Threesology Research Journal
"Threes" Origin Hypothesis
page 1

(The Study of Threes)

Formulating a "Threes" Origin Hypothesis

Sooner or later those who have ventured into the "Threes Perspective" may wonder why there are so many "Three"-organized views. In fact, you may ask what might have gotten the snowball going in the first place. In order to answer the latter question you first have to decide on what "Three" represents the first one. Indeed, what was the first "Three" to have arrived on the scene of existence?

  1. Most of us might eventually conclude that the three fundamental particles of atoms (Electrons - Neutrons - Protons) might very well be the candidate. However, that which originated this particular Three might well be impossible (under current conditions), to recreate experimentally.

  2. For a second candidate, most of us might well choose to consider the Planet Earth, which is the third planet from a source of solar irradiation. However, again, we are confronted with the possibility that a re-creation of the events which produced this particular "three" example might well be beyond our present ability.

  3. Thus, we come to a third candidate which are the "Threes" found in DNA, RNA, and Proteins, even if we don't know which of the three "three-patterns" came first... unless they all showed up simultaneously. But unlike the first two considerations, re-creating the pristine "Threes-originating" conditions may well be within our present experimental abilities... and are known as Chemical Evolution Experiments, though individual researchers are not necessarily "Threes-origin" focused or for that matter, conscious thereof.

For those readers who have come to this site by way of attempting to substantiate one or more claims regarding some religions pattern-of-three such as the Trinity, you might likely sum up your questions by saying that the many different kinds of "threes" represent some aspect of your religious ideas and ideal. If this is the case, you might as well go elsewhere, because that is not my intent. While I have listed various "threes" examples from a variety of religious perspectives, including mythology, as well as having written a poem about numerous "threes" in the New Testament, none of the examples are meant as an advocation of any religious belief.

Be you a student of Anthropology, Education or otherwise, an instructor may have mentioned fundamental "Threes" such as (for brief examples):

  • Cultural Anthropology: Alan Dundez' 1967/68 book "Every Man His Way", in which there is a chapter entitled "The Number Three in the American Culture."

  • Education: Threes in Fairy tales.

  • Physics: Three Families of Fundamental Particles.

  • Music: Musical Triads.

  • Sociology: Three classes, Tripartite government structure.

  • Medicine: Triads in human anatomy.

  • Languages: All languages are said to have a Trimodal structure.

  • Geology: Three basic rock formations.

  • Zoology, Biology, Genetics: DNA's Triplet Codon system.

  • Psychology: Id, Ego, Superego, Family triads.

  • Philosophy: Syllogistic logic.

  • Computer programming: Zeros and Ones by way of (And OR Not) Boolean logic.

  • Linguistics (Grammar)/Literature: Period, Question Mark, Exclamation point.

  • Religion: Trinitarian concepts.

  • Indo-European Mythology: Triadic groupings.

  • ETC.

And I do not mean to imply that "threes" are in any way the sole content of any one of these disciplines... including my own Threes research interests. Sometimes the word or numerical value of "three" is not mentioned, even though three items are used in a singular context as a representative model. No less, instances of overlapping singles in a tripartite organization are overlooked, as well as are examples which may represent transitional developmental stages. However, by the same token, a previous three items grouping may have, for whatever reason, become a two-model or become part of a larger array. Such factors may be independent of occurrences taking place in different areas of interest. I do not as yet have a comprehensive model to explain the variations I have encountered, but I am working on it. Perhaps it will be the reader who develops the formula.

I won't pretend to have all the answers, unlike some religious oriented individual who makes a claim for the three-in-one lettered God-word whenever they are confronted by circumstances which require at least a little effort at taking stock of information and questions beyond the normal purview of their religious texts and Sunday School coloring book and crayon discussions; even though there are a number of sincere religious scholars who are not fearful of intellectually treading where previous religious devotees could not have even imagined the existence thereof. For example:

  1. They know that the God of human religions is humanity, but this does not refute their claim to the existence of a supreme God.

  2. They know that even if all the World's religions were to vanish, a new religion could be developed based on the idea of a Supreme God... minus all the previous human-based historical nonsense.

  3. They know that the concept of God is part of human evolutionary processes and may eventually become extinct if it can not evolve through similar avenues of adaptation, mutation, and niche exploitation.

