vithar
12-08-2007, 10:16 AM
hopefully this is an easily answered query. i get the nested platonic solids concept.
but for ie., we've got the star tetrahedron inside the sphere, or earth. this might account for the anomalous events at places like the bermuda triangle etc. the 19. something degrees being the place of the star's points. this is fine.
but i saw the pics of the "earth grid". if i recall it's like a combination of both the dodeca and icosahedrons. if not it's something along these lines...
what i don't get is that i thought the geometric forms were nested inside of each other. one being smaller in scale to the next (or visa versa).
if so, how can say the star tetrahedron - which "surfaces" at 19.x degrees on the sphere's surface - coincide with the other geometries that make up the more complex earth grid?
is it that even tho they are nested, all points or vertices touch the sphere's surface!? don't think this is it.
perhaps it's the fractal-izing that's got my visualizations confused.
but for ie., we've got the star tetrahedron inside the sphere, or earth. this might account for the anomalous events at places like the bermuda triangle etc. the 19. something degrees being the place of the star's points. this is fine.
but i saw the pics of the "earth grid". if i recall it's like a combination of both the dodeca and icosahedrons. if not it's something along these lines...
what i don't get is that i thought the geometric forms were nested inside of each other. one being smaller in scale to the next (or visa versa).
if so, how can say the star tetrahedron - which "surfaces" at 19.x degrees on the sphere's surface - coincide with the other geometries that make up the more complex earth grid?
is it that even tho they are nested, all points or vertices touch the sphere's surface!? don't think this is it.
perhaps it's the fractal-izing that's got my visualizations confused.