General Mung Beans
Banned
Would earthquakes and volcanic eruptions still happen in an alternate timeline centuries after the POD?
A Question On AH
- Thread starter General Mung Beans
- Start date
Generally, geological events will occur even after the POD. The only real way to change that (assuming the POD does not involve such an event) is if human or other activities wind up fiddling with the earth on that level (for example, a nuclear strike might slightly change the balance of nearby plates, thus changing the patterns of earthquakes).
Grey Wolf
Donor
Exactly so, especially if you have inserted or omitted a major war with all the smoke and explosions and disturbance they bring
I always ignore such types of disaster, insert a few of my own, whilst trying to remember all the earthquakes and so on
Its an interesting question how much nuclear detonations may affect such things, or not ?
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
There is some evidence that pumping water out of/into a fault area can alter earthquake frequency/timing. That's pretty minor mostly. But I could imagine minor differences affecting where and when stresses are released, leading to e.g. a different part of the fault being the next 'big' one.
I would assume that absent any significant changes in the activities of human civilization the geologic events still happen. I would say the same for climate-related events, although a "significant change in the activities of human civilization" could impact that much sooner.
Now, if your POD leads to humans strapping rockets onto asteroids, all bets are off...
Now, if your POD leads to humans strapping rockets onto asteroids, all bets are off...
You could have the event a few days sooner or later to keep the dogmatic butterflyists happy, perhaps.
Deleted member 5719
This mat be a load of tosh, as I haven't though it through at all, but...
1. Weather may affect earthquakes as heating rocks will cause them to expand. This would mean there would be tiny changes in the volume of tectonics plates according to weather.
2. That would mean that over time, weather would alter the stresses on plates, perhaps in tiny ways.
3. These tiny changes (theoretically) could, over time, lead to quite radically different times for earthquakes (years, decades, centuries?).
(I call my theory the "Butterfly effect", because if a butterf....oh you'd heard about that, had you?)
I may be wrong, but instinct tells me that accuracy requires the butterflying of earthquakes, though I'm not sure about volcanoes.
1. Weather may affect earthquakes as heating rocks will cause them to expand. This would mean there would be tiny changes in the volume of tectonics plates according to weather.
2. That would mean that over time, weather would alter the stresses on plates, perhaps in tiny ways.
3. These tiny changes (theoretically) could, over time, lead to quite radically different times for earthquakes (years, decades, centuries?).
(I call my theory the "Butterfly effect", because if a butterf....oh you'd heard about that, had you?
)I may be wrong, but instinct tells me that accuracy requires the butterflying of earthquakes, though I'm not sure about volcanoes.
Philip
Donor
I doubt it. I don't think variations in weather are going to effect the temperature of the plates past a depth of a dozen meters or so.
Days, maybe. Past that? I doubt it. It's going to take a lot of force to shift the tectonic plates.
(I call my theory the "Butterfly effect", because if a butterf....oh you'd heard about that, had you?
Before applying this to the tectonic plates, you must first establish that their motion is chaotic. I am not convinced it is.
A lot of what's behind earthquakes is based on plate tectonics (regular and linear??) and the composition of the earth/rock at the place of the faultline. In this way Hollister, CA, which is smack on the San Andreas fault, sees bent walls but almost never earthquakes while LA sees rare but serious quakes. This is thought it's related to the talc-based rock of the former (slides easily) and the silicate rock of the latter (stresses for years then suddenly cracks and releases.
Since the soil/rock is effectively a constant the question on the "chaosity" of the quakes is based more, I'd think, on the nature of plate tectonics. If they move at a relatively regular and/or linear rate (such as following motions that stay constant for millions of years) then butterflies might not effect them much. But if they're related to short-term magma heating, for example, you could see chaotic effects.
Any geologists here? I'm an electrical engineer and admittedly talking out my ass here. Or, I should say, making logical assumptions.
Since the soil/rock is effectively a constant the question on the "chaosity" of the quakes is based more, I'd think, on the nature of plate tectonics. If they move at a relatively regular and/or linear rate (such as following motions that stay constant for millions of years) then butterflies might not effect them much. But if they're related to short-term magma heating, for example, you could see chaotic effects.
Any geologists here? I'm an electrical engineer and admittedly talking out my ass here. Or, I should say, making logical assumptions.
Deleted member 5719
Like I say, I´m not certain I'm right here, but a heat induced expansion of rock at a depth of 10 metres over the entire plate is a hell of a lot of force, that being applied at different times could do some funny things.
I'm not sure I agree that earthquakes are not chaotic systems, the forces within plates couldn't be anything else (given the billions of variables affecting them at surface level), the question is whether these forces directly affect (or even effect) earthquakes, or whether they are too small to cause any changes.
Again, any1 who knows, feel free to shoot me down, coz this is just conjecture.