Plate Tectonics is Expansion Tectonics
Karl W. Luckert
emeritus at SMSU
Presentation at the Conference on “Erdexpansion—eine Theorie auf dem Prüfstand“—
Convened by Prof. Dr.-Ing. Karl-Heinz Jacob, Technische Universität Berlin
Bold print identifies the VideoScript. Normal print indicates
materials of similar importance for which no place was found in the video.
Abstract: A number of conclusions at which popular Plate Tectonics has arrived shall be accepted at the outset as being basic. The crust of our planet appears divided into several fragments or “plates.” With the continuous addition of rising magma, the plates are growing along the fissures and rifts that contour them. Cooled by ocean water, the rising magma cushions harden and thereby add new stripes of crust.
At this point of theoretical visualization the various tectonic theories divide to continue along different paths. The majority of subscribers to Plate Tectonics believe that the Earth has maintained her size, and that for each fresh stripe of ocean floor that is being added a corresponding width is being subducted along continental coastlines or elsewhere in the great ocean. In order to better visualize the difficult wide-angled process of ocean floor subduction, along continental coast-lines, these scientists have postulated a process of subduction that is being kept in motion by currents of magma in the mantle.
Nevertheless, the presence of tectonic plates and spreading rifts, as well as the widening of ocean floors, are more easily explained with the help of a general theory of Earth-expansion. The oceans widen, the distances between the continents are getting larger, and the Planet grows. My presentation therefore follows a path of plate-tectonics that accepts the possibility of Earth-expansion.
Arguments for Earth-expansion do sort themselves into a variety of foci as well. First, there is a group of arguments that have been developed on the basis of physical theories. With their help one hopes to find an explanation for the suspected increases regarding the mass and volume of the Planet. Such arguments would enable us to explain Earth-expansion materially, but not necessarily tectonically. I personally consider the demand, that a credible theory of Earth-expansion must first explain the physical core of expanding matter, merely as a burdensome overload, which is demanded of Earth-expansionists but ignored by those who demand it when it comes to explaining their own convection currents or magma in the mantle. In my opinion, this demand only serves as a distraction from tectonic questions. I therefore limit myself intentionally to tectonic phenomena that offer themselves superficially as structures and which can be grasped as such. As the pioneering astronomy of Nicolas Copernicus has been purely structural or “tectonic” astronomy—which never really touched upon the substance of the universe—so it should be possible, to begin with and still today, to approach the problem of Earth-expansion tectonically.
Among tectonically oriented theories of Earth-expansion, one can find
again several hypothetical placement patterns for the primeval continents. These
differences pertain mostly to the continents of
With this present-day “almost established“
solution I do not agree. First, the round of
The Earth-expansion theory which is offered here seeks to derive
As far as the large mountain ranges along continental margins are concerned, the popular field of Plate-tectonics has always tried to explain their uplift on hand of a postulated subduction of ocean-floors. However, utilizing a clump of painter’s putty, and a rubber balloon, I shall demonstrate analogously the tectonic origin of mountain ranges along the continental peripheries—having recourse only to spherical expansion, and making do without a process of subduction.
Past the Popular Plate
Tectonics, to the Uplift of Mountain Ranges
The events about which I am reporting here may surpass in scope all stories that we have read in past decades—about meteorite impacts or about other natural catastrophes on our planet, during early epochs. The opening of the oceans between the continents, the rising of mountain ranges, and the breaking of the global belt of continents, during the Eocene, are creative events which can be traced in the widening cracks of the Planet’s crust. And all of this can be explained, without having recourse to the risky “subduction” hypothesis of popular Plate Tectonics, with its “convection” currents of magma in the mantle.
