An Alternative to Plate and Expansion Tectonics

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: An Alternative to Plate and Expansion Tectonics

Unread postby webolife » Fri Mar 10, 2017 10:37 pm

RM,
I don't want you to get me wrong. I applaud your efforts in this arena. It takes guts and no little stamina to stand up to the mainstream science community/paradigms. But my own model of rapid drift slowed now to a near stop is not a mainstream concept by any means. Subduction is an essential of mainstream plate tectonics because they must offer a vehicle to maintain a process for hundreds of millions of years, which is not the case in the catastrophic scenario. The plate movement vectors in your referenced diagram aptly describe a process which has virtually halted by the sheer simple force of frictional resistance. The movement I describe is no longer happening*, nor can it under the present conditions. This is where both your electrical discharge machine and my rapid mechanical drift model depart from the uniformitarian presuppositions of mainstream geology. The model to which you object is the SM version of plate tectonics, with which I find as many objections!
(*with the acknowledgement of the measured fingernail growth pace oft quoted in the literature)
But I will leave off this discussion for now and let your thread proceed without further debate from me.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2371
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: An Alternative to Plate and Expansion Tectonics

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Tue Mar 14, 2017 11:07 am

webolife wrote:RM,
I don't want you to get me wrong. I applaud your efforts in this arena. It takes guts and no little stamina to stand up to the mainstream science community/paradigms. But my own model of rapid drift slowed now to a near stop is not a mainstream concept by any means. Subduction is an essential of mainstream plate tectonics because they must offer a vehicle to maintain a process for hundreds of millions of years, which is not the case in the catastrophic scenario. The plate movement vectors in your referenced diagram aptly describe a process which has virtually halted by the sheer simple force of frictional resistance. The movement I describe is no longer happening*, nor can it under the present conditions. This is where both your electrical discharge machine and my rapid mechanical drift model depart from the uniformitarian presuppositions of mainstream geology. The model to which you object is the SM version of plate tectonics, with which I find as many objections!
(*with the acknowledgement of the measured fingernail growth pace oft quoted in the literature)
But I will leave off this discussion for now and let your thread proceed without further debate from me.

webolife it was not my intention to stifle any debate, we can leave that to mainstream science.

It was my intention to offer an electrical alternative to the consensus view in the Earth sciences, by definition this meant the current Plate Tectonic paradigm; I included Expanding Earth hypotheses as proponents of this group of ideas cite the same evidence, minus subduction, in support of their views.

In my opinion, proponents of the Electric Universe should be weary of adopting ideas from consensus science without question. The Plate Tectonic paradigm is a perfect example, despite claims of success at ‘explaining’ geological features on Earth it has failed abysmally elsewhere in the solar system even at Earth’s ‘twin’- Venus. Plate Tectonics arose to dominance before we had global maps of any of the inner planets and satellites of the outer planets- would this have been so if we had prior knowledge of the surfaces of these bodies? Geologists view the solar system through earth-coloured spectacles, are volcanoes on Earth, Venus, Mars, Io and Titan the same phenomena?

The consensus view that an internal heat source drives tectonic activity here on Earth has led to the reliance on tidal heating or hidden oceans on worlds considered too small to have an active internal heat source. How simpler is it to view that all geologic activity, regardless of how it manifests on the surface of a planet or satellite, is driven by an external electrical source?

An electric discharge driving geologic activity on terrestrial planets and satellites produces a wide variety of features both similar to and different from, features we find on Earth depending upon the make-up of the body and its environment.

Perhaps the radical departure from conventional geological thought is one reason my views are not viewed in a favourable light, or maybe they are just plain wrong; with this in mind and not wanting to take the path taken by mainstream peer reviewed science, all comments are welcomed!
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: An Alternative to Plate and Expansion Tectonics

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Sat Apr 15, 2017 11:44 am

Currents from above or from below?

In this thread I have suggested that Earth’s geological activity is a product of an electrical discharge between Earth and its environment.

