presentation is that you go 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10. You

know, that's how that's the exoteric version of it. That's how we understand it. That's how uh Pythagoras is

it. That's how uh Pythagoras is integrated with emanationist new plat Platonic philosophy with the

sephro with the tree of life with the valorization of unity because we know that anything that goes to 10 goes back

to one um is dominated by one. You know

the the uh exoteric version of the Pythagoran tetractis has one at the summit, one is the cap of the pyramid,

one dominates the whole of the system.

You know, it's like it's competitive with the tree of life as being one of the great hermenic diagrams for the exaltation of unity for esoteric

theology.

Um but now we have a very different tetra you know it's the it's our 10 numerals now 0 to nine very I think

rigorously if if if quickly we've seen that they fall into these levels of the pyramid zero

no one 2 3 4 um because yeah I don't I probably don't have to repeat that um it very neatly

actually goes up the numog, but even if it didn't, who who cares? It stands on its own. You have an esther character

its own. You have an esther character tetraactus.

Um, and the numbers of the exoteric trait

1 to 10, 10th triangle 55. As we know from our little delve into Atlantinism, five and five is 10 equals 1. Again,

valorization of unity. The esoteric

tractus 0 to9 ninth trigon 45 as we've already seen four and five is nine not the valorization of unity in fact we

have uh the empty summit we have zero at the top of our esoteric tractor at the

bottom of our model of the numograph.

Um so you know I know I've rushed through that but that procedure that like looking at the base you now understand decimal numerousy to to an

adequate level of how the new is going to be put together. It divides into these four phases like it only goes to four

different basins of attraction. Those

basins of attraction are irreducible.

They don't fall into one another. They

don't all, you know, 1, four, and seven go to unity, but they don't all go to unity.

This isn't some emanationist schema where everything finally beautifully converges back on Malcolm X= 10als 1 or some other system that folds everything

back into unity. No, it's not. There's

these four different completely irreducible basins of attraction and phases on the numogram that that simply

do not reduce. That is an irreducible multiplicity and therefore it's flat

in this fundamental sense. It's flat

because it doesn't fall under any pinnacle. There's no

pinnacle. There's no the the the capstone of unity that we saw in the exoteric attractors is not functional for it. There is it's an empty summit. There's nothing there.

empty summit. There's nothing there.

It's not it's not dominating the system.

These basins of attraction are autonomous. They don't they're not

autonomous. They don't they're not tending to fall into unity at all.

And so the numogram really is telling exactly that

just more with more ctographic elaboration. That is the

ctographic elaboration. That is the fundamental esoteric payload of the numograph. It's the fact

that it isn't Atlantan. It isn't

emanationist. it isn't something that is falling into some primary dominant unity.

Um th those are that is the Atlantean story and the Atlantean story while I've really tried to be um I'm not going to be patron say generous

to Atlantian because as I say it's it's it's built the whole tradition. I it

would be ridiculous. But the Neimogram is not Atlantan and the and the Neimogram is not showing what the

Atlantean tradition wants us to see, which is the folding of everything into an ultimate primary dominant unity.

So, you know, that right there raises like some philosophical connections for me where the Atlantean thing seems to be

uh in the tree of life, there's a hierarchy built into it as a central principle. Um whereas the numogram, I

principle. Um whereas the numogram, I can't help but start thinking about it in terms of ryomatic connections. It's

open-ended. it's always uh geared towards becoming uh it's not finished and so disharmony is at work in it but perhaps that's

exactly why it could be more productive than the other the other one maybe I mean it it's definitely I think the

basic divergences one as as we've mentioned and continue to talk about is zero is at work in the

numogram. It's not at work in the tree

numogram. It's not at work in the tree of life.

And secondly, uh the numogram is a is a cgraphy of true multiplicity.

Number is not about something folding into unity.

One is a number.

Um you know, one is a number among many others. It's like so this we've already

others. It's like so this we've already seen the fact that there's this really important event that happens I think especially

with neoplatanism Plato himself is is is no doubt already crusading it uh in which the number one takes on this

extremely important theological veency.

you know the the way you think about numeracy is almost the ultimate way you're thinking about God. It's like you

know it's like God is almost functioning as a figurative vocabulary and set of associations

visual icon for a certain appention of number and for the supremacy the transcendence of unity.

Um so it's a it's a kind of all of the theological and religious discussions are ultimately about numerical relations

and particularly about this thing about is multiplicity or is it not reducible

um and I think we can see like the new falls on the multiplicity side of that

controversy.

Um I just say one more thing on that is just to say you know when I say controversy I think that it's there's this crucial thing of the fact that our tradition as part of

the fact that it's it's been dominated by unity it tends to think that what you're looking for in to be able to think and philosophize and do all the things that

you know have been important to this tradition even up to talking about this kind of stuff is find

a logic that is going to be the master key to to thinking. You know, you've got you understand really what this what

truly is logic and and and logic thought as something that is in some kind of coordination with the dominion of unity.

So that's to say it's basically going to be a binary logic. And I'm not saying that in order to make this move the the typical move we're all used to, you

know, after Hegel, after deconstruction, after shelling, after every move that has been made to problematize binary oppositions. It's not to say no,

binary oppositions. It's not to say no, no, you know, there's a fundamental operation that scramles all your binary opposition. It's instead to say no what

opposition. It's instead to say no what there is is poly logic. What there is is an irreducible multiplicity

of logical functions that are distributed arithmetically and there is no master thought of that

that can be returned to logic and returned to the dominion of unity. It's

not that there is a concept a logical concept of the numogram. The numer does not come out of a logical concept. It

comes out of decimal numerousy and it comes out of decimal numerousy in a mode in which the multiplicity of the

numbers is not reduced. There is not a commanding logic. As we've seen, there

commanding logic. As we've seen, there are a small set of of arithmetical methods that allow you to make these ctographic connections. But the logical

ctographic connections. But the logical relations that are then encoded, I think, are not simply even back reversed

to those mathematical operations.

It's rather that they're actually distributed in all the relations that this exploded explicated

decimal machine then exhibits.

Um, so it makes it look like in a sense it's a fool's errand of a certain kind or to put it more generously, it's a very recognizable

Atlantean hermetic aspiration to find a master logic. Even if that master logic is deconstruction, even if

it's dialectics and alpha, well, even if it seems subversive, that isn't the point. The point is that it's in the

point. The point is that it's in the service of a commanding unity.

Um because there's one there this one way that you think where which makes everything fall into place. And what you know what I hope any you know the numogram I think should always come out

of demonstration in in people's minds when they're thinking about it. Well,

how did this thing as a demonstration?

How was it produced? How did it appear and how what made it? And what made it is not a commanding idea. There is no

commanding idea. Um there's there's

commanding idea. Um there's there's multiplicity. There's number. Um I mean

multiplicity. There's number. Um I mean and so in that regard, but would is this where back then you saw this um

compatibility between seeing the numogram this way and delusionari and ryomatics and all is that where you saw this convergence

between the two?

Uh well I'm not really exactly sure. I

mean the point is we were just steeped and baked in durianism you know especially capitalism and schizophrenia

and so that was just our intellect or whatever I mean that's just the way everything was talked about um so you know and I think there are some

resonances um there I think also a lot of dis resonances or you know there's things that I

I think don't really work. I mean one thing for instance like I just start with one example

as you know D hate trees.

Um now I'm I 100% think the numogram is the tree of knowledge. I mean you've seen my little demonstration of that my cabalistic

demonstration. I mean, so, so I think

demonstration. I mean, so, so I think it's like I'm more interested in rethinking what is a tree than I am in

saying trees suck. We want grass, you know. I I think it's like what is a

know. I I think it's like what is a tree? Uh I I I think of course there is

tree? Uh I I I think of course there is a question about branching, you know, and D and don't like everything being about branching. I'm I think now more

about branching. I'm I think now more sympathetic to branching, but I'm also sympathetic to the wanting to like

delimit that or to contextualize it. Um,

but I think our history is full of trees, you know, like there's the there's the tree of life we already seen. There's the tree of knowledge.

seen. There's the tree of knowledge.

There's the cross is a tree. Odin is

enlightened on the tree. Buddha is

enlightened under the tree under a tree.

I mean I don't think trees are just something you can throw in the trash. I

think it's for us to make sense of trees not to use aruresence as a kind of criterion of philos philosophical insufficiency. Well, let me ask this

insufficiency. Well, let me ask this point of clarification then because throughout this you've used the word multiplicity and the first time the first thing that comes to mind is

delusionari. Are you using it in

delusionari. Are you using it in in that framework or are you using it in a different way when you talk? I think

I'm using it entirely naively and innocently and if I hadn't read any it would be the same. All I mean by it is what happened in that demonstration of

the esoteric tetraact is to say multiplicity is what you've got when a project of unification is shown to be

not only to fail but to to be impossible. Okay. And that that gives

impossible. Okay. And that that gives you multiplicity and anything more to the notion of multiplicity than that I is surplus value. It's you know so as I

say I'm very open to this having all these interesting resonances and whatever but it's not that some philosophical notion of difference and

multiplicity from Qatari should should be telling anybody how to think about this this is this is just showing them

something completely innocently clearly and unproatically that doesn't require a philosophical context for

intolerability I think. Okay. I mean,

and I think one of the things that also would help is okay. I mean, because so far we've talked about the numogram and we've talked about the role of decimals

and number and it's been purely mathematical.

But then then you take an example like and and I wonder if one of the reasons this number is significant to you is

just it perhaps it's an interesting triangle. So 333 is always a number that

triangle. So 333 is always a number that seems to you know on Twitter you if something in alpha numeric kabala adds up to 33 it it's significant to you. And

so on the one hand if if I mean even I think about the trinity well the trinity each member of the trinity is one but

ultimately there's there's a way where each is the other two and so 333 could be seen as a number for the trinity trinity but the the I guess the thing

that I'm I'm not I don't understand sometimes is how content comes to be associated with these numbers. So for you, as far as I

these numbers. So for you, as far as I understand it, 3 I3 has to do with a demon that Alistister Crowley

encountered Kurans on. And no, but that isn't right. That isn't right. I know

isn't right. That isn't right. I know

that's the myth, but that's completely wrong. Chonzan

wrong. Chonzan in Alpha Net Bal is 209.

It's not It's not 333. Okay. It has to be Chaonzon's shadow or some other construct to get it to 333. So it's not Churonzan is not 333 at all.

