Gravitational
collapse structures of Pakistan
( ....fossilised curvature of the Pangaean Earth...?)
Gravitational
collapse structures of Pakistan
( ....fossilised curvature of the Pangaean Earth...?)
Fig.1. An illusion of perspective?:- Shuttle's-eye view along strike of the Iran-Pakistan border showing the difference in curvature between the present day more spherical Earth (horizon) and a remnant ambital oblateness of the Mesozoic on a smaller Earth? (frittered cloud north of the Suleiman Mountains reflects slope; Makran Mountains in the foreground; Indus valley is on the right. (Image courtesy of Nasa.)
An illusion of perspective? Maybe. But it poses a question regarding slope. ..Slope can be easily seen when observed directly, but on a large scale it becomes concealed by gravitational adjustment (spherical correction) over geological time, particularly when there has not only been a shape change in the Earth, but a size change as well. Are there still remnants of Pangaean oblateness? Would we expect to see them? And if we could see them, what would they mean - really? Is there a real change in the profile of the Earth's curvature from left to right in the figure, between the horizon and a line immediately below it, across the Makran Mountains of the Iran -Pakistan border - a remnant of gravitational collapse of Mesozoic oblateness? Or is the profile apparent only, ..an illusion? That's the sort of question at least, that Earth expansion raises. It makes you think. To plate tectonics however there is no question; we are merely looking at present-day Indian collision with Asia and "crumpling of the crust", with the 'Horns of India' being the chief crumpling culprit.But are we? For a start there is no subduction zone here. The view is taken looking northeastwards along the line of the Owen Fracture Zone, so 'movement' (if there were to be any) is up the page, towards the frontal arc of the Himalayas. And 'movement' (according to Plate Tectonics) would have to be commensurate with strike-slip faulting, not compression. If there were any 'push' forming mountains it would have to be from right to left, at right angles to the direction plate tectonics says India is moving. Moreover maximum push would have to align with the westwards (leftwards)-pointing cusps, to give the most 'compressed' part of the fold belt. But these occur where the Indus valley is widest, and the Indus valley, being on a transform ( 1, 2, 3, ) is according to other ways of thinking extensional in its own right. Moreover, the Indus Valley links the Persian Gulf, with the Ganges Basin, both of them substantially extensional structures. And further moreover, the uplift is essentially symmetrical. Indian push would generate asymmetry, since the crust is not strong enough to sustain a stress that would cause such a symmetrical lift.
Even from a Plate Tectonic point of view collision seems improbable, since it would mean India has to be moving both northerly and westerly at once (see Horny Little India). But does that mean that the difference in apparent profile curvatures in the figure may be real? Who knows, but certainly remaining oblateness or not, on the evidence to hand gravitational collapse certainly seems a better option to account for what we see. And for the first time in history we get a bird's eye view, and the opportunity to consider what apparent differences in profile curvature of the horizon (the Earth's equilibrium surface) might mean. To plate tectonics, this avenue of investigation is entirely closed.
The Earth is oblate. It is the first-order shape of the Earth. It is a first-order deviation from spherical equilbrium and it is consequent on rotation. Yet Plate Tectonics sees no connection between this first order deformation of the Earth as a whole and the Earth's crust, ..no role for rotation in the gravitational equilibration of mass. It is, they say, "too small". Too small? When it determines the oblateness of the Earth? Who's kidding who? To these self-appointed gurus with shiny badges and photo-ops, The change in rotational equilibrium in the crust - evidenced by slope, pediment, and sediment (erosion), ..and gravitational creep, as a first-order behaviour - is beyond their ... Well, ..it's just not on their horizon.
Gravity acts to make things flat, whether it be the surface of a pond after the rain, or the oceans of the world. Likewise the mountains of the world are reduced to flatness
The analogy: In scale, something like the similarity between the surface of a pond after the rain, and the oceans of the world. A difference in scale, but the same controlling parameters makes both of them 'flat'. Believe it if you like. I do.
