In my last post I presented the tricolor model of Waterman polyhedra that allowed me to visualize individual planes in this shape much easier than before. Of course, after making the model with spheres, I set about applying it to a Waterman-Lintinen polyhedron made of cylinders, very much like what I had done decently well with two colors. But once I had converted most of the spheres into cylinders, I began looking at the shape with more skeptical eyes than before. The reaso

This past week I’ve been slowly polishing the visual representations of my theory, and in the process I was learning a bit more about how the structure is grown. I had already illustrated the shape in my post “The Perfect Cylinder-Sphere”, but I thought I could make the shape ‘pop out’ more. In the post “The Waterman-Lintinen Cylinder Crystal” I showed the inner structure of the crystal. However, I wasn’t fully happy with the way the coloring expressed the crystal layer. That

Note: I posted a version of this post earlier today, but because I wasn’t happy with how the 3D model looked, I rewrote the text a bit and made a recolored model. In my last post I showed how to cut a cubic array of spheres into quasi-cylindrical zig-zag crystal. At the end of the post, I talked about how the shape can be multiplied into six copies that can be rotated to fill a circular volume with no gaps or overlaps. But it’s one thing to talk about something and another

In my last post I presented The Perfect Cylinder-Sphere, or a way to crystallize cylinders into a sphere. However, in the post I only presented the crust of such a crystal and led the reader imagine how the crystal structure continues to the core of the sphere. However, even when posting the model, I knew most people would be able to imagine the internal crystal structure. The biggest reason for knowing this is that despite knowing the structure of the crust, I couldn’t prope

It’s been nearly two weeks since my last post on The LignoSphere Cylinder Crystal, where I presented the mathematically accurate way to crystallize cylinders into quasi-spheres. Ever since then I’ve attempted to improve the theory, so that I can more closely describe the electron microscopy images that have guided me in working on the theory in the first place. One of the biggest needs for improvement has been how to make the model to produce more spherical crystallites. And

In my last post I presented the Waterman-Lintinen Sphere. The sphere is an adaptation of Waterman polyhedra, but applied to the crystallization of (nano)tubules, or short cylinders, into quasi-spheres with a truncated octahedral core. The only issue I had with the model was that I knew it was a simplified version of the true crystallization of lignin nanotubules, lacking certain elements clearly visible in Electron microscopy of the disrupted crystallization of colloidal lign

Today I’m doing something brash. I’m claiming a geometrical shape as my own. The shape in question both is and isn’t a Waterman polyhedron. Or more specifically the notation of a Waterman ‘sphere’ is non-physical and needs to change to be relevant to the crystallization of nanotubules. To begin, I’ll start explaining how a Waterman polyhedron is defined. According to Wikipedia: A Waterman polyhedron is created by packing spheres according to the cubic close(st) packing (CCP

In my previous post I presented the simple theory of the seeding and growth of truncated octahedral Waterman polyhedra. That is, how to make a sphere of spheres, where the core of the structure is a tiny octahedron of spheres, on top of which a second slightly larger octahedron of spheres is deposited, after which the next layers are truncated octahedra of very specific dimension. Like this: However, this model assumes that the structure grows gradually into a dented cubocta

In today’s post I’m taking a mathematical detour. In most of my posts I’m talking about topic relating to quantum gravity, and lately more specifically quantum pressure. But today, I’ll return back to Waterman polyhedra. I think I’ve mentioned Waterman polyhedra a ton of times in my previous posts, but I can’t remember most of them. I think the most important post and possibly the first one was in the post “Lignin vs Water”, where I describe the crystallization of lignin na

I’ve been slowly writing my quantum pressure manuscript for some days now. In the process I’ve been trying to cut off all the vagueness from my old theory. Besides not really giving a proper mechanism for the curved motion of supramolecular arrays, I didn’t really explain how the precise mathematics that leads to helical toruses also leads to quasi-spherical toruses. But now I’ve started the process of doing exactly that. I’ll first clarify why this is important by giving a

