CompuServe Messages

>>There is no need or evidence to suppose the convection follows rise movements. You have offered no reason to suppose it could not be the other way around, that the rise is moving because the convection is moving (or is in both places equally).<< The rise is the most organized and consistant feature on the earth. It has the same basic features all along its 50,000 mile length, an up lifted region that has parallel and perpendicular fractures. It is more or less balanced between the continent masses that it lies between. ( To see this fragmented continent stragglers need to be estimated back against the main mass before the measurements. the northern Pacific basin where I maintain departure occurred is the only nonconforming basin.)Therefore the entire rise must have been created by the same source in a similar way that underwent very similar chaotic stresses to distort what was originally aligned. If the rise has been a continuous creation over millions of years the shifted sections would have blended centers…that is the rise initially would have shifted parallel centers like we see now…but in time weather the building mechanism was huge or focused these shifted parallel sections would end up looking like S curves as new Rise was being created. The deep shifted transform faults and the rise would have blended. This proves that the shifting all occurred recently and all at once. >>You have offered no reason why linear heat sources are needed to get planar connections (and thus linear ridges). Since examples of non-linear sources producing such flows are abundant, what is the problem?<< On the earth linear convection on the surface of the earth is due to heat absorption along a linear maximum, if the earth didn't rotate there would be a less linear convection system and would organize into increasingly larger cells. All convection is source dependant and for an uprising to occur there must be a heat source. It will not organize into a linear upwelling unless there is a linear source. The down cycle is more linear at times and is confined by the down cycles of its neighbor cells and other restrictions. There has been no explanation of how this interior linear source could function. There is also another problem in that the rise is balanced even though the speed of the flow on each side would be a factor of the size of the downward cycle of the cell and when the up and down cycles are plotted there is a big difference. The African and south american cells are much smaller than the asian cell. The source of the up welling is the same but the materials that move from the source through their cycle back down and then up again would have different speeds. The rise should be forming and moving much slower on the asian side of the rise than on the other sides. but it is balanced. >>Given that the ridges and trenches are so far apart, why would it have to be released at the trenches? And why can it not be absorbed by deep processes?<< Pressures would all seek a balance. The flow that is said to occur towards the trenches would increase the pressures if anything yet there is no leaking at the subduction area. Another problem… There are a few areas where the rise has three legs… south of india, east of South America. These areas on one hand should have an increased upwelling and increased building….the formation of new continent on a three axis system should create an area that has the evidence of the trilateral accretion of crust… that is there should be an increase of material where the two sides of the rise are building towards each other, the galopogos Islands for one may show this but instead of volcanic islands I would expect to see a folding of the crust here. Another observation… if you look at the area south of the Indian there are linear features that flow southward towards Antarctica. It is easy to see the flow of that continent away from the african and indian masses. The flow patterns are carved into the basin. If the separation of the masses was caused by the Rise why would these linear flow like patterns be evident in the basin? Another problem…. There are pieces of Continental crust( this is crust with a geological table as opposed to volcanic Islands.) all around the existing continents. If the rise divided the masses and built up between them then why are these pieces separated from the main mass. This has occurred all over the planet. If the basin was formed in the rises and pushes the land masses apart why have the rises formed around these masses as a rule. Kamron