|
|
 |
The Numbers
Pictures may be worth a thousand words, but numbers are often more telling. So, that was the next part of my investigation. I wanted to define these locations numerically and compare them. Despite my desire for precision, I quickly found out that working with whole degrees of latitude and longitude was the only way to actually get anywhere with this in one lifetime. Thus, I have rounded to whole numbers and likely created some discrepancies in doing so, but the numbers seem to be so close that it may not matter.
| Feature |
AWest |
AEast |
|
| ... |
Gulf of Mexico, Caribbean Sea, Central America to South America |
South Pacific islands b/w China and Australia, ala Indonesia, etc |
|
| deep to deep |
| Milwaukee Deep | 20°N | 65°W |
| Hess Deep | 3°N | 101°W |
| Distance | 2695 miles |
|
| Challenger Deep | 11°N | 142°E |
| Java/Sunda Deep | 11°S | 110°E |
| Distance | 2672 miles |
|
| |
 |
 |
| As noted, the distance between the deep points at each site is virtually the same, off by only 23 miles. Also, the angle or pitch of these lines is very close - AWest 61° and AEast 56° from vertical. These differences are extremely slight considering rounding to whole degrees and that there is no logical or geological reason for these two sites to resemble each other in any way. |
|
| center points |
11°N 83°W in the Caribbean Sea, border b/w Nicaragua and Costa Rica |
0°N 126°E in the Molucca Sea, east of Sulawesi, Indonesia |
| The center point of each site works out to the same latitude and longitude, whether calculated or measured. They currently have no real significance other than giving me a central reference point for comparison of the two sites. |
|
| Are AWest and AEast really opposite the globe from each other? (ie, antipodes) |
| Milwaukee Deep | 20°N 65°W |
... |
antipode | 20°S 115°E |
| AWest center | 11°N 83°W |
... |
antipode | 11°S 97°E |
| Hess Deep | 3°N 101°W |
... |
antipode | 3°S 79°E |
|
| Challenger Deep | 11°N 142°E |
... |
antipode | 11°S 38°W |
| AEast center | 0°N 126°E |
... |
antipode | 0°S 54°W |
| Java/Sunda Deep | 11°S 110°E |
... |
antipode | 11°N 70°W |
|
None of the points appear to be antipodes of other points, ie, no coordinates in the left-hand column are equal to any in the right-hand column. Although AWest center's antipode (11°S 97°E) is suspiciously close to the Java/Sunda deep point (11°S 110°E), 13° of longitude is quite a gap, about 900 miles. That seems much more than a rounding error. By longitude only, the closest matchup appears to be Milwaukee Deep and Java Deep for a difference of 5°, ie, only 5° off the 180º halfway mark. Even so, that's about 345 miles.
The 11's are quite interesting because the 11°N and 11°S in AEast puts it perfectly across the current equator. Also, note that the center point in AWest is on 11°N which makes a horizontal alignment with Challenger Deep. Hess Deep (3°N) is somewhat aligned with AEast's center. It seemed quite odd that the bottom two AWest points are almost aligned with the top two AEast points. I made a note to keep this in mind, it could be a clue.
|
|
| What about distances between the points in AWest and AEast? |
| Milwaukee Deep to Challenger Deep | 9624 mi | - northeast point to northeast point |
| Hess Deep to Java/Sunda Deep | 10252 mi | - southwest point to southwest point |
| Milwaukee Deep to Java/Sunda Deep | 11732 mi | - northeast point to southwest point |
| Hess Deep to Challenger Deep | 8009 mi | - southwest to northeast point |
| AWest center to AEast Center | 10315 mi | - trans-pacific |
|
| All of these distances were calculated using great circle java apps on the web, so they represent the shortest distance between the pairs of points. Mileage may vary a little depending on the precise formula used. I don't see an obvious correlation in these numbers. Certainly none of them mark half the circumference of the Earth, as would be expected for antipodes. I tried combinations and couldn't make a clearly sensible full circuit either. |
|
Earth stats:
at the equator
..circumference 24900 mi
...half 12450 mi
...diameter 7926 mi
...radius 3963 mi
pole to pole
..circumference 24860 mi
...half 12430 mi
...diameter 7913 mi
...radius 3956 mi
|
|
At this point it occurred to me that..
1) There are angled lines involved and so the whole circuit around the globe may or may not add up to the circumference.
2) I'm using today's grid of latitude and longitude to try to calculate the relationship between points which might have been oriented differently when created.
3) I hadn't taken into account any changes in the Earth such as expansion/contraction or other more independent movement of land formations.
While I felt sure that the deep points have not moved relative to their respective locations, I do not know how much the Earth has changed. The Mid Atlantic Ridge is perpetually active and reportedly widening the gap between the Americas and Europe/Africa. Perhaps the Pacific has expanded too, as part of the Earth's bulging around the middle. The likelihood of perfectly proportional expansion around the equator seems fairly slim, so an uneven distribution might explain why the deeps were not precisely correlating horizontally. But, I didn't know if there was really that much stretch in it.
There were also vertical adjustments to consider. After all, the magnetic poles move around quite a bit and surely the energy 'machine' I had in mind would have been based on magnetic more than geographic poles from which latitude and longitude are derived.
With all these variables in mind, I still pondered the logistics of some sort of connection, which from my understanding had to be an energy loop through and around the Earth. AEast was stretched across the current Equator, but AWest was not. What if it had been, at the time? If the deep points constituted part of an energy loop through the Earth, but made energy available on the surface as well, then wouldn't there be IN points and OUT points? Also, because of the distance between the deeps in each location, perhaps there would be no real antipodes?
My list of questions grew. My theories expanded and contracted. I spent months working at this puzzle and began to wonder if everything I thought I saw was wrong, in fact, if everything I thought was wrong.
Then, I bought a globe.
|
Gratitude for these tools freely available on the web for calculation and location:
Great Circle Calculator
Great Circle Distance Mapper
Source/Target Distance Calculator
How Far Is It?
Next in Sequence
Select From Menu
|
|
 |
|
uicksilver