Why is the World's Land Mass mostly in the North? - Page 3

EHocking · 18th February 2021, 11:19 PM

Originally Posted by Vixen

Why is the larger part of the world's land mass mostly in the north?

42,000 years ago, they were not...
https://www.livescience.com/magnetic...years-ago.html

rjh01 · 19th February 2021, 03:28 AM

Originally Posted by EHocking

42,000 years ago, they were not...
https://www.livescience.com/magnetic...years-ago.html

Only trouble is that the last time the magnetic field reversed was 800,000 years ago. So either we have learnt something or what you have linked is rubbish.

http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/education/reversals.html

Pixel42 · 19th February 2021, 03:50 AM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laschamp_event

Quote:

The Laschamp event was a geomagnetic excursion (a short reversal of the Earth's magnetic field). It occurred 41,400 years ago, during the end of the Last Glacial Period. It is known from geomagnetic anomalies discovered in the 1960s in the Laschamps lava flows in Clermont-Ferrand, France.[1]

The Laschamp event was the first known geomagnetic excursion and remains the most thoroughly studied among the known geomagnetic excursions.[2]

Samson · 19th February 2021, 04:18 AM

Originally Posted by Pixel42

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laschamp_event

Plate techtonics are a more leisurly game.

Roboramma · 19th February 2021, 05:26 AM

It's possible* that civilization could only arise in a world with the land mostly near one of the poles, rather than more evenly distributed north-south, and so any online discussion would take place in such a world.

It's likely that the pole where most of the land was clustering would be defined as North.

I don't mean this very seriously. Putting this post's chance of being at all reasonable around 5%.

*because of it's effects on climate.

RecoveringYuppy · 19th February 2021, 08:16 AM

Originally Posted by rjh01

Only trouble is that the last time the magnetic field reversed was 800,000 years ago. So either we have learnt something or what you have linked is rubbish.

http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/education/reversals.html

It's referring to to the Laschamp event.

EHocking · 19th February 2021, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by rjh01

Only trouble is that the last time the magnetic field reversed was 800,000 years ago. So either we have learnt something or what you have linked is rubbish.

http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/education/reversals.html

Hopefully, “we” have learned something.
Laschamp event^WP

HansMustermann · 19th February 2021, 11:31 PM

Originally Posted by Roboramma

It's possible* that civilization could only arise in a world with the land mostly near one of the poles, rather than more evenly distributed north-south, and so any online discussion would take place in such a world.

It's likely that the pole where most of the land was clustering would be defined as North.

I don't mean this very seriously. Putting this post's chance of being at all reasonable around 5%.

*because of it's effects on climate.

Actually, far more than 5%, IMHO, but I would approach it from a completely different angle.

Namely that, forget civilization. To have good enough conditions for very complex life, for the whole billions of years needed to evolve intelligence from scratch, you NEED a world with plate tectonics. Otherwise:

A. you'll lack a magnatic field, which will <bleep> up your atmosphere and get rid of your water,

and even more importantly

B. a planet of sufficient size to hold on to much of an atmosphere at all, will have an active enough core. Without such tectonics it would just periodically overheat and completely melt and swallow its crust, like Venus does. You don't get to evolve to civilization stage when every few millions of years the whole planet turns into a lava pool

So if you're having this discussion, it will be on a planet where the continents move around more or less randomly, depending on where those cracks formed that push them around. So no matter how that imaginary civilization names its directions on a map, let's say, flub, blub, foo and bar, chances are at any given moment they would have moved to be more mass in flub than blub, or viceversa.

Delvo · 19th February 2021, 11:43 PM

Without plate tectonics there'd also be no source of new rocks from which to make new soil to replace old soil once it's been damaged or washed away. (This is already a big contributor to the challenges for life in general in Australia just since it separated from the other continents.)

HansMustermann · 20th February 2021, 01:21 AM

Well, that is very true, though you probably wouldn't have much soil, nor much in the way of minerals other than silica for that soil (or really for any life,) after the first time the whole planet turns into a molten ball of lava. Heavier stuff would just sink.

Roboramma · 20th February 2021, 04:33 AM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

So if you're having this discussion, it will be on a planet where the continents move around more or less randomly, depending on where those cracks formed that push them around. So no matter how that imaginary civilization names its directions on a map, let's say, flub, blub, foo and bar, chances are at any given moment they would have moved to be more mass in flub than blub, or viceversa.

