My Mountains Have Fallen and They Can't Get Up

[Juggernaut1981]

Okay, from what you've drawn... (and my moderately better than high-school understanding of the vagaries of plate techtonics)
I'd expect to see a chain of islands potentially occuring between A & B.
B, C & H should be creating some SERIOUSLY tall mountains.
There will be limited mountains between B & D (they're passing plates)
F & I might actually be one plate (they're basically moving together)
F & G won't be likely to have mountains between them.

[2cents] My thoughts...
I would merge F, G & I into one plate subducting under D & H.
I'd probably have E crashing a little harder into D.
[/2cents]
Seems good, but hey feel free to adjust my ideas to better suit yours.

[Hawksguard]

1. Are plates moving away from each other more likely to have volcanic activity? Thinking this was the case I did not place Hot Spots along plates G & I, G & J, and H & K.
2. You refer to F & I and H & L, but I don't have any mountains there. Could you mean the mountains along the sea between D, G, and H? Those are remnants of prior collisions. The mountains in the interior are mega-ancient (to coin a term) and are not affected by current tectonic conditions.

1. Hmm. Good question. Based on what we see on Earth at diverging plate boundaries, I don't think you are generally going to get the kind of explosive "disaster movie" type volcanism you see from volcanos created in subduction zones like around the Pacific Ring of Fire. But then the mid-Atlantic Ridge, where the North & South American plates are moving away from the Eurasian & African plates, is the longest mountain chain in the world. When measured from the sea floor base, the ridge rises some 15,000 feet. But it's hard to be impressed by mountains (or volcanos) that are mostly hidden beneath another 8,000 feet of water.

And again, as far as the hotspots go, you can really put them anywhere, they don't need to be near plate boundaries.

2. I think I lost my train of thought briefly when I was taking about your plates and just got focused on what direction they were going. I was comparing the three sets because the pairs were moving in unison but, as you say, there weren't any mountains between two of the pairs, as there right oughtn't to have been. So, Kudos for you. My bad for the confusion. /smack

B, C & H coming together should develop a very high mountain range. However, since all you're dealing with here is continental crust (not as dense or high in water content as oceanic crust), there probably won't be a lot of volcanos, just really really huge mountains (like the Himalayas). If volcanos are a must-have you could stick a deep inland sea in there somewhere next to where the mountains are forming, it being the last remnant of some ancient ocean soon to disappear forever (like the Mediterranean).

[Porklet]

1. Hmm. Good question. Based on what we see on Earth at diverging plate boundaries, I don't think you are generally going to get the kind of explosive "disaster movie" type volcanism you see from volcanos created in subduction zones like around the Pacific Ring of Fire. But then the mid-Atlantic Ridge, where the North & South American plates are moving away from the Eurasian & African plates, is the longest mountain chain in the world. When measured from the sea floor base, the ridge rises some 15,000 feet. But it's hard to be impressed by mountains (or volcanos) that are mostly hidden beneath another 8,000 feet of water.

And again, as far as the hotspots go, you can really put them anywhere, they don't need to be near plate boundaries.

2. I think I lost my train of thought briefly when I was taking about your plates and just got focused on what direction they were going. I was comparing the three sets because the pairs were moving in unison but, as you say, there weren't any mountains between two of the pairs, as there right oughtn't to have been. So, Kudos for you. My bad for the confusion. /smack

B, C & H coming together should develop a very high mountain range. However, since all you're dealing with here is continental crust (not as dense or high in water content as oceanic crust), there probably won't be a lot of volcanos, just really really huge mountains (like the Himalayas). If volcanos are a must-have you could stick a deep inland sea in there somewhere next to where the mountains are forming, it being the last remnant of some ancient ocean soon to disappear forever (like the Mediterranean).

Cool. Cool. Cool. I don't need volcanoes along the plates I mentioned. The islands along those seams resemble the types of island chains you might get from vulcanism, but they don't necessarily need them.

I hadn't given much thought to volcanoes along the massive wall of mountains between B, C, & H, but the idea of an inland sea is intriguing. When I decided to recreate the map I almost doubled it's size, and that left a lot of new area to fill. That is a phenomena I was unfamiliar with, thanks.

Just one more quick question. When I look at how D and F collided with B and G to form the mountains along the straits in the west it seems that they don't match up to well. I was thinking of eliminating the mountains on B and D (or converting them to ranges of a more ancient origin), and making the ranges on D, F, and G fit together better. Or do you think the passage of time and several course changes between the four plates could account for that configuration of mountain ranges? I have included the map below for your convenience.

Edit: Removed map, see post below.

[Porklet]

Okay, from what you've drawn... (and my moderately better than high-school understanding of the vagaries of plate techtonics)
I'd expect to see a chain of islands potentially occuring between A & B.
B, C & H should be creating some SERIOUSLY tall mountains.
There will be limited mountains between B & D (they're passing plates)
F & I might actually be one plate (they're basically moving together)
F & G won't be likely to have mountains between them.

[2cents] My thoughts...
I would merge F, G & I into one plate subducting under D & H.
I'd probably have E crashing a little harder into D.
[/2cents]
Seems good, but hey feel free to adjust my ideas to better suit yours.

When you're in the dark there is no such thing as bad feedback, thanks.

There is an island chain between A & B. You just can't see it, because of my massive red pen stroke when drawing the plate borders.

