The History of our Planet in Under 3000 Words

Update 2017-09-21

Here is an interesting article. If anyone would like to explore this topic in more detail, please contact me.

Update 2016-11-25

Great news! The Agraqua Hypothesis has been tacitly accepted here. This will help us all to refocus our energies in line with the desired future we all deserve.

Update 2016-08-19

Oh, look, more stuff. I’m glad people are connecting to the truth of our world.

“But recent research adds weight to an alternative idea, that life arose deep in the ocean within warm, rocky structures called hydrothermal vents.”

“Where this energy comes from and how it gets there can tell us a whole lot about the universal principles governing life’s evolution and origin. Recent studies increasingly suggest that the primordial soup was not the right kind of environment to drive the energetics of the first living cells.”

“Deep-sea hydrothermal vents represent the only known environment that could have created complex organic molecules with the same kind of energy-harnessing machinery as modern cells. Seeking the origins of life in the primordial soup made sense when little was known about the universal principles of life’s energetics.”

Update 2016-08-03

Perhaps someone wants to take a crack at answering this.

Update 2016-07-20

I have received the most wonderful news: researchers have adapted their hypothesis about tectonic plates to conform with the Agraqua Hypothesis. They will be presenting the results at The Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. I have shared this post (the first expression of the Agraqua Hypothesis) widely because I am worried about the pressure building up along the San Andreas fault line combined with obvious faults (ha ha) of the reductionist tectonic plate theory.

Some highlights from the article:

[…] suggest[s] that the gravitational pull of the astronomical bodies could be causing the Earth’s plates to move up and down like the ocean’s tides.

The findings also suggest that the geological region is a lot weaker than previously thought.

But the good news is that understanding these small tremors, known as low-frequency earthquakes, might lead to a better way of monitoring the fault itself, which lies roughly 32 kilometres (20 miles) underground.

“It’s kind of crazy, right? That the Moon, when it’s pulling in the same direction that the fault is slipping, causes the fault to slip more – and faster,” team leader Nicholas van der Elst, from the US Geological Survey, said in a statement.

Is it crazy? Or is it crazier to think the Moon has no bearing on Earth (these are the silly competing hypotheses I have to contend with from devotees of Elon Musk).

Are these results predictions of my theory? Yes.

Did they get the idea from me? Who knows? (and where safety is concerned: who cares?)

It is much more important to me that people have the best scientific hypotheses with which to approach their problems than little old me receiving recognition, especially since my Aunt and Uncle live near the San Andreas fault line.

Update 2016-07-10

Looks like tectonic plate science is evolving!

You might think geologists have a pretty good idea about the inner workings of the Earth’s mantle – that hot, rocky region between the crust and the core thatmakes up 84 percent of the total volume of our planet.

But a new study suggests that the mantle’s movement could be affected by factors we haven’t even yet considered yet, and that could completely change our thinking about earthquakes, volcanoes, and other plate-shifting events.


And that’s not the only recent discovery that sheds new light on what’s going on below Earth’s surface. Last month, researchers from Arizona State University found that two large ‘blobs’ sitting inside the planet – each the size of a continent and about 2,900 kilometres (1,800 miles) down – are made of a different material than the rest of the mantle.

They said blobs! 😀

Update 2016-06-28

I made a TTS video of this 🙂


These are my opinions.


Most will want to skip “Hypothesis”, going straight to “Demonstration” and reading the hypothesis last: it’s is quite dense and may be hard to understand if you’re not used to thinking this way. In the great tradition, complex (often verbal) explanations are preceded by a short version (Sutra); it is contemplated often, so often that it becomes part of you. It is how we have always connected to the past, and will continue to do in the future. A Sutra is structured like a hypothesis, but is interpreted as imperative (unless it can be demonstrated fallacious). 

Every chapter in my book starts with a very dense explanation, or “hypothesis” followed by an expanded one. Reviewers have also found the expanded section “dense”, however, so maybe it’s all dense 😉 . The modern age represents unprecedented access to knowledge, but we must discriminate and contextualize our sources. If our findings are scientific (i.e. the ancient knowledge represents the true knowledge), so too should they be verifiable.

Unfortunately the universal knowledge cannot necessarily be “Googled in two seconds”, so please take your time. You are not stupid for not understanding immediately. You are stupid if you think you understand everything with no proof! These are the rigid structures or “cataracts” my Guru speaks of. They dishonour the very nature of the mind: a quantum mechanical waveform. The path of nature can be subverted by neither man nor ideology, nor man bearing ideology (I don’t care how cool your beard looks).

