|
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 |
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
From: don findlay <d...@tower.net.au>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 04:48:29 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Fri, Apr 11 2008 9:48 pm
Subject: Re: Seismic waves, density and temperature.
Stuart wrote: Good. > > Is that right. Well, there's a big difference between something > > behaving LIKE a fluid and it BEING one. Solid rock, despite it > > deforming into more contortions than an Indian/ Egyptial/ Balinese > > Belly Dancer, is not a fluid. Crystal gliding and accompanying > > recrystallisation and movement on faults/ microfaults (and the > > language to conveniently describe it) is NOT *fluid* flow. You're > > only fooling yourself if you think you can apply the same equations of > > state. What's more, all of that stuff, all those contortions that > > makes you think lovingly of belly dancing, is *stress* induced, more > > than it is temperature induced. > In this case of continental rocks, I would tend to agree. > Simple point is, under stress rock will flow, yes? > > No. Not until you answer the bit about the mantle slab getting > You mean pulled down? http://users.indigo.net.au/don/nonsense/fails.html Where do they get the idea of 'forcing down' You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||