George <Geo...@george.net> wrote: > Umm, your words, Floppy:
> "Sounds like you deny the existence of ridges extruding ice".
That must be why everybody use the expression "spreading ridges".
Anyway. Let's check your brand new position on the matter.
Do you agree that there is ice extruded by rifts (to make you more confortable) on Enceladus? Do you understand that this ice is fresh because it is crystalline? So where is that ice going?
-- Florian "Toute vérité passe par trois phases. D'abord, elle est ridiculisée; ensuite, elle rencontre une vive opposition avant d'être acceptée comme une totale évidence" - Arthur Schopenhauer
>> "Sounds like you deny the existence of ridges extruding ice".
> That must be why everybody use the expression "spreading ridges".
> Anyway. Let's check your brand new position on the matter.
> Do you agree that there is ice extruded by rifts (to make you more > confortable) on Enceladus? Do you understand that this ice is fresh > because it is crystalline? So where is that ice going?
> -- > Florian
No.The ice isn't extruded BY rifts. The ice is extruded AT the rifts/fracture zones. Since we know almost nothing about the tectonic system at Enceladus, it would be premature to make a definitive statement about why the ice extrudes AT the rifts. But we can look at what we know about physics and tectonic systems overall and make some generalizations. For instance, given the nature of the extrusions there, in the form of ice geyser activity, and given the presence of hotspots along the tiger stripes, it is a pretty good bet that hotspot ice volcanism (yes, I realize that term may appear to be an oxymoron) is involved. You claimed that the ridges are extruding ice, which is an inaccurate statement. The ridges aren't extruding anything. Neither are the rifts. The ice is extruding AT the rifts. The rifts aren't doing the extruding. The rifts likely exist BECAUSE of the extruding ice, and the ice is likely extruding because of the presence of hotspots. That was my point.
George <Geo...@george.net> wrote: > No.The ice isn't extruded BY rifts. The ice is extruded AT the > rifts/fracture zones.
From the rifts... through the rifts.; whatever...
> Since we know almost nothing about the tectonic > system at Enceladus, it would be premature to make a definitive statement > about why the ice extrudes AT the rifts. But we can look at what we know > about physics and tectonic systems overall and make some generalizations. > For instance, given the nature of the extrusions there, in the form of ice > geyser activity, and given the presence of hotspots along the tiger stripes, > it is a pretty good bet that hotspot ice volcanism (yes, I realize that term > may appear to be an oxymoron) is involved.
Indeed, it does appear to be an oxymoron.
It is liquid water volcanism. Otherwise there would be no crystalline ice. There is very likely steam that would explain the geysers of ice. A large amount of water is constantly ejected from the moon and feeds ring E. It is evident that this phenomenon is going on for a long time. In addition, most of Enceladus surface is young (low cratering) with the young floor surrounding the ridges, especially the southern pole at the "tiger stripes". It means that the young floor was spread by the tiger stripes. This is reminiscent to Earth's ocean floor. Of course, all that water ejected in space or spread at the surface must come from somewhere as the moon show no sign of depletion.
Secondly, the surface of Enceladus is full of open fractures. It implies a tensional stress all over the surface without evidence for compressional stress at all. It is a strong argument for an expansion of the surface. Besides, we have similar clues from other moons like Ganymede, Miranda, or Ariel... and from the Earth.
This is clearly a universal phenomenon: Telluric planets/moons (an likely gaseous one) are growing.
Live with it or go back to your cave.
-- Florian "Toute vérité passe par trois phases. D'abord, elle est ridiculisée; ensuite, elle rencontre une vive opposition avant d'être acceptée comme une totale évidence" - Arthur Schopenhauer
>> No.The ice isn't extruded BY rifts. The ice is extruded AT the >> rifts/fracture zones.
> From the rifts... through the rifts.; whatever...
