[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: looking for a clear explanation of the earthquake

Now right there this doesn't make sense. The Burma plate sits between the
Indian/ Australian plate(s) and the Sunda plate in the entire region where
Sundaland allegedly moves straight south while moving straight east. What
does the Indian/ Australian plate(s) do

Move straight north.

when it gets to the Sunda plate on the other side -

Which other side?

What I want is a simple plain language explation of what these plates are,
wehre they are, and how tehy contributed to the earthquake, if they did.

I'll try to explain the big picture... in terms that look simplified but aren't because I don't know it any better.
India pushes north and squishes basically all of east and south Asia out to sea -- to the Pacific and Indian oceans. South China goes southeast, Sunda goes south and Burma goes southwest. Sunda happens to go south as precisely as India and Australia go north. Therefore a small part of the Sunda-Indian plate boundary apparently experiences (anti)parallel motion of the two plates instead of subduction. I think the earthquake happened more or less there where this strike-slip fault (in the north) has its transition to the subduction zone (in the south).

The way all my sources describe a strike/ slip fault, they are two
dimensional, and if something changes altitude, it drops.    So something
wouldn't thrust suddenly upward.

Everything's relative. One drops, or the other bounces up. Or both.

You're right, it might be true that there was more than one kind of motion
at once - though atleast analytically that is not logically possible. Two
plates cannot slide smoothly past each other and under each other.

When a plate boundary is curved enough, it can be a strike-slip fault in one place and a subduction zone (or midocean ridge) in another.