This discharge exists because Earth is not electrically ‘at rest’ with its environment, this situation has arisen due to Earth’s potential and/or the Earth’s environment potential changing ‘recently’.
This change was initially catastrophic.
Prior to this ‘recent’ change Earth was very different geologically.
Today, the discharge powers all manner of tectonic and atmospheric phenomena.

An announcement from the European Space Agency (ESA) suggested that a ‘jet-stream’ exists at the Earth’s core but is this really so?

(https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2017/01/02/clenched-by-iron-bands/)

Recently, the ESA Swarm mission discovered ‘supersonic plasma jets’. The jets were sandwiched between Birkeland Currents, these ‘…currents carry up to 1 TW of electric power to the upper atmosphere – about 30 times the energy consumed in New York during a heatwave.’

‘While much is known about these current systems, recent observations by Swarm have revealed that they are associated with large electrical fields…These fields, which are strongest in the winter, occur where upwards and downwards Birkeland currents connect through the ionosphere.’

‘Bill Archer from the University of Calgary explained, “Using data from the Swarm satellites’ electric field instruments, we discovered that these strong electric fields drive supersonic plasma jets.’

‘“The jets, which we call ‘Birkeland current boundary flows’, mark distinctly the boundary between current sheets moving in opposite direction and lead to extreme conditions in the upper atmosphere.’

‘“They can drive the ionosphere to temperatures approaching 10,000°C and change its chemical composition. They also cause the ionosphere to flow upwards to higher altitudes where additional energisation can lead to loss of atmospheric material to space.”’

(http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Swarm/Supersonic_plasma_jets_discovered)

The location of the ‘supersonic plasma jets’ is not too dissimilar to that of the ‘jet-stream’ supposedly at the Earth’s core, how likely is it that the two observations are actually related. In my opinion, very likely, the two phenomena are probably part of the same discharge and the ‘jet-stream’ at the core in my opinion is more likely to be a near-surface effect.

Another finding from the Swarm mission is that the magnetosphere is asymmetrical, Birkeland Currents in the northern and southern hemispheres differ. ‘In fact, the two geomagnetic poles are not geometrically opposite to one another, and the magnetic field intensity is also not the same in the north as in the south.’

We appear to have one magnetosphere but two individual Birkeland Currents! I have previously suggested that currents flow to Earth from a region where free electrons are available in greater numbers and not being usurped by the Sun, this is why all magnetotails extend in the anti-sunward direction. I see it being highly likely that the two Birkeland Currents behave differently over the course of an Earth orbit because they are sourcing electrons from slightly different regions plus we would expect any dynamical changes induced from coronal mass ejections, for example, to evolve differentially in each hemisphere.

(http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Swarm/Swarm_detects_asymmetry)

It was also found that the electric field associated with the ‘supersonic plasma jets’ was strongest in winter (northern hemisphere) when Earth is closest to the Sun; perhaps at this time Earth’s magnetotail is forced to extend farther in the anti-sunward direction in search of collectible electrons?

All of this may seem a long way from geological activity but spacecraft have mapped Birkeland Currents from the magnetosphere to the ionosphere (http://sci.esa.int/cluster/56098-seven-esa-satellites-team-up-to-explore-earths-magnetic-field/) how big is the next step- realising that it is the electrical nature of Earth and its environment that powers global tectonic activity?
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: An Alternative to Plate and Expansion Tectonics

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Tue Jun 27, 2017 1:10 pm

The Basaltic Earth

The reigning global geo-tectonic paradigm, Plate Tectonics, views Earth as consisting of two different types of ‘crust’. This approach is required to enable ‘continental drift’ the idea that less dense ‘continental crust’ is pushed and pulled in response to the movement- spreading and subduction- of the more dense ‘oceanic crust’.

The problem faced by Plate Tectonicists is that Earth is the only terrestrial planet in the solar system where Plate Tectonics is supposedly happening, Mercury, Venus, Mars and the Moon have all been mapped to a degree at which we would expect to see surface features associated with tectonic movements- if Plate Tectonics was occurring or had occurred on these worlds. But, the evidence is absent.

