After the celestial cube-based architectural style, the bodal wheel, and the fusion of these artifacts were conceived, the exploding growth of what would become the comprehensive framework of Geocentric Design Code owes much to the direction-imbued disc.
To build such naturally begins with the bodal disc which is the bodal wheel oriented to co-plane with the surface of travel. Unto any of the disc’s bottom squares is placed a square pyramid which in effect completes a full octahedron.
To the octahedron’s triangle, the one that adjoins the disc’s central hexagonal plane, a tetrahedron is placed. That’s it. Both additions are natural extensions to, and fully consistent with, the bode pattern.
Thus assembled, the tetrahedral triangle that extends from the disc’s central co-planing hexagon forms a point by which the disc is given direction.
In practice, the pointed triangle might be the bow of a marine vessel or lead a spaceship on a non-shuttling mission beyond mere orbit.
To me, it was this construct’s evocation of the Starship Enterprise that sparked the idea that the bode pattern could well be applied to much more than earthly abodes and rolling artifacts Early on, an interesting connection was made between cube-based abodes and the direction-imbued disc was observed.
Because the tetrahedral “bow” is built on a bode square, the opposing square that characterizes the upper stern becomes distinguished – just as the geocentric cuboda’s axial alignment of opposing vertices distinguishes an equatorial pair of opposing squares (upon which celestial cubes are perched to project cube-based abodes).
Because of this distinction, a 3D rectilinear construct is allowed to extend from the disc’s stern square, without any special linking just like the geocentric cuboda’s equatorial squares. Thus the stern square is viewed as framing the cosmos in a way similar to the way the CBA style does. With the direction-imbued disc, the framing is freed from earth’s equatorial/polar alignment, which although being the single best possible alignment, ultimately there is nothing sacred about it.
Thus the directional disc constitutes an alternative for those who can’t abide in, or feel imprisoned in the P-R grid. If the cubical pattern is extended outward from the square, it may be capped with a square pyramid whose upper triangle parallels the disc’s primary planes. The cubical extension may also proceed inward and meld (as juxtaposed celestial co-cube projections do in forming the CBA style) with an axially-directed 3D rectilinear construct, if properly linked to the triangles on either end.
More involved linking is required for a fore-and-aft, axially-aligned plane necessary for keels, aircraft tail fins, etc. First, with a circular plate link, an slternate hexagonal pattern is orthogonally shifted. Because one of 3 hexagonal lines now aligns with the direction of travel, a cubodal shift may be executed.
A cube-linking scheme is then placed on the bodal shift’s opposing octahedral squares, which are bolstered on one side by tetrahedral linking. On the other side, an h-shifted edge-up bode may be nested to supply the needed plane. Naturally, this orientation is als0 conducive to incorporating propulsion components.
Linking configurations that enable docking are worth a brief look as direction-imbued discs are generally suited for working vessels or floating islands that often need to exchange people and needful things with shuttling type vessels. Docking these thus require linking to the edge-up geometry of template-guided constructs.
One way to nestle a transporter is to set tetrahedral links on a cubical construct extending from the stern square. Another way involves cube links set on a hexagonal extension from the stern’s bottom triangle; or both schemes can be used together. However docked, the frameworks may double as conveyers of people, goods, and raw materials.
Finally, rounding techniques, be they elementary or advanced, are just as applicable to directional disc constructs as they are to template-guided transporters.