2.2.0 - A research on tides in its early days.

(first edition 2019-02-16;
updated 2021-09-03)


When an area of knowledge, taken for granted - that the phenomenon of the ocean tides are due to attraction - is found to be instead terra incognita.

Our minds find it difficult to accept something that is new to them. We perceive only what is in accord with the content of our thought.

Fear of error and fear of the truth are one and the same thing.
Whoever is afraid of making a mistake is not able to discover.
Alexandre Grothendieck


© copyright notice ||| français ||| italiano

prologue > index tides > 2.2 How this research on tides started.

>2.2.0 - Title, subtitles, content, notice.
2.2.1 - Introduction to a research in its early days.
2.2.2 - Problems to be solved.
2.2.3 - A force not considered.
2.2.4 - The attention shifts to water.
2.2.5 - Hunting for discontinuous events.
2.2.6 - The water figures.
2.2.7 - Problems of perception.
2.2.8 - Perspectives.

If on a tablet, set the display vertically; if on a smart phone, set it horizontally.

In order to ease the reading, I advise to conform the column of the text to the line below.



This itinerary traces the difficult beginning of the reserach on water, in order to understand, from its behaviour, if it too is subject to cumulative dissipative processes, induced by its movement with respect to the Moon (and the Sun).

This itinerary covers the phase of uncertainty at the beginning of this research, from March 19 2005 to March 24 2007. On this last date, I realized that the tides could be due to the variation in water density.

This was clear to me when I witnessed discontinuous events in the water, the favorite signature of “force d”, already seen in action in seeds.

My journey to get there was long and arduous. So will be for the reader of the itinerary 2.2.

To the reader, not patient enough, I recommend moving on to itinerary 2.3, dedicated to the collection of evidence.



This report, on the progress of my research on the phenomenon ocean tides, is presented as if written by a person, other than me, who tells me the nature of what I have done, and what I am about to do, and the probability that others might accept the results.

This rhetorical device is justified as a sincere attempt to analyse, as objectively as possible, from the outside, and from above, the development in stages of my research, a kind of brief biography of a discovery, summarizing to some extent also the opinions of persons near to me, about the progress of my work.