In my last post I presented my revelation that quantum pressure is torque confined in space. In the post I compared the definitions of angular momentum and pressure and realized that the units point to not just a spatial correlation of angular momentum and pressure, but also a temporal one. That is, pressure is angular momentum divided by time and volume. With a bit of handwaving, I simply stated that torque is angular momentum divided by time, and thus pressure is simply tor

In my last post I revealed that my quest to understand quantum gravity led to the discovery of quantum pressure. Not to recap the whole post, the discovery was about applying the ideal gas law, pV = nRT, to my theory of quantum gravity and almost unexpectedly seeing the definition of pressure popping up. I don’t think that my post was very easy to follow. The reason for this was that I had only come up with the realization recently and didn’t really understand the new theor

I’ve spent months trying to figure out how to rewrite my Quantum Gravity Manuscript in a more physically rigorous way. My last post on the topic was over five weeks ago and in the intervening time I’ve tried to find a satisfying way to explain how steric effects can cause the curved supramolecular motion at the heart of the theory. I always knew that I hadn’t really described the physical mechanism for quantum gravity in the paper. I had merely said that the sum-effect of f

In several of my previous posts I´ve talked about the nature of light. In fact, I might even say that having an epiphany on the nature of light is what initially led me to try to develop the theory of everything. I´ve known the simplified model of light for more than four years now. And the simplified model is a ring of elementary particles of energy. But what I haven´t understood is how these rings move. More precisely, in the beginning I had a mathematical idea of how lig

I’ve been attempting to convert the sneaky Quantum Gravity manuscript into an actual (non-sneaky) manuscript on Quantum Gravity for a few days now. It has been a long slog. Partly because I’m feeling lazy in the evenings after long days doing actual lab work, but partly because I’m not an expert in the current theory of gravity. One might (perhaps rightfully) ask how could I have anything to contribute to gravity, if I don’t understand the current relativistic model of gravi

Ten days ago, in my previous post , I presented an illustration of steric quantum gravity in 3D. In the illustration I was able to show an array of spheres bending and twisting around itself into a helical torus. To show its inner structure, I needed to make the neighboring array of spheres transparent. In the post I said that next, I need to combine the helical segments into two entangled toroidal helices. That way I can animate two arrays of spheres moving along the curves.

Four days ago, in my previous post , I said I need to illustrate my equations on steric quantum gravity in 3D. The reason for this statement was that it appeared that people weren’t able to fully understand what I meant without seeing the equations illustrated in 3D. While I had already shown the equations in 2D plots in projections in x-y, x-z and y-z dimensions, it seemed that these projections were too abstract. Sometimes the only way to form a 3D image in someone’s head i

In my last post I talked about gravity being a repulsive force on a smaller scale. Or specifically, when dealing with molecules of gas. In today’s post, I’m trying to represent gravity as steric phenomenon, where the curvature of spacetime is a result of space never being a true vacuum in the macroscopic scale. At least if vacuum is defined as an absence of particles. This means that gravity isn’t primarily an attractive interaction, but a repulsive one. However, the repulsi

I’ve had a two-month long holiday from blog posts but know I’ve finally decided to post again. There are two reasons for the pause in posts. The first is that I indeed received a rejection to my sneaky theory of quantum gravity. And the second reason was that I knew that my next post would be addressing the responses from the reviewer, but I didn’t have the proper state of mind to do this. To cut a long story short, the journal had only got a single reviewer to look at my p

I’ve been keeping you updated on the fate of my sneaky theory on quantum gravity these past months (or even years by some counts). While for a moment I thought my manuscript had been accepted , I was soon brought to my senses when the submission tracking system said that the paper was only sent for peer review . Well, today the same tracking system said that the first report is in, only 12 days after the peer-reviewer accepted the assignment! So, what did the reviewer say?