Cosmic Geometry
Of ferman: Fernando Mancebo Rodriguez--- Personal page. ----Spanish pages

You can see many of my works, in the following pages:

Email: ferman25@hotmail.com
Email: ferman30@yahoo.es

Cosmic Geometry versus Human Geometry
Spherical Geometry versus Cartesian Geometry

Cosmos procedure

In physics and astrophysics we can observe as any central nucleus that executes any force or influence around it (matter and its gravity fields, magnetic fields, electric fields, etc. ) on other elements (often minor orbital ones), this influence of that central nucleus are spread and executed in spherical way from the central nucleus to its surrounding periphery.
(In not case the central nucleus executes its power and influence along the axis of the Cartesian coordinates, X,Y,Z.)
In astrophysics this is observed continuously when proving that gravity and magnetic fields are distributed spherically around the great celestial bodies, such as galaxies, stars, planets, moons, etc., of course, besides the equatorial plane rotation if these Astros have spin, but this also remains being spherical rotation.

Human procedure

Nevertheless, humans prefer invent, use and place space points by mean of the definition of the Cartesian coordinates, where elements are distributed in cube way along (or in the middle of) the axes of the Cartesian coordinates.
Although this is made due to the point (0) of the coordinates doesn't execute any type of influence or field of force, but alone a common reference point.
In this sense, we can say that our mind has quadrangular vision, say, we have a square mind.
Then, it is possible say that we define the spatial situation of any point P by mean of Cartesian coordinates P(x,y,z)
While the cosmos defines, acts, organizes and executes places y motions by mean of the number Pi. P = f(pi). See last drawing.

Macro and microcosms

In the macrocosms that we observe continuously, we can see as the actuation and distribution of physical elements is made in spherical and spiral ways, due to the elements are organized by mean of major central nuclei that spread and distribute their influence (gravity fields, magnetic fields, etc.) around them on other minor Astros, those which are captured, directed and forced to the rotation around the major ones with the final goal of encountering the perfect balance among fields of forces; attraction/repulsion forces; angular momentum, quantity of matter and speed of each one of them, etc.

Microcosms

But in the microcosms, what occurs?
Of course the same thing, because of here the same structural elements exist, with major central nuclei; gravity, magnetic and electric charges of attraction/repulsion; captured orbital ones, those which are forced to the rotation according their mass, speed of rotation, etc.

Then, which is the current problem of this physical field?

Because of the current Quantum Mechanics (QM) is invented by humans, and so, we reproduce and pretend that the microcosms works and fallows our own cosmic vision, and not the nature of the cosmos structuring.
Logically this pretension is totally erroneous (treating of being polite and putting it softly and respectfully) since due to our scientific sufficiency and self-importance don't allow us the required humility for revising such important error for taking conscience that the QM goes against the logic, observations and physical knowledge.

But not, we invent personal formulas (i.e. Schrodinger) and when we see that the results are against the physical laws, we simply say that these laws are wrong and the correct ones is our formulas, vision and physical pretensions.
Nevertheless, many questions would arise from this enormous wrong.

Could any serious physicist accepts that the electric attraction force that surrounding the central nuclei of atoms can redistribute electrons along the X, Y or Z axes of the Cartesian coordinate, remains this way in total unbalance the attraction forces (positive-negative) among nuclei and electrons?
No, electrons must to rotate around the central nuclei with adequate speed as for their distance from the nuclei to be in balance the system.
This way, any critical scientist should reject this QM pretension.
Although it seems to be that scientists prefer to be quiet and don't contradict to the masters of QM, perhaps for fear "to be accursed of ignorant".

I wouldn't like to be included in this group and prefer to protest of it.
For that, in this article I include the following satire drawing.
Sorry to those who could be annoyed for this satire.

Satire against the QM

Conjunction QM - Classical Physics

I put here a possible approximation between the planetary models of the classical physics with the distribution of orbital ones in stationary waves.

Greeting friends