http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles%202005/MoonModel_F04.pdfThe last pages(71-72) of this document on figure 14 becomes relevant in certain relativistic speculations. The four diagonals bisecting the cube are said to be magnetically neutral with respect to each other, and do not form a 90 degree angle between them but some 109.5 degrees. A very similar arrangement showing a 60 degree separation of an equilateral edges of the four faced or triangular pyramid exists where How many points in space may separate so that each (reference) point in movement sees identical separations from the other points in movement? The answer after some introspection concerning symmetrical separation of reference points so that EACH reference point sees the same thing with respect to its neighbors as it does itself; after further mental introspection of these claims of absolute mirror image symmetry and its analogous magic square arrangements of numbers; another amazing thing is encountered; which is ANOTHER four points in space taken as reference points from the same equilateral pyramid that can separate and remain symmetrical in their respective separation viewpoints. And here perhaps a DISTINCT difference in both of these spatial "Magic" movements can be shown. Each of these spatially symmetrical movements are described as expansional movements in the spaces between them; where a certain amount of space exists in the beginning of this mental exercise of analogies. Before anything begins in each case four reference points as specified geometrically in space have a certain amount of relative separation between them. The TWO significant differences between these two systems is that one begins with a shorter separation distance then the other one; and perhaps more importantly when those symmetries are run in reverse direction of time; one system fails symmetry and the other does not! The sheisse gets deeper then this, perhaps even going into cosmology. Now in the first described system of the four points of the equilateral four faced pyramid moving outwards we would have 12 possible extensions of movements outwards in space., all coming from the edges of the pyramid. If we reversed these movements so that each corner showed a path of collision with its opposite corner in the middle of the edge pathway from both opposite movements; obviously we then have four separate collisions in geometrical space at the midpoints of each edge; but the question remains difficult at first glance as to whether symmetry is preserved on that inward movement. In the second case not elaborated on all the reverse pathways come to a single point. Now for equations in two dimensional xy coordinate mappings if two linear equations are other then parallel, then they must have an intersection point in common. But for equations with x,y,z coordinates each equation line could appear to be perpendicular in reference yet have no intersection point. However may be the case one here one symmetrical system does appear to have an intersection point in space with the other one and their movements do appear to be orthogonal to one another. Actually I have read other comments about my past writings saying that I speak in a language of my own making which is seemingly undecipherable to others. Well just imagine this then; what might appear to be a complexity within a complexity might just be simple to begin with. If we have two systems of symmetrical separations in space each at 90 degree angles to another how would those symmetrically derived separations appear to each other? Would they still be symmetrical to each other. I doubt it. HDNPioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/
