e For Euler and Ancient Measure

In this brief extract, we shall examine a few computations regarding the concept of e and some of the ancient reckoning measurements of spacetime.

In Western mathematics, letters of the alphabet have been employed to represent numbers. This is such a widespread practice today, that, it is possible to read an entire book in some field of higher math and, never see a significant number appear. Mathematical theory is based upon the symbolic representation of numbers; not the specific treatment of number. In fact, the impression is often given that when one has to resort to a specific number example in the alphabetic discourse, then there is visible impatience in such a procedure.

One of the more significant alphanumeric expressions of today's math is that of the e proposed by Leonhard Euler (1727), the value of which is cited, give or take a few decimal places, at

2.71828182845904523536..., ad infinitum (possibly). In a more visible presentation, we make the following distinction in the numbers:

There are different interpretations as to the origin of the letter e in this case, but many scholars state that it was derived from the word "exponential", which it represents in a sense. The concept of e concerns the theoretical posit that, "the rate of change of any exponential function is proportional to the function itself". An example thus offered states that the slope of inclination of a wall is proportional to the height of the wall. Simple enough; and thus it is stated that

, that there is a number between 2 and 3 to which this equation corresponds. That number, traditionally, is the one cited above, for which we shall simply employ a shorter version: 2.718281828.

As we proceed in the computations, a point must be emphasized: please, keep in mind the maya long count period of 1872000 days, whose integers reflect the first four integers of the value for e.

Coincidence; one can only view such a set of numbers as being the result of mere chance.

But, are we in the face of happenstance or, in the face of a history of math for which we have no historical record available. That has been one of the questions that we have been exploring in the Earth/matriX series. Now, let us view the value of e in relation to specific numbers of the ancient reckoning system from the Maya and the Kemi peoples.

While searching for other computations, I keyed in on my pocket calculator the following:

Various ideas came to mind. The 756c count as we have examined previously, has been cited as the baseline measurement in feet of the Great Pyramid. The 15184c concerns the Maya companion number, 1366560, which when divided by nine yields 151840. And, the 66591c of the mantissa, reminded me of the maya long-count companion number just cited. In this seemingly strange set of numbers, it occurred to me that possibly the baseline measurement could be thus related to the 151840c Maya companion number.

So, in a little reverse engineering, I set about finding what would be the number taken to the cube of e that would yield an even-number expression for the 151840 count. The answer is even more intriguing:

7559.66846 e³ = 151840

Surprisingly enough, the baseline measurements of the four sides of the Great Pyramid reflect a 755.+ number; not the precisely 756c number. One wonders whether the much debated baseline measurement of the Great Pyramid might not reflect this particular computation involving the concept of e. And, further, one must have already noticed the 846c termination that was previously observed as the difference between the number series 1872 : 2718 above.

Let us visualize the numbers themselves:

The odds of having three mathematically distinctive numbers thus related would appear to be quite improbable, but the numbers coincide. So, we immediately asked, what would be the value for nine times the 755+ number, thinking of the nine times the 151840 number.

which calls to mind the Sothic calendar number that we have discussed previously in other essays.

Many more adjustments may be produced with these considerations, but for now, let us emphasize only one.>

Now, instead of employing the natural log of 2 as is generally the case, let us employ that of simply .693 , the historically significant count that we viewed above (v.gr., 6930432), and its corresponding value.

How intriguing that yet another coincidence of terms makes its appearance as in the number series 7560 : 7056.

Now, consider the obvious:

Essentially, then, we are observing a direct relationship between the value of e and the ancient Kemi number/count (756c) with that of the ancient Maya (151840). The significance of the 151840 count reflects that of the all important calendar round of the ancient Meso-American reckoning system, that of 18980 days. We have often observed how the 189c of the ancient Kemi and the 189.8 count of the Meso-American system may have reflected the day-count, while simply representing modifications of the same.font>

Obviously, adjustments may be made in either direction or on either side of the equation, but for now, we shall simply present the apparent similarities between the ancient Maya and Kemi reckoning systems through their corresponding counts. The most intriguing aspect of these computations, in our mind, is how the value of e fits in so easily as a mediator of the two ancient systems. One may comprehend how the above computations correspond to numbers and their behavior. The intriguing point, in our mind, is that the numbers relate specifically to two distinct historical systems of ancient reckoning and their apparently unrelated day-counts.