Geologists have a working tectonic model, but a model that is a special case, only applicable to the Earth and not applicable to other terrestrial bodies in the solar system.

The model I have proposed on this thread does not endorse the Plate (and Expansion) Tectonic paradigm- how then do we explain the dual nature of the Earth’s crust?

As above, so below

Earth’s lower atmosphere is dominated by nitrogen and oxygen, the outer atmosphere –the exosphere- is dominated by hydrogen and helium, is this a clue to the process that forms not only the Earth’s ‘continental crust’ but also the planet’s oceans?

The presence of these elements in Earth’s gaseous envelope suggests that they continue to exist in significant quantities in Earth’s interior- I have suggested that Earth may well contain a hollow- such a hollow would serve as a reservoir for hydrogen, methane, ammonia, silane etc. Results from the Kola Super-deep borehole show a counter-intuitive exponential increase of rock porosity with depth. Such porosity would enable elements from deep within the Earth to migrate to the surface. Near the surface upwelling methane is gradually oxidised CH4 + O2 = 2H2O + C, leaving behind vast deposits of oil and coal. If sufficient quantities of methane reach the oxygen rich surface then we find CH4 + 2O2 = 2H2O + CO2. Clearly upwelling methane contributes to Earth’s water budget.

The principal “…composition of volcanic gases (analyses of gases from fumaroles and of gases preserved in solidified lava and in a fresh tephra) show that the most important among them are H2O, H2,CH4 (and other hydrocarbons), O2, CO, CO2, COS, N2, NH3, Cl, H2S, SO2, SO3,S, He, Ar, Xe, boric and arsenic acid, chlorides and fluorides of metals."

It would seem that most volcanic eruptions have less to do with the popular picture of molten rock and more to do with upwelling methane reacting with plentiful amounts of oxygen in the Earth’s crust.

Upwelling silane too, is oxidised as it approaches the surface SiH4 + O2 = 2H2 + SiO2, like methane, if silane reaches oxygen rich layers then we find SiH4 + 2O2 = 2H2O + SiO2. Equally, upwelling silane contributes to Earth’s planetary water budget.

However, there is a difference when we look at the two chemical reactions especially when we consider one of the products of the silane reaction- silicon dioxide or silica.

“Quartz is the second most abundant mineral in the Earth’s continental crust, after feldspar. It is made up of a continuous framework of SiO4 silicon–oxygen tetrahedra, with each oxygen being shared between two tetrahedra, giving an overall formula SiO2.”

Earth’s atmosphere provides a glimpse into the planet’s make-up. Methane and silane when oxidised produce water. Water vapour along with methane and ammonia in Earth’s atmosphere are vulnerable to dissociation by solar radiation. “There is a continual escape of the hydrogen atoms into interplanetary space; but the liberated oxygen atoms (and nitrogen atoms) remain in the atmosphere, and the number that must thus have been added in geological time seems to be comparable with the number now present.”

The process is closely linked with tectonic activity which I believe is, in turn, closely linked to Earth’s electrical environment.

We have seen how the Earth’s reservoir of water and hydrocarbons are formed but what of the other reservoir, silica?

The origin of the ‘continental crust’

Basalt is one of the most common rock types found on Earth and not only Earth, basalt is found on all the terrestrial planets.

Results from the MESSENGER spacecraft show that the surface composition of Mercury is most similar to that of a terrestrial magnesian basalt (with lowered FeO), composed mainly of Mg-rich orthopyroxene and plagioclase.

At Venus, Venera 9, 10, 14 and Vega 1, 2 landing sites the surface composition was found to be chemically close to tholeiitic basalts, while at the Venera 8 and 13 landing sites the surface was found to be close to alkaline basalts in composition.