>> Since we know almost nothing about the tectonic >> system at Enceladus, it would be premature to make a definitive statement >> about why the ice extrudes AT the rifts. But we can look at what we know >> about physics and tectonic systems overall and make some generalizations. >> For instance, given the nature of the extrusions there, in the form of >> ice >> geyser activity, and given the presence of hotspots along the tiger >> stripes, >> it is a pretty good bet that hotspot ice volcanism (yes, I realize that >> term >> may appear to be an oxymoron) is involved.
> Indeed, it does appear to be an oxymoron.
> It is liquid water volcanism.
Umm, the temperature at the south pole of Enceladus is -220 C. The hotspots are only 100 degrees warmer, making them -120 C. Which means that it is ice volcanism.
> Otherwise there would be no crystalline > ice. There is very likely steam that would explain the geysers of ice. A > large amount of water is constantly ejected from the moon and feeds ring > E. It is evident that this phenomenon is going on for a long time. In > addition, most of Enceladus surface is young (low cratering) with the > young floor surrounding the ridges, especially the southern pole at the > "tiger stripes". It means that the young floor was spread by the tiger > stripes. This is reminiscent to Earth's ocean floor. Of course, all that > water ejected in space or spread at the surface must come from somewhere > as the moon show no sign of depletion.
> Secondly, the surface of Enceladus is full of open fractures. It implies > a tensional stress all over the surface without evidence for > compressional stress at all. It is a strong argument for an expansion of > the surface. Besides, we have similar clues from other moons like > Ganymede, Miranda, or Ariel... and from the Earth.
The tensional stress can more easily be explained by tidal forces which, by the way, would also explain the hotspots, expecially considering the fact that you can't explain why Enceladus would be expanding.
"The leading model for the cause of the plumes on Enceladus is that the moon's tides cause its crust to ratchet, or rub back and forth, in a set of faults near the south pole. The forces between Enceladus, the big planet Saturn and another moon, Dione cause what's called dynamical resonance, and Enceladus is continually squeezed under this gravity field. This process creates a small hot spot, in relative terms, for an icy satellite."
> Of course, all that > water ejected in space or spread at the surface must come from somewhere > as the moon show no sign of depletion.
Just how much material do you think there is in the ring system? It does not take very much material to make a ring, especially one as ephemeral as the E Ring.
"Abstract - The dynamical evolution of fine dust particles ejected from Enceladus and subsequently electrically charged within the Saturnian magnetosphere is studied. It is shown that the gyro-phase drift, which is radially outwards due to the strong radial temperature and density gradients in the magnetospheric plasma, is, by far, the fastest transport mechanism of these grains. Maintenance of the E-ring in a steady state throughout the age of the solar system would need a mass loss from Enceladus of about 2 parts in 1000."
Note that last sentence. Read it again. Now read it yet again.
George <Geo...@george.net> wrote: > > It is liquid water volcanism.
> Umm, the temperature at the south pole of Enceladus is -220 C. The hotspots > are only 100 degrees warmer, making them -120 C. Which means that it is ice > volcanism.
George, you're boring. If there is crystalline ice, there is liquid water. period.
> > Otherwise there would be no crystalline > > ice. There is very likely steam that would explain the geysers of ice. A > > large amount of water is constantly ejected from the moon and feeds ring > > E. It is evident that this phenomenon is going on for a long time. In > > addition, most of Enceladus surface is young (low cratering) with the > > young floor surrounding the ridges, especially the southern pole at the > > "tiger stripes". It means that the young floor was spread by the tiger > > stripes. This is reminiscent to Earth's ocean floor. Of course, all that > > water ejected in space or spread at the surface must come from somewhere > > as the moon show no sign of depletion.
> > Secondly, the surface of Enceladus is full of open fractures. It implies > > a tensional stress all over the surface without evidence for > > compressional stress at all. It is a strong argument for an expansion of > > the surface. Besides, we have similar clues from other moons like > > Ganymede, Miranda, or Ariel... and from the Earth.
