Jump to content

Mystery to '1001001' solved?


Maestro
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (different strings @ May 26 2008, 04:20 AM)
QUOTE (Maestro @ May 26 2008, 03:20 PM)
QUOTE (OriginalFan @ May 25 2008, 06:05 PM)
QUOTE (Maestro @ May 24 2008, 11:33 PM)
Splitting 2112 makes perfect sense to the casual Rush fan.

Splitting 2112 yeilds the integers  21  and  12 repectively...

Now, if we take the integers of The Cask of  '43 - four and three repectively- and reverse them, this yeilds the integers 3 and 4.

Now, if we take the integer 21 and divide it by the all-powerful 3, this returns the number 7 and, by the same logic, if we divide the integer 12 by the integer 4 this returns our all-powerful number 3.

Now if we concatinate 7 and 3 this yeilds the decimal number 73 -which in ASCII Code represents the letter 'I'

What was Ayn Rand's theme in Anthem? The suppression of individuality?

If splitting 2112 by the The Cask of '43 yeilds 73, and 73 = 'I' and 'I' = 1001001, then it follows that 'I'=2112.

You see?  It all makes perfect sense!    rofl3.gif


III.

Will you marry me?

 

 

biggrin.gif

 

 

 

I love the way your mind works!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

K

Noone's ever proposed to Moi before! How Untraditionally Sweet!

 

 

 

blush4.gif

 

 

 

smile.gif

 

 

III.

laugh.gif So is that a yes Maestro confused13.gif rofl3.gif

That's a definate I don't perhaps maybe know wink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Maestro @ May 26 2008, 11:41 AM)
QUOTE (different strings @ May 26 2008, 04:20 AM)
QUOTE (Maestro @ May 26 2008, 03:20 PM)
QUOTE (OriginalFan @ May 25 2008, 06:05 PM)
QUOTE (Maestro @ May 24 2008, 11:33 PM)
Splitting 2112 makes perfect sense to the casual Rush fan.

Splitting 2112 yeilds the integers  21  and  12 repectively...

Now, if we take the integers of The Cask of  '43 - four and three repectively- and reverse them, this yeilds the integers 3 and 4.

Now, if we take the integer 21 and divide it by the all-powerful 3, this returns the number 7 and, by the same logic, if we divide the integer 12 by the integer 4 this returns our all-powerful number 3.

Now if we concatinate 7 and 3 this yeilds the decimal number 73 -which in ASCII Code represents the letter 'I'

What was Ayn Rand's theme in Anthem? The suppression of individuality?

If splitting 2112 by the The Cask of '43 yeilds 73, and 73 = 'I' and 'I' = 1001001, then it follows that 'I'=2112.

You see?  It all makes perfect sense!    rofl3.gif


III.

Will you marry me?

 

 

biggrin.gif

 

 

 

I love the way your mind works!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

K

Noone's ever proposed to Moi before! How Untraditionally Sweet!

 

 

 

blush4.gif

 

 

 

smile.gif

 

 

III.

laugh.gif So is that a yes Maestro confused13.gif rofl3.gif

That's a definate I don't perhaps maybe know wink.gif

ph34r.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PLEASE, stop cool10.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (nimagraven @ May 26 2008, 03:56 PM)
I still don't get how it loosely equates to 2112.

I even added them both together.... In binary.. And the number wasn't divisble by 8 tongue.gif.

I think he just means you can derive 1001001 from 2112 and 43, and thats the link

 

I hope so anyway, else its way beyond me comp26.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (J0N @ May 29 2008, 02:51 AM)
QUOTE (nimagraven @ May 26 2008, 03:56 PM)
I still don't get how it loosely equates to 2112.

I even added them both together.... In binary.. And the number wasn't divisble by 8 tongue.gif.

I think he just means you can derive 1001001 from 2112 and 43, and thats the link

 

I hope so anyway, else its way beyond me comp26.gif

1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif

1022.gif We Have A Winner!!!!!! 1022.gif

1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Maestro @ May 29 2008, 12:17 PM)
QUOTE (J0N @ May 29 2008, 02:51 AM)
QUOTE (nimagraven @ May 26 2008, 03:56 PM)
I still don't get how it loosely equates to 2112.

I even added them both together.... In binary.. And the number wasn't divisble by 8 tongue.gif.

I think he just means you can derive 1001001 from 2112 and 43, and thats the link

 

I hope so anyway, else its way beyond me comp26.gif

1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif

1022.gif We Have A Winner!!!!!! 1022.gif

1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif

Not really.

