|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,915 Year: 4,172/9,624 Month: 1,043/974 Week: 2/368 Day: 2/11 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Some help for the TC model | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
TC has proposed on here (now critiqued and discussed on various threads) that sea-floor spreading and magnetic reversals were more rapid in the past and have been slowing since the flood. I'm assuming the tacit assumption he considers the earth to be quite young. I've asked TC repeatedly to discuss the full consequences of his model in order to harmonize it with the magnetic reversal stratigraphy on land and to acount for the geodynamical consequences of his model. So far he has not been willing to provide this information. In the interest of moving the discussion along, I thought I would point out some interesting omissions from TC's model and also offer some hope (false hope though it may be) for his model. Here are some important points that TC has not considered:
(1) The correlation of the continental magnetostratigraphic record (and its variability) with the oceanic reversal record in terms of timing, mechanics and global implications. (2) The geodynamic mechanism for generating this rapid drift. TC has casually mentioned (with some confusing mixing of terms) that the viscosity of the mantle must play a role. Indeed, one can play with mantle viscosity in order to generate faster plate motions (ala Baumgardner). However, what generates this change in viscosity and what is the relationship to this increase and the concomittant (according to TC) increase in reversals on earth? I am hoping this can be expressed in a quantitive manner rather than by 'word play'. Here's a bone for you: Increased spreading such as what you propose would generate significant continental flooding without the need for any extra water. (3) How does point (2) relate to point (1)? (4) How does the mechanism for locking in magnetization in the ocean floor relate to the mechanism for locking in the magnetization in the continental sedimentary sections (especially during a flood)? Discuss these in terms of their temporal correlation. (5) How much oceanic crust was generated during the flood and opening of the Atlantic ocean (for example)? Discuss (quantitatively) the topography generated by this spreading, the subsequent rates of cooling and subsidence predicted by the rapid flood spreading model and how this all relates to point (4) above. (6) How long does it take to relax the thermal anomaly generated during the time of the flood (if a thermal anomaly is the cause)? Express this answer quantitatively. (7) Discuss quantitatively the dimensions of the earth during this rapid motion. Here's what you must show: Decreased viscosity results in increased spreading rates. Is there a mass balance situation within the lithosphere earth during the flood? How do you maintain this mass balance given the amount of heat generated during the rapid phase of drift. Please express this quantitatively. That should be a good start. Cheers you may find this figure useful:
[This message has been edited by Joe Meert, 03-22-2002]
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
quote: JM: Yes, my typing was ahead of my head! I've corrected the text. Cheers Joe Meert
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
TC,
I thought you might find this useful as you work through your model:
Of course, you'll have to plug in the appropriate range of values applicable to your model. WHy not do that and post the results here for further discussion? Cheers [This message has been edited by Joe Meert, 03-22-2002]
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
Sure,
Tm=Mantle tempw=average depth of seafloor below the ridge pm=mantle density pw=density of water k=diffusivity term t=average age of subducted crust pi=pi T0=surface temperature, nominally taken as zero Think that's all of them. Cheers Joe Meert
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by joz:
[B] 1)t or tau is average age? Theres an integral involving dt so t being a constant seems odd....[/QUOTE] JM:Average age; however, it falls out of the integration; note the 1/tau term outside the integral will factor into the integration because the integration is done from 0 to tau.
quote: JM: Yes, and no. You can't use Fahrenheit, but Kelvin is ok as is Celsius. If you want to use Kelvin then nominal would be 273 K.
quote: JM: In my example, yes.
quote: JM: Yes, you've got to keep units straight here. I wrote this for TC since he told me he's pretty up on all this so that's why I skipped the explanations. Sorry quote: JM: kappa=K/pc quote: JM:coefficient of thermal expansion. Cheers Joe Meert [This message has been edited by Joe Meert, 03-23-2002]
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
For those who just can't wait...here is part of TC's problem. Explanation to follow once TC has made his analysis (but notice the average depth of the ocean floor in the top model).
Cheers Joe Meert
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
Well, he told me that I should consider him on the same page as I am. The analysis we are discussing is all non-controversial physics insofaras young earth creationism is concerned! That's why it's such a big problem for him. These are earth materials (he even said so) and therefore he only has a small leeway in changing the parameters to fit his model. The other point is that in any 'model', the devil is in the details. You cannot have your model and ignore its physical consequences.
Cheers Joe Meert [This message has been edited by Joe Meert, 03-23-2002]
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
quote: JM: There's nothing to critique! I asked you a series of questions and asked you to conduct an analysis. You need to do that before we can have a meaningful discussion. Cheers Joe Meert [This message has been edited by Joe Meert, 03-23-2002]
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
quote: JM: Yes, those pesky details get in the way of an otherwise perfect hypothesis! Cheers Joe Meert
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
quote: JM: Tau, is average age. Sorry, thought that was clear. During integration, the solution is 2/3t3/2 evaluated from 0 to tau. the final expression looks the same as I gave earlier except the integral is removed and the expression is multiplied by 1/tau (means the final tau is tau1/2 and the constant is 4/3. pc= is actually rho* c....Rho=density and has units of kg/m3. c is specific heat and has units of Joules/kg*C. Now, to anticipate your next question, joules are kg*m2/s2....cancelling all you get kappa = kg*m2 * m3 * sec2*oC / m * oC * sec3*kg*m2 if i've copied this correctly, you get kappa= m2/sec [This message has been edited by Joe Meert, 03-24-2002]
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
quote: No problem, now go plug them and test them! Cheers Joe Meert
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
quote: JM: Yes, the units are 1/temp Cheers Joe Meert
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
quote: JM: Well, you told me you and I were at the same level of understanding. Is that assumption now incorrect? Cheers Joe Meert
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
quote: JM: What do you think is happening in the East African rift? The Rio grande rift? Actually, I don't know how you concluded that this is what I was talking about, but so be it. The East African rift has added some mass to the continents (Kilimanjaro and Mt. Kenya come to mind), so rifting can add mass to continents (contrary to your suggestion)....however that is an aside. Are you now saying that you cannot answer the questions I posed? I don't know of any internet site with these equations. The symbols are all defined along with their units in this thread as is the solution to the integral so you should have at it. Cheers Joe Meert
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
quote: JM: Not at all, but that in itself leads to some issues. You have presented a half-cocked hypothesis on a subject (which you now admit) you don't understand fully. Most of us try to understand something before we present foolish ideas. Just about everything you've presented with regard to geology has been naively incorrect and inconsistent. That is because you don't know the topic well enough yet to make reasoned arguments. Work on answering the questions I posed here and explain why the oceans today are more than 50 meters deep when your hypothesis predicts that the oceans would only be ~50 meters deep. Cheers Joe Meert
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024