When in 1979 a
Pangaea-oriented paleontologist provoked me into making my first paleo-globe, I had never heard of Alfred Wegener, and I also was oblivious to the fact that several
people before me have been making evolutionary Earth models. Paleo-models of Planet Earth were constructed primarily to
explore the possibility of matching continental contours beyond the obvious
display in the
contours of the
Paleo-globes are not the only means by which to argue for our planet’s expansion. In every argument some of the issues are being defined by the opposition. Those in opposition believe that tectonic plates do exist. I do too—and moreover, I utilize empirical data that Plate Tectonics people have collected. These people also believe that there are rifts running along the ocean floors and that along these the floors are spreading. I do too—even though I also am convinced that the oceans could be better understood if their floors were being perceived positively, not as gaps, but as the “growing edges” of continents. Most people who belong to the opposition would love to live upon a planet that proves to be eternally solid. I would prefer this as well. But unfortunately, such a wish is not in my power to fulfill. The Earth is doing whatever the Earth is doing. Plate Tectonics people are laboring under the shadow of Alfred Wegener, and Wegener labored under a shadow that neither he nor his followers have contemplated sufficiently.
The Continents according to Alfred Wegener
In 1915 Alfred Wegener published Die Entstehung der Kontinente und Ozeane, in which he showed how the continents were separating from an assembly of continents that he named Pangaea. There was general opposition to his ideas, but over time the possibility was accepted that continents may be adrift.
When after World War II the American initiative to explore the world oceans led to startling discoveries, the sea-faring Earth-scientists reached back to Wegener’s theories. They combined his notion of “wandering continents” with their new discoveries of tectonic plates, the global mid-ocean rift, symmetric magnetic striping, and chronology. They synthesized this combination by adding “ocean floor subduction” and “convection currents in the mantle.” Caught up in euphoria about the new oceanic discoveries, under the aegis of the natural sciences, it was generally not noticed that Wegener, as well as his latter-day followers, were all along laboring under an ancient cloud of mythology.
Of course, this fact alone does not prove that they are wrong. Surely, ancient mythology had some things right. But this happenstance should be an incentive for careful historical introspection and examination of the subject matter.
There are two mythical notions that still haunt those who study tectonic plates in the shadow of Alfred Wegener. First there is the “central land,” surrounded by a world-ocean, and second there is the “sea in the middle.” Wegener was under the spell of both.
Mesopotamian land dwellers envisioned their all-land to be centrally located. It
was watered by rivers and surrounded by the boundless and mostly unknown
world-ocean. For merchants who subsequently crisscrossed the
When Alfred Wegener contemplated the matching shorelines of the
Today the notion
of pagaea-centered ocean-spreading is being
demonstrated, in Plate Tectonics theory, still mostly on hand of the easily
matched shorelines of the
Of course, this exemption from a supposed natural law does not withstand even a first spark of reason. According to the new magnetic ocean-floor chronology, the Indian and Pacific oceans do feature similar quantities of epochal stripes and patches along their floors, which have accumulated since Jurassic times. In order to avoid fair comparison, the Indic and Pacific oceans are being dissolved in the mythic Panthalassa with all its fog and glory. An all-surrounding world ocean that is kept close to the Wegenerian ancestry—supported by the central presence of Pangaea—surely can devour any amount of ocean floor. Why should an all-surrounding world ocean be unable to do this?
The function ascribed to deep-sea trenches, as places of subduction, has no place in an empirical science. The conjecture merely rests on the blind assertion that deep-sea trenches cannot be simple jarring-features. All the while, the deep-sea explorers were dumbfounded from the outset, that the sediment in these suspected “subduction trenches” appears undisturbed and of the same age as the surrounding sea. There was no scrape debris to be found anywhere. Instead there are occasional cracks—running lengthwise—as obvious signs of small movement in the “wrong” direction. The equivalent of two thirds of the planet’s lithosphere would have had to disappear through these imaginary subduction zones without leaving a trace “somewhere” in the Greater Panthalassa—within less than 200 million years.
It is of course understandable, that someone who believes in a process of subduction will search the suspected subduction zones for every possible trace of evidence. Slanted earthquake zones dipping under the coastlines—so-called Benioff Zones—have been mentioned as such evidence. But expansion-friction can account more easily for these zones. The difference in thickness that exists between continental and oceanic crust implies that all along the boundary, between land and the deep sea, there must exist not only a downward shelf-slope overhead, but also a corresponding mantle-slope that rises below the crust, seaward as well. Inasmuch as our postulated “expansion-friction” (also named “expansion-flow”) would then necessarily have to rumple upward along that bottom-slope of the lithosphere, all earthquakes along the so-called Benioff zones are explained.
