Science behind the number 108?

108=112233, making it a hyperfactorial,[1] which is pretty interesting.

Christopher Giannaras' answer[2] lists a few more such mathematical curiosities about 108.

But 108 is also the subject of a lot of pseudoscientific woo, as evidenced by some other answers on this page which have their content from viral forwards that can be found all around the internet. The idea is to justify the presence of 108 in ancient scripture and religious rituals by assigning some cosmic significance to it. Of course all this is wishful thinking. Let's look at a few claims.

One common claim is of 108 being the ratio of some astronomical distances.

• The distance between the Earth and the Sun is 108 times the diameter of the Sun.
• The distance between the Earth and Moon is 108 times the diameter of the Moon.
• The diameter of the Sun is 108 times the diameter of the Earth.

The fact is that the orbits of the earth and the moon are slightly elliptical, so that the ratios do not remain constant.

• The mean distance from the sun to the earth is 149.6 million km.[3] Over the course of the year, the distance varies from 147.1 million km to 152.1 million km.[4] Defining the diameter of the sun is a bit tricky but is usually defined as the distance from the center to a region of the photosphere,[5] and that turns out to be 1.391 million km. The ratio of the distance to the sun to its diameter ranges from 105.8 to 109.3, with a mean value of 107.5.
• Similarly the distance to the moon is 384,400 km on average, with a range from 356,400 km to 406,700 km and its diameter is 3475 km.[6] The ratio ranges from 102.6 to 117.0, with a mean value of 110.6.
• The diameter of the earth is 12,742 km on average. The ratio of the sun's diameter to that of the earth is 109.2.

In short the numbers have a big range, and their average values can be closer to 107, 109 or 111 than to 108 — this allows us to rule out any astronomical significance of 108.

Now, ancient people did know the approximate angular diameters of the sun and the moon, and the inverse being approximately around 108 which is a highly divisible number might have caught the eye of the ancients and caused its incorporation to rituals. But they definitely did not know the real diameter of the sun.

The claim then continues

These distances might be a predicting factor for other star/planet systems in the galaxy.

There is absolutely no reason for that to be the case. Even in the solar system, the other planets obviously have different distance ratios. And even the exoplanets we have observed come in all sorts of varieties.[7]

Another claim

Sanskrit alphabets are numbered: 54. These sound differently when articulated by the two genders (counted at that point of time). Multiply 54 x 2 = 108. These sound-vibrations consciously pronounced using life-energy include all vibrations in the Universe. This is being understood by scientific studies.

There are different ways to count the number of letters in Sanskrit,[8] but I'm yet to see one that results in 54. Even if that were the case, multiplying that by two genders is arbitrary. Life-energy is a meaningless word scientifically,[9] and relevant vibrations in the universe far exceed the sounds made by humans.

So I would really like to know that “scientific studies” are understanding these.

The next set of claims is dependent on units, like

Stonehenge, a prehistoric monument in England is 108 feet in diameter.

Yeah, and that would be 33 m. What cosmic significance does the combination of a random unit of length measurement and a random site have?

Well that got nothing on this one

The circumference of the Earth at the Equator is 21,600 [=108x200] nautical miles. On average, we take about this many breaths a day. This connects our human body with the planet.

That number is 21,600 because the nautical mile was historically defined so![10] The number of breaths is of course an approximation.

There are many more claims involving things without evidence such as Ayurvedic pressure points and chakras, and a lot of numerology with 1,0 and 8 that can be dismissed outright. What remains are mentions of the number in rituals and astrology of eastern religions. That could have had origins in the fact that 108 is a highly divisible number or even in the approximate astronomical ratios, or could well have been a coincidence. All that is only of historical and religious interest, and there is no cosmic significance of 108. All these atrocious “scientific" claims are made later by religious followers who want to give a totally unnecessary scientific justification for their customs.

Footnotes