The Agraqua Hypothesis

Life on Earth came about as a consequence of an impact with a gigantic (mostly) ice structure, herein called Agraqua. At the point of impact, a moon-sized rock was displaced, falling away from Earth and into orbit, always with (approximately) the same side facing inward. The motion of Moon around Earth tilts the vectors of escaping water molecules tangentially, slowing their escape. The process of melting of Agraqua resulted in the distribution of elements we experience today.


Consider proto-Earth: it has a liquid-hot magma core, but what about its surface? Let’s say that by its proximity to the cold of space, the surface was less liquid than the core: maybe a little solid and a little liquid. Next imagine an impact between this rock and a frozen chunk of (mostly) water. It is catastrophic, breaking proto-Earth into two pieces.

Agraqua impacts of Earth with enough force to permanently displace Moon but with insufficient momentum to give it spin: it therefore falls into orbit with approximately the same side facing inwards: geolocked.

Consider the following:

mass of Earth’s oceans = 1.37 x 10^21 kg
mass of Moon = 7.34 x 10^22 kg

The similarity in their masses indicates support for this “breakaway” theory: this mass of water could certainly displace a Moon-sized chunk from Earth.

The Initial Development of our Macrostate

Can we use our model to make predictions about the state of that system that might be testable today? If this model is true, maybe it is also possible that part of Agraqua became embedded in the Moon after it impacted Earth. There is no reason to believe they would have made a “clean” break anyway! (Especially since Earth was much hotter at the time).

Can we find evidence of ancient water on our Moon? First we must consider both sides of Moon:


The dark relief on the near side appears smoothed out by ages of liquid water pressure. The far side, exposed only to the cold dead of space, has nothing but craters from impacts of meteors. (We will see later on that this is consistent with the lunar heat trapping phenomenon).

We can imagine a more complex hydrosphere long before the water settled down to Earth: one that involved the Moon. . . What storms there must have been! This mechanism begs the question:

Why did Agraqua saturate on Earth?


more like churchoffuntropy – for Ra

The macrostate here is:

{Earth (solid part), Agraqua, Moon}

The microstates here are:

All possible combinations of these three elements (to within the limit that they can mix).

In the steady state (achieved once the system stops changing with time), the actual macrostate corresponds to the situation of maximal Entropy. Boltzmann’s Entropy formula states that Entropy is maximal when the microstates are most numerous by:

S = k ln W

W = number of microstates for a particular macrostate

Boltzmann’s Grave

Think of the individual water molecules: they have more space to potentially occupy on Earth, because it’s larger than the Moon. All water molecules in this three element system therefore eventually saturated on Earth.

Oceanic Development

Let’s examine some images:


Above is a map indicating oceanic depth. The red sections are ridges and the blue are canyons. (Credit: NASA)

Above is a colour graph of the age of the oceanic lithosphere (ocean floor).

What does it really mean for an ocean to be of a certain age? Isn’t the whole world the same age? What scientists mean by “age” is the elapsed time since liquid Earth solidified (upon meeting oceanic water) and became part of the lithosphere (solid Earth).

For example, the red line between America and Europe/Africa: it is youngest in the centre because this ocean has been increasing in size, pulling more semi liquid earth from beneath the surface (as the Sun’s heat expands the oceans).

A possible contender for the Agraqua impact point is shown below:age_oceanic_lith2

There is a large chunk of ancient seafloor off the coast of modern day Japan that is very close to the same age, likely where Agraqua spent ages incubating before completely melting and spreading throughout the globe.

The melting of Agraqua across (what would later become) the Pacific Ocean is consistent with the measured age: the Pacific lithosphere gets “younger” as we move East.

The Moon: Requisite for Life on Earth

We postulate that the development of Earth is not independent of Moon. Without her, the waters of Agraqua would melt away to the ends of the Universe: a lifeless greatest Entropy state. We will see how the heat binding action of the Moon allowed the Sun’s energy to mix with Agraqua,  creating the atmosphere and stability required to sustain life.

The Lunar Influence on Temperature

Temperature is a measure of kinetic energy (energy of motion) calculated using the average of a distribution of velocities of particular constituent particles: some travel faster, others slower; different gases have different velocity distributions.

700px-MaxwellBoltzmann-en.svgAbove is an example of the distribution of speeds for some high Entropy elements (noble gases). We can imagine a cut-off point: the escape velocity, or minimum velocity satisfying the criterion that it imparts sufficient energy to a particle for it to permanently escape the Earth’s gravitational field. As the Sun warms Agraqua, the proportion of the distribution of velocities of gaseous water molecules moving fast enough to escape the surface gravity increases.

