Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

GeoGeoGeoGeo OP t1_j2q8pv6 wrote

Apparent Polar Wander vs True Polar Wander:

Apparent polar wander (APW) occurs as the magnetic pole drifts about the surface of the Earth, this is why your compass needs to account for declination. APW is associated with reversals of the geomagnetic field. True Polar Wander (TPW), on the other hand, is a re-orientation of the solid Earth as a whole relative to the spin axis. On Earth, TPW is achieved by wholesale rotation of the solid, silicate Earth (mantle and crust) around the liquid outer core. As Earth’s magnetic pole is tied primarily to rotationally induced excitations of the outer core, the magnetic poles remain aligned with the rotation axis through a TPW event. For example, 90° of TPW could result in Antarctica moving to the equatorial region, Africa moving to the pole, and all other geographic features moving accordingly. Theoretical constraints demonstrate that TPW can occur quite rapidly, limited to approximately 61° in 100 million years (Ma) and 8° in 10 Ma (Theoretical constraints on true polar wander). 1° latitude ≈ 111 km. 61° per Ma ≈ 6771 km per Ma or 677.1 cm per year and 8° in 10 Ma is ≈ 88 cm per year. Those rates are exceptionally fast when compared to tectonic speed limits (Tectonic speed limits from plate kinematic reconstructions) and modern rates of plate motion; The Cocos and Nazca plates (in the pacific ocean) are right now the quickest, moving at over 10 cm per year.

EDIT: An analogy for further clarity and distinction between APW and TPW: Think of a hot slice of cheese and pepperoni pizza with a laser pointing up from below. The pizza sauce is Earth's mantle, and the cheese and pepperoni toppings are the continents. If you were to shoot a laser upwards, from below the pizza slice, you could trace the movement of the laser by looking at the trail it left behind on the toppings. In this scenario, the magnetic pole (the laser) moved but the continents (the toppings) remained in their positions. TPW on the other hand would be like picking up a hot slice of pizza and the toppings all sliding off in one direction at the same time. The laser from below would still leave a trace on the toppings but this time it was the toppings that moved instead of the laser.

84

very_humble t1_j2qbeyj wrote

This seems like something that would be fairly trivial to negate if it happened today. Even at 677.1 cm/year, that's 50,000 years to move NYC to where Boston is

48

GeoGeoGeoGeo OP t1_j2qjl16 wrote

As to whether or not this would increase intraplate or marginal plate stress I really have no idea. If the plates don't move perfectly synchronously with one another there might be a bit of a jostling around per se. If there were, 677.1cm/yr (22 ft./yr) is potentially a lot of increased seismicity / strain within any infrastructure adjacent to or spanning major fault systems, along with subsequent increase in associated natural hazard risks. All that being said, TPW is effectively a decoupling of the fluid outer core to the silicate Earth (mantle and crust) so it really may be a bit of a stretch to think that there may be increased seismicity. Certainly interesting to ponder.

29

FranticPonE t1_j2tuhmp wrote

TIL What Polar Wander means, and holy shite I didn't think that was possible.

5

GeoGeoGeoGeo OP t1_j2twr06 wrote

Glad to hear it! There are so many things I still find mind blowing or hard to grasp in geology, it's such a fantastic field of study. TPW is also thought to have occurred on Mars as well^1, ^2

5