You are aware that the crust is ductile, are you not? The plates are not solid rigid bodies, even though they may seem so at our puny human scale.

Also, not that there is anything wrong with putting forward a hypothesis, do keep in mind the logical fallacy that 'correlation does not equal causation'. That is, just because the Arkansas quakes started before and seemed to reduce after the Japan quake does not necessarily mean they are related.

Again, not knocking the hypothesis. Just pointing out that your next step is to figure out WHY and HOW they are related. But, don't fall into that other nasty logical fallacy of 'only looking for evidence that supports a claim'. While you look for ideas that support your hypothesis, you also must look for ideas that negate your hypothesis.

Actually, it would be interesting to know whether tectonic stresses/strains on one part of a plate can be transferred thousands of miles to other parts of the same plate.

Brian