The cubodal EM model developed in the last post is but one interpretation and is at that somewhat crude. In matching nature – as explained by the most sound science – to the geometry of the cuboda, I sometimes feel that what I am doing is not much more advanced than what ancient astronomers did in ascribing star clusters to common beasts.

Off target characterizations notwithstanding, I also feel strongly that the model is at least in the ballpark of what it should be. Before leaving the topic, the resolution to one glaring mistake that came to me as such by way of a nagging inconsistency is offered. In modeling the magnetic field produced by the orthogonally moving charge, the direct proportional scaling of speed and field strength seems to infer a corresponding de Broglie wavelength increase which should not be. To fix this, a more reasonable way to express B-field strength is to simply scale the size of the into-and-out-of-the page vector, an approach facilitated by the cubodal pattern.

As the field enlarges with speed, so the distance between its boundary and the axis models the inverse relationship between speed and the scale of the particle wave. Also, clarification should be made regarding charge paths, namely those possibilities ascribed to the realm of quantum mechanics, which should come with the warning that choosing such paths effects results.

Qualified thus, I think the tetrahedral conducting edge should be likened to 1) a diffraction slit and 2) the direct conducting E-field line connecting opposing charges of a dipole. I think it safe to say that the whole dynamic of real charge motion begets a bona fide dipole, while the specific one is relegated to the weird rules of quantum mechanics. Another nagging problem with regard to the persistence of 70°/110° hexagonal plane intersection.

It appears to find solution by first recalling that a tetrahedral triangle also belongs to an octahedron always. So by appending such and projecting its lines onto a sphere encompassing it, the 60° intersection of those lines in the plane of the triangle is also the 70° skew of the cubodal hexagon, both of which become 90° upon projection. Finally, I have given more thought to the idea of the model’s two very different spherical representations, one having mass by virtue of its intrinsic center, and which is the origin of spherical waves caused by the oscillation of its charged nature. The other is centered in an empty (massless) symmetric (charge-less) octahedron which nonetheless carries electromagnetic energy as a photon.

In trying to coordinate the constancy of a light quanta with the ballooning spherical wave, I first took a geodesic approach to cubodal face divisions increasing with the sphere encompassing it outward. However, I failed to find any meaningful connection there, or anything having meaning at all. So I took to viewing it all from the rectilinear perspective. Maybe something is there that I don’t see yet, but this perspective allows a clearer view of how the photon and wave spheres coordinate.

That’s enough on specifics for now. In general the model’s easy interchangeability between space and time, the relativity of electro-statics and dynamics, and by extension potential and kinetic energy, the sum of which is as constant as the speed of light, seems to suggest that with the added necessity of evoking intrinsic spheres to properly project vectors into curved space, that general relativity might come into play at the quantum level.

Yes or no, the cubodal pattern easily lends itself to modeling light quanta bent by a gravitational field, and the effect of a gravitational field on clock speeds also has a simple though limited representation. (This idea is an adaptation of the representation given by volume II, chapter 42, section 7 on the Curvature of Space Time in the Feynman Lectures).

What leads me to think that largescale cosmic principles might be present in the realm of quantum mechanics is that the converse appears to have some plausibility. In identifying the center of all things, recall that earth was once regarded as the center of the (physical) universe before that assumption gave way to the sun just a few centuries back. Then the sun was found to revolve around the center of the galaxy, which being a part of a globular cluster, spins about its center. Even as the effort would seem to be zeroing in on the ultimate center, the notion of such evaporates as a kind of uncertainty principle writ large. The absolute center has no place. Fortunately, all is not lost as the effort succeeds in determining another kind of center: the origin of time, i.e. T = 0 when our Father spoke the universe to life – everywhere.

If such a take does constitute an extension of the uncertainty principle, perhaps the door to cosmic phenomena appearing at the quantum level opens to notions like the Schwarzschild radius of a proton or something like the Hawking (beta) radiation of neutron decay.

Speaking of the primal neutralized mass particle conglomerate, whose isolated existence happens to be a very relatable 15 minutes, the code’s next topic deals with gravity. If the neutron is in sense an oscillating dipole, so the earth long labeled ground will model one last construct. In the description of electrodynamic phenomena playing out in the cubodal pattern, it was inferred that points, nodes, or whatever represented potential mass centers while the empty centers of relational octahedra potentially represented mass-less particles called photons. So framed, the model easily lends itself to switching to a center-seeking gravitational field directed to a point mass. As all real particles of stable mass possess charge, so the model’s EM dynamism can be utilized for gravitational challenges in the sense that the mass moves without regard for how.

In the model, the representation of the obstacle facing the mass’s movement is again the triangle which will thus be regarded as an iso-gravitational surface. The construct intended to deal with gravity directly mirrors the deeper abstracted environment and adopts the triangle-up cuboda for its design guidance.

The triangle can be located in 2 ways: with universal positioning’s opposing equatorial axis; or about opposing equatorial vertices.

In a sense, the rocket represents a 3^{rd} orientation of the cubodal wheel after the rolling version and the co-planing disc. As the electron’s dipole path eventually succumbs to any of a handful of decelerating mechanisms, so the rocket must break through the barrier. But in a sense harnessing electrical forces is actually the bigger challenge as evidenced by the stupendous waste heat produced regardless of fossil fuels being involved; and by the fact of the Chinese blasting off a few thousand years ago. So although the endeavor is going against the flow, it is, in a sense, going with it to the extent that it can pick up the heat and the momentum of a trillion bees to escape the greater electronically-knitted mass of the earth, as a greater de Broglie matter wave.

With such in mind, the prime feature of the rocket’s geometry is the same cylinder proportioned for the triangle-up tower design. However, the tower was permitted to be freely proportioned up to the 1-to-1 ratio. But as a dynamic construct, the rocket is not allowed this option and must hue to an even number of tri-up proportioned cylinders.

Such expresses the span between iso-gravitational layers with a full matter wavelength of presupposed diameter (amplitude) as modeled by the tri-up cuboda, which in turn reflects the conservation of linear momentum. A top view of the so-oriented cuboda shows how the triangle poses maximal stability and control. Rocket streamlining is addressed next.

### Like this:

Like Loading...