B B oo o ok k II I II I
Th T he e B B oo o ok k W Wi it th h N No o Na N am m e e
Like the song with the line "the horse with no name," I have chosen to call this little book "The Book With No Name."
The reason being that the idea presented here does not fall into any easy category.
Although it might have been presented along with a general discussion of the Square of Nine chart, the Teleois or the triangular numbers, it seems to fit best here following the information presented in Book I-"The Cycle of Mars" and Book II-"The Great Cycle."
In Book I, I showed how I placed the Square of 144 on the weekly chart of soybeans from the late 1940's and early 1950's and did not learn much of anything until I placed the heliocentric positions of the planets on the chart.
I noted in Book I that when soybeans reached their high of 436 in January, 1948, the planet Mars was crossing Pluto. The crossing during that week could have been at either 133 or 132 degrees. In Book I, I explained some of the possible number combinations if the crossing was at 132 and in Book II, regarding the "Great Cycle," I noted other combinations if the crossing was at 133.
In addition to the "Great Cycle" there is another reason why I thought the crossing was more likely at 133.
In Book I, I made the following statement, presented here in parentheses.
(Did you look at the planetary positions on Jan 15, l948 and
find something interesting? If you did not, try comparing the number of Mars with the other planets. Now what did you find? Correct. You found Mars and Pluto at conjunction at 133.
(That's an interesting number because of its relationship to a
number in "The Tunnel Thru the Air," Gann's novel, and to the "Great Cycle." But that's another work for another time and there is no need to go down that path now.
(It is also interesting because of its position on the Square of Nine chart in relationship to the triangle of the Teleois and their relationship to a paragraph in Gann's discussion of planetary resistance lines on soybeans in his "private papers." In the "new"
course see Section 8, Soy Beans, Price Resistance Levels) It should be noted that I have already discussed the number 133
and its relationship to the "Great Cycle" in Book II of this series,
"The PATTERNS of Gann."
It is that last paragraph quoted above that I will deal with now.
First, we must read that paragraph in Gann's discussion of planetary resistance lines on soybeans in his "private papers." In fact you should read the paragraph several times before proceeding with this book to see if you detect a
PATTERN
or a "lack" of one. I had read that paragraph many times before I learned to look for PATTERNS. And if I had not learned to look for them, the paragraph would have had no significance.
So here is your chance to put to work your search for PATTERN
The paragraph in question is located at the bottom of page one and continues to the top of page two.
Did you read it? Several times? Notice anything unusual? If not give it a good try before moving on.
Got it now?
In this paragraph he is subtracting parts of the circle from the high on soybeans, 436 3/4. All the parts he subtracts are natural numbers (a number without a fraction or decimal) except for one, 236 1/4.
It was this number which caught my eye.
Why did it catch my eye? Why should it have caught yours?
Remember in the introduction to this series and in many other places in this work I said we would be watching for
PATTERN
This number stood out because it was "outside" the PATTERN. It was the only number in the group not a natural number!
It is also the number that Gann subtracts from 436 3/4 and gets the low on soybeans 56 weeks later.
Let's write that number down and put it aside for awhile:
236 1/4 or 236.25
Now look at page 115 of the "old" commodity course (Section 10
#2 M.C. of the "new" course) and read the paragraph on
the divisions of the circle.
Although there are times when Gann divides the circle into
smaller parts, here he ends with the division by 64 which give 5.625 or 5 5/8. So let's write that number down with the other number.
236.25, 5.625
Let's also put down our planetary position which was 133.
236.25, 5.625, 133
Now this is the part which intrigued me. The time from the high of 436 to the low was 56 weeks. This can also be read as 13 months.
The triangle of 13 is 13x7 or 91.
Check the positions of 133 and 91 on the Square of Nine chart.
They are next to each other on the same angle. I will now put down the four numbers discussed above and see if you can make a PATTERN.
