Does the Torah Code Predict Presidents?

HOME PAGE Web Site Contents Mars Report Contents Mars Report Abstract CV for Dr. David Roffman Diplomas PhD Thesis PhD Thesis Powerpoint Mars PowerPoint MSL Weather Reports Base on Mars? Seasonal Pressure Altitude Calculations Seismic Activity on Mars? Perserverance Weather Data MSL Years 5-6 Winter MSL Year 5 FALL MSL Year 5 Summer MSL Year 5 Spring MSL Years 4-5 Winter MSL Year 4 FALL MSL Year 4 Summer Weather MSL Year 4 Spring Weather MSL Yr 3-4 Winter Weather MSL Fall Yr 3 Weather MSL Yr. 3 Summer Weather MSL Yr. 3 Spring Weather Martian plume March 25 2017 MSL Ultraviolet 3 YEARS OF MSL UV Desai, EDL, Parachutes & ExoMars Mars winter vs. summer temps Helo to Mars Sea at Utopia Planitia, Mars Tree Stump at MSL? Spherical life on Mars? Mars Report Abstract, 1-1.2 Mars Report Sec.2-2.1 Report 2.2-2.4 Report 2.5-2.5.2 Report 2.5.3-2.7 Report 3-4 Report 4.1-4.1.2 Report 5 to 6 Report  7-7.2.1 Report 8 Report 9 Report 10 Report 11 Global Dust Storm Report 12 Report  13-13.2 Report 13.3-13.5 Report 13.6 Report 14-15 Report 15.1 Report 15.2-15.3 Report 15.4-15.6.2 Report - Report Report 16-16.1 Report 17-20 Report References Rebuttal of REMS Report Running water on Mars MSL Year 0 Weather MSL Yr 2 Winter-Spring Weather MSL Yr 2 Summer Weather MSL Yr 2 Fall Weather MSL Yr 2-3 Winter Weather Adiabatics MSL Hi Temps MSL Low Temps Organic Chem found by MSL Oxygen in Mars Air MSL Day length & Temp Warm winter ground temps 155-Mile High Mars Plume Radiation Diurnal Air Temp Variation Mars Temps Fahrenheit Beagle found JPL/NASA Pressure Mistakes Enter MarsCorrect Sol 370, 1160 & 1161 Histories Mars-Radio-Show JPL Fudges Pressure Curves MSL Temp. ∆ Mast to Ground High & Low Pressures Normalized Mars soil 2% water Moving rock Mars MAVEN MSL Relative Humidity Claim Ashima Concedes Original MSL Weather Record Old MSL Weather Record MSL Summer Weather Pressure Estimate REMS Wind MSL Pressures REMS Reports Curiosity Geology CERN-2013-pics Daylight Math MSL Errors P1 MSL Errors P2 MSL-Chute-Flap MSL daylight Ashima Sols 15 to 111 Ashima Sol 112 to 226 Ashima Sol 227 on New Ashima Sols 270+ MSL Summer to Sol 316 Updated Secrets of Mars Weather Forecast Wind Booms MSL Credibility MSL Temp. Swings MSL Temperatures Sample Analysis at Mars (SAM) VL2 - MSL Ls Comparson Ashima MIT Mars GCM Dust Storm Nonsense Mars Slideshow Moving Sand & Martian Wind 3 DEC12 Press Conf. MSL Press Conf. 15NOV2012 Sol Numbering MSL Pressure Graph to Ls 218.8 MSL Sky Color Mars Sky Color DATA DEBATE! Zubrin's Letter Phoenix Vaisala Vaisala Pressure Sensors Phoenix &MSL Flawed MSL REMS Viking pressure sensors failed MSL landing site Mars Landings Phobos Grunt Martian Air Supersaturation Mars & CH4 Mars and MSL Time Viking Pressure Audit Links Mars Society 2008 Quant Finance Frontiers Home Front. Preface Frontiers Ch. 1 Frontiers Ch. 2 Antimatter Lightning Frontiers Ch. 3 Frontiers Ch. 4 Frontiers Ch. 5 Frontiers Ch. 6 Frontiers Ch. 7 Frontiers Ch. 8 Frontiers Ch. 9 Frontiers Ch 10 Frontiers Ch 11 Frontiers Ch 12 Frontiers Ch 13 Frontiers Ch 14 Frontiers Ch 15 Frontiers Ch 16 Frontiers Ch 17 Frontiers Ch 18 Frontiers Ch 19 Frontiers Ch 20 Frontiers Ch 21 Frontiers Ch 22 World Tour Spring-Break -13 Other Travels Asteroid Impact? ExoMars data Unit Issues Viking Pressures Tavis CADs Landing Long Scale Heights LS of Max/Min Pressures Tavis Report Tavis Failures Lander Altitude Martian Trees? Code Experiment Gedanken Report Mars Nuke? Martian Flares Mach Numbers MOLA (altitude) Original Mars Report Mariner 9 & Pressure Mars  Temps MSL Time MPF Pressure Blog Debates Spring Pendulum Plasma Model Reporting Errors Orbital Parameters Anderson Localization P. 1 Anderson Localization P. 2 Moving rock old Navigating Mars Mars Report Section Links Mars Report Figure Link Gillespie Lake rock outcrop MSL Sol 200 Anomaly Sol 1300&1301 Anomalies Gilbert Levin & Labeled Release Brine on Mars Ceres Lights Yr 1 Table 1 Missing data Mitchell Report Old Mars Report All MPF Temps ExoMars fails Did Spirit find past life? MSL ground temps go haywire OPACITY AT MSL Luminescence on Mars Dust Storms & Microorganisms 2018 Global Dust Storm Links to Sections of the Basic Report

