Extract from Underground Geophysics for Geoelectric Energy, by Michael Csuzdi, Core Publishing 1994
I am indebted for help, support and contribution to this study only to one person: David C. Gilmore, M.Eng., Professional Mechanical Engineer. He worked out the three-dimensional geometry necessary for calculating the movement of objects on the spherical surface for forces acting in 3D space. He also prepared the necessary computer codes for the mechanics in a user-friendly and interactive way. Without this vital tool my theory would have remained only a qualitative discussion and a vague
proposal. I probably would have never arrived at the general conclusions about characteristic patterns of continental masses. He also gave me invaluable help on the effective use of computers. This took place at the time when computers all too often displayed messages like 'not enough memory', 'disk full', or the required calculations tended to take forever.
I met Dave shortly after the first presentation of my theory in 1976. My paper was not well received at that meeting. None of the six geophysicists in my audience could deny the pentagonal arrangement of the continents around Africa (and they all admitted that they had never before noticed this pattern, or heard about it). But they unanimously declared that the pattern was coincidental, like constellations in the sky, and it was without any merit to investigate it further. Moreover, they also declared that my proposed electrical positioning was "just impossible".
That verdict came as a total and unmitigated surprise to me. When I first noticed the pentagonal pattern myself, I had two possibilities in my mind. One was coincidence of course, and the other that it may be the result of some yet undiscovered forces. What would be its scientific value if it were the latter? Perhaps enormous. Consequently, an off-hand dismissal was out of the question for me, and I felt that an investigation was morally compulsory. I knew very well that my knowledge in geophysics was little, but I thought I could make up for the shortfall by reading all the necessary material, even though that might take some time. Then, I decided to keep my discovery a secret until I found it out. I thought that if a geophysicist learned about it, he would run away with it, would solve it overnight, and publish it at once. Then I would be left
behind, and forgotten.
However, I had bad conscience about this secrecy, for causing a delay in making the discovery public. Because of my vanity, scientists would be prevented from doing something significant with it. I knew the story of the French scientist who discovered insulin years before Banting and Best, but he kept it secret. He deposited its sealed documentation with the French Academy of Science. Then, when the Canadian discovery became known, he asked that the document be opened to prove his own priority. In response, the Academy publicly disgraced and condemned him for committing a crime against humanity for the delayed availability of insulin. The only difference was, perhaps, that I was willing to make my discovery public, as soon as I could also propose an explanation, formally at a recognized institute. That is exactly what I did at the presentation of my theory. Curiously enough, while I failed to make the discovery public because of the resistance of those scientists, I did achieve an implied official acknowledgment of my priority in their letter of rejection of my proposal.
I soon recovered from my bitter disappointment because I realized that the scientific jury did not offer any scientific evidence that my proposal was wrong. Evidently, they did not have any. I worked out a plan in my mind to expand my evidence to a higher level. I decided to make a computer model in which electrically charged objects would be allowed to move on a spherical surface under Coulomb's law of electrical repulsion forces. If six mathematical continents would move to the same relative positions on the computer screen as the real continents do on the Earth's surface, then this would be irrefutable evidence.
However, the task appeared to me too difficult, beyond my mathematical and computer skills. Furthermore, I was also at the end of my money. I had quit my job a year before, to work exclusively on the theory in preparation for the presentation, (and I expected a job offer or a research grant after it that never came). Thus, I joined another engineering company. On my very first day I was sitting, a little intimidated, in the middle of a huge and busy engineering office, among some 50 new faces, and a new post of duty on my hand. That was the time when a tall, thin, well-dressed, and quiet gentleman walked slowly towards my desk, and greeted me as a newcomer. That was Dave Gilmore.
Later we talked more and more often, and then I asked him how he would solve certain geometric problems. To my surprise, he always had an elegant, short, and exact answer. Sometimes I showed him pages of my computer programs, and he would say "why don't you do it this way?", and he did it in just a few lines. Eventually we spent hours at a time discussing these problems. I always found these discussions spectacular in a certain way; how two introvert people would exchange ideas. Always in total patience and attention to each other, and never yielding without being totally convinced on purely technical merits. And never trying to force an issue on any other grounds. No urgency, or convenience, or amount of effort would count; only a perfectly satisfactory technical solution. Then, after years of struggle, when perfect results were obtained, Dave would say "Yes, Mike. Any other problems?"
In time, we became friends. We discussed also many other subjects, personal aspirations, art, philosophy, religions. I never saw the end of Dave's patience and understanding. Sometimes, when the subject tended to go out of control, Dave would say "this is hot vine for me", but nevertheless continued the discussion and offered his honest opinion on the subject in a highly civilized manner.
But most importantly, he had eternal patience with the frequently ambiguous, obscure, and sometimes totally wrong results, and with my ever changing plans on how to tackle the problems, and how to formulate the question to which the computer was expected to answer. His endurance with this task is without parallel in my life experience. He unfailingly supported me for more than 14 years without a shade of compensation for his untold hours of hard work. Or better to say, until I obtained the computer's answer to my question; yes, the mathematical continents move to the very same relative positions where the real continents are. And not only on the Earth, but also on Mars, and on the Moon, too. Thus the force is real.
Then our ways parted. He accepted engineering consulting positions in the Far East where he is also doing exquisitely beautiful watercolors on ancient and natural objects. A few years later I retired from engineering to work full time on the finishing touches of my theory. I always feel extremely privileged for having such a friend and a godsend at the same time.
David C. Gilmore, M.Eng. P.Eng.,
M. Eng. Aerodynamics; McGill University
B. Eng. Mechanical Sciences; McGill University
David Gilmore held various senior technical positions at Urban Transportation Development Corp. in Kingston Ontario from 1980 to 1989 where he met Michael Csuzdi. From 1989 to 1999 David Gilmore worked overseas in Asia. Michael and David communicated via fax and telephone from 1989 until Michael passed away in 1995