[resonance]

There are other observations that the O continuous model needs to accommodate. The first is the observation that the earth has a bulge at the equator and/or is compressed from pole to pole. If one thinks in terms of gravity alone, the earth should be more spherical. Relative to the O continuiity model, this observation is what one would expect. With the equator being the maxima for solar evaporation, this is the zone of maximum potential with the iron core. The result should be hydrothermal connections and crustal uplift at the eqatorial region of the earth. The integrated magnetic field should complement this, with the attraction between poles, irregardless of field inversion, helping to squish the viscoplastic inner earth from pole to pole. The magnetic field probably had a very limited influence, but it nevertheless integrates, in way, that coordinates with the geomtery that is observed. 

This brings up the second observation. If you look at the continents, and trace their history back in time, they all originallly were connected as one super continent. Although this is the reality of the situation, it is counter intuitive to the observed earth potentials in the O-continuous model. The model would have predicted the orginal land being more randomly distributed, more or less centered around the equator. One possible way to accommodate this anomaly is that a significant breech occurred in the crust, in the area that would become the orignal land mass. For example, an asteroid hitting the ancient ocean covered earth, could explain this anomaly. This crustal breech hooked the earth up with a very significant hydrothermal connection, which became the primary center of current. This would become the preferential zone where new crustal material would form resulting in the orginal singular land mass.

What is significant about the singular land mass forming, it that it will be giving off a lot of heat at one place place on the earth.. This would create a secondary AC current, along side the one created by the sun-earth rotation. In other words, this zone of high evaporation would almost be like a pseudo-second sun orbitiing the earth (secondary maximum evaporation zone) at the same time the earth is rotating for solar evaporation. If the landmass was off equatorial center, its current to the magnetic motor, will add a slight perpendicular directional vector to the solar-rotational AC. This force vector could result in a wobble in the inner core magnet, which would eventually translate into a wobble of the earth.

The split -up of the singular land mass and the continental drift are both things, one would expect as the super continent cooled. The potential requirement of the earth would become more distributed on the earth, with the hydrothermal seam propagating to help distribute the potential. The result was the landmass breaking apart and redistributing.

The last important thing that needs to be integrate with the O-continuum is the living state. Without getting into biology, one basic obervations is that plants, both single and muticellular, produce O2. By having plants producie O2, the impact of the O continuum was able to extend into the ozone layer,  connecting the O continuity higher into the earth's magnetic field. Although I have no proof, it is not out of the realm of possiblity that life also formed the nitrogen gas; N2. Many modern bacteria, in the absense of O, i.e., anaerobic conditions, can take their O needs from nitrates and will form N2 as a waste product. The advantage of this is that light or O2 is not required to get life going. In other words, with the ancient earth much higher in atmospheric water, photosynthesis, would not be very affective, until the atmosphere cleared. The production of N2, would increase the partial pressure of N2 in the atmosphere and help to clear the atmosphere of the water, in line with the direction of the O continuum potentials. (Oxygen will condenser easier a higher pressure). Photosynthesis would become easier increasing the O2 concentration in the atmosphere.

What is interesting about life producing O2, is that it may not be coincidental, since the net result created the next logical propagation of the O-continuum. The logical conclusion I reached was that earth potentials played a role in the evolutiion of life on earth. Not just im terms of environmental change and selective advantage, but an actual provider of chemical potential. This sounds far fetched using exsiting bio-genesis theory. But there is another variable than nobody fully takes into consideration, which does the trick; hydrogen bonding. The early earth had a lot of hydrogen potential within the atmosphere, which needed to be lowered. The need to reduce hydrogen potential gave life a push; move the earth surface chemicals in the direction of decreasing hydrogen potential. For example, nucleic acids and animo acids go from acids, into hydrogen bonding polymers.

[resonance]

I would like to clarify some of the time scale. The singular landmass from which the modern continents appeared was Pangaea. This split apart roughly 200millions years ago, when dinosaurs roamed the earth. Before that, evidence suggests another super continent called Rodina that was around about 1billions years ago. Rodinia also went through its own continental drift. Before that, the data is quite sketchy. There have been rocks found that are dated in the order of 4billions years in the NW US. This implies land was already around at that time but it is difficult to trace its origins. This latter time scale is roughly the age that life or the seeds of life have been around on earth, which is presumed to be about 4 billions years. There is also evidence of a major asteroid at about 3.5billions years. The data I was trying to integrate was connected to the oldest earth dynamics where there is not much data.

Getting back to origins of life on earth, this is relatively easy to address, using the O-continuous model, but it runs into philosophical problems with the existing state of the art. The state of the art is heavily dependant on random instead of potential directed. The life sciences are a huge organization and there is only one me, so that makes anything based on potential directed, suspect for any number of reasons. The random approach hasn't really panned out and is now reaching out into the universe to seed the earth with life. But even this is a short term fix, since it does not remove the "how in the first place". It just adds more time for random to work. That being said, to present an integrated model of life, by default, is going to be presumed wrong irregardless, because of philosophical differences. Part of the need for an integrated model of the earth, in one main variable, is that life can also be integrated in the same way; one main variable. The earth potentials provide all that is needed for this one variable to help form life. I am going to end this topic and start a new topic connected to "integrating life with one variable, i.e., hydrogen bonding".

