PDA

View Full Version : Impactor raises the Colorado Plateau?



trinitree88
2017-Nov-10, 05:44 PM
You've got to like new ideas that are "out there", but have some scientific rationale for being correct. I'm reminded of the arguments around the anomalous iridium concentrations in deposits in the K/T boundary, and Luis Alvarez's contentious, yet correct surmise of impactor origin. Here the author follows a family thought on impactors affecting tectonics, and brings some new found thinking to the Colorado Plateau uplift. Neat. Possibly correct. SEE:https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.03099


pete

Jeff Root
2017-Nov-10, 10:34 PM
The size and mass of Mars??!! Just 750 million years ago??!!!!

I see what you mean by "out there".

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

geonuc
2017-Nov-10, 10:39 PM
Well, that's interesting and ... novel. An impactor the size of Mars. It will be more interesting if further study substantiates the hypothesis.

Note the hypothesis calls for an oblique impact, not a full-on collision.

Superluminal
2017-Nov-12, 08:56 AM
An object nearly the size of mars, skidding across the deserts of Colorado, Utah and Arizona. Now that would have been an interesting sight.

Eclogite
2017-Nov-12, 09:37 AM
I was amused by the typo in the abstract that describes the impactor as a "rouge exoplanet", instead of a "rogue exoplanet". Was this why the author thought it might be the same size and mass as Mars, the Red Planet? :)

grapes
2017-Nov-12, 02:19 PM
Wow

In the first paragraph of the introduction, they make a comment about the Rockies not being explained by plate tectonics and their reference is specific pages of Annals of the Former World, John McPhee's compilation of his popularizations. Yes, I know it won a Pulitzer, but still...

Eclogite
2017-Nov-12, 08:49 PM
Wow

In the first paragraph of the introduction, they make a comment about the Rockies not being explained by plate tectonics and their reference is specific pages of Annals of the Former World, John McPhee's compilation of his popularizations. Yes, I know it won a Pulitzer, but still...I have only scanned the paper, but I did get a sense of Imannuel Velikovsky learns high school mathematics.

That said, - and I hope this is not considered ATM - we know the following:

Simulations of planetary formation generally involve the ejection of planets from the system
The odds of such a planet passing through the solar system are orders of magnitude lower than the odds required for the glancing blow proposed in this research
Such a passage would have some effect on the orbits of the planets, the magnitude of this effect depending upon the mass of the rogue and its path
Forget plate tectonics. An altered terrestrial orbit could provide a plausible alternate explanation for the faint young sun paradox
The odds would be much more favourable than the proposed impact scenario and could be evaluated with current simulation software

John Mendenhall
2017-Nov-13, 04:36 PM
You've got to like new ideas that are "out there", but have some scientific rationale for being correct. I'm reminded of the arguments around the anomalous iridium concentrations in deposits in the K/T boundary, and Luis Alvarez's contentious, yet correct surmise of impactor origin. Here the author follows a family thought on impactors affecting tectonics, and brings some new found thinking to the Colorado Plateau uplift. Neat. Possibly correct. SEE:https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.03099


pete

The link is good, and feee. The idea seems unlikkely, but I don't want
to argue from ignorance. Time out now o read he paper.