Absolutely, though I'm wondering how much of the time you'd get say 10% more land mass in one hemisphere than the other, and how much of the time it's more like 50% more, or 2x or 3x more, etc. What's the distribution, and where does the current situation fit on that distribution.

In other words, regarding the OP, is the current situation pretty much explained by the fact that the continents move at all, or is it a pretty unlikely configuration which could be coincidence but might be worth looking for some other factor (anthropic or not) to explain it?

I'm guessing the current state isn't very far from what we'd expect at random, to be honest.

PhantomWolf · 22nd February 2021, 08:42 PM

It's because the South Pole is actually the top of the world and, because rock is denser than water, all the landmasses have slid down to the bottom.

EHocking · 22nd February 2021, 11:20 PM

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf

It's because the South Pole is actually the top of the world and, because rock is denser than water, all the landmasses have slid down to the bottom.

Most of the Helium reserves in the world are under the "northern" continents, so they float to the "top".

Brainster · 23rd February 2021, 09:52 AM

Because there is water on the rest of it?

Thor 2 · 23rd February 2021, 12:54 PM

Originally Posted by sphenisc

Centrifugal force. The dense, heavy basaltic rocks of the sea floor are thrown outwards towards the rim, so the lighter rocks of the continental land masses float in towards the centre.

The question is about the land mass being greater in the North not on the Equator.*

Oh, by the way, centrifugal force does not exist.

* Where centripetal acceleration is greatest.

Steve · 23rd February 2021, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by Hellbound

The way we draw maps

I have been thinking about how to say this but I would have used many more words. This makes the point succinctly. It's all really rather human-centric and arbitrary. If the first map makers lived in the southern hemisphere then "north" would be reversed 180 degrees and we would be viewing the world upside down.

erwinl · 23rd February 2021, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by Steve

I have been thinking about how to say this but I would have used many more words. This makes the point succinctly. It's all really rather human-centric and arbitrary. If the first map makers lived in the southern hemisphere then "north" would be reversed 180 degrees and we would be viewing the world upside down.

In the kings palace of Sevilla, there’s a room with a gigantic and truly magnificent map of Spain on one of the walls. Africa can be found at the top of that map, with France at the bottom.

MRC_Hans · 23rd February 2021, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

I still feel like you should be able to find Mt Everest or the Mariana Trench on a billiard-sized Earth by running your thumb over it. Or by licking it.

Maybe. Let's hope nothing actually licks the Earth to find out.

Hans

MRC_Hans · 23rd February 2021, 01:43 PM

Originally Posted by alfaniner

What if we've had the maps upside-down all this time?

The orientation of maps is entirely arbitrary. These days, the convention is that north is up, but it wasn't always so.

Hans

Captain_Swoop · 23rd February 2021, 02:49 PM

We can measure the movement of the plates.

India for example is moving north in to Asia, hence the mountains.

arthwollipot · 23rd February 2021, 04:19 PM

At one time, maps were centred on Jerusalem.

Roboramma · 26th February 2021, 02:55 AM

To some extent I think people are missing out on what the question really is.

Imagine a world in which all the land was clustered in a single continent whose coastline was all equidistant from the North Pole. There'd certainly be something odd and in need of an explanation in that case.

Perturb that world a little, so that the coastline includes some irregularities, some parts a few miles further from and some parts a few miles closer to, the North Pole. Still odd, and not something you'd get from a random walk: looking at it, you'd expect some mechanism to lead to that situation.

Keep perturbing it, and you end up with large peninsulas and islands coming off that continent, but again you've still got an odd situation.

Eventually, when we move far enough from the perfect circle around the North Pole, we find ourselves in a situation that's easily explained as just the random movements of the continents over time. While there is some clustering in the northern hemisphere, it's still well within what you'd expect.

We can also look back through time and see that the continents have moved all around the earth, so if there were any mechanism, it would have to be one that applies today but didn't apply in the past.

But again, the important point is that the distribution of the continents, while it may cluster somewhat in the northern hemisphere, isn't clustering in a way that deviates far from random movement over the globe.

theprestige · 26th February 2021, 08:58 AM

I thought the question was how any western-educated adult in this day and age doesn't know about plate tectonics and the movement of continents over time.

