[Spiral Path]

As a professional geologist, I have worked on the causes of mountain building and seafloor-spreading more than 30 years ago together with my late brother, a geology professor. We published several papers, but nobody believed us. After my brother's passing in 1982, I carried on alone and decided to properly evaluate the largest recorded earthquakes (which, after all, result in mountain building and seafloor spreading) with astrophysical means. I was just about stunned by the insights I gained in the intervening years. Not only did I develop a rather accurate method of possible earthquake prediction (to within an hour or so), but by doing so I also stumbled by accident on a very plausible TOE.
However, it takes a lot of time, money and energy to just write about it, let alone convince the skeptics of the validity of my research - and I am slowly running out of all three of these assets. So I have to realize that there seems to be no hope for me to ever get proper funding and other help - especially because this new theory entails the discarding of many of Einstein's ideas and even parts of the Newtonian gravitational concept (how dare I question these icons of science!!). Furthermore, in my TOE, or rather cosmology, there is no big bang (which time limit, in geological thinking, would be impossible anyway). Also, black holes, dark matter and dark energy simply do not exist because our so-called "fundamental physical constants" are not constant at all but oscillating within certain limits, depending on the ever-changing speed every body/mass/particle on the surface of the Earth travels on its multi-spiral elliptical paths through space guided by its interaction with other bodies/masses/particles according to Kepler's third law. - It's a "celestial waltz" of the planets, stars and galaxies or a "dance of the quanta" when we go to subatomic levels. - But how much more heretical could I get with these ideas? In Giordano Bruno's times I would be burned at the stake like he was.

In any case, I joined this forum to see where my TOE might possibly register on the scale of believability in comparison to other people's TOEs.

[dleviwing]

Hi S.P.;
Welcome to TOEquest.
Many who have had ideas that go against the mainstream of science or society, have used "Self Publishing". One outlet is at http://www.authorhouse.com/ I believe it is a Canadian company.
I do agree that our motions within the universe do play a roll in the behavior of physical systems.
Does your idea give an answer as to the cause of "MASS"? If so, I would like to hear it.
Best regards;
Dave

[Spiral Path]

Hi, Dave -

Thanks for the suggestion on self-publishing and the address. Unfortunately it's still too expensive for me. I would be satisfied with a Web site, but my computer is right now so corrupted that I can't do anything with it except write simple emails. Have to wait until I can afford a new CPU.

As to your question about "mass" - in my humble opinion, mass (m) is just a coalescence of quanta, i.e. an accumulation of the momenta (mv) of the smallest particles, divided by the resultant velocity (v) obtained through vector addition of their original velocities. These "clumps of momenta" might then go through lots of "spiral paths" and momentum exchange up the rungs of the growth ladder to the limit of supernova masses when disintegration takes over. The scalar unit of mass is actually only a convenience for us to be able to easily make our calculations in our particular reference frame - in reality there is no mass without movement, it is always a vector. - As I said before, this is just my opinion. I simply understand the process intuitively and I could write a whole paper about it, but I have neither the time nor the interest to embark on something that has little practical value. - Somehow, to sell my earthquake prediction method to the powers-that-be seems to me much more important as it could potentially save millions of lives.

Elfriede

[dleviwing]

Hi S.P.
I would like to thank you for the comments you made in my blog pages. Sorry I did not respond to this post.

I agree that mass is a pure function of motion and to be more exact, it is the “uniform motion” component of an object that I believe promotes mass. I’m sure “Absolute Logic” would also be a great stride toward a TOE.

If you produce a thread in the “Your TOE Theory” forum or create your own blog pages, you may attract more responses from other members. Of course posting on an annual basis tends to make your posts forgettable.

[mkirkpatrick]

Many thanks Spiral path,for your thread starter,I too am in awe of the wonder of the
music of the spheres,from looking at minute shells under a magnifying glass and seeing
the perfect spiral pathway there,then looking at the spiral galaxies,and seeing the exact
ratio of spiral as the tiny shell,only trillions of times larger.

I think your ideas have much promise,and anyway we can help you on this forum,I think
you have but to ask.

The spiral,the spin,and in particular the vortex,which is my pet,I love vortexes!Without
them life could not function.


regards michael.

[Spiral Path]

Thank you, David and Michael, for your encouraging words and I am sorry if my recent posts sounded somewhat desperate. I had a lot of trouble with my computer in the last couple of years as there seems to be a mysterious "network manager" manipulating it Complaints to the Internet Provider did not bring any results and I am worried. I just don't like writing when somebody is "looking over my shoulder". But I guess I have no choice about it, especially if this present computer invasion originates with the same people that 20 years ago tried their "honey trap" trick on me and even made a kidnap attempt. - Naturally nobody believes me.

In any case, just in case I won't get around to starting a new thread or blog about my TOE, the key to my theory lies in the Newtonian gravitational "constant" which really is, as one can easily deduce from its units (newtons*m^2/(s^2*kg^2), NOT A CONSTANT at all but a definite VARIABLE due to its velocity component (m^2/s^2). That's why nobody has yet been able to determine it to more than 4 decimal digits and only last year some researchers in Israel apparently found undeniable diurnal and annual oscillations.

This variable gravitational function leads to variable gravity on and within the Earth which, in turn, results in alternate expansion and contraction of the Earth (thus generating earthquakes). Translated into larger time frames, this variable G, which has originally been caused by the constantly varying speed of the Earth during its interaction with other celestial bodies on its spiral path around the galaxy, is then obviously the cause of large-scale mountain building and seafloor spreading.

