Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Some help for the TC model
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5679 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 1 of 84 (7630)
03-22-2002 12:34 PM


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]

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by joz, posted 03-22-2002 1:04 PM Joe Meert has replied

  
joz
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 84 (7635)
03-22-2002 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Joe Meert
03-22-2002 12:34 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Joe Meert:
a)(2).....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.
b)(6)How long does it take to relax the thermal anomaly generated by the decreased viscosity (if that is the cause)? Express this answer quantitatively.

a)What causes the flooding? Only thing I can think of is the bow waves thrown up by the continents as they steam around at speeds in the miles per hour range, but that would probably cause tsunamis instead of floods per se.....
b)Doesn`t the thermal anomaly cause the reduced viscosity? If not what does? If the decrease in viscosity is due to the anomalous temperatures how can the decreased viscosity cause the thermal anomaly?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Joe Meert, posted 03-22-2002 12:34 PM Joe Meert has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Joe Meert, posted 03-22-2002 1:32 PM joz has not replied

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5679 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 3 of 84 (7639)
03-22-2002 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by joz
03-22-2002 1:04 PM


quote:
Originally posted by joz:
[b] a)What causes the flooding? Only thing I can think of is the bow waves thrown up by the continents as they steam around at speeds in the miles per hour range, but that would probably cause tsunamis instead of floods per se.....[/QUOTE]
JM: The flooding is caused by the increased volume of the oceanic crust and the dynamic topography generated from the thermal anomaly.
[QUOTE]b)Doesn`t the thermal anomaly cause the reduced viscosity? If not what does? If the decrease in viscosity is due to the anomalous temperatures how can the decreased viscosity cause the thermal anomaly?[/b]
JM: Yes, my typing was ahead of my head! I've corrected the text.
Cheers
Joe Meert

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by joz, posted 03-22-2002 1:04 PM joz has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Joe Meert, posted 03-22-2002 8:27 PM Joe Meert has not replied

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5679 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 4 of 84 (7675)
03-22-2002 8:27 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Joe Meert
03-22-2002 1:32 PM


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]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Joe Meert, posted 03-22-2002 1:32 PM Joe Meert has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by joz, posted 03-22-2002 9:47 PM Joe Meert has replied
 Message 10 by Quetzal, posted 03-23-2002 5:56 AM Joe Meert has replied
 Message 23 by TrueCreation, posted 03-25-2002 4:18 AM Joe Meert has replied

  
joz
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 84 (7676)
03-22-2002 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Joe Meert
03-22-2002 8:27 PM


Hey Joe any chance of providing definitions of the terms in that equation for us thickies who don`t have access to a decent library?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Joe Meert, posted 03-22-2002 8:27 PM Joe Meert has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Joe Meert, posted 03-22-2002 10:19 PM joz has replied

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5679 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 6 of 84 (7677)
03-22-2002 10:19 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by joz
03-22-2002 9:47 PM


Sure,
Tm=Mantle temp
w=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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by joz, posted 03-22-2002 9:47 PM joz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by joz, posted 03-22-2002 10:51 PM Joe Meert has replied

  
joz
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 84 (7678)
03-22-2002 10:51 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Joe Meert
03-22-2002 10:19 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Joe Meert:
1)t=average age of subducted crust
2)T0=surface temperature, nominally taken as zero
3)k=diffusivity term

1)t or tau is average age? Theres an integral involving dt so t being a constant seems odd....
2)Does it matter what temperature range you use? I`m guessing its not Kelvin if its normally aproximated to zero....
So is it Centigrade?
(sorry about that second one but certain equations like L = sigmaT4 give funny results if you use the wrong scale....)
3)Oh thats nice.... Um Joe (insert embaressed looking smilie here) what is the diffusion constant? Is it a constant or a function of something else? Sorry i have to keep asking like this....
4)Ummmm.... What is the alphav....
[This message has been edited by joz, 03-22-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Joe Meert, posted 03-22-2002 10:19 PM Joe Meert has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Joe Meert, posted 03-22-2002 11:52 PM joz has replied

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5679 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 8 of 84 (7681)
03-22-2002 11:52 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by joz
03-22-2002 10:51 PM


