Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (182272)	2/21/2006 9:08:16 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Also, subduction is a zero frequency system. It doesn't have a frequency. Frequencies are to do with oscillating systems. Subduction has a frequency like rivers. Some flow quickly, carrying huge mass. Some flow slowly carrying huge mass. Some are trickles carrying nothing. Or trickles which carry lots [sometimes]. Visit the Sierra Nevada mountains in CA. Thats called uplift. Subduction and uplift are two sides of the same coin. The world is a nice round ball. If parts of it are sinking inward, other parts have to be popping outward. The materials are pretty incompressible. I'd perhaps agree with you if there is a long term trend of surface roughness decreasing, so that the whole globe ends up under water, but I have not heard of such. I myself live on top of 3-4 miles of basalt spewed out only 15Mya. Relatively short in geologic time. AFAIK, we don't know if and when another spasm of volcanism is going to contort the planet. Yellowstone, for example as exploded with some regularity and is approximately due again. Exciting times indeed. BTW, pretty much any spacial or temporal object can be described in terms of frequency, one Messr Fourier wrote the cannonical treatise on the subject. It need not look anything like a sinewave to your eyes. I neglected also to inform you the linear systems are not of course those described by strictly linear equations. Differential equations (hence integrals and derivatives in abundance) are the normal manner. In a simplified sense, linear systems are ones which respond sinusoidally if driven sinusoidally at with the same frequency. You might recall that the derivative (or integral) of a sinusoid is also a sinusoid of the same frequency. So a big swath of dynamic systems with all sorts of feedback are linear systems. There is a branch of control theory that examines the problem of a black box with inputs and outputs, but you don't know what is inside. If you can control the inputs, and look at the outputs, under nice conditions, you can describe precisly what is in the black box from a dynamical standpoint, if the system has the property of being "observable". However, sometimes you can't control the inputs, only observe them. As long as a reasonable frequency rich input stream is observed over time, you will be able to fully characterise the box. Thats what I was reacting to in your theory. The input to the 2'nd box is the output of plate tectonics, which is very frequency poor (its is nearly DC). So consequently, the dynamics of the 2'nd box are never revealed by that source (we say they are never excited). Now it is possible they might be excited by some other source, which would allow you to make some claims. But not IMO, from plate tectonics.