We have updated our Privacy Notice, you can read the updated document here
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

Evolutionary geology

  • #2
    Registered Users Posts: 462 ✭✭ oriel36

    Having put this out about 15 years ago, the reaction of those who were not able to follow the reasoning was to throw the kitchen sink at the links between evolutionary geology and rotation.

    What I did was connect the largest geological feature, in this case the 26 mile spherical deviation between equatorial and polar diameters with crustal eolution/motion.

    All planets with rotating fluid compositions and even the Sun displays differential rotation across latitudes so unlike the Earth fractured surface crust which rotates in a predictable declining rate from a maximum equatorial rotation velocity of 1037.5 mph to zero rotation at the North/South polar latitudes, the fluid interior rotates in bands of fluid which distinct breaks between those bands.


    Of course, I haven't met a geologist who can affirm the correct rotational velocity of the Earth, after all, following a mistake made in the 17th century, the value assigned to the Earth's equator is abysmally false -

    Sidereal rotation period - 23hours 56min 4 sec
    Equatorial rotation velocity - 1040.4 mph


    The great MAR positively shouts out the differential rotational mechanism with its elegant 'S' shape and many other facets that go into the best explanation for an internal dynamic.


    Geologists never learned the last lesson from Wegener unfortunately -

    “Scientists still do not appear to understand sufficiently that all earth sciences must contribute evidence toward unveiling the state of our planet in earlier times, and that the truth of the matter can only be reached by combing all this evidence. ... It is only by combing the information furnished by all the earth sciences that we can hope to determine 'truth' here, that is to say, to find the picture that sets out all the known facts in the best arrangement and that therefore has the highest degree of probability. Further, we have to be prepared always for the possibility that each new discovery, no matter what science furnishes it, may modify the conclusions we draw.”

    ― Alfred Wegener, The Origin of Continents and Oceans


  • #2

    Wegener (1880-1930) and the Continental Drift Hypothesis. Problematic. He lacked a "plausible mechanism for how the continents could move through the oceans."

  • #2

    Fathom wrote: »
    Wegener (1880-1930) and the Continental Drift Hypothesis. Problematic. He lacked a "plausible mechanism for how the continents could move through the oceans."

    I fixed that.

    I borrowed from differential rotation across latitudes common to all rotating celestial bodies with viscous compositions whether the Sun, the gas giants or indeed the Earth's atmosphere.

    The Romanche fracture zone splits along the orientation of the Equator dividing both hemispheres so there is what I consider a provisional term of a 'lag/advance' mechanism creating ocean crust symmetrically either side of the fracture zone by way of zonal flow of viscous material moving in one direction with the Earth's surface rotation.


    Unlike the fractured surface crust which has a steady diminishing of equatorial velocity from a maximum 1037.5 mph at the Equator to zero at the North/South polar latitudes, the rotating fluid interior has an uneven velocity as the fluid diminishes in bands towards the poles. It is this differential between the zonal bands but also the difference with the fractured surface crust which provides the necessary mechanism to make crustal evolution and motion possible. It is also a neat mechanism to mesh in with the spherical deviation of the planet as it spreads that deviation across the planet from equator to poles by way of the zonal bands.

    A faster band of rotating fluid at the Equator creates crust towards the East, however, as the band beneath it moves slower, it also creates crust towards the West. The mechanism is played all the way down through the fracture zones towards the poles when they become less prevalent where rotational velocity diminishes and leaves particular evolutionary geology clues -

    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/John_Gibson13/publication/41758514/figure/fig1/AS:[email protected]/Map-of-southern-South-America-and-the-Antarctic-Peninsula-showing-the-location-of.png

    The jigsaw puzzle of the continents themselves is matched by the seafloor evolution but also tied to the spherical deviation of the planet via rotation of the fluid interior.

    The next step is making a planetary comparison with our sister planet Venus and its residual rotation where volcanic activity dominates, plate tectonics and a spherical deviation are absent. This is an example of combining all sciences but in a more productive and expansive way, even in outlines.

  • #2

    The observation of differential rotation across latitudes is an established principles for all rotating celestial bodies with some form of viscous material whether the atmosphere or plasma. It is not a stretch to apply the same principle to the fluid material of the Earth operating on the evolving fractured crust


    I well appreciate the difficulties presently where planetary dynamics and Earth sciences like evolutionary geology intersect, however, it is possible to set aside the specific problems and take a wide overview to move things along in a productive and creative way.

    It is perhaps that differential rotation across latitudes suits both the development of crust either side of the Mid Atlantic Ridge and the spherical deviation between equatorial and polar diameters that makes the rotational mechanism so appealing. It is the tendency for the fracture zones to develop symmetrically either side of the MAR along with that most elegant 'S' shape with a pronounced split at the Equator rather than a definite treatment with closure.


    I did all this back something like 17 or 18 years ago but then later people tried to introduce rotation as a mechanism in a pretty awful and haphazard way as the Wikipedia article on 'Plate Tectonics' did. It really has nothing to do with priority but the dismaying way rotational influences were introduced around 2005 as though desperate to say something, they created contrived declarations with little joined-up considerations -


    Maybe geology does advance one funeral at a time but I would like to think that is an outdated view of things.

  • #2

    How does this relate to climate change? Global warming. Melting of the polar caps and Greenland. Differential distribution and levels of melted water across latitudes.

  • #2

    Fathom wrote: »
    How does this relate to climate change? Global warming. Melting of the polar caps and Greenland. Differential distribution and levels of melted water across latitudes.

    Thank you for your comment.

    I prefer to enjoy what I have in front of me in terms of the facts which connect the planet's 26-mile spherical deviation with plate tectonics using a common rotational mechanism. In this case, it is differential rotation across latitudes from the Equator to the North/South poles.

Society & Culture