Comparitive Experiment: Matching a Nonsense Term with Baal Zephon
FREQUENCY AND SIMPLE TERMS
In synagogue 7 years ago my rabbi mentioned that in a certain portion of Torah where divine retribution was mentioned in the open text, it was exactly 50 letters from the first letter of the 4-letter Hebrew word for Holocaust to the next letter, and so on. He thought this was significant. However, in private, even though I did not have my computer with me, I assured him that (based on my 10 years of Torah Codes study) it was not significant. Unfortunately, even the greatest Torah student is not prepared to analyze the Codes properly without either (a) a lot of experience using a program like CodeFinder or (b) a good background in statistics and probability.
With respect to the word (pronounced Shoah) for Holocaust, while it is true that it occurs at an 50-letter Equidistant Letter Sequence (spacing) or ELS where the rabbi indicated, it is also true that at this same interval (either forwards or backwards), it occurs in 33 other places in Torah. If the interval was 51 letters rather than 50, it occurs 24 times. At a spacing of 52 letters, it occurs 25 times, and at 53 letters, it occurs 34 times. If we search between skips -100 and +100, we find it 2,411 times. Between skips 1,000 and -1000, it pops up 24,941 times. Indeed, 4-letter words that like shoah (which do not contain rare letters) are so easy to find at an ELS, that they often fill a computer screen. As such, their use is generally of very limited value.
Further, even when a term has eight letters (and ELS terms are rarely longer), they are only of statistical value when paired with a-priori terms - that is, terms specified before the computer search was begun. But do they prove anything when they are so paired? Again, the question can not be intelligently answered without a lot of experience, or without a statistical analysis.
Let us, for example, create as an axis term a nonsense word composed of only two letters - alef and bet, but have the two repeated 4 times. In English our axis term looks like this: ABABABAB. How many times does this occur at an ELS in (wrapped) Torah between skips -150,000 and +150,000? The answer is 48 times.A SIMPLE EXPERIMENT: PAIRING A NONSENSE TERM WITH BAAL ZEPHON.
Now let us pair this with one of the two focuses of my study - the fortress of Baal Zephon. Baal Zephon occurs 3 times in the open text of Torah. As such, a match of my axis terms with one of these three is often my goal before starting any search. On two occasions (Exodus 14:2 and Exodus 14:9) Baal Zephon is spelled with six letters - bet ayin lamed tsadeh fey nun. But in Numbers 33:7, it has a vav added giving us a spelling of bet ayin lamed tsadeh fey vav nun. In a search for both spellings between skips -150,000 and +150,000 - including the three open text hits, Baal Zephon occurs a total of 129 times. So Torah Code software like CodeFinder must then take on the job of looking for matches between 48 occurrences of ABABABAB with 129 hits for Baal Zephon. Experience indicates that most of the matches are likely to be with one of the three open text (skip +1) occurrences of Baal Zephon. But how many matches will there be? Here, experience indicates, it depends upon how large we will allow the matrix to be - that is, how many rows and how many columns to fit in the matches.
Normally I start out by leaving the program at a default matrix size of 80 columns by 50 rows with the row split function enabled. If we do this here, we obtain 14 matches of ABABABAH with Baal Zephon (and another two matches of ABABABAB with ABABABAB). How good are these meaningless matches of a nonsense term with a real place? For ABABABAB with Baal Zephon, we find that all 14 matches were indeed with an open text Baal Zephon. In area (rows times columns), the sizes of the matrices were as follows:
Skip of ABABABAB
Area of Matrix (rows * columns) with Baal Zephon in it.
-2,920 (minimum ELS of ABABABAB)
If we were to increase the allowed area to more rows and/or more columns, the number of matches would grow. If we decrease the allowed matrix area, the numbers of matches obviously shrinks. Which of the above ELS finds for ABABABAB will still have a match if we turn off the row split function of CodeFinder, and what will the areas of the matrices look like if we still leave the program in the default setting of 80 columns and 50 rows? There are now only five matches for Baal Zephon (with improvements in area shown in blue). Results are as follows:
Skip of axis term ABABABAB
Area of Matrix
(rows * columns) with Baal Zephon in it.
-2,920 (minimum ELS of ABABABAB)
So, as we can see, it is not that hard to obtain some nice matches of a nonsense axis term like ABABABAB with a term that occurs only three times in the open text. It is also interesting that the best match (smallest matrix area - just 102 letters) occurred with the minimum ELS of ABABABAB.CONCLUSION.
So what's my point? The stated course from Temple Mount in Jerusalem to the suspect Ark site on the El Zuqba (Bardawil) Peninsula is 251.565o True. From Temple Mount to the obstruction believed to be Baal Zephon is 255.2o True (see http://arkcode.com/whats_new_10.html). Do any of the above matches on either chart match either of these courses? No! The closest match to this bearing was about 258 o True, and this only with the highest (worst) ELS of ABABABAB at skip -139,472. The requirement for ELS maps is that they are within one degree of the known or pre-stated course. So the moment we pre-specify the required course is the moment we begin to separate the wheat from the chaff. The bulk of matrices out there on the Internet and in published books do not have this requirement. Therefore caveat emptor - let the buyer beware before accepting such matrices as of positive value. The moment we drop the position requirement, we obviously make it far easier to obtain matrix key term matches. It is true that matrices with large numbers of a-priori key terms in a very tight (small) area will be significant, but all too often as researchers add to the number of terms, they continue to add to the size of the matrix allowed to find all the terms. Really large matrices (with several thousand letters) are either of very limited use or no scientific value.
Barry S. Roffman, Updated 9/12/2014