Geological aspect of mountains?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Luke987
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the geological aspects of mountains, particularly their formation through plate tectonics and their implications for Earth's surface and ecosystems. Participants explore the potential consequences of a planet without mountains, touching on topics such as weather patterns, geological processes, and historical contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that without mountains, Earth would be covered by a few thousand feet of water, leading to a uniform geode-like shape.
  • Others argue that mountains play a crucial role in creating weather patterns, influencing precipitation and climate.
  • There are claims that the absence of mountains would not necessarily lead to extinction for early humans, but it could complicate evolutionary processes.
  • Participants mention that mountains contribute to the rock cycle, affecting sediment deposition and geological diversity.
  • Some express uncertainty about the overall impact of mountains on weather, suggesting that without them, weather might be harsher but more consistent.
  • Mountains are noted as important sources for rivers and agricultural support due to their influence on precipitation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the significance of mountains, with no consensus on their overall purpose or the implications of their absence. Disagreements persist regarding the effects on weather and ecological systems.

Contextual Notes

Some claims rely on assumptions about geological processes and historical contexts that are not fully explored. The discussion includes references to external sources for further information but does not resolve the complexities of the arguments presented.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying geology, environmental science, or climate science, as well as individuals curious about the role of mountains in Earth's systems.

Luke987
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
A few days ago I heard that if mountains, really a result of plate tectonics, didn't exist our planet would only be covered by a few thousand feet of water and that it would have a perfect geode form.

How true is this? Scientifically have they been given a purpose?

(Not interested in philosophy here)

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
Luke987 said:
A few days ago I heard that if mountains, really a result of plate tectonics, didn't exist our planet would only be covered by a few thousand feet of water and that it would have a perfect geode form.

How true is this? Scientifically have they been given a purpose?

(Not interested in philosophy here)

Thanks
They create weather patterns for one thing.
 
If you smoothed out the surface, it would be under water. Basically the oceans are on average much deeper than the land is high.

As to the purpose of mountains - other than for planes to crash into and singing nuns to run across I don't know.
 
Well conceivably all the solid mass could form a uniform sphere and the water form an outer layer, it being less dense.

But Nature seemed to have other ideas.

Here are some ideas of what the Western US looked like at different periods.
http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~rcb7/paleogeogwus.html

Somewhere there is a site that maps ancient oceans, which indicates that water covered more of the Earth's surface in the past than now. The ocean's were much shallowe as well. But at the moment, I don't remember the site. :frown:

Here's one but it's not the one I'm thinking of.
http://www.palaeos.com/Proterozoic/Proterozoic.htm
http://www.palaeos.com/Paleozoic/Paleozoic.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mgb_phys said:
As to the purpose of mountains - other than for planes to crash into and singing nuns to run across I don't know.
or serving as a backdrop to the sound of music. :smile:
 
Thanks for the quick replies.

So is it safe to say that there would be no real problem if mountains weren't on Earth? Would it have been a problem back in Homo sapiens periods etc when they had no idea on how to make sea water drinkable or the like? I don't see it leading to extinction.

All other posts appreciated.

Evo, can you expand on the weather patterns? Thanks :)
 
Last edited:
Luke987 said:
So is it safe to say that there would be no real problem if mountains weren't on Earth?
For anything that lives in deep oceans it wouldn't really matter.

Would it have been a problem back in Homo sapiens periods etc when they had no idea on how to make sea water drinkable or the like? I don't see it leading to extinction.
It would have been difficult to get H.S. when there was no land for fish to crawl out onto and begin the process of evolving into reptiles and then mammals.

Remember if there were no mammals the surface would ALL be ocean a few 1000 feet deep!
 
I imagine if we didn't have mountains, the weasther would be a fair bit more harsh though more consistent.

You could get high velocity winds and very powerful hurricanes unfettered by the weakening effect of landmasses.
 
  • #10
DaveC426913 said:
I imagine if we didn't have mountains, the weasther would be a fair bit more harsh though more consistent.

You could get high velocity winds and very powerful hurricanes unfettered by the weakening effect of landmasses.

Though would you say more consistent weather would make up for that and thus no mountains would be good?
 
  • #11
Luke987 said:
Though would you say more consistent weather would make up for that and thus no mountains would be good?
I am merely stating effects, not judging them.:-p

Perhaps I shouldn't have tied harsh and consistent together like that. Though I think it would have been even weirder to say more harsh and more consistent.
 
  • #13
Interesting stuff.
 
  • #14
It's all party of the rock cycle mate, mountains = uplifted rock, you get basins behind the overiding tectonic slab (hinterland) and in front of it (foreland), the mountains erode and the sediment is deposited in the basins. So if you didn't have mountains these basin sediments wouldn't form, basically the Earth's geology would be completely different, that's not the "purpose" of mountains, the purpose of mountains is so we can go rock climbing :). Mountains do provide geologists with a lot of rock exposure, without mountains most of the Earth's surface would be covered with water and soils (although maybe without mountains there wouldn't be life, and thus no soils?) - without mountains most people wouldn't even know what a rock was!
 
  • #15
Mountains are important for a couple of reasons:

1) They usually are the source for rivers that provide a water source to human populations.
2) They create a cooling off spot for precipitation. As the clouds move over the mountains, the air cools and finally produces rain which helps the agriculture for human populations.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
16K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
19K
Replies
11
Views
10K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K