|
|
sci.geo.geology |
"don findlay" <d...@tower.net.au> skrev i en meddelelse > > snip > > > > Don, when one explains the forces acting on a surface relative to an > > > Yes, I do think the coriolis effect is worth following up. > > meaning? > That the crust is anisotropic/ layered/ variably ductile/ brittle Your answer implies that you talk about the Coriolis effect as it manifests > > > Well lithosphere (and possibly a fair > > skating? > The movement on these interfaces. > > snip > > > It's difficult trying to > > cause and effect of what? > how the stress is transmitted through the different parts of the > >I expected that you would draw a diagram/make an > Coriolis EFFECT, not a force, though the differential torsions result > Anyhow, fair go. 've already drawn a fair few diagrams that snip > Why are you persisting with this Carsten? 1. The connected, single-set, global extent of their growth (figures Since it will not be possible to get a straight answer from you, I cannot 1) If this is a significant issue it is likely to dismiss EE as well All of your headlines takes considerable imagination to account for it's
news:5f164087.0406280828.5bbc1b53@posting.google.com...
> > "don findlay" <d...@tower.net.au> skrev i en meddelelse You still have not applied the differential effect of torsion (different
> > news:5f164087.0406270434.bd7b750@posting.google.com...
> > airmass
> > > > changing latitude, one describe the Coriolis-effect (torsion
involved).
> > Can
> > > > you explain your application of torsion in a comparable manner?
> > > <http://users.indigo.net.au/don/carsten.html> Though it all needs to
> > > be compressed into the crust.
> (competency interfaces), (where the atmosphere and the hydrosphere
> isn't), so there is an accent on these interfaces when it comes to
> considering torsional motion.
momentum) on the different parts of the crust to picture (presumably) the
direction of the movement of it. Yet you do not hesitate to scetch a neat
spiral as (presumably) the propagation of the spreadingridge ... where is
the connection?
itself in the crustal movement.
Putting it that way would prevent misunderstanding
> > > bit deeper - core mantle boundary) I think it is that, that largely
> > > describes the mechanics of early 'skating'
That is, how the Coriolis effect manifests itself?
> > > assign the scale of cause and effect..
> crust, the different scales that need to be taken into account, and
> the strain effects that result.
Isn't that what you try to outline in your application of torsion?
> > explanation of forces involved - as one can do on a mass of air affected
by
> > 'coriolis'
> in forces as things move into regimes of different momentum.
You sure have, but fail to explain a picture of what? And it wouldn't be a
> illustrate the broad picture.
good idea to use your own litteral inventions.
> Moreover, any drawing needs to be fixed if you insist to refuse to use any but your own litteral inventions, then do
> to the geology, not some imaginiary 'coriolis concept' akin to
> convection
it without us.
> Coming at it from a geological point of view and being prepared to pay I'm just asking for what forces you apply where
> attention to the anisotropies just mentioned, and noticing the
> different sorts of behaviours that go on at different scales puts it
> all in a different ball-park from the simple comparison you're talking
> about.
> Anyone going about it that way? Forget it. It's a mapping Take a look at what you'r doing
> job in the first instance. All I meant was a very loose analogy,
> related to the polewards swing of the Pangaean hemispheres. You see
> the mess plate tectonics has made of the geology thus far,
> with it's It's not a proof. When a fluid cools, it happens that way.
> half-century of arithmetic that 'proves convection'.
> It's not the way Becourse you don't answer my questions though I've tried to be extremely
> to approach it. Ask somebody with the arithmetic to take that sort of
> anisotropy into account and see what they say, about how simple it is.
> Robert Grumbine or Stu are bound to post a helpful note for you.
specific.
> All I have to say is Where you dismiss PT under these three headlines
> posted on my site.
below).
2. The aggregate, spiral symmetry shown by that growth relative to the
Earth's rotational axis.
3. The stepped offsets of transform terminations by which the evolution of
the ocean floors is inscripted
but comment
2) You have persistently avoided to go into practical details
3) You see the stepped offset as a zipper. If EE can be unzipped, why not PT
influence on the PT/EE question. And you deliver. It's fatal though, that it
is not possible to get straight answers on simple questions to you.