 

You're just putting a lot of useless ends together to derive a meaning that no one else had seen/thought of before.

 

That's not really meaningful, it's like the six degrees of separation hypothesis. It's just a likelihood not that it was actually DEVISED around that.

 

That's why I still maintain that there isn't really a link. More of coincidence than anything.

 

Now if you could get 2112 and 1001001 to actually mean something without adding just a lyric into the equation, I'd be impressed, until then I'm nonplussed over it logically, because it's a song lyric mixed with two names of songs. Plus, 2112 is never a lyric in 2112, yet Cask of '43 is. Just sayin', I don't really think it's fair to compare two separate classes and a property in a separate class (Hey.. We HAVE been talking binary and all) wink.gif.

 

I personally don't believe Neil Peart is some kind of grand master of math that sat there and did all the workings out to make all this fit - he's a musician and his songs tend to have a meaning, but I don't really think he went to all this trouble lol. I mean, it's possible, but it's also highly unlikely.

 

It's kind of like putting poop in cake. Lots of ingredients make cake, but it doesn't mean it'll taste good if you put the poop in the cake wink.gif. Thus, the end result in a way is garbage (Though I mean this in the nicest way possible, Maestro). GIGO and all that smile.gif. Yet another computing term I thought I'd throw in LOL.

 

It just so happens, you can mix the ingredients together, but does the end result mean it's a good or correct one? Well, that's highly debatable smile.gif.

Edited by nimagraven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (nimagraven @ May 29 2008, 06:36 PM)
QUOTE (Maestro @ May 29 2008, 12:17 PM)
QUOTE (J0N @ May 29 2008, 02:51 AM)
QUOTE (nimagraven @ May 26 2008, 03:56 PM)
I still don't get how it loosely equates to 2112.

I even added them both together.... In binary.. And the number wasn't divisble by 8 tongue.gif.

I think he just means you can derive 1001001 from 2112 and 43, and thats the link

 

I hope so anyway, else its way beyond me comp26.gif

1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif

1022.gif We Have A Winner!!!!!! 1022.gif

1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif

Not really.

 

You're just putting a lot of useless ends together to derive a meaning that no one else had seen/thought of before.

 

That's not really meaningful, it's like the six degrees of separation hypothesis. It's just a likelihood not that it was actually DEVISED around that.

 

That's why I still maintain that there isn't really a link. More of coincidence than anything.

 

Now if you could get 2112 and 1001001 to actually mean something without adding just a lyric into the equation, I'd be impressed, until then I'm nonplussed over it logically, because it's a song lyric mixed with two names of songs. Plus, 2112 is never a lyric in 2112, yet Cask of '43 is. Just sayin', I don't really think it's fair to compare two separate classes and a property in a separate class (Hey.. We HAVE been talking binary and all) wink.gif.

 

I personally don't believe Neil Peart is some kind of grand master of math that sat there and did all the workings out to make all this fit - he's a musician and his songs tend to have a meaning, but I don't really think he went to all this trouble lol. I mean, it's possible, but it's also highly unlikely.

 

It's kind of like putting poop in cake. Lots of ingredients make cake, but it doesn't mean it'll taste good if you put the poop in the cake wink.gif. Thus, the end result in a way is garbage (Though I mean this in the nicest way possible, Maestro). GIGO and all that smile.gif. Yet another computing term I thought I'd throw in LOL.

 

It just so happens, you can mix the ingredients together, but does the end result mean it's a good or correct one? Well, that's highly debatable smile.gif.

Shhhhh! I was winning sad.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (nimagraven @ May 29 2008, 10:36 AM)
QUOTE (Maestro @ May 29 2008, 12:17 PM)
QUOTE (J0N @ May 29 2008, 02:51 AM)
QUOTE (nimagraven @ May 26 2008, 03:56 PM)
I still don't get how it loosely equates to 2112.

I even added them both together.... In binary.. And the number wasn't divisble by 8 tongue.gif.

I think he just means you can derive 1001001 from 2112 and 43, and thats the link

 

I hope so anyway, else its way beyond me comp26.gif

1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif

1022.gif We Have A Winner!!!!!! 1022.gif

1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif 1022.gif

Not really.

 

You're just putting a lot of useless ends together to derive a meaning that no one else had seen/thought of before.

 

That's not really meaningful, it's like the six degrees of separation hypothesis. It's just a likelihood not that it was actually DEVISED around that.

 

That's why I still maintain that there isn't really a link. More of coincidence than anything.

