“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(This session was witnessed by Carl Watkins, of Odessa, New York. Carl studied math for two years in college; reading the first session, he said that the ideas presented by Jane in trance made sense to him; he cited some examples to us and worked out some figures, especially concerning quadrants, and drew some diagrams. This proved interesting to us and we understood it while Carl was speaking; later however because of our lack of background in math we found it difficult to recall what Carl had said.

The magnitudes are overextended in your first version. (Pause.) Four has been underrated. (Then Jane said: “I have no idea what this means:” ) And 3 in the yellow column would lead to annihilation. (“I get something like disaster,” she said, “but I think it’s annihilation.”)

(9:53. Jane came out of trance easily. However she acted and looked, somewhat bleary. This sleepy effect was already more pronounced, I thought, than it had been at any time during the last session. She still had no real idea of the source of the material. The last phrase of her delivery, above, seemed to be a quote. See page 153 of the last session, concerning the old-fashioned little man Jane had seen in image form.

...An encyclopedia of mathematical knowledge... Edinburgh... would have this guy’s name in it. It would seem to be in Latin. This theorem came up again in 1831. The particular volume or edition of the encyclopedia came out in the fall, and at the time this guy was working there was some kind of mathematical dispute going on, and a schedule set for some kind of conference to be held at the university for mathematicians from all around. The dispute had mathematical and philosophical connotations, because the ideas were wrapped up with science somehow.

...Somehow this whole controversy almost seems to have been thought of in the nature of a conspiracy, that would overthrow, I suppose, current ideas at the time. M I N N I U S (spelled), did I give the name?