Re: Terracycles
Posted by David Thomson on December 14, 2001 at 08:29:20:

I thought you were a geologist, Roger?

>Look at the numbers. The earth is (very roughly) 4000 miles in radius and a good sized apple is about 2 inches in radius. If we say the ocean is 4 miles deep (an overstatement) then it's 4/4000 of the radius which is 0.001.

The earth has a 4000 mile radius, but that has nothing to do with this calculation. The crust, that portion of the planet near the surface and floating on molten rock, is only 6 miles thick under the entire Pacific Ocean. The Pacific Ocean has an average depth of about 2.5 miles deep. The ratio of ocean to crust is about 40 percent. That is a huge ratio and definitely one capable of supporting an ocean driving tectonic theory.

To give a correct perspective, the Pacific Plate is like a giant cookie sheet with 1" deep sides and filled 40 percent with water. This is a very unstable structure.

Your incorrect assumption that the planet is a solid all the way through is completely at odds with your previous statements that tectonics are driven solely by magmatic convection.

>The motion of the Pacific plate(s) is a counterclockwise rotation, not a simple east-west movement. The Atlantic has no seismicity belts on either side to speak of despite the spreading from the mid-atlantic ridge.

You're a geologist? There is only one Pacific Plate. The Nazca is completely separate and has a west to east movement. There is a slight rotational component to the Pacific Plate but it's primary vector is from east to west. And what's more, the rotational component of the Pacific plate follows exactly the path of the daily tides, which also has a slight counterclockwise component across the Pacific Ocean.

The Atlantic Ocean is not supported by a single plate, as the Pacific Ocean is. All the real estate (aside from an insignificant square miles of islands) of the Pacific Plate is submerged. It is conveniently submerged begining at the plate boundaries and thus supporting my theory. In contrast, the Atlantic Ocean is supported by several plates that join in the center of the ocean. The Atlantic Ocean is also one third the size of the Pacific. They are two completely different animals.

And so forth and so on.

Dave


Follow Ups:
     ● Re: Terracycles - Roger Hunter  15:53:21 - 12/14/2001  (11943)  (2)
        ● Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - David Thomson  22:56:14 - 12/14/2001  (11964)  (1)
           ● Re: Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - Roger Hunter  06:51:23 - 12/15/2001  (11981)  (1)
              ● Re: Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - David Thomson  07:28:49 - 12/15/2001  (11987)  (3)
                 ● Re: Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - Roger Hunter  18:31:58 - 12/15/2001  (12027)  (1)
                    ● Re: Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - David Thomson  21:39:17 - 12/15/2001  (12035)  (1)
                       ● Re: Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - Roger Hunter  07:26:17 - 12/16/2001  (12054)  (0)
                 ● Re: Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - Roger Hunter  15:16:33 - 12/15/2001  (12009)  (1)
                    ● Re: Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - David Thomson  17:04:14 - 12/15/2001  (12020)  (1)
                       ● Re: Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - Roger Hunter  17:51:47 - 12/15/2001  (12025)  (1)
                          ● Re: Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - David Thomson  21:48:25 - 12/15/2001  (12037)  (1)
                             ● Re: Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - Roger Hunter  07:12:48 - 12/16/2001  (12051)  (0)
                 ● Re: Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - Don In Hollister  08:55:24 - 12/15/2001  (11991)  (1)
                    ● Re: Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - Billion Watts  09:27:46 - 12/15/2001  (11994)  (2)
                       ● Re: Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - 2cents  15:12:49 - 12/15/2001  (12008)  (0)
                       ● Re: Convection cannot be prime tectonic mover - Don In Hollister  09:58:17 - 12/15/2001  (11998)  (0)
        ● Open Question - bobshannon.org  16:42:40 - 12/14/2001  (11944)  (2)
           ● Re: Open Question - Mary C.  19:57:36 - 12/14/2001  (11954)  (1)
              ● Re: Open Question - bobshannon.org  22:33:07 - 12/14/2001  (11960)  (1)
                 ● Re: Open Question - Roger Hunter  06:53:50 - 12/15/2001  (11982)  (1)
                    ● Actually no.. - bobshannon.org  09:53:21 - 12/15/2001  (11996)  (0)
           ● Re: Open Question - Roger Hunter  17:09:13 - 12/14/2001  (11945)  (0)
     ● Re: Terracycles - Scorpio  11:22:44 - 12/14/2001  (11939)  (3)
        ● Re: Terracycles - David Thomson  20:59:45 - 12/14/2001  (11957)  (0)
        ● Re: Terracycles - Canie  12:54:12 - 12/14/2001  (11942)  (0)
        ● Re: Terracycles - bobshannon.org  12:42:08 - 12/14/2001  (11941)  (0)