My science/technology-related thoughts, sometimes controversial, sometimes can be based on limited knowledge base, logic can be non-perfect as well. I develop my vision in iterations. Don't take this blog as an attempt to convince anybody in anything.
Each post in this blog reflects my level of understanding of Tectonics of the Earth at the time the post was written; so, some posts may not necessarily be correct now.

01 August, 2011

More On Flood Basalt, Or Siberian Traps Suggested Scenario.

Some Siberian Traps observation. 
   Navigate to Noril'sk using a map tool, set it to "Terrain"mode". See "Imangda Rudnaya" approx 70 km East-South-East from Noril'sk. Then, see six-point divergent star relief structure aprox 30 km East-North-East from "Imangda Rudnaya". The "pizza" of mountain ridges were cut into six pieces, and the pieces were diverged off the center approx 5 km, the space between pieces was filled with basalt. How could that happen?

Suggested scenario.
- The strong diverging process caused by Moon induced deformations (Moon was closer to Earth at the time) was mostly located on North and the continent was accreting incoming crust from North.
-The belt on Earth surface (corresponding to a circle of latitude(or parallel)) consisting of a) cratons, b) accreted chunks of oceanic crust, c) just oceanic crust was moving south under the force from North.
- In higher latitudes each kilometer of the belt's propagation to South would increment the belt's length by approx 3 km.
- 10 sm/year of the propagation in the course of a million years would increase the belt's length up to 300 km.
- Cratons and newly spread oceanic crust are not easy to get broken to compensate the expanded belt. The assembly of loosely coupled chunks of accreted crust would disassemble to accommodate the increased surface even without the help of extension force. The loosely coupled chunks would spread just because of the deformations caused by Moon and/or by the deformations caused by the incoming subducting crust.

Pangaea-related consideration.
   If the scenario is valid and the movement of East Pangaea was persistent on the course of at least 100 My, then, would not it mean that the entire Pangaea was located around South Pole before braking-up?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Follow by Email

Content © 2006-2014 Sergey D. Sukhotinsky