North Atlantic geoid high, volcanism, glaciations and Atlantis

[Mario Dantas]

19 hours ago, Abramelin said:

@Mario Dantas

You failed to explain how a big island, like Greenland, was able to cross the Mid-Atlantic Ridge without changing shape of either the island or the ridge.

Posting images resembling the contours of Greenland won't help your case.

Just saying.

Thanks for the tip, i will try to do that soon.

[Mario Dantas]

@ Hanslune

I will not even argue about this because i know now this geological feature is measurable. What are the odds of these two sections of the MAR having almost exactly the same volume, and shape?

 

It would be impossible to refute this, wouldn’t you say? Those two sectors are to be equal in volume of the MAR:

 

“Mid-Atlantic Ridge

The MAR divides the Atlantic longitudinally into two halves, in each of which a series of basins are delimited by secondary, transverse ridges. The MAR reaches above 2,000 m (6,600 ft) along most of its length, but is interrupted by larger transform faults at two places: the Romanche Trench near the Equator and the Gibbs Fracture Zone at 53°N. The MAR is a barrier for bottom water, but at these two transform faults deep water currents can pass from one side to the other.[26]”

“The MAR is intersected by two perpendicular ridges: the Azores–Gibraltar Transform Fault, the boundary between the Nubian and Eurasian plates, intersects the MAR at the Azores Triple Junction, on either side of the Azores microplate, near the 40°N.[29] ”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Ocean

 

These features (Gibbs fracture zone, Azores-Gibraltar Transform Fault, or the Azores microplate?) are just a few of the limits of the two sectors…

 

 

[Mario Dantas]

[stereologist]

7 hours ago, Mario Dantas said:

Here is a new similarity within the gravity field, that you might want to see:

 

I really hope no one here can deny the similarity between these two sectors (1 and 2) of the northern MAR.

When i said that it seems that the tectonic changes that happened were registered in the gravity field, i was thinking about earthquakes because they can lead to changes in the local gravity field:

 

So what? Similarity is usually meaningless. Can you deny that the Sun and Earth are similar? hey are both oblate spheroids?

The change in the gravity field changes with each quake, each plate motion, each erosion event. The history of events is  not recorded in the gravity field.

[stereologist]

2 hours ago, Mario Dantas said:

@ Hanslune

I will not even argue about this because i know now this geological feature is measurable. What are the odds of these two sections of the MAR having almost exactly the same volume, and shape?

 

It would be impossible to refute this, wouldn’t you say? Those two sectors are to be equal in volume of the MAR:

 

“Mid-Atlantic Ridge

The MAR divides the Atlantic longitudinally into two halves, in each of which a series of basins are delimited by secondary, transverse ridges. The MAR reaches above 2,000 m (6,600 ft) along most of its length, but is interrupted by larger transform faults at two places: the Romanche Trench near the Equator and the Gibbs Fracture Zone at 53°N. The MAR is a barrier for bottom water, but at these two transform faults deep water currents can pass from one side to the other.[26]”

“The MAR is intersected by two perpendicular ridges: the Azores–Gibraltar Transform Fault, the boundary between the Nubian and Eurasian plates, intersects the MAR at the Azores Triple Junction, on either side of the Azores microplate, near the 40°N.[29] ”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Ocean

 

These features (Gibbs fracture zone, Azores-Gibraltar Transform Fault, or the Azores microplate?) are just a few of the limits of the two sectors…

 

 

Please show this to be the case: "What are the odds of these two sections of the MAR having almost exactly the same volume, and shape?"

I have no idea what you are measuring when you measure a volume. And I do not believe they are exactly the shape. Let's see if you can show us.

[Mario Dantas]

On 9/20/2022 at 12:03 AM, stereologist said:

Please show this to be the case: "What are the odds of these two sections of the MAR having almost exactly the same volume, and shape?"

I have no idea what you are measuring when you measure a volume. And I do not believe they are exactly the shape. Let's see if you can show us.

Sorry for not replying earlier, i have been away from work for a week now, but not on holidays...

You can't imagine how these conversations have been helpful to my research. Even though i know that you do not agree with my reasoning regarding many aspects of it.

But to the point, i have created a new set of images to prove that in fact there seems to be a volumetric and shape similarity between two different and far apart sectors of the northern MAR:

I am still trying to figure out how to forward this similarity in the best way possible. For the time being i guess this is my best shot.

Nevertheless, as difficult it may be to believe, the similarity is also coincident with Greenland tectonic movement shown in the image.

