Notices
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Is The Snake River Plain A Divergent Boundary?

  1. #1 Is The Snake River Plain A Divergent Boundary? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    24
    Am I the first to spot that borders of the Snake River Plain fit each other like if the mountain ridges were broken along some line and then were spread off the line? I'm sure I am not, but I've looked through approx a couple of dozens .gov and .edu sites on The Snake River Plain, - none of them mentioned that the borders of the East of The Snake River Plain would fit each other.

    Let's take a look at The Snake River Plain satellite photo at: OSU, "The Snake River Plain and the Yellowstone Hot Spot" ( http://volcano.oregonstate.edu/vwdocs/volc_images/north_america/yellowstone.html ) [Accessed Jun-21, 2011]

    Let's take Eastern part of the plain (the one that is closer to Yellowstone). For this part of the plain, its North-West border would fit exactly South-East border if the plain between borders gets cut off the image.

    And, as the ridges are very diverse in their shape, the only explanation of the exact fit, would be the divergent process to spread The Snake River Plain .

    Am I missing something? Any links on discussions of the snake river plain as a divergent boundary?

    In a bit more details the question is on my blog: "The Snake River Plain As A Divergent Boundary. Yellowstone Caldera."
    Sergey D. Sukhotinsky's Blog: The Snake River Plain As A Divergent Boundary. Yellowstone Caldera.

    Thanks,
    Sergey Sukhotinsky.


    Last edited by Sergey S.; August 19th, 2011 at 04:24 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,387
    Hmm, why would it not be the track left from the North American plate passing over the yellowstone Hotspot?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    Hmm, why would it not be the track left from the North American plate passing over the yellowstone Hotspot?
    The borders clearly fit each other. This only is possible on diverging process.

    The "hotspot track" is meant to "erase" the relief, as far as understand it. This way borders of the plain would not fit each other.

    Neither the hotspot can diverge the plain "on the run" as it would not work locally like unzipping the plain, in my opinion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,387
    Quote Originally Posted by Sergey S.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    Hmm, why would it not be the track left from the North American plate passing over the yellowstone Hotspot?
    The borders clearly fit each other. This only is possible on diverging process.

    The "hotspot track" is meant to "erase" the relief, as far as understand it. This way borders of the plane would not fit each other.

    Neither the hotspot can diverge the plane "on the run" as it would not work locally like unzipping the plane, in my opinion.
    The hotspot was a fairly uniform width and therefore left a uniform plain though the landscape, erasing the relief.

    There is no related boundary markers such as faulting on either end of the plain, and the volcanic rock of the plain geochemically matches that of yellowstone if I recall correctly.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    Quote Originally Posted by Sergey S.
    The borders clearly fit each other. This only is possible on diverging process.

    The "hotspot track" is meant to "erase" the relief, as far as understand it. This way borders of the plane would not fit each other.

    Neither the hotspot can diverge the plane "on the run" as it would not work locally like unzipping the plane, in my opinion.
    The hotspot was a fairly uniform width and therefore left a uniform plain though the landscape, erasing the relief...
    Me English language problem, maybe. I should have written "plain", not "plane" sorry. If the relief were erased, then the borders of the plain would not fit each other after you cut the plain off the image. (Eastern part of the plain)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,387
    Quote Originally Posted by Sergey S.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    Quote Originally Posted by Sergey S.
    The borders clearly fit each other. This only is possible on diverging process.

    The "hotspot track" is meant to "erase" the relief, as far as understand it. This way borders of the plane would not fit each other.

    Neither the hotspot can diverge the plane "on the run" as it would not work locally like unzipping the plane, in my opinion.
    The hotspot was a fairly uniform width and therefore left a uniform plain though the landscape, erasing the relief...
    Me English language problem, maybe. I should have written "plain", not "plane" sorry. If the relief were erased, then the borders of the plain would not fit each other after you cut the plain off the image. (Eastern part of the plain)
    Why would they not?

    The areas on either side follow the general pattern of each other yes, but this does not trump the geologic evidence that the area was formed by the Yellowstone hotspot.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    127
    Yeah, the Snake River plane is an artifact of the Yellowstone hotspot track. Isotopic evidence from the Columbia River flood basalts eastwards suggest a significant influence from thick, cratonic crust, pointing away from a divergent boundary scenario.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    The areas on either side follow the general pattern of each other yes,
    Yes, the fact that the plain was formed by a diverging process is hard to deny.

    but this does not trump the geologic evidence that the area was formed by the Yellowstone hotspot.
    So, you mean the diverging process was caused by the Yellowstone hotspot? I am not sure if that was possible for the Coriolis effect.

    Anyway, as the direction of the diverging process is roughly parallel to the coastline, the Yellowstone seismic activity, I'd expect, to be tightly coupled to the seismic activity all over the coastline from South California to Alaska.

    I can see how scientists who invested years into hotspots/plumes research, are not willing to step back and rethink the basics. But, really, can the society afford the situation? If my concept of the divergent boundaries is relevant, then it could mean there were a positive feedback all over the Pacific pond. For example, Moon-related weekly cycle June-6, June-13, June-21 for NZ quakes and, probably, coupled to it Alaska's June-16, June-23 would mean the Moon-induced deformations are amplified by the effect of distant quakes. And the NA West Coast is not just Alaska.

    Sergey Sukhotinsky.
    http://divergent-boundaries.blogspot.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,387
    Quote Originally Posted by Sergey S.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    The areas on either side follow the general pattern of each other yes,
    Yes, the fact that the plain was formed by a diverging process is hard to deny.
    That's not what I said, please do not quote mine my comments. All I said was the two sides of the plain are similar in contour. I was in no way agreeing with you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sergey S.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    but this does not trump the geologic evidence that the area was formed by the Yellowstone hotspot.
    So, you mean the diverging process was caused by the Yellowstone hotspot? I am not sure if that was possible for the Coriolis effect.
    Again that is not what I said. I said the track was a direct effect of the passage of the YHS. At no point was the YHS a divergent boundary.

    If you trace your finger through a sandbox from one end to the other the trace you leave will have two sides that mirror each other. At no point was your finger creating a divergent boundary.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sergey S.
    Anyway, as the direction of the diverging process is roughly parallel to the coastline, the Yellowstone seismic activity, I'd expect, to be tightly coupled to the seismic activity all over the coastline from South California to Alaska.
    And yet your are totally wrong. As already pointed out the YHS magmas and lavas have a completely different geochemical fingerprint from the west coast volcanoes.

    Also you should be aware that the coast volcanoes are the result of a convergent boundary not a divergent one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sergey S.
    I can see how scientists who invested years into hotspots/plumes research, are not willing to step back and rethink the basics. But, really, can the society afford the situation? If my concept of the divergent boundaries is relevant, then it could mean there were a positive feedback all over the Pacific pond. For example, Moon-related weekly cycle June-6, June-13, June-21 for NZ quakes and, probably, coupled to it Alaska's June-16, June-23 would mean the Moon-induced deformations are amplified by the effect of distant quakes. And the NA West Coast is not just Alaska.
    These earthquakes are not related in anyway to hotspots, why are you bringing them into this discussion.

    Yes there is a WEAK correlation to quakes but its a very small one and in no way allows for prediction of where or when a severe quake may occur.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •