2016 Stuff I find interesting in my goof off time - drones and the 1989 SF earthquake

Presently, since I proposed what I believe the first natural law of time and space which WD Gann wanted us to recognize, I am working on re learning my high school math and geometry.  It's tough re training an old dog things that were much easier many years (decades) ago.  So I goof off, entertaining stuff I wanted to consider but hadn't.

Drones.  Living in a military city its not surprising that drones are a topic that is closely reported in the news.  Seven years ago, in the last term of Bush, maybe a handful of remote kills had taken place and now they're a staple of foreign policy.  Drone can be used as a verb as in "The ISIS leader was droned."  Anyone can buy a drone... a practice soon to be curtailed I expect but hardly one that can be eliminated anymore than the sale of guns.  It just keeps happening.  We see on TV today ISIS creating a heat seeking drone at "Jihad University."  Did Mr. Gann foresee military drones?

I remember when I first read "The Tunnel Thru the Air" in about 1973 in grad school, the class was stunned to think of the miniature airplanes described as flying about at the Paris air show on page 243:

Of course, we decided then that it was pretty logical that, someday, there'd be a remote pilot technology of some sort.  But in 1973, the space it took to house an IBM 360 was in the neighborhood of 4000 square feet and it could hardly provide the firepower to perform instant and interactive calcs necessary to keep a plane in the air.  Heck, the first IBM 360 sold was to NASA for $6M and it calc'd only the trajectory necessary to put a vessel into orbit or allow its return...and it did it slowly.  [In the '80s I was privileged to attend a lecture of a NASA mathematician who had delivered that $6M check to IBM and told the story.]  I heard on a news program today that an iPhone  has 320,000 times the computing power of those massive old computers.  [I wonder how they figured that.]

Back to 1973....we missed one.  We didn't catch the remote controlled military drone on page 355:

Robert Gordon had invented a drone with a military application.  Mr. Gann had envisioned this before 1927 and a class of grad students didn't blue-sky it to impress the visiting prof in 1973.  Note the telestic word highlighted in blue Mr. Gann assigns to this line...."heed."  Note also the date 10/23/1994 highlighted in pink.  It denotes the battle which marked the turning point in the Pacific against Japan in WWII; the Battle of Leyte Gulf.  It was the largest naval battle of WWII and, some say, the greatest in all of history.  And it was the battle in which the Japanese first used Kamikazes.

Take it to another level.  I've seen recent news articles where F-16s were retrofitted and flown as drones.  The importance?  An F-16 can perform well beyond the G-force tolerances at which a pilot passes out....a pilot wouldn't stand a chance against a far more mobile drone of the same technical capabilities.

Earthquakes.  I haven't a clue what got me to read page 128 on which I'd previously written as having encoded the Pythagorean diatonic scale and its discovery (see HERE, HERE and HERE among others).  I thought I'd exhausted pages 128 and 129...wrong.  Consider the top of page 128:

"Notice this prophecy; the bridges shall be opened.  The suspension bridge opens our rivers."  Now look over at the right side green highlighted date in 1989.  Hmmm, try Googling "bridge" and "1989" and you get:

Pictures of the San Francisco Oakland bridge having failed due to the October 17, 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake.  The bridge was repaired and reopened in November 1989.

But that wasn't a suspension bridge was it?  Perhaps the prophecy involving a suspension bridge has not occurred as yet?  Is there a nearby suspension bridge?  Perhaps the Golden Gate Bridge of San Francisco Bay?  One of the seven wonders of the world; the longest suspension bridge of the world?

Mr. Gann tells us point blank, "Notice this prophecy...."  Shouldn't we sit up and take notice?

Dates.  In the context of the ongoing proposal that Mr. Gann provided clues that a great earthquake would occur in 2016, might there be clues?  Well, I ran the dates of the 1906, 1989 and latest calculation of the possible 2016 earthquake and there's some kinda interesting numbers (one the left side below):

The 30,498 days between the 1906 and 1989 earthquakes divided into the 40,124 days between the 1906 earthquake and the most recent estimated date in 2016 is 1.3156.  Adopting Mr. Gann's penchant for squaring and then re-squaring again, we have 2.9959....fashionably close to the diagonal of the 1X1 cube.  That would seem to indicate, the estimated date is close but not exact (presuming it will come to pass which is, well, rather err unlikely by any measurement of probability).

So where might an exact date fall according to the 1906, 1989 and 2016 date sequence?  First, we have to suspect the beginning and end of each earthquake.  History is not so kind in that about all we know of the 1906 quake is the date of the greatest shaking; April 18, 1906.  Preceding the main shock in 1906 by about a half minute, there was a pre shock and thereafter for about one minute the major 1906 quake occurred.  There aren't a lot of measurements of the 1906 quake that seem comparable to those found in later quakes when measurement became finer.  For the 1989 quake, Stanford professor Anthony C. Fraser-Smith reported increased magnetic field noise beginning October 5 (see Wikipedia HERE)...the earthquake had begun.  So, given the 1989 earthquake having begun at the earlier date (and ignoring such a comparable date in 1906 because we simply don't have it), we might come up with February 22, 2016 as forming the perfected 3.0 metric (the diagonal of the cube).  See the right side of the above insert.

The WD Gann Map of Time shows February 24, 2016 as exactly opposite the "mirror" date of the October 16, 1848 Marlborough earthquake, the subject of numerous essays.  My calculation of the dates could be off by 1 line which equates to two calendar days.  The MOT could be indicating as early as February 21.  Based on the above, I favor February 21 or February 22.

Which is all nothing more than putting some contrived math to some possible clues that are perceived such by a richly fertile imagination.  Its important, especially for me, the imaginer, to keep in perspective from where the speculation came; subjectively perceived clues.  If the result is true, its not because anything I've offered to date is proof.  If it is true it is because Mr. Gann did the math which provided the truth.

And which is more "wearisome," my "droning on" about such speculation or the math and geometry instruction to which I must now return?  I really need to get a life.

Jim Ross