heyuhua
Registered Senior Member
Earthquakes are a movement of the earth's crust. But why, how and why do the earth's crust move? Modern science and technology, despite their persistent efforts, have an unsatisfactory outcome. Almost all viewpoints have weaknesses that can't be refuted and puzzles that can't be solved. From this point of view, the traditional understanding The traditional idea is that the crustal movement is the continuation of the earth's gravity center of gravity by the crustal material since the formation of the earth's crust. It is incompatible with the so-called plate drift, mantle heat convection, Earth rotation rate changes, ocean floor expansion and other explanations. Dark clouds, people should break through existing theories and look for new mechanisms. We find that in looking for the real causes of earthquakes, the door to higher-level physics opens.
First of all, we should be convinced that there is an insurmountable contradiction in explaining earthquakes by plate motion. The earth has been in existence for more than 4 billion years, and even horizontal motions have been consumed by strong friction. The earth's surface is a hard crust, the thinnest part of the earth's crust (such as the deepest ocean bottom) is several kilometers, and the plateau is 70 kilometers thick. With an average thickness of 33 kilometers and a hard crust enclosing the earth, there is no force source for local horizontal movement. Is it almost impossible for the two plates to suddenly move in relative motion? According to the division of plates, there is a long dividing line between the plates, and the earthquake area is not linear, and most of them are circular or radiative. If it were a plate impact, a large earthquake could extend thousands of kilometers along the plate boundary, when in fact it wasn't. We do not rule out the existence of weak conjunctions in the crust, but there is no overall lateral relative motion. In fact, it is precisely because of this horizontal relative movement that weak places can remain weak for a long time-relatively stable.
First of all, we should be convinced that there is an insurmountable contradiction in explaining earthquakes by plate motion. The earth has been in existence for more than 4 billion years, and even horizontal motions have been consumed by strong friction. The earth's surface is a hard crust, the thinnest part of the earth's crust (such as the deepest ocean bottom) is several kilometers, and the plateau is 70 kilometers thick. With an average thickness of 33 kilometers and a hard crust enclosing the earth, there is no force source for local horizontal movement. Is it almost impossible for the two plates to suddenly move in relative motion? According to the division of plates, there is a long dividing line between the plates, and the earthquake area is not linear, and most of them are circular or radiative. If it were a plate impact, a large earthquake could extend thousands of kilometers along the plate boundary, when in fact it wasn't. We do not rule out the existence of weak conjunctions in the crust, but there is no overall lateral relative motion. In fact, it is precisely because of this horizontal relative movement that weak places can remain weak for a long time-relatively stable.