236.25, 5.625, 133, 91
Give up? Subtract 91 from 133 and try again.
133-91=42. Now do you have it?
If you said subtracting 91 from 133 gives 42 and 42 times 5.625 equals:
236.25
you are correct!
A coincidence?
Maybe. You have noticed that I made much of the number 56 in Book I and Book II. That was the number of weeks from the high in 1948 to the low in 1949.
If we divide the triangle of 56 by the number of months in a year or the signs in the zodiac we arrive back at
133!
our planetary crossing!
Another coincidence? Again, maybe. But the coincidences noted in Books I, II and III are certainly piling up.
B B oo o ok k IV I V
O O n n T Th h e e S S qu q ua ar re e
C C ha h a pt p te e r r 1 1 -H - Ho ow w D Do o Y Yo ou u M Ma ak ke e a a S Sq qu ua ar re e ? ?
"Do you know how to make squares?"
This is a question I put to a friend recently, a man who had been studying Gann much longer than I had.
He thought for a few seconds and replied, "No, I don't guess I really do."
I had expected what he would say. My friend is no dummy. His answer showed no lack of intelligence. If you don't know the answer, that does not show a lack of yours. I would have said the same thing a few years ago.
Ask 100 persons in downtown New York and you would probably get the same results. Ask doctors, lawyers, Indian chiefs. You might get a couple of right answers from mathematicians. And again you might not.
Someone might get down on the sidewalk with a piece of chalk and draw a box. You would say to them, "That's a nice picture of a square, but how do you make squares? More specifically, how do you make the "natural squares" in order?
And here we will have to pause to answer a question before we go on. We are going to have to answer the question, "What is a natural square?" before we go on to make them.
When Gann used the term "natural square" I had an inclination to ask out loud, "What is an unnatural square? A square is a square.
What is natural or unnatural about it?" I would ask it in the same way that when someone starts talking about a "right angle" I want to ask them about a left angle or a wrong angle.
The answer came when I went through a book on modern math. The
"natural numbers" or as some other books put it, the "counting numbers" are simply the series 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. These are numbers that back in my school days the teacher probably called "whole numbers." That is, numbers without fractions or decimals. But in present day modern math terms the name "whole numbers" is applied to the same series with the exception that the series contains the zero and is made thus: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. More about the number 1 and 0 in the Gann material, but for now we will stick to the "natural numbers."
Since 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc. are the "natural numbers" then the
"natural squares" are the squares made from these natural numbers.
One could build a swimming pool 67.5 by 67.5 feet and have a square swimming pool, but it would not be a swimming pool made of natural squares since the natural numbers do not have fractional numbers. The swimming pool could be 67 by 67 or 68 by 68 or any other
non-fractional number and be a natural square.
Although we may be tempted to use the term "whole number" to differentiate from the fractional numbers, remember that we found that the whole number series contains the zero and in Gann's work there is no 0 times 0 as can be seen from his Square of Nine and Square of Four charts. We will find out why later on.
So now we have learned what a natural number is and what a
natural square is. (By "we" I mean me and all the non-mathematicians in the crowd.)
Let's go back to our original question: "How do you make the natural squares in order numerically? I am adding that new word
"numerically" to let you know we are not drawing squares, we are dealing with them only as numbers.
Well, you might say, we could make them simply by multiplying the natural numbers by themselves (find the second power) in order.
Yes, we could do that and we would have:
1x1 is 1 2x2 is 4 3x3 is 9, etc.
And we would certainly have a PATTERN.
I talked about PATTERNS in the preface and in the other books in this series, but let's pause again for another word about PATTERN.
The PATTERN we seek is one that when established it will be easy to supply the next step in the PATTERN.
For example, if I listed the numbers 100, 99-1/2, 99, 98-1/2,
etc. and asked you to supply the next step you probably would say 98.
That's because you noticed that there is a PATTERN that starts with 100 and counts backwards in increments of one-half.