2.3: Alfred Wegener and the Theory of Plate Tectonics

If you look at a map of Earth, you may notice that some of the continents seem to fit together. An early reference to this phenomenon came from Francis Bacon in the 17th century, who noticed the similarities in the Atlantic coasts of Africa, and North and South America. This apparent fit is due to the fact the continents were once connected, and have since moved apart in what has been called continental drift. However, we now know that it is not just the continents that move, so a more correct term is plate tectonics. We can credit Alfred Wegener (Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\)) as the originator of this idea.

Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\) Prof. Dr. Alfred Wegener, ca. 1924-1930 (Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons).

 

Alfred Wegener (1880-1930) earned a PhD in astronomy at the University of Berlin in 1904, but he had always been interested in geophysics and meteorology and spent most of his academic career working in meteorology. In 1911 he happened on a scientific publication that included a description of the existence of matching Permian-aged terrestrial fossils in various parts of South America, Africa, India, Antarctica, and Australia (Figure \(\PageIndex{2}\)). Wegener concluded that this distribution of fossils could only exist if these continents were joined together. Furthermore, some of these transcontinental areas have similar fossils until around 150 million years ago, then they begin to diverge, suggesting that the areas eventually separated and speciation took different paths on the separate continents. Wegener coined the term Pangaea (“all land”) for the supercontinent from which all of the present-day continents diverged.

 

Figure \(\PageIndex{2}\) Distribution of similar fossils across the continents, suggesting they were once connected into a single supercontinent (Steven Earle, “Physical Geology”).

 

Wegener pursued his theory with determination — combing the libraries, consulting with colleagues, and making observations — looking for evidence to support it. In addition to the fit of the continents and the fossil evidence, Wegener relied heavily on matching geological patterns across oceans, such as sedimentary strata in South America matching those in Africa (Figure \(\PageIndex{3}\)), North American coalfields matching those in Europe, and the mountains of Atlantic Canada matching those of northern Britain both in morphology and rock type.

 

Figure \(\PageIndex{3}\) Matching geological formations spanning from South America to Africa (By Woudloper – Own work, [CC BY-SA 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons).

 

Wegener also referred to the evidence for the Carboniferous and Permian (~300 Ma) Karoo Glaciation in South America, Africa, India, Antarctica, and Australia (Figure \(\PageIndex{4}\)). These areas contain evidence of past glacial deposits, including glacial scars oriented away from the poles, despite the fact that some of these locations are now tropical environments. This indicates that these continents were once closer to the south pole where the glaciers could have formed. Wegener argued that this could only have happened if these continents were once all connected as a single supercontinent. He also cited evidence (based on his own astronomical observations) that showed that the continents were moving with respect to each other, and determined a separation rate between Greenland and Scandinavia of 11 m per year, although he admitted that the measurements were not accurate. In fact they weren’t even close — the separation rate is actually about 2.5 cm per year!

 

Figure \(\PageIndex{4}\) Extent of glaciation (shaded area) on Pangaea (Modified by PW from Steven Earle, “Physical Geology”).

 

Wegener first published his ideas in 1912 in a short book called Die Entstehung der Kontinente (The Origin of Continents), and then in 1915 in Die Entstehung der Kontinente und Ozeane (The Origin of Continents and Oceans). He revised this book several times up to 1929, and it was translated into French, English, Spanish, and Russian. It took 50 years for this theory to become accepted for a few reasons. First, it was a true revolution in thinking about Earth, which was difficult for many established geologists. Second, there was a political gulf between the main proponent of the theory Alfred Wegener (from Germany) and the geological establishment of the day, which was mostly centered in Britain and the United States. Third, the evidence and understanding of Earth that would have supported plate tectonic theory simply didn’t exist until the middle of the 20th century. Wegener could not conceive of a good mechanism for moving the continents around. Wegener proposed that the continents were like icebergs floating on heavier crust, but the only forces that he could invoke to propel continents around were poleflucht, the effect of Earth’s rotation pushing objects toward the equator, and the lunar and solar tidal forces, which tend to push objects toward the west. It was quickly shown that these forces were far too weak to move continents. 