Data returned from spacecraft show that Mars is composed mostly of rocks similar to terrestrial basalts called tholeiites, which make up most oceanic islands, mid-ocean ridges, and the seafloor beneath sediments. The Martian samples differ in some respects that reflect differences in the compositions of the Martian and terrestrial interiors, but in general are a lot like Earth basalts.

On Earth the largest occurrences of basalt are on the ocean floor which is almost completely made up of basalt. On the continents themselves we find outpourings of rock normally associated with the ocean floor- basalt is the rock most typical of large igneous provinces.

“Continental flood basalts are known to exist in the Deccan Traps in India, the Chilcotin Group in British Columbia, Canada, the Paraná Traps in Brazil, the Siberian Traps in Russia, the Karoo flood basalt province in South Africa, the Columbia River Plateau of Washington and Oregon.

“Ancient Precambrian basalts are usually only found in fold and thrust belts, and are often heavily metamorphosed.”

The prevalence of basalt not only on Earth but on the terrestrial planets suggests that we could consider basalt and its relatives as ‘primary’ or ‘primordial’ rocks- the foundation of the terrestrial planets themselves.

Upon the Earth’s basaltic foundation we find features not found on the other terrestrial planets, the continents. We have previously seen that a product of the silane - oxygen reaction is silica- is it possible that the continents themselves formed from the outgassing of silicon dioxide?

We could picture the early Earth as being Venus-like in its topographic appearance with very little relief. Over time outpourings of silica collected, perhaps around localised elevated regions of the basaltic ‘primary’ crust or areas undergoing outgassing. Water collected initially, in depressions in the basaltic ‘primary’ crust. A topographic dichotomy developed with the formation of a ‘secondary’ crust and would later be interpreted by geologists as two types of crust.

Modern day analogous processes would include deep sea vents, particularly ‘white smokers’ which emit minerals comprising barium, calcium and silicon. Such vents are known to develop ‘chimneys’, geomorphic and geologic structures on Earth today show a resemblance to ‘chimneys’ formed long-ago; they are variously described as ‘Limestone pillars’, ’Sand-columns’, ’Sandstone pillars’, ‘Pipes’, and perhaps we could include ‘Monadnocks’ and ‘Inselbergs’. On land we find geysers leave similar silica deposits.

In North Africa today we find a geological feature known as the ‘Richat Structure’. “The Richat Structure is a deeply eroded, slightly elliptical dome with a diameter of 40 kilometres (25 mi). The sedimentary rock exposed in this dome ranges in age from Late Proterozoic within the centre of the dome to Ordovician sandstone around its edges. The sedimentary rocks comprising this structure dip outward at 10°–20°. Differential erosion of resistant layers of quartzite has created high-relief circular cuestas. Its centre consists of a siliceous breccia covering an area that is at least 30 kilometres (19 mi) in diameter.

“Exposed within the interior of the Richat Structure are a variety of intrusive and extrusive igneous rocks. They include rhyolitic volcanic rocks, gabbros, carbonatites and kimberlites. The rhyolitic rocks consist of lava flows and hydrothermally altered tuffaceous rocks that are part of two distinct eruptive centers, which are interpreted to be the eroded remains of two maars. According to field mapping and aeromagnetic data, the gabbroic rocks form two concentric ring dikes. The inner ring dike is about 20 m in width and lies about 3 km from the center of Richat Structure. The outer ring dike is about 50 m in width and lies about 7 to 8 km from the center of this structure. Thirty-two carbonatite dikes and sills have been mapped within the Richat Structure. The dikes are generally about 300 m long and typically 1 to 4 m wide. They consist of massive carbonatites that are mostly devoid of vesicles. The carbonatite rocks have been dated as having cooled between 94 and 104 million years ago. A kimberlitic plug and several sills have been found within the northern part of the Richat Structure. The kimberlite plug has been dated to around 99 million years old. These intrusive igneous rocks are interpreted as indicating the presence of a large alkaline igneous intrusion that currently underlies the Richat Structure and created it by uplifting the overlying rock.

