Hi, Peeplezs,
Okay, yer on! And no, Ocmbr, it has nothing to do with the Expanding Earth theory, nor does it have anything to do with Creation Science, even though I feel they do have some points. This is entirely new.
It is a bit involved, as is any 4 dimensional model would be, so I wish to construct it in stages. I think you will find that each stage will lead into the next stage in a natural manner. We are merely playing with the effects of one factor at a time. The model could be used in any of a multitude of ways, but for this application we will concentrate only on how it might affect the theories of Pangea and continental drift.
I want to thank you folks too, for while this is just plain old fun for me, there is a serious purpose behind it. Briefly, I find to my surprise that I’m close friends with some high ranking (scientific, military, & otherwise) folks that are currently engaged in some studies that go beyond the frontiers of our current knowledge. This includes D.O.A.A. and other such entities. If you’re interested, I can give you a few more details on this later.
I’ve been submitting some of these things to them and they’ve been accepted well. Therefore, the accuracy of the known components and the logic is quite important. I’m challenging you, yes, but that’s just the fun part of it and (hopefully) helps make it fun for you too. The serious part of it is that I will be grateful for anything you can add and/or mistakes you find.
This is a “model” I’ve been playing with for a long time, and was inspired by a disagreement I had with AlanF years ago. Therefore, if you need someone to blame things on, blame it on him. (Grin)
And for what it’s worth, if you don’t mind playing out here in the intellectual “empirean”, there are a few more of these that I’d like to run by you later.
So, let’s sketch in a framework for this “model” and maybe a detail or two to demonstrate its possible value. One post would be far too small to try to give you a complete picture. That said, grab a beer, stick yore feet up on the desk, and prepare to peruse some heresy.
You know what happens when an astronaut “spills” water in the Space Station. In that weightless environment, it becomes little balls of liquid that float around in the air until they are recaptured. Now, let’s have some fun with one of them.
Increase its diameter to 10 ft by adding water to it. Of course, we now have a problem (not counting that the Space Station probably wouldn’t have room for it) in that the only thing holding it in a ball shape is the water’s surface tension, and just about anything would shatter it into smaller balls. Let’s solve that by inserting a cupful of gecko juice (most people call it gravity) smack dab in the middle of it. That should give us a fairly stable (coherent) 10 ft. ball of water floating in space right in front of us. It’s about now that it becomes interesting.
For instance, let’s stick a heating device right in there with the gecko juice, thereby causing a convection current. How we power it will make a difference. If we use infrared lasers and make them intersect in the heart of the globe, then after a while we should find “plumes” of heated water coming straight up the laser beams. This in itself would be a fascinating study because we are only used to thinking of convection currents in an “up/down” planar environment where the liquid goes up in a hot spot, then across and down in a cooler one. In our imaginary 10 ft. ball of liquid, the only “down” would be in the center of the ball, and all other directions would be “up”. What would a convection current look like now? How would it flow on the surface? At a depth of 2 ft.? At a depth of 4 ft? (It’s getting narrower down here!)
Of course the ideal way to power the heating device would be by using something that has no reaction with the water itself and therefore doesn’t affect the resulting convection currents. Would a heater powered by EMP work? (Grin)
Whatever, we now have a 10 ft. ball of water that not only holds together, but it is in motion on the inside. Once an equilibrium is established under the existing conditions of heat and gravity, fairly stable currents should result. Change the conditions, and you change the results.
Now, let’s apply this in just one small way.
Increase the temperature of the ball to about 120 degrees F. (slightly above the melting point of most waxes), and slip a few bricks of wax into the ball. It will, of course, melt, float, and gradually cover the surface of the ball. Now cool the ball to where the wax starts solidifying. What will the wax do and where will the convection currents deposit the solids?
Perhaps a better idea could be gained by changing the ball of water to a ball of milk, and raising the temperature to boiling. As anyone who has boiled milk will remember, a skim is formed over the top. However, it is not evenly distributed. The milk is still boiling in the hot spots, but the skim is shunted off to the coolest and least active areas where it gets thicker and is jammed together, forming a mass of solids with wrinkles and ridges.
Now look at the shapes of the hot spots. They determine the shapes of the fields of solids. If you have a hot circular “plume”, the solids will be pushed away in all directions evenly, leaving a roughly circular space around the plume (unless, of course, another hot spot interferes).
But what if the hot spot isn’t circular? What if it is linear, similar to that type of volcano known as a “Fissure Vent”, where the ground opens and lava flows out all along the crack? The liquids will now tend to flow at a roughly 90 degree angle to the fissure, and will leave a series of layers on each side (according to what is being belched out at any given time) that will be mirror images to each other. Plus, the fields of solids on each side will roughly imitate the shape of the fissure and be equidistant from it.
In addition, let’s say that the fissure is a few thousand miles in length and is shaped like an elongated “S”. Now grab an atlas and take a long hard gander at the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and the surrounding continents and tell me what you see.
Yup. I’m being a naughty bad boy and am suggesting that Pangaea is the fig nootin of an overheated scientific imagination (probably one o’ those global warming experts), and is 200% hogwash, poppycock, and just plain old BS.
And heck, this is only playing on the surface of our ball for a few minutes! Wait until we go down! It really gets interesting then!
Okay, I’m awaitin’ fer them thar fellers in the little white coats. (Grin)
Turrible Tom
