It has also been proved that the plates float on molten rock, not water.Ã‚Â It has always been possible. The plate theory predicts it.
The whole point of my original post was to show that there is an "ocean" , or "vast water reservoir" under Asia. I have no presuppositions towards tectonic theory.
I believe the attenuations in the seismic waves show water. And that the interpretation put upon the evidence by Wysesson is complete hogwash.
Hydrated silicate minerals are never mentioned .You made that one up. Water molecules between crystalline sheets are never mentioned. You made that one up too. Where you get the sentence Ã¢â‚¬Å“Groundwater is not going to flow freely between those sheets because it at a molecular levelÃ¢â‚¬Â only you would know. Did you read the article?
YoungDavid, before you try to get smart, YOU should read the article1.Ã¢â‚¬Å“The water molecules are actually stuck in the mineral structure of the rock,Ã¢â‚¬Â Wysession explained.
and2. "the composition of some ocean floor rocks is up to 15 percent water."
Where else is the water going to be if it is not in the minerals?
There are many hydrated minerals. You might also know that silicate minerals are the majority of the earth's crust. So you won't think I made it up Young David. "...some geologists estimate that 90% of the Earth's crust is made up of silicates."Source
and..."In this subclass[phyllosilicates], rings of tetrahedrons are linked by shared oxygens to other rings in a two dimensional plane that produces a sheet-like structure. Typically, the sheets are then connected to each other by layers of cations. These cation layers are weakly bonded and often have water molecules and other neutral atoms or molecules trapped between the sheets."Source
I think that water molecules "trapped between the sheets" of silicates would be water at molecular level to answer your question about the groundwater. It wouldn't be flowing freely. It's a regular rock.
Scientists have found evidence of a vast water reservoir...It certainly does not say it found an ocean.
Exactly. Nowhere in this article is it mentioned that these rocks attenuate the seismic measurements.
You are completely wrong. "They noticed a region beneath Asia where seismic waves appeared to dampen, or 'attenuate,' and also slow down slightly. 'Water slows the speed of waves a little,' Wysession explained. 'Lots of damping and a little slowing match the predictions for water very well.'
The cold slab of oceanic crust containing water mentioned originally does. This oceanic rock attenuates seismic waves, heats up (and attenuates seismic waves) then and looses its water. The water moves into the overlying region, which becomes saturated with water.
That is a complete interpretation of the evidence--not the evidence. He goes on further to say...The water then rises up into the overlying region, which becomes saturated with water [image]. Ã¢â‚¬Å“It would still look like solid rock to you,Ã¢â‚¬Â Wysession told LiveScience. Ã¢â‚¬Å“You would have to put it in the lab to find the water in it.Ã¢â‚¬Â
Complete hogwash!! He's saying water is going to saturate rock. ROCK IS A CRYSTALLIZED SOLID, NOT LOOSE SEDIMENT.
When Wysesson says the water is stuck in the minerals of the rocks and it's still going to look like solid rock to you--he is speaking of hydrated minerals in the rock. It can also be said there are microscopic cracks in rocks. But that is not going to dampen the seismic waves like water will. So is it water or is it rock Mr. Wysesson? Please do not con us with your little mineralogy lesson.