It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Did Earth's Twin Cores Spark Plate Tectonics?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Did Earth's Twin Cores Spark Plate Tectonics?


dsc.discovery.com

The idea stems from an ancient, cataclysmic collision that scientists believe occurred when a Mars-sized object hit Earth about 4.45 billion years ago. The young Earth was still so hot that it was mostly molten, and debris flung from the impact is thought to have formed the moon.

Haluk Cetin and Fugen Ozkirim of Murray State University think the core of the Mars-sized object may have been left behind inside Earth, and that it sank down near the original inner core.
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 01:20 AM
link   
Earth's core may have a twin? The story says that the cores would be combined by now. This is an interesting concept. What if live never would have existed on Earth if it weren't for this dual core? Scientist know that the Earths magma core has a lot to do with life on Earth.

Imagine the Earths core being half the size and not keeping the crust at a life sustaining temperature?

What are your thoughts?

The article is a two page story, don't miss the second page.

dsc.discovery.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 01:22 AM
link   
There are already at least 2 threads on this topic that are active. Here one of them:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



[edit on 7-1-2009 by MCoG1980]



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 01:35 AM
link   
Man! I looked and looked and looked. Thank you. How do I get this puppy deleted?

[edit on 1/7/2009 by leisuredrummer]



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 01:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by leisuredrummer
Man! I looked and looked and looked. Thank you. How do I get this puppy deleted?




No need. The rules state that you can have two; one discussion thread and one for breaking news (or something to that effect) so you're good.


Very cool btw, thanks for posting this! Learn something new everyday.



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 03:12 AM
link   
Cool find!

I have a buddy that is a major Geology buff. I am sure he is probably aware of this already, but I will still ask about this.

This is a good starting position for a new line of thought...

More to come...



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 04:03 AM
link   
I'd love to hear somebody that is highly eduacated in geology thoughts, that would be great.



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Great find.


I read a snippet about the dual core concept earlier today but hadn't considered the impact (hehe) it had on the development of life on Earth.

Does anyone know how long this dual-core idea has been floating around for? Is it new, or is the likelihood just emerging?



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 07:11 PM
link   
As far as I can tell it is a pretty recent theory. It's really hard to find any more info on this subject other than the article above.

I'm a strong believer in life on other planets, etc, but imagine if the impact was a freak occurance that happened to create the perfect circumstances for life.

Saying it was a one in a billion chance would mean that there are many more out there. Thats why I love space.



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Computer models based on the Giant Impact Hypothesis show that the core of Theia [which is the name for the mars-sized body which collided with the early Earth] merged with the Earth's core. So the idea of the two cores coming together is pretty old (since the 40's according to wiki).



I guess the new idea is not that the core sank and combined with Earths' but, as the linked news article says, "... the two may still remain, either separate or as conjoined twins, locked in a tight orbit." Further suggesting this had a hand in starting (and/or continuing to affect) Plate Techtonics.


The article calls this a "new theory" but, I don't see where they [Cetin & Ozkirim] are publishing anything on this. They are quoted in the article as saying, "We have no solid evidence yet, and we're not saying 100 percent that it still exists..." if there's no solid evidence then there certainly is no Theory yet. At the end they quote a release from the American Geophysical Union which stated:


"In terms of its volume, and even its mass, the Earth's inner core is quite small relative to the whole planet, about 1 percent," Paul Richards of Columbia University said. "I seriously doubt that inner core dynamics could play a significant role in moving the tectonic plates."

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.



Cetin's page is: Haluk Cetin, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Geosciences (Murray State University)

I can't find one for Ozkirim but did find an abstract for their paper on this (they appear to have withdrawn it?) here:

A Hypothesis Explaining The Dynamics Of Plate Tectonics

Since the introduction of the plate tectonics theory, one of the unsolved fundamental problems has been the understanding of how and when plate tectonics began, as well as initial dynamics of plate tectonics although several mechanisms have been suggested (i.e. the hypothesis that asthenospheric convections drive plates, which is not supported by modern geodynamic theories). The kinematics behind the subduction zones and sea- floor spreading have been well understood and well described by the theory of plate tectonics. However, there is no consensus on the main driving mechanism for the plate tectonics and how it began. We are proposing a hypothesis that attempts to explain several fundamental questions: (1) Why is the planet Earth unique among the silicate planets of the solar system in terms of plate tectonics?; (2) How did plate tectonics start?; (3) What did drive the lithospheric plates in the first place?; (4) Why do mantle plumes form? What kinds of forces are responsible for the plumes?; (5) Why is the outer core fluid?; (6) Why do "ultra-low seismic velocity zones" exist at the base of the mantle?; and (7) Why does the magnetic field of Earth change? The other explanations and examples to be presented include three-dimensional animations of the Paleoproterozoic and Neoproterozoic Earth, and the kinematics and dynamics of the tectonic plates such as the Atlantic and Pacific plates.



I imagine if these guys have something they will publish and we will certainly hear more about it then.




[edit on Wed Jan 7 2009 by Rren]




top topics



 
1

log in

join