The mountains between B, C, & H are the home of the gods. The actual home of the gods. No beast or man or man-beast could ever survive there. That's the working theory for the moment, although it isn't final. At least in religious terms it will be considered the home of the gods by some (if not actually). I am going to stop before I confuse myself, again. Aside from that, I want it to be a massive physical and cultural barrier. Mission Accomplished.

The ranges between B & D are the result of previous collision (along with F & G). They are not colliding anymore, but the ranges remain. I am toying with removing some ranges and making them fit better. See my reply above to Hawksguard for more details, if you want.

I am not opposed to combining F & I. Whatever the case I need to fix the border between F & G and remove that concave portion. I don't think a plate of that shape could exist. I might be wrong. I'll toy around with it when I fix F.

Noted above, F & G were once colliding (along with B & D). They have since divorced, and they have joint custody of the kids, er, mountain ranges. F & D were colliding together with at least G (if not B & G); in theory.

I need the mountains along G (created by previous collision with F). If I combine F, G, and I...I won't get the mountains there that I want. The problem is I am reverse engineering the plate tectonics to match a mountain configuration that was already in place. I have made significant changes already, but I don't want to sacrifice too much of the original.

You are absolutely right about D and E. The original design of the land mass on D was basically a circle of mountains (not really but close enough to be impossible under natural law). I wanted mountains along as many sides as possible there. I can't believe I missed that opportunity. Thanks. I'll repost a fix below. Thanks again, again.

[Porklet]

I have included the fixes that I noted earlier. I straightened out the border between F and G. I included another range between D and E. I made the ranges bordering B and D more ancient, or ancienter. I also filled out the ranges along D, F, and G so that fit together better. Let me know what you think.

As a side note, the Hot Spot in the bottom left hand corner (the smaller one) was once the site of a massive volcanic eruption, similar to Krakatoa. It destroyed the civilization that was centered there centuries ago. It created a mini-ice age similar to the one we experienced around a 1,000 years ago. My question is, what would a massive volcanic eruption do to the surrounding islands and major land masses? Tidal waves? Accompanying earthquakes? I am curious to know.

I could not get the image uploaded. I will try again soon.

[Porklet]

Here is the image. It would not let me insert it online, for whatever reason. Sorry about that.

New World Tectonics.jpg

[Hawksguard]

As a side note, the Hot Spot in the bottom left hand corner (the smaller one) was once the site of a massive volcanic eruption, similar to Krakatoa. It destroyed the civilization that was centered there centuries ago. It created a mini-ice age similar to the one we experienced around a 1,000 years ago. My question is, what would a massive volcanic eruption do to the surrounding islands and major land masses? Tidal waves? Accompanying earthquakes? I am curious to know.

The extent of physical damage that volcanos are capable of causing depends entirely on its Volcanic Explosivity Index. For most volcanic eruptions in recent history, the primary damage tends to be fairly localized. Of course secondary effects like tidal waves can have serious consequences for population centers far from the actual volcano itself, and things like increased sulfur dioxide in the atmosphere can lead to drops in global temperature.

Your Krakatoa comparison might be a bit weak if you want to induce a mini-ice age. Krakatoa was capable of lowering global temperatures from its eruption, but it only lasted a few years, and not with particularly drastic results. The Krakatoa eruption was a VEI 6. The Tambora supervolcano eruption (VEI 7) was responsible for the "year without a summer" in the Northern Hemisphere in 1815, kicked off a typhoid epidemic in Europe that lasted until the end of the decade, and killed the Indian monsoon season three years running resulting in widespread famine and outbreaks of cholera.

The next order of magnitude up from that would be VEI 8, something like a Yellowstone Caldera supervolcanic eruption, which could bury the western half of North America in inches to feet of ash. You'd have widespread famine, outbreaks of disease, and lowered global temperatures for an extended period resulting in widespread crop failure, desertification, and quite possibly a crippling of political and economic infrastructure. If it were on an island in deep waters, you'd also get huge tsunamis (perhaps megatsunamis).

[Hawksguard]

And I forgot to mention, your most recent map is looking good. Nothing huge that jumped out at me that needed an overhaul. I'd stick it in the "entirely plausible" category.

[Porklet]

And I forgot to mention, your most recent map is looking good. Nothing huge that jumped out at me that needed an overhaul. I'd stick it in the "entirely plausible" category.

I don't necessarily need a mini-ice age. I figured an explosion massive enough to bury a, albeit small, civilization might have wide ranging effects. As long as the Acrilotian people are scattered throughout the southern seas as a result of the eruption I am satisfied. I'll toy around with the global effects, if any, later. I saved your VEI post in Notepad for future reference. You've been very helpful.
Entirely Plausible is absolutely acceptable to me. Consider yourself thanked and Repped.

You wouldn't happen to be a climatologist, would you? Just kidding.

EDIT: Forgot Something

[Hawksguard]

You've been very helpful.
Entirely Plausible is absolutely acceptable to me. Consider yourself thanked and Repped.

You wouldn't happen to be a climatologist, would you? Just kidding.

You're most welcome, I am glad to be of help. And no, hehe, I'm not a climatologist. I do have a rather intense fascination with the forces of nature and have an insatiable curiosity in understanding "how stuff works," so I'm always looking for new things to learn and how to apply them to my creations. Map making, even the fantastical variety, for me is as much about history, and economics, and politics, and geology, and climatology as it is about geography.