Um our my first lucid encounter with 333 actually is much more recent

but which is say it goes back maybe 2013 or 14 something like that where some commentator

just said oh by the way I think yeah Alvin Mcapala was out there and I find it a bit hard to remember exactly what I was doing with at that point. So, you

know, I can't psychologically reconstruct this very well because it was familiar methodologically but also unfamiliar in terms of content. But this

person just said to me, "Oh, dark enlightenment is 3 I3."

Um, which it is. Um,

I had no idea, of course. Um,

and then I thought, "Wow, I mean that's uh that's interesting." Um, and so I

started being attentive to 333s now and I kind of adopted a 333 kind of tag and that was my first I think you're quite

right to say my first sort of hit you could say with this. And

so yeah it I think there's a really important question about this um which is your question like you know how do

you get how do you get content in terms of number um because I really want to go down I just want to ask for clarification

though. So yeah, you know, Kenneth Grant

though. So yeah, you know, Kenneth Grant when he when he talks about Kuranzon, Kuranzan says his number is 333. He says

it to Crowley and then but also Kuranzon is linked to another being Shugal whose number is 333. So it adds up to 666. So

this isn't anything that's influencing your usage of your usage of 333. Is that

right? No, no, no. That's perfect

coincidence. I mean it may it's possible. Well, I mean, I've read lots

possible. Well, I mean, I've read lots of Kenneth Grant. It's in credit. It's

entirely possible that something unconsciously was, you know, some seeds of something, but they were definitely unconscious. I

mean, I was not in any way.

I had I pulled these aside like outside the circles of time and then outer gateways.

something I definitely read a lot of Kenneth Grant but frankly I don't think I got anything from his numerology from his cabala okay and and

that's because I think I mean this is another huge interesting question but I don't think he his numerology I think is all based on

Hebrew values you know I mean on I don't think is 3 I3 in any in any there's a whole bunch. As

I say, I've given you this link to this ciphers news. It's it's it's

ciphers news. It's it's it's overwhelming in its content. So, it's

all these different ciphers. Um, I have it always up, but I have like six

six different ciphers up at a time. Um,

but if I wanted to, I could have 40 up, you know? Well, I mean it would be a

you know? Well, I mean it would be a there's so people could depending on what people can cognitively cope with and so there might be some old English

cipher or something that makes in English chron equal 333 but I think chonzon is 333 because of its Hebrew

gumatri value nothing to do with English that's interesting okay and the whole of there's a there's a a question again which too deep to go

into with us. Now, I I mean, I'm too hazy about it. So, it's not it's my incompetence as well as uh time issues,

but you know, did Crowley Kenneth Grant for sure doesn't know what he's doing with Kabell. I'm sorry. I mean, he just

with Kabell. I'm sorry. I mean, he just doesn't. He's interesting guy, but that

doesn't. He's interesting guy, but that he doesn't know that. Um, Crowley,

does Crowley secretly talk about English Capala or not? Because he pretends not to. He

or not? Because he pretends not to. He

He too pretends that all his cabalistic values that he's interested all come from the the Hebrew. Actually, I mean, um, I'm trying to think in 177 there's some

stuff about Greek, but I think it's all basically uh Hebrew grammatria.

Um, but a lot of weird stuff happens in English and and you probably know it's the one that was my for the whole CCIU

actually I shouldn't perize it. This was

a kind of really threshold point was when the law of themer do what thou wilt

shall be the whole of the law is 777 in alpha numeric kapala and obviously crowley's collection of cabalistic

writings it's called 777 now weird winky dink right well it's overwhelmingly the most important phrase

in IA and the most important phrase attached to Crowley's name without any question. I mean these guys when they

question. I mean these guys when they wrote letters to each other they just had in the header do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law. You know

what I mean? It's like they basically had it tatted on their forehead. And um

and so you something's going on there that's you know I think I can only really see two two possibilities.

One is Crowley is the is the unwitting vehicle of a capitalistic miracle.

The second is that he's playing some really cunning game and talking to people that know without doing so in a

way that is obvious to almost anyone. As

I say, I as far as I'm concerned, his followers do not get the the point if it if if in fact he is trying to communicate a point to that. So, and

that goes way back, you know, we're back in the mid 1990s or whatever with that moment. Um,

moment. Um, yeah, sorry, I've gone down a slightly rabbit hole with this. Yeah, I maybe we bring it back to where um the the the

question of how content gets associated with. So for example, we have a bunch of

with. So for example, we have a bunch of mathematical relations and any mathematician would hear how you explain the numogram mathematically and go sure. The question

is how do lemurs or demons or entities or even planets get come to get associated with

and these each one of these numbers takes on meaning and and significance.

Yes.

Um, I mean, I think this is a big and very open question. So, you know, I think it might have to be answered in part in parts because I think there's

lots going on here. I don't think it's a simple a simple question. Okay. I mean

I back in the first decade of this millennium when we when a few people doing this

hypian blog wrote a little article that's called against numerology

and my point on that was I think way too simple minded really but like not uninteresting

um and it was attempt to really I mean I straw man numerology a lot in that maybe it can be debated how fairly or unfairly

I did it you know there is a whole zone of numerology that is very like pop astrology and I find it hard not to be a

little bit super sillious about that um and that is very tied up with quickly establishing

relations between significant numbers and content.

So you know the one guy I won't I won't name him I I saw him secondhand talked about in a book about number that I was looking at but his whole method is that

you know he gets people's names numerically reduces them probably by the simple cipher that is called in

on ciphers news that is called English ordinal it's uh it's not an It's very crude but it's not an interesting cipher and it

just is a is one through to zed is 26.

So you give num you give each letter those numbers digital digital reduction you end up obviously with one number and

that number has content you know so there's basically you can you never get zero out there so you get you always get nine categories

um and so there are nine basic personality types or whatever you know what I mean that if this guy he he's a professional numerologist. I guess rich

professional numerologist. I guess rich Hollywood people will kind of pay him to do them numerology on them. They tell

him his their names. He gives them a digit and says, "Oh, that means you're this sort of person." You know, one of nine basic types.

Um, now I sort of feel it's probably wrong to just

completely assume there's nothing to that.

But that is very strongly my tendency.

So, so I mean any mathematician say or any secular materialist rationalist sort of person would say there's that has zero meaning to it at all. That's just

complete fuzzy random garbage.

I'm close I'm close to them in that. I'm

close to them. And this against numerology was sort of making that point. It was saying look this isn't

point. It was saying look this isn't what we're trying to do here at all. Um,

it's not we're not trying to there's not this kind of dictionary of carefully numbered meanings that we kind of find a number and then we look it up in this

checklist and then we say that that seven means this, you know, and then so here's here's the meaning. That's not

like an oult DSM5.

I mean that's like there are pe lots of people doing that and that is kind of an inherent decay tendency. You know what I mean?

decay tendency. You know what I mean?

It's like once you start doing this stuff once you start doing Masonic arithmetic and getting into Renaissance occultism people 100% are going to end up doing

this. You can just tell. You know what I

this. You can just tell. You know what I mean? anyone any prophetic

mean? anyone any prophetic any prophetic Italian hermetic or cult philosopher is going to say look let's be realistic you know in 300 years time

there's going to be a guy with a numerical DSM manual who's doing this kind of junk pop kala that's just numerology that's just like baked into

the fact that this can can happen but I think it like basically can't be that it basically can't be So, you know, so go the other way and

say, well, what is it instead?

Um, and I think this is a sort of important work in progress that's happening.

Um, and actually when we do actually have to loop back to the name again.

Okay. A little bit because we're we're we're kind of halfway through this list and some of the stuff we need to get to.

Well, we're more than halfway through.

Yeah. And if you think you think cuz we can bookmark what we're talking if you want to come back to it and if you think some of your notes would help here then well well why why don't we just take this a little bit further and then and

then maybe we can do whatever looping seems that seems convenient and just retrochronic loop at a certain point there's a bit more numogram content that

we need I think that will okay feed in help and we definitely want that. So,

but I I just say on this on this question, I think it's so what you're saying I think what you're doing with

with these cabalistic ciphers is you're saying that

there's a channel of communication.

Um, and in fact, I think I I used to be a very extreme alpha numeric cabala

chauvinist. You know, my position was

chauvinist. You know, my position was definitely there's just various forms of

outdated rotting crab or new fangled confused crab and there's the alpha new capella. And you know if you're not

capella. And you know if you're not doing alpha numeric acropella you're basically just wasting your time. That

used to be my position. I'm now don't think that I think now any coherent channel is used.

I think it's just like if there's an if there's a potent every potential channel of communication is an actual channel of communication and that people if they could get up

ciphers news and they could find any of these ciphers and start decoding text you with them and they will find stuff

you know if if if it's complex and sophisticated enough to uh to to make sense and to generate content and that's

a very low bar actually it will do that it will do that and I think you know as I say I've got six ciphers up all the time and I have those six ciphers up because I think all of them are talking

you know so it's still for me partly just because of where I've come from or whatever but you know alpha cabaler is just like a kind of working master key

it's a vernacular thing and I I it's much more convenient and I I take it as the default, but I no longer at all

think that these other ciphers are just full of noise. I mean, I think they're full of communicative activity. So, what

is that communicative activity?

Well, I think the first level of it is so this is in the near future, this will seem so pitifully basic. It's kind of

sad but I I I have to start here is that you know there still probably for me 60% of the whole thing is on this very very

basic level that's just to do with attention.

So there are certain ways in which a number can just um draw your attention. It's just as if

it's like date load, you know what I mean? So like as you said 333.

mean? So like as you said 333.

So if ever I come across something now that adds to 333, I take that as an act of

communication. Not in the sense that 333

communication. Not in the sense that 333 is giving me some particular content associated with that number.

There might be some of that, but that's by not what we're talking about now.

It's rather that my attention is being drawn to that thing. I'm being told look at this.

So you know for instance it might be that you want to as in a you know again echoing but independent of still learning of

creating concept. You've got some

creating concept. You've got some concept you want to create. The the

example we've got here is uh we were just talking about Masonic arithmetic. Masonic arithmetic I think

arithmetic. Masonic arithmetic I think is a good helpful downto-earth concept. You know, it's functional. It's

concept. You know, it's functional. It's

meaningful. It's like in no way random.

It points to something real. It's

helpful. It's 33.

And it's 3 I3 because after searching around that's what I settled on and be by as far as I'm concerned being told yes you

know this is it of all the different ways you could phrase this of all the different terminological options you have for this concept yeah do this this

is 333 it's nice um so that's a that's a process of communication you know it's a concrete exact helpful functional process of communication, but it's not

about the number having some lookup value that you can go to. It's rather that it's just you're

to. It's rather that it's just you're having your attention worked on by something beyond you.

