http://free-numerology.org/blog/2010/03/08/after-a-long-time-i-am-back-with-a-bang/ Learn Numerology the easy way ! Sat, 05 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 http://free-numerology.org/blog/2010/03/08/after-a-long-time-i-am-back-with-a-bang/comment-page-1/#comment-12799 rajesh sharma Mon, 23 Aug 2010 04:45:55 +0000 http://free-numerology.org/blog/?p=104#comment-12799 Hello, THis is regarding the different standards adopted by most numerologists incuding your website in calculating compound names. In your example of JOHN SMITH , the compound number is (18)is taken as 9 and (17)is taken as 8 , totaling to 17. However in harish malik, it is taken as 17 + 11 = 29 ?? instead of 8 + 2 = 10 . The results will obviously be totally different. If JOHN SMITH was calculated as per Harish Malik, then it would be 18 + 17 = 35, a very unlucky number! IF the same author applies diferent rules and contradicts himself, how can different authors reach a consensus on numerology? Hello,
THis is regarding the different standards adopted by most numerologists incuding your website in calculating compound names.
In your example of JOHN SMITH , the compound number is (18)is taken as 9 and (17)is taken as 8 , totaling to 17.
However in harish malik, it is taken as 17 + 11 = 29 ?? instead of 8 + 2 = 10 .
The results will obviously be totally different. If JOHN SMITH was calculated as per Harish Malik, then it would be 18 + 17 = 35, a very unlucky number!
IF the same author applies diferent rules and contradicts himself, how can different authors reach a consensus on numerology?

]]>