Talk:666 (number)

Way too much stuff

Okay, this is just ridiculous. Some of this is marginally interesting, but honestly, saying what Alt-666 will get you? Why not add what Unicode character 666 is? (There isn't one; it skips straight from 601 to 710.) Or how about adding what day of the week June 6, 1966 was? (It was a Monday.) I mean, come on! I'm considering the removal of:

• All "the 666th X is Y", like "The 666th non square-free number is 1701." This is not a mathematical property of 666.
• Stupidly obvious stuff, like "666 is the 333rd even number".
• The entries about $6^{6^{6}}$ and Ü.

Any opinions? If nobody objects, I'll just delete the stuff, and narrow the entry down mostly to legitimate mathematical properties. —Simetrical 20:17, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you, but it seems you never got around to this. Since nobody has responded to this. I will leave it a couple of days to give people time to object, then do it myself. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 20:47, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hold on, it appears that some of this stuff has gone and some new junk has crept in. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 20:50, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

userbox for people obsessed with 666

{{User:Java7837/Userboxing/User 666thian}}

666	This user is a 666thian; he or she sees the number 666 everywhere. ((view))

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Java7837 (talk • contribs)

John of Patmos encoded Neron Kaisar (Greek) as "666", Nero Caesar (Latin) became "616" in Vulgate

I added... John of Patmos encoded Neron Kaisar as "six hundred sixty-six (666)" by transliterating his name in Greek into Hebrew gematria. Nero Caesar in Latin was transliterated into "six hundred sixteen (616)" through Hebrew gematria. "616" appeared in the Latin Vulgate. 73.85.202.238 (talk) 13:57, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

616 is an alternative to 666 known from a few old Bible manuscripts. I'm not sure how much relevance it has to this article (as opposed to Number of the beast). AnonMoos (talk) 00:23, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

The Unicode value of the words HOLYBIBLE total to 666 but I don't know how to post it without the moderators deleting my contributions and threatening me. DavidRussellLayton (talk) 19:52, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

666

The subject of 666 is misunderstood.The scripture says that 666 is the number of the name of a man.The first six of the most significant digit represent the initial of the first name and the position the alphabet lies on the alphabetical list.The second digit represent the middle name and the last digit represent the surname or tittle.Note that the old Hebrew contained no Vowels but only consonants. Using the Roman letters,a name like Avensius Armenius Augustus would be written as Hvnshhs Hrmnhs Hgsths.If we remove the Vowels from the Roman Alphabets,the letter H lies the sixth place and the name vnshhs Hrmnhs Hgsths can numerically be represeted as 666. 666 is the initials of a name of the Roman emperor Avensius Armenius Augustus.He is the the man referred to in the scripture as the son of Perdition.Note that at his command the second Temple that was at Jerusalem was destroyed by his son Titus Christianitystudycentre (talk) 18:41, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

That's not how it works with traditional examples such as "Nero(n) Kaisar". Ancient isopsephy used the Greek alphabet, and the New Testament is in Greek, so I really don't know why the Latin alphabet would be relevant at all... AnonMoos (talk) 19:48, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Numerology argument

Off-topic and falls foul of WP:NOTFORUM
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Recently, @DavidRussellLayton: added "It's also worth noting that the Unicode values of the words HOLY BIBLE (using capital letters) total to 666. Where H = 72, O = 79, L = 76, Y = 89, B = 66, I = 73, B = 66, L = 76 and E = 69, HOLY BIBLE = 666." to the article. While this is true, (and stems from ASCII code values), it should also be noted that : There are at least 169 words (up to 8 letters long) for which the sum of the ASCII code of its letters adds up to 666. That includes: slinky, royals, runner, buyers, mosque, soviet, sperms, sphinx, floppy, tomboy, zipper and worker. There are millions of words combination where the sum of the letters also adds up to 666, including "A MUSICIAN", "A Bookie", "A PARASITE", "A SERAPHIM", "A SERGEANT", "A RELIGION", "A DIURETIC", "I REASONED", "HE HAMMERS", "AN ANALOGY", "GO EARLIER", "BY ADVICES", "WE ENLARGE", "WE DICTATE", "IS PAYABLE", "NO BATHING", "ON CHARGES", "PACKING IT", "OR PEACHES", "TO DEFLECT", "CUDDLED UP", "MY BANANAS", "Be Giant", "US CALIBER", "He Bears", "Hi Alien", "An Ankle", "Do Cheer", "As Death", "Go Panda", "In China", "Magic Ax", "No Babes", "My Cache", "TIMELY CAB", "BAD SUBURB", "HONEST DAD", "ACE ALWAYS", "RANSOM BAG", "VIRGIN BED", "MORGUE BED", "MORTAL FAD", "MATURE BEE", "POLITE AGE", "VICTIM AID", "LOUNGE FEE", "FLYING BAN", "hi sexy", "LIVING ICE", "ORGASM CAM", "BIG SAVING", "ENTIRE EGG", "BOB SPEAKS", "FILTER CAP", "CLERGY GAL", "MATZAH FAN", "JOCKEY BAR", "KIDNEY MED", "HAM EATERS", "HYDRID CAR", "ODD REPAIR", "ODDEST ELF", "SMOKED BAT", "SAD NOTICE", "FAR CITIES", "ALL RECENT", "CENTER SEA", "HORNED GOD", "GOD wept", "RED CARPET", "FAT GAMERS", "INSANE MAN", "SESAME BAY", "GLORIA AVE", "we poop", "FARMER TED", "CHURCH HAT", "SALTED DIP", "VERBAL MAP", "GINGER PIE", "OLD INCOME", "RAM BUFFER", "THE ORCHID", "GAY BRIDES", "so this", "LILAC HUES", "ONE GAZEBO", "COCKER EYE", "ORB NEBULA", "to pass", "SHARED POD", "up axis", "my ship", "GAMING FIX", "BEFORE MAY", "BENIGN FLU", "TEN MADAMS", "ANY ANIMAL", "ENAMEL CUP", "us dorm", "HANGAR KEY", "PET BAZAAR", "GENIAL BOY", "WAR DEVICE", "NEW DIALOG", "BIGGER BUS", "FRAMED TUB", "CUT BAGELS", "CAPPED TAX", "SAY CHEESE", "DEALER TIP", "CEREAL MIX", "OFFICE RUG", "AGEING LOT", "WET PAJAMA", "FEMALE SEX", "SIX BABIES", "HABILE GUY", "GRAPE JAMS", "ARABIC ZOO", "Bad Goon", "Evil BABE", "NYLON Bag", "Shoe Fad", "DEAD SKUNK", "Folk Aid", "PERKY FACE", "CAFE OWNER", etc... to list a few. And I only looked at words up to 8 letters. If you include bigger words, you can get many more. The point is, to figure out if it is significant or not, you need to look at the bigger picture, i.e. how often that happens in in any random text. Dhrm77 (talk) 18:44, 20 June 2024 (UTC) The words HOLY BIBLE are not random. I can do exactly what you did as well and analyze thousands of word and word combinations at once to find other combinations that total to 666. But HOLY BIBLE is literally the title of the book that discuss the number 666 in Revelation 13:18. None of the words and/or word combinations have anything to do with Revelation 13:18 or the Bible so your analysis is meaningless. The title of the book is not random, and I think that you are the one that is not looking at the big picture and the implications of my point. You're clearly trying to discredit me by throwing irrelevant information in volume at the readers. DavidRussellLayton (talk) 19:41, 20 June 2024 (UTC) Please stop pushing this trivial coincidence. And "HOLY BIBLE" does not sum to 666 when adding up the Unicode values of the characters. It adds to 698 since the Unicode value of the space is 32. Meters (talk) 21:49, 20 June 2024 (UTC) This is all off-topic, not to mention extremely silly. Unicode, ASCII and the English Language didn't even exist when Revelation was written. We don't even mention Unicode or ASCII in the article because they are completely irrelevant to this topic. Per WP:NOTFORUM, I'm rolling this up to avoid further time wasting. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:50, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