Um, and you I think that that is the kind of that's the level that's the kind of entry level cabala that is just I would

say helpful to anyone. You know, it doesn't require any exotic beliefs. You

don't you don't need to sort of you're not committing yourself to anything in terms of like what am I saying the universe is like? What am I saying about anything? You're just simply saying

anything? You're just simply saying there's this huristic where you can tap something that will

direct your attention in a way that is functional. And I think

functional. And I think anyone therefore engaging in this sort of cabalistic activity is going to slowly clock up

a set of numbers that work like that for them. You know,

it's like they've been told they've been told to, you know, that something's lighting up when that number appears. That's that number. Like

appears. That's that number. Like

another number for you is 137, right?

Yes. Yeah. Yes. 137. So that's much more uh recent.

And uh well for instance as again I probably already said this but you know when I was just quoting from the crit that's

page 137 um it's uh Milton is 137 you know both

uh nosis and wisdom is 137 uh English is 137. So, you know, 137 is a lot of things. Some of them are not

particularly like um hard to kind of work out why is my attention being drawn to this, but it's like for me there's a cluster there that

is like yes, you know what I mean? This

is I'm being I'm being brought to this.

This is a this is a list of content that I'm h I'm being drawn to. So once again, it's not there's a crossover point where you can say, well, doesn't 137 at a

certain point have associations. And I

think I would be lying if I said, you know, it's just totally neutral. It's

just a kind of it's just a kind of like um index code that that means nothing.

No, because after a certain time you get well, aren't I getting rather a strange amount of words in this series that are like tied up with language, tied up with

a certain kind of angophone tradition. Um, whatever. It's

angophone tradition. Um, whatever. It's

it has a sort of set of suggestions that begin to kind of infest at a certain point. But I think that that's secondary

point. But I think that that's secondary to this just very sensible functional

usage of it as a kind of a a light an attention attention device. Okay. I

mean, yeah, it it is inter because like okay, like from with the numogram and then the lemurs like h how do you like when we talk about distances like I

guess this is the stuff where I get confused. I don't. So there's there's

confused. I don't. So there's there's distances and yet that the lemur is a distance and again it's this whole

question of how content maps on to to numbers because I mean look the the thing with the lemurs of course the first thing that comes to mind is

burrows and and his piece on the ghost lemurs of Madagascar and the way I I guess I understood it was I guess this is the way I see I think for you there

are you you nowadays you call them lofty powers there's something some form of intelligences outside of our world and

because of burrows and especially since he linked his his depictions of the little lemurs as temporal anomalies right I think you guys latched on to

that as all right this this is a interesting way to represent the lofty powers And so yeah, somebody's like, "Do they

believe in literal outside lemur?" It's

like, "No, it's not like actual the animal." But it found it was a way for

animal." But it found it was a way for you guys to make sense of how these numbers connect to what you now call the

lofty powers. Is that somewhat accurate?

lofty powers. Is that somewhat accurate?

Yes. I mean, look, Crowley talks about the holy guardian angel. Yes. Yeah. You

know, I think it's the same. I mean,

it's part he's he's been raised in this Christian tradition. There's a notion of

Christian tradition. There's a notion of a holy guardian angel. It it's like what he means by the holy guardian angel and what that tradition means by holy

guardian angel.

I guess it's a complicated question. I

mean, he might say he might be thinking, well, what does the culture implicitly mean when it says that? what's being

said without being understood or what's the secret esoteric content of this. But

in any case, he's happy if people have a slightly ridiculous notion of some winged character hovering over his

shoulder talking in his ear when he uses that concept. because you know everyone

that concept. because you know everyone who reads him just a little bit knows roughly what he means by the holy

guardian angel and it's and it's not helpfully reduced to that um and so yeah for sure like so on this

level the lemurs as you said burrows lemurs I mean we big influence for us was also just the Roman lemurs you know the ghosts I mean it's a it's pretty

part something that it might have been even that I think they probably the lemurs were called lemurs the animals because they seem like little jungle ghost creatures you know it's like I

think it's as an occult weight to it before even it has this kind of um a biological

zoological sort of set of associations um so it's because because out of these mathemat. So

mathemat. So each each of the lemurs has a pitch, has you know a mesh tag. Uh and so these are

the types of things where I'm interested and each one is defined as a distance.

Um so in the numogram just mathematically speaking, how did you see these like for you? What is a pitch?

What does that mean for there to be a pitch within this uh decimal maze? Well,

I mean, look, I have to say at that point, you know, this stuff is neither on my list, okay? Nor is it something

that I've really thought about honestly for probably decades. You know, it's like So, I mean, I can vaguely remember I can vaguely remember what this what

this pitch is. I I think at that point when the CCIU was doing this stuff, we were just trying to say, look, let's try

and find a set of absolutely rigorous qualitative uh

associations that we can pin on these things. So we can produce some sort of

things. So we can produce some sort of something that's richly fleshed out that all of the or as much as possible of

that fleshing out is just beyond any question. Even if we didn't um

question. Even if we didn't um explicitly say what we were doing, for instance, those values,

the pitch of the leas, it's like there's no question once you understand what the pitch is representing what the pitch is going to be. can't disagree about it.

It's not because someone can't say no, you if we got the pitch wrong, it's because we made a elementary arithmetical mistake. It's not because

arithmetical mistake. It's not because there's some sort of doctrinal question or something that is open to sort of

dialectics. So even the pitch would be

dialectics. So even the pitch would be mathematically generated. Oh, 100%. Yes,

mathematically generated. Oh, 100%. Yes,

for sure. It's like I mean I could rush over and grab my copy of the CCIU book and and try and remind myself exactly what's going on there, but I honestly

don't think it would be helpful right now to do that. And and look, this isn't me this isn't me hiding something. This

isn't because I've got some pitch secret. It's just to say I can assure

secret. It's just to say I can assure you I can assure you that there's a there's an arith arithmetical procedure that's very simple. Yeah. Like with K-C

it says pitch null for KC.

Um and the net span is five four. Mesh

number is one 14.

Okay. Well the mesh numbers is purely putting it in a list. Okay. So we had a whole bunch of this. We were very

interested in the differences between um a sort of integral numbers like okay the net span as we called it then 54 that's something completely clear. I

mean let's just say you've got these two zones that's it. Mhm. Um

the mesh mesh tag is that you list all of your entities and in sequence and just give them a number. And so yeah, we we thought, look, this is just an

opportunity for stuff to creep in. You

know, why we have no idea what kind of patterns are going to come out of this.

Is it going to be there's all kinds of weird strange associations between these two numbers that of course we haven't foreseen. We had no model of what was

foreseen. We had no model of what was going to come out of it at all. So it's

just really inviting coincidences into the into the thing.

the more of these varants dimensions and values that we we had the more chance there was for something to start talking by saying oh isn't it weird that this is

also this and you know one set of numbers matches up to another set of numbers without any obvious necessity about why that should happen. So it's

really just it's really just enriching the channel so that something can talk through it.

Okay. Um,

so like for examp but like uh when we played subdecadence with you and we did get kac, you said that's ominous and I

look back and I'm like can you tell me why that's ominous to you though, right?

Well, yeah. Now this is Yeah. So this is I think what we have to do at this point is do our little Do we need to go back?

Can we just do I think you know a fairly a fairly um there's basically two topics remaining

on on my okay on my list. Let's do those then. There's one of them is just about

then. There's one of them is just about looking at this what we what I'll use our old language when it's not been replaced by anything to my mind

accessible and superior. So we called this thing the time circuit or the hex.

Yeah. Yeah, it's like the zone of so to speak. Okay. Um and maybe we can just look at that a little bit. Sure.

We'll show um can I ask you right now since we're talking about should we also understand because it moves it seems to move counterclockwise but at one point if you look when it goes down it starts

to move in a linear direction then on the top part it's going retroactively.

So should we view it as both when it's the time circuit it's in it's incorporating both linearity and retrochronic

it's incorporating all kinds of stuff for sure so it's a very very rich notion of insideness

um it's not it's well let me just see what the yeah so the first just there's a little arithmetical And then there's a few And then there's

just mapping it on to a few things uh very quickly and then we'll be able to talk about it. Sure. The arithmetic

arithmetical thing very simple is what uh I think can be called the iron law of six.

The iron law of six is extremely simple.

It's now what we actually we're in a new numerical operation, a very modern one which is doubling. So you've got your

sequence in our whole sort of world of like uh computers and everything like that. It's probably now we've shot

that. It's probably now we've shot beyond it, but definitely in the early years. So we're going back to kind of

years. So we're going back to kind of early early cyber culture and obviously the the powers of two were just like the

cool numbers or at least if not the cool numbers necessarily it's like they were the numbers that are everywhere the numbers that had all this association with because boolean logic is kind of

governing all these machines etc etc. Um, and so obviously you count 1 2 4 8 16 32

64 128 256 512 boom boom boom boom boom boom. And the thing about those numbers

boom. And the thing about those numbers is when you then subject them to Masonic arithmetic,

they fall into this absolutely mechanical loop.

They go uh well the we can just follow it I think is probably the quickest thing like so we go 1 2 4 8

16 we digitally reduce to seven 32 we reduce to five. So we've gone six

numbers 1 2 4 8 7 5. Now after 32 comes 64. 64 is 1 again. After 64 is 128. 128

64. 64 is 1 again. After 64 is 128. 128

1 + 2 + 8 is 11 is 2. 1 2 after 18 256 6 and 5 11

2 13 = 4 1 2 4 again 2 256 512 5 + 1 + 2 is 8. So, we've got our 1 1258 52 uh

is 8. So, we've got our 1 1258 52 uh 1,024 1 0 1 plus 0 plus 2 plus 4 is seven.

We've got our seven back. Last one I think I'll bother you with, but 2048.

Obviously, lots of people like that as the uh cyberpunk apocalypse deadline

when treated as a as a date. 248 2 + 4 +

8 6 + 8 14 is 5. So we go 1 2 4 875 1 2 4 8 75 that's the iron law of six that

counts forever. Um and you know however

counts forever. Um and you know however big your number gets it's doing that number.

So that I let me go rather than in the obvious order. I'll go first to the ejing just

order. I'll go first to the ejing just incredibly quickly because you know you can ask what kind of number system is the egene and everyone has it as a

binary system. It's broken and unbroken

binary system. It's broken and unbroken lines. Um you know that's the they can

lines. Um you know that's the they can move but it's basically a binary system.

