Plate tectonics and astronomy

The great mechanism which links the Earth's planetary shape and
crustal evolution/motion is easily discovered through observations of
a rotating viscous composition,specifically the idea that the
rotational gradient between equatorial and polar regions is uneven in
a rotating viscous composition (differential rotation) while the
rotating fractured surface crust has an even rotational gradient from
a maximum 1669.8 km at the equator down to 0 km at the poles
reflective of a rotating sphere.

There is a lot of handwringing going on at the moment as scientists
try to promote the idea that convection cells are inadequate yet seem
not to notice that the solution which connects the spherical deviation
of the planet with crustal motion is staring them in the face via
differential rotation and the rotational dynamics of the planet.

Maybe astronomers who are aware of differential rotation in stars can
at least help geologists with the ins and outs of rotating fluid
dynamics and why an Earthquake is a signature of the fact that beneath
the fractured crust is a large rotating viscous composition and while
destructive,lets people know we are on a rotating Earth.It is this
whole area where planetary dynamics and terrestrial effects mesh that
needs an entire overhaul,not just for geological and climatological
reasons but just because it is exciting and productive.

On 12/25/09 6:02 PM, oriel36 wrote:
The great mechanism which links the Earth's planetary shape and
crustal evolution/motion is easily discovered through observations of
a rotating viscous composition,specifically the idea that the
rotational gradient between equatorial and polar regions is uneven in
a rotating viscous composition (differential rotation) while the
rotating fractured surface crust has an even rotational gradient from
a maximum 1669.8 km at the equator down to 0 km at the poles
reflective of a rotating sphere.

There is a lot of handwringing going on at the moment as scientists
try to promote the idea that convection cells are inadequate yet seem
not to notice that the solution which connects the spherical deviation
of the planet with crustal motion is staring them in the face via
differential rotation and the rotational dynamics of the planet.

Maybe astronomers who are aware of differential rotation in stars can
at least help geologists with the ins and outs of rotating fluid
dynamics and why an Earthquake is a signature of the fact that beneath
the fractured crust is a large rotating viscous composition and while
destructive,lets people know we are on a rotating Earth.It is this
whole area where planetary dynamics and terrestrial effects mesh that
needs an entire overhaul,not just for geological and climatological
reasons but just because it is exciting and productive.


It is interesting how the Earth's magnetic field comes about, due
to the rotation of the earth and the outer molten iron core.

On Dec 25, 4:42*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 12/25/09 6:02 PM, oriel36 wrote:





The great mechanism which links the Earth's *planetary shape and
crustal evolution/motion is easily discovered through observations of
a rotating viscous composition,specifically the idea that the
rotational gradient between equatorial and polar regions is uneven in
a rotating viscous composition (differential rotation) while the
rotating fractured surface crust has an even rotational gradient from
a maximum 1669.8 km at the equator down to 0 km at the poles
reflective of a rotating sphere.

There is a lot of handwringing going on at the moment as scientists
try to promote the idea that convection cells are inadequate yet seem
not to notice that the solution which connects the spherical deviation
of the planet with crustal motion is staring them in the face via
differential rotation and the rotational dynamics of the planet.

Maybe astronomers who are aware of differential rotation in stars can
at least help geologists with the ins and outs of rotating fluid
dynamics and why an Earthquake is a signature of the fact that beneath
the fractured crust is a large rotating viscous composition and while
destructive,lets people know we are on a rotating Earth.It is this
whole area where planetary dynamics and terrestrial effects mesh that
needs an entire overhaul,not just for geological and climatological
reasons but just because it is exciting and productive.

* *It is interesting how the Earth's magnetic field comes about, due
* *to the rotation of the earth and the outer molten iron core.

http://www.whoi.edu/science/B/people...ages/SMAR1.jpg

The symmetrical generation of crust off the MAR along with the
orientation of the fracture zones are visible signatures of the
rotating viscous composition beneath the fractured crust mesh with the
same rotational mechanism which causes the planet to deviate by 40km
between its Equatorial and polar diameters ,it is good to work with
unlike the hideous 'convection cell' mechanism and it is time for
geologists to recognise that Earthquakes are signatures of planetary
rotation and the uneven rotational gradient between Equatorial and
Polar regions.

You can even enjoy the inputs for the Earth's magnetic field based on
the idea that the material in contact with the surface crust does not
rotate as a single unit but in differential rotational sheer bands.

On Dec 25, 4:02*pm, oriel36 wrote:

There is a lot of handwringing going on at the moment as scientists
try to promote the idea that convection cells are inadequate yet seem
not to notice that the solution which connects the spherical deviation
of the planet with crustal motion is staring them in the face via
differential rotation and the rotational dynamics of the planet.

You need to stop making this stuff up as you go along, and instead
learn some real science for once.

http://tinyurl.com/ydtsqtc

I know you are convinced that you can just look at a picture and solve
untold problems at a single glance... but you just can't. Stellar
interiors are just not the same as planetary interiors, no matter how
much you want them to be. Get over it.

On 12/26/09 12:42 AM, palsing wrote:
On Dec 25, 4:02 pm, wrote:

There is a lot of handwringing going on at the moment as scientists
try to promote the idea that convection cells are inadequate yet seem
not to notice that the solution which connects the spherical deviation
of the planet with crustal motion is staring them in the face via
differential rotation and the rotational dynamics of the planet.

You need to stop making this stuff up as you go along, and instead
learn some real science for once.

http://tinyurl.com/ydtsqtc

I know you are convinced that you can just look at a picture and solve
untold problems at a single glance... but you just can't. Stellar
interiors are just not the same as planetary interiors, no matter how
much you want them to be. Get over it.


