He was buried in the Mason's section of Green-Wood Cemetery in Brooklyn in plot 37747. If you check on a list of prime numbers, you find that 37747 is the 3995th prime number if you assume 1 is not a prime number or the 3996th if you assume 1 is prime. You can easily compute there's about 12% chance of a his securing a plot having a prime number as its denomination. But the numbers comprising that number; if you add the 3 and 4 you have 4 sevens.
But let's not stop there by any means. Let's take 3X7X7X4X7=4116. And then let's take the four sevens or 7X7X7X7=2401. And 4116 / 2401 = 1.714286. Do you remember the essay on the Philosopher stone numbers of John Dee and WD Gann of 252 and 432, respectively. 432 / 252 = 1.714286. And we know that the Biblical 12 and 7 divided equal 1.714286.
Oh, did I forget to mention, 1.714286 is the Egyptian royal cubit.
Contrivance or coincidence?
Long ago on this Gann journey of mine, I gave up believing in coincidence. Perhaps you might want to re read the essay "Did WD Gann predict the date of his death."
Confirmation of Einstein prediction
You may recall that previous essays provided, in the writer's opinion, a preponderance of evidence that Luo Clement was actually a ghost name of WD Gann. You may further recall that essays tied Luo Clement to the "Einstein Essay Editor" who, in 1920-21 published about 5 essays in Scientific American concurrent with his judging the "Einstein Essay Contest," a contest whose benefactor was Eugene Higgins (relation to Frank Higgins, doubtful but inconclusive). One of the Einstein Editor's choices of reading regarding "Relativity" was Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington's (Cambridge) celebrated "Space Time and Gravitation" Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington (Cambridge). [As a side, the Einstein Editor commented on the prominent omission of either a hypen or comma between the Space Time in the title as perhaps having meaning one might ponder.]
On May 29, 1919, Sir Arthur Eddington traveled to the island of Principe to observe the solar eclipse. Based upon those observations, Eddington was able to confirm a major prediction of Einstein's work; that light was bent by gravity (see HERE).
May 29, 1919 was 96 years ago. There's that 69 / 96 number again that was so interestingly woven into Robert Gordon's birth date, his first business address in New York City ….and the sixth prophecy of 9/11. That 9/11 occurred 69 years and 69 days after the fictional battle of New York / creation of the United Kingdom of the World.
I discovered the May 29, 1919 date significance via the tenuous Luo Clement / Einstein Editor connection on May 29, 2015. Exactly 96 years between the dates.
Geometric points of Force in Space and Bradley Cowan
Frequently dwelled upon quotes of Mr. Gann include his invoking an unsourced quotation of Michael Faraday in which Mr. Faraday is alleged to have said "There is nothing in the universe but mathematical points of force." [I understand this Faraday quote has been found and documented recently.]
I find in Bradley Cowan's "Four-Dimensional Stock Market Structures and Cycles" page 59 "Financial market unfold in price-time within the confines of predetermined points of force."
Of course, Bradley Cowan is a student of Mr. Gann's work so its not so surprising.
It might be worth mentioning that one of the Einstein Editor's essays dwelled on Michael Faraday's having provided free public lectures so that men, unable to afford tuition to a school, could study higher mathematics and physics. Similarly, the never named Einstein Editor taught physics in NYU's night school. I have twice petitioned Scientific American to name the Einstein Editor without success.
Some elegant statements contained in early chapters of Eddington's "Space Time and Gravitation"
From the Prologue- time as the fourth dimension and math and geometry incomplete without it:
From the Prologue- Bertrand Russell commenting on the fallacy of math derived from false axioms:
Perhaps then, math and geometry derived based on the 3 dimensions we "see" is false and, only upon including the fourth dimension, T or time, can we create a correct 'geometry' of reality?
From Chapter 1 "The Fitzgearld Contraction", Rene Descartes on suspending what is "known:"
Again from Chapter 2:
"Length" and "duration"…space and time…denominated in miles and hours. When I think of this paragraph, I think about "Robert Gordon's 7 days" and how we aren't given definitive times of his 20 stops during his trip. We can only derive miles; as the crow flies, East/West miles and North/South miles. Of course, we can derive net miles since he left NYC and returned to that same place of departure. And we can derive net time because we are given the 7am departure from and 'almost' noon return to the 'Mammouth Building' in NYC. But we can only denominate miles in between. Can space and time be denominated into a common measure….miles?
And what about an observer of Robert Gordon's trip from a position on the Sun; how many times would he see the 'moving' RG appear from behind the Earth and how many times would he see the stationary 'Mammouth Building' appear from behind the Earth during those seven days. Was RG time the same as Mammouth Building time or was motion an intervening element?
Just some thoughts,