Breakthrough achieved in explaining why tectonic plates move the way they do

Breakthrough achieved in explaining why tectonic plates move the way they do
The sinking of the Farallon plate beneath the North American continent over 30 million years created the geologic feature known as the Basin and Range Province, an area of the western United States that encompasses much of Nevada, seen here in a topographic model. Credit: Mike Sandiford/University of Melbourne

A team of researchers including Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego geophysicist Dave Stegman has developed a new theory to explain the global motions of tectonic plates on the earth's surface.

The new theory extends the theory of plate tectonics - a kinematic description of plate motion without reference to the forces behind it - with a dynamical theory that provides a physical explanation for both the motions of tectonic plates as well as motion of plate boundaries. The new findings have implications for how scientists understand the geological evolution of Earth, and in particular, the tectonic evolution of western North America, in the past 50 million years.

The research, led by Monash University's Wouter Schellart, is published in the July 16 issue of the journal Science.

These findings provide a new explanation as to why tectonic plates move along the Earth's surface at the speeds that are observed, the details of which were previously not well-understood.

"The earth's surface is covered with that move with respect to one another at centimeters per year," Schellart said. "These plates converge at deep-sea trenches, plate boundaries where one plate sinks (subducts) below the other at so-called subduction zones. The velocities of these plates and the velocities of the boundaries between these plates vary significantly on Earth."

Schellart and his team, including Stegman and Rebecca Farrington, Justin Freeman and Louis Moresi from Monash University, used observational data and advanced computer models to develop a new mathematical scaling theory, which demonstrates that the velocities of the plates and the plate boundaries depend on the size of subduction zones and the presence of subduction zone edges.

"The scalings for how subducted plates sink in the earth's mantle are based on essentially the same fluid dynamics that describe how a penny sinks through a jar of honey," said Stegman, who developed the computer models that helped the team reenact tens of millions of years of tectonic movement. "The computer models demonstrate that the subducted portion of a tectonic plate pulls on the portion of the plate that remains on the earth's surface. This pull results in either the motion of the plate, or the motion of the plate boundary, with the size of the subduction zone determining how much of each."

"In some ways, plate tectonics is the surface expression of dynamics in the earth's interior but now we understand the plates themselves are controlling the process more than the mantle underneath. It means Earth is really more of a top-down system than the predominantly held view that plate motion is being driven from the bottom-up."

This discovery explains why the Australian, Nazca and Pacific plates move up to four times faster than the smaller African, Eurasian and Juan de Fuca plates.

"It also provides explanations for the motions of the ancient Farallon plate that sank into the mantle below North and South America. This plate slowed down during eastward motion from about 10 centimeters (four inches) per year some 50 million years ago to only 2 centimeters (0.8 inches) per year at present," Schellart said.

The decrease in plate velocity resulted from the decrease in subduction zone size, which decreased from 14,000 kilometers (8,700 miles) to only 1,400 kilometers (870 miles).

"This had a dramatic effect on the topography and the structure of the North American continent," said Schellart. "Until 50 million years ago, the west coast of North America was characterized by a massive mountain chain similar to the present day Andes in South America, and ran from Canada in the north to southern Mexico in the south."

As the decreased in size, the compressive stresses along the west coast of North America decreased, resulting in destruction of the mountain range and formation of the Basin and Range province, a 2 million-square-kilometer (772,000-square-mile) area of elongated basins and ridges that characterizes the present-day western North American landscape.


Explore further

Australian discovery solves mystery of the Andes

Citation: Breakthrough achieved in explaining why tectonic plates move the way they do (2010, July 16) retrieved 22 September 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2010-07-breakthrough-tectonic-plates.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
0 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Jul 16, 2010
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Jul 16, 2010
More complete bullshit. When will this ridiculous idea go away? "Plates sink thru mantle like a penny through honey?"
Are you serious?
Has anyone ever heard of physical density?
The mantle is much more dense that the crust, regardless of make up.
It is impossible for the crust to sink through the mantle.
Really, could people be more uninformed?

Jul 16, 2010
More complete bullshit. When will this ridiculous idea go away? "Plates sink thru mantle like a penny through honey?"
Are you serious?
Has anyone ever heard of physical density?
The mantle is much more dense that the crust, regardless of make up.
It is impossible for the crust to sink through the mantle.
Really, could people be more uninformed?


"sinks" isn't the right term- more like dragged/pushed.

Jul 16, 2010
stillwind, nowhere in the article did it say or even suggest that any plate "sank through the mantle".
You need to re-read the article.
They spoke of subduction under other plates. Whether you call the act of subduction sinking into the mantle or being forced down into the mantle is arbitrary and to me not as important as the disclosure that the subducted plate acts upon the remaining surface plate. That is enlightening.

Jul 17, 2010
plates don't sink by themselves, they are not pennies and the mantle is no honey, wrong analogy, a better analogy would be that of a siphon where you initialy pump up some water first and gravity and electrostatic forces will keep dragging/pumping the remainder downward. What their research does highlight is that the downward siphon action while not being the prime driver/spark plug, it is a much bigger catalyst in keeping the process going and has much greater impact on shaping the remaining plates on the surface than previously thought.

Jul 17, 2010
i wouldn't interchange subduction and sinking, you can subdue a football by pushing it under water, but if not subdued, it will not sink but float.

Jul 17, 2010
"...will not sink but float"
But, Husky, if you push it down just a little further, it will crush and sink. Subducted plates get heated and squeezed, lose their light fluids and become denser...

Jul 17, 2010
i did not take that in consideration!

it does underscore that the initial push comes before pulling/dragging force release the potential energy stored in the subdued plate and put it in sink mode, not unlike a rollercoaster is pushed uphill first to be released

Jul 17, 2010
It's still a fact, though, that most crustal rock is much lower-density than mantle, with a higher melting point, and continues to be "forced under" for a very substantial part of its journey in subduction. It has to be buried pretty deep before it can melt and be chemically altered enough to gain density. A large portion of it is melted, and makes its way back to the surface as a magma "plume", and forms plutonic domes, or catastrophically, if not supervolcanically, erupts.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more