Welcome to SP!  -
Areas & RangesMountains & RocksRoutesImagesArticlesTrip ReportsGearOtherPeoplePlans & PartnersWhat's NewForum

Growing Ranges?

Post general questions and discuss issues related to climbing.
 

Re: Growing Ranges?

Postby surgent » Thu Aug 25, 2011 7:05 pm

I wonder if any of the ranges or peaks in Virginia grew a little after their earthquake...

You pose a good question. You'd need some sort of subduction-type fault nearby. Perhaps some of the peaks in the Cascadia region are inching upward due to the big fault off the coast of WA/BC/AK.
User Avatar
surgent

 
Posts: 484
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 2:45 pm
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona, United States
Thanked: 113 times in 63 posts

Re: Growing Ranges?

Postby MoapaPk » Thu Aug 25, 2011 7:09 pm

Boarh grew by 1.5' after the 1983 earthquake.

I suppose one has to ponder the meaning of "grow." The change to earth-centered geoids has boosted the reported elevations of some mountains; some of that is "real," as plates in the lithosphere move relative to the rest of the earth.
User Avatar
MoapaPk

 
Posts: 7714
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 7:42 pm
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Thanked: 773 times in 505 posts

Re: Growing Ranges?

Postby MoapaPk » Thu Aug 25, 2011 7:53 pm

An interesting dilemma, since a growth rate of 1mm/y has to be reconciled with a 1cm/yr growth from simply sliding to a new position relative to the older geoid.
User Avatar
MoapaPk

 
Posts: 7714
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 7:42 pm
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Thanked: 773 times in 505 posts

Re: Growing Ranges?

Postby Buz Groshong » Thu Aug 25, 2011 8:29 pm

surgent wrote:I wonder if any of the ranges or peaks in Virginia grew a little after their earthquake...

You pose a good question. You'd need some sort of subduction-type fault nearby. Perhaps some of the peaks in the Cascadia region are inching upward due to the big fault off the coast of WA/BC/AK.


My guess would be that they subsided a tiny bit and that the coastal plain east of the Spottsylvania Lineament might have inched up a bit. It was definitely weird as hell experiencing that - we're not in Cali-friggin-fornia.
User Avatar
Buz Groshong

 
Posts: 2845
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 10:58 pm
Location: Alexandria, Virginia, United States
Thanked: 687 times in 484 posts

Re: Growing Ranges?

Postby Marmaduke » Fri Aug 26, 2011 6:42 am

Whitney was always listed at 14,997 feet and it has been listed at 14,505 (for some time now), Is this possibly the same thing or was Whitney's elevation adjusted because of better accuracy with new technology? Were Muir, Mallory and Russell found to have "new" elevations as well?
User Avatar
Marmaduke

 
Posts: 1363
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 1:08 am
Location: Sonoma, California, United States
Thanked: 608 times in 468 posts

Re: Growing Ranges?

Postby MoapaPk » Fri Aug 26, 2011 2:55 pm

Marmaduke wrote:Whitney was always listed at 14,997 feet and it has been listed at 14,505 (for some time now), Is this possibly the same thing or was Whitney's elevation adjusted because of better accuracy with new technology? Were Muir, Mallory and Russell found to have "new" elevations as well?


The change in reported elevation was caused by the change to an earth-centered geoid for reference of the elevation. Whether it is "real" depends on your mindset. See discussion above.
User Avatar
MoapaPk

 
Posts: 7714
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 7:42 pm
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Thanked: 773 times in 505 posts

Re: Growing Ranges?

Postby H2SO4 » Sat Oct 06, 2012 12:37 am

What's an "earth centered geoid"? Presumably any reasonable way you choose to extrapolate the sea level isn't going to affect the answer very much...especially for something so close to the ocean. So while it might be a big part of the growth over the last 100 years, it's not going to be a big part of the growth over the next 10^6.
User Avatar
H2SO4

 
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 1:14 pm
Location: Storrs, Connecticut, United States
Thanked: 3 times in 2 posts

Re: Growing Ranges?

Postby lcarreau » Sat Oct 06, 2012 1:07 am

Sorry, I don't have any big-ass scientific theories in order to explain the growth rate of peaks .... :shock:

I'm still waiting for California to fall into the sea, for crying out loud !

That hippie chick (real estate agent) was WRONG, when she told me she had proof that Arizona would soon have "Ocean-front" property .... :roll:
User Avatar
lcarreau

 
Posts: 4059
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:27 pm
Location: Court of the Crimson King, Arizona, United States
Thanked: 1064 times in 797 posts

Re: Growing Ranges?

Postby desainme » Sat Oct 06, 2012 4:38 pm

mt borah earthquake would have popped this portion of the lost rivers up 7-8 ft
User Avatar
desainme

 
Posts: 6259
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2002 6:02 pm
Location: Oxford Cornland, Ohio, United States
Thanked: 74 times in 58 posts


Return to General

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 0 guests

© 2006-2013 SummitPost.org. All Rights Reserved.