Furthermore, it is quite likely that whatever occurs in the macroscopic world is probably also occurring in the microscopic world because all the Planck and other related "constants" depend on this variable gravitational function. Thus all 4 presently known forces can be ultimately expressed with the same equations and the TOE is created, though I am still working on the EXACT mathematical formula for G.

S.P.

[dleviwing]

Hi S.P.;
Are you saying that the variance of “G” is the cause of plate tectonics? I would think that a variance of “MASS” due to velocity would have an effect on the Earths gravity but, not on the gravitational constant which is independent of the Earths mass. It would appear that you are interpreting the “units of measure” as an equation; that’s like saying m/s (meters per second) is an equation for velocity when it is actually the units of measure of velocity.

BTW: the accuracy of G is within 3x10^-14 and NOT the 4th decimal place. That's 14 decimal places.

[Spiral Path]

Hi, David -
Thanks so much for questioning my statements. Finally somebody is seriously thinking about them! Now I'll try to answer one item at a time:

Are you saying that the variance of “G” is the cause of plate tectonics?

Yes, I am saying exactly that! My late brother (Johann Steiner) and I wrote several papers about that 30 years ago and found beautiful correlations. I can list them for you, if you are interested.

I would think that a variance of “MASS” due to velocity would have an effect on the Earths gravity but, not on the gravitational constant which is independent of the Earths mass

In my theory, G varies with both - speed AND mass - of the celestial bodies that are orbiting each other; speed often quite fast and all the time (as evidenced in the "drift" shown for example on stationary field gravimeters) and mass (where, except in supernovae, perceptible changes take eons and are mainly gains from space dust and meteorites, or losses from volatile materials escaping into space). The gravitational "constant" is therefore NOT CONSTANT at any time, but dependent on the absolute speed with which any particle travels around the center of the surrounding mass within an absolute reference frame - which is in the case of our Earth mainly the Galactic Center. (I guess this paragraph could be expressed much clearer and more eloquently than I did just now - it's past midnight and I am dead-tired after a hard day's work. Besides, my 75-year old brain doesn't work as well any more as 50 years ago and English is not my mother tongue.)

It would appear that you are interpreting the “units of measure” as an equation; that’s like saying m/s (meters per second) is an equation for velocity when it is actually the units of measure of velocity.

Well, I guess this is just a matter of semantics. I am not a stickler for it, therefore m/s is for me synonymous with velocity. And why not?

BTW: the accuracy of G is within 3x10^-14 and NOT the 4th decimal place. That's 14 decimal places.

Over the past 200-odd years, G has been measured hundreds and perhaps even thousands of times with many different methods. Granted, some methods may have been better than others, but I have seen papers showing the sigma-bars of many of these measurements by quite reputable scientists - and those sigma-bars exhibited quite considerable up and down movement over time. Actually, I vaguely remember that the overall accuracy varied already with the second digit. I have also seen the accuracy figure you are quoting (3x10^-14) and laughed about as it occurred to me that the measurements might apparently have been taken in quite a hurry, possibly within half an hour or so, as the experimenter probably had a more pressing engagement to look forward to than staying in the lab. - My own Handbook for Space Astronomy and Astrophysics says that the relative uncertainty for G is 128 ppm, so that would make the 4th decimal place variable. Similarly, the 3x10^-14 figure can, of course, also come from the manner of expressing the approximation of G, i.e. 6.672 x 10^-11 m^3/(kg*s^2) +/- 3x10^-14, which would make the relative uncertainty about 450 ppm, or 3.5 times higher than the Handbook states. That's still "in the ball park", isn't it?

Finally let me add, I welcome your questioning - as it makes focussing my own thoughts a little easier. So please fire away!

Thanks,
S.P.

[dleviwing]

Hi S.P.
Why would you say that the variance of “G” would have greater effect in causing quakes than what others say the variance due to the lunar cycle stresses or even the variances of “g” throughout the Earth?

[Spiral Path]

Why would you say that the variance of “G” would have greater effect in causing quakes than what others say the variance due to the lunar cycle stresses or even the variances of “g” throughout the Earth?[/

The variance of G causes, of course, the variances of g and thus determines whether there will be a subduction/mountain-building earthquake (such as for example around the "Ring of Fire" bordering the Pacific Ocean) or a spreading earthquake (as on mid-oceanic ridges, the Red Sea and in rift valleys). In other words, when G increases there is a volume decrease and therefore crust-shortening and subduction, while when G decreases the crust "expands" which means that new crust is formed through extrusion of lava at mid-oceanic ridges or just through a V-shaped trough on land surfaces. I guess you have to study geology to fully visualize this phenomenon. - The variance in G is mainly caused by the solar system's (and therefore also the Earth's) elliptical spiral path around the Galaxy. Because of the huge mass of the galaxy compared to the Earth's mass, the variance of G has the most profound effect on the surface of the Earth and is best demonstrated by comparing G with the geological history of the Earth over millions and even billions of years..

But the Earth, actually the barycenter between the Earth and the Moon, also follows a superimposed annual elliptical spiral path around the Sun. Here the resultant vector analyses can be done easily with appropriate computer equipment, using approximately the same formula as for G. These vector analyses are, of course, even more complicated when we add the effects of all the other planets (an occasional exceptionally high acceleration rate can even make the forces from a small planet locally quite important) and they are different for every location on the surface of the Earth and for every minute of the day. Thus the ability for accurate earthquake prediction to within an hour or so is given if the math concerning these vector analyses is done correctly.

That's what I am working on right now (at least whenever I have enough energy and time left after pure survival chores).
S.P.