If God is the answer, then what was the process used by God? Agreeably, there are multiple questions which could be asked that are not really answered in any religious text, except in the tunnel-visioned eyes of ignorant adherents. For example:

  • Why not make a species with a "holy seven" (etc.,) coding DNA system and thus increase the genetic potentials of all species's accordingly?

  • Why not use 666 (Satan) or 888 (Jesus) or three X three (Angels) families of fundamental particles (instead of just three) and thus increase the diversity of matter?

  • What's so great about a three-party or three-divisioned Democracy when all forms of Democracy (The Peoples Government) are hypocrisies? (America for example has a Plutocracy.)

  • Why not put us on 12 different (disciple) planets at one time, and not just the third planet, so as to produce more dutiful worshipers by improving humanity's chances of survival in different environmental contexts?

  • Why have a three-divisioned human anatomy when theologians vie for the significance of other number patterns?

  • ETC.

One reason to seek out that which may have initiated the "Threes Phenomena", is that the original influence may still be at work. This of course assumes that the influence(s) are environmental and are in a form that is recognizable. If they are recognizable, are they changing? If so, will the "Threes" structures change accordingly? If the change is in-tune with the path of the solar system oriented towards a demise, is life genetically designed to follow-suit... meaning we are our own worst enemy because we develop ideas which conceal this inclination? (Many such ideas are fostered by religions and religious philosophies.)

Even if the Science foundations of all the world's governments came to find out that we are genetically oriented towards defeatism, governments might well deny this so as to prolong their control no matter the eventual costs. Accordingly, they would likewise encourage corporations and religions to back them up... to keep the public in-line. Then again, religious ideas about an Apocalypse may be nothing but metaphors concerning an insight into such an entrainment of consciousness linked to a self-disposing genetic formula designed by a like-fashioned environmental sequence. Such thoughts may well be the case for human-based destruction of the environment even though we delude ourselves into thinking we can save that which has already been destroyed.

The whole of the Earth's environment may actually be going to perish and the only thing we can really do is circumvent the old genetic endowment with a new one... if we take the time to understand where, why, when the triplet codon system in DNA came to be. While we might not like what we find, this does not mean we can not re-create anew. We might then be able to alter it for a more purposeful future... and hopefully, some politician (or government department), business zealot (or corporation) nor religious (person, place, thing) entity takes hold of it as their own and proclaim it as a manifest destiny that they are in charge of.

For the skeptic, an hypothesis must be able to present an idea that is not easily discarded by common-sense notions. For example, when it is claimed that there are numerous "threes" in human anatomy, and this is used as a proponent fact to assert a serious example, the fact that any child can see body parts occurring in "twos" would appear to be offering a consideration that is obviously stupid, "IF" such a comment is not responded to with an answer just as easily understood. Hence, the fact that there are readily observable "two-patterned" body parts is not a refutation of a "Threes" hypothesis, but plays a supportive role. Let me list some of the "twos" of the body alongside three-patterned notions. In other words, if the fact that the two-patterned body parts are non-refutable examples contrasting a "threes" perspective, then why develop three-patterned ideas accordingly?

Two EyesWe have the concept of a third, Mind's eye.
Two HandsOur mouth is sometimes referred to as a third hand.
Two EarsWe have the concept of a third Ear.
Two nostrils, One noseWe have three related words: Scents, Cents, Sense.
Two LegsA cane is sometimes referred to as a third leg. Some men refer to their penis as a third leg.
Two brain hemispheres, One headWe have the concept of a Triune Brain.
One VaginaWomen are said to have 3 orifices which can be used for sex: Vagina, Anus, Mouth.
Two ArmsWe have "arm" related concepts: Armed and dangerous, Armed to the teeth, etc...
*Two FeetBalance requires 3 semi-circular canals in the ear. Otherwise, the simplest constructed balancing object is a tripod stance.
Two thumbs, eight fingersEach, except for the thumbs have 3 joints.
Two LipsYet in kissing, many "French" kiss by including the tongue.

*Most people have two feet but leave only a single imprint, thus implying a third or single foot. Other ideas include: a sure footing, foot the bill, two left feet, foot in the mouth, etc...