> The tensional stress can more easily be explained by tidal forces
Tidal forces imply both tension and compression. The compression component is missing here. If you look at other moons, explaining the surface of miranda as the effect of tidal forces is equal to believe in Santa:
> "The leading model for the cause of the plumes on Enceladus is that the moon's > tides cause its crust to ratchet, or rub back and forth, in a set of faults > near the south pole. The forces between Enceladus, the big planet Saturn and > another moon, Dione cause what's called dynamical resonance, and Enceladus > is continually squeezed under this gravity field. This process creates a > small hot spot, in relative terms, for an icy satellite."
The tidal hypothesis does not hold. Mimas is as big as Enceladus, it is much closer to saturn and the excentricity of its orbit is much more important. It should be subjected to a tidal effect that is 25 times more important than enceladus. But despite it is also an icy moon, there is NO visible geological activity. Its surface is heavily craterized.
The sole valid explanation which is also the most universal one is planetary growth. That's all.
-- Florian "Toute vérité passe par trois phases. D'abord, elle est ridiculisée; ensuite, elle rencontre une vive opposition avant d'être acceptée comme une totale évidence" - Arthur Schopenhauer
Skywise <i...@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote: > Note that last sentence. Read it again. Now read it yet again.
Bad troll. That is already equivalent to 200m of the whole surface. that is far from being negligible. And when one consider that is is local, it the equivalent loss is even thicker. There should be collapses to account for that loss. On the contrary, the surface display exclusively in-out tensional stress
Now your turn:
" Of course, all that water ejected in space or spread at the surface must come from somewhere as the moon show no sign of depletion."
Note that sentence. Read it again. Now read it yet again.
-- Florian "Toute vérité passe par trois phases. D'abord, elle est ridiculisée; ensuite, elle rencontre une vive opposition avant d'être acceptée comme une totale évidence" - Arthur Schopenhauer
>> Note that last sentence. Read it again. Now read it yet again.
> Bad troll. That is already equivalent to 200m of the whole surface. that > is far from being negligible.
You obviously failed to comprehend what was being told to you. (gee, does this sounds familiar?)
OK...I'm not checking your work, so let's go with 200m. That's 200 meters over the entire life of the Solar System... 4.5 billion years. That's a rate of loss of what? 45 nanometers per year? Woo Hoo!!
The rest of your post is irrelevent in light of the fundamental comprehension problem noted above.
(Florian) wrote: > George <Geo...@george.net> wrote: > > > It is liquid water volcanism.
> > Umm, the temperature at the south pole of Enceladus is -220 C. The hotspots > > are only 100 degrees warmer, making them -120 C. Which means that it is ice > > volcanism.
> George, you're boring. If there is crystalline ice, there is liquid > water. period.
> > > Otherwise there would be no crystalline > > > ice. There is very likely steam that would explain the geysers of ice. A > > > large amount of water is constantly ejected from the moon and feeds ring > > > E. It is evident that this phenomenon is going on for a long time. In > > > addition, most of Enceladus surface is young (low cratering) with the > > > young floor surrounding the ridges, especially the southern pole at the > > > "tiger stripes". It means that the young floor was spread by the tiger > > > stripes. This is reminiscent to Earth's ocean floor. Of course, all that > > > water ejected in space or spread at the surface must come from somewhere > > > as the moon show no sign of depletion.
> > > Secondly, the surface of Enceladus is full of open fractures. It implies > > > a tensional stress all over the surface without evidence for > > > compressional stress at all. It is a strong argument for an expansion of > > > the surface. Besides, we have similar clues from other moons like > > > Ganymede, Miranda, or Ariel... and from the Earth.
> > The tensional stress can more easily be explained by tidal forces
> Tidal forces imply both tension and compression. The compression > component is missing here. If you look at other moons, explaining the > surface of miranda as the effect of tidal forces is equal to believe in > Santa:
> You're denying the evidence. Probably because you belong to the past > century. It's time to move on georgie!
