ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Religion and Philosophy»
  • Paganism & Witchcraft

Does Earth Have a Heartbeat?

Updated on August 24, 2015
Buildreps profile image

Mario Buildreps is a graduate engineer. Become aware of topics in a way you have never heard before.

If Earth is an organism, it must have a heartbeat. Is it observable in any way?
If Earth is an organism, it must have a heartbeat. Is it observable in any way? | Source

What Do You Think?

Does Earth Have a Heart?

See results

Earth and the Gaia Theory

Many people feel intuitively that Earth is somehow a living being. How can a dead thing sustain life? Wouldn't that be an ultimate contradiction?

Many native people, like the Indians, knew that Earth is a living organism.

The Gaia theory (James Lovelock) proposes that organisms like plants, bacteria, animals, fish, etcetera form together with the inorganic substances a self-regulating system. All parts in this system work together to maintain the habitability on Earth.

All lifeforms on Earth are considered to be part of one single living planetary being, called Gaia. The Gaia theory is not something vague or woolly. It is mathematical and scientific.

The energy produced by the Sun, for example, has increased with 30% since the solar system was formed 4.5 billion years ago, but the temperature on Earth didn't rise with 30%. How did mother Earth managed to keep the temperature on Earth steady? There must a very complex active feedback loop at work on Earth, but no one really knows how this exactly works.

What follows from the Gaia theory is that if Earth would work together with all the organisms on it, Earth would be an intelligent organism itself. How can a dead thing interact with life? And if Earth is an organism, it would have a heartbeat like all other organisms. Isn't it?

As above, so below - as below, so above.

However, the Earth as a unit does not match one of the generally accepted biological criteria for life: there is no evidence to suggest that "Gaia" has reproduced yet.

— Wikipedia about Gaia

The Schumann Resonance

Schumann resonances are global electromagnetic resonances, initiated and maintained by lightning discharges in the space between the Earth's surface and the ionosphere. Schumann predicted this phenomenon mathematically in 1952.

Schumann resonances occur because the space between the surface of the Earth and the conductive ionosphere acts as a 'closed waveguide'.

A closed waveguide is a phenomenon that is comparable with how fata morgana's can occur. Light is then reflected between several air layers of different densities (temperature) and therefore able to transport images over longer distances, seemingly ignoring the curvature of the earth.

The Schumann frequency of 7.83 is a standing wave which wavelength equals the circumference of the Earth. The standing wave causes the resonance that is the strongest at 7.83 Hz. There are other less strong waves of higher frequencies, which are not dominant. Because lightnings occur everywhere on Earth this standing Schumann waves becomes a complicated pattern of waves.

That Schumann resonance must influence life on Earth is obvious. There is evidence that hippocampal rhythm of animals (and humans) is influenced by the Schumann resonance, because they seem to adapt to this frequency quite strongly.

To claim that it would be Earth's heartbeat is premature and illogical, because there appears to be clear relations between heartbeat rates and size of organisms. So, when Earth is a living organism this couldn't be its heartbeat. The Schumann resonance has to be something else, like the frequency of its brain. Does Earth have a brain then? Why not?

Heartbeat in Relation to the Size of Animals

The heartbeat of animals is depending of its size, weight, and metabolism. This all boils down to the same thing. Little animals have a high metabolism and low weight. Large animals have a low metabolism and high weight.

There is a distinct relation between the two characteristics weight and heart rates.

If we assert that Earth is a living organism, like the Gaia theory says, Earth would have a heartbeat. That heartbeat would then depend of its weight.

Heartbeat Rates From Small to Large

Creature
Weight (Kg)
Average Heart Rate (beats per minute)
Mouse
0.025
670
Chick
0.05
400
Hamster
0.06
450
Rat
0.2
420
Rabbit
1
205
Rabbit 2
2
205
Chicken
1.5
275
Cat
3
120
Small dog
3.5
100
Medium dog
5
90
Monkey
5
192
Large dog
30
75
Human
80
65
Pig
150
60
Horse
800
40
Elephant
5,000
25
Blue Whale
125,000
8

Graphical Representation of the Above Table

Relation between weights and heart rates. Note: both X and Y-axis are logarithmic.
Relation between weights and heart rates. Note: both X and Y-axis are logarithmic. | Source

Extrapolation to Earth

Let's continue with the adoption that Earth is an organism similar like us, but much larger and therefore much slower and hardly capable to move, because of its enormous weight.

The extrapolation below would some scientists raise their eyebrows. But this mathematical miracle delivers a very interesting explanation for phenomena like earthquakes, and also other curious phenomena, like the Hallstattzeit cycles of the Sun.