[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:
2)Does it matter what temperature range you use? I`m guessing its not Kelvin if its normally aproximated to zero....
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:
So is it Centigrade?
JM: In my example, yes.
quote:
(sorry about that second one but certain equations like L = sigmaT4 give funny results if you use the wrong scale....)
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:
3)Oh thats nice.... Um Joe (insert embaressed looking smilie here) what is the diffusion constant? Is it a constant or a function of something else? Sorry i have to keep asking like this....
JM: kappa=K/pc
....It has units of length^2/time, but the K (thermal conductivity) tells you its related to how far/fast heat diffuses. Does that help? It is not a constant (hint: this is a term that will cause TC fits when he starts to model).
quote:
4)Ummmm.... What is the alphav
JM:coefficient of thermal expansion.
Cheers
Joe Meert
[This message has been edited by Joe Meert, 03-23-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by joz, posted 03-22-2002 10:51 PM joz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Joe Meert, posted 03-23-2002 12:27 AM Joe Meert has not replied
 Message 17 by joz, posted 03-24-2002 10:09 PM Joe Meert has replied

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5679 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 9 of 84 (7682)
03-23-2002 12:27 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Joe Meert
03-22-2002 11:52 PM


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Joe Meert, posted 03-22-2002 11:52 PM Joe Meert has not replied

  
Quetzal
Member (Idle past 5871 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 10 of 84 (7684)
03-23-2002 5:56 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Joe Meert
03-22-2002 8:27 PM


Joe: Besides being an evil, evil man (
), you're wasting your breath. TC has already stated (in response to an assertion about his physics knowledge on another thread) that he doesn't know calculus. He won't be able to respond to your equation or analyse your graphs any more than I can (hey, at least I admit I don't have the first clue what you and joz are on about). Of course, that hasn't stopped him from saying physics is wrong in areas like measurement of radionuclide half-life, C being a constant, etc.
Best of luck.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Joe Meert, posted 03-22-2002 8:27 PM Joe Meert has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Joe Meert, posted 03-23-2002 9:01 AM Quetzal has not replied

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5679 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 11 of 84 (7687)
03-23-2002 9:01 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Quetzal
03-23-2002 5:56 AM


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]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Quetzal, posted 03-23-2002 5:56 AM Quetzal has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by edge, posted 03-23-2002 11:45 AM Joe Meert has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1705 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 12 of 84 (7691)
03-23-2002 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by Joe Meert
03-23-2002 9:01 AM


Joe,
What does your equation regarding depth of the oceanic crust tell us about the possibility of depressing the oceanic crust with water loading? I am too lazy to figure this out and was hoping that you had an easy explanation. I know that I've heard an argument on this issue but can't remember it. It just nags me every time I read wmscott's rambling on his ideas regarding the flood. It seems to me that the whole idea of water loading causing depression of the oceanic crust was put out of its misery a long time ago.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Joe Meert, posted 03-23-2002 9:01 AM Joe Meert has not replied

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 84 (7692)
03-23-2002 4:28 PM


Ugh, give me a bit, I must release my frustration, I clicked the back button on this page instead of another one moments before I would have submitted. I had a critique of good length, so I will redo it.
------------------

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Joe Meert, posted 03-23-2002 4:55 PM TrueCreation has not replied

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5679 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 14 of 84 (7694)
03-23-2002 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by TrueCreation
03-23-2002 4:28 PM


quote:
Originally posted by TrueCreation:
Ugh, give me a bit, I must release my frustration, I clicked the back button on this page instead of another one moments before I would have submitted. I had a critique of good length, so I will redo it.

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]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by TrueCreation, posted 03-23-2002 4:28 PM TrueCreation has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by nator, posted 03-24-2002 7:42 AM Joe Meert has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 15 of 84 (7700)
03-24-2002 7:42 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Joe Meert
03-23-2002 4:55 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Joe Meert:
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]

AAAAAhhh!!!
Please!....no....more....math.....
Aaaaahhhh...gurgle....thump.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Joe Meert, posted 03-23-2002 4:55 PM Joe Meert has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Joe Meert, posted 03-24-2002 11:45 AM nator has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024