> > which, by > > the way, would also explain the hotspots, expecially considering the fact > > that you can't explain why Enceladus would be expanding.
> > "The leading model for the cause of the plumes on Enceladus is that the moon's > > tides cause its crust to ratchet, or rub back and forth, in a set of faults > > near the south pole. The forces between Enceladus, the big planet Saturn and > > another moon, Dione cause what's called dynamical resonance, and Enceladus > > is continually squeezed under this gravity field. This process creates a > > small hot spot, in relative terms, for an icy satellite."
> The tidal hypothesis does not hold. Mimas is as big as Enceladus, it is > much closer to saturn and the excentricity of its orbit is much more > important. It should be subjected to a tidal effect that is 25 times > more important than enceladus. But despite it is also an icy moon, there > is NO visible geological activity. Its surface is heavily craterized.
Hmmm. So Enceladus is expanding but Mimas, roughly the same size isn't?
So what magic ingredient do you suppose keeps Mimas from expanding?
Stuart <bigdak...@aol.com> wrote: > Hmmm. So Enceladus is expanding but Mimas, roughly the same size > isn't?
> So what magic ingredient do you suppose keeps Mimas from expanding?
You tell me.
You know stuart, when you do research on a new subject, you must accept that some questions will remain unresoved for some times. Keep focus on what is observed, and try to find some rules as data accumulate...
-- Florian "Toute vérité passe par trois phases. D'abord, elle est ridiculisée; ensuite, elle rencontre une vive opposition avant d'être acceptée comme une totale évidence" - Arthur Schopenhauer
Skywise <i...@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote: > You obviously failed to comprehend what was being told to you. > (gee, does this sounds familiar?)
What about your comprehension issue bad troll?
" Of course, all that water ejected in space or spread at the surface must come from somewhere as the moon show no sign of depletion."
Note that sentence. Read it again. Now read it yet again.
-- Florian "Toute vérité passe par trois phases. D'abord, elle est ridiculisée; ensuite, elle rencontre une vive opposition avant d'être acceptée comme une totale évidence" - Arthur Schopenhauer
Stuart <bigdak...@aol.com> wrote: > Hmmm. So Enceladus is expanding but Mimas, roughly the same size > isn't?
> So what magic ingredient do you suppose keeps Mimas from expanding?
You tell me.
You know stuart, when you do research on a new subject, you must accept that some questions will remain unresolved for some times. Keep focus on what is observed, and try to find some rules as data accumulate...
-- Florian "Toute vérité passe par trois phases. D'abord, elle est ridiculisée; ensuite, elle rencontre une vive opposition avant d'être acceptée comme une totale évidence" - Arthur Schopenhauer
Stuart <bigdak...@aol.com> wrote: > On Apr 10, 1:08 am, ;c auxotectonics_deletethis@nachon_andthis.net > (Florian) wrote: > > Stuart <bigdak...@aol.com> wrote: > > > Hmmm. So Enceladus is expanding but Mimas, roughly the same size > > > isn't?
> > > So what magic ingredient do you suppose keeps Mimas from expanding?
> > You tell me.
> > You know stuart, when you do research on a new subject, you must accept > > that some questions will remain unresoved for some times.
> This is a contradiction; not something that is merely unexplained.
The explanation relying on tidal effect is a contradiction, because we do expect that mimas shcould be more affected than enceladus. It is not.
When the phenomenon is not understood, you're stuck with an observation: Mimas is not growing, enceladus is, Ariel, is. then start the work of characterization of the different sample, in order to find a rule. It won't be done in a snap.
> > Keep focus on > > what is observed, and try to find some rules as data accumulate...
> Except you have no obs for an expanding earth.