“Initially interpreted as an asteroid impact structure because of its high degree of circularity, the Richat Structure is now regarded by geologists as a highly symmetrical and deeply eroded geologic dome. After extensive field and laboratory studies, no credible evidence has been found for shock metamorphism or any type of deformation indicative of a hypervelocity extraterrestrial impact. While coesite, an indicator of shock metamorphism, had initially been reported as being present in rock samples collected from the Richat Structure, further analysis of rock samples concluded that barite had been misidentified as coesite. In addition, the Richat Structure lacks the annular depression that characterizes large extraterrestrial impact structures of this size. Also, it is quite different from large extraterrestrial impact structures in that the sedimentary strata comprising this structure is remarkably intact and "orderly" and lacking in overturned, steeply dipping strata or disoriented blocks. A more recent multianalytical study on the Richat megabreccias concluded that carbonates within the silica-rich megabreccias were created by low-temperature hydrothermal waters, and that the structure requires special protection and further investigation of its origin.”

Given the abundance of silica and carbonates found within the structure it is possible that the structure is large-scale ‘vent’ or ‘pipe’. I would expect that such structures exist on other continents-over a variety of scales- some may be long buried.

(I would also consider it likely that similar structures exist on the other terrestrial planets and may be associated with ‘holes’, ‘curious landforms’ and areas of emissions of volatiles, different to so-called impact structures.)

Sedimentary Basins and the Precambrian

“Sedimentary basins are regions of Earth of long-term subsidence creating accommodation space for infilling by sediments. The subsidence can result from a variety of causes that include: the thinning of underlying crust, sedimentary, volcanic, and tectonic loading, and changes in the thickness or density of adjacent lithosphere…As the sediments are buried, they are subjected to increasing pressure and begin the process of lithification.”

The above is the consensus geological view of sedimentary basins but is this correct?

“…we are assured by mainstream geologists that in the two billion years from the early Archeozoic to the present, just about every square mile of the Earth’s surface has been subjected to countless contortions, uplifts, downwarpings, depositions, erosions and various other tectonic activities of all violent kinds, over and over again… In view of all these countless destructive activities, how is it that we find hundreds, nay thousands of locations all over the Earth where nicely formed, undisturbed sedimentary beds, many of them enormous in size, both vertically and in horizontal area, ranging back two or more billion years ago…”

The enormous extent of undisturbed ‘sedimentary’ rocks presents a problem for geologists, furthermore some of these ‘ancient’ deposits are unconsolidated, “…but it seems that even the Penokee series of this region, regarded as a subdivision of the Algonkian or Precambrian, is also in the same unaltered and unconsolidated condition.” Consensus geology tells us that hundreds of millions of years have elapsed from the Precambrian to the present, yet this is still insufficient time to lithify these ancient sediments.

Does the picture presented here offer a solution? Major global sedimentary basins are often associated with deposits of hydrocarbons, it is assumed by geologists that sedimentary basins provided the conditions, over millions of years, for the formation of oil and coal. Is this assumption correct?

In light of what I have suggested above is it possible that sedimentary basins are not ‘sedimentary’ at all, rather they are ‘outgassing’ or ‘eruptive’ basins?

The coincidence of the occurrence of hydrocarbons with such basins is then explained by the observation that both ‘sediment’ i.e. silica and hydrocarbons share a similar origin.

Lowermost ‘sedimentary’ rocks in such basins we can reclassify as ‘pre-sedimentary’ rocks, lacking fossils geologists would assign them to the Precambrian. Upper layers would consist of re-worked ‘pre-sedimentary’ rocks, as sedimentary rocks that contain fossils geologists would assign these rock formations to the Phanerozoic. Whilst the rock units are real, the time units are imaginary.

Greenstone Belts

“Greenstone belts have been interpreted as having formed at ancient oceanic spreading centers and island arc terranes.