2005 Science Fair Experiment by David Alexander Roffman


       The first published Torah Code findings in Statistical Science were published by Eliyahu Rips, Doron Wiztum, and Yoav Rosenburg.  They claimed that 66 famous Rabbis were encoded with birth and death dates, and claimed the odds for this being due to chance was 16 out of one million.  This was unchallenged until Dr. Brendan McKay said he could do the same with other non-religious texts, and that the WRR Study played with transliteration to get their results.

      There are people with doctorates in math who say the codes are real.  Dr. Robert Haralick is Chairman of the Computer Science Department at City University of New York.  He points to assassination plots and birth and deaths of famous people.  For some of these, he says the odds that they are there due to chance are less than one in a million.  But still McKay argues that similar plots can also be found in War and Peace or Moby Dick.  Each side tries to point out mistakes made by their opponents

    Michael Drosnin’s first book, The Bible Code, says on page 32 that Clinton is encoded (at skip 33,720) in such way as to touch the word for President in the open text (the matrix also seems to describe the Clinton – Lewinski scandal).  He does not tell us that the matrix he shows uses only the 4th lowest skip for Clinton.  Clinton and president appear together in a box that is only 7 rows by 5 columns (35 letters).  However, the lowest skip for Clinton is at skip 6,254 and President at skip 43,778.  Here Clinton and president appear together in a box that is 25 letters – only a single column of 25 rows.   Most researchers emphasize the lowest ELS as the most important.  Still, while the above Clinton matrices seem good, it is also true that we can put the (President) J.A. Carter together with the word for president in a box of only 15 letters in the Control text of CodeFinder software.  So what is needed to see if the Codes are really somewhat predictive is a comparison of how all 42 men who have held this job fit in with the word for president in both Torah and Control.




      The Torah Codes hypothesis is that there will be smaller boxes for historically related things in the Torah than in the Control (scrambled Torah).  The Null hypothesis is that there is no significant difference in box (matrix) size between the Torah and the Control. The Code is based on an Equidistant Letter Sequence (ELS).  Which hypothesis will be supported when I find names (at an ELS) of all United States presidents and the word for president  (spelled nun sin yud alef) in Hebrew in both the Torah and Control text?