 

Now if you could get 2112 and 1001001 to actually mean something without adding just a lyric into the equation, I'd be impressed, until then I'm nonplussed over it logically, because it's a song lyric mixed with two names of songs. Plus, 2112 is never a lyric in 2112, yet Cask of '43 is. Just sayin', I don't really think it's fair to compare two separate classes and a property in a separate class (Hey.. We HAVE been talking binary and all) wink.gif.

 

I personally don't believe Neil Peart is some kind of grand master of math that sat there and did all the workings out to make all this fit - he's a musician and his songs tend to have a meaning, but I don't really think he went to all this trouble lol. I mean, it's possible, but it's also highly unlikely.

 

It's kind of like putting poop in cake. Lots of ingredients make cake, but it doesn't mean it'll taste good if you put the poop in the cake wink.gif. Thus, the end result in a way is garbage (Though I mean this in the nicest way possible, Maestro). GIGO and all that smile.gif. Yet another computing term I thought I'd throw in LOL.

 

It just so happens, you can mix the ingredients together, but does the end result mean it's a good or correct one? Well, that's highly debatable smile.gif.

Oh... ...I dunno...

 

It was only a casual observation in the first place; the [1001001]='I' 'argument' is a very old [1985]. I was simple trying to have bit of fun with it. No big deal. Garbage In, Garbage Out. wink.gif

 

But then again... ...Not that Neil had/has anything to do with it [it would seems like an 'Alex-Sot-Of-Thing' to me -maybe even Hugh Syme's]; but, the puppet master left his marionette's 'hand-control' on the reverse of Farewell To Kings in the shape of an "X-1"

 

And it takes two line-segments to form an 'X' and one line segment to form a 1 -and we all know [2+1] = 3 (most of the time) smile.gif

 

Not to mention the bones going out the window in the insert on Roll The Bones are also in the shape of "X-1" (or "1-X", depending on your point of view...)

 

And it goes without mention that the majority of the pips on the AlbumArt dice from Roll The Bones are themselves, indeed number 3; and, if you were to hold said AlbumArt upsidedown in a mirror RUSH could be made out to be LAZY...

 

And I'm STILL counting all the references to The All Powerful Number 3 on Moving Pictures alone...

 

Again... ...These are all old observations intened for the enjoyment or bemusement and/or befuddling of The Casual Rush fan.

 

Just coincidence?

Who knows?

 

Still makes Perfect Sense to me... wink.gif

It was meant in good, clean fun. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

In no way am I an 'Offical Source' of information.

 

No harm, no foul.

 

 

III.

Edited by Maestro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

O& incidentally: Not that it really means anything; but if we were to take two's complement of 1001001 [i.e., 0110110], split that, then we would have:

 

[0110] & [0110].

 

Do I detect a some sort of familar form of symmetry here.

 

How do the digits from that album go?

 

[2112] or something like that?

 

Its only obvious; there is a certain Order to The Universe!

 

 

wacko.gif cool10.gif 653.gif bekloppt.gif

 

 

music.gif

 

 

O& BTW, Jon... ...You did 'Win.' wink.gif

 

Congradulations!

 

 

III.

Edited by Maestro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (telegraphcreeklocal @ May 29 2008, 08:28 PM)
QUOTE (Maestro @ May 29 2008, 08:24 PM)
Just a post to resurrect the thread!  smile.gif

Hows it up there in Redding! Hilltop drive ring a bell. It rhymes with Hell... 2.gif 1022.gif

Local News: Redding's okay but only just; Red Bluff sucks out loud; Eureka's better than both/either. It's my destination. Changing residence next year.

 

Mount Shasta's still in tact (for now) Mount Shasta Mall is what it is. Just caught Mannhiem Steamroller at the Convention Center last month. Weaverville almost burned to the ground last year.

 

Shasta Lake is always big fun! smile.gif

 

 

Thanx for asking.

 

 

III.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Maestro @ May 29 2008, 04:33 PM)
O& incidentally: Not that it really means anything; but if we were to take two's complement of 1001001 [i.e., 0110110], split that, then we would have:

[0110] & [0110].

Do I detect a some sort of familar form of symmetry here.

How do the digits from that album go?

[2112] or something like that?

Its only obvious; there is a certain Order to The Universe! 


wacko.gif  cool10.gif  653.gif  bekloppt.gif


music.gif


O& BTW, Jon...  ...You did 'Win.'  wink.gif

Congradulations!


III.

Yes, except it's rather like clutching at straws, which is kind of the point.

 

Plus, you use the same zero twice to come to your conclusion, which could potentially instantly makes it false wink.gif. The real answer is that you come up with 0110 and 110. The fact that there's symmetry there is the simple fact that it's a coincidence. In binary, it's quite easy to get a number that's symetrical. Especially because it's only 7 bits wink.gif. Try it in 32, and I think you might find a problem. Again, BECAUSE 0110 and 0110 are not able to be derived in ASCII (Except for the 0110 and 011 which can be derived in ASCII) you come across a problem. You are setting a 0 constant to a parity, which is false. A parity can be even or odd, and this case it is constantly even. That is an impossibility in itself, which is why your new deduction doesn't work nor does it make any sense in the mathematical scheme of things. The only way it WOULD work was if you were talking about a machine that worked in octets. Then yes, they WOULD set the parity bit to zero. HOWEVER, you come across a fundamental problem that you have added a 0 in the middle of the binary.. And not at the end wink.gif. In theory, the correct answer you're looking for is 0110 and 110(0)(1) which completely breaks the symmetry and is actually the correct version you are looking for smile.gif

 

Again, I'm talking about ASCII because ASCII runs in 7 bits. We've deduced that 1001001 is 73/43/I and therefore, any binary number you start messing around with in 7 bits, for the sake of this argument, since you can't change the meaning if you change the 1001001 formula (because that'd break the connection to I etc) it is 7 bit ASCII.

 

Sorry. You won't win me over. I still remain unconvinced and will still argue this one. There's too many logical breaks in it.

 

Forgot to add before I had to go catch my public transport that you can't get symetry from 7 bits. If 1001001 was symetrical it'd be 10011001 and the result would be 01100110. Of course, you could still say there's parity on top of that, but we just found out we = null on that anyway :/. new_thumbsupsmileyanim.gif

Edited by nimagraven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Maestro @ May 26 2008, 12:41 PM)
QUOTE (different strings @ May 26 2008, 04:20 AM)
QUOTE (Maestro @ May 26 2008, 03:20 PM)
QUOTE (OriginalFan @ May 25 2008, 06:05 PM)
QUOTE (Maestro @ May 24 2008, 11:33 PM)
Splitting 2112 makes perfect sense to the casual Rush fan.

Splitting 2112 yeilds the integers  21  and  12 repectively...

Now, if we take the integers of The Cask of  '43 - four and three repectively- and reverse them, this yeilds the integers 3 and 4.

Now, if we take the integer 21 and divide it by the all-powerful 3, this returns the number 7 and, by the same logic, if we divide the integer 12 by the integer 4 this returns our all-powerful number 3.

Now if we concatinate 7 and 3 this yeilds the decimal number 73 -which in ASCII Code represents the letter 'I'

What was Ayn Rand's theme in Anthem? The suppression of individuality?

If splitting 2112 by the The Cask of '43 yeilds 73, and 73 = 'I' and 'I' = 1001001, then it follows that 'I'=2112.

You see?  It all makes perfect sense!    rofl3.gif

III.

Will you marry me?

 

biggrin.gif

 

I love the way your mind works!

 

K

Noone's ever proposed to Moi before! How Untraditionally Sweet!

 

blush4.gif

 

smile.gif

 

 

III.

laugh.gif So is that a yes Maestro confused13.gif rofl3.gif

That's a definate I don't perhaps maybe know wink.gif

blush4.gif Ah well... I tried laugh.gif

 

Untraditional yes.gif

 

 

 

Kismet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (nimagraven @ May 29 2008, 10:43 PM)
QUOTE (Maestro @ May 29 2008, 04:33 PM)
O& incidentally: Not that it really means anything; but if we were to take two's complement of 1001001 [i.e., 0110110], split that, then we would have:

[0110] & [0110].

Do I detect a some sort of familar form of symmetry here?

How do the digits from that album go?

[2112] or something like that?

Its only obvious; there is a certain Order to The Universe! 


wacko.gif  cool10.gif  653.gif  bekloppt.gif


music.gif


O& BTW, Jon...  ...You did 'Win.'  wink.gif

Congradulations!


III.

 

...Plus, you use the same zero twice to come to your conclusion, which could potentially instantly makes it false wink.gif...

 

...You are setting a 0 constant to a parity, which is false. A parity can be even or odd, and this case it is constantly even...

 

...The only way it WOULD work was if you were talking about a machine that worked in octets. Then yes, they WOULD set the parity bit to zero....

 

...HOWEVER, you come across a fundamental problem that you have added a 0 in the middle of the binary.. And not at the end wink.gif.

 

...In theory, the correct answer you're looking for is 0110 and 110(0)(1) which completely breaks the symmetry...

 

...Again, I'm talking about ASCII because ASCII runs in 7 bits...

 

 

We've deduced that 1001001 is 73/43/I and therefore, any binary number you start messing around with in 7 bits, for the sake of this argument, since you can't change the meaning if you change the 1001001 formula (because that'd break the connection to I etc) it is 7 bit ASCII.

 

Forgot to add before I had to go catch my public transport that you can't get symetry from 7 bits...

 

If 1001001 was symetrical it'd be 10011001 and the result would be 01100110....

 

I concede the argument...

 

It is TRUE... I, in my haste, inadvertantly added an imaginary zero mid-string where I shouldn't have... [0110 [j(0)]110] wink.gif

 

An oversite... ...Simply because someone wants something to be true doesn't make it so; but such a desire can influence one's perception...

 

Such was my case in this situation...

 

I know bits can be [and sometimes, for a host of reasons must be] added to the end of 7-bit byte; but, never, for any LOGICAL reason should a bit be slipped into the middle of a word...

 

Here I am mistaken and freely admit it...

 

Indeed, had I been more objective, had I slowed myself down a bit wink.gif I'd have caught myself and realized the symmetry I sought was indeed, the last string you mentioned: [01100110]!

 

Thanx for pointing out my error...

[Can't blame a guy for trying!!!]

 

Octal... ...Haven't heard that in an aeon.

 

Three-bit bytes! smile.gif

How quaint!

 

 

III.

Edited by Maestro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (OriginalFan @ May 30 2008, 01:35 PM)
QUOTE (Maestro @ May 26 2008, 12:41 PM)
QUOTE (different strings @ May 26 2008, 04:20 AM)
QUOTE (Maestro @ May 26 2008, 03:20 PM)
QUOTE (OriginalFan @ May 25 2008, 06:05 PM)
QUOTE (Maestro @ May 24 2008, 11:33 PM)
Splitting 2112 makes perfect sense to the casual Rush fan.

Splitting 2112 yeilds the integers  21  and  12 repectively...

Now, if we take the integers of The Cask of  '43 - four and three repectively- and reverse them, this yeilds the integers 3 and 4.

Now, if we take the integer 21 and divide it by the all-powerful 3, this returns the number 7 and, by the same logic, if we divide the integer 12 by the integer 4 this returns our all-powerful number 3.

Now if we concatinate 7 and 3 this yeilds the decimal number 73 -which in ASCII Code represents the letter 'I'

What was Ayn Rand's theme in Anthem? The suppression of individuality?

If splitting 2112 by the The Cask of '43 yeilds 73, and 73 = 'I' and 'I' = 1001001, then it follows that 'I'=2112.

You see?  It all makes perfect sense!    rofl3.gif

III.

Will you marry me?

 

biggrin.gif

 

I love the way your mind works!

 

K

Noone's ever proposed to Moi before! How Untraditionally Sweet!

 

blush4.gif

 

smile.gif

 

 

III.

laugh.gif So is that a yes Maestro confused13.gif rofl3.gif

That's a definate I don't perhaps maybe know wink.gif

blush4.gif Ah well... I tried laugh.gif

 

Untraditional yes.gif

 

 

 

Kismet

She gives up to easily, huh peeps? wink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, if we split 2112d [an even integer] by 33d [an odd interger] it yeilds 64d -which we all know is 2^6 or 00I0 0000b, correct ? wink.gif Edited by Maestro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know if it was mentioned, but there's no mystery to 1001001. That's binary code, used in all computers. That's the language that computers speak. They're using the metaphor of machines in the song, and that's just something to represent that in the chorus.

 

They're basically saying the computer has gone mad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Maestro @ May 25 2008, 12:33 AM)
Splitting 2112 makes perfect sense to the casual Rush fan.

Splitting 2112 yeilds the integers 21 and 12 repectively...

Now, if we take the integers of The Cask of '43 - four and three repectively- and reverse them, this yeilds the integers 3 and 4.

Now, if we take the integer 21 and divide it by the all-powerful 3, this returns the number 7 and, by the same logic, if we divide the integer 12 by the integer 4 this returns our all-powerful number 3.

Now if we concatinate 7 and 3 this yeilds the decimal number 73 -which in ASCII Code represents the letter 'I'

What was Ayn Rand's theme in Anthem? The suppression of individuality?

If splitting 2112 by the The Cask of '43 yeilds 73, and 73 = 'I' and 'I' = 1001001, then it follows that 'I'=2112.

You see? It all makes perfect sense! rofl3.gif


III.

I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND LOST NOW! ohmy.gif common001.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...