Usual numerology enacts an information reduction that is non-retrievable after the operation is performed (if one lost the original number one could not derive it from the reduced number).
One way to conceive of large numbers as reduced to single numbers is to conceive of them on a series of axes. Usually, at least in telluric numerology we take a larger number like 47 nd reduce it to 2 (via 11), the same process happens in the others. The other associative one (mercurial or *) is also straightforward i.e. 47 becomes 28 becomes 16 becomes 6. A nagging sensation is sometimes felt in number reduction, the sensation that we wish the trace of the bigger number was still somehow present. In their brutal form, numerological reductions eradicate more complicated structures to reveal the underlying pattern, that’s what they’re supposed to do.
The idea here is not a perfect solution to informational loss, it is more just a turning round of the problem that gives an intriguing sense of quasi-visualization. It does also however give some grounds for saying that under some circumstances ~(2=2) or indeed any number, including 0.
The idea is that for any numerological reduction (which necessarily involves an integer greater than 9) we can represent it as a spatialized schema. The below represents the reduction of all 2 digit integers in base 10. The highlighted figure shows the exact location of 47. 47 is not just 2, it is that 2 that occupies that position.
Of course any coordinate transcription is in some sense equivalent to writing 47 and hence slightly tautologous, however 47 by itself does not give the spatialized position of its reduction. Naturally increasing the number size just adds more axes leading us into higher and higher dimensional coordinate systems to demonstrate the location of the single digit e.g. 231147 uses 6 dimensions to point to the 9 that it becomes.
This can be done with the other elemental numerologies too (though aetheric / is still being processed). The below is the 2 dimensional table for mercurial operations (*)
Again the 10s are on the y axis and the 1s on the x, 100s would be on z and so on.
This only invites ways of thinking upon the matter. The key one being the non-identity of identical numbers which seems to have some allure that may be worth dwelling on further. The other thing that strikes me is the status of the numbers in the grid. They are not really 1s as one might assume for they only exist by virtue of the axes that identify them. They are necessarily numbers but of no definite kind. The real 1s are an axis that identifies the number in the grid by virtue of the elemental operator. There are 1s that are identical but single digit numbers derived from larger strings in numerological reductions are not strictly single integers.
One might object that this does not help visualization of names as numbers like Azathoth (1 22 1 18 7 14 18 7) as these are not enormous numbers but small numbers strung together. I think given the realm we’re in here already one could do two things to continue employ the visualization. One could either treat the numbers as one long number i.e. 12218714187 or alter the representation of the axes from 1s 10s 100s to simply multiple axes. It is still usable in this regard.
There is no proposed use for this idea as yet but we believe it may have certain hyperstitional possibilities inchoate in it. Ideas are welcome.