JURASSIC ARK – ROCK LAYERS FORM FAST – LINEAR STRATA MACHINE REPORT 10 © Copyright John Mackay 21st January 2022.
CHIASTIC FLOW EXPERIMENT 1 c) 5/2/22
Explanatory text and pictures below slide show.
CHIASTIC LAMINAR FLOW
By John Mackay c) 5/2/22
Any comments, criticism, welcome to firstname.lastname@example.org.
THE ROLE OF THE NEWLY DISCOVERED CHIASTIC LAMINAR FLOW IN THE FORMATION OF SIMULTANEOUS MULTIDIRECTIONAL LAYERING WTHIN STRATA FORMATION PRODUCED BY A MOVING BODY OF WATER.
PHOTOGRAHIC RECORD of my experiment in our flume tank Friday 14th January 2022, at Bells Bridge Queensland Australia.
- TEST SAMPLES
- SECOND SET OF TESTS.
- A) BACKGROUND HISTORY ON THE NECESSITY FOR THESE TESTS.
Since the 1600’s the art of reading rock layers has been governed by the 3 principles of Nicholas Steno (1638-1686). His concepts are used to interpret the order in which rock layers have been deposited, as well as the physical and biological history associated with the layers.
Steno’s principles are known as 1) the law of original horizontality, 2 the law of superposition, and 3) the law of lateral continuity.
- Original Horizontality – all sedimentary layers/strata were deposited in the horizontal position, therefore if a set of strata are found at an angle to the horizon, it is assumed they have been tilted from their original position.
- Superposition – the layers at the bottom were laid down first.
- Lateral continuity – all parts of a continuous layer have been deposited at a similar time and such strata originally extended in all directions until they thinned to zero or terminated against the edges of their original basin of deposition.
It is necessary to note that none of these three principles (now commonly labelled laws) were based on experimental confirmation by Steno, so they are more correctly (though unpopularly) labelled as the Presuppositions of Nicholas Steno.
- To the above three a fourth principle was added by Scottish Geologist James Hutton (1726 – 1797). Now known as ‘The law of cross cutting relations’, Hutton’s principle argues that any layer which cuts across another must have been formed after the layer which has been ‘cut through’.
- By the early 1800’s a fifthprinciple had been added which is known as ‘The law of faunal succession’, dealing with the biological history of the strata such that any creatures found as fossils in a layer lived, died and were buried before any fossil creatures contained in the layers above.
- This fifth principal led to the extensions popularized by Charles Lyell (1797- 1875) that rock layers are a history of life on earth, which in turn led to Charles Darwin’s adaptation that any differences in creatures within the layers are best explained by the theory of ‘The evolution of species’ (1859). This led to two further extensions by Lyell that a) since evolution is a long slow process, therefore the differences in either a) the number of separate fossil species, or b) within a fossil species through the strata, equates to a real-time difference between separate strata, so c) therefore strata can be categorized/named and dated by the percentage difference in fossil content.
It is worth noting at this point that almost two hundred years earlier (1691), the UK Scientist John Ray pointed out that if Steno was right the world was far older than the then accepted Biblical record allowed. History has confirmed that Ray’s predicted ‘old earth’ consequence based on Steno’s presuppositions has certainly been the result. It should therefore come as no surprise that the 3 original principles of Steno, as well as Lyell and Darwin’s logical extensions of Stenos ‘laws’ have become ‘embedded in stone’ and are used by most geologists without question. Since they are perceived as factually true and self-evident, they are neither tested nor challenged from High School to Post Grad geology and any suggestion they need testing is often met with much resistance. But since first principles should never be assumed without verification, let us open this can of worms with some repeatable experimentation, which continues my research into the existence of laminar flow in water and its influence on strata deposition which I began in 2016.
All results from 2016 to the present (reports 1-9) have been filed in picture form with explanatory text on https://creationresearch.net/exciting-research/rock-layers-form-fast-updates/strata-machine-report-1-sideways-strata/
My original motivation for this research goes back to my university Geology student days under Professor Allan Wilson (Uni Qld) who commented once and once only, that the Grand Canyon strata got old sideways then never commented upon nor explained his comment in the next 4 years I was there. Motivation 2 was a German University Librarian who introduced me to translations of the research on the sediments of Venice in the 1800s, by Johannes Walther 1893-1894. See Einleitung in die Geologie als historische Wissens- chaft, Jena, Verlag von Gustav Fisher, Sud. 1 055 pages). As to why most never hear about Walther’s work see ‘Johannes Walther’s law of the correlation of facies ‘ by Gerard V Middleton – Geological Society of America Bulletin, 1973 – 1973 – pubs.geoscienceworld.org
French Sedimentologist Guy Bertault’s work has obviously similarities to my own and acknowledgement is given where required, though his aims and end points differ.
To run this series of tests I have upgraded our original Flume Machines (Mark 1-11 2016-2021), to Mark 12. Machine number 11 was destroyed by a violent storm – outdoor Aussie research can be a trifle expensive.
B AIM OF MY INVESTIGATIONS
All flume versions, number 12 included, have been designed to investigate the role of differing parameters; eg sediment load, the influence of variables such as width, breath, length of flume, and the role of water velocity etc on strata formation. As previously discovered, the only significant factor continues to be the almost ignored property of flowing water in that it possesses laminar structure prior to sediment being added. Our new strata machine 12 was given its first test Friday 14th January 2022, at Jurassic Ark Australia. For the first time a new flow phenomenon was observed, consisting of separate laminar flows moving through each other at different angles which I have labelled CHIASTIC (crossed over) LAMINAR (layered) FLOW (movement). In the photos below the Intersecting laminar flows are marked with white dotted lines.