The formula that is derived from the graph above is used to calculate the heartbeat of planet Earth, and also that of the Moon and the Sun.

The formula: heartbeat(n/min) = 213.7 × weight(kg)-0.271

In the table below you see the resulting heartbeats of the Moon, Earth and Sun. They are translated into the amount of years per heartbeat.

Heartbeat of Moon, Earth and Sun

Celestial body
Weight (kg)
Years per Heartbeat
Moon
7.35E+022
12.8
Earth
5.97E+024
42.2
Sun
1.99E+030
1323
The pattern of an electrocardiogram of a human has more peaks before and after the major peak.
The pattern of an electrocardiogram of a human has more peaks before and after the major peak. | Source

The Electrocardiogram of Earth

The heartbeat of Earth has clear similarities with its earthquake history. Note that when you're looking at an electrocardiogram, you're actual looking at the energy patterns of a heart.

The first thing that had to be done is to recalculate all significant earthquakes from 1900 into energy releases, similar as with the electrocardiogram, and group them in periods of 10 years. What you'll see might be amazing. This appears to be close to the calculated heartbeat. With a deviation of just 4% this looks quite precise. Coincidence?

Both peaks appear to be at the opposite locations of eachother (Chile 1960 vs. Sumatra 2004). Has Earth heartbeats at more than one place? Could be. Regarding its size this would be logical.

As with an electrocardiogram of a human, that has minor ripples before and after every major peak, so has Earth minor ripples before and after every major earthquake. The larger peaks seem to concentrate around the major peak, like in an ordinary electrocardiogram.

Coincidence? What reason would there be for coincidence? As above, so below works everywhere. Look at the similarities between weather patterns and galaxies. There is no sufficient reason why the superb second Hermetic Law (the Principle of Correspondence) would stop to work, because a subspecies (scientists) of Homo Sapiens considers Earth to be a rock?

Is This Earth's Heartbeat?

Heartbeat of the Earth seems to comply to the calculated heartbeat. The earthquakes since 1900 are presented in energy (EJ) instead of in Richter
Heartbeat of the Earth seems to comply to the calculated heartbeat. The earthquakes since 1900 are presented in energy (EJ) instead of in Richter | Source

What About the Heartbeat of 1916 Then?

You would probably ask the question: 'why is there no peak around 1916 in the graph above?' There is actually a peak around this period, but not (graphical) noticeable between the two immense violent peaks of 1960 and 2004.

The energy of earthquakes is exponential compared to the Richter scale. A quake of 8.0 is 10 times stronger than one of 7.0. That is one of the reasons why the period of 1916 is hardly noticeable in the graph.

The weighted average of 3 of the 20 heaviest earthquakes in recorded history (since 1900), appear to group exactly around 1916. Does that mean that the heartbeat of Earth was calm at that time? Maybe. It shows in any case that patterns of a heartbeat are clear, also around 1916.

The atomic tests all around the world during the fifties and sixties might have caused mother Earth a kind of a heart attack. And indeed 4 of the 10 heaviest earthquakes recorded are between 1952 and 1960. The heaviest of all times was in 1960. Most of the underground atomic tests were conducted between 1951 and 1963. Does this look like coincidence too? Again? How would you react when they stick a tiny explosive needle under your skin?

The Dotted Distribution on Richter's Scale (Squared to Stretch)

The dotted distribution on Richter's scale squared shows also a clear pattern around 1916. Not every heartbeat has the same strength. Do you see the pattern?
The dotted distribution on Richter's scale squared shows also a clear pattern around 1916. Not every heartbeat has the same strength. Do you see the pattern? | Source

The Pattern Continues Before 1900

Before 1900 there are no official records of magnitudes. But based upon the recorded damage reports, are seismologists able to estimate the magnitude on Richter's scale. Each locality for which information is available is assigned a score on the so called Mercalli Scale.

Based on the heaviest pre-1900 earthquakes the heartbeat rhythm appears to continue according to the prediction:

  • year 1868 - Chile magn. 9.0 ([1916 - 1868] ÷ 42.2 ≈ 1.1 heartbeat)
  • year 1700 - Pacific Ocean magn. 9.0 ([1868 - 1700] ÷ 42.2 ≈ 4.0 heartbeats)
  • year 1611 - Japan magn. 8.9 ([1868 - 1611] ÷ 42.2 ≈ 6.1 heartbeats)

There were unregistered very heavy earthquakes (>8.5) around:

  • 1653 ±2 years
  • 1695 ±2 years
  • 1737 ±2 years
  • 1779 ±2 years
  • 1821 ±2 years

The strongest earthquakes follow clearly the pattern of the heartbeat rhythm of about 44 years. The less stronger earthquakes don't follow this pattern.

