The expert's chief example; Mr. Gann never mentioned Fibonacci or Phi. I've written on this many times but find one more example this evening. First reprising just a couple cites.
We find Leonardo de Pisa aka Fibonacci on page 71.
We find "Phi" on page 120, buddy buddy with the telestic "Dee."
When we consider John Dee's secret name with Queen Elizabeth I, "007" appears on page 198:
Then we can find Phi again. There are 10 unnumbered pages preceding page 1 in TTTTA. Take page 198 + 10 and 120 + 10 to get their true page numbers and figure their quotient:
(198 + 10) / (120 + 10) = 1.6000 or Fibonacci sequence numbers 8 / 5
Wow, you can do the same thing with page 71, above and page 120.
(120 + 10) / (71 + 10) = 1.6049 or Fibonacci sequence numbers 8 / 5
I couldn't get a word in edgewise as the Gann expert had launched into his world of how he bought the "Gann secret knowledge" by purchasing the papers of a lady astrologer who studied Mr. Gann.
So this is what I realized tonight and its two-fold.
1. Robert Gordon was born on June 9, 1906 which is the 160th day of the year (161st in a leap year). Hmmm, that 160 number looks a lot like, why yes, it is that same 1.6000 seen above X 100; Phi.
But that's not the neatest thing. After all, all Mr. Gann had to do to arrange the fictional birth of Robert Gordon the way he wanted was to call the typesetter.
2. Here's the Houdini flourish. Here's something that is really really tough; arrange the average of your birth date and death date to create Phi:
And June 12 would be the 163rd day of the year... Darn, Mr. Gann missed the more accurate rendition of phi or 1.618 (rounded to 1.62 X 100 =162nd day) by....1 day.
Well, I guess if he shaved a day he would have achieved Phi, but he would have sacrificed his dying at a life span of 77 year and 12 days... That beautiful Biblical combination of 12 and 7 would have become a mere 77 years and 11 days.
I guess we all make tradeoffs.
*******
As to the "Gann expert," perhaps Ralph Waldo E. had something to say in "Intellect:"
I'm kinda glad I didn't get a chance to say anything that day for I'd have been exhibiting my character in a not so gracious way. At least, I would have known, that between the two of us on the phone that day, there weren't any wise men around to "record the verdict."
Jim Ross
Sounds like Norm Winski. What a sales hack. Can't get a word in edgewise. Doesn't trade his own signals.
ReplyDeleteFunny, when I read this I had the exact same thought
DeletePardon the interjection into your conversation. When I was talking to that guy I was like the 2nd grade student waving his hand because I had an answer but the teacher wouldn't call on me. I was frantic to tell him where de Pisa and Phi was in TTTTA but he wouldn't listen. Then I looked at myself and reflected that I knew it was there but I didn't know what he knew. I had the same disease he had. Maybe he was trying to sell me his product out of greed. Or maybe he was trying to help me because he knew things I didn't know and he wanted to help me. Actually, I do think the former was the case but all I can really say is "I don't know."
DeleteThat means, a person must consider the evidence and, thereafter, make the personal decision to believe or not. Hardly a revelatory thought. But a thought a person with a lifelong history of self importance...me... finally realizes.
Thank you, DM, for your interest. Its been an honor for you and others who aren't participative to read my 'inventions' and consider. There are a modest 100 or so people that read this 'stuff.' I hope I'm wrong as I've said before. In which case, I'll gladly stop posting and retire to follow the tenets of "After the Years-Quiet."
Jim
Jim
DeleteYou approach this as Socrates did... you know nothing.... and that makes you the smartest Gann researcher I have ever come across. You are the only one that doesn't KNOW all of Gann's proprietary methods and secrets. You are the only one that isn't selling something.... You are the only dummy of the whole gang apparently ;)
Keep up the good work. Whether you reach a meaningful final conclusion or not.... the journey has been a joy to follow.
Ha!!! If I have a spiritual gift, its that I've come to realize I know nothing. I got here by trying to figure Mr. Gann's methods and look where I've landed; selling doomsday and snake oil on the back of a wagon. And for nothing of recognized value. I do believe I have an inside track on his math methods and I do believe I'll understand them someday. If I do, the price will be high.
DeleteSocrates knew he was the wisest of all men because he asked each of the learned ones, the poet, the politician... and each indicated his knowledge rivaled that of God. Socrates knew that he was the wiser of all mortals he encountered because at least he knew that he didn't have the knowledge of God. As meaningful in the Apology, Socrates knows that the afterlife is good (as he'd already inferred) for otherwise his 'oracle' would have warned him that same day of his end. Paraphrased to his students "I go to my end, you go to live. The question is which is better?"
I know you know the above. Someday, after this spell passes as I hope it does and without incident, I hope to become "less dumb."
Jim
Haha, I've done a dozen disciplines over the years that make sense and 'kinda' work; various astro, Elliott, Carolan, Mikyla.... I find Bradley Cowan's work is 60% of the way to what Mr. Gann knew (or I believe he knew) but even the last 2%, which he doesn't give you if he, himself, knows, is all important.
ReplyDeleteI bring the "expert" up because I saw in him a lot of me; not willing to understand that "I" don't know everything. If you accept Emerson, a person cannot 'know' what another person knows so we should never judge....just observe and record the other's judgement. Let others judge themselves and observe. Each of has a personal duty to observe and weight; to record that which is good and hold tight to it.
What did Mr. Gann 'know?' I think I'm demonstrating (to myself as much as any of the few readers of this blog) he knew more than just market. Personally, I believe his knowledge dwarfed the theoretical knowledge of Einstein, Russell or Hilbert... He encoded what people, if they studied it, would call "miracles." WDG called his insights simply the product of math and science that is otherwise explained, for those who would look and study ("ask, seek, find"), in the Bible. One simple miracle audited in real time appears in the Ticker Interview; 288 trades in 25 days with only 22 losers. There weren't any computers to compute an advanced statistical technique such as in implementing Fourier or Elliot Wave back then. What's the chance of a 95% winner rate in a random walk market? One in however many (infinite) stars in the sky. And I'd add, he took those losers only NOT to be considered something that was totally bizarre. Just my opinion.
If he could judge the market with the perfection of math and science, why did he have a staff of what many variously say 12 to as many as 24 employees? My speculation...he needed that many people to piecemeal make calculations of future events not knowing how the calculations were to be used by him in predicting the future. And he encoded his vision of OUR future in TTTTA. Again, my opinion but I've got a lot of miracles pretty well documented to contest the "randomites."
A great part of my journey which started unknowing its path seems to be coming to a close rapidly. I'll bring all this together in a post this next week to challenge persons of "math and science" to consider the "miracles" and determine for themselves how it might affect their lives.
Thank you for considering these thoughts, extreme as I know they appear,
Jim
I with them, Jim. Keep up the good hunt. If ignorance is bliss that must be why I'm so damned happy. If you are studying what everyone else is studying, it probably isn't the answer!
ReplyDeleteIsn't it noteworthy that so much research is done based on either the plainest reading of very simple courses (watch the 45 degree, watch doubling of time...) or based on comments on the sides of pages which haven't any corroboration of intent (various conjunctions). In contrast, when you solve an enigma you find a thought that was demonstrably intended to be found with hard work and something that is worth more than the simple assertions; a thought that is self proven by virtue of its being purposefully included in an enigma. A thought in plain sight but one that a person needs to struggle to find and 'earn.'
DeleteThanks for considering,
Jim