I cannot open http://www.cut-the-knot.org/Curricul...onInCube.shtml
But from your snanpshot I would say it matches the picture I drew. The icosahedron touches every side of the cube with one point, on 1/3 from the corner (i don't know how to say more exactly) , so fitting to a cube 6 x6 x6 (or maybe also to cube 3 x 3 x 3)
- Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
- Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?
Check out my blog site
Last edited by sylvius; 12-28-2013 at 03:25 AM.
Wikipedia presents this graphic form as inherent to the icosahedron:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icosahedron
That's very nice, especially sincce it is the birth-image I drew for my first child:
This construction can be geometrically seen as the 12 vertices of the 6-orthoplex projected to 3 dimensions.
I saw it by then as picture of the Alpha and the Omega and the name of God and the letter Alef (as 10 - 6 - 10).
Last edited by sylvius; 12-28-2013 at 06:39 AM.
- Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
- Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?
Check out my blog site
Here you can see how the isocahedron fits within cube 6 x 6 x 6 = Metatron's cube:
It must be proof enough!
I did put it together from this, just that my granddaughter ruined it a bit (and I don't like to do it over again):
http://www.korthalsaltes.com/model.p...en=icosahedron
![]()
Last edited by sylvius; 12-29-2013 at 02:28 AM.
If we use circles we can make a 2D star of David with 37/73.
If we use spheres we can make a 3D version with 220/300.
You didn't have to go through all the effort to make a model. We already knew that the icosahedron fits within the cube. Your model is the same as this pic I posted (except is shows the precise points of contact):
The point is that this does not match the drawings you have done, where you overlap the icosahedron with a 2D projection of a cube.
- Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
- Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?
Check out my blog site
On the pic you posted all 12 vertices touch the cube.
In my figure 6 vertices touch the cube, it being like Mr. Gilchrists isocahedron that fits within Metratron's cube.
I wanted to contend that Metratron's cube is the perfect cube 6 x 6 x 6, to which does fit star 73.
That is correct - all twelve vertices touch the sides. We can see this in the pic you posted earlier:
None of the pictures you have posted showing the real icosahedron in a cube match the pics you have draw projecting the icosahedron onto the projection of the cube in the star. That's my point. They just don't match up. The 2D drawings are wrong.
- Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
- Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?
Check out my blog site
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks