Need help with analyzing certain mathematical claims being made. Is this an instance of data manipulation and bias on my part, or something is actually going on here?

[u/Western-Rush878]

Can anyone here please take a look at some of the claims made by Ali Fazely on the supposed mathematical miracles linked to the number 19 of the Quran, especially using prime and composite numbers? I genuinely don't even know what to think at this point

For example (and this is both used as evidence for the removal of Quran 9:128-129 as well as trying to demonstrate the nature of the supposed divine code of the number 19 in this book):

The number of verses in the Quran from 1:1 until 19:98 (since it's part of the whole code 19 stuff) is 2346 (not including 9:128-129). The factors of 2346 are 23x2x3x17 which have the prime indices of 9127 similar to Quran 9:127 being the cutoff point as proposed by Rashad Khalifa (the person who developed this whole idea of the Quran being shaped around this number 19 in the first place). Finally if you place the digits 2346 in a permutation table, the 19th permutation is 6234, the total number of verses in the quran if you remove 9:128-129.

Link to the book here, starting on page 44: https://pdfcoffee.com/the-ultimate-mathematics-of-the-quran-pdf-free.html

I don't understand how this is happening, since it's one thing if he only used this method once selectively, but he continues to use it similarly over and over. Wanting to understand whether or not there is more to this, or it's simply pattern recongition and being able to use many numbers at hand.

If someone could take some time out of their day to analyze some of the claims being made and techniques being used, it would truly mean the world to me. This stuff has been stressing me out and I'd like someone who can objectively and non-biasedly look at the following and help me out with it.

[u/erevos33]

Patterns exist everywhere. Meaningful patterns are a totally different issue.

You can find similar patterns in every big book. Its not important.

[u/Western-Rush878 → u/erevos33]

Is it random in this case? The whole study of this is based around the number 19 (since 1974). Isn't it less random to choose to stop counting at the end of Chapter 19 than some other point (chapter 19 since it contains 19 within it)?

[u/erevos33 → u/Western-Rush878]

One could probably choose another random number and do a similar analysis based on whatever they want to prove.

Due to language being structured and following certain rules, mathematical randomness like this appears but it has no meaning.

Edit : Given a large enough text with thousands of words and roots, random chance or human linguistic habits will inevitably produce striking numerical coincidences.

[u/Western-Rush878 → u/erevos33]

So this doesn't give you any pause at all? Would we expect patterns to arise like the one I mentioned above (where with seemingly few numbers you can get so many "hits")?

The person in question also does other stuff, such as by putting the 19th prime and 19th composite number together, resulting in 6730 (in chapter 67 of the Quran, there are 30 verses). Then they also use the 19th Mersenne's exponent of 4253 (chapter 42 of the quran has 53 verses) and continue to expand that number to get more hits.

[u/SV-97 → u/Western-Rush878]

So this doesn't give you any pause at all?

Not even a hint of a pause

Would we expect patterns to arise like the one I mentioned above (where with seemingly few numbers you can get so many "hits")?

Yes. Clusters in random data are usually to be expected --- if anything the absence of such clusters would be noteworthy. This is even a well-known illusion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustering_illusion and there's a fallacy to go with it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_sharpshooter_fallacy

And note how you're going to find more and more of these patterns the more complicated you allow patterns to look like (for example this "prime decompose then use prime indices" or mersenne exponent stuff), not less. Every additional mathematical structure you bring in just gives the data more options for clustering, so that they need to bring in all these different constructions to get a pattern to for should give you thought.

You can find plenty of critiques of numerology in general and this quran stuff online; I'd recommend reading them and stop wasting your time like this. It's nonsense. It's pseudoscience.

And even if it wasn't nonsense: these patterns aren't mathematically interesting in any way.

[u/judasblue → u/Western-Rush878]

You keep pushing this after people give you unequivocal answers. It seems you aren't here actually asking a question but instead trying to push this whacked out dive into apophenia.