1. Set the skips to search in CodeFinder software at -153,000 to 153,000.  This allows the software to search at skips (Equidistant Letter Sequence or “ELS”) of -153,000, -152,999, -152,998, etc to up +153,000 where – means backwards and + means forward direction.  For a skip of 1,435, the computer will put 1,435 letters on each text line.  If the skip of the axis term (first term sought) is 100,000, the computer will arrange the text with 100,000 letters on one line if the row split function is disabled.  But if the row split of 2 is chosen, it will only put 50,000 letters on one line, and with a row split of 4, it will put 25,000 letters on one line. 

2.  Open the virtual Hebrew keyboard on the software and type Hebrew name you are searching for.  You will need the Hebrew spelling.  I asked a friend in Israel to e-mail me a list of all U.S. presidents in Hebrew from an Israeli web site.  There are many ways to transliterate a Hebrew name into English, but I used only that list.  I always used the last name, and usually used the first name, or first initial, or first and second initials.  It is rare to find a name more than 8 letters long at an ELS, but vowels are often implied and not written in Hebrew as it appears in Torah.  All names used in this experiment had at least 6 letters, but not more than 8 letters. In the case of the Roosevelts, I found in Torah and Control a T. Roosevelt for Theodore Roosevelt, but not F. Roosevelt for Franklin Roosevelt.  Therefore, I used 2 Roosevelt (for second Roosevelt) with the letter bet standing for the number 2.  There was a George H. Bush, but no George W Bush in the Control, so I had to settle for just George Bush for the second Bush.  Spellings used at an ELS had to be the same in both the Torah and in the Control.  For Eisenhower, a slightly shorter, but OK transliteration had to be used because the spelling of his name was not in either Torah or Control.  Also, if a spelling using the letter tet could not be found, tav was used, as both sound like T.

3.  After you type a president’s name, next type in the Hebrew word for president.

4.  Put on settings of 50 rows by 50 columns.

5.  Click search.  The first search is conducted with row split function set on automatic (where the computer automatically finds the best match).

6.  Use only the lowest ELS for each president as found in Torah and Control

7.  Change row and column settings to decrease the matrix size until only one occurrence is on each matrix for the word president. 

8.  Disable the row split.  Repeat the search.

9.  Find the smallest box out of the two ways (with automatic row split on and with it disabled).  Record the smallest matrix for Torah and the smallest matrix for the Control in the Results.

10.  Analyze the results.


RESULTS – See Tables at the Bottom of this Page 



       The Torah Codes hypothesis is that there will be smaller boxes for related things in the Torah than in the Control.  The Null hypothesis is that there is no significant difference in size between the Torah and the Control.  The results of this experiment seemed to support the Torah Code Hypothesis. 

 The Control did better in the following ways: 
  • The small matrix (15 letters for J.A. Carter)
  • The lowest skip (-6) for Buchanan)
 The Torah out performed the Control in the following Categories: 
  • The overall average matrices were smaller in the Torah (130.9 letters to 166.2 letters).
  • 26 more compact matrices in the Torah compared to 16 in the Control
  • If an excellent matrix is under 50 letters, more such findings for Torah (8) compared to Control (4)
  • If a good matrix is under 100 letters, the Torah wins by a score of 14 to 8.

    The Torah Codes hypothesis does not address skip, although most researchers think the lowest ELS or skip is most important.  This is because if you have thousands of matches or matrices, some will be much better than others.  The trick is to get the desired information there the first time a president’s name comes up.  This experiment suggests encoding in the Torah, but shows that there are good matrices that can often be also made by Control texts, so we shouldn’t get too exited about just one good match.

Note: This experiment earned me a Third Place for the 2005 Science Fair for San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose, California.  Results below were cited and expanded upon by Distinguished Professor Dr. Robert Haralick of the City of New York Graduate Computer Science Department.  See American Presidents.