Initially, the velocity of escaping water particles is radial, like a rocket, emanating from the surface of Earth. In the absence of the Moon, like the light of an uncovered bulb,  these high-velocity particles would radiate away. Since the Moon rotates around Earth, it changes the direction of the velocity of escaping water particles, giving them tangential velocity as well (at 90 degrees from radial). The overall effect is the binding of heat energy to the spatial interval between Moon and Earth.

We can now visualize the ancient lunar “engine”: trapping solar energy inside escaping water molecules in the region that would later become the atmosphere.

Evidence for this is that life on Earth (on galactic timelines) started almost immediately after Moon began to exist: 4.53 versus 4 billion years for life: the age of life on Earth is 88% of its total age!

Fun in the Sun

We approximate the conditions on Earth as approximately equal to those of modern day Moon: -203 to 116 degrees Celsius between day and night. This temperature interval easily allows Agraqua a mechanism to (slowly) melt. Life as we know it requires the macrostate of {Earth, Moon, Agraqua}.

Even though life was inevitable the moment that macrostate configued,  some time (530 million y) was required to precipitate an environment sufficiently stable (yet virile) to cradle life.

Ancient Earth had a much thinner atmosphere, but it still saw the Sun rise in the East and set in the West. The lack of atmospheric buffer and resulting large temperature difference between morning and night made morning melts much more devastating than evening freezes.

This could explain the underwater archipelago spanning from the hypothetical impact point towards the coast of America: These cracks and crevices could have formed under rapidly freezing and thawing conditions.



Below is a suggested diagram of the relative positioning of Agraqua and Pangea (the pink arrow is approximately where Agraqua impacted). Being West of Agraqua, Pangea would have impeded the flow of water in this direction. When water did move significantly westward, it was much later, as we can imagine in the diagram below:

This array is a lot like a soluble crystal placed into a glass of water, only the crystal is larger than the water, and the water is solid! Regardless, Entropy increases and the crystal eventually diffuses.

Liquid water later migrated between Greenland and Europe, slowly forcing these land masses apart, filling the Atlantic Ocean from above. NA euro

Today, now that it’s mostly melted, we can see that the burrowing depths and deep cracks along both American coasts are from water is pushing on both sides of the total land mass (with the imperative to increase Entropy):


The end result of this is that America, like a giant zit, is being squeezed from the surface of the Earth. Once the surface cogent layer of water can expand laterally no more, tectonic plates are driven underground. They cannot rise because the Americas are already raised (quantum states are full). Mass must “expand” into the Earth, descending by gravity at the faults (blue).

These configurations represent increasing Entropies over time: more possible microstates for water to explore. Each configuration has different proportions of crust above/under water at any given time. Over time we expect the total Entropy of such a system to be maximized.

As long as Earth is constantly absorbing new solar energy, there will always be new microstates for Agraqua to explore. The repositioning of land mass on Earth is consequent to the increasing Entropy of the {Earth, Agraqua, Moon} macrostate. The development of life (a self-replicating microstate) now reduces to a simple “mixing problem”: how much time must go on before the molecular configurations arrange in such a way as to be self-replicating? This is explored elsewhere and won’t be discussed here.

Predictions of this Theory

Over time, we expect to see more microstates available to terrestrial water. What about a giant crack in Africa that will later become an ocean?

Looks like the Mediterranean Sea cracked! More microstates will now become available here ;-).

Tectonic Plate Theory

This is still a model that makes predictions. This new model simply elaborates the underlying mechanism of oceanic terraforming:



In the beginning, Earth was barren and hot. Collision with Agraqua displaced the Moon and subsequently melted Araqua, creating a system of tidal photon funnelling (yes). In the beginning, the atmosphere formed slowly, because it was small. Therefore in the beginning the rate of change of the terrestrial landscape was small. As the atmosphere developed, the greenhouse effect increased, leading to an increase in the rate of melt of Agraqua: a positive feedback loop.

6 year olds see a lot

Like the touch of a million fingered mudra, the waters of Agraqua would eventually completely self-connect from opposite sides. Now that Agraqua embraced Earth in a permanent hug, the pair would henceforth move as a cogent entity under the spell of the Moon.

Further Exploration

What is hiding unseen in the background?

Agraqua of course!

Thank you


Ocean Floor Image from:

Müller, R.D., M. Sdrolias, C. Gaina, and W.R. Roest 2008. Age, spreading rates and spreading symmetry of the world’s ocean crust, Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst., 9, Q04006,doi:10.1029/2007GC001743.

One thought on “The History of our Planet in Under 3000 Words

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s