New evidence recently published on the subject.

Hi. There is new evidence on the subject of 666 that seems relevant. The edit was deleted by Meters, for what I'm sure he feels were good reasons, but the subject was religion and the edit came with this image https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Divine_Tetractys.png

Also the edit came with this text:

In the book "Proof of God For The Modern Mind" the author asserts that 666 is the sum of the Pythagorean tetractys (0123+456+78+9). It's further posited that this is significant because it provides evidence of intelligent design. Hidden within the equation is a calendar of 365.25 days, which resembles the traditional Jewish calendar.

An ISBN and page numbers were provided. The equation adds to 666. I'm wondering how this isn't relevant?

Thanks for your time. Sneedledee (talk) 21:52, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

• It's not well-written, it's not well-verified. Drmies (talk) 21:56, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

  What can be done to improve the entry? I'm very open to suggestions and thanks for the prompt reply. Doesn't 0123+456+78+9 = 666 not verify that at least it is relevant to the subject? The other information is out of the book and is easily verifiable. Just name the verification required and I'll see what I can do.

  Thanks for the help Sneedledee (talk) 22:03, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

It's poorly written, it's not sourced, that type of numerology is not useful content, and I can't even find a book associated with that ISBN number or that title. Meters (talk) 22:07, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

And even if the ISBN were valid, that would not prove that the book had actually been published, just that an ISBN had been applied for.. Meters (talk) 22:13, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Appreciate the feedback. It's not numerology, it's addition. And if breaking down Roman numerals to create possibilities warrants entry, it seems that the natural numbers in their natural order adding up to 666 should at least warrant mention.

I was fortunate enough to obtain a hand bound copy and saw that this wasn't mention here. The release date is Sunday, so I might have jumped the gun. Sneedledee (talk) 22:14, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I would call claiming that this sum is "Proof of God" and "evidence of intelligent design" numerology. Meters (talk) 22:23, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

And just how is it that you happened to obtain a hand bound copy of this before it was actually published? You might need to read WP:COI. Meters (talk) 22:25, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I can see what you're saying, but the subject was religion so it seemed the relevant section for the other claims which ARE backed up and yes..unbelieveable. (I get it.) It does add to 666 and I can see how it might belong in the earlier math section instead until the book comes out.

It's definitely not numerology, though. 666 reduces to 9 in numerology. Thanks for the help. Sneedledee (talk) 22:27, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

About 15 (or 16? They sound alike) copies were made for friends to beta read. Again, the information wasn't here when I looked and so I tried to add it. (Clumsily, apparently. My apologies.) Sneedledee (talk) 22:31, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

So you have a conflict of interest in adding material about this. Please follow WP:COI. Meters (talk) 22:35, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

If the information is missing from Wikipedia, it seems like it should be there. Never meant it to be a conflict of interest, although I can see how mention of the book in the main article would cross that line. Thanks for pointing that out. It was a little too much excitement on my part. The reference alone is enough. Sorry about that. Sneedledee (talk) 22:36, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I'll wait until publish date I guess. Thanks again for taking some time out of your night. Sneedledee (talk) 22:38, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

No, don't wait for publication and restore it. Just don't add this inappropriate material without consensus. Meters (talk) 00:28, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

It's published independently. Always a bad sign. Drmies (talk) 01:14, 25 July 2024 (UTC)