About barcodes and "antichrist printing"
There are some issues that periodically regain their relevance, even when discussed more than once.
Each group of people has its own eternal themes – motorists regularly argue about the benefits of a manual gearbox over an automatic, young and not-so-mothers – about breastfeeding and artificial feeding, and Orthodox Christians – about the time, place and method of applying the promised print of the Antichrist. ".
Argue as much as there is a subject of dispute. And recently, the Orthodox debate went to a new circle. The reason was the speech of the businessman Vasily Boyko-Veliky, famous for his orthodox extravagance, who explained that “The Seal of Antichrist” is contained in bar codes that his company has to stick on its products in order to sell it in stores. But in order to demonstrate the position of non-acceptance of “printing”, barcodes on the products of the factory “Russian Milk” are crossed out with a red St. Andrew's Cross.
There are quite a few technical details in the text and therefore it makes sense to provide a technical commentary.
Pavel Belousov works in the company “VMC”, which is engaged in the development of barcode scanners, and writes software stuffing of those devices that scribble at the cash registers of supermarkets. And, accordingly, Pavel knows everything about barcodes. His commentary with a number of minor technical edits is given below:
“As a barcode specialist, I decided to figure out for myself the whole story with the number 666, allegedly encoded in any barcode.
I am not discussing the correctness of the interpretation of the text of the book of Revelation, but only a technical fact: is it true from the point of view of bar coding to assert that this number is always present in bar codes? My findings are outlined below. The text is long and tedious, but, I believe, exhaustive. And at the very end of the bonus – a terrible revelation!
I) First, it is not about ALL bar codes, of which there are dozens of types, but only about two very similar types (symbols) called EAN – 13 and UPC – A. These are, however, the most common types. That they put on all products. They are described in Wikipedia here and here (more on the structure here). All the arguments that I cite below can be checked on these articles.
II) The main thesis of the bar-code-gens: “According to the standard, all the bar-codes contain three bands: two from the edges and one in the middle. The remaining bands correspond to individual digital coding and correspond to numbers from 0 to 9. So, three universal bands, longer than the individual ones, correspond to the same digit, namely, the six. Since there are three universal ones, it’s exactly three sixes that are obtained. ” An explanatory picture can be viewed in the text on the Russian Milk website.
Iii) Is this true? The answer is no, not true. But first, a few words about the EAN – 13 / UPC – A bar code structure. There are no “bands” in the standard.
A bar code consists of elements, strokes and spaces that take equal part in coding information and can have 4 widths: single, double, triple and quadruple (I will write 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively) . I emphasize that the color of the element does not matter, but only its width.
Any digit from 0 to 9 corresponds to its own set of four elements (space-bar-space-bar or bar-bar-bar-space), the sum of the widths of which must be strictly equal to seven minimum widths. The sequence of the widths of the elements in such a set determines exactly which digit in them is encoded.
For example, in the right half of the bar code, the digit 5 is encoded as “1-bar-2-space-3-bar-1-space”, and the ill-fated 6 as “1-bar-1-space – 1-bar – 4-space ".
IV) The structure of any EAN – 13 barcode is as follows (from left to right): 1) a left protective pattern of three elements (1-bar – 1-space – 1-bar); 2) 6 blocks of 4 elements each (space – stroke – space – stroke), specifying the first 6 digits; 3) a central protective pattern of five elements (1-spacebar – 1-bar – 1-space – 1-bar – 1-space); 4) 6 blocks of 4 elements (bar – space – bar – space), specifying the second 6 digits; 5) the right protective pattern of three elements (1-bar – 1-space – 1-bar);
V) It is in the protective patterns, left, center and right, that some see three sixes. They see it, because in each of them there is a set (1-stroke – 1-space – 1-stroke), which is among the blocks encoding digits, found only in the six (see Section III). But templates cannot encode digits, since none of them satisfies the necessary condition: FOUR (rather than three or five) elements, the sum of widths of which is strictly equal to 7. The right and left patterns have 3 elements each with a total of 3, and the central one – 5 with the amount also 5.
VI) Thus, these patterns are NOT sixes or even numbers at all! More precisely, they are the same sixes, which six is, say, the letter “o”: in order for “o” to become the number “6”, you need to add a squiggle to it. Without it, it's just an “o” or circle.
Also, to the set (1-bar – 1-space – 1-bar) you need to add 4-space, so that it becomes a six in the sense of bar coding. The objection that the lower circle is also found in, say, figure 8, whereas the block “1-bar-1-space-1-bar” is ONLY in the six, and, therefore, is always a hint to it, you can recall the letter C – exactly 6 has such a silhouette! So where do you see the three letters C, you know – this is a hidden 666!
VII) Regarding the left and right patterns, “decoders” try to get out of the situation as follows: look, they say (not in this, but in more solid texts on the topic), there are always large spaces to the left and right of the bar code (in the stroke coding, they are called free zones), – there is hidden the necessary space for the number "6" quadruple!
I note that according to the standard, the free zone must be at least seven 1-widths. But you don’t assert anything from any side to the central protective pattern – there is no place, the standard does not allow.
VIII) So, I suppose subject 666 is closed: the allegations that this number in each EAN-13 / UPC-A bar code contains this number are based on significant and equally dubious additional constructions.
So, to summarize: repeating elements in EAN – 13 / UPC – A bar codes are not sixes, since they do not encode digits at all.
"St. Andrew's Cross" on "Ruza Milk"
And if we apply the same method, that is, we find a three-fold repeating sign that can be “added” (say, an additional hook or dash) to a six, and be taken as a six on this basis, then we find, for example, that all these strikethroughs -codes on milk are needed only to remove one's eyes from the terrible secret connected with Russian Milk: the number of the beast is 666 hidden in the holy of holies – the very name of the Russian Milk agricultural holding, and twice more !!!
Do you already see him? Not? And so: "RU66K6E M6L6K6"? What is dishonest? Doubtful additional construction? But, just a minute, who first started something?
Subscribe to the usa-health-online.com channel in Telegram, so as not to miss interesting news and articles!