What is this about

[CaspianTheDreamer]

Theres a common theme i keep noticing in numerology. And that is the total sum of all the individual digits in a certain number. And, i guess thats supposed to convey or mean something. But i dont really understand how that is mathematically authentic if for example, one would want to explain that to someone... like, what is the basis and foundation of this method?

An example would be a lot of ppl saying 666 would be 6+6+6= 18, and then saying 1+8= 9, and then reaching some form of conclusion from that. This always bugs me a little.

 

[The Alchemist7 [JG]]

Theres a common theme i keep noticing in numerology. And that is the total sum of all the individual digits in a certain number. And, i guess thats supposed to convey or mean something. But i dont really understand how that is mathematically authentic if for example, one would want to explain that to someone... like, what is the basis and foundation of this method?

An example would be a lot of ppl saying 666 would be 6+6+6= 18, and then saying 1+8= 9, and then reaching some form of conclusion from that. This always bugs me a little.

It is possible that in numerelogy all numbers bigger than 10 have the symbolism and meaning of the `root number` (smaller than 10) that results from adding their individual digits. Every single number bigger than 10 can be added this way to result a root number. It is possible that only the numbers from 1 to 10 have a relevant energetical meaning and the rest are just augmentations of these meanings, except of some major numbers like 40, 108, 666 etc. that have their own symbolism and power relating to the planets mostly, but I don't know this as a fact.

 

[Demonic]

Theres a common theme i keep noticing in numerology. And that is the total sum of all the individual digits in a certain number. And, i guess thats supposed to convey or mean something. But i dont really understand how that is mathematically authentic if for example, one would want to explain that to someone... like, what is the basis and foundation of this method?

An example would be a lot of ppl saying 666 would be 6+6+6= 18, and then saying 1+8= 9, and then reaching some form of conclusion from that. This always bugs me a little.

https://ancient-forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=74710&hilit=Numerology&start=50#p367531

Scroll down within that reply to where High Priest Hc answers to luis.