I remember a post to the Internet around 1993 or 1994 thereabouts that asked me to
do the science on earthquakes so that they can be predicted. Back in 1993-1994 I
was busy on p-adics as the Natural Numbers in mathematics and busy on the Atom
Totality theory. So the poster must have been somewhat impressed with my science
acumen to have asked for me to unravel earthquake theory. Trouble was that in
1993-1994 I could not oblige this poster in any way shape or form because in
1993-1994 the world science community had not progressed far enough in
understanding as to any one of these 4 phenomenon of (i) Volcanoes, (ii)
Tornadoes, (iii) Hurricanes, (iv) Earthquakes. But by the decade of 2000s enough
progress was made on predicting Volcanoes as per the NOVA TV show sometime around
2002-2004 that enough science has progressed on these 4 phenomenon that I can put
my mind to work at unraveling not just one of them but all four combined. I
possess perhaps the most science-unifyer mind ever given to a individual human
being. But I need a background of a modicum of data to begin to unify 4 diverse
and separate phenomenon and that indice of data had been reached once Volcanoes
can be mildly or strongly predicted as that NOVA show displayed.

I am hoping I kept and archived that poster asking me to work on solving
Earthquakes back in 1994.

Anyway, what can unify those 4 phenomenon is the bathtubdrainhole physics for all
4 possess that physics. And since they all possess the main physics at work of a
twisting rotational motion, then all four can be predictable.

Volcano predicting leads the way in that it has 2 waves where the smaller second
wave predicts a dangerous capp about to erupt.

So, if I apply bathtubdrainhole physics to all four then I should be able to unify
all 4 both in physics and in prediction.

Another poster last night asked me what I mean by "Weakest Rock Layer" for
Earthquakes. He even dared say "caves" when I mentioned gaps in rock layers.

Let me try to make some clarification by asking some questions:

In tectonic plate theory of subduction where earthquakes abound is there not some
gaps in the rock layers and these gaps are zones of air layers? So a Weakest Rock
Layer would have many zones of air pockets.

In tectonic plate theory is not the main mover of plates the rotation spin of the
planet Earth on its axis? That if the Earth did not spin on its axis that tectonic
plates would be mostly stationary. Is not the rotation of Earth the prime mover of
tectonic plates? If so, then the rate of movement of tectonic plates such as in
subduction where earthquakes abound would be connected to rotation and spin of
Earth.

So that the rate of Earthquake production is linked to differential rates of
rotation. The tectonic plates are themselves a result of the rotation of Earth on
axis and where a the rotation rate is highly varied is a place where earthquakes
abound.

So that to predict earthquakes is to map and chart the rotation rate of Earth axis
upon various points of geography and to couple that mapping to the map of the
weakest rock layers of the tectonic plates. By weakest I mean those places where
there are many air zones or air pockets. So to predict future Earthquakes with
some accuracy and precision is to be aware of weak rock layers and to be aware of
a future date time in which the rotation of Earth on axis puts a stress on that
weak rock layer of its air gaps.

Here we can go back in time and measure how much our worst earthquakes at there
precise epicenter how much they moved up or down, how much air pockets had been
there, how weak those rock layers were, and what the rotation spin of Earth's axis
had been prior to the earthquake.

In Volcanoes, the 2nd wave is created by the sealing of the dome or capping of the
volcano. In Earthquakes there should be a "Reverse Analogy" to volcano in that the
weakest rock layers are ones with many air spaces and air pockets which we can
measure. And then as in Volcanoes a determinant amount of energy of pressure from
below as reflected in the 2nd wave can predict its eruption. Likewise the weakness
of the rock layers and the periodic rotation of Earth applying differential stress
to that region should predict when an earthquake and the magnitude of damage by
that earthquake.

I have asked many questions above especially concerning the link between plate
tectonics and Earth rotation spin on axis and hopefully some geologists and
physicists have begun work on that relationship.

Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
www.archimedesplutonium.com
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium

Archimedes Plutonium wrote in message ...
2 Apr 2004 21:43:22 -0800 MikeDinGRI wrote:

You seem and wish to believe that I said that Hurricane equals Tornado equals Earthquake equals
Volcano. I said nothing like that.

From:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 11:15:39 -0600
Message-ID:
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 11:15:36 -0600
From: Archimedes Plutonium
Reply-To: NOiwEMAIL
Organization: www.archimedesplutonium.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.geo.meteorology,sci.geo.geology
Subject: cure for tornadoes connecting
Tornadoes,Volcanoes,Earthquakes,Hurricanes,bathtub drain all into one

PBS show on Tornadoes

You Said:

"I need to point out a gap in logic of the scientists that appeared on
that NOVA
PBS show on Tornadoes in that they remarked there is no physics model.
There
well is a physics model in that of a bathtubdrainhole. But there
exists a 2nd
model that the scientists on that program should have discussed and
that is a
Hurricane for we can say that a Tornado is simply a hurricane on land
and a
hurricane is a tornado at ocean. So if we can delve into how a
hurricane is
created we can then re-apply that knowledge to how a tornado is
created on land."

I think your words speak for themself.

Finding a connecting link such as bathtubdrainhole is equal. Not the phenomenons themselves.

I cannot teach you how to read and comprehend what is said, and besides it is a huge waste of my
time. And you should not be in science judging from your comments.

And you shouldn't be in science judging by your complete ignorance of
the synoptic and mesoscale dynamics involved in cyclogeneis and
tornadogensis.


Look up the following terms and then report back with your findings.

You need a crash course education in logic for you are unable to even read someone else without
misunderstanding them. You are so silly and cannot even recognize that a model is connective
links and the equality is not hurricane equals tornado but that the bathtubdrainhole is equal.

Nothing to misunderstand. See above.

Baroclinic (hint, synoptic scale systems which spawn supercells and
tornadoes)
Barotropic (hint, the type of system a hurricane is)

Saying a tornado and a hurricane are the same thing is like saying a
Porsche and a Yugo are the same thing. At the very basic level, they
are; get under the hood, however, and the differences end.

Regards,

Mike

Sad to see that alot of people in science like Mike cannot even read and understand and
comprehend what they read before they make some stupid comments.

Yet, you still believe a tornado and hurricane are the same type of
cyclone, the only difference is whether it's over land or water.

You know, they do have these things called satellites, radars,
soundings, NWP models, etc. which inidicate that there may be a
slight, yes, a SLIGHT, difference between tropical cyclones and
tornadoes.

Maybe you should trade in your copy of Aristotle's "Meteorologica" and
pick up a copy of Bluestein's "Synoptic-Dynamic Meteorology in
Midlatitudes" and join the rest of us as we go into the 21st century.

Barring that, maybe you and Sollog could team up and become the next
Abbott and Costello.

Regards,

Mike

Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

"Hoo boy..."

Maybe you should trade in your copy of Aristotle's "Meteorologica" and
pick up a copy of Bluestein's "Synoptic-Dynamic Meteorology in
Midlatitudes" and join the rest of us as we go into the 21st century.

Barring that, maybe you and Sollog could team up and become the next
Abbott and Costello.

Regards,

Mike

Not Aristoteles, Immanuel Kant is the key to Archimedes Plutonium's
inner world.

A priori, there is always a first and a second wave, cyclones are
bathtubdrains(Baroclinic cyclones does not exist) and the universe is
a large atom:
http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/5f.htm
http://www.lclark.edu/~rebeccac/kantsci.html

Volcano:
Initial conditions(First wave): Magma chamber filled with molten rock
and gas under high pressure.
Final event(second wave): Molten rock and gas spewing out of a bathtub
hole on the top of the mountain.

Baroclinic cyclone:
Initial conditions: A steady front between cold polar air and warmer
subtropical air and a small mysterious spinning wave disturbance.
Final event: A very mysterious, unpredictable and large bathtub drain,
luckily most often not too severe.
http://www.phys.ufl.edu/~liz/13.pdf
http://www.eumetsat.de/en/index.html...=0&c=0&d=0&e=0

Tornado, bathtub drain coming down from a rotating raincloud:
Initial conditions: wind shear, unstable moist air/cold front.
Final event: Rain, hail and a very small but windy bathtub drain.
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/srh/jetstrea...le/tornado.htm
http://www.torro.org.uk/

Polar low(arctic hurricane), baroclinic/barotropic hybrid ?:
Initial conditions: Very cold air above ice free water, baroclinic
instability
Final event: Relative small and shallow bathtub drain with unpleasant
cold and fierce winds.
"Studies have shown that a warm core often forms (Rasmussen 1985,
Shapiro et al. 1987).
http://meted.ucar.edu/norlat/snow/po...ofpolarlow.htm

Tropical cyclones, organised rain clouds, barotropic:
Initial conditions: Cluster of rainclouds(or a baroclinic low) feed
by moisture from warm water 4 - 5o south or north, little or no
significant wind shear.
Final event: Medium size bathtub drain, most often very rainy and
windy.
http://iri.columbia.edu/outreach/edu...ne/node14.html

4 Apr 2004 22:07:36 -0700 MikeDinGRI wrote:

Archimedes Plutonium wrote in message ...
2 Apr 2004 21:43:22 -0800 MikeDinGRI wrote:

You seem and wish to believe that I said that Hurricane equals Tornado equals Earthquake equals
Volcano. I said nothing like that.