I have found an article portraying the "separation" of Greenland from Norway. This "separation" was perhaps the last tectonic shift, before Greenland move came to an end:

Greenland- Norway separation: A geodynamic model for the North Atlantic

https://njg.geologi.no/images/NJG_articles/NGT_82_4_281-298.pdf

 

[Mario Dantas]

Google earth sea floor and Greenland tectonics chronology

[Mario Dantas]

Just linking my latest album:

Northern MAR Geoid and Tectonics

https://photos.app.goo.gl/nL82ezWiYDs1Uzw49

[Ell]

On 9/18/2022 at 9:16 PM, Mario Dantas said:

How do you explain that the Canary and Cabo Verde islands, and the eye of the Sahara have these kind of geoid undulations? There are "ripples" in the gravity field from the MAR eastwards, that look like propagating waves across the ocean floor, it must mean something...

At a guess - entirely unproven - I suspect that we may be seeing (mini?) mantle convection cells.

[Mario Dantas]

On 9/18/2022 at 6:26 PM, Abramelin said:

@Mario Dantas

You failed to explain how a big island, like Greenland, was able to cross the Mid-Atlantic Ridge without changing shape of either the island or the ridge.

Posting images resembling the contours of Greenland won't help your case.

Just saying.

In fact, a long time ago now, i found an interesting article about crustal thickness, that indicate that Greenland has a considerable thinner crust, which is lower than the average continental thickness (25 to 70 km):

Quote

Crust and uppermost-mantle structure of Greenland and the Northwest Atlantic from Rayleigh wave group velocity tomography

[...]The thinning of the crust at the continental margins is also clearly imaged. [...]

[...]The Greenland crust is highly heterogeneous and anisotropic, reflecting the complex tectonic processes affecting the continent over its ∼4 Ga history.[...]

[...]Crustal thickness, as inferred from velocity gradients and the transition to shear wave velocities over ∼4.2 ± 0.2 km s−1, ranges from 25 km to almost 55 km beneath mainland Greenland. Offshore SE and central-E Greenland the crust thins significantly, with velocity profiles showing structures typical of rifted continental margins and the continent-ocean transition.[...]

https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/212/3/1546/4590044

Therefore, and answering your question, Greenland has a thinner continental margin (which should be expected if the island had moved that far across the upper mantle).

 

[Mario Dantas]

3 hours ago, Ell said:

At a guess - entirely unproven - I suspect that we may be seeing (mini?) mantle convection cells.

That might be the case, and my question to you is why? Although i am not proposing that those geoid anomaly wave undulations are the vestiges of an impact, an impact can affect mantle convection:

Quote

Perturbations of Earth's upper mantle convection caused by asteroid impacts

Large impacts by asteroids may have significantly affected the evolutionary history of Earth. Based on geological models and numerical simulations, we have studied the effects of large impacts caused by asteroids of different diameters (10 km and 100 km) on Earth's upper mantle convection.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279014546_Perturbations_of_Earth's_upper_mantle_convection_caused_by_asteroid_impacts

[stereologist]

5 hours ago, Mario Dantas said:

Sorry for not replying earlier, i have been away from work for a week now, but not on holidays...

You can't imagine how these conversations have been helpful to my research. Even though i know that you do not agree with my reasoning regarding many aspects of it.

But to the point, i have created a new set of images to prove that in fact there seems to be a volumetric and shape similarity between two different and far apart sectors of the northern MAR:

I am still trying to figure out how to forward this similarity in the best way possible. For the time being i guess this is my best shot.

Nevertheless, as difficult it may be to believe, the similarity is also coincident with Greenland tectonic movement shown in the image.

I have found an article portraying the "separation" of Greenland from Norway. This "separation" was perhaps the last tectonic shift, before Greenland move came to an end:

Greenland- Norway separation: A geodynamic model for the North Atlantic

https://njg.geologi.no/images/NJG_articles/NGT_82_4_281-298.pdf

 

You have not shown what you are measuring when you say volume.

You have not shown two regions or sections of the MAR to be the same shape.

I can only suppose that this is not true

[stereologist]

34 minutes ago, Mario Dantas said:

In fact, a long time ago now, i found an interesting article about crustal thickness, that indicate that Greenland has a considerable thinner crust, which is lower than the average continental thickness (25 to 70 km):

Therefore, and answering your question, Greenland has a thinner continental margin (which should be expected if the island had moved that far across the upper mantle).

 

 

The crust does not thin out as you suggest here: "(which should be expected if the island had moved that far across the upper mantle)."

Why do you think that is the case?