There is an additional effect of the expansion process that will produce earthquakes along Benioff Zones. Expansion-friction, between the mantle and the crust, tends to roll the edges of the plates upward (a process which earlier I have characterized as “flanging”). This tendency of “upward rolling” increases the gradient of the mantle slope until, eventually, the differential between the continental and oceanic crusts—along the half anticline—has been evened out with intrusive transported materials.
Accretionary prisms also have
been mentioned as remnants of subduction. In 1998 I
wandered, in the company of a bus-load of international geo-scientists, along
the shores of
The idea of a Pangaea and the surrounding world-ocean was conceived on behalf of a Flat Earth view of the world. For that reason it enables now the modern Pangaea dwellers to arrange their geography quite easily on a flat world map. This predilection enables them to neglect the backside of the sphere. The convenience of a two-dimensional geo-science is preferred by many students. On the other hand, fully developed three-dimensional thinking, which also is well anchored in the fourth dimension of time-awareness, cannot just choose any one ocean as being central. And it cannot just push all the difficult area-problems out into a surrounding Panthalassa. While Wegener’s theory can be animated with a single view, by showing a flat world map, my own theory requires several perspectives of hemispheres.
people who espouse an Earth Expansion theory have been susceptible to ancient
mythology. For instance, the goddess Tethys, revered
along the shores of
Formation and Uplift of Mountain Ranges
Whenever in a debate I reject the subduction hypothesis, for lack of empirical support, I am given as evidence only a protest question: “How else can one explain the uplift and presence of mountain ranges on our continents?”
Indeed, I will explain the uplift and presence of mountain ranges in a few short minutes. But first I like to give recognition to the honest perspective of a pioneer of the Plate Tectonics revolution.
During May of
2002 the international “New Concepts in Global Tectonics (NCGT) Conference” was held in La Junta,
magnificent mountains of
Surprised that we were in agreement I continued asking: “Why nothing?” He answered “There is no ocean nearby for subduction to work.”
Clear and simple,
Plate Tectonics theory cannot explain the formation of inland mountain ranges.
Personally I would add that—apart from theoretical diagrams, it also cannot show
convection currents in the mantle and the subduction
of ocean floors. It also cannot explain to my satisfaction the volcanoes of the
A Slab of Putty versus the Miter Joint
Already in 1979 I simulated continents in the form of slabs of putty upon the flattening surface of an expanding balloon. Back then I argued for Earth expansion, and noticed tensile folding, flanging, and relative expansion flow. I referred to cracks that were forming in the lithosphere under “Precambrian geosynclines,” and I wrote about magma intrusions from below. But because my aforementioned concepts could not be found in official geology texts, no-one dared to understand what I meant—or to take it seriously.
For this video lecture I have devised a method of showing the underside of my continental slab of putty. I patted down a clump of putty and pumped up a balloon. A balance between brittleness, cohesion, and adhesion, was required. Since I had neither control over slippage on the balloon surface, nor a way of simulating gravity from within the balloon, I could only experimentally adjust the stickiness of the putty by trial and error.
There was some flanging along the edges, and when a significant rupture appeared at the surface I assumed that the cracks that formed at the underside of the slab would be greater. It had to be that way, because the surface of an expanding balloon flattens out. I mixed a batch of plaster to cast a mold. By means of this cast the putty slab could then be lifted from the balloon surface untouched.
In real-Earth processes, by Relative Expansion Flow, all the dents and cavities at the underside of the lithosphere would have been filled by magma and metamorphosed rocks—and been filled at the same speed as they were being torn open.
I poured Plaster of Paris into the mold. At the upper right on the cast one can see formations of tensile folding. These represent the initial form of all parallel mountain ranges. In areas of greater stress, deep cracks have been torn open. They all run parallel to the perimeter of the slab. Most mountain ranges upon the continents of our planet are aligned in this manner. The challenge of popular Plate-tectonics, with its stiff-angled subduction of ocean floors, is with the help of this simple putty-and-balloon experiment effectively bypassed.