All criticisms or suggestions welcome.
- C) METHODOLOGY
Sediment rich water was pumped in from right to left maintaining a constant flow via the venturi pump. Sediment was added evenly to the water flow via the same venturi mechanism and monitored by the controller (Clem Grieger). Excess water was recycled back though the same venturi.
Previous tests on all my 11 flumes have consistently shown that results are not dependent on the physical dimensions of the flume as neither width nor height nor length of the flume have shown any major influence. The key factor has always been the properties of flowing water.
For the next step in the experiment we have concentrated on the ‘organically stained’ water (at the left end of 3 below) which travelled just ahead of the main sediment load. The water colour seems to have staining due to the build-up of microscopic orange algae in our dam water supply during the recent drought.
A photographic record of this is below. The results are consistent with all previous experiments, and again show laminar flow exists within the water before it deposits sediment. To make laminations within the flow more visible I have overlaid the photographs 4-7 with white trace marks showing direction of laminar flow.
We are satisfied that the experiment again demonstrates the existence of laminations within the water, but in addition we observed another phenomenon for the first time. What appears to be multiple laminations were observed moving in discrete and varied directions. In addition, such discrete laminar flows seemed to show an ability to move through other laminar flows moving in a different direction without disruption in many cases.
The two pictures below show the brand new Perspex Flume walls taken immediately after the experiment to eliminate the contention that scratches on the Perspex were being photographed.
- D) CONCLUSION
These results again seem to support my original contention that sedimentary deposition is a consequence of the pre-existing property of laminar flow that already exists within a moving body of water. Thus, sinking sediment is not the cause of the majority sedimentary layering, therefore I suggest Steno’s 3 principles at best apply to standing water only and not to sediment deposited by water in motion, so the 3 principles should be replaced with the following:
ORIGINAL HORIZONTALITY should be replaced with the term Original Emplacement defined as ‘Sedimentary Strata deposited by a moving current will be laid down parallel to the main direction of laminar flow within the moving water and will only parallel the horizon if the flow parallels the horizon.
Since the flow direction of the water laminae determines the angle of the strata to the horizontal, it can therefore be any angle to the horizon. As a result the angle of settling via a moving current is not governed by the ‘exposed slope factor’ of Stenos maximum angle of deposition.
However when a flow or flows occur within the bulk of a moving sedimentary mass, the particles of differing mass will move at differing rates along and within the enclosing flow, which may also result in multiple and simultaneous directions of intersecting bedding as seen in our experiments. We have defined this phenomenon as CHIASTIC LAMINATION.
SUPERPOSITION should be replaced with:
‘Chronology of Deposition’ defined as; “Sedimentary sequencing will be related to the direction of the flow and is therefore linear not vertical, commencing at the source and finishing at the terminal end of the flow. Ageing will therefore be along the bed and not through the sequence from bottom to top.
LATERAL CONTINUITY needs to be redefined as: ‘Whilst a bed may be laterally consistent in space across a basin, it will not necessarily be laterally consistent in time.
A NEW PRINCIPAL IS NEEDED which I will call Deltaic Flow which should state that ‘All flows whether confined within liquid boundaries or by solid boundaries, will behave as deltaic flows’ .. SEE ALSO Guy Bertault’s work.
Thus the interpretation of the order of strata deposition will be largely determined by the direction of flow with the consequent sequence-time of deposition in any basin being mostly lateral, not vertical.
Therefore, the distribution of fossils contained within a stratigraphic series will be the result of whatever fossil mixes were accumulated at the source of the different laminar flows carrying the sediment.
This concept of Deltaic Flow within either liquid or solid boundaries predicates that most fossil beds will therefore appear to be mixed environments, rather than buried ecosystems, which is the commonly ignored norm in observation of geological strata.
Consequently since the strata in reality ‘age’ horizontally along the bed and not vertically up through the bed, the fossils in the top sequence at the start of a flow may actually be older than fossils in the bottom layer at the terminal end of the flow.
Plus all fossils in a stratified formation could be deposited in the same flow event.
THEREFORE FAUNAL SUCCESSION, being totally dependent on Steno’s principle of Superposition which led to the concept that the fossils in the bottom layer lived, died and were buried before creatures in the next layer which then led to treating the cumulative strata as an ascending column through deep time, which next led to Darwin’s Theory, all now collapse like a house of cards, and Faunal Succession and evolutionary transition exist only in the minds of palaeontologists.
FURTHERMORE the results of these experiments add support to my contention that for sedimentation the ‘key issue is process not time!’
- TEST SAMPLES
Real-world examples of geological strata are shown below asking the questions a) can the results of our experimental phenomenon be observed in the real world? , and b) are Stenos 3 principles helpful in explaining these or does Chiastic Laminar Flow work better.
Photos above shows specimen of Jurassic Picture Sandstone Utah USA by Joseph Hubbard from his own collection.
Photo below is of Sandstone from near Bondi NSW and is c) Evelyn Mervine email@example.com
Are Stenos 3 principles helpful in explaining the picture below or does Chiastic Laminar Flow work better?
Now try your hand at explaining sedimentary structures below ..Steno ..Chiastic Flow.. other.. mysterious?
Experiment Team: Flume Design John Mackay, Flume construction Roger Medland, Venturi pump design Clem Grieger, pump 3D printing Selwyn Grieger, Photography John Mackay, Jurassic Ark Curator Daryl Brenton.
Constructive Criticism welcome. Address to Jbmackay@live.com.au
YOUR FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF OUR RESEARCH IS GREATLY APPRECIATED. GIVE VIA PAYPAL, PIN PAYMENTS OR BANK TRANSFER (tax deductible USA and UK) DONATE NOW