Acme

I believe what you are seeing in that image is this area looks to be limestone or similar soluble rock and this feature is the result of the underlying limestone slowly subsiding and creating a depression that collected water.

 

...

Except that it is not a depression. Go to Imatfaal's post #2, follow his directions, and see this is a hill. Result attached. (Nice tip Imatfaal!)

That equation does have constants; they are all 1.

My bad; I meant to say the coefficients are all 1.

Well, they aren't necessarily constant with respect to the variable you're solving for, you can't always just pretend variables as constants, so it may be okay to always use the quadratic formula in that manner, or there may be exceptions in which case there is no garuntee the formula works. If the intermediate algebra allows for the separation of variables, then it would be valid, but if there is no known method of separating the variables but still pretend the variables are constants to loophole the problem, you will find your solution is completely invalid.

Variables -by definition- can vary in their values. Constants -by definition- do not vary in their value. One cannot 'just pretend variables as constants'. Oh... but you're loop holing it, so it makes perfect sense.

I want to use a quadratic equation that uses not constants, but variables, like 0=xz^2+yz+w. Does the regular formula work for that?

That equation does have constants; they are all 1.

While reading through several articles I seem to have confused the aeolian ripples with the Giant Current Ripples created during the Missoula Floods.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_current_ripples

10-4. You can't be any more confused than I. I like big rocks and I can not lie...

Thanks!

In the article you linked it mentions that "In reverse or inverse grading the bed coarsens upwards. This type of grading is relatively uncommon but is characteristic of sediments deposited by grain flow and debris flow.[1] It is also observed in eolian ripples. These deposition processes are examples of granular convection."

 

Since eolian ripples were generated by the Missoula Floods, is it possible you are looking at the remains of one of those ripples, with the coarser material (your large boulder) sitting atop finer particles?

Mmmm...Wiki doesn't have a page on eolian ripples, but USGS does and it says this is a wind driven phenomenon. > Eolian Processes

 

However, the debris flow mentioned is more plausible. Still, the immediate underlying material is not composed of debris likely to accompany the boulder according to the survey map notes: "Lake deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene) Unconsolidated black to gray silt, mud, and organic debris underlying wide flat valley; grade into fine-grained alluvium (Qa) and peat deposits (Qp); overlie gravel probably deposited by cataclysmic floods (Qfg) and hyaloclastic sedimentary rocks.

 

The (Qfg) description is: "Gravel facies -- Unconsolidated bouldery pebble to cobble gravel ... Underlies creek valley, part of a large bar formed to the south. Poorly sorted; clast-supported; contains well-rounded to subangular clasts as large as 2.5 m diameter; some open-work gravel, but most contains matrix of basaltic to arkosic sand. Excavations reveal foreset bedding with west to northwest dips as great as 25°. Clast population dominated by Columbia River Basalt Group and Pliocene or younger basalts from the Cascade Range; commonly includes Tertiary volcanic rocks, pre-Tertiary granitic and metamorphic rocks, and quartzite. Well logs indicate that gravel grades into mixed sand and gravel.

 

Soooo, if the boulder were the tip of an iceberg so to speak, there may me 15ft more of it below the surface that is surrounded by the sedimentary lake deposits but sitting more-or-less on top of cataclysmic flood or debris flow material that delivered it. ?

 

A monolith wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.

What do you mean by 'drop out first'?

(Just to be clear I have no expertise on this subject and so cannot add much. I just find it interesting.)

Love the interest! So it takes a larger flow of water to move a boulder than a pebble, so when a flow sufficient to be moving a boulder slows below the threshold to move the boulder, the boulder will drop to the bottom of the channel, while pebbles will continue to be moved along. When the flow drops below the pebble threshold, the pebbles drop out while sand would keep flowing. Then sand drops out with more slowing, then silt particles still flow until water slows to stop.

 

I think I linked to this article earlier, but it gives a more rigorous explanation so worth reposting. >> Graded bedding

My immediate reaction on seeing Columbia mentioned was the Missoula floods. I see zapatos had the same thought.

First, thanks for having a look at this.

So on the Missoula flood idea, see again what I quoted from a USGS geological survey map of the area where the boulder sits. I have bolded the pertinent part:

...

The material underlying the boulder is described as "Lake deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene) Unconsolidated black to gray silt, mud, and organic debris underlying wide flat valley; grade into fine-grained alluvium (Qa) and peat deposits (Qp); overlie gravel probably deposited by cataclysmic floods (Qfg) and hyaloclastic sedimentary rocks (Ttfh); lower part may include Missoula-flood slack-water deposits (Qfs). Sparse well logs indicate deposit is less than 5 m thick."

What I am not understanding is if the boulder is a Missoula flood artifact, how is it sitting atop finer Missoula flood material since larger material would drop out first? Is my speculating on granular convection a non-starter?

 

The tephra explanation from arc also seems plausible. I think you may have misunderstood the nature of tephra. The suggestion is not that the boulder was formed by the fusion of ash and larger crystals into a tuff. The idea is that a fragment of previously consolidated magma was ejected as a discrete piece.

Roger that. As I responded to Arc, the boulder is too large to have fallen where it is as a bomb from either St. Helens or Adams, and could not have washed where it is from St. Helens. This leaves Adams as a source, but when a water flow sufficient to carry so large a boulder -the valley carries a creek at present- slows, the boulder should drop out first and the finer material should fall out later and bury it. Oui/no?

 

As to the hand specimen, the large crystals appear to feldspar, while the ground mass looks generally basaltic, based upon the colour. How sharp are the crystal boundaries of the phenocrysts? That would give insight as to the extent of disequilibrium/equilibrium between the phenocryts and the then liquid magma.

