Multi-Dimensional Design Aspects of the Bible Code
Part 1
by Roy A. Reinhold

I am revealing a secret of the Bible code that I discovered 2-3 years ago, but have never fully explained before. It is the multi-dimensional aspect of the Bible code. Without this knowledge, a Bible code researcher is just touching the fringe of knowledge in the Bible code. By correctly applying this knowledge, you will greatly expand your success without much effort.

In the last 8 months or so, two Bible code programs have implemented my discovery, after I cajoled them into it. The only two Bible code programs that currently have the multi-dimensional aspect of the Bible code built in, are ABC Decoder PRO/Bible Codes 2000 and CodeFinder: Millennium Edition. Even though users of these three programs have the function at their beck and call, almost all don't understand the significance of it, and the science behind it. This article will fully reveal everything.

Note: ABC Decoder PRO and Bible Codes 2000 (release Jan 2000) are the same exact program, except for the name on the CD. They are both made by Computronic Corp. in Savyon, Israel. They are currently exactly the same, but marketed differently. In the future, they may diverge in capabilities.

In 1997, I decided to create a complex Bible code matrix on the life of a person for the first time, in order to prove to myself whether the Bible code was real or not. At the time, everyone else was doing little simplistic code matrices with 4-8 terms and calling them a valid code. Michael Drosnin's book had become a best-seller and his book was entirely full of these simplistic matrices. My goal was to do a single matrix on the life of a person, that showed every aspect of their life in a readable matrix (a matrix of 50+ terms when everyone else was looking for 4-8 terms). I chose Thomas Edison, the great inventor. Why? Because Thomas Edison had many inventions to his credit, the inventions used uncommon words, and if a life matrix had all his inventions plus personal life information, then it would prove to me that the Bible code was real.

I started out compiling a list of terms a priori, after skimming 3 biographies on Thomas Edison. I included every one of his inventions, plus many personal items, places lived, both wives, parents, etc. As I always do, I listed them on a pad of paper in English, and then translated and transliterated them all on paper, compiling a list of ~80 terms. Only after doing all this on paper, did I begin the search using the Torah as the search text, and using the original Bible Codes program by Computronics as my Bible code software program. At the time, we could only search for one term at a time. Current software is light years in capability from those available in 1997. I searched for all terms, and dutifully wrote down each find in a research notebook. It didn't take me long to see that there were only 11 finds of the main term Edison (ELS range 1-5000, forward and reverse occurrences), and by visually examining the lists of finds for each term in my research notebook, the best one was the find of Edison at an ELS (equidistant letter spacing) of -1231 in the book of Numbers. Even by manually looking at the finds on paper, I could see that they all were likely to be found in the vicinity of Edison at -1231. So I focused on developing that matrix.

I quickly was severely disappointed. My matrix ELS was 1231 which allowed the main term (Edison) to be vertical, with no spaces between the vertical letters. However, many of the inventions, while in the matrix, were far out from the main term. After all, unless all the inventions were clumped around Edison's name, then it just didn't seem relevant. Not being one to give up easily, I decided to print out the entire matrix with a width of 1231 letters. I had to print out 8.5x11" paper and then tape them together. The matrix was actually about 14 feet wide. I then hand plotted each find of each term on the printed matrix. It didn't take long before my first "wow". The longer terms appeared at clumped distances from the main term. In fact, I noticed by measuring the distance of letters along a row between the clumps, that the clumps of data were at the same distance between each clump.

The above graphic is not pretty, or drawn to scale, but it shows what I saw on the 14 foot wide printed matrix. The horizontal scale is the width in letters, with the matrix width being 1231 letters wide (about 14 feet). I saw clumps of terms at harmonics or exact periodic distances. I hand counted the distance between the clumps and it averaged 205. This was a very significant find, because if the clumps were at different distances, then it wasn't useful inforamtion. The periodicity provided meaning to it all.

Now what to do? I stared at it for a while, realizing that the answer was right in front of me. Then I got the thought, why not try to change the matrix width and see if the clumps are drawn into the main/center term (Edison). I manually changed the matrix width by dividing the 1231 matrix width by 2-10 (615, 410, 308, 246, 205, 175, 154, 137, 123) one at a time. Then by looking for a few of the longest terms at each new matrix width, I observed how they were displayed. Obviously, I realized that since the distance between clumps was ~205, that a matrix width of 205 (a row-split of 6) was optimal. At a row-split of 6, every term came into proximity of the main term. That was the discovery that a matrix has an optimal display. Subsequently doing many matrices, I discovered that ALL matrices had an optimal display using a row-split range between 1 and 7, with a row-split of 1 being "no row-split". For each matrix, there is a "best" row-split or optimal display.

It took me a long time to fully develop the theory and test it in many matrices. It worked every time, which is good science, since a true discovery will have repeatability. It took until early 1999 to convince Kevin Acres to build the row-split function into the CodeFinder program. Since then it's been refined further to allow manual row-split selection, or do an automatic row-split, where the program checks every row-split and determines the number of matches for each one, and then selects the best row split for the user. Later in 1999, I convinced the wonderful folks at Bibletech/Computronics to build the system into ABC Decoder PRO/Bible Codes 2000 program. In parts two and three, I will show you how the multi-dimensional aspect of row splits are used in both programs, but first lets apply this finding in a general sense.

1. There is an optimal display for each matrix, and only a few matrixes have an optimal display with a row-split of 1 (no row-split). Initially, everyone searches for a matrix with the center term vertical, and no row-split. If you don't investigate all row splits from 2-7, you are most likely using a sub-optimal display and are missing many terms that would be in the matrix if optimally displayed.

2. CodeFinder: Millennium Edition implements a range of row-split choices from 1-7, while ABC Decoder PRO/Bible Codes 2000 allows a choice of 1-9 for row-splits. My research shows the range is 1-7, but ABCD PRO/BC2000 allows a wider range to allow users to look at all possibilities and see if all of you find the same range I did.

3. Instead of printing out a very wide matrix and plotting by terms by hand, the programs allow you to see the results of every possible row-split in a few minutes. This saves an incredible amount of time.

4. If you have any other Bible code program than CodeFinder or ABCD PRO/BC2000, you can apply the multi-dimensional aspects of row-splitting manually. What you need to do is note the the matrix ELS, then divide that by 2-7 on paper. You then have a column of 7 numbers. Enter these one at a time in your program and change the matrix display to account for the new matrix ELS. This works for programs like Unlocking the Bible Codes and Torah4U. You cannot do this in Bible Decoder.

5. The optimal matrix display is where all the terms are drawn into the vicinity of the main term by using the optimal row-split. Changing the row-split to obtain the optimal display is like changing the margins for a word-processing document. It only alters the width and does not alter the serial sequence of letters.

The following small graphics show the main term of a matrix at a row split of 1, 2, 4, & 7 from left to right.

Go To Part 2 of This Article, Application in CodeFinder: Millennium Edition

Go To Part 3 of This Article, Application in ABC Decoder PRO & Bible Codes 2000

Go Back to Articles page