A rose, Luo, by any other number would smell as sweet

Obviously, Romeo misplaced "name" for "rose" and he was envisioning Juliet and not Luo Clement.  Just as obvious to any reader of this blog, I maintain the number of a name is not a device of the never having existed Luo Clement but WD Gann.

Where are we going?  Is the name the stuff of which a person's "number" is made in this modern era?  Or is a person's number, the number?  The cell phone number.

How important was the name, and particularly, the given name in the age that Mr. Gann seemed to have an attraction?  Let's take medieval Scotland and Sir Robert Gordon 1 Baronet of Gordonshire (and later 1st Baronet of Nova Scotia).  How would a contemporary of Sir Robert, say Lord Francis Bacon or John Dee, send a correspondence to him?

Okay, you're a courier and you've got the letter and all it says is Sir Robert Gordon, 1st Baronet of Gordonshire and has a wax seal.  Duh, you go to Gordonshire and find a village within it, preferably the largest.  A bit dusty from the ride, you visit the local pub and ask the bartender where to find Clan Gordon.  The directions are go to the north end of town and take the main road 30 miles north.  Pass Clan Sinclair's castle on the right, pass Clan Douglas' castle on the left and take the next castle on the left.  Hmmm, that name sounds a lot like Claire Douglas.  Clan Sinclair as in Clan St Claire…didn't they build Rosslyn….  Surely not.  Clan Douglas of Sir Robert de Bruce Douglas whose heart was delivered to Jerusalem upon his death in battle?  And Sir Robert Gordon….Baronet of Nova Scotia?  Where fore art thee Peter Amundsen for clarification

There you find yourself a couple hours later staring at the Gordon emblem, knocking on the giant door with the brass knocker.  "Is Robert available to take private correspondence from Lord Francis?"  To which the doorman responds, "Are you addressing Sir Robert Gordon 1st Baronet or his grandson, soon-to-be 3rd Baronet?"  Of course, the letter finds its way to Sir Robert the 1st.

The process is identifying a person in the 1600s is 1) find a place close by using the general location, Gordonshire, 2) find the physical mapping to the closer area where the person might be, namely the Gordon castle, identified by the last name and 3) ask for the person by the specific first name.  The smallest, most personal and most specific name, the given name, Robert.

Is it any wonder the most important number, the name number, identified by Luo Clement (err WDG) is the given name?  It is by far the most personal.  It is the "final mile" in finding a specific person.

And now?  Is the name as important.  How many James Ross' are there across the nation.  You still need the physical parameters (state, city, street) to get to me.  And how unremarkable is "James" by itself?

In the old days (hmmm, a mere decade ago), the one land telephone line in the typical house would get a person to the "clan" homestead with the three digit state code, three digit local exchange code and the unique four digit code.  Still, a call to that land line number only got you to the "doorman" of the clan and, in a household of 4, only a 25% chance of getting the person sought.  Not a personal connection.

But now, we have the cell phone.  That last 4 digits is exact and personal.  For many years I knew myself as "Jim" or Jimmy" or "James".  For many college years (too many), I thought of myself as 4633 (SSN) almost as much as the former.  Now, with 20+ years as cell number 3459 (last 4 digits of my cell number), perhaps I'm of that vibration.

How does one most quickly 'get to' another in these days?  The number.  Pure number.  And the unique component of the cell number is the last four digits; the previous 6 only get the caller close.  The last four get to you exactly.  Not to the household.  But to you personally, just as the given name completed the last leg of the seeking, so does the last four digits of modern communication.

SO, can the last four digits indicate one's vibration?  For me its a moot question.  The number of James is '3' and the number of 3459 is '3'.  Interestingly, my SSN would be a 7; concatenate either the name or cell number and the SSN and you have 37 and 33.   Concatenate again and we have 3733.  And what do we find on line 3733 of "The Tunnel Thru the Air" prey tell?

Why, we find the "Map" that I blogged about two days ago.  A treasure map of cycle and price dynamic information?  I do not believe in coincidences as I've said before.

A name is with you for your life unless it is a bad vibration.  In which case, Luo says change it.  Your cellular number may be even more personal.  If Apple has its way, it will be on your wrist (Applewatch) in the next 10 years.  And if the NSA has its druthers, it will be chip in your flesh.  Now that will get really personal.

WD Gann said his greatest discovery occurred in 1908; and "The Anicient Science of Numbers" was published in 1908.  The personal vibration, was it his great discovery that he published under a fictional name so it would not be discovered?  Is personal vibration, the number determined by name or cell phone, the link between the "curvature of time" and the actual events occurring in a persons life or the time and price pivots on a stock chart?

Jim Ross