There's 64 hexoggrams. So that's a nice binary number. That's as you'd expect

binary number. That's as you'd expect there six lines. 2 to the 6 is 64. So

that's why you've got hexogs and there's 64 hexogs.

Um but why are there six lines?

And I think we've answered that just now. I mean the iron law of six is being

now. I mean the iron law of six is being recognized in the Egyp. I mean you know is could could it be a coincidence? I

mean could it be somehow there were any number of lines possible in a in a kind of not in a hexagram but in but in the system of the eaging and they just

somehow randomly settled on six. I don't

know but we know we know that actually when you do digital reduction which is a decimal operation on binary

exponentiation we get the iron law of six we get 1 2 4 875 1 2 4 8 75 I we get if you've got six lines you've got

enough for everything you know there's you're never if you're in this world of binary exponentiation you're never going ever get a number

that isn't on that 1 2 4 8 7 5 six line system. So the

eging by having hexogs of six lines is implicitly cosmic and universal in the sense that it's saying you know anything that can

happen and by anything can happen anything can happen by doubling is is in here is in these six lines. We

don't need a 100 lines, a thousand lines. We don't need that because, you

lines. We don't need that because, you know, because the iron law of six always brings everything that happens, however big your B exponent, two to the

quintilion is still going to be one one of these six numbers. Um, it's you can have the exponent as high as you want.

Doesn't make any difference. This is a basic numerical law that the eging makes a cosmic law.

Um, and this the the numbers the lines it's there's a commentary that comes with the ejing.

haven't pinned down this exact quote this time, but I so I'm just going to assure you it's in there, which says the lines pair up. The first

and fourth, second and fifth, third and sixth lines pair up.

So, if we do our 1 124875, um, here I'm just going to I'm just going to help myself out here.

One minute.

Yeah. So, okay. So, the first line is obviously going to be a one and the fourth line is eight. 1 + 8 is

9. That's a numograms, is it? The second

9. That's a numograms, is it? The second

line pairs with the fifth line. Two is

the second line. Seven is the fifth line. Two and seven. Oh, it adds up to

line. Two and seven. Oh, it adds up to 93.

Third line pairs up with sixth line.

Four and five.

There we have it. So the so the six lines of the aging absolutely precisely numerically correspond to

the six numbers of the numog time circuit.

So the numogram time circuit and ejing are isomorphic at this level. There's there's some other stuff going on in the new there's other stuff I guess going on in Eging.

But in terms of their basic mechanics, they're the same. They're the same thing. And so we can say, look, this is

thing. And so we can say, look, this is what the Eging is talking about. This

this zone, this central zone for the Neog that is the universe. That's the

cosmos of the Eging. and and everything we can just go backwards and forwards between these two things as as much as we like in so far as the ENG's telling us about the world we can see we're

going to see it here and in so far as the numogram is telling us about stuff in the circuit it's going to we can map it back onto the eing they're perfectly isomorphic

systems um it's also like the seal of Solomon which is a very sort of it's actually kind of

mysterious. I mean, everyone now it's

mysterious. I mean, everyone now it's the modern Israeli flag and all of that and it's the sign of Zionism and Judaism, all kinds of things, but but

it's a it's kind of mysterious where it comes from is the the early signs of it are really tied up with various kinds of

kind of uh Jewish esotericism and occultism. You know, it's basically

occultism. You know, it's basically called the seal of Solomon. It's tied up with uh it's tied up with exorcism. Um I

just saw a kind of interesting thing today that's saying look if you're doing exorcism you're already doing full demonology. I mean they're not really

demonology. I mean they're not really distinct things. You know you're telling

distinct things. You know you're telling a you're telling a demon be gone.

You know you're giving it instruction.

You're contacting it. You're giving it instructions. The exorcist finds out its

instructions. The exorcist finds out its name. you know, so it's utterly fuzzy

name. you know, so it's utterly fuzzy and so solmonic esotericism is demonology. I mean, I

don't think that's again controversial.

you know, his strange wives, you know, turned him on to to uh all of this this

esoteric idolatrous demonological activity, you know, which the Bible's strangely forgiving of actually. It's

kind of interesting. Um,

and yes, so the seal of Solomon, what is it? It's two triangles.

it? It's two triangles.

It's two triangles and we've seen that what we have here with the EJ it's these two you know two set the first and the fourth line the second and the fifth line the third and the sixth line two

triangles click together that's also a model of the of the numogram of the of the time circuit final one of these that needs to

be said is the median strip because what the what Eging does better than the seal of Solomon. Seal of Solomon is two

Solomon. Seal of Solomon is two triangles but and it is two triangles.

You know you go around one side you you go around one two and four and then you flip over onto the other side. So eight

is the other side of one. Seven is the other side of two. Five is the other side of four. You flipped over in a different interlocking triangle. But

that is actually a median operation because it's continuous. You know, you go you get to you go one, two, four, then you go to eight, but you flipped

over onto the other side of the median strip. You know, it's paired now with

strip. You know, it's paired now with something you've already been to on the other side, but now you're traveling on the other side. And so you you know you

go your eight seven five the other sides of the sciss um you have this kind of complete meian loop that you now go back looping out onto the first cycle. You

know it's funny to bring in Lon here but his his term for this relation you're describing is extimacy where the thing that seems external is actually at the

heart of the thing that you make external to it. And so yeah, I think that even the term extimacy kind of helps understand these mathematical

relations here. Yeah. But in a way the

relations here. Yeah. But in a way the mathematical relations are very simple.

I mean I think that's part of it. You

know what I mean? It does like as I I sort of like to treat as a theme of this of the fact that look I think all of this stuff plugs into all kinds of

philosophical material for sure.

But it's not that you need the philosophical material to get to this machinery. This machinery is assembled

machinery. This machinery is assembled very simply. You know, it's like it's

very simply. You know, it's like it's just these basic numerical operations.

There's no presuppositions. There's no

beliefs. There's just there's just methods. They're not difficult. And what

methods. They're not difficult. And what

they end up doing is just exploding or explicating decimal numerousy that we use every day. But we don't know what's in there. Yeah. You know, and what's in

in there. Yeah. You know, and what's in there?

What the numogram says is what's in there is just like everything's in there because it's not just as we've now seen the time circuit.

That's just that's just part of the mimograph. The

aging that's the universe. But the

universe is just part of part part of the part of the thing. The Chinese are very, you know, sensible people. I think even in their religion a lot, they they they

like the time circuit. It tells them what's going to happen, you know, bad stuff, good crop harvest, whether the emperor is going to have a good day or

not. It's all in there. Um, and the sort

not. It's all in there. Um, and the sort of fully exotic stuff that goes on outside the time circuit is like, well, why why does this matter? I'm not saying

it's not ever explored, but it's not it's certainly not part of the fundamental machinery of the Eging. As

we've seen, the fundamental machinery of Eging we know is fully constant with the time circuit. Um

time circuit. Um but there is there is the outside um numina

well it's kind of the numina but you know can is in the history of philosophy and it's all very hard for him is I mean the numina is just unthinkable it's like

inaccessible incomprehensible um you know and then obviously the his immediate philosophical successes basically saying, "You've got to chuck

this out because it's just nothing." You

know, you can't contact it, you can't communicate with it, you can't obey it even. It's like simply not anything

even. It's like simply not anything that's intelligent.

Yeah. So, yes, it's it's he gets himself into that fine. Whereas now the outside that we have now that we get to

um is a is a set of very distinctive relations and uh it we for a start we can say a few things about it. We can say that it

divides into two parts.

So you know what we used to call what I I haven't replaced in some convincing way to myself this language with the the warp and the plex

three and six 90 there again as we've had as a theme of this is like the logical relations there are different you know it's different

it's a different part of reality it has some echoes um they both everything It's like as you can see everything's revolving. The

whole of the numogram is this set of cycles within cycles within cycle. Um

the warp is the most vortical thing that is actually imaginable. I mean it's pure vortex.

imaginable. I mean it's pure vortex.

It's so insanely vortical. Is there any way to get out of the warp if you're caught in it? Yeah. It's just uh absolutely insane how vortical is. And

you know, as we saw when we were doing our esoteric um esoteric detractice, it's like it's the one of

those phases that isn't a stable basin.

You know, zero goes to zero, 8, 9 go to 9, 4, 7, and one go to one. 2 5 6 and

three go to the 63 vortex. They don't

there's no rest state.

in that basin at all. Instead, it's just once you're in the vortex, that's it.

You've arrived. That's that's the thing.

That's the the terminus. The terminus is the vortex. Um,

the vortex. Um, yeah, I guess it would be important and maybe you're going to do this, but I just for clarification because the plex

and the warp are outside the time circuit and they both have similarities, but it it would be important to mark their differences, right? Like what what what is the important significant

divergences between these two different outsides?

Yes.

Um I mean look I'm not right now maybe in the course of this I will try but right

now I'm not going to say you know this is the difference between I mean other than the things you can see I mean you can see there are differences they can they connect up differently both sides

of the plex have this kind of inner rotation they don't have a collective rotation whereas the 36 is is in this binary rotational

structure. I think the main thing to say

structure. I think the main thing to say about it is that this isn't continuum anymore.

You know, like just the fact that it's split and not only is it split, but any possibility of communicating

across those two different sides of the outside is extremely arcane. You know,

you can't you can't get there by any of the paths that we've mapped out there.

So that's not to say that you can't add stuff to the N. You can't add more connections. You know, there's no law of

connections. You know, there's no law of any kind about that. Um I guess what I'm calling a num is the is the basic numog.

And you know, I can definitely see people wanting to add things. Um,

but what we're what we're dealing with is what in the back in the CCU days was called the chaotic

xeno demons.

Um, anything that's crossing like 6030 96 93, there's no path. we'll maybe get a

chance to get to the book of paths but there's no path that you can trace to them. So if you choose some other demon

them. So if you choose some other demon even a random one I mean the tendency is to concentrate on the synergies. I do

that massively you know all other demons get very neglected but in the classic CCU version there's the whole set as you

said there's 45 0 to 44 by mesh number.