Compare this with a human heartbeat - between the beats the heart 'rumbles'. That is what Earth's heart is doing as well.

Stupidity is an elemental force for which no earthquake is a match.

— Karl Kraus
The flu virus.
The flu virus. | Source

Is Mother Earth Heartless?

When we look at the disasters that Earthquakes caused over our entire history, what about the argument that Earth would be a living and intelligent organism?

Consider this: Would you notice if your heartbeat would kill a few million of the trillions of viruses on your body? This is also what results from as above, so below.

Virus ∝ Human = Human ∝ Earth. It means that a Virus is proportional to a Human in the same way a Human is proportional to Earth. Too many harmful viruses are devastating for the host. But there are also useful viruses. Which kind do you want to be?

Did Earth ask for all mutilations it has to endure for the economical profit and comfort of Homo Sapiens? Should mother Earth stop her heartbeat because people want to live in poorly constructed buildings in cities? Would that be wise of mother Earth?

Shall we take a look at the Moon and the Sun?

The Heartbeat of the Moon

There are no data available of moonquakes that correspond with the predicted heartbeat of the moon of 12.8 years. So, there appears no way to verify this outcome.

Wanna take a bet how the strongest moonquake cycles look like?

There are cycles though, called the Metonic cycles of 19 years, with subcycles of 3, 6, 8, 11, 14 and 17 years. But these cycles are about the displacement of the moon through space, and have no (direct) relation with a heartbeat of the moon.

The Hallstattzeit cycles of the Sun

The long solar cycles appear to be around 1200 years.
The long solar cycles appear to be around 1200 years. | Source

The Heartbeat of the Sun

The calculations above predicted a heartbeat of the Sun every 1323 years. What do we see? Scientists discovered a solar cycle, called the Hallstattzeit cycle of 2400 years. This cycle shows very clear peaks every 1200 years. Coincidence? Again?

So, one Hallstattzeit cycle contains two heartbeats.

The cosmic extrapolation shows a deviation of only 10%, and that's eery precise on this scale.

How About Reproduction?

Does Earth reproduce itself? According to science that seems to be the definition of life. So, if a woman gets no children in her life, she is supposed not to be alive? What about a man then?

Strange definition of life forms, isn't it? It seems more logical to posit that the higher the life form, the less reproductive.

How does science want to observe the birth of a new baby planet? This is not the kind of event you want to hang around with. But according to the same logic of as below, so above, a baby planet could be born every few billion years. Maybe every 15 billion years. Maybe never.

Conclusion

Earth has a heartbeat, and Earth has therefore a heart. Earth is a living being. How this heart is constructed is unknown to me. The mathematics shows clear heartbeat patterns, that cannot be argued with. Similar like anyone can't argue with the fact that 1+1=2.

The chance that all 6 heartbeats (1611, 1700, 1868, 1916, 1960, 2004) would fit coincidental into the same pattern, with a deviation between 4% and 15%, is less than 0.1%. Meaning that it is 99.9% sure that Earth's heartbeat recurs every 42.2 ±2 years.

Earth's heartbeat rhythm is predicted from the heartbeat rates of animals, and then confirmed by the strongest earthquake patterns. Who wants to argue about coincidence?

It is now up to science to find out how Earth's heart actually works and for everyone to acknowledge that Earth is an enormous living organism, and should be treated in accordance with this fact.

Earth is a living being. The patterns are clear. When earthquake activity goes up, the metabolism goes equally up, similar like we're having fever. That seems to be part of the feedback loop of Gaia.

By the way, what kind of a virus do you want to be?

Well, that's it folks!


© 2015 by Buildreps

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Buildreps profile image
      Author

      Buildreps 2 years ago from Europe

      That's exactly how it is, MizBejabbers. You must have had a great mentor. Thanks for reading and commenting.

    • MizBejabbers profile image

      MizBejabbers 2 years ago

      If Earth is a living organism with a heartbeat, then Gaia is a living soul. This is something that most people have never considered. Perhaps they don’t want to acknowledge that the earth is a greater living creature than they are, and that that they have no right to prick her skin and drain her blood or dig craters in her physiology.

      My metaphysical mentor used to say that “Gaia has a bellyache” whenever a natural occurrence such as the tsunami caused a lot of loss of life and property. Absolutely wonderful posits, Buildreps. Voted up and awesome.