[Ell]

18 minutes ago, Mario Dantas said:

That might be the case, and my question to you is why? Although i am not proposing that those geoid anomaly wave undulations are the vestiges of an impact, an impact can affect mantle convection:

Sure, a large impact will affect the interior processes of the Earth.

However, 1. Whether we see the effects of convection cells is an as yet unproven hypothesis,

2. A causal connection between a hypothetical impact and those hypothetical convection cells is unproven too.

 

If I recall correctly, convection cells do influence the course of some rivers, one scientific article showed during the past decades.

 

It is no use to speculate in the absence of necessary information.

Edited September 28, 2022 by Ell

[stereologist]

15 minutes ago, Mario Dantas said:

That might be the case, and my question to you is why? Although i am not proposing that those geoid anomaly wave undulations are the vestiges of an impact, an impact can affect mantle convection:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279014546_Perturbations_of_Earth's_upper_mantle_convection_caused_by_asteroid_impacts

The anomalies are everywhere according to links you have posted. Every place that is not the same as the surface of the Earth is an anomaly.

None of this really matters since you have already showed us that Greenland cannot be connected to Atlantis. It has been far away for tens of millions off years. That is what you have posted. You also posted images showing that it was never off Gibraltar.

[Mario Dantas]

On 9/28/2022 at 4:48 PM, stereologist said:

You have not shown what you are measuring when you say volume.

You have not shown two regions or sections of the MAR to be the same shape.

I can only suppose that this is not true

I have just finished editing this image, where we can clearly observe the said similarity. This last image was made with the highest resolution available (2.2) in the geoid viewer G_RED (this can take eons to load, depending on your internet connection speed):

https://www.g-red.eu/geoid/geoidViewer.html

 

[Ell]

1 hour ago, Mario Dantas said:

this image, where we can clearly observe the said similarity.

In my opinion you suffer from pareidolia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

[ThereWeAreThen]

I still have no idea what's happening in this thread apart from pretty pictures.

[Ell]

2 hours ago, ThereWeAreThen said:

I still have no idea what's happening in this thread apart from pretty pictures.

As far as I can determine the opening poster has no understanding of geology nor of physics and he cherishes the idea that he may have discovered traces of a huge asteroid impact in the Indian Ocean that - I guess - ought to have happened about seventy million years ago.

[ThereWeAreThen]

2 hours ago, Ell said:

As far as I can determine the opening poster has no understanding of geology nor of physics and he cherishes the idea that he may have discovered traces of a huge asteroid impact in the Indian Ocean that - I guess - ought to have happened about seventy million years ago.

Hasn't the opening poster also promoted his YouTube or book or both on here a few times aswell?

[Mario Dantas]

On 9/28/2022 at 4:52 PM, stereologist said:

The crust does not thin out as you suggest here: "(which should be expected if the island had moved that far across the upper mantle)."

Why do you think that is the case?

You said that the crust will not thin out by the erosive action of surface processes. Can you explain?

[Mario Dantas]

On 9/28/2022 at 4:55 PM, Ell said:

Sure, a large impact will affect the interior processes of the Earth.

However, 1. Whether we see the effects of convection cells is an as yet unproven hypothesis,

2. A causal connection between a hypothetical impact and those hypothetical convection cells is unproven too.

 

If I recall correctly, convection cells do influence the course of some rivers, one scientific article showed during the past decades.

 

It is no use to speculate in the absence of necessary information.

I did not know that convection could influence the course of rivers, will look into it...

 

[stereologist]

10 hours ago, Mario Dantas said:

 

I have just finished editing this image, where we can clearly observe the said similarity. This last image was made with the highest resolution available (2.2) in the geoid viewer G_RED (this can take eons to load, depending on your internet connection speed):

https://www.g-red.eu/geoid/geoidViewer.html

 

What are you talking about? You show two images and claim some sort of similarity. I don't think anyone other than you sees anything similar.

You also used the term volume and still  have not stated what that is about

[stereologist]

4 hours ago, Mario Dantas said:

You said that the crust will not thin out by the erosive action of surface processes. Can you explain?

I didn't state that. You posted something that is not true.

The crust does not thin out as you suggest here: "(which should be expected if the island had moved that far across the upper mantle)."

What does surface process have to do with an interior process: "moved that far across the upper mantle".

Personally I think the problem is that you don't understand what plate tectonics means or how it works.

 

[Mario Dantas]

10 hours ago, Ell said:

In my opinion you suffer from pareidolia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

Didn't even know what that meant, pareidolia... does these two regions of the MAR not have any similarity at all?

Unless, you call me something that i am not, will wait for your sincere opinion.