Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!bath63!ma_jpb
From: ma_jpb@bath63.ux63.bath.ac.uk (Bennett)
Newsgroups: sci.misc
Subject: Re: alternative to plate tectonics
Message-ID: <648@bath63.ux63.bath.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 5-Dec-86 16:38:02 EST
Article-I.D.: bath63.648
Posted: Fri Dec  5 16:38:02 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 7-Dec-86 03:46:14 EST
References: <531@weitek.UUCP> <1272@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> <1273@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>
Reply-To: ma_jpb@ux63.bath.ac.uk (Bennett)
Organization: University of Bath, England
Lines: 22
Keywords: plate tectonics, continental drift
Summary: continental drift doesn't work


There is a problem with tectonic plate theory and continental drift due to the
conservation of energy. Consider the theory that the Himalayas are caused by
the Indian plate hitting the Asiatic plate. A substantial amount of potential
energy is generated in raising the Himalayas, which has presumably come from
the kinetic energy of the Indian plate. Given we can work out the kinetic
energy of the plate, we can calculate the height of the mountains this would
raise if converted to potential energy with 100% efficiency. Although the
Indian plate is large it moves exceedingly slowly (a few centimetres a year at
most).  Calculation would suggest that within an order of magnitude the
Himalayas should be one millimetre high. Observation refutes this. At least in
this case continental drift is not a good model.

This is a well documented objection, and has led to the foundation of the "Stop
Continental Drift Society" (of which I hasten to add I am not a member). If
there is enough demand I can dig out the references to papers that discuss this
theory.

J.P. Bennett
University of Bath
England BA2 7AY
+44 225 826826