On this experimental model I obtained only a single row of cracks. This was a limitation of the experiment. In real-world geological history these crevice molds would have gotten filled with hot materials at the same time as they were torn open. Gradually they would have cooled and toughened. This means that parallel rows of cracks would have been torn open and filled next to them.
A marginal detail of my experiment deserves to be mentioned. I have put forth every effort to lay down an even putty surface onto the experimental balloon. Only at one place did I allow a thin fold to form underneath, intentionally, running ninety degrees against the direction along which I expected flanging to occur. I wanted to see how such an adverse wrinkle would behave.
No crack was torn across this test fold. But small perpendicular fissures have begun to form. These fissures are not spaced at crossings, exactly opposite one another; rather, the crust at either side of the test fold simply tore wherever tension from expansion friction exceeded the putty’s cohesion factor. We have here a clear case of offset faults, such as have been discovered along rifts and cracks in the oceans. Such offset transform faults are being created because the lithosphere is being stretched in all directions at once—by all-around Earth expansion. All the while, cracks break open at random, wherever and whenever tension is sufficient. Because the oceanic lithosphere is thinner, rifts and transform faults are breaking through the surface more easily than on continents.
experiment has yielded unexpected results. My quantity of putty was too dry, and
it sat and slid upon the rubber surface as though expansion-friction
(Relative Expansion Flow) did not matter. The
experiment seemed unworthy of a plaster cast. But scientific habit prevailed,
and behold! I got a continent covered with low granite domes. I recognized this
landscape immediately, because I have seen it in
From Baby Mountains to Grand-old Peaks
Evidence for a rebuttal of subduction-oriented
Plate-tectonics stared me right in the face on several occasions during that
same field trip in
being carried eastward by rivers, and they contribute to weighing down the
Central Plains just a little more. The cycle exerts a little more pressure
westward, deep under
Nevertheless, the primary engine for mountain formation and uplift is not climatic erosion. Earth expansion is that engine. The energy and material for mountain formation, and for uplift, comes from beneath the lithosphere. There the mountains are preformed. Because the Planet expands, continental surfaces necessarily must flatten. This means that the mid-regions of continents must sag and adjust to the new curvature. And by so settling they produce large central plains that some geologists call “cratons.”
Underneath, where mantle and lithosphere share a viscous semi-liquid cushion between themselves, surplus magma is being squeezed sideways and outward from under the middle of the continental crust. Creeping outward from under the flattening continental shield, magma pressure can cause outlying plains to bulge upward and become “high plains.” Then along that bulge, the brittle lithosphere may fail to contain the increasing pressure from underneath. Anciently pre-molded, jagged mountain ridges gradually break forth and rise. They are being uplifted hydraulically from below, pushed by their own youthfully hot, sluggishly creeping posterity.
The processes of
magma injection from beneath, and uplift for exposure to erosion, are displayed
After having seen
So, before we allow Alpine reality to overwhelm us, we should bear in mind that the age sequences in sedimentary and igneous strata generally are different. Sedimentary layers, at the surface of the lithosphere, are deposited on top of one another. Unless they get overturned by severe tectonic upheaval, bottom layers are oldest and top layers are youngest. In addition, they are unevenly distributed on the surface of the Planet.
At the underside of the lithosphere, “erosion” and “deposition” do happen upside down. Hot igneous strata are pasted to the bottom of the lithosphere, and are cooled from top downward as the crust thickens. Younger magmas carry with themselves sedimentary and metamorphosed scrapings from the lithosphere overhead as well as from the mantle below. Together these materials may end up either intruded into fresh crevices, or layered underneath older rock which they help uplift hydraulically. Hydraulic fluid and molten rock, in this case, are the same substance.