Steve · 26th February 2021, 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

I thought the question was how any western-educated adult in this day and age doesn't know about plate tectonics and the movement of continents over time.

That, plus the alternate hypothesis that must not be ruled out:

"I am guessing it is to do with how the earth spins on its axis?"

Given sufficient time the earth will spin the entire land mass "up" to the north pole where it will remain for all eternity.

MRC_Hans · 26th February 2021, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by Steve

That, plus the alternate hypothesis that must not be ruled out:

"I am guessing it is to do with how the earth spins on its axis?"

Given sufficient time the earth will spin the entire land mass "up" to the north pole where it will remain for all eternity.

My guess is: No.

Hans

Steve · 26th February 2021, 01:27 PM

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans

My guess is: No.

Hans

Mine too. But as a skeptic I maintain the utmost respect for the "well reasoned" thoughts of others.

18th February 2021, 11:19 PM	#81
EHocking Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,531	Originally Posted by Vixen Why is the larger part of the world's land mass mostly in the north? 42,000 years ago, they were not... https://www.livescience.com/magnetic...years-ago.html
EHocking Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,531	__________________ "A closed mouth gathers no feet" "Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke "It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite You can't make up anything anymore. The world itself is a satire. All you're doing is recording it. Art Buchwald

19th February 2021, 03:28 AM	#82
rjh01 Gentleman of leisure Tagger Join Date: May 2005 Location: Flying around in the sky Posts: 26,507	Originally Posted by EHocking 42,000 years ago, they were not... https://www.livescience.com/magnetic...years-ago.html Only trouble is that the last time the magnetic field reversed was 800,000 years ago. So either we have learnt something or what you have linked is rubbish. http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/education/reversals.html
	__________________ This signature is for rent.

19th February 2021, 03:50 AM	#83
Pixel42 Schrödinger's cat Join Date: May 2004 Location: Malmesbury, UK Posts: 12,998	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laschamp_event Quote: The Laschamp event was a geomagnetic excursion (a short reversal of the Earth's magnetic field). It occurred 41,400 years ago, during the end of the Last Glacial Period. It is known from geomagnetic anomalies discovered in the 1960s in the Laschamps lava flows in Clermont-Ferrand, France.[1] The Laschamp event was the first known geomagnetic excursion and remains the most thoroughly studied among the known geomagnetic excursions.[2]
	__________________ "If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett

19th February 2021, 04:18 AM	#84
Samson Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 9,380	Originally Posted by Pixel42 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laschamp_event Plate techtonics are a more leisurly game.
Samson Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 9,380

19th February 2021, 05:26 AM	#85
Roboramma Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shanghai Posts: 14,261	It's possible* that civilization could only arise in a world with the land mostly near one of the poles, rather than more evenly distributed north-south, and so any online discussion would take place in such a world. It's likely that the pole where most of the land was clustering would be defined as North. I don't mean this very seriously. Putting this post's chance of being at all reasonable around 5%. *because of it's effects on climate.
	__________________ "... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together." Isaac Asimov

19th February 2021, 08:16 AM	#86
RecoveringYuppy Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 10,725	Originally Posted by rjh01 Only trouble is that the last time the magnetic field reversed was 800,000 years ago. So either we have learnt something or what you have linked is rubbish. http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/education/reversals.html It's referring to to the Laschamp event.

19th February 2021, 04:31 PM	#87
EHocking Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,531	Originally Posted by rjh01 Only trouble is that the last time the magnetic field reversed was 800,000 years ago. So either we have learnt something or what you have linked is rubbish. http://www.geomag.bgs.ac.uk/education/reversals.html Hopefully, “we” have learned something. Laschamp event^WP
EHocking Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,531	__________________ "A closed mouth gathers no feet" "Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke "It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite You can't make up anything anymore. The world itself is a satire. All you're doing is recording it. Art Buchwald

19th February 2021, 11:31 PM	#88
HansMustermann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 18,009	Originally Posted by Roboramma It's possible* that civilization could only arise in a world with the land mostly near one of the poles, rather than more evenly distributed north-south, and so any online discussion would take place in such a world. It's likely that the pole where most of the land was clustering would be defined as North. I don't mean this very seriously. Putting this post's chance of being at all reasonable around 5%. *because of it's effects on climate. Actually, far more than 5%, IMHO, but I would approach it from a completely different angle. Namely that, forget civilization. To have good enough conditions for very complex life, for the whole billions of years needed to evolve intelligence from scratch, you NEED a world with plate tectonics. Otherwise: A. you'll lack a magnatic field, which will <bleep> up your atmosphere and get rid of your water, and even more importantly B. a planet of sufficient size to hold on to much of an atmosphere at all, will have an active enough core. Without such tectonics it would just periodically overheat and completely melt and swallow its crust, like Venus does. You don't get to evolve to civilization stage when every few millions of years the whole planet turns into a lava pool So if you're having this discussion, it will be on a planet where the continents move around more or less randomly, depending on where those cracks formed that push them around. So no matter how that imaginary civilization names its directions on a map, let's say, flub, blub, foo and bar, chances are at any given moment they would have moved to be more mass in flub than blub, or viceversa.
	__________________ Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

19th February 2021, 11:43 PM	#89
Delvo Дэлво Δελϝο דֶלְבֹֿ देल्वो Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: North Tonawanda, NY Posts: 9,291	Without plate tectonics there'd also be no source of new rocks from which to make new soil to replace old soil once it's been damaged or washed away. (This is already a big contributor to the challenges for life in general in Australia just since it separated from the other continents.)

20th February 2021, 01:21 AM	#90
HansMustermann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 18,009	Well, that is very true, though you probably wouldn't have much soil, nor much in the way of minerals other than silica for that soil (or really for any life,) after the first time the whole planet turns into a molten ball of lava. Heavier stuff would just sink.
	__________________ Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

20th February 2021, 04:33 AM	#91
Roboramma Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shanghai Posts: 14,261	Originally Posted by HansMustermann So if you're having this discussion, it will be on a planet where the continents move around more or less randomly, depending on where those cracks formed that push them around. So no matter how that imaginary civilization names its directions on a map, let's say, flub, blub, foo and bar, chances are at any given moment they would have moved to be more mass in flub than blub, or viceversa. Absolutely, though I'm wondering how much of the time you'd get say 10% more land mass in one hemisphere than the other, and how much of the time it's more like 50% more, or 2x or 3x more, etc. What's the distribution, and where does the current situation fit on that distribution. In other words, regarding the OP, is the current situation pretty much explained by the fact that the continents move at all, or is it a pretty unlikely configuration which could be coincidence but might be worth looking for some other factor (anthropic or not) to explain it? I'm guessing the current state isn't very far from what we'd expect at random, to be honest.
	__________________ "... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together." Isaac Asimov

22nd February 2021, 08:42 PM	#92
PhantomWolf Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 20,278	It's because the South Pole is actually the top of the world and, because rock is denser than water, all the landmasses have slid down to the bottom.
	__________________ It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

22nd February 2021, 11:20 PM	#93
EHocking Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,531	Originally Posted by PhantomWolf It's because the South Pole is actually the top of the world and, because rock is denser than water, all the landmasses have slid down to the bottom. Most of the Helium reserves in the world are under the "northern" continents, so they float to the "top".
EHocking Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,531	__________________ "A closed mouth gathers no feet" "Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke "It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite You can't make up anything anymore. The world itself is a satire. All you're doing is recording it. Art Buchwald

23rd February 2021, 09:52 AM	#94
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 18,296	Because there is water on the rest of it?
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

23rd February 2021, 12:54 PM	#95
Thor 2 Philosopher Join Date: May 2016 Location: Brisbane, Aust. Posts: 6,598	Originally Posted by sphenisc Centrifugal force. The dense, heavy basaltic rocks of the sea floor are thrown outwards towards the rim, so the lighter rocks of the continental land masses float in towards the centre. The question is about the land mass being greater in the North not on the Equator.* Oh, by the way, centrifugal force does not exist. * Where centripetal acceleration is greatest.
	__________________ Thinking is a faith hazard.