    • Buildreps profile image
      Author

      Buildreps 2 years ago from Europe

      Thanks for your comment, Dizze Blogger. Insects have another circulatory system as mammals, some insects have even more than one heart. It's an interesting idea to look into plants as well. Plants have a kind of root-to-shoot and shoot-to root circulatory system.

    • Dizze Blogger profile image

      Nalani Sanderson 2 years ago from Oregon

      I am curious to see the Gaia theory and the idea of the Earth being alive compared to plants instead of animals. Not all living beings have a pulse; I don't know what science there is for plants, but I'm pretty sure single-celled organisms don't have a heart and are no less alive for it.

      Reproduction as a species is a valid idea of what being alive is - any species of living creature will try to perpetuate the existence of itself, as a whole, even if certain individuals do not have offspring themselves. In fact, isn't it beneficial to the species' survival if those individuals without the instinct to procreate do not procreate, so that trait of lacking instinct to procreate is not passed on? Further on, I suppose there is the point that while we may not know if or when or how (or have any evidence to support) Earth having procreated *yet*, there are quite a large number of planets in the galaxy and universe. Certainly they have not all simply died off; some have died off, and others are made or born. As a species, planets are perpetuating, and if we are to assume that they are a living species, why would it be that they are not intentionally, as a species, perpetuating their own species?

      In any case, it could make sense for earthquakes to be a metaphorical heartbeat, or compared to a heartbeat, as magma is the flowing substance that heats the planet from within, and lava the stiffening blood that heals the open wounds volcanoes create on Earth's planetary skin, like a pimple or boil bursting.

    • Buildreps profile image
      Author

      Buildreps 2 years ago from Europe

      Thanks for your comment, CatherineGiordano. That's one of the wonders of mathematics, it shows things that our senses don't reveal and defies common sense.

    • CatherineGiordano profile image

      Catherine Giordano 2 years ago from Orlando Florida

      I think the earth has a metaphorical heart. Nonetheless, an excellent job explaining this. Voted up and interesting.

    • Buildreps profile image
      Author

      Buildreps 2 years ago from Europe

      Thanks AliciaC. The native American Indians knew this intuitively long time ago!

    • AliciaC profile image

      Linda Crampton 2 years ago from British Columbia, Canada

      This is very interesting, Buildreps. Thank you for sharing such a thought provoking hub!

    • Buildreps profile image
      Author

      Buildreps 2 years ago from Europe

      Thanks for your wonderful comment, Akriti Mattu! The quote you posted is very true.

    • Akriti Mattu profile image

      Akriti Mattu 2 years ago from Shimla, India

      Brilliant piece. I feel your every word. Our planet has a heart and we're smashing it and hurting it every day. Sad.

      i'm gonna quote David Bayliss here -

      "Humanity; the most intelligent species on the planet, capable of anything, but is governed by it's aggression and youth. A species fast in developing, but slow in maturing.

      Once a species that cared about it's home, it's provider, let it's ego dominate it's decisions. A period of ignorance and neglect has had profound effects across the world. Effects which can be reversed, if nature is given the time to repair the damage.

      Remember: We only have one home."

    • Buildreps profile image
      Author

      Buildreps 2 years ago from Europe

      Thanks for your great comment, d.william! I read your comment with great interest :)

    • d.william profile image

      d.william 2 years ago from Somewhere in the south

      Great article. We tend to try to define life by comparing it to that of a human being. And according to some astrophysicists that might be true in the respect that everything has a time of birth and a time of death.

      Earth is obviously a "living" thing in that it monitors itself and corrects for any deviations in its makeup. When man pollutes the atmosphere the earth increases in storms and weather patterns to counter the damages that man inflicts on her.

      Another example is fracking and taking excessive amounts of oil out of the ground leaving great holes in the earth. With any disturbance of the ground there forms a "sinkhole" effect to compensate for that kind of damage to the planet. Stupid greedy people discount that kind of logic because believing it to be true would detract them from their ultimate goal of greed for money at any expense to human life or the planet itself.

      Nature (God if you will) takes care of itself despite of man's inane beliefs. For instance while the earth is in the throes of destroying itself by over population and the dire consequences that will inevitably follow, a simple genetic "tweaking" renders humans without the desire to procreated by producing homosexual behaviors on a global scale. And still the stupidity of man protests that it is against nature as they believe it should be.

      We truly are a stupid species devoid of common sense and logic.

    • Buildreps profile image
      Author

      Buildreps 2 years ago from Europe

      Thanks a lot for your priceless comment, Bill :) I'm glad you enjoyed it!

    • billybuc profile image

      Bill Holland 2 years ago from Olympia, WA

      I am forced to think when I read your articles. You did it again, my friend. Great discussion. I'll be tossing this around for quite some time.