The Final Four-Fold

In my last post I made the careful pronouncement that I might have found the mathematically accurate model to describe reflective gravity, or the first step to explain the Theory of Everything. Then I started looking through the folding model and for an instant it seemed that I would yet again need to make a major change to the model. But when I started making these changes, I realized that I was going farther from the correct model. Rather, I realized that I had only drawn a single reflection vector the wrong way around.

However, in the process of making this small correction, I realized that for the purpose of illustration, it’s better to lose the cones (because they clog the picture, not because they aren’t needed) and rather show the flyby paths as triangular planes. And the good thing about triangular planes is that they remain as triangles also in projections:

In the above y-z projection it’s easy to see that when two rectangles, originally at right angles are folded from their diagonal, keeping the distance between specific tips constant, you get a shape where the tips still fit snugly in a sphere.

And this is the 3D model of the above shape:

This model is practically the same as the four-leaved model, except for the small correction in the green reflection vectors. But the reason I don’t think this is procrastinating, instead of converting the four-leaved model into equations, is that when converting simple triangles into triangular planes, it’s much easier to distinguish the important triangles from the rest, as seen in this x-z projection:

If I wasn’t working on this in my free time, unpaid, I’d probably be able to finalize it in no time at all. However, due to life, it will still take some time to get the kinks sorted out. The most important flaw in the above model is that I know that the dimensions are bit off. Not because the basic theory is flawed, but because I started from the assumption that the spacetime quadrilateral has a length of √2 r and width of 2 r, when flattened into a rectangle.  I knew this to be probably wrong when I started, but not worrying about the exact dimensions allowed me to focus on the general principles, instead of the minutiae. But now this needs to be corrected.