Alfred Wegener died in Greenland in 1930 while carrying out studies related to glaciation and climate. At the time of his death, his ideas were tentatively accepted by only a small minority of geologists, and soundly rejected by most. However, within a few decades that was all to change.

 

Mechanisms for Plate Motion

One of the reasons that Wegener’s ideas of continental drift were initially rejected by the scientific community was that he could not provide a plausible mechanism for plate motion. However, with all that we have learned about the processes occurring in the Earth’s interior since then, there is still some debate about the actual forces that make the plates move. One side in the argument holds that the plates are only moved by the traction caused by mantle convection. The other side holds that traction plays only a minor role and that two other forces, ridge push and slab pull, are more important. Some argue that the real answer lies somewhere in between.

To understand mantle convection, imagine a pot of water on a hot stove. The water at the bottom of the pot near the heat source becomes hot and expands, making it lighter (less dense) than the water above. The hot, low density water rises, and cooler, denser water sinks and flows in from the sides. This water then gets heated and rises, and the cycle continues. This creates a circular pattern of rising and sinking water called a convection cell. (To test this, try sprinkling a few flakes of spice in the center of a rapidly boiling pot of water. The flakes will move outwards to the edge of the pot as warmer water rises and pushes them aside).

Heat is continuously flowing outward from Earth’s interior, and the transfer of heat from the core to the mantle causes convection in the mantle (Figure \(\PageIndex{5}\)). Even though the mantle material is essentially solid rock, it is sufficiently plastic (fluid) to slowly flow (at rates of centimeters per year) as long as a steady force is applied to it. This convection is a driving force for the movement of tectonic plates, as the horizontal movements of mantle under the crust drag the plates with them. At places where convection currents in the mantle are moving upward, new lithosphere forms and the plates move apart (diverge). Where two plates are converging (and the convective flow is downward), one plate will be subducted (pushed down) into the mantle beneath the other.

 

Figure \(\PageIndex{5}\) Convection cells in the mantle (By Surachit [GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html) or CC BY-SA 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons).

 

The ridge push/slab pull model also relies on mantle convection, but in this case it is not simply the traction from the convection cell that moves the plates. In this model, plates move through a combination of pull from the weight of the subducting edge of the plates, and through the outward pushing of an ocean ridge where magma is rising and forming new crust (Figure \(\PageIndex{7}\)).

 

Figure \(\PageIndex{7}\) Models for plate motion mechanisms (Steven Earle, “Physical Geology”).

 

Some compelling arguments in favor of the ridge-push/slab-pull model are as follows: (a) plates that are attached to subducting slabs (e.g., Pacific, Australian, and Nazca Plates) move the fastest, and plates that are not (e.g., North American, South American, Eurasian, and African Plates) move significantly slower; (b) in order for the traction model to apply, the mantle would have to be moving about five times faster than the plates are moving (because the coupling between the partially liquid asthenosphere and the plates is not strong), and such high rates of convection are not supported by geophysical models; and (c) although large plates have potential for much higher convection traction, plate velocity is not related to plate area. Although ridge-push/slab-pull is the favored mechanism for plate motion, it’s important not to underestimate the role of mantle convection. Without convection, there would be no ridges to push from because upward convection brings hot buoyant rock to surface. Furthermore, many plates, including our own North American Plate, move along nicely — albeit slowly — without any slab-pull happening.

 

Plates and Plate Motions

The idea of plate tectonics became widely accepted around 1965 as more and more geologists started thinking in these terms. By the end of 1967, Earth’s surface had been mapped into a series of plates (Figure \(\PageIndex{8}\)). The major plates are Eurasia, Pacific, India, Australia, North America, South America, Africa, and Antarctic. There are also numerous small plates (e.g., Juan de Fuca, Nazca, Scotia, Philippine, Caribbean), and many very small plates or sub-plates. For example the Juan de Fuca Plate is actually three separate plates (Gorda, Juan de Fuca, and Explorer) that all move in the same general direction but at slightly different rates.