As with any idea, you can rally information to either support or deny a particular claim. I don't deny the existence of other ideas for which, when labeled with a number, a large quantity of the number suggests a greater value. If we list a million "One" items, or a million "Two" items, or a million "Three" items, but only fifty "Seven" items, clearly this has some meaning when looked at if for not other reason than quantitatively. For this reason, when we can find hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of "Three" items associated with fundamental biological processes as well as fundamental ideas related to what we surmise as natural laws' maybe, just maybe, and maybe again, we should take a closer look.

This look has prompted me to develop an hypothesis with both general and specific questions. In effect, it is a shotgun approach at attempting to pinpoint a target related to the idea of a pristine origin, though there may be multiple and overlapping occurrences, some of which may have become extinct. I do not know the totality of the target's dimensions, except to say it has depth in (past) time, breadth in history, and an undetermined length into the future:

  1. The depth in time has been uncovered by discovering a triple pattern to exist with DNA, RNA and Proteins, which are said to have developed billions of years ago.

  2. The breadth in history has been surmised by the occurrence of "threes" in multiple subject areas as historically recorded. This however does not give an accurate account of "threes" ideas and activities which took place prior to the advent of historical recordings.

  3. The undetermined length into the future is self-explanatory.

While I have hypothesized the parameters of a search into the pristine origin of the "Threes Phenomena", such a search may, realistically, be ill-fated if the conditions which inspired the development of basic three-patterned biological substrates (DNA, RNA, Proteins), are no longer viably available or reproducible; no matter how sincere, well thought out, and logically sound are our chemical evolution experiments. Yet, even if we did achieve to reproduce the circumstances which permits, for example, a re-creation of a triplet codon DNA system, this is not to say there are not other avenues which would not (or did not) produce the same thing. Nonetheless, such results would at least be a beginning into further inquiry.

Some readers may conclude that the research into the "Threes Phenomena" is just another exercise into a form of intellectualization akin to something such as is ludicrously labeled as "Christian Science", as if there were a defensible "Natural Law Science" to Christianity. Labeling an interest as a science does not improve the interest's truth value, though the attribute of assumed seriousness provides the illusion of infallible genuineness. It is merely the exercise of a mind that convolutes emotionally-laden information into an aura of rationalized irrefutability prodded by self-convinced personalized promotions sustained in a community of like-minded nonsense.

In the case of the "Threes Phenomena", long ago I made the remark to a skeptic that she thought my collection of "threes" was little more than numerically rationalized superficial correlations. This is true if your primary interest is in highlighting a "three" value used to promote one or more ideas for the purpose of manipulating someone into believing a negative and/or positive assumption with an ulterior motive; such as is widely used in numerology, astrology, fortune telling, religious counseling, gambling, etc... Frequently, but not always, such ulterior motives involve a gain, involving:

  1. A person.
  2. Property (animate/biological or inanimate).
  3. Currency (solid: potential or liquid: on hand).

We can spend time negating any "Threes" puzzle, we can expend energy working out a possible "Threes" clue-based algorithm, or pursue more conventional and "practical" (socially profitable) avenues since our individual lives are finite and there is much to do in preparation for amassing typical necessities in the wake of an eventual old age. While all three are not necessarily exclusive, perhaps relegating two of the three to some hobby or momentary excursion, only the last is endowed with typical common-sense.

Years ago when I was introduced to Dr. Alan Dundez's "The Number Three in the American Culture", I was not only intrigued that someone other than myself had seen the multitude of "threes" in various subjects, but also disappointed that he didn't really address the issue of an origin other than to say: Trichotomy exists but it is not the nature of nature. It is part of the nature of culture. Having been pondering the question of a "Threes" origin, upon reading his comment I wanted to know how he could say that when there were numerous "threes" in nature; unless it meant that such an idea about a fundamental structure was little more than the result of culture. Because it seemed unreasonable to conclude that the triplet codon system of DNA was due simply to culture, there must be some process of nature which influenced the "threes" design. I could not bring myself to surrendering my thoughts to the mere notion that God made it happen and that was all there is to it. I still wanted to know the process. Thus began my search for an answer which eventually brought me to making an attempt at an hypothesis.

Page reposted: Thursday, January 22, 2015

Your Questions, Comments or Additional Information are welcomed:
Herb O. Buckland