Einstein at 999; Moon Capture And The West Coast

.
WHAT CAUSED THE WEST To ROCK and The WORLD TO ROLL?

The current causeology on sites (such as Mountain Nature) http://www.mountainnature.com/ is that the motion of westward masses named terraines in the US west coast was like a bulldozer pushing up mountains higher to the east. A problem with this idea is that if you have a bulldozer pushing soil, it will just push in front of the plough. It won't push the soil here and skip 50 feet away and then push up more soil.

So this doesn't explain how the Cascades formed to the west and then the Rockies 1600 miles east. And with the terraine explanation you need a large bulldozer with the Rockies and Andes being one continuous chain all the way from the South SA to Alaska, so it would take a bulldozer of just the sort to form a continuous range that fits the west. Tauruses and Memo Pads Awake! That mountains are held up by fluid dynamics like a ship in the water has been well known. If the Rockies and Andes were formed by changes in the density of the rocks by a fissure for the coast of the W of the US this would offer a better explanation. In my explanation the continent's motion to the W would take the place of the terraines (motion to the west would push the rocks east relative to the rest frame of the continent but they wouldn't expand down or up vertically like a ship in the water for support by change in density of the rocks) without a fissure below to allow room inside for the expansion. As you see in the rest of this post, the fissure may come from the now accepted explanation because of the moon exploration of the 70's of the origin of the moon being moon capture. My version of the moon capture would have a relatively small proto moon rolling around the earth digging out the trough, then the W motion of the continents would have moved over the fissure. So a fissure may explain the Rockies.The high and low expansion would allow heat which would cause more expansion, and the mountains would rise higher and higher with the same pressure from the west that wouldn't cause the phase change in the rocks between. Troughs in the upper mantle may not be uncommon because there are both high and low regions on the surface, like the mid ocean ridge, if there are up regions it seems usual to think there would also be lower ones. If a Heavenly Housecleaning lady asked how the mountains were formed, and you say "pressure" if she says', "I don't see any pressure." She's an angel and bleach blond!
.

