Originally posted by CLPrime
So, for the record, here's what I've plotted so far. This includes all quakes of the Oregon and Japan clusters up to 19:45 UTC.
There are problems with the supermoon theory, though. For instance, why does this relatively small decrease in distance lead to such a marked increase
in seismic activity? Also, my plot only takes the Oregon and Japan clusters into account - which, though I did this because they seemed out of place
compared to other quakes, may add a significant bias. And, the pattern, itself, is debatable. How can we scientifically determine a pattern without
any bias? How does this take other factors (both known and unknown) into account, which may be responsible, in whole or in part, for this seismic
activity? How can we know this seismic activity is, in fact, a deviation from what naturally occurs?
I just want to make that absolutely clear: it's all subjective.
I don't know what that recurring oscillation at the bottom of your chart is -- High tides, maybe?
The question in, with regard to Oregon and Japan -- there is alway a High Tide somewhere in the world. And perhaps the most like "stress reliever"
of a fault line might be perpendicular to the moon's gravity.
Also, when as a kid I first learned that the "high tide" is on two sides of the planet; facing the moon and exactly opposite the moon -- that's
when I had a sudden "aha" moment. A question about gravity. I tried modeling in my head the "standard" theories for gravity -- and they didn't
fit the idea of two tides. REALLY, with the standard model, it would make sense to only have one high tide pointed towards the moon (with the concept
of Gravity as a force in itself.
Perhaps gravity is NOT the main factor in high tides and low tides -- it might have something to do with the bi-polar and semi-magnetic nature of
water itself, which is a molecule with unusual properties (like, it contracts slightly as it becomes ice, and that it can get lighter as a solid than
a liquid). The water itself might expand as a gross volume, or perhaps it contracts with the force of the moon at a right angle.
>> But I figure, the BEST explanation, is that Gravity is a byproduct of one force; space/time coming from the particles themselves. Massless things,
do NOT add or subtract space/time -- which means it is possible to have massless matter, but ONLY if the space/time fluctuations are balanced
internally. So, if gravity is a net effect of some "propulsive" force of the particle, the particles APPEAR to be attracted to one another because
they are pushing on space itself -- and usually where a particle is not (as this reduces pressure and conserves energy). The strong, weak and gravity
forces are merely geometric "positions" of the same force -- as well as electromagnetic merely being a "ripple" along space of contraction in the
Any-who: my point is that GRAVITY WAVES, are never going to be "discovered" because it's really Space/Time fluctuating -- and whether it's
stretched or not, the "space" particles occupy is always going to be RELATIVE to the energy and mass therein. "Stretched" space, has light that
moves relatively faster -- so that it APPEARS to move at the same speed -- so any MEASUREMENT of the curvature of space, shows the same distance but
can show that light is bending because space itself is "curved". The MOON, is merely a source of "pressure" on the particles that make up the
earth -- and so the reaction to the gravity of the moon is much more dispersed over time -- meaning, objects don't TRACK the moon like we see with
magnetic fields. The GRAVITY of the moon is felt as merely a net pressure on ALL particles of the planet -- and only the very LARGEST objects, like
the earth itself and maybe the oceans and large lakes, are effected. YOU cannot feel the moon pass, because a car has more "pressure" on your
space/time due to the inverse Square rule.
The idea of a molecular/electromagnetic compression/expansion due to the Magnetic FIELD of the earth being manipulated by water -- and perhaps we only
get the high and low tides due to a strange circumstance of water's di-pole nature -- WELL, proof of that is going to require finding a water covered
planet without a strong magnetic filed AND a large moon that shows NO TIDE.
>> OK, where is this going? Because GRAVITY is not the FORCE that current science imagines it is; the Moon does not trigger earthquakes. Our
intuition, reasons that it WOULD - because we think of it like a "weak magnetic field that works on all matter." Actually, magnetism is when the
flow of space/time is "organized" and it "spins" the expression of space as objects Project it outward. All particles that produce gravity have
poles -- when an aggregate are organized -- you get magnetism -- BUT NO CHANGE IN GRAVITY.
Off topic - this means that gravity is about a million times more powerful than traditional models -- and that magnetism is merely what you get when
SOME of that force is organized rather than diffused to non-mass particles. The ultimate STRENGTH of gravity is expressed in the STRONG nuclear force
that bonds protons and neutrons together. The ENTIRE planet, sits on top of atoms in the core of our earth -- yet they feel pressure and do not
collapse. The gravity is not cumulative, but a particle in the center of the planet, is going to "stabilize" it's pressure in space/time -- the
strong force increases as the gravity pressure increases -- like when equilibrium is achieved in deep sea dives; a thousand atmospheres of pressure do
not crush fish, because they have the same pressure INSIDE as out. That gives another clue that Gravity itself is NOT a force -- there is a medium
that permeates inside the particles and "empty space" and distributes the pressure.
High pressure and high gravity, do not change molecular interactions too much. Nor would changes and fluctuations in gravity...
... it would be VERY interesting to test "how permeable" molecules are changes in "gravity" -- just as there is a certain rate that pressure
changes can occur in deep sea dives.
[Back on topic/ mind wandering over]
>> As I've said in earlier Blogs, the LIKELY reason for our increased volcanic activity is because of GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE. The huge amounts of ice
being melted off of Greenland and the Poles and Glaciers around the world, is going to "uncork" areas of the earth that have been compressed by tons
of ice. ONE of the many "unintended consequences" of our changing of the planet.