Earth-science texts give the impression as though Alpine mountains have risen,
and then been given all their characteristic shapes by climate and erosion. Most
of the high Alpine mountains are covered nowadays with snow and ice. On that
account, glaciers are given most of the credit for having fashioned them. And
indeed, the contributions of glaciers to Alpine cosmetics are extensive. But
seriously! Did these long mountain ranges get their crests, or did the
looks as though many Alpine peaks in the world have been molded during the late
Precambrian and early Cambrian periods. Here is a map that sketches Precambrian
mobile belts (It is based on a projection by Professor Harold Levin The Earth Through Time, 1988). Accordingly, expansion must have been
underway already 500 million years ago—thus long before the first oceans began
to crack open. These jagged high peaks were uplifted to pierce forth at many
places on the Planet—such as in the
Since Jurassic times, the continents have extended their crusts by way of adding stripes of ocean floor. Along the oceanic spreading rifts we therefore find another generation of mobile mountain belts, generated and uplifted by the same processes of Tensile Folding, Flanging, and relative Expansion Friction.
Relative Expansion-friction, or Expansion-flow, is caused by expansion movement in the mantle. Relative to the continental crust that lies overhead, Expansion-flow increases its speed outward from the middle of a continent. It grows a half-ocean along the continental edge. The outer edge of the young surrounding crust rolls upward as a half-anticline. In this manner the puckered “lips” of tectonic plates touch lightly, uplifted by hot magma. Their light “kiss” surrounds the whole Earth.
If a crack from
down below is torn all the way up through the lithosphere, the intrusive magma
may erupt and a lava flow may result at the surface. Examples of such massive
flows are the Deccan Traps in
Strong earthquakes are rare in the middle of sagging continental shields or “cratons.” But they do happen when a brittle section of the continental dome collapses to adjust to the expanding and flattening mantle curvature. Such inland earthquakes, when they are contained in a craton, frequently create over- and under-thrusts that in time may extend to tens of kilometers. Petroleum engineers in the American Midwest frequently find themselves drilling through the same stratum twice. Expansion tectonics can explain such duplicate stratification rather easily.
In my 1999
booklet, Planet Earth Expanding and the
Eocene Tectonic Event, I have explained the 1964 earthquake in
Part One of this presentation can now be summed up in form of a small riddle: In their first manifestation during tectonic evolution, how could a mountain range and an ocean be distinguished from one another? The Answer is: They could in the beginning not be distinguished from one another, because both originated as similar cracks along the underside of the Earth-crust. Their later differences must be explained in terms of differential expansion rates in the mantle, and in relation to regional physical characteristics inherent in the crust.
Makers of paleo-globes usually have, for the sake of simplicity, preferred to work with a “budget of available areas.” However, I personally have come to the conclusion that a “budget of continually adjusting tensions” is of equal importance. I therefore like to begin the second half of my presentation, concerning the oceans and continents, with an emphasis placed on asthenospheric and continental cohesion. After an overview on directional tensions has been provided—illustrated in the shape of three straps that during the Eocene were reduced to a simple belt—the “budget of available areas” will display itself.
Three Straps and a Belt
When the crust of
our planet began to tear open seriously during the Jurassic, there appeared
cracks that later widened to become the Pacific,
Large hemispheres showing present continental cohesion in the north and separation in the south.
Smaller Jurassic hemispheres showing the beginnings of our deep oceans.
When our oceans
were still young and existing by themselves—that is, during Jurassic times
before Africa, South-America and Australia were severed from each other—the
cracked-open crust of our expanding planet still consisted of three bands or
„straps“ that remained fastened together in the north and in the south. All
three continental bands were significantly stretched apart, already during
Jurassic times. Large stretch-zones came into being along the
Because the continental straps broke first in the south, and because
their breaking has reduced expansion stress in other areas, there was no
immediate need for them to also tear apart in the north. The tip of
Cretaceous the “
The remaining two straps—that is, the two
It is noteworthy that the rupture between
Obviously, the talk about a “crack,” in this context, pertains only to a
“superficial” surface perspective. The deeply torn gash can also be valued
positively, as locally amplified growth in the mantle, caused by
Earth-expansion. In addition, this entire torn area became a new home to the
firstborn continent of the Planet—round
While in earlier days we constructed our paleo-globes in hope of improving our continental outlines with better continental shelf estimates, we now have vastly improved topographical maps of all the ocean floors. Since 1988 we also have the UNESCO Geological World Atlas, with ocean floor maps based on magnetically embedded stripes and reversals. While not everything on these maps is perfect and free of risky projections, some of the stripes have been drilled into, dredged, and dated. We now have sequential isochrons—a series of steps extending from a zero-ocean globe in the Jurassic, some 180 million years ago, to the size of the present oceans. This situation is a scientific illustrator’s dream that has become reality.
