John Forbes Nash
American mathematician and economist (1928–2015)
The numbers
3 + 0 = 3
Lo Shu grid
Missing: 4, 5, 7. Present digits repeat to show how many times they occur.
Life path 3 — The Communicator
Three is the number of expression — the point at which a thing becomes shareable. Tradition links it to language, humour, performance and the ability to make an idea land. It is generally read as the most immediately likeable number, and the reading usually adds a warning in the same breath: fluency can outrun substance, and 3 is described as capable of talking its way past work it has not actually done.
Complete lines
Line of Action
The 8-1-6 row complete. Read as follow-through — the traditional marker of someone whose plans reliably become events.
Line of Expression
A complete line in the grid.
Responsibility
A complete line in the grid.
Care
A complete line in the grid.
Repeated numbers
3 appears 3 times
Concentrated expression. Read as a voice that arrives before the edit does.
What is missing
Missing 4
Read as impatience with structure and maintenance. Associated with starting well and leaving the scaffolding to someone else.
Missing 5
The centre of the grid, so its absence is weighted heavily. Read as difficulty adapting mid-course — a preference for the plan already chosen over the plan now indicated.
Missing 7
Read as reluctance to sit with an unresolved question. Associated with wanting the working answer rather than the true one.
Vedic — Ank Jyotish
Moolank 4 comes from the day of the month alone; Bhagyank 3 from the whole date. They differ, which is the ordinary case — the two numbers answer different questions.
Rahu
The ascending lunar node — a shadow graha, not a physical body. Disruption, ambition, the unconventional. Read with more caution than any other.
Bhagyank uses the same arithmetic as the Western life path, so the two will always agree. That is not two traditions confirming each other — it is one calculation under two names.
In their words
I would not dare to say that there is a direct relation between mathematics and madness, but there is no doubt that great mathematicians suffer from maniacal characteristics, delirium and symptoms of schizophrenia.
By the time I was a student in high school I was reading the classic Men of Mathematics by E. T. Bell and I remember succeeding in proving the classic Fermat theorem about an integer multiplied by itself p times where p is a prime.
As a graduate student I studied mathematics fairly broadly and I was fortunate enough, besides developing the idea which led to "," also to make a nice discovery relating to manifolds and real algebraic varieties. So I was prepared actually for the possibility that the game theory work would not be regarded as acceptable as a thesis in the mathematics department and then that I could realize the objective of a Ph. D. thesis with the other results.
Gradually I began to intellectually reject some of the delusionally influenced lines of thinking which had been characteristic of my orientation. This began, most recognizably, with the rejection of politically-oriented thinking as essentially a hopeless waste of intellectual effort.
At the present time I seem to be thinking rationally again in the style that is characteristic of scientists. However this is not entirely a matter of joy as if someone returned from physical disability to good physical health. One aspect of this is that rationality of thought imposes a limit on a person's concept of his relation to the cosmos.
Statistically, it would seem improbable that any mathematician or scientist, at the age of 66, would be able through continued research efforts, to add much to his or her previous achievements. However I am still making the effort and it is conceivable that with the gap period of about 25 years of partially deluded thinking providing a sort of vacation my situation may be atypical. Thus I have hopes of being able to achieve something of value through my current studies or with any new ideas that come in the future.
Sourced from Wikiquote, restricted to the subject’s own sourced sections.