23rd February 2021, 01:14 PM	#96
Steve Philosopher Join Date: May 2005 Location: Sydney Nova Scotia Posts: 8,386	Originally Posted by Hellbound The way we draw maps I have been thinking about how to say this but I would have used many more words. This makes the point succinctly. It's all really rather human-centric and arbitrary. If the first map makers lived in the southern hemisphere then "north" would be reversed 180 degrees and we would be viewing the world upside down.
	__________________ Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"

23rd February 2021, 01:33 PM	#97
erwinl Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 2,734	Originally Posted by Steve I have been thinking about how to say this but I would have used many more words. This makes the point succinctly. It's all really rather human-centric and arbitrary. If the first map makers lived in the southern hemisphere then "north" would be reversed 180 degrees and we would be viewing the world upside down. In the kings palace of Sevilla, there’s a room with a gigantic and truly magnificent map of Spain on one of the walls. Africa can be found at the top of that map, with France at the bottom.
erwinl Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 2,734	__________________ Bow before your king Member of the "Zombie Misheard Lyrics Support Group"

23rd February 2021, 01:41 PM	#98
MRC_Hans Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 23,483	Originally Posted by theprestige I still feel like you should be able to find Mt Everest or the Mariana Trench on a billiard-sized Earth by running your thumb over it. Or by licking it. Maybe. Let's hope nothing actually licks the Earth to find out. Hans
	__________________ Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills.

23rd February 2021, 01:43 PM	#99
MRC_Hans Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 23,483	Originally Posted by alfaniner What if we've had the maps upside-down all this time? The orientation of maps is entirely arbitrary. These days, the convention is that north is up, but it wasn't always so. Hans
	__________________ Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills.

23rd February 2021, 02:49 PM	#100
Captain_Swoop Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 31,870	We can measure the movement of the plates. India for example is moving north in to Asia, hence the mountains.

23rd February 2021, 04:19 PM	#101
arthwollipot Observer of Phenomena Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ngunnawal Country Posts: 70,272	At one time, maps were centred on Jerusalem.
	__________________ Please scream inside your heart.

26th February 2021, 02:55 AM	#102
Roboramma Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shanghai Posts: 14,261	To some extent I think people are missing out on what the question really is. Imagine a world in which all the land was clustered in a single continent whose coastline was all equidistant from the North Pole. There'd certainly be something odd and in need of an explanation in that case. Perturb that world a little, so that the coastline includes some irregularities, some parts a few miles further from and some parts a few miles closer to, the North Pole. Still odd, and not something you'd get from a random walk: looking at it, you'd expect some mechanism to lead to that situation. Keep perturbing it, and you end up with large peninsulas and islands coming off that continent, but again you've still got an odd situation. Eventually, when we move far enough from the perfect circle around the North Pole, we find ourselves in a situation that's easily explained as just the random movements of the continents over time. While there is some clustering in the northern hemisphere, it's still well within what you'd expect. We can also look back through time and see that the continents have moved all around the earth, so if there were any mechanism, it would have to be one that applies today but didn't apply in the past. But again, the important point is that the distribution of the continents, while it may cluster somewhat in the northern hemisphere, isn't clustering in a way that deviates far from random movement over the globe.
	__________________ "... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together." Isaac Asimov

26th February 2021, 08:58 AM	#103
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 49,589	I thought the question was how any western-educated adult in this day and age doesn't know about plate tectonics and the movement of continents over time.

26th February 2021, 09:24 AM	#104
Steve Philosopher Join Date: May 2005 Location: Sydney Nova Scotia Posts: 8,386	Originally Posted by theprestige I thought the question was how any western-educated adult in this day and age doesn't know about plate tectonics and the movement of continents over time. That, plus the alternate hypothesis that must not be ruled out: "I am guessing it is to do with how the earth spins on its axis?" Given sufficient time the earth will spin the entire land mass "up" to the north pole where it will remain for all eternity.
	__________________ Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"

26th February 2021, 01:15 PM	#105
MRC_Hans Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 23,483	Originally Posted by Steve That, plus the alternate hypothesis that must not be ruled out: "I am guessing it is to do with how the earth spins on its axis?" Given sufficient time the earth will spin the entire land mass "up" to the north pole where it will remain for all eternity. My guess is: No. Hans
	__________________ Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills.

26th February 2021, 01:27 PM	#106
Steve Philosopher Join Date: May 2005 Location: Sydney Nova Scotia Posts: 8,386	Originally Posted by MRC_Hans My guess is: No. Hans Mine too. But as a skeptic I maintain the utmost respect for the "well reasoned" thoughts of others.
	__________________ Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"