FAQs

  • Is “sacred geometry” the basis of Geocentric Design Code?
  • Is GDCode applicable to any human construct?
  • Not a few code guidelines seem so conventional. What’s the point?
  • Must code architecture only be built within its outer grid specifications?
  • How does GDCode fit into the material aspect of the American Dream?
  • Does GDCode address environmental/energy sustainability issues?
  • Could GDCode take over the world in a design revolution?
  • Isn’t characterizing the code by using the term “Geocentric” backwards?           

Is “sacred geometry” the basis of Geocentric Design Code?

No, because I don’t believe there is any such thing. The geometry is characterized as universal because its simple yet amply varigated representation of physical nature makes it widely applicable to constructs and artifacts that must function in such. But useful as the geometry is, it is definitely not something that qualifies for worship.

 Is GDCode applicable to any human construct?

The code has a very wide but not universal spectrum of application. In the architectural context for example, code applicability breaks down with sitting furniture, and applying code geometry to clothing design would be plainly absurd. In general, code applicability hues to constructs and artifacts that function in human-scale physical contexts. The most it can do in anatomically interfacing design is to frame or provide a base for such.

Not a few GDCode guidelines seem conventional. What’s the point?

As the code was developed, some solution insights did indeed seem quite conventional and this bothered me a bit at first. But I have come to think that what this means is that humanity has been hewing to the geometry by which the code is based in a groping quasi-intuitive way all along. The value in codifying design lies in providing a sensible default framework and foundation that is well tuned to nature.

Must code architecture only be built within its outer grid specifications?

No. Although code architecture has strict alignment with lines of latitude and longitude, it is not absolutely necessary that it coincide within a similarly aligned grid. However, in extensive architectural applications, it would be better if it did. In this context, the US is already as accommodating for such as the rest of the world is combined, led by Canada. On the other hand, if unaligned within an existing grid, code architecture can be more distinctive and add a quality of complementariness.

What does GDCode say about the material sspect of the American Dream?

Hopefully, code architecture is scaled down enough to allow for a resurgence of a vibrant populous middle class and pride of ownership without people living on top of each other and that typically includes some private outdoor space of one’s own. In scaling down from the old model, the two-car garage gives way to a one car, multiple bicycle port, a single compartmentalized bath/utility room. In the areal contraction, a compensating sense of the (infinite) space above is supplied by code architecture.

Does GDCode address environmental/energy sustainability issues?

Most definitely. Its signature architectural geometry relates to the spherical earth in a way that encourages compactness while affording a feeling of spaciousness by its tilt. Its latitude dependence universally aligns for optimal solar utilization while its wave-formed embanking offers an element of passive temperature moderation.

The style also harmoniously accommodates the bicycle to take its rightful place in the transportation spectrum as the most efficient mover along side the family car. In engineering, the common geometry utilized throughout transport modes offers sensible a standardization whereby components of one mode may find re-use in another.

Could GDCode take over the world in a design revolution?

By its utter simple sensibility, it hypothetically could. The designed world hoped for is half and half, with code and non-code engaged in healthy constructive competition. A scenario in which code application reaches double that of the non-code however begins to be nightmarish IMO. Conversely, at a minimum, it is hoped that there is enough code design in the world so that it is within the weekly realm of everyone.

Isn’t characterizing the code by using the term “Geocentric” backwards?

Not at all, although it may unfortunately give that impression and drive scientifically minded (or religions fearing scientific ridicule) away. We actually take geocentrism for granted as it is quite necessarily employed in our modern world although we are not aware of it. For example, navigation of marine vessels, air and spacecraft is based a geocentric reference frame. As sophisticated as our view of the universe has gotten, there is still no objective center to it, and selecting one subjectively to be earth is not only convenient, but true with regard to it being the one sphere common to all people at all times