Originally posted by camus154
Originally posted by randyvs
You really are bringing nothing to the table of any value as far as getting down to brass tax of what may be an actual cause that we're looking at
here. No one needs your negative bull. Try to come up something that will determine cause like the rest of us. Don't be so pathetic.
Oh puh-lease. Let's not have any false delusions of grandeur here, lest we think all of this is nothing more than massive ego stroking.
Not a single one of you has brought anything even remotely close to the table that helps explain the CAUSE here. All you're all doing is arguing over
times and dates because "the truth is interesting".
Perhaps you'd like to change that now and start explaining how, even if a 188 cycle does exist, how that goes towards explaining a thing?
I suggest you just google the 188 day cycle and you will find numerous hypotheses. A lot of people here already have.
But just to give you a starting point, this cycle would land roughly on both equinoxes. As I proceed I will separate fact from hypothesis so that you
have a common starting point and knowledge.
It is a *fact* that gravitational forces result in tidal effect on planets. To what extent tidal stress can result in earthquakes might be an open
question, but the fact is planets and moons end up "facing the same way" to their center of orbit after a sufficient long time. Our moon faces the
earth all the time. Our earth is slowing down ever so slowly so that our days are getting longer. This is a very gradual effect because the kinetic
energy on the planet's rotation is simply astronomically large.
This slowdown is because of tidal braking. Read up on tidal braking. Tidal braking is dissipation of rotational energy of a body in the form of heat.
This heat might be released in any form. Note that even acoustic energy and all mechanical energy dissipation ends up as heat. Note that so far these
are all facts so far.
Now, this part is hypothesis and you are free to take this statement with a grain of salt, but not dismiss it without careful thought and a good
-Tidal braking can result in some of that energy dissipation occurring as earthquakes and other seismic activity *closely timed* to the points of
maximum tidal stress.
THIS is the hypothesis presented by the 188 day cycle. The hypothesis is that there is a source of tidal stress that occurs twice a year, but much
more strongly once a year *BECAUSE* there would be a large mass somewhere such that the line connecting that mass and the sun approximately crosses
the spring equinox.
If this were true (and I am not saying whether it is or it isn't) then the gravitational distortion from this mass combined by the gravitational
distortion of the sun would lead to a "valley" in the gravitational field across this line, much like the valley that would be created if you put
two bowling balls on a bed, and use the distortion of the surface as a model for spacetime.
again, *if* this was true, the valey would have two ramps, one going down and one going up that contain *LARGE GRAVITATIONAL GRADIENTS* which will
result in a large tidal stress.
Whether this are facts or not is the subject of the thread. But a plausible mechanism of action explaining the 188 day cycle has been presented. What
remains to do is analyze the data over a sufficiently long period of time with a method such as what I proposed, where there is no implied periodicity
input to the math, if periodicity exists it would have to emerge from the data and not be an input that we are searching for.
As far as I know this rigor of test has not been done, although it seems to me from other tests that at best this cycle wold only hold for 2 years.
It would remain as a curious fact that both fema region 5 and mexico are conducting earthquake preparedness just during this season as if there was
some causal connection they know that we don't.... But that could just be a very large coincidence.
Hopefully you can now understand where other people are coming from and can come up with well thought out responses as to why you agree or disagree,
instead of basing it on your personal perceptions of the people you're discussing with.