So you take one that's like seems quite of a stretch like five

uh nine a 95 as it would be. Now you can you can make that connection. You can

make that connection because you can go from five to four. You just cross the sig. That's always allowed. Then you've

sig. That's always allowed. Then you've

got a current. You can either go from four then on to one down the path down the the through the gate or you follow

the current from the five forces which you've now completed to one cross over again synoggetically to eight and then go down through that path

to nine. So you've made you've followed

to nine. So you've made you've followed by a set of lawful moves in your sort of numogram chess or whatever it is. You

have integrated that dema you've it's it's sort of you you know that's it that's what it's spanning that path in

its different variants. Um

69 you absolutely cannot do that.

Six cannot get out of the 63 vortex.

Nine can cross over to zero. It can go through a gate to itself. It can't it can't climb its way up into the time circuit. Nothing can get into the time

circuit. Nothing can get into the time circuit. And there's no roots outside

circuit. And there's no roots outside the time circuit between the two different outer zones. So it's

completely obscure. So the so this is our ultimate metaphysical question. If if if if K is banging his head against the

wall of a numon, we're saying look look at it like this. You know, this is

this is a problem just as apparently insuperable.

How do you how do you integrate a chaotic zen as xeno demon? But it's

absolutely rigorous and clear what you're trying to do there. you know,

it's it's a far less fuzzy, you know, dialectical philosophical problem. You can you can talk about how

problem. You can you can talk about how do you make contact with a numogram in philosophical ease, you know, without convincing anyone or you know what I

mean? It's like the fuzziness is just

mean? It's like the fuzziness is just massive. um and just necessarily is

massive. um and just necessarily is going to be sectarian and and whatever this everyone everyone should be able to

agree that there seems to be a kind of serious problem about integrating chaotic xeno demon I mean it you don't need any philosophical beliefs about it

you don't need any religious commitments about it you don't need any medical sort of sophistication it's just like you can see there's not a part.

Um, so you're translating that metaphysical conundrum into something that is

extremely clear in a sense. I think like it really lucid. It's just you can say well you can say oh but it doesn't mean

anything much to me. I mean, but you know, does the numogram mean I mean, not does the numon mean anything to you?

Like, what what's the difference? So why

do you why do you want to talk about this thing that you can't say anything about as opposed to this other thing that also seems to you completely incomprehensible

but in fact the way in which it's incomprehensible the way you can't talk about it the way you can't do it the way you can't think

it are all extremely clear extremely clear exact rigorous the problem is perfectly defined you And so this is my we're now in this zone of me in a way

negotiating with your book. You know

what I mean? Because it's like when I'm dealing with this question about the outside, this is the terrain I want to be dealing with on. I'm not making a philosophical

with on. I'm not making a philosophical claim about the outside. I'm not saying because I've got some particular take on postcanian metaphysics I believe that

you know there's some integration or connection with the numon that is possible. I'm saying just look at this

possible. I'm saying just look at this thing you know let's try let's just try to move around this thing and see where

we can get and where we can't get and getting to the outside is not actually a problem at all. Um there's a problem

about the outside that is hugely problematic. But I think even

hugely problematic. But I think even there it invites imaginative solutions. You

know I think people could add interesting things to the mumogram that would help. Like for instance they might

would help. Like for instance they might add a set of paths that connect a number to its prime ordinate. You

know, so you've got the prime number series and you number the prime numbers and you've got a relation between each of those two series and you reflect that relation by drawing a line on the

numeric grand that relates to that relation that captures that relation perfectly rigorous perfectly simple perfectly unproatic

you can say well does reality actually have that in it you know that's I guess a question about all this, you know, does reality have that in it? Does it

have the rotational uh warp out of vortex? Is that actually real? I mean, sure.

real? I mean, sure.

Sure. I mean, people can say that, but I think it's like um overwhelmingly cognitively functional to

assume that yes, it does. I mean,

I feel that that's what I've been taught by my history, you know, by the history of my culture. It's like, yes, this it's

drawing this thing for you like um Yeah.

Yeah. Okay. Um I mean, Nance, I want to see check in. What What are you thinking about what? Sorry. Seeing what N's

about what? Sorry. Seeing what N's got a thought, Nance.

I don't I don't think I have a thought.

Um I the constructing a a a framework to

um cope with the irreducibility or the um inability to communicate with the outside rather than um doing a disavowel.

um I think is helpful in in kind of dealing with I don't know subject object relations I

don't know and um I just so I I feel like there's a a desire to map meaning

onto the numogram and and onto this uh I I think in this way it's a very objective map of where we find

ourselves, but there is still a pool to to map meaning on to it. Um,

and I think it sounds to me like you're you're you're saying, "No, resist the urge. Don't don't map the meaning and

urge. Don't don't map the meaning and and just look at this." I I mean, just look at this thing. Um

this thing. Um I mean I actually look if I can just respond immediately to that I would I would say yeah I don't I don't think that any such prohibition

is at all justified like where would that be coming from you know it's like there there is no there is no ecclesiastical authority that can make

that law in any way binding on anybody.

So I mean I would only have the recommendation that in so far as you want to construct semantic superructures

on this don't get trapped in them. You

know it's like don't don't think that the semantic superructure is then the thing that is just like caging you and giving you your options. It's it's not

you know the the semantic superstructure is something that has been allowed by something by something else and the constraints that matter are the ones

below that. So yes, it's just like

below that. So yes, it's just like semantic prisons are very easy to build.

um and they probably just need this recommendation against them like which isn't at all to say don't construct this stuff. I think

I think it's interesting to do that actually. You know I could see someone

actually. You know I could see someone having listened to what you just said somebody saying well then the time circuit you've you've referred to it as

the universe. It's as if that's what

the universe. It's as if that's what this loop the these three sizes represent the universe as we know it in its temporal dimensions. That's the

fruit of the big bang. These other two sizzes are what were there prior to it?

I mean would how do you feel about making that move? It's I think that's an interesting discussion. I mean I my

interesting discussion. I mean I my obviously response to that would be to say what do you mean before right you know because I mean the time circuit

time is obviously a hugely interesting topic anyway and it's a hugely we've we've described the numogram as a time

map so that each of the each of these zones that sorry I'm scrambling my technical terminology These regions, you

know the the war, the time circuit, the plex, these regions have their own temporal structure.

Clearly, they're all relatively complicated.

Uh the as would be expected by its scope, the temporal complexity of the time circuit itself is extraordinary. And like you

were yourself making the point that there's the seventh gate which just purely

has this function of a sort of retro retrochronic reversal you know so that you go back

you go from one and 8 to 7 and then but you back to eight again down that thing.

So there's a time loop in that thing. So

it's not like um it's not as at all as if the time circuit alone is giving you some just straightforward

simple kind of in so far as we're constrained by the temporality of the time circuit.

It's in a way that it's extremely loose compared to the normal ways of thinking about these things because this is a

temporal system that allows for retrochronic paths.

You know, it's a it's a a temporal system that allows for absolute violations of kind of standard consensus temporality. And that's before you even

temporality. And that's before you even get into the question of the outside or try to trace paths into the outside at all. Um,

all. Um, so I guess I the two questions I have right now. One I kind of now that we've

right now. One I kind of now that we've done this I want to go back and ask you again. So what is ominous about getting

again. So what is ominous about getting doing subdecident and getting KTAC?

Okay. Okay. Well, I think then yes, that's right. This is why we did all of

that's right. This is why we did all of that to get to get there. That's exactly

why.

So, uh I think the context for this is also your deeper question about this thing about how do you attribute content? Mhm.

And that's very similar to Nancy's question about how you assemble semantic structure on terms on top of these systems. So let's just take the time

circuit and you know at what point do we start engaging in something exorbitantly

creative if we if we start trying to add some semantic a semantic content because as we've already seen there's there's a theme if you've got

this the the uh what was the um I'll use the old traditional I'm not very happy with these names. Now, I don't call them

these names. Now, I don't call them these myself, but I will use our old CIA traditional names. Can I ask you before

traditional names. Can I ask you before I forget because there's one question, okay, it's related to this. Is it true?

I saw a guy, he's done some work, and I don't know if somebody sent this to you on X, but if not, I'll send it to you.

Somebody has said that making the case that you can generate the lemurs names out of certain prefixes or syllables attached to being attached to each zone.

And it goes back to like the mythology with the is it the numes? Uh is that is that correct? One sec, Nick. I'm gonna

that correct? One sec, Nick. I'm gonna

let you finish. But that actually wasn't totally correct. It turns out that it

totally correct. It turns out that it was actually Amy Ireland who figured out the relationship between the numogram and how to generate the demon's names.

Here is a photo of her presenting on the topic, showing how the Munamese quasi fontic particles map onto the numog. Be

sure to check out Amy's new book co-authored with Maya B. Chronic called

Cute Accelerationism.

It'll change how you think about accelerationism forever.

Yeah, that's basically correct. Yeah,

it's it's not very rigorous or strict, but it but it's basically the case that the names the old the CCIU traditional names of the demons

is is based on a combinatorial system where there's certain salabic uh values attached to the different zones and their then like kax is related

to catastrophe and well that's another that's a whole other issue what the associations of that Uh it's just that but no isn't like kax as

a as like the root prefix for it kata on catastrophe kata kex something like that that that again that's another step that's another step okay all I'm saying

all I'm agreeing to with this is just that for instance like yes katak so I think I I don't even remember what our basic

uh our basic syllables were for this. But,

you know, um Yeah. This guy went and he put I think he put the syllables on each zone. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That would make

zone. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That would make sense. So, but there would be because

sense. So, but there would be because there's a C sound in in in on the five zone and some kind of t

sound on the four zone, you know. or we

had odub was this 72 which is again a dub sound that we just added whatever vowels we need to make that into a okay sound that's that's the degree to which

that story is is right now if you then but does it have a whole bunch of then associative things with English etmology and other language edm I mean probably fuzzily

very very fuzzly but there's nothing like a systematic structure to any of It's just like stuff swirling around. Okay. I just want But

swirling around. Okay. I just want But I'm glad I mean I'm glad for the clarification that what this guy is doing is based on something you you guys were doing with it. Yeah. And I would

only say but even if we hadn't been aware of it, it's entirely possible there's all kinds of patterns and structures in there that we just had no idea were there and I still haven't

identified and could be discovered by someone doing it. So it wouldn't if I had just said I know nothing about any of that. I don't think remotely would

of that. I don't think remotely would have invalidated that guy's project.

Okay. I mean it's I'm totally open to stuff being found in this stuff that is not been deliberately deposited there and that happens in fact. So yeah, we

were going to do the thing why KTAC was open, but uh can you can I just follow that up by asking like so why are you unsatisfied with the names now?

I now think that the names should be much more rigorously constructed. Okay.