“Greenstone belts are primarily formed of volcanic rocks, dominated by basalt, with minor sedimentary rocks inter-leaving the volcanic formations. Through time, the degree of sediment contained within greenstone belts has risen, and the amount of ultramafic rock (either as layered intrusions or as volcanic komatiite) has decreased.

“Sedimentary sequences within greenstone belts comprise both clastic (e.g., conglomerate, quartz arenite, shale and graywacke) and chemically precipitated (e.g., banded iron formation and chert) components.

“Opponents to Archean plate tectonics… consider that Archaean tectonics was dominated by mantle plumes and was possibly analogous to the tectonics of Venus.”

The descriptions of greenstone belts above fit remarkably well with the proposed hypothesis presented here. Although associated with continental cratons we find a link with basalt, consensus geology attributes this to long vanished island arcs- in reality a link to the basaltic ‘primary’ crust. The observed increase in sediment and decrease in basalt type rocks “through time” is explained by what I have proposed here i.e. accumulated silica outgassing.

Greenstone belts are yet another indication of Earth’s ‘primary’ crust- found on the continents, this seems at least to have been unknowingly acknowledged by some geologists, evoking an analogy to Venus, as I earlier suggested.

The terrestrial planets all appear to be largely basaltic bodies that probably share similar bulk properties. The differences between them would be due to their idiosyncratic nature and histories, for example Earth has been able to hold on to most of its volatiles, Mercury has not (although MESSENGER did find unexpectedly high levels of volatiles at Mercury). Given that I see this process as being electrically driven, the differences between the terrestrial planets also suggests a changing electrical history for each of the terrestrial planets.
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: An Alternative to Plate and Expansion Tectonics

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Wed Jun 28, 2017 12:19 pm

Counter-rotation in Earth’s Magnetic Polar Vortex

The authors of a recent study (http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Swarm/There_s_a_jet_stream_in_our_core) suggested the existence of a “high-latitude jet” in the Earth’s postulated liquid core.

Figure 2, from the released paper, (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/archivos_pdf/accelerating-high-latitude-jet-earth-core.pdf) clearly shows evidence of counter-rotation across the tangent cylinder.

Earlier studies had hinted at the existence of a “polar vortex” at the Earth’s north pole (http://spinlab.ess.ucla.edu/wp-content/Papers-Aurnou7.1.13/OlsonAurnou-PlrVrtx-Nature99.pdf).

It was also found that; “Although the geomagnetic field is largely an axial dipole on the Earth's surface, the radial component of the field on the CMB (Core Mantle Boundary) is maximum not at the pole, as for an axial dipole, but instead at two flux bundles located just outside the tangent-cylinder region…”

“The vorticity is negative within 15 degrees of the pole, but becomes positive at lower latitudes, reaching a local maximum around the tangent cylinder. The vorticity reversal has the effect of confining the azimuthal circulation to the region inside the tangent cylinder, shielding the polar vortex from the rest of the core circulation.”

“Inside the tangent cylinder, convection driven dynamos show intense polar vortices associated with upwellings or downwellings in both the northern and southern hemispheres. Convective upwellings that generate anticyclonic polar-vortex motion beneath the core-mantle boundary (CMB) seem to be preferred but downwellings with cyclonic polar vortex motion beneath the CMB are seen in some numerical dynamos.”

“Our results indicate that the convection in the north polar region has a structure more like a tropical hurricane, cylindrical in shape with circulation and vorticity changing with depth through the outer core.”

All of this activity is supposedly generated by a hidden dynamo deep within the Earth, a dynamo that grows increasingly complex with each new discovery.

What if all this activity originates externally to the Earth? Then the power source for Earth’s tectonic activity arises from its environment and not a hidden dynamo.
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: An Alternative to Plate and Expansion Tectonics

Unread postby Lloyd » Thu Jun 29, 2017 8:04 pm

Robert, how about answering my questions in the Catastrophist Geology thread at http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=16703&start=15#p120099 and my corrected question in the post after that?
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4025
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Previous

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests