A Comment on the Land Mass on Earth and the
|1) The Equator Fixed Rotation
2) The Ecliptic Plane [Earth|Sun relation]
3) Precession motion
6) Gravity Pull-to-Center: Earth
7) Inner-Core Levels
8) Gravity Pull-to-Moon
9) Gravity Pull-to-Sun [closest star]
10) Gravity Pull-to-Solar System
11) Gravity Pull-to-Stars|Galaxy
12) Gravity Pull-to-Great Attractor
13) Gravity Pull-to-Other Galaxies
|[resulting motion] [resulting motion] [resulting motion] [resulting motion] [resulting motion] [resulting motion] [resulting motion] [resulting motion] [resulting motion] [resulting motion] [resulting motion] [resulting motion]|
The cited aspects and forces|relationships of matter-energy shape the land mass on Earth.
The theory of continental drift represents initially a superficial interpretation of the visible landmass above the waterline, which was later modified to postulate its theses below the waterline at the level of the continental shelves of the continents. Continental drift theory postulates a 95% match between the coastlines of the continents of Africa and South America, thereby disregarding almost any possibility of land mass erosion between the two after their supposed separation from having occurred during their hundreds of millions of separation.
Any movement that the land mass on Earth undergoes is itself the result of the cited levels above. The act of drifting, the supposed radical motion of the continental land mass cannot explain its own composition and form. The composition, form and motion of the land mass on Earth requires an explanation as of its relationship to the different factors cited above.
Certain relationships are more easily identified in their consequences than others. For example, the direct contact between land mass and moving water mass on Earth more easily identifies aspects of land mass erosion, than say for example, the relationship between the land mass and the inner-core levels of motion. And so on.
In my book, Eventpoint Cosmogeography, specific aspects and levels of those cited are treated. For example, mainly, levels 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, and 9 are examined in specific examples. In my view, it becomes next to impossible to discern relationships between the land mass and the levels 10 through 13. But, I am not ruling such knowledge out, just simply stating that it is more difficult to isolate and identify the effects of those relationships upon the composition, form and motion of land mass on Earth.
Volume I. Eventpoint and Extremepoint Geography between Land and Water Mass on Earth
Volume II. The Earth's Inner Core in Relation to Its Geography
Eventpoint Cosmogeography, a new study, opens up a distinct line of inquiry into the geography of the Earth. Charles William Johnson, from Earth/matriX, Science Today, questions the theory of continental drift by examining the distances between geographical extreme points and selected cosmogeographical event points. The translation and centrosymmetries of geographical coordinate points suggest the fact that the continents undergo movement, but that they have not drifted randomly on the face of the Earth for the past 250 million years as proposed by Alfred Wegener nearly a century ago. The symmetry between extremepoints and eventpoints illustrated in this study suggests that continental drift theory must be reconsidered, possibly abandoned.
A Study in Relating Event Point Cosmogeography and Extreme Point Geography
Earth/matriX Editions ISBN 1-58616-432-5
Purchase and download Volume One in a PDF file
Fully illustrated with drawings.
The Earth's Crust-Mantle-Core Boundaries and Mean Plane of Motion
Earth MatriX Editions ISBN 1-58616-458-9
Purchase and download Volume Two a PDF file
©2006-2014 Copyrighted by Charles William Johnson. All rights reserved.Earth/matriX:
Science in Ancient Artwork. P.O. Box 231126, New Orleans, Louisiana, 70183-1126.
Charles William Johnson: email email@example.com