With the help of
isochron maps it is now possible, theoretically, to take any ocean and reduce it
to its Jurassic size. This method works fine all across the
The Eocene Event in the
hesitation, in 1979, I have concluded that the
rifts of severance that ran along both sides of
Obviously, in this discussion all references to the directions—east, west, north, or south—are to be understood in relation to the present globe. I do not wish to say much about the location of the poles or the equator during the earlier epochs.
The Paleocene and Eocene floors in the Indic show that the entire continental mass of Austral-Asia was bent eastward and away from the Ninety-East Ridge. The Eocene triangle, in the northeastern corner of the Indic, leaves no room for another explanation. According to tephro-chronology, this eastward bending might have happened some 42.7 million years ago. This date of 42.7 million years ago has been assigned by tephro-chronology to a huge tectonic upheaval along the Ninety-East Ridge (see Jonathan Dehn, http://www.aist.go.jp/GSJ/~jdehn/research/diss.htm). The continental edge that left the Ninety-East-Ridge scar—the longest straight line on the globe—could initially only have been pulled straight by a north-south tension. Then, while the Austral-Asian continental unit was bent eastward, the west/east Paleocene spreading rift provided the soft edge along which all the older southern floors, up to the Paleocene, could slide east and northward together. On a sketch-map we can return some of these to their former places.
The angular slabs
from the Cretaceous appear to be broken and pushed into one another—too much to
be completely sorted out at this very moment. We shall keep this condition in
mind and simply return
The round Pacific
was expanded over the course of time, to such a degree that the belt that
consisted of four continents—
This flat map is
ill suited to illustrate the dynamic of an expanding sphere. While we now turn
to an approximate Paleocene globe, we are enabled to observe the Eocene event
from the perspective of the
While I now display the evolution of the Indic, in the time-span of one minute, I will only name the epochs: Jurassic, Lower Cretaceous, Upper Cretaceous, Paleocene, Eocene, and Oligocene onward to the present globe.
The Eocene Event along East Asia’s Marginal Seas
Now we bring our
camera into the northern Pacific and look westward—to obtain a wide-angle view
of the marginal seas of
The great retreat
of the Asian mainland was triggered by the break in the global belt of four
On the Asian
mainland changes have occurred as well. When one observes the general topography
A Round Continent
When mantle-expansion is to peal from the crust of a planet a first continent, what might be its shape? About a quarter of a century ago I have concluded that it could be round. Then, in 1998 I undertook a series of tear-experiments that involved the breaking of balloons.
Here are some samples of typical first patches that were obtained during these tear-experiments. In order to slow down the tearing of the balloon skins, I have inserted a second skin as a lining—so that outward expansion pressure might be transformed into horizontal tension along the surface. Later I have slipped a transparent third skin over the top, to capture the results between two layers. In general, the results indicate that it is reasonable to expect from the skin of an expanding sphere a rounded patch—and that a teardrop-shaped balloon tends to produce a more ellipsoid patch.
From obtaining a
first rounded continent it is but a small step to visualize the expanding cavity
By now I have
come to regard the Pacific and the Antarctic oceans as a single entity. Taken as
one, this largest of the oceans has been expanding mostly in the southern
hemisphere—widening from there subsequently the Atlantic and the Indic. Inasmuch
as the Pacific-Antarctic Ocean has peeled out for itself no angular feature in
the north, it nevertheless has within itself three V-shaped continents.
Originally the capes of
Reading the Isochrons
Since the discovery of magnetic stripes and the production of chronological ocean maps, the age-boundary, which divides the round Pacific right down the middle, has become our primary puzzle. The western half is older and contains floors from the Jurassic to the Paleocene. The eastern half is younger and features floors from the Eocene to the present. The new formulation of the riddle is therefore: Where was the Pacific spreading rift since the Upper Jurassic—from 180 to 43 million years ago? Some scientists have suggested that there may not have been an early spreading rift. But if this is the case, then the Pacific contradicts everything that we have learned about symmetric spreading in the other oceans. While a spreading rift in the round-like expanding Pacific could not always be straight and constant, it nevertheless seems that a dominant spreading rift has persisted there over time—all the way to the point when an entire plate was severed. Earlier, the direction of the older spreading rift had to circumvent the round of the continent that got torn from the Pacific womb. This means, the direction of tearing had to keep changing. Indeed, spreading rifts in the Pacific have proven to be as ephemeral as the sea-faring Henry William Menard has always suspected them to be.
Since the Eocene
the central spreading rift of the Pacific has radically changed its location.
continents, so also
data are there, that permit us to derive
First: The oldest
Jurassic patch of ocean floor one finds in the north-western Pacific. A Jurassic
band, of matching length, runs also alongside
Second: When the
addition to the contour of the Pacific, and of the Ring of Fire, one can today
contemplate the finger-print of expansion also on hand of magnetically
established isochrons. Successive isochrons provide us, regularly since the
Jurassic, with the “9”-shaped contour of
the early Eocene, South-America has loosened its embrace around the teardrop
shape of the Antarctic plate. The Eocene ocean floors, which were formed as a
result of this loosening, along the coastline of the
The epochal stripes of these floors widened and leaned eastward as if the ocean were a dish of gelatin. For a considerable length of time no spreading rift was necessary in the east—until Earth-expansion caught up with the hardening process of the crust, and until the “gelatin” had found its new tectonic balance. Or, to explain the same process without using the metaphor: In the course of 43 million years the eastern Pacific area necessarily contracted at first, and when thereafter global Expansion caught up with its soft areas, it developed a fresh compromise spreading rift.
A Rare Continental Collision
There are traces
of a continental collision in which
Seven years ago
(in 1996) when I first animated this collision, I associated the route of the
turning plate directly with the collision that followed. Because the continent
needed to turn into the southern ocean counter-clockwise, in order to attain its
subsequent inclination, it seemed as though South-America had been “bitten”
during that process. During my final revision of that video I had in my hands
the decisive NOAA map, of 1994, but my animations had
all been finished earlier. Observing now more precisely, one can see that the
collision did not happen because
With great force
it has scooped up the
During the Eocene
in the eastern Pacific can be precisely dated only after the movements of
from the edge of
To solve the
Pacific puzzle, I will animate the story about the birth and liberation of
During the first
round we focus our camera on
It must have become obvious by now, that my animation technique is not quite up to the task. Instead of cracks I can only show lines by means of extreme stretching. In order to avoid having my colors and continental patches flow into one another during simulated movement, I must maintain unseemly distances between them. By contrast upon the real Earth, any relative movement among the tectonic plates does happen along real cracks and always in close conformity with the surrounding plates—almost with the flexibility of a birthing process. Only the wide open gaps in the lithosphere, produced by Earth expansion, have been able to persuade a few of our continents to travel a little ways.
For the second
round we focus on the area between
The flexibility in the total crust of the Planet, for facilitating the “birth” of a continent, is to be sought mostly along the thinner floors of the oceans. Here and there around the sphere, these floors can be compressed and stretched wherever required by greater forces. For our research with satellites this means that unless measurements of movement can be obtained contemporaneously around the entire globe, the results will not be of much help to us.
Regardless of my overly loose animations, scientists in the field of paleontology may take note of my “near-contact” hints—between Australia, South America, and Antarctica—and consider these as potential temporary land bridges for certain species of animals.
Reverberations in two Americas and the Atlantic
As a result of
the Eocene event the continents of the Earth suddenly lost the cohesiveness that
formerly was maintained by tension along the global “belt” of continents. This
new instability affected especially the continents in the southern hemisphere.
