As things begin to assume something of a holding pattern, perhaps it’s a good time to do a bit of reviewing. Our Founder, Carl Munck, went as far as introducing a lot of redundancy into his materials – very frustrating for long-time followers – to make his publications more “stand-alone” for anyone who might have come along only recently or who might be looking at their first materials on the subject.
The mathematics takes considerable inspiration from the Great Pyramid and its perimeter/height ratio interpreted as 2 Pi. To the best of my knowledge so far, the Pi ratio is literally sacred to the Pi Jedi, as is the basic equation implied by the Great Pyramid, 360 degrees / 2 Pi = radius of a circle.
To Munck, the Great Pyramid represented the ancient Prime Meridian marker of the world, situated at 0 or 360 degrees of latitude, making this basic message even more emphatic, but the importance of Pi or two Pi stands even independently of any concerns about geography.
It should hardly have come as such as surprise recently how easily the ratio 2 Pi can organize groups of ancient metrological units, neatly aligning them like beads on a string, in ways that – as much as I concede that there may be other valid and useful systems that replace the true Pi ratio with the approximation 22/7 – neither relationships between units based on lower square roots, nor approximations like 22/7 can quite achieve.
A Pi Jedi studies the measurements of Giza with the expectation that every number found there should show a notably dramatic response when exposed to the numbers 360, 2 Pi, or the Radian 57.29577951.
The usefulness of 2 Pi hardly ends with connecting ancient units of measurement, however. 2 Pi is one of a select few numbers that can generate impressive series of important numbers if we keep multiplying or dividing by 2 Pi.
This interconnected nature of important numbers allows them, even in practice, to be contained in many ancient monuments or structures. and recovered by using these select few numbers repeatedly in operations of multiplication and division.
That these operations can can be carried out with complete precision in theory helps steer us toward what might be the original intent, among many possibilities and theories.
A basic philosophy here is that any of us who are looking for mathematically important numbers in ancient measurements or monument proportions are looking for stored data, and that a system that permits whole series of important data to be generated though the deliberate combination of the right numbers offers obvious advantages in terms of data capacity and retrieval.
You will hear me talk about what we can do in terms of data storage and retrieval with numbers like 2 Pi, (Pi / 3), or sqrt 60 at as high as the current record of use at the 27th power – 27 important pieces of data stored and rendered retrievable, simply by combing sqrt 60 or its reciprocal with the right number. Two numbers that provide us with 25 additional important numbers, perhaps in the event that we are subjecting our very first monument to such mathematical scrutiny.
Munck’s math works heavily with numbers that resolve into whole numbers if we apply the the Pi ratio, yet they exclude many common whole numbers. Numbers like 7, 11, 13, 17, 21 and etc, are not part of Pi Jedi math.
I don’t recall seeing Munck ever explain things this way why numbers like 7 and 11 aren’t part of his calculations or publications, but we can extrapolate for ourselves that the 360 part of the equation 360 / (2 Pi) = Radius = Radian = 57.29577951 may have been considered just as “sacred” as the 2 Pi part.
These are the whole numbers used in this math – these and whole numbers that can be formed from multiplying and dividing them.
One would think these omissions would be limiting, but in fact we can use multiple approximations to compensate for their loss, which actually affords the system even greater versatility.
In the absence of the number 7 for example, depending on the actual equations, we may see 7 represented as 7.008385550 (in feet, 576 / 100 Remens of 1.216733603), and we might also see it effectively represented as 6.981307008 ((1 / 45) x Pi x 100), allowing for certain equations to work perfectly that otherwise wouldn’t have.
Both of my main candidates for the value of the Indus Foot in modern feet, 1.100874628 and 1.100078967, serve as functional approximations of the excluded number 11 – and there may be others – and so forth.
The same is true with the omitted square roots – in absence of the true square roots of 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, etc, we are afforded with a number of useful and important approximations. The square root of 2, 1.414213562, can be represented, again depending on equations, as 1.413716694 (45 Pi / 10), or 1.412694925 (6 x 1.177245771 / 10).
At least some of these square root approximations are not just seen in theory, but in actual practice as the true ratios between ideal values for ancient units of measurement loosely linked though the square roots of the geometry of circles, squares, cubes, or triangles.
This is also true of the Golden Ratio Phi. Its true form, 1.618033989, is not part of Pi Jedi mathematics. Instead, we are afforded a remarkable variety of amazing approximations scarcely even known outside our own realm, the most notable being Munck’s introduction 1.622311470.
Not only is it stunningly close to some of the ratios formed by important numbers from ancient calendars (Earth Year 365 days / Venus Orbital Period 225 days = 1.622222222), but the number 2 / 1.622311470 may hold the current record for being able to retrieve the longest known string of important data from just two numbers. It is an extremely powerful data storage and retrieval tool.
Pi Jedi math has traded away much, but it may have gained much more.
Rather than memorizing endless important numbers, Pi Jedi math is concerned with leaning to recognize those important numbers, and to remember them though simple formulas, requiring us to actually memorize no more than a dozen or even a half dozen ten digit strings in order to explore the system of numbers, or recreate any part of it, no more difficult than memorizing the telephone numbers of a few friends.
Even learning to recognize only the first few digits of important numbers tells us when to dig deeper to check if we are in fact looking at “that number”.
One isn’t even required to remember that Pi looks like, if their pocket calculator has a Pi key, in order to function effectively as a “Pi Jedi”.
The use of a recursive, self-limited mathematical system like this has in fact automatically filtered out literally trillions of possible ten-digit number strings, ensuring that we will never have to concern ourselves with them. It’s an extremely elegant and logical system for anyone to use, and we know that the ancients certainly had the opportunity – and apparently the motivation – to develop it.
Being a Pi Jedi means, though, having some small amount of devotion to the question of whether part of the history of mathematics has gone missing, just as much history has obviously gone missing, and whether like many other things, decimal mathematics was discovered long before it is usually given credit for.
Carl Munck one described his mathematics as “a science in its infancy”, which has seemingly held even truer than he realized. In spite of many false first steps, the sheer mathematics of it is able to stand on its own.
The question now is whether because of both skepticism and obscurity, it has unfairly fallen to individuals to unravel a very versatile but eventually rather complex mathematical system that it may have taken dozens of very gifted individuals to design.
The closer the subject draws to the subject of ancient calendars as the source of both ancient units of measurement, and the actual proportions of ancient monuments, the more complex things try to become.
Even if the ancients had merely used potentially cumbersome fractions to do so, arranging the motions of planets into a grand scheme of order had to have been one of the greatest early mathematical achievements of mankind. Our modern calendars tend toward being almost embarrassingly simple by comparison.
As always, it begs the question of just what else our ancestors were capable of intellectually. If their achievements in mathematics were half as grand as many of their achievements in architecture, that question may already be at least partly answered, but we will continue to ask.
–Luke Piwalker
Luke Piwalker 