. It would seem there is one large cut of the same shape as the left coast of the W hemisphere. Why would this be so? The world's geologists (not just the national geologists!) believe a proto moon the size of mars was captured when it almost blew the earth to bits on impact. My theory has been that the moon was more moon sized when it hit. Complete Theory of Moon Capture. If the moon rolled around a bit and was then flung off by moments of spin from the Earth outward, it would have first hit the parabolic southern coast of the Gulf of Alaska, this would be the shape a sphere like the moon would cut out. The Kenai peninsula (of Seward) S. Alaska and the large Valley with the ocean in it to the W. of B.C. in this theory were formed by the moon acting like a large meteorite pulling a bit of crust with it. In the larger impact basins on the moon concentric rings are formed; the inlet between Kenai (at the top of the parabola) and mainland Alaska would be like an impact ring, it would have broken off the crust a bit where it hit like this except it was caused more by the spin of the proto moon, so is not concentric. The first bounce would have had the most spin and linear motion of the moon, so the moon would have first cut a more linear cut on the side like the W coast of Canada above Washington state as you can see on this map site (land). Then when the spin caught it would cut a more round path like a billiard ball with spin. The Kenai peninsula and the B.C. west coast (which also looks like a more elliptical concentric line of mountains) would be thus explained by a moon of much the same size it is now about a fifth the diameter of the earth, a mars sized proto moon would have cut a more mars sized coastline and a magma ocean for which no evidence has been found. Then rolling and bouncing it would have cut out two more indentions of the West coast of the Western Hemisphere, what I name the Panama Indention and the Chile indention, on to a bounce from the Chile indention to the S. most tip of (E.) Australia then one long bounce from SE Australia to N. of Madagascar. The spreading centers where the ocean floor in is the most active in the world in terms of the motion of the continents drift would be where relative to the more unchanging earth as a whole the band of magma the proto moon would have dug out would be. The fastest spreading centers of what may be the band cut by the moon are off the W coast of South America, the Chile Indention. The moon would have taken a minute or two for the gravity to cause compression because if the Earth had enough spin to fling the moon outward after the capture, it would have first spun the moon outward from the gravity at the first two bounces of the Alaska and Panama sections of the moon's path. By the third bounce, the moon would have had a few minutes compression. Maximim compresssion and shear would be because the moon would be speeding up side wise and the gravity would be causing most pressure before the centrifugal force would reduce it, this would explain why Southwest S.A. would have the most well dug geology about the speed of plate motion in the world. The Earth's spin would have flung the moon off as it was headed toward the Arabian Sea after rolling all the way around what was then the tropical zone of the world. This traces out the path of the band of tectonic high activity that goes from Alaska to the Arabian Sea and this is why the pacific line of mountains is much more active than the Mid atlantic mountain chain. In the theory it's a fissure caused by the out digging out of the moon and not just the more gentle flow of heat from the earth. If you look at the path of the line the moon would have taken, the curves go from smaller with a bit more level line (the first bounce as in B.C. theory of the area of Seward Alaska above) to more length with each cycle of the bounce. The final bounce would have been with more spin of the earth, so this bounce, from S.E Australia to N. of Madagascar (as you see in the link (map)) is stretched the most of any of the series, just as if the spin was being sent with higher speed from the more massive Earth to the moon of reduced size, not a mars sized moon. The current theory is a Mars sized proto moon is needed to explain the large amount of angular momentum needed to capture a mars sized moon! If the proto moon was smaller, this would be the explanation. A smaller proto moon would be how the moon rolled around the earth in the path the geology shows. A larger moon wouldn't have rolled around the earth and then flung the moon away because with about the same masses the moon wouldn't have rolled away with more gravity, the only way for them to not stay as one mass would be via impact and recoil. This would just leave a round basin without the moon sized wavy oscillations seen on the coast of N and SA. The path of the cut seen on the W of the western hemisphere would be explained by the rolling of a smaller moon around the Earth. A larger moon would have more wavelength, and a smaller moon would go through one oscillation in just the distance from S Alaska to the Panama Indention, and the distance between this and the Chile Indention as to the other indentions is consistent with a moon of smaller size that would be moving slower on impact, and then dug in and then sped up for more distance of the indention as the moon was being flung off what was then the Earth's lower latitude. By conservation of angular momentum a proto moon of lower mass would have picked up more of the spin and rolled around the earth and then flung away. The moon would have had a good bit of spin before it hit the earth so the Kenai peninsula and the W. Coast of British Columbia would be somewhat unlike the other indentions of the path the moon would have taken.
.
. The mountains of the coast of the W. Hemisphere are to the east of the tectonic band because if it were dug out by the geometry of the size and shape of the moon it would be about this wide, a relatively narrow band not allowed in the impact explanation. There may be no mountains in the center of the Pacific on the other side of the cut because the moon's gravity combined with the Earth's higher centrifugal force would sling most of the crust toward what was the equator when the capture was achieved. By this vision of earth science the West coast of the Americas hasn't moved West much from where they were relative to the cut formed when the moon would have hit in the original super continent. The cut would have stayed the same because it was deep. This is why it has the highest expansion rate in the world, and would have had much tectonic resistance compared to the upper levels and the surface while many other continents like India may have moved much. So relative to the cut, motion may have been mostly to the East, like the mid Atlantic ridge which this theory predicts with more pressure from the West with the power of the more deep cut from the Moon, puts out more new earth headed East than West in the rest frame of the world as a whole. The line west of the W. coast of N. and S. America, being formed by a deeper cut of more power, wouldn't have moved as much as the mid Atlantic mountains might relative to the unchanging world more as a globe, with bubbling lava in the whole general area of the Atlantic range, so the Atlantic Range would have given way, and as you see on the link (here) the Atlantic ridge is actually a good bit more to the E of the mid Atlantic .
.
. Even with the resistance of the W cut where they are (off the W Coast of N and SA) the plates may have moved somewhat to the West and over most of the trough, so the mountains wouldn't now be where they were formed compared to the trough which would be more stationary. This may explain why the Andes unlike other high mountains don't have roots. They would have originally formed with more over the cut and then when they moved E. the roots would have been sheared off by the more level rock of the upper mantle than the trough below them. So first the trough would have been formed, then the US West coast would have moved west over the trough. The lower vertical pressure of the trough combined with the sidewise pressure from the resistance to the westward motion would have formed the Rockies. As you saw in the link above the SA plate has moved more to the East so the Andes were formed with higher altitude than the Rockies by much pressure between both East and West. (The general motions of all plates due to tides would be more West relative to the overall stationary mantle due to land tides which flex the land up a foot each time the moon goes over us.) The rockies are much more broad as you see in the image because they would be right over the trough, and the Andes are narrow and higher because they are formed by opposite pressure with no trough to stretch out in.

The trough theory would seem to explain how the Rockies and Andes formed. The reason they were formed in the Jurassic and not just after when the moon was captured would be because the North American plate would have first moved E by the flow of lava from the moon's fissure and eventually since it was the N. fissure that wasn't cut so deep as the faster moving S fissures like The Panama Indention it ran out of lava and momenta. Then the plate would have moved West over the fissure and this would have allowed the Rockies to ascend higher up with a foundation with the lower pressure of the fissure. So this explains why the Rockies although related to the moon capture in geology formed billions of years later than the moon capture. The fissure and pressure motif of mountain building may also explain the formation of the Appalachians, a fissure of some sort allowed the expansion high and low with more pressure from the E via the mid ocean Atlantic Ridge in the geologic hours after it's formation, I've seen no other explanation this good of how and when the Rockies and Appalachian were formed (if some mountains were formed withe the same pressure form E and W, why not more?) And the geology shows that there were mountains off the West coast of the US that have been completely eroded away, the mountains left aren't being eroded much, the Rockies are still at high altitude, this would be because the leftmost mountains would be loose rubble built up from the moon capture, so they would have eroded well. If they were formed by this event they may be more like igneous rock or at least show signs of it.

I saw a heat sensing electric blanket sold on Sale of The Century for just 25 (that time I almost won 10 million hours of dish!). Thermoelectric cooling are modules with two wires in and out that generate cool when the power is one way and heat when the power is rewound. A good use of thermoelectric cooling now in stores is in electric blankets, which make you cool in the evening and cozy when you wake up in the morning. This is a summer blanket so air conditioning is saved. The only problem is, thermoelectric modules are made of something like bismuth. So while this is where you'd have a somewhat radioactive wash, all your overalls would be radiant.

CBC News says that cellphones, Ipods, and other devices actually disrupt the power of heart pacemakers. The beat goes on if they listen to that old gold song, Shboom, Shboom, Shbooom! Songs for the Heart are better than the listening to defibrillators.

Pizza Hut in the 90's had a plan to put a giant ad on the moon with a laser. It would take a big laser so the ad was subtracted. This might be achieved if many mirrors (half spheres) of reduced size were launched and a much low power laser were in orbit around the moon, it would be low power without so much distance. The laser on the space vehicle would be aimed just right to the surface of the mirrors which would have small motors to aim the commercial to the earth.. So while the power would be lower and would be of much lower cost, the ad would be seen on earth. When I eat hot pizza, I'm so scorched lake Huron's level levels out!


While Einstein was bright, sometimes I think Einstein was overrated. Like Edison he didn't even invent relativity, 999 Einsteins lived in ancient evolution who were just as savvy, he was just the 1000th Einstein at the right moment in history. Remember the Alamo Einstein!

.
My feline, was jumping around, playing and then would rest, jump around, and run, jump around. I took my feline to the vet, what a relief. Muffy was just mousatonic!

.