My limitations and advantages developing this integrated life model was connected to the fact that I am not a biologist. This put a limit of how far I could extrapolate the model, requiring that I stay simple. Bu this limitation also freed me from the philosophical baggage that keeps life in a random box. I am a chemist who was also an engineer with a background in polymers. This gave me a good feel for the importance of secondary bonding forces for defining the properties of bio-materials. It also made me look at the cell just the way it works, which is a highly integrated entity. I did not want to isolate materials out of the context of the big picture, to make my job easier. Everything needed to integrate, like a well oiled machine, with everything in situ.

An integrated model required one variable that was everywhere. This left out genetics as the central variable. This is not to downplay the importance of genetics, but DNA is not needed for cells, like red blood cells, to work. There had to be something more fundamental. The only possible variable that fit all the integrated needs was hydrogen bonding. It is everywhere in life, it is common to all the big players like DNA, RNA and proteins and water. It is both a static and dynamic variable, with DNA showing both at the same time. The biggest challenge was re-characterize hydrogen bonding and the H-proton, so it could play an integrating role in life, both single and multicellular. All and all, here is how I now look at the cell. The DNA is the hard-drive. It has all the data, operating system and software stored in its template relationships. The proteins are the software and operating system this are active at any given time. While the H proton is the CPU.

[xiankai]

In other words, if life formed the oxygen, the O2 levels rose from zero to the current ceiling level and stopped. This could be due to the amount of photosynthesis peaking out, although evolution should have been increasing efficiency such that oxygen be higher today that ever before.

i dont see how evolution would make animals/plant more efficient in photosynthesis/respiration, there's no lack nor excess of it in the first place for their biological systems to react to (correct me if im wrong)

This ceiling might be explain as being due to the increasing O potential with the iron core. Oxidizing O2 should be making its way into the mantle via the hydrothermal continuity, in response to the iron core potential.

the oxygen in the atmosphere and the iron core is well... very far apart, so im not so sure. after all, the coulomb force acts strongly at very small distances mostly. in addition, when you mention hydrothermal continuity, here i am thinking of volcanoes, geothermal outlets, etc. how does the oxygen get in that deep, anyway? does it dissolve in the molten lava that originally came from the iron core, and diffuse all the way inside? or does it move as small gaseous atoms, able to tunnel through the earth?

also, what about oxygen being tied up in the ozone cycle? that could be another possibility for the 'ceiling' you mention, never heard of such an upper limit before.

This amounts to solar evaporation increasing the net electrophilic potential of the atmosphere

could this be the factor that catalyzes the dissociation of water molecules into hydroxyl radicals?

yet low pressure is where water will condense in weather, i.e., rain.

i don't really get the principle behind this; can you explain, please?

The first is the observation that the earth has a bulge at the equator and/or is compressed from pole to pole.

i think this is due to the earth's rotation and thus its mass is contracted towards itself - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equatorial_bulge something about rotational dynamics, i don't know the specifics.

With the equator being the maxima for solar evaporation

unfortunately the equator is not the true area where incident sun radiation is greatest - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_tilt

The integrated magnetic field should complement this, with the attraction between poles, irregardless of field inversion, helping to squish the viscoplastic inner earth from pole to pole.

while it is true that there is a magnetic field, unless the earth is completely made of ferrous materials, the soil will not be magnetized and pull towards the center. - unless i missed what is viscoplastic? (no such word exists as far as i know )

Many modern bacteria, in the absense of O, i.e., anaerobic conditions, can take their O needs from nitrates and will form N2 as a waste product.

while i do not dispute the presence of nitrogen-fixing bacteria, i wonder where nitrate is to come from, especially in the early age of the earth when elements are more common than compounds (or i may be thinking about the big bang, heh)

your posts are like an iceberg to hack across, but once the job is done i can see the beauty of your work keep up the good job, and the ideas coming!

[resonance]

I don't have much time tonight so I will only address one two. The net electrophilic potential of the atmosphere is due to the H in water. I posted a topic on integrating the cell using hydrogen bonding. That hopefully will answer that question.

When I said low pressure is where water should condense I was talking in terms of plots of vapor pressure versus pressure for water. Higher pressure allows water to condense easier. Weather does the opposite chosing to condense at low pressure. I tend to attribute the low pressure to the water condensing, rather than the other way around. In other words, when atomospheric water vapor condenses it removes gas from vapor space, 1000 to 1 reduction in volume. This lost of partial pressure pulls the vacuum. If you ever canned veggies, when the hot water vapor condenses this pulls the vacuum on the jar.