(snip)



You Said:

"I need to point out a gap in logic of the scientists that appeared on
that NOVA
PBS show on Tornadoes in that they remarked there is no physics model.
There
well is a physics model in that of a bathtubdrainhole. But there
exists a 2nd
model that the scientists on that program should have discussed and
that is a
Hurricane for we can say that a Tornado is simply a hurricane on land
and a
hurricane is a tornado at ocean. So if we can delve into how a
hurricane is
created we can then re-apply that knowledge to how a tornado is
created on land."

I think your words speak for themself.

Anyone can read anyone of my posts with a slant of hatred of me and concoct some different meaning as
to my intent. Especially since I type fast and never bother to proof read or re-read my posts before
I hit the "send key".

My threads are very open to those scientist who love science and the subject at hand. My threads are
never meant for those like yourself who hates Archimedes Plutonium and is just looking for the
opportunity of hate spam.

The "bathtubdrainhole-physics of Hurricane" is equal to the "bathtubdrainhole-physics of Tornado" and
if you cannot read that into my missives or understand that is where I am coming from, then you
should not participate in my threads.



Finding a connecting link such as bathtubdrainhole is equal. Not the phenomenons themselves.

I cannot teach you how to read and comprehend what is said, and besides it is a huge waste of my
time. And you should not be in science judging from your comments.

And you shouldn't be in science judging by your complete ignorance of
the synoptic and mesoscale dynamics involved in cyclogeneis and
tornadogensis.

Okay, let us examine your above. Perhaps you have been in meteorology and Hurricane analysis for 20
years or 30 years. I have been in Hurricane analysis for a sum total of 3 minutes. The question is,
is not that I am ignorant of Hurricanes since I never studied them, but the question is as to why
you, Mike knows so much about Hurricanes yet has never listed what the similarities between a
Hurricane and Tornado are.

Are there connective links of synoptic dynamics between Hurricane and Tornado?

Are there connective links of mesoscale dynamics between Hurricane and Tornado?

What exactly is similar between Hurricane and Tornado? Yes, I have been into this field for only a
matter of minutes or hours whereas you Mike is in it for years. So the ignorant person is really not
me because off the starting block I want to know exactly the similarities between Hurricane and
Tornado because the BathtubDrainHole-Physics demands that they are similar in many respects.

So the ignorant person is you Mike who has studied this stuff for years and yet with all those years
is unable to list those similarities. For if you list them, you would see this:

bathtubdrainhole-physics of Tornado equals bathtubdrainhole-physics of Hurricane

And I can include in that equality the bathtubdrainhole-physics of Volcano plus Earthquake.





Look up the following terms and then report back with your findings.

You need a crash course education in logic for you are unable to even read someone else without
misunderstanding them. You are so silly and cannot even recognize that a model is connective
links and the equality is not hurricane equals tornado but that the bathtubdrainhole is equal.

Nothing to misunderstand. See above.

Baroclinic (hint, synoptic scale systems which spawn supercells and
tornadoes)
Barotropic (hint, the type of system a hurricane is)

Saying a tornado and a hurricane are the same thing is like saying a
Porsche and a Yugo are the same thing. At the very basic level, they
are; get under the hood, however, and the differences end.

Regards,

Mike

Sad to see that alot of people in science like Mike cannot even read and understand and
comprehend what they read before they make some stupid comments.

Yet, you still believe a tornado and hurricane are the same type of
cyclone, the only difference is whether it's over land or water.


Yes, the bathtubdrainhole-Physics is the same in both because energy is all the same. And if we
magically could lift a tornado up from the land and put it instantly over water it would become a
hurricane and vice versa. But you are not enough of a scientist to appreciate that.


You know, they do have these things called satellites, radars,
soundings, NWP models, etc. which inidicate that there may be a
slight, yes, a SLIGHT, difference between tropical cyclones and
tornadoes.

Maybe you should trade in your copy of Aristotle's "Meteorologica" and
pick up a copy of Bluestein's "Synoptic-Dynamic Meteorology in
Midlatitudes" and join the rest of us as we go into the 21st century.

Barring that, maybe you and Sollog could team up and become the next
Abbott and Costello.

Regards,

Mike

The reason little progress is made in understanding Tornadoes and Earthquakes is because most people
like Mike never really pursue the heart of the matter on these phenomenon and when they encounter
someone who makes the leap into understanding they instantly attack him with hate-spam.

Let us start this discussion over Mike. Forget the adhominem. Let me ask you a question.

Question: what similarities exist between a Hurricane and Tornado in terms of physics? That is the
important question at the moment and it is this question that the participant scientists of that NOVA
show made a mistake by saying there were no models to model Tornadoes. That is false for there are at
least 2 models and one being bathtubdrainhole-physics and the second model is Hurricanes.

Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
www.archimedesplutonium.com
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium

Sun, 04 Apr 2004 12:32:36 -0500 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
(huge snips)


So that the rate of Earthquake production is linked to differential rates of
rotation. The tectonic plates are themselves a result of the rotation of Earth on
axis and where a the rotation rate is highly varied is a place where earthquakes
abound.

So that to predict earthquakes is to map and chart the rotation rate of Earth axis
upon various points of geography and to couple that mapping to the map of the
weakest rock layers of the tectonic plates. By weakest I mean those places where
there are many air zones or air pockets. So to predict future Earthquakes with
some accuracy and precision is to be aware of weak rock layers and to be aware of
a future date time in which the rotation of Earth on axis puts a stress on that
weak rock layer of its air gaps.


Now I do not know how well and easy it is to measure pockets of air or air spaces in
rocks at lower depths. I suspect it is easy and that such a mapping already exists.

I conjecture that if one were to make a thorough mapping of the rock layers
especially near fault zones and tectonic plates of subduction (or abduction) that
most earthquake epicenters occur on or near a extensive air pockets or zones in which
alot of air spaces exist.

I would conjecture that Japan and California have alot of earthquakes and earthquake
epicenters because those rock layers have a large volume of air pockets and
air-space.

So that we can conceive of a Earthquake as an underground event of a bathtubdrainhole
physics of energy by the rotation of Earth on an axis and the place where a
earthquake originates is a place of large air-space-volume.

Suppose we had two buildings made of brick and one had alot of air gaps between brick
layers whereas the other was solid brick and we impose a energy force on these two
buildings and it is obvious which building would collapse first.

So we need to go back in history of where all major earthquakes occurred and we need
to mapp those sites for underground air spaces in the rock layers.

Once we complete such a mapping, if we find an agreement to volume of airspaces in
rock layers to epicenters of past history earthquakes would tell us immediately where
future earthquake epicenters are likely to occur. And after we get such an extensive
mapping we then go to the physicists to supercomputer run where we need a
energy-driver of the Earth's rotation spin as the driver. Such that the supercomputer
tells us when enough energy is focused on that air-pocket-rock-layers will break
those layers and create the next big earthquake.

So to predict future earthquakes as to where and how big will occur is to mapp
underground air-pockets and then compute the breaking energy for those rocks with
air-pockets. That should predict time and place and magnitude of future earthquakes.

Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
www.archimedesplutonium.com
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium

Mon, 05 Apr 2004 15:21:12 -0500 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:


So to predict future earthquakes as to where and how big will occur is to mapp
underground air-pockets and then compute the breaking energy for those rocks with
air-pockets. That should predict time and place and magnitude of future earthquakes.


There is a substitute for air-spaces in underground rock layers and that is
light-density rock layers underneath heavy more dense rocks. If under California or
Japan were alot of basaltic rock above less dense rocks is an equivalent substitute for
air-space. So that we do not need exactly airpockets in the rock layers to be a site of
earthquakes when a substitute weak rock layers is caused because you have dense rocks
above those of less dense rocks.

Perhaps the rock layers of California are basalt or granites resting on top of
sedimentary layers. Such a condition is a substitute for rock layers with alot of air
spaces in them.

Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
www.archimedesplutonium.com
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium

Archimedes Plutonium wrote in message ...
4 Apr 2004 22:07:36 -0700 MikeDinGRI wrote:

The "bathtubdrainhole-physics of Hurricane" is equal to the "bathtubdrainhole-physics of Tornado" and
if you cannot read that into my missives or understand that is where I am coming from, then you
should not participate in my threads.

Well, quit cross posting to s.g.m and I'd be more than happy to leave
you and your mindless tripe alone to do whatever you so desire.

Okay, let us examine your above. Perhaps you have been in meteorology and Hurricane analysis for 20
years or 30 years. I have been in Hurricane analysis for a sum total of 3 minutes. The question is,
is not that I am ignorant of Hurricanes since I never studied them, but the question is as to why
you, Mike knows so much about Hurricanes yet has never listed what the similarities between a
Hurricane and Tornado are.