The fact that the plates include both crustal material and lithospheric mantle material makes it possible for a single plate to be made up of both oceanic and continental crust. For example, the North American Plate includes most of North America, plus half of the northern Atlantic Ocean. Similarly the South American Plate extends across the western part of the southern Atlantic Ocean, while the European and African plates each include part of the eastern Atlantic Ocean. The Pacific Plate is almost entirely oceanic, but it does include the part of California west of the San Andreas Fault.

Rates of motions of the major plates range from less than 1 cm/year to over 10 cm/year (for comparison, human fingernails grow at around 6 cm/year). The Pacific Plate is the fastest at over 10 cm/year in some areas, followed by the Australian and Nazca Plates. The North American Plate is one of the slowest, averaging around 1 cm/year in the south up to almost 4 cm/year in the north. Plates move as rigid bodies, so it may seem surprising that the North American Plate can be moving at different rates in different places. The explanation is that plates move in a rotational manner. The North American Plate, for example, rotates counter-clockwise; the Eurasian Plate rotates clockwise.

 

Figure \(\PageIndex{8}\) The major lithospheric plates of Earth. Arrows indicate direction of plate movement, and the length of the arrows represent the speed of plate motion (Steven Earle, “Physical Geology”).

 

As originally described by Wegener in 1915, the present continents were once all part of the supercontinent Pangaea. More recent studies of continental match-ups and the magnetic ages of ocean-floor rocks have enabled us to reconstruct the history of the break-up of Pangaea.

Pangaea began to rift apart along a line between Africa and Asia and between North America and South America at around 200 Ma (Figure \(\PageIndex{9}\)). During the same period, the Atlantic Ocean began to open up between northern Africa and North America, and India broke away from Antarctica. At this stage, Pangaea was divided into Laurasia (now Europe, Asia and North America) and Gondwanaland (the southern continents; South America, Africa, India, Australia, and Antarctica). Between 200 and 150 Ma, rifting started between South America and Africa and between North America and Europe, and India separated from Antarctica and moved north toward Asia. By 80 Ma, Africa had separated from South America, and most of Europe had separated from North America. By 50 Ma, Australia had separated from Antarctica, and shortly after that, India collided with Asia.

 

Figure \(\PageIndex{9}\) Movement of the continents over the past 225 million years (USGS, https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/dynamic/historical.html).

 

Within the past few million years, rifting has taken place in the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea, and also within the Gulf of California. Incipient rifting has begun along the Great Rift Valley of eastern Africa, extending from Ethiopia and Djibouti on the Gulf of Aden (Red Sea) all the way south to Malawi.

Over the next 50 million years, it is likely that there will be full development of the east African rift and creation of new ocean floor. Eventually Africa will split apart. There will also be continued northerly movement of Australia and Indonesia. The western part of California (including Los Angeles and part of San Francisco) will split away from the rest of North America, and eventually sail right by the west coast of Vancouver Island, en route to Alaska. Because the oceanic crust formed by spreading on the mid-Atlantic ridge is not currently being subducted (except in the Caribbean), the Atlantic Ocean is slowly getting bigger, and the Pacific Ocean is getting smaller. If this continues without changing for another couple hundred million years, we will be back to where we started, with one supercontinent.

Pangaea, which existed from about 350 to 200 Ma, was not the first supercontinent. In 1966, Tuzo Wilson proposed that there has been a continuous series of cycles of continental rifting and collision; that is, break-up of supercontinents, drifting, collision, and formation of other supercontinents. Pangaea was preceded by Pannotia (600 to 540 Ma), by Rodinia (1,100 to 750 Ma), and by other supercontinents before that.

With all of these plates constantly on the move, they inevitably end up interacting with each other at their plate boundaries. Plates can interact in three ways: they can move apart (divergent boundary), they can move towards each other (convergent boundary), or they can slide past each other (transform boundary). The following sections will examine each of these types of plate boundaries, and the geological features they create.

 

---

 

*”Physical Geology” by Steven Earle used under a CC-BY 4.0 international license. Download this book for free at http://open.bccampus.ca