The liberation of South-America from the global belt has bent
In order to
conclude this treatise, I need only to show yet the expansion process in the
Alvarez, Luis W. T. Rex and the Crater of Doom,
and Barton Payne. “A New Palaeozoic Reconstruction of
_____. ed. The Expanding
Earth, a Symposium.
Choubert, G. and Faure-Muret, Geological World
Coleman, Robert G. Geologic Evolution of the
Jonathan Dehn¾ www.aist.go.jp/GSJ/~jdehn/research/diss.htm.
Gottfried, Rudolf. „The Importance of Quantitative Inspections for the Understanding of the Earth’s Origin,“ in New Concepts in Global Tectonics 2002, La Junta, Colorado, pages 100 – 117.
Grand, Stephen P. and Rob C. Van der Hilst, and Sri Widiyantoro, “Global Seismic Tomography, a Snapshot of Convection in the Earth,” in GSA Today, April 1997.
Hoshino, Michihei. The
Expanding Earth: Evidence, Causes, and Effects.
Hsü, Kenneth J. Challenger at Sea: a
Ship that Revolutionized Earth Science.
Jacob, Karl-Heinz. “Self-organization of Mineral Frabrics during Lab Experiments—a possible Key for Better Understanding of Mountain-Forming Processes?” in New Concepts in Global Tectonics 2002, La Junta, Colorado, pages 278 - 285.
Lamb, Simon and
David Sington. Earth Story, the Shaping of Our
Levin, Harold L. The Earth Through Time, 1988.
Luckert, Karl W. Mother Earth Once Was a Girl: a Scientific
Theory on the Expansion of Planet Earth.
_____. “A Unified Theory of Earth
Expansion, Pacific Evacuation and Orogenesis,” in Theophrastus’ Contributions to Advanced
Studies in Geology, pages 61-73.
_____. Expansion Tectonics, a video program.
Part One: the Formation of Oceans; Part Two: the Formation of Mountains; Part
Three: Story of Discovery. VHS and PAL, 84 minutes.
_____. Planet Earth Expanding and the Eocene
Maxlow, James. Global Expansion
Tectonics: Small Earth Modelling of an Exponentially
Expanding Earth. Glen Forrest,
Menard. H. W. The
Meyerhoff, Arthur A. “Surge Tectonics
evolution of southeastern
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory and National Geographic Society. The World Satellite Map, 1998.
Paris, Geol. Survey Commission of
Ocean Drilling Project¾ www.odp.tamu.edu/sciops/LegSummaries
Parker, Sybil P.
ed. Dictionary of Earth
Pflafker, George. Henry C. Berg, ed. The Geology of
Prothero, Donald R. and William A.
Berggren. Eocene-Oligocene Climatic and Biotic
Scalera, Giancarlo. “Possible Relations Among Expanding Earth, TPW, and Polar Motion,” in New Concepts in Global Tectonics 2002, La Junta, Colorado, pages 36 – 50.
Suzuki, Yasumoto and Takashi Mitsunashi,
Kisaburo Kodama, Yoshijiro
Shinada, Seiki Yamauchi, Atsushi Urabe, Boso Peninsula: Guidebook of the
International Symposium on New Concepts in Global Tectonics.
Tassos. Stavros. Anisotropy, Spatial and Temporal Correlation...Earthquakes, Free-Air Gravity, and Geoid Anomalies, and the Dominance of Uplift,” in New Concepts in Global Tectonics 2002, La Junta, Colorado, pages 247-278.
Van der Hilst, Rob C., Sri Widiyantoro, and E. R. Engdahl,
“Evidence for Deep Mantle Circulation from Global Tomography,” in Nature, vol. 386,
Vogel, Klaus. “The Expansion of
the Earth, an Alternative Model to the Plate Tectonics Theory,” in Critical Aspects of the Plate Tectonics
Theory, II, 19-34.
Wegener, Alfred. John Biram transl. The Origin of Continents and
Wertenbaker, William, The Floor of the Sea, Maurice Ewing and the
Search to Understand the Earth.
Yano, Takao, ed. Proceedings of International Symposium on New Concepts in Global Tectonics, Tsukuba 1998.