Skip to main content

How does magnetic reversal prove seafloor spreading?

Seafloor spreading is a process that occurs at mid-ocean ridges. These ridges mark the boundaries between two plates that are diverging, or moving away from one another. As the plates move apart, the crust is stressed and weakened. This allows magma from under the surface to break up through the crust, coming out and creating new sea floor. The plates move apart, carrying the “new” sea floor with it. The idea that this happens was proposed in the 1960s.


At first, seafloor spreading was not proven. However, magnetic reversals have now proven it. Magnetic reversals occur every so often. When they happen, the Earth’s magnetic field reverses its polarity. In other words, north becomes south and south becomes north. Magnetic reversal proves seafloor spreading because we can see the polarity of the Earth’s magnetic field in rocks. As magma cools, particles in it get “frozen” in the direction of the magnetic field. By looking at these particles, scientists can see the polarity of the magnetic field at the time the rocks were created.


If seafloor spreading actually happens, we would expect rocks farthest away from the mid-ocean ridge to be the oldest and we would expect the rocks to get progressively younger as we approach the ridge. Magnetic reversals help to prove this because scientists know when the reversals happened. As you can see in the link below, scientists have found bands of rock with different polarity on either side of mid-ocean ridges. This proves that these bands of rock were laid down at different times. The magnetic evidence shows that the oldest rocks are far away from the ridge and the newest rocks are closest. This is powerful evidence that seafloor spreading does in fact occur.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more