Similarities between tornadoes and tropical cyclones are generally
taught in an Intro to Met/Atmospheric Sci. while the differences can
fill entire tomes. Why should I reinvent the wheel once again when
you can take your lazy ass down to BN or Borders and pick up a copy of
"Weather for Dummies."

Are there connective links of synoptic dynamics between Hurricane and Tornado?

So the ignorant person is really not
me because off the starting block I want to know exactly the similarities between Hurricane and
Tornado because the BathtubDrainHole-Physics demands that they are similar in many respects.

Yes, and the glass-full-of-liquids-Physics demands that water and
hydrochloric acid are similar in many respects. I bet you wouldn't
want to take a blind taste test with them though.

So the ignorant person is you Mike who has studied this stuff for years and yet with all those years
is unable to list those similarities. For if you list them, you would see this:

bathtubdrainhole-physics of Tornado equals bathtubdrainhole-physics of Hurricane

And I can include in that equality the bathtubdrainhole-physics of Volcano plus Earthquake.

I've got to quit here. You're definitely smoking some good stuff that
my "ignorant" mind can't keep up with. I haven't heard enlightenment
like yours since my old school friends and I use to pass ganja and
drop tabs.

So changing the subject a bit, does anyone want to hear how the
babyruth-physics of candy bars and the babyruth-physics of turds are
equal?

Regards,

Mike

Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

Mon, 05 Apr 2004 15:21:12 -0500 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:


So to predict future earthquakes as to where and how big will occur is to
mapp underground air-pockets and then compute the breaking energy for
those rocks with air-pockets. That should predict time and place and
magnitude of future earthquakes.


There is a substitute for air-spaces in underground rock layers and that
is light-density rock layers underneath heavy more dense rocks. If under
California or Japan were alot of basaltic rock above less dense rocks is
an equivalent substitute for air-space. So that we do not need exactly
airpockets in the rock layers to be a site of earthquakes when a
substitute weak rock layers is caused because you have dense rocks above
those of less dense rocks.

Perhaps the rock layers of California are basalt or granites resting on
top of sedimentary layers. Such a condition is a substitute for rock
layers with alot of air spaces in them.

Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
www.archimedesplutonium.com
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium

you sir, are a wingnut

Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

Sun, 04 Apr 2004 12:32:36 -0500 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
(huge snips)


So that the rate of Earthquake production is linked to differential rates
of rotation. The tectonic plates are themselves a result of the rotation
of Earth on axis and where a the rotation rate is highly varied is a
place where earthquakes abound.

So that to predict earthquakes is to map and chart the rotation rate of
Earth axis upon various points of geography and to couple that mapping to
the map of the weakest rock layers of the tectonic plates. By weakest I
mean those places where there are many air zones or air pockets. So to
predict future Earthquakes with some accuracy and precision is to be
aware of weak rock layers and to be aware of a future date time in which
the rotation of Earth on axis puts a stress on that weak rock layer of
its air gaps.


Now I do not know how well and easy it is to measure pockets of air or air
spaces in rocks at lower depths. I suspect it is easy and that such a
mapping already exists.

I conjecture that if one were to make a thorough mapping of the rock
layers especially near fault zones and tectonic plates of subduction (or
abduction) that most earthquake epicenters occur on or near a extensive
air pockets or zones in which alot of air spaces exist.

I would conjecture that Japan and California have alot of earthquakes and
earthquake epicenters because those rock layers have a large volume of air
pockets and air-space.

So that we can conceive of a Earthquake as an underground event of a
bathtubdrainhole physics of energy by the rotation of Earth on an axis and
the place where a earthquake originates is a place of large
air-space-volume.

Suppose we had two buildings made of brick and one had alot of air gaps
between brick layers whereas the other was solid brick and we impose a
energy force on these two buildings and it is obvious which building would
collapse first.

So we need to go back in history of where all major earthquakes occurred
and we need to mapp those sites for underground air spaces in the rock
layers.

Once we complete such a mapping, if we find an agreement to volume of
airspaces in rock layers to epicenters of past history earthquakes would
tell us immediately where future earthquake epicenters are likely to
occur. And after we get such an extensive mapping we then go to the
physicists to supercomputer run where we need a energy-driver of the
Earth's rotation spin as the driver. Such that the supercomputer tells us
when enough energy is focused on that air-pocket-rock-layers will break
those layers and create the next big earthquake.

So to predict future earthquakes as to where and how big will occur is to
mapp underground air-pockets and then compute the breaking energy for
those rocks with air-pockets. That should predict time and place and
magnitude of future earthquakes.

Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
www.archimedesplutonium.com
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium

and a k00k

HTH