Ten years on

The continental 'S' feature which eventua the process of Oceanic crust development (and still does) accentuates the rotational mechanism and involves the actual coastlines of those continents and the ancient roots of their shape -

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18pe...g/original.jpg

The power to generate a 26 mile spherical deviation between equatorial and polar diameters via differential rotation across latitudes is certainly many magnitudes greater than what is needed to move the thin fractured crust. What it takes to move men to look at this connection between evolutionary geology and rotational dynamics is quite another story.

oriel36 wrote:
The Nepalese Earthquakes brings to mind the enormous rotational forces
that go into shaping the thin surface crust and although the loss of life
is tragic,the diversity of structures on the surface are shaped by the
relationship between the motion of the fluid and the fractured crust.

The creation of Oceanic crust is central to the narrative as the build-up
of pressure created along the Mid Atlantic Ridge as new crust develops
affects the destruction of the crust locally at all the other boundaries
. One part of the puzzle where crust is created locally and destroyed
locally came one day while walking along a beach after a storm and
dwelling at a fast moving stream eroding a sand bank and very much like
this borrowed video from a Scottish beach-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKrbXPKz-Zw


What makes plate tectonics possible is a differential between the fluid
interior moving faster than the surface crust across latitudes by virtue
that all celestial objects with viscous compositions rotate in bands with
the assumption that the fluid interior of the Earth in contact with the
crust acts in a similar way.

Wrong.

Despite appearances, the use of differential rotation across latitudes to explain both oceanic crustal evolution/motion and the spherical deviation of the Earth with special emphasis on the Mid Atlantic Ridge is from the Western scientific tradition. I encountered a YouTube video today where some guy superimposed differential rotation of Jupiter overlaid on the Earth's geometry with a wayward conclusion -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yduo9wi8wjM

Of course I have to stitch together graphics from elsewhere instead of encountering individuals willing and able to apply dedicated graphics to an astronomical observation that rotating fluid compositions on a celestial scale produce the characteristics of differential rotation with the Earth's interior no exception. I looked for clues on the surface crust and the Mid Atlantic Ridge satisfies a more in-depth look at rotation from the 10 year old perspective that originated in this forum.

On Thursday, May 14, 2015 at 8:31:13 PM UTC+1, oriel36 wrote:
Despite appearances, the use of differential rotation across latitudes to explain both oceanic crustal evolution/motion and the spherical deviation of the Earth with special emphasis on the Mid Atlantic Ridge is from the Western scientific tradition. I encountered a YouTube video today where some guy superimposed differential rotation of Jupiter overlaid on the Earth's geometry with a wayward conclusion -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yduo9wi8wjM

Of course I have to stitch together graphics from elsewhere instead of encountering individuals willing and able to apply dedicated graphics to an astronomical observation that rotating fluid compositions on a celestial scale produce the characteristics of differential rotation with the Earth's interior no exception. I looked for clues on the surface crust and the Mid Atlantic Ridge satisfies a more in-depth look at rotation from the 10 year old perspective that originated in this forum.

There would have to be some group willing to simulate the symmetrical growth of oceanic crust either side of the Mid Atlantic Ridge using the lag/advance mechanism associated with the uneven rotational gradient of the fluid interior.

This business of living with ideologies of the late 17th century and early 20th century may be fine for unimaginative drones who can't handle the cause for the Sun rising and setting each and every day but with all these 21st century tools it is truly dismaying that only a few have the ability to make the connection between the rotation of the fluid interior with the clues left on the surface crust.

With the concept of a differential rotation mechanism drifting out there for over a decade as the most plausible dynamic behind the evolution of the surface crust, it was always going to be a matter of time before it will be picked up by someone else. The elegant 'S' shape of the continental coastlines is a part of the development occurring along the Mid Atlantic Ridge so it is handy to pick up an image which somebody here in this forum should have helped me develop -

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9qUONTCMAI_p2h.jpg:large


It must be great coming here and spraying graffiti over these posts which comprise an original look at the mechanism which connects the 26 mile spherical deviation with the evolution of oceanic crust but the real indignity is watching others assign conclusions that I never would because of physical considerations which connects the Continental crust to Oceanic crust and from there to the fluid dynamic which creates and destroys the crust locally. It is therefore no advantage to see differential rotation emerge as a mechanism among academics who have shown no interest in the surrounding facts in general or in detail. In a desperate rush to throw the kitchen sink at rotation and geology, where once there was the pristine outlines of a mechanism for a few years has now become defaced over the years.

Perhaps it is a good thing that non Western societies will respond to these things while the traditional Western societies remain unresponsive and still stuck in the 20th century. There was a time when an innovator would die and the academic community with slowly absorb the innovation while allowing their fellow academics to die off peacefully with their salaries and pensions intact, Wegener was an example of this, but this is a different era with a different dynamic emerging with the internet providing a more immediate transmission of ideologies.


Readers of SAA have the benefit of seeing arguments unfold over 2 decades for a rotational mechanism for crustal evolution and motion as opposed to these standalone proposals that appear out of nowhere and draw conclusions that have no continuity with the original proposals for plate tectonics, something like this -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CV8mYFXkNts


I actually invited participants to expand on what was proposed over the years so I can't complain if somebody takes a shot at differential rotation even if it misses the mark by a wide margin like that guy done however it is the presentation that counts, the ability to forge a narrative using imaging which provides the best chance for understanding evolutionary principles in terrestrial sciences be it geology, climate or any other evolutionary discipline.


I know too well that Western empiricists would rather die than change even though it means other societies will overtake them in productive and creative research but perhaps that is the way it is meant to be. As a representative of the Western astronomical tradition I say that with some dismay.