That I think that they should have the the names of each of the lemurs should be um

it should uh in alpha numeric cabala correspond to the neck span of that demon

understood as a natural number. So like

for the 72 scissor G it should it should uh sum to 72

and that the and that the reduced value of the first letter should correspond to

the first um zone in that sit going by the convention that's already such you have higher lower one. So, so any any

names of which there are many for the seven for ODUB as it was for the 7 to

scissor G will begin with the letters G, P or Y and and alpha numerically sum to 72.

Um, and any names that fit those criteria I consider rigorously satisfactory and any that don't I I may personally I'm not

satisfied with those. So, okay.

Um, okay. So, uh, yeah, thanks. Uh, so KTAC

okay. So, uh, yeah, thanks. Uh, so KTAC is ominous.

Yes, KAC is ominous because like what is the what are we seeing with the time circuit as a historical circuit? And

we've already seen that. Uh it would I'll just add on a bit

that. Uh it would I'll just add on a bit slap on a bit of semantic content and then maybe strip it again. The semantic

slap on is just traditional meaning CCIU semantic content. And the CCIU

semantic content. And the CCIU semantic content first of all that we we had for this stuff was based on a mythos that we produced to sort of talk about

it and work on it and write about it which was to do with the uh the NMA.

Mhm. Um you know which was we had uh Ikidna Stillwell I think going on a kind of ethnographic expedition to Sumeriia.

uh she finds the Newman Graham but blank like there's no lettering on it. There's

no no numbers on it. It's just the pallet, you know, and that's to me really beautiful. I mean, I I so wish

really beautiful. I mean, I I so wish that had been historically possible that there was this thing that had come to us out of history just as this set of lines

and swirls and connections and no numbers on it. and someone sees hang on like if we put these numbers on it all makes sense you know and then love

craftian mind emulsion so we that's what we allowed we allowed in the stairwell to have to have that ecstatic moment

um and uh so it's they were three tribes engaged in a kind of exagamic exchange circuit that I don't think matters very much. It

was also what we call the hydro cycle, you know. So, you start off with the C

you know. So, you start off with the C basically down in the 18 [ __ ] Uh there's it evaporates up to the 27

cycle. Um

cycle. Um yeah, I'm trying to remember. I'm think

I'm missing a stage. Somehow the clouds go across the I'm making a travesty of it to well but then it kind of stormingly thunderously comes back as

precipitation down in the in the thing in the final set and and that's because if you look at the asymmetry of the two sides as we've we've already pointed to

this this the seventh gate and the fact that it allows for this this is already in a way got an Eddie in it. You know

what I mean? It's not very strong momentum. It's it's you can try and tack

momentum. It's it's you can try and tack back along this line. Um

the interesting thing about the other side is that the gate and the current perfectly reinforce each other. So

there's this massive there's this massive sort of transitional energy going on at this side of it like

four and five either four can go to one through the 10th the fourth gate or the four five scissy following the current

goes to one in either case you've got this uh you've got this transitional phenomenon that completes the cycle in

this completely inexraable fashion.

And so we were saying, well, okay, what what is that?

You know what? We don't want to just heap on just arbitrary semantic content, but what is that? That is like that is very apocalyptic.

You know, this is we're talking about destiny. We're talking about this these

destiny. We're talking about this these two things reinforce each other. There's

no alternative. Has to go this way. you

know, you can't get off it in any way.

You're going down that line. You're at

the end of the circuit. It's coming to an end. You're going back to the start

an end. You're going back to the start of a new circuit. What you know, what do all

circuit. What you know, what do all world myths think of that as? You know,

the end of the circuit and the rein some necessary inevitable inescapable transition that takes you out of this

final state. It just that to us it's

final state. It just that to us it's like you know how much semantic fluff are we actually putting on to say

that certainly at the time it felt to us not much you know it's like we definitely the whole beacons field thing we were talking about earlier

uh sizzy thing was like yeah that whole our our apocalypse we were it was it's the age of kadak it's like because the age of kadak is

going to take is going to end. It's it's

the end, you know, it's the end of the cycle. It's there's going to be this

cycle. It's there's going to be this thing that happens. Um, yeah, you can say you can emphasize the new beginning side of it to be enthusiastic or

whatever, but you're basically talking about this apocalyptic transition at the end of history, you know. It's it's fun.

Second advent. Yeah. Yeah. No, for 100% for 100%. I I'm sort of sad. Again, this

for 100%. I I'm sort of sad. Again, this

is back to my whole AOE education thing, you know, because at least esoterically I think the AOE is the heart of the European Christian

tradition. You know, probably somehow

tradition. You know, probably somehow transitioning through the whole history of Western Christianity through the Catholic and then Protestant reformed

churches. And you know they would for

churches. And you know they would for sure they don't exactly have an imogram.

That's the all complicated thing. They

have some, as we were saying earlier, they they have the Atlantean cross and they have whatever they however close they can get to this in their system,

but I think that the Atlantean tradition is fed stimulated from the side by

the Leuran.

I can't even say tradition. The Leam

Muran. And you once called mur sorcery.

Um and yeah and so it would be the case that um a lot of this stuff would be thrashed

out in terms of Christian apocalyptic theology 100%.

you know, and I think you just, you know, I'm going to slowly drift and persuade myself this thing that like actually, you know, because it could happen like that or could have happened

like that, then actually it really did happen like that. And and in fact, you know, hunting around in cathedrals, you should be looking. This is what you

should be looking for. You should be looking for what actually did bleed into our actual historical tradition from

this artificial numerical decimal machine because that artificial numerical decimal machine really happened.

I mean, it's not like it's not like something that's been arbitrarily spun up. We sort of know from the history of

up. We sort of know from the history of her medicine that it really happened.

Um, well, it is I mean the the very fact that in the entry for Kadak uh I always said K-K but Kadak uh you you're very

welcome to you're very welcome to but no it's you know cataclysmic convergence. I

mean that's exactly how Christians especially in America view the second coming of Christ is it is a complete cataclysmic event uh when he comes back

and then some new beginning starts to arise out of this but uh yeah I can't help but notice that um and it's

this intense point of unity you know it's like on the gate this 10 to one 10 to one thing that we've been talking about a lot is is happening if you

follow the fourth gate route into the first zone. So you know that is

zone. So you know that is that is the cycle as represented within the tree of life

and within the the the Atlantean esotericism and the theological tradition and is is the you

know seen in isolation that is completely epiphany of unity that is happening there. I mean it's like anyone should

there. I mean it's like anyone should from that tradition should recognize they're just taking that zone in isolation. They should just see that

isolation. They should just see that 100% for sure as a kind of theological event of which they have deep familiarity.

Um it's only when you pan out in the whole thing that you then have these questions about well you know it's maybe that doesn't look like the whole story

from other places you know places that even sometimes it's hard to see how you sort of get. Yeah. Well, I guess the the

the last question I really have concerning the numogram for now. Um I is this question that I think we've talked about it on X before, but it's this

ongoing question about how to use the numogram and you use it every day, right? But

there's a sense where people who are new to it are trying to get a handle on like what would what would an

a numogrammatic analysis of a political event look like? or um you know, I guess another way to put it would be something

like what would a successful intentional act of time sorcery look like? What's an

example of what a magician would do in order to manipulate time using the numogram?

Um, I can tell that I'm going to be in this moment that you're going to think, "Oh my god, he's refusing. He's refusing to

divulge. He's refusing to divulge that

divulge. He's refusing to divulge that that hermetic secret that he actually has launched away. No, because here's the thing. I I know you use it all the

the thing. I I know you use it all the time because I I follow you on Twitter, so I know you're you're constantly Oh, I do. I use it every

do. I use it every five minutes. You you know, so for sure

five minutes. You you know, so for sure it's like that is 100% true. So So what is it? I mean, look,

is it? I mean, look, I think there probably are. I know 100% there are people who actually could call

themselves magicians and, you know, would be vastly more competent at magic than I would ever pretend to be. I don't

even know whether I ever really try to do magic, you know. Um, so, and I've never seen you call yourself a magician.

I don't see you talk like that very I do what I do is cababala and what what I and what I mean by

cababala is I try to engage in communication with the outside or and and not just the

out the big outside like this the plex and the wall but just generally I just think like I think communication with

you angelic beings is completely practical and you know we have a lot of methods

and techniques for that and it's the thing that is most interesting to do and that history is going to basically get

everyone doing it like I have a very strong belief that you know we're entering at sort of we are entering the

end times in the in the wide sense. I

mean it may be decades but it's not more than decades and it might be substantially less than decades. And the

symptom of that is that stuff breaks through the walls in ways that stuns people and amazes them and they just are increasingly think this crazy thing

happened to me. This crazy coincidence happened to me. You know this I I had a friend who had this thing about oh you know I was just reading about what's the

meaning of dead bird and I walked across my campus and a bird fell out of the sky and dropped dead at my feet. And I think she was expecting me to say oh my god I

can't believe that. But I just thought of course you know that's where what times do you think we're living in? I

mean this is this is now you know everyone better get used to it. And so I think that you know communication with

the lofty powers is something like sh do it you know because it's like going to happen anyway. All the channels that can

happen anyway. All the channels that can be used are being used. It's like you just have to choose random if you like choose some channels that could actually be kind of passing a message down.

Technically you can use Shannon or whatever you want. It's like you know could this technically be a communication channel? if it could be

communication channel? if it could be assume it is and just like try and tune into it. Um so that is cababala but

into it. Um so that is cababala but magic I think is trying to make things happen and I I'm not really

I'm not really doing that because frankly I'd rather I'd rather the angels were doing that. I mean they sort of like why why would I think that I'm going to do a better job of that? I

mean, I'm more interested in finding out what's being done by higher intelligences than I am of trying to somehow mobilize higher intelligences to

get stuff done that I think would be cool from my narrow current perspective.

Okay, this might sound like a naive question or like but no, I mean it sincerely where Okay, I because you've spent your life thinking about

why why do you think and and maybe it's unanswerable. Why do you think the lofty

unanswerable. Why do you think the lofty powers want to commune with us via I mean and if mathematics let's say is

their language this specific way of using numbers is their language why do you think they have they have an an

interest in sending us messages well I think that there's a two-stage thing to that and the first stage is to

say do you think that they are doing that and of that I have extreme conviction you know and I have extreme

conviction because of the fact that I think I've probably mentioned this before even in conversations with you in this thing but the two great examples

for me are the the phrases uh the cybernetic culture research unit

and the architectonic order of the escaton. Now when we coined when the CCU

escaton. Now when we coined when the CCU coined those phrases or it was a obviously the it was kind of the CCU was

coined by that phrase absolutely nothing of cabalistic deliberate cabalistic intent was

involved. No one had started thinking

involved. No one had started thinking like that at all. Um, you know, even the AOE, the architect on the board of the Escodon a little bit later, uh, you

know, it's possible we had some of this, but but no one was constructing cabalistically coherent phrases at that point. And so I

find out much much later, decades later that these two phrases both have an alpha

numeric cabala value of 666.

