Why would a gematria depend on nanometers? Does a meter have any Jewish meaning?

For that matter, the frequency is in 1/sec (Hertz). Wouldn't a more Jewishly significant way of stating frequency be in 1/cheleq?

-micha
micha | Homepage | 03.07.09 - 7:37 pm | #

Sorry but this is not true. Let me quote Dr. Singer:

First of all, to refer to anything related to murex trunculus as the “tekhelet” molecule assumes their theory is correct, and of course the Dutch scientists did not mention tekhelet, merely murex. More importantly, the statement is just false. Aside from the issue that nanometers has no standing in Torah, the wavelength at maximum absorption varies quite a bit (between 585-621) depending on many factors: bromine substituent, solvent, fabric, season, gender and other individual variation. Moreover, even when the magic 613 was the result, this was for purple, the brominated dye, not the debrominated blue dye used by P’til Tekhelet for dyeing. An article by the British scientist, Chris Cooksey, discusses this. I e-mailed Dr. Cooksey, and he confirmed that the 613 claims of P’til Tekhelet are bogus. He said that many non-chemists are trying to make something from information they don’t understand.
shimon s | 03.11.09 - 11:58 pm | #

First, I never claim the 613nm. I think nm are useless when it comes to Torah. The gematria I posted converts the nm into cubits/amos. The gematria is in units of amos as well. Thus, I am not using nm.

As for the range of absorbtion wavelengths, there is also a range in the size of the amos as mentioned in the Mishnah (the long one, average one, adn short one). Therfore the fact that there is a range is not a problem.
Reuven Meir | 03.16.09 - 1:53 am | #

I'm reading it again and I'm confused. You are not using nm? What are the magic numbers in amoth?

Also, if the range is large enough, you can surely find there the gematria of your name too.
shimon s | 03.16.09 - 9:10 pm | #

We only know wavelengths of chemicals in the units of nm (or any SI unit of measure). For the gematria, I convert the scientific finding into amos. Therefore I have the wavelength in amos, not nm. Then, from the gematria, I get the same number in AMOS. Therefore I do not "use" nm othere then that the original science result is in nm, and so I must convert it to amos.

(And yes, wiggle room is always nice to have in gematrias But here its not THAT wiggly)
Reuven Meir | 03.19.09 - 12:59 am | #