Repeating it ad nauseum won't make it true, Stuart. Try to exerce yourself by looking for the anomalies in the pattern of seafloor using my kmz file. Is actually really easy to refute plate tectonic:
clues: Scotia, Philippines, Antarctica, North Pacific.
Either you have a good sense of observation, or you have none. If you don't, then quit research.
-- Florian "Toute vérité passe par trois phases. D'abord, elle est ridiculisée; ensuite, elle rencontre une vive opposition avant d'être acceptée comme une totale évidence" - Arthur Schopenhauer
> " Of course, all that water ejected in space or spread at the surface > must come from somewhere as the moon show no sign of depletion."
No problem. You've lost 200 meters of surface over 4.5 billion years. So, 4.5 billion years ago Enceladus' radius was 200 meters larger. Any evidence for this small shrinkage of 0.2% would be wiped out through resurfacing events as evidenced by the low crater count that you yourself have pointed out.
> > " Of course, all that water ejected in space or spread at the surface > > must come from somewhere as the moon show no sign of depletion."
> No problem. You've lost 200 meters of surface over 4.5 billion years.
Jeez, you have a big problem. Read it AGAIN:
"Of course, all that water ejected in space or spread at the surface must come from somewhere as the moon show no sign of depletion."
-- Florian "Toute vérité passe par trois phases. D'abord, elle est ridiculisée; ensuite, elle rencontre une vive opposition avant d'être acceptée comme une totale évidence" - Arthur Schopenhauer
Stuart wrote: > On Apr 10, 1:08 am, auxotectonics_deletethis@nachon_andthis.net > (Florian) wrote: > > Stuart <bigdak...@aol.com> wrote: > > > Hmmm. So Enceladus is expanding but Mimas, roughly the same size > > > isn't?
> > > So what magic ingredient do you suppose keeps Mimas from expanding?
> > You tell me.
> > You know stuart, when you do research on a new subject, you must accept > > that some questions will remain unresoved for some times.
> This is a contradiction; not something that is merely unexplained.
> Keep focus on > > what is observed, and try to find some rules as data accumulate...
Skywise <i...@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote: > It comes from Enceladus.
There is a good 2/3 of the surface that is fresh ice extruded from the rifts and no evidence of surface recycling (as usual), which means that it is extra surface => the surface increased. And for sane people, when the surface of a globe increased, it means that the globe itself increased.
Dude, you're living in a universe where the planets are fucking growing. So it might be time to pull out that finger from your ass and look for a rational explanation about what's going on here! OK?
-- Florian "Toute vérité passe par trois phases. D'abord, elle est ridiculisée; ensuite, elle rencontre une vive opposition avant d'être acceptée comme une totale évidence" - Arthur Schopenhauer
> There is a good 2/3 of the surface that is fresh ice extruded from the > rifts and no evidence of surface recycling (as usual), which means that > it is extra surface => the surface increased. And for sane people, when > the surface of a globe increased, it means that the globe itself > increased.
There are other ways in which material can be recycled besides classic tectonic subduction.
> Dude, you're living in a universe where the planets are fucking growing. > So it might be time to pull out that finger from your ass and look for a > rational explanation about what's going on here! OK?
Ad hominem noted.
You obviously have no desire to debate the subject like a rational intelligent adult.
Skywise <i...@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote: > There are other ways in which material can be recycled besides > classic tectonic subduction.
Indeed, David Copperfield knows a lot about these methods.
> > Dude, you're living in a universe where the planets are fucking growing. > > So it might be time to pull out that finger from your ass and look for a > > rational explanation about what's going on here! OK?
> Ad hominem noted.
You're welcome.
> You obviously have no desire to debate the subject like a rational > intelligent adult.
For sure, I have no desire to debate the subject with a troll.
Go back to your cave bad troll.
-- Florian "Toute vérité passe par trois phases. D'abord, elle est ridiculisée; ensuite, elle rencontre une vive opposition avant d'être acceptée comme une totale évidence" - Arthur Schopenhauer
|
