1 cubit foot of sea water at the surface weighs

Don Quixote

Don Quixote

cancer survivor
Contributor
64.1 pounds - metric fans may convert at their leisure

now multiply 64.1 pounds by the number of square feet ocean surface and you get a not exactly small number

roughly 89,000 TONs per square mile of ocean additional weight just during the 20th century with about triple that of last century's increase

now this amount is not equally applied so maybe some slippages may occur
 
DonQuixote said:
64.1 pounds - metric fans may convert at their leisure

now multiply 64.1 pounds by the number of square feet ocean surface and you get a not exactly small number

roughly 89,000 TONs per square mile of ocean additional weight just during the 20th century with about triple that of last century's increase

now this amount is not equally applied so maybe some slippages may occur
Click to expand...

What point are you getting at? There is no "additional" weight here.
 
But even so, it doesn't matter. Its 8 oz per square inch if you want to extrapolate it the other way. The weight of the water is utterly meaningless. Wholesale, totally meaningless.
 
DonQuixote said:
b

it is not 'additional' weight but redistributed weight

from land mass to oceans
Click to expand...

Okay, but even so, it is so miniscule relative to overall weight that it is still meaningless.

It would be the equivilent to adding /100,000th of an inch to the equator n a bech ball that is 35 million times that addition in diameter. Its meaningless.
 
Beefy said:
But even so, it doesn't matter. Its 8 oz per square inch if you want to extrapolate it the other way. The weight of the water is utterly meaningless. Wholesale, totally meaningless.
Click to expand...

you seem to not know your weights and measures

a square inch of anything has not mass and therefore no weight

however, if you take a balance beam scale and shift mass from one side to another you will note that the scale tips

if you take weight/mass from land mass and transfer it to the ocean, a greater pressure will be exerted on ocean floors and a lesser pressure on land surfaces

living in california, i have noticed that shift happens and i have lived here for a long time and have studied seismic masses and movement

a 'thrust' earthquake is the deadliest of earthquakes

if one side of a thrust fault drops or rises, enormous pressure is involved and consequently enormous damage
 
Beefy said:
Okay, but even so, it is so miniscule relative to overall weight that it is still meaningless.

It would be the equivilent to adding /100,000th of an inch to the equator n a bech ball that is 35 million times that addition in diameter. Its meaningless.
Click to expand...

not quite

check the math and apply the physics

please note the increase in weight for just one square mile or roughly 14000 tons per square mile times 1 foot
 
DonQuixote said:
not quite

check the math and apply the physics

please note the increase in weight for just one square mile or roughly 14000 tons per square mile times 1 foot
Click to expand...

1 foot of water depth added to the equator is less than 1/20,000,000 of an increase in the diameter of the earth. Its not going to send us spiraling into the sun.
 
The mass of all the water on the planet is estimated at 1.35 x 10^18 metric tons. The total mass of the planet is 6 x 10^21 metric tons. This gives a ratio of 1 to 4400. This comes out to 0.023%.

If the mass of water is only 0.023% of the mass of the earth, it seems to me that shifting a small portion of it around isn't going to change the movement of the continental plates or make a huge difference in the earth.
 
Desh said:
It could cause earthquakes to occur sooner than would have happened otherwise.
Click to expand...

I am not sure it would have any profound effects in earthquakes. Since 70% of the surface is water, the melted ice would be roughly spread over a very wide area. The lessening of the weight on land masses formerly covered by ice might have a greater effect. But in all my geology classes, I never recall any mention of the retreating ice having caused more earthquakes or a change in the relationships of the various plates of the earth's crust.

What we see as huge weights and masses, are tiny in comparison to the whole.

With the deepest depths of the oceans and the highest mountains, and all the irregularities in its surface, the earth is still smoother (relatvely speaking) than a billiard ball.
 
no I mean in wieght shift on the earth in general. Earthquakes shift a grain of sand at a time until they blow.
 
Desh said:
no I mean in wieght shift on the earth in general. Earthquakes shift a grain of sand at a time until they blow.
Click to expand...

Right. The tectonic plates are always under pressure to move, but friction holds them in place until enough energy is built up to cause the movement, and thereby, the release of the stored energy.

So I suppose the shifting of the weight would have an effect. But I meant would it have a measureable effect. A person walking from one plate to the other along the san andreas fault would, theoretically, have an effect. But the effect would be too tiny to measure.

If you take a bucket of boiling water and throw it in the pacific ocean, you change the temperature of all the oceans of the world. But not by a measureable amount.
 
hopefully , we dont really understand the forces in earthquakes very well and this thread has brought an interesting point in my mind.
 
Solitary said:
Right. The tectonic plates are always under pressure to move, but friction holds them in place until enough energy is built up to cause the movement, and thereby, the release of the stored energy.

So I suppose the shifting of the weight would have an effect. But I meant would it have a measureable effect. A person walking from one plate to the other along the san andreas fault would, theoretically, have an effect. But the effect would be too tiny to measure.

If you take a bucket of boiling water and throw it in the pacific ocean, you change the temperature of all the oceans of the world. But not by a measureable amount.
Click to expand...

sol

we are not taking a bucket or moving a person but vary large mases over centuries

as water melts off the land eventually into the oceans, there is a measurable and significant shift in the tectonic balance

given as a percentage of change it may be small, but the shift in pressure is significant relevant to the change in stresses - think of the straw that broke the camel's back

or perhaps think that the resultant shift happens sooner rather than later or the shift is stronger than it would have been otherwise

since the weight removed from land masses is greater than the weight added to ocean floors (per square mile) it may increase above sea level earth movements more than below sea level movements

the reality is that we do not know, save that shifting masses from one place to another is not a null action
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top