Thanks--I was hunting for this article last night.
-Sam

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/feature...a uid=5750565

On Dec 26, 1:23*am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 12/26/09 12:42 AM, palsing wrote:





On Dec 25, 4:02 pm, *wrote:

There is a lot of handwringing going on at the moment as scientists
try to promote the idea that convection cells are inadequate yet seem
not to notice that the solution which connects the spherical deviation
of the planet with crustal motion is staring them in the face via
differential rotation and the rotational dynamics of the planet.

You need to stop making this stuff up as you go along, and instead
learn some real science for once.

http://tinyurl.com/ydtsqtc

I know you are convinced that you can just look at a picture and solve
untold problems at a single glance... but you just can't. Stellar
interiors are just not the same as planetary interiors, no matter how
much you want them to be. Get over it.

* *Thanks--I was hunting for this article last night.
* -Sam



http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/feature...msource=f20091...

As the 'world churns' indeed,a proper article would be on the
correlation between maximum equatorial speeds and spherical deviation
in stars with differential shear bands taken as a given -

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=5604

The generalized rules for any rotating composition in a viscous state
is an uneven rotational gradient between Equatorial regions and
depending on the composition,a spherical deviation between Equatorial
and polar diameters Of course it requires the basic rotational speeds
for different latitudes indicative of a rotating sphere and as none
of you affirm these known values (given for 4 minutes of rotation in
the following tables),it is unlikely that you can handle the uneven
rotational gradient coming under the topic of fluid dynamics of the
material in contact with the surface crust.

If people can't mesh the planet's spherical deviation with the motion
and evolution of the surface crust using a common rotational mechanism
then there is nothing I can do about it,all the same,this phony debate
about an alternative mechanism to 'convection cells' is merely
irritating and trite.Being in California at the moment,I am reminded
of the magnificent internal forces shaping the crust and especially
the fact the the internal geodynamics affects the surface crustal
dynamics and that Earthquake events too are signatures that we are on
a planet that is rotating.

On Dec 26, 1:23*am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 12/26/09 12:42 AM, palsing wrote:





On Dec 25, 4:02 pm, *wrote:

There is a lot of handwringing going on at the moment as scientists
try to promote the idea that convection cells are inadequate yet seem
not to notice that the solution which connects the spherical deviation
of the planet with crustal motion is staring them in the face via
differential rotation and the rotational dynamics of the planet.

You need to stop making this stuff up as you go along, and instead
learn some real science for once.

http://tinyurl.com/ydtsqtc

I know you are convinced that you can just look at a picture and solve
untold problems at a single glance... but you just can't. Stellar
interiors are just not the same as planetary interiors, no matter how
much you want them to be. Get over it.

* *Thanks--I was hunting for this article last night.
* -Sam



http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/feature...msource=f20091...

As the 'world churns' indeed,a proper article would be on the
correlation between maximum equatorial speeds and spherical deviation
in stars with differential shear bands taken as a given -

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=5604

The generalized rules for any rotating composition in a viscous state
is an uneven rotational gradient between Equatorial and polar regions
and depending on the composition a spherical deviation between
Equatorial and polar diameters Of course ,for our planet,it requires
the basic rotational speeds for different latitudes indicative of a
rotating sphere and as none of you affirm these known values (given
for 4 minutes of rotation in the following tables),it is unlikely that
you can handle the uneven rotational gradient coming under the topic
of fluid dynamics of the material in contact with the surface crust.

http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/...s/table02.html


If people can't mesh the planet's spherical deviation with the motion
and evolution of the surface crust using a common rotational mechanism
then there is nothing I can do about it,all the same,this phony debate
about an alternative mechanism to 'convection cells' is merely
irritating and trite.Being in California at the moment,I am reminded
of the magnificent internal forces shaping the crust and especially
the fact the the internal geodynamics affects the surface crustal
dynamics and that Earthquake events too are signatures that we are on
a planet that is rotating.

On Dec 26, 1:23*am, Sam Wormley wrote:

* *Thanks--I was hunting for this article last night.
* -Sam

I was saving the URL for a "special" occasion, which presented
itself...
- Paul

On Dec 26, 6:44*am, oriel36 wrote:

As the 'world churns' indeed,a proper article would be on the
correlation between maximum equatorial speeds and spherical deviation
in stars with differential shear bands taken as a given -...

So, you point to an 8 year-old article that is written about a single
star whose equatorial diameter is 14% greater than its polar diameter
because of its rapid rotation, and immediately jump to the conclusion
that virtually every round body in the universe will behave in exactly
the same way, regardless of its composition or size.

In science, not much can be taken as a given, you need empirical data
to back up your claims. You do know what empirical data is, don't you?
Without it, everything you say is just a guess. It might be right, it
might be wrong, but it can't be proven one way or the other. Your
Intuitive Intelligence fails the sniff test here, as it does just
about everywhere you go....

On Dec 25, 10:42 pm, palsing wrote:
On Dec 25, 4:02 pm, oriel36 wrote:

There is a lot of handwringing going on at the moment as scientists
try to promote the idea that convection cells are inadequate yet seem
not to notice that the solution which connects the spherical deviation
of the planet with crustal motion is staring them in the face via
differential rotation and the rotational dynamics of the planet.

You need to stop making this stuff up as you go along, and instead
learn some real science for once.

http://tinyurl.com/ydtsqtc

Nice link, have a glance how tides affect Earth's interior too,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1223133347.htm

We figured the Moon's tides puts 90 MT's of energy into the Earth
everyday, and is a major cause of plate tectonics, that it's sister
planet Venus does no seem to have.
Regards
Ken S. Tucker
....