It's coincidences in to me. I'm sorry.

That's just like game over as far as like I I mean I could be skeptical about it, but life's too short. I'm going to waste my life like just pissing on

something like that like you know. So

that's like that's just them saying look we're here you know we're talking um so then I can proceed to the question

well why why do you want to talk to me or like you know why why is this content here? Why is this communication channel

here? Why is this communication channel in use? I honestly am reluctant. I don't

in use? I honestly am reluctant. I don't

have any particularly dogmatic thing about that. I mean, I just Yeah, I I

about that. I mean, I just Yeah, I I don't know. I mean, I I my assumption

don't know. I mean, I I my assumption is that well, I don't know honestly. It's

complicated because if I then say sort of just another of these kind of rather miraculous ones.

Um the other one is a little bit drawn out but it's actually I think all the things that are involved in it are extremely interesting.

So 666 is a triangular number. Um it's

the triangular number.

It's the 36th trigon and there's a gate 36 on the numogram of extreme importance. You know, it sort of

importance. You know, it sort of obviously echoes the warp while leading down into the plex. So, it's about in terms of relating to the outside, it's

like extremely you couldn't have a more axial kind of point. Um

point. Um and as we've seen like both the cybernetic culture research unit and the architectonic order of the escraton both

have a value of 666. Um

you know that seems like a point being made of some kind.

Um, so not so long ago, um, you know, I started looking at phrases in

in the amount of 666 now from the America.

And in fact the slight the slight just one slight more digression is that there's a precursor to that which is

again not so long ago I on Twitter said with what astounding idiocy oh you know there's lots there seem to be lots of

333s about but I've never seen anyone give me a good 666 you know and this deluge of stuff came in I mean both this cybernetic culture research unit and the

alpha the architectonic audio escar was people saying are you kidding me you know like what do you not realize that you're basically again like have this number tattooed on your on your forehead

what what the hell are you talking about so I start sort of just examining it a little bit more and

um it's you know to be or not to be That is the question is a 666.

It seems to sort of have a lot of kind of literary potential. And what gives it special literary potential is that it

very closely tracks amic pentameter in English.

So you know if you have a sentence in amic pentameter you know the basic sort of the basic schema the basic metric schema of the

English literary tradition it tends anomalously towards 666 as an alpha value obviously not at all

consistently but beyond chance those two things seem it is almost as If I amic pameometer in English had been conceived

as a vehicle in which you can have these sentences phrases of this cabalistic value which which I started to call beast pulse.

So beast pulse is any phrase equivalent to a line of poetry that adds enough alpha new America ballad to 666.

And so I sort of chatted with people on Twitter about doing this and I said, you know, and obviously I've been very very intimately tied up with reading Milton

for a long time. So I said, "Oh, does anyone sort of have a sense of like this like uh whether we're going to find lots of this stuff in English epic poetry?"

And almost immediately someone came back to me and said, you know, the first line of Paradise Lost is in beast poetry.

Um, of man's disobedience and the fruit.

Of man's first disobedience and the fruit. Um, 666.

fruit. Um, 666.

Okay.

Now, this is like, okay, we're not in Kansas anymore. We're not in the CCU

Kansas anymore. We're not in the CCU anymore. We're in the history of

anymore. We're in the history of English, English history, you know, seriously, it's we're back in the 17th century.

What is going on there? You know, so the the default option obviously is to say it's a coincidence.

I mean, yeah, it could I mean, you know, it's mathematically possible. It's a

coincidence that the first line of Milton's great poem about the luciferic revolt adds up to 666 in Alpha New

Cabal. I mean, sure, you know, that

Cabal. I mean, sure, you know, that could be a coincidence. Secondly,

Milton was secretly encrypting messages in alpha numeric Capala. I mean, okay, that's also like mathematically

possible. I mean, it's I can't you can't

possible. I mean, it's I can't you can't rule it out entirely. I mean, yeah, I don't know what P value you'd put on that. It wouldn't be high in my opinion,

that. It wouldn't be high in my opinion, but whatever. It's it's possible. If you

but whatever. It's it's possible. If you

do if you don't go for those then you're saying okay something is talking to us in a mode

that actually involves putting messages into our deepest strumm of our literary

tradition. you know, um, why

tradition. you know, um, why why I mean, if you take the crudest possible example of this and just say,

look, I mean, I'm not unsympathetic to this entirely, but I think it's too too simple. But say you were the sort of

simple. But say you were the sort of Christian who said, look, clearly this is Satan [ __ ] with us. Uh, it makes

me feel like maybe Milton is a problem, you know? Mhm. Uh

you know? Mhm. Uh

uh I don't know quite where you'd go from that. There's probably an

from that. There's probably an interesting kind of fauna of kind of hardline quite traditionalist Christian takes on that. I think whatever

they at least are getting something right, which is that something is reaching in from the outside and

putting communicative content encrypted uh communicative content into the deepest strata of our culture and and

literary tradition.

Um, no. I'm I don't have a nice theory about this. You know, quite honestly, I think if I could answer this question, if I could say, why the hell

is that happening? Did that happen? Is

that there and could convincingly say, I would have solved I would have solved human history, you know? I mean,

it's like I don't think I can do that, you know? It's it's inter because this

you know? It's it's inter because this is where you know when somebody starts studying your work there's kind of a few

lands and people you know even I in in my book I was constantly struggling okay so there's neo-reactionary land but then

there's occult land but then there's early libidinal materialist land and you know so much of the occult thing

like There's so much consistency in how you laid this out here for us today. But

then in the background, I'm I when we start talking lofty powers, my mind goes artificial super intelligences produced in history that escape out into the

outside and then retroactively. And it's

not what like what an average people person would think of as an ancient demon. It's actually machinery produced

demon. It's actually machinery produced by capital that somehow via time anomalies gets outside of time and then is retroactively

feeding us like it's it's such a weird thought to think no what's actually sending

communication through the channel in a very broad is MCM prime right it's that and but that's where there's this really

interesting original twist that you've put on it that totally takes the occult thing in a direction that the vast majority of cultists aren't thinking

that somehow this relates to capitalism.

Yeah, that's probably true. That's

probably true. Yeah. I mean, I I would very much like and I think it's going to happen that there's going to be vastly

more sort of productive exact communication between people in the religious

tradition and in our, you know, the technoc capitalist types of people. You know, I I think they've tended not to understand each

other very well. You know, like it's tended to be like probably at least recently in history that the the the technocapitalist types tend to think

that, oh, you've got these kind of regressive traditionalist people who don't understand why we've got to just build the future fast. And the religious people have said, oh, they're just screwing up our culture and tearing

everything apart and they've got no values. And uh you know it's not a

values. And uh you know it's not a particularly harmonious um engagement and there's no real common

language. You know on the one side

language. You know on the one side there's the language of math and science you know there's accountancy there's there's there's calculus and and and

technological mathematics and computer science and on the other side there's uh there's scripture there's you know

the notion of ko the cannon of of of these sort of particular texts of especially inspired texts And those things

can seem like they don't fit together very well, but actually I think are really converging. You know, I think

really converging. You know, I think that the people often that I'm talking with on X now is like often people who are

really engaged in the convergence of these two very different registers and set of references and and it's a convergence you made like this is where

I I say look it's true with all philosophers right that's why I think your influence uence is just starting I

think and it is a thing once a philosopher dies then there's a level of respect somehow death does something for

a philosopher and so I honestly believe it's almost like oh we still have Nick he's he's over on Twitter doing his thing but I do think after you die this

connection between the occult and capitalism is only going to expand and we already see that over on

Twitter and so and it's something that I see as a kind of cyber positive feedback loop that's building. So I honestly think like you were kind of haha a cult

theorist because you could have done the I'm a world internationally recognized deloo scholar. You could have done the

deloo scholar. You could have done the Brian Massumi and uh Emanuel Danda thing, but the very fact that you were like, "Nope, [ __ ] that. I'm going in this other direction and then left

academia a and there's all the lore that that's baked into it, you know, going to Shanghai and all this and and fetamine

and there's just so much lore to it that I think after you die, there's going to be a lot of people go, who was this guy?" And I honestly think this

guy?" And I honestly think this connection you made between and that's why I said to you when we were talking about it on Twitter a few months back, this stuff with the numogram is going to

be this thing that doesn't go away. It's

going to build and build and the way it connects to capitalism is going to be your legacy as a thinker.

Well, I honestly hope that that's not I mean I I'm fine with that as a kind of way into this stuff. But what I I think is really important about this

conversation is like this stuff is is like anyone can do this now. You know what I mean? Like what the CCLU got all this

mean? Like what the CCLU got all this stuff. There's no question of like

stuff. There's no question of like deserving it or anything like that. I

landed on our lap. We didn't know what the hell was going on. We ran with it, which I think is good retrospectively.

Um, but the point is it being here now, it's like anyone can do this thing and it doesn't if if someone says, "Oh, like

how does this bit of the numogram work?

I should go and read some weird note Nick Lan wrote about it." That's totally not getting it. You know, that's getting

stuck in the semantic fluff. You look at the look at the thing. It's like it's there, you know, and it's like I it's

for me to try to be as true to it as I can. It's not that for someone else

it it makes sense somehow through me at all, you know, that's just like it's I I want to be

uh really like a clear channel like it's like these all all the things that you bring to this are clear methods. They

don't require anyone's intellectual biography, anyone's intellectual history, anyone's particular patchwork of interest. They're there public

of interest. They're there public available simple methods that can be applied and will produce reliably these uncontroversial

results you know and while and the context of that is the end times are you know I don't know closing in

maybe sounds a bit ominous but they're just going to be just drenching people in miracles and you that there's going to be a lot of stuff

coming to people, a lot of stuff. Um, so

if I can just help people a bit to set up communication channels that will allow them to kind of pick things up, to tune

into things. I that for me is would be

into things. I that for me is would be just fantastic. That's what I if I was

just fantastic. That's what I if I was going to try and vocationalize my sense of what I'm doing, why I'm doing this chat now, it it's like that. It's just

to say, you know, you can this is communications engineering that is practical and you can do it and it's going to be really interesting and it's

going to get ever more interesting and sure, you know, go for it. That's that's

where I am. Well, Nance, as we're we're kind of wrapping up this discussion of the numogram, do you have anything you want to ask or add or anything? Well,

there's one more numogram bit that maybe Yeah. Can I just really quickly try and

Yeah. Can I just really quickly try and do it? It's like a just the last bit. It

do it? It's like a just the last bit. It

was on my section of notes, which is just this section. We just talking about this 30 gate eight the eighth gate 36.

Yeah. because this was central of central importance to you guys and I I guess I don't feel like I really understand why it was so important. So

I'd love to know. Well, it's it takes you down into the plex. Okay. And it

takes you down in the plex because over gate 36 it takes you down into the plex in a way that seems to invoke the warp.

So it's especially crucial to the whole question about the numogram and outside.

Um the path goes just straight down 1 890.

So this number this is uh there's a few things that I want to say. That's all.

So 89 which is the center of that all these numbers then 189 89 1890 all are charged by this and we're

getting close to this thing about content because okay taking nothing except the diagram it's has a lot of kind of narrative

suggestability. you know, you're you're

suggestability. you know, you're you're crossing the eighth gate, you're going descent into the underworld. Um, this is something that's actually pretty much

diagrammatically on there. Um,

and the alpha numeric cabala of just written of just the words the the numms 1890

is 333.

It's also the ordinal is 189.

Um 333 in uh Roman numerals. XXX

hang on CCC XXX 111 is 189.

That that this is for me like the first of my what I would call like eloquent miracles. They're just cabalistic sort

miracles. They're just cabalistic sort of outcomes so crazily informative and rich that they just like um blow you

away. Yeah. Um and and this very very

away. Yeah. Um and and this very very talented uh occultist uh Luis Gonzalez, sorry, I'm probably going to get his

name wrong now. I know him as um Obano.

He was on Twitter and is now gone.

Gonzalez, sorry. He he discovered that that in his new cipher which are extremely

important. One of the really key things

important. One of the really key things it's we call it syncs.

Um there are a number of these 1890 uh things and one of them is desensus Christi ad infro

the descent of Christ into hell.

Um, and I think within the Christian tradition, you know, it's I think it does other I think there's other things. I mean, 1890

in Sinx is also Zen Buddhism. So, I'm

not going to be like uh, you know, exclusionary in my sort of religious affaliation about this. But

within the Christian tradition, this has this strong, if we're going to add some semantic stuff that's removable or

whatever, but just we can add it quite neatly. It's it's very much uh

neatly. It's it's very much uh well the descendency Christie adro is the is the harrowing of hell. Of course,

it's actually you know Christ's descent into hell.

Um, gate 36 as we know the number of 36, the triangle of 366, the number of the

beast. Um,

beast. Um, this extraordinary theological drama is being

played out then in this zone. I mean the the desensus Christy add infra it's almost as if it's drawing that you know

what I mean it's like but on this question of about content and numbers it's almost as if we have here a drawing

of that event it's so powerfully suggestive sort of um uh so okay I'll go

to my last my last point on that which is that um so 89

is the 24th prime number.

Uh so that is also suggested. It's got

some good some good cabalistic associations. 89 is faith. It's space.

associations. 89 is faith. It's space.

There's lots of interesting stuff there.

But it's but it's the 24th prime number.

So you can have the hours of the day the the 24 hours as the first the prime the first 24 primes.

Um and therefore let me just sorry my hours why this

so I've just confused myself. One

second.

Yes. Yes. Sorry. It's it's not not complicated. Um so yeah, so you just

complicated. Um so yeah, so you just list the primes.

First 24 primes. The last one is going to be 89 because we've already said that 89 is the 24th prime.

Add those primes up. Just go down the list adding the numbers. So it starts 2 3 5 2 + 3 + 1 + 10. Next is 7 17. You

get to 24 and the first 24 primes add to 963.

So you know again on this letter of content obviously 963 and 0 are the numbers of outsideness.

That isn't semantic fluff. That's not

accretion or anything. That's just it.

That's just there. Yes. So 963

that's just come out of the fact that you add up the 24 primes and you know that it's the first 24 primes you have to add together because 89 89 is the two

sides of the of the eighth gate.

uh 963 is the most elegant way of of you know a number of outside I

mean it's like again I couldn't believe it when I saw this it's like how could it be so beautiful you know um but yeah I think maybe I should maybe I

no you know and as I'm looking at it I mean the way you describe like okay so the lower part of I mean if we use the Christian perspective, the the plex would be hell.

I mean, the lemurs are there. I mean,

the 45. So, would the warp is there a way to view it as heaven? Because the

interesting thing about both heaven and hell from the Christian perspective is that once you're there, you never get out. There's no you can go to either,

out. There's no you can go to either, but you never you never come back. Yeah.

Yeah. I think there's a whole theological zoo we can build around this, you know. I mean, there's Blake's magic of marriage of heaven and hell.

That that's me trying to draw the trace of these chaotic xeno demons. Um, but

100% you can say like why are we trying to marry these things? Like this is the, you know, this is very theologically

orthodox. I mean, how does Jesus get out

orthodox. I mean, how does Jesus get out of hell? That right. Yeah. I mean, I

of hell? That right. Yeah. I mean, I don't know. I'm not a theologian. Well,

don't know. I'm not a theologian. Well,

if you do the the the the Baptist, it's because he's the literal creator of the universe. So, you know, if you do that,

universe. So, you know, if you do that, but then that does suggest there's a path. Yeah. But you're you're right.

path. Yeah. But you're you're right.

You're right. And so, I mean, and then Dante, there's a path out for Dante.

Yeah, for sure.

And so I mean, no, it's just I I this is why I'm so glad you did this is because there's bits and pieces people can pick

up from seeing stuff you say on Twitter about it. But like when you see like

about it. But like when you see like okay so the e-ching is in the time circuit and then these different relations to numbers in the Christian like there's so much content going on

here that has made this so significant to you that just hearing one thing is like okay you you almost have to hear it all. It's like if you if you say well

all. It's like if you if you say well the cybernetic culture research unit adds up to 666 in uh alpha numeric cabal it's like okay but then when you say but

the the alpha you know the architectonic order of the escaton and then crowley's famous maxim is 7 seven it just piles up and it's it's seeing it pile up that

makes it significant and not one thing on its own.

Yes. I mean it's obviously as we've repeatedly said look it's always mathematically possible that there's just coincidence here you know and it's

for particular people there's a threshold at which you say look it's not like I want to become dogmatic about it but I'm just going to say

hypothetically it doesn't seem worth my while to keep denying that there's a lot of interesting pattern here. Mhm. Um, and

I'd rather spend my time with the interesting pattern than with an attempt to fabricate a massive cosmic improbability that would tell me that

all that pattern is void and nothing, you know, and I think probably for everyone there is a threshold

of that kind, you know, there's a certain point at which so much weird interesting stuff seems to happening that it's like, okay, you know, I'm just

going to suspend the skepticism and just explore this stuff, you know. And I I think it's good if you stop short of full dogmatic commitment. I I don't want

to commit to belief in anything that can't just be rigorously constructed on these on these uncontroversial

formal systems. Like you know it's for me it's there's absolutely no question that the 63 city is structured the way it is with all the vertical motion there

because I can reconstruct that a 100 times. You know what I mean? And it's

times. You know what I mean? And it's

always going to be the same and anyone else who who constructs it is going to find the same thing. That's completely

uncontroversial.

You know other things. Yeah. like to

think that there's some significance to the fact that the first line of Paradise Lost is in Beast Pulse. I'm I'm willing to say sure, you know, you don't have to

be persuaded of anything like that. You

know, it's if that doesn't trip your meter and this added this and this and this and they still don't trip your meter for that, that's like totally

cool. you know, the dogmatic

cool. you know, the dogmatic dogmatic assertion is really not a helpful element of any of this. Um,

okay. But I think that people can find a lot of pattern and have a really fascinating time exploring that and you

know it's probably good to be open to that I would say. No, and seriously, like this is, you know, this was a very special conversation because this is a conversation I know a lot of people have

wanted to see you talk about this the way you did here and it really means a lot to us that you had the conversation with us. Uh, Nance, do you want to say

with us. Uh, Nance, do you want to say anything related to the numogram before we wrap this up?

I just I I think there's it works for the the the you know fascinated brideeyed young man

in me who is fascinated with paridoia and and and just says oh this works this works but it also does work for me because I can see that um

all these kind of codes and and systems of of meaning implicate the the human.

So it makes sense to continually find significance as a human. Like coming

from the perspective of someone who would discover meaning, it it does make sense that the meaning seems to be there to be discovered like an anthropic

principle of of numerousy itself. Um and

I think that's something that's maybe not evident to everybody. I I I do think um you can mysticize or mystify this,

but this stands alone apart from the mysticism. So, and I think that's

mysticism. So, and I think that's powerful.

Nick, you you want to say anything in closing? Well, I just want to say, you

closing? Well, I just want to say, you know, you guys have been like so patient and have allowed me to basically be in

splurge mode here. So, I'm very grateful for that and and I hope it's not been too overbearing. No, it's been great.

too overbearing. No, it's been great.

I'm definitely open to uh future more sort of conversational engagement. Um, so this was Yeah, this

engagement. Um, so this was Yeah, this was a sort of a nerd dump as far as I was concerned. It's just like I thought

was concerned. It's just like I thought I I mean I guess the final thing I say is I just you know because you were saying oh you know I was talking to Nick

about this stuff and he wouldn't I I knew he knew something that he wouldn't let and and I hope I've got beyond that much

because this is really like it's you know this is it for me. I mean, it's like I if I had if I had other

massive persuasive secrets, there's obviously are all kinds of weird capitalistic bits and pieces, but I I've brought to the table everything that I

think is like crucial to just getting started with with this. Well, thank you so much for this. Uh I'm sure that people are going to be watching this one

for many years and so it's a real pleasure and we'll we look forward to talking to you again. Absolutely. Okay,

great. It's been a great pleasure for me to Yeah.

Heat.

Heat.

Heat. Heat.

[Music] [Music] Heat.

[Music] [Music] Heat.

Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat.

[Music] [Music] [Applause] Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat.

[Applause] [Music]

[Applause]

Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat.

[Music] Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat.

Heat.

Heat.

[Music] [Music] Militant proletarian snake handling over abysses never gets much wilder than

this.