By 'sharp' I presume you mean abrupt. If so, the boundaries are quite sharp and there does not appear to be any grading between phenocrysts and groundmass.

 

I can add that I have no idea how much boulder is below the surface. While chipping a small piece was OK, any digging would require a formal permit application and approval. As the preserve is principally founded on biota and I am not suitably qualified to conduct geological research, I doubt such activity is in the cards simply to satisfy my idle curiosity. D'oh!

 

Thanks for the input.

Not sure where to post this.

 

This comment by Koji

...

Very inappropriate.

So you perpetuate the meme. Inappropriate. Leave the kid alone.

Acme, what you have found is a tephra that is probably from the Smith Creek Eruptive Period that occurred between 3.9 - 3.3 thousand years ago. As the link below testifies, these tephra materials have been found "as far away as 950 km (590 mi) from source."

... The largest pieces of tephra (greater than 64 mm) are called blocks and bombs. Blocks and bombs are normally shot ballistically from the volcano (refer to the gas thrust zone described in the direct blast section). Because these fragments are so large they fall out near their source. Blocks and bombs as large as 8-30 tons have fallen as far away as 1 km from their source (Bryant, 1991). Small blocks and bombs have been known to travel as far away as 20-80 km (Scott, 1989)! ...

 

That is a nice find I hope you kept a souvenir er I mean sample.

Yes, I collected a sample. It is pictured in the second 2 photos of my original post. I regularly report all my findings to state officials and seek their direction for dispensation of anything I collect. (My primary activity on the site is botanical in nature.)

I don't think this is tephra as it is quite hard and dense. The apparent siliceous crystals do not appear to be cemented fragments as in a breccia, rather formed in situ during cooling as in andesite. The groundmass appears basaltic to me. Here, I am unsure of the minerals' ID. I no longer have a mineral handbook, but I do have a scratch plate and may have a go at getting some streak info.

 

Ophiolite! You got your ears on? :-D

 

Anyway, using an online calculator and using a volume of 728 ft³ (7'x8'x13') & presuming it is andesite as I surmised, the boulder would weigh approximately 125,000 lbs. (62 tons) and so by your own source could not have landed in its present location as a bomb from St. Helens which is ~50 miles(30km) north.

 

Neither could the boulder have washed from St. Helens as the prairie drainage comes from the east and drainage south off of St. Helens goes into the Lewis R. drainage thence west to the Columbia.

 

I would entertain the notion that the boulder's source was Mt. Adams which is ~ 60 miles NW, but again not as a bomb. (Eruptive history of Mt. Adams)

 

The mystery of the boulder's mineralogy and source aside, I am mostly curious about how it came to be sitting on top of relatively young sediment. I have yet to check on the age of the nearby man-made lake, but as I say it is not very deep and from an engineering standpoint I would think workers would break it up if encountered rather than moving the whole shebang.

...

And is Madonna's speech where she contemplates blowing up the White House also constitutionally protected Acme ?

Presumably if not, she will be prosecuted.

 

And thanks for looking out for us Canuks, Acme, but maybe the best way would be to overhaul your political system.

But but...you said bitching and complaining won't get us anywhere.

 

Hey I know! Canada should build a wall on the northern border and get donny john to pay for it.

You're right Zapatos, I may be.

But you Americans let this happen, and bitching and complaining afterwards won't get you anywhere.

Normally I wouldn't care as its not my country, but we all know what a huge influence American politics and policies have on Canada.

...

LOL Peaceful protest is a constitutionally guaranteed right. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." We got grievances with little Donny and we fully intend to assemble and petition for redress. That's not only for ourselves, but you Canookians as well.

Perhaps something like the Missoula Floods.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missoula_Floods

 

http://columbiariverimages.com/Regions/Places/missoula_floods.html

Well, there are Missoula flood deposit there, but they underlie the prairie. (see geologic study quote in post #1) Those flood rocks in the boulder area are at most a couple feet in diameter and rounded. As the water spread and slowed in this area, the heavier stuff dropped out first, so if this boulder was from those floods it should be buried it seems to me. And 13,000 years of sediments washing down the valley since should have buried it too. ?

 

There is a nearby manmade lake that they may have dug the boulder from, but it's not very deep. I'll have to go see if someone there knows any history on it.

Never mind if there is any evidence ?????

Google the voter turnout for the election !

 

Then put your sanctimonious attitude on display.

Dude! I'm not questioning voter turnout in general, it's trump's -and now your- assertion that those in the womens' march didn't vote that I'm questioning. "Hey everybody, grab a bucket, we're going up to Jerry's. It's a pee party!"

Assume anything you want Phi.

But as the voter turnout for this so important election was only about 58 % what would be your conclusion ?

EXACTLY !

More than 40% of American voters didn't give a damn !

So trumpian a response. The issue here is your parroting trump's tweetment 'Why didn't these people vote?'. Never mind if there is any evidence of the protesters' voting records or that anyone bothered to even check. Just say whatever contrary crap comes to mind. Good grief!

 

The morning political shows were a circus as trumpian surrogates got pissy when asked by journalists why crowd size was so important to little hand Donny that he was pissy. To quote Jerry Seinfeld, 'why don't we just have a big pee party!?' LOL

Well, if they did vote, they got outvoted by others whose vote is just as valid.

So how about getting on with running the country and minimizing the damage D Trump does without descending into anarchy.

( or have you and Madonna been plotting to blow up the White House together )

 

And unfortunately the election rules have less to do with popular vote than Electoral College votes. If you want to amend the constitution, knock yourself out, but until then, D Trump won the election ( and I had to take 3 people out for $300 in drinks and lunch