Re: Pole Shift Nonsense

On Sep 9, 5:59 pm, don findlay <d...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Sep 9, 4:05 am, Ken Shackleton <ken.shackle...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
My brother-in-law is fascinated by the idea of the Pole
Shift....uh....theory. The latest incarnation has the earth ending in
2012 as the result of a solar max interacting with the earth's
magnetic field....which then tips the planet over.....or something
like that.

I think that it's complete nonsense, but I have a difficult time
convincing him. He is not immune to reason, so if anyone can educate
me on some of the specific points that make the idea of a geographic,
planetary pole shift [not a magnetic reversal] ridiculous, I would
appreciate it.

Ken

There is a historical bias in thinking of the polar axis, which
surfaces geographically at the North and South poles, apart from the
rotational dynamics which define it and specifically the dynamics of
a molten/flexible interior.

Take the rotation of the Sun for instance -

http://www.astronomynotes.com/starsun/sun-rotation.gif

In respect to the Earth,the dynamics of the rotating interior affect
the motion of the surface crust along with giving the Earth its
'Equatorial Bulge' and even if evolutionary geologists have still to
make the connection,it will only be a matter of time before they do
so.

The deficiency in understanding rotational dynamics of the interior
can lead to exotic notions and a complete flip of the Earth is among
them but these things are understandable in an era where evolutionary
geologists do not take the physical considerations of rotational
dynamics into account when constructing notions of the relationship
between the interior,the crust and surface features.

Geological speaking Oriel makes a very good point. There could be
good *GEO*-logical reasons for thinking (as distinct from believing)
that the Archaean spin axis lay in the ecliptic. And that the
transition to the present one occurred through the Proterozoic. By
the Phanerozoic the present spin direction was essentially set, and in
terms of geological time you could lump the entire post-Proterozoic to
the present as one spin domain - with there being a 'criticality' at
the onset of the Mesozoic defining the point of easily recognisable
expansion when the mantle broke through the shell of the Earth's
crust.

That easily recognisable breakthrough is a clue to pre-Mesozoic
crustal reconstruction which better defines Phanerozoic expansion, and
a further hint towards what Oriel is saying, ..that the present near-
coincidnece of the rotational and geographic poles is just that -
coincidence: a snapshot in the progression of migration of the Earth's
interior rotational dynamics. Prior to the Phanerozoic the
rotational axis may have been entirely different from that of today

(But you don't get a hint of that from considering fluid dynamics -
only the geology.)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear oh dear oh dear.




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Static vs. Dynamic typing
    ... > Another reason is that in order to be statically decidable the type system ... We could think of types as a static component of the ... while *all* dynamics of the system is represented by values. ... [That does not exclude types as values, ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: Static vs. Dynamic typing
    ... > Another reason is that in order to be statically decidable the type system ... We could think of types as a static component of the ... while *all* dynamics of the system is represented by values. ... [That does not exclude types as values, ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: Pole Shift Nonsense
    ... rotational dynamics which define it and specifically the dynamics of ... Take the rotation of the Sun for instance - ... In respect to the Earth,the dynamics of the rotating interior affect ... 'Equatorial Bulge' and even if evolutionary geologists have still to ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: This Dynamic Planet
    ... dynamics occuring in the Earth's molten/flexible interior or across the ... Why do you think the Earth has no mantle convection cells? ... stationary Earth 'convection cell' models,it takes only a little effort ... In other words, as long as you don't talk to any real geologists, you're ...
    (sci.geo.geology)