- Reply to : Jan Sammer

>> This means that no parabolic jolt is implied.

What is noticeable about the actual figures is that 30 and 60 belong to the

sexagesimal system common in Mesopotamia while 100 belongs to the decimal

system characteristic of Egyptian mathematics. In GMark one would be led to

expect the progression 30, 60, 120, but instead one gets 30, 60, 100. I

wonder if this fact is of any significance <<

Personally, with a mathematical background, I see the sequence 30, 60, 100

in terms of triangular numbers 3, 6, 10 (each multiplied by 10) and

lending itself to a graphic demonstration, thus :-

* ;

** ;

= 30 ;

* ;

** ;

*** ;

= 60 ;

* ;

** ;

*** ;

**** ;

= 100

Is it possible that Jesus used a graphical demonstration in his teaching

(with collections of objects that were gradually built up into triangles -

the rule of three again) and thus arrived at the sequence 30, 60, 100 ?

Richard.

E-mail from: Richard Mallett, 01-Jul-2001 - From: Richard Mallett:

> Personally, with a mathematical background, I see the sequence 30, 60, 100

I am not sure that you are right in your solution (my reservations have

> in terms of triangular numbers 3, 6, 10 (each multiplied by 10) and

> lending itself to a graphic demonstration, thus :-

>

> * ;

> ** ;

> = 30 ;

>

> * ;

> ** ;

> *** ;

> = 60 ;

>

> * ;

> ** ;

> *** ;

> **** ;

> = 100

>

> Is it possible that Jesus used a graphical demonstration in his teaching

> (with collections of objects that were gradually built up into triangles -

> the rule of three again) and thus arrived at the sequence 30, 60, 100 ?

>

> Richard.

>

mainly to do with the chopped-off zeroes), but I appreciate the effort at

dealing with the actual figures, rather than just discussing whether they're

reasonable, disproportionate, ascending or descending. Frankly I do not

think we have a satisfactory solution yet.

Jan - Richard mallet notes:

>>Personally, with a mathematical background, I see the sequence 30,

60, 100

in terms of triangular numbers 3, 6, 10 (each multiplied by 10) and

lending itself to a graphic demonstration, thus :-

* ;

** ;

= 30 ;

* ;

** ;

*** ;

= 60 ;

* ;

** ;

*** ;

**** ;

= 100

Is it possible that Jesus used a graphical demonstration in his

teaching

(with collections of objects that were gradually built up into

triangles -

the rule of three again) and thus arrived at the sequence 30, 60, 100

?<<

This seems to most directly address Ted's interest in the possible

meaning of the numeric progression found in the parable. I suspected

some sort of progression was being used, but was at a total loss to

figure out what it came from. What does it all mean in interpretive

terms, though? It would suggest that the author of the parable was

mathematically inclined, and familiar with progressions. Perhaps a bit

of Gematria was intended.

Respectfully,

Dave Hindley

Cleveland, Ohio, USA - Richard mallet notes:
>>Personally, with a mathematical background, I see the sequence 30, 60,

100 in terms of triangular numbers 3, 6, 10 (each multiplied by 10) and

>>lending itself to a graphic demonstration, thus :-

These numbers can be precisely derived at least two different ways, one

as a numerical sequence, one as points on a parabola, as follows:

30 = 2 * 15

60 = 3 * 20

100 = 4 * 25

This makes the pattern obvious. These numbers can also be found in the

following equation (which is a parabola, by the way):

y = 5x^2+15x+10

Substituting the values of 1, 2 and 3 for x will yield 30, 60 and 100

for y.

Interpretation is hardly my strong suit, but these numbers do not go

along a linear path. They continue to get bigger on an exponential

basis. For example, the next numbers would by 150, 210, 280, 360, 450,

550 and 660. Whatever is being referenced in the parable, it seems fair

to me to say that the return on investment will not be linear, but

exponential, and maybe that's the point of the parable.

Just my modest 2¢.

Russ Conte - And then we have to ask ourselves:

(1) What esoteric meaning does the parabola have?

(2) What esoteric meanings lie in the numbers you and others have provided here?

I think you're onto something here. Just my 2 cents as well.*S*

Barb Leger

Russ Conte wrote:

> Richard mallet notes:

> >>Personally, with a mathematical background, I see the sequence 30, 60,

> 100 in terms of triangular numbers 3, 6, 10 (each multiplied by 10) and

> >>lending itself to a graphic demonstration, thus :-

>

> These numbers can be precisely derived at least two different ways, one

> as a numerical sequence, one as points on a parabola, as follows:

>

> 30 = 2 * 15

> 60 = 3 * 20

> 100 = 4 * 25

>

> This makes the pattern obvious. These numbers can also be found in the

> following equation (which is a parabola, by the way):

>

> y = 5x^2+15x+10

>

> Substituting the values of 1, 2 and 3 for x will yield 30, 60 and 100

> for y.

>

> Interpretation is hardly my strong suit, but these numbers do not go

> along a linear path. They continue to get bigger on an exponential

> basis. For example, the next numbers would by 150, 210, 280, 360, 450,

> 550 and 660. Whatever is being referenced in the parable, it seems fair

> to me to say that the return on investment will not be linear, but

> exponential, and maybe that's the point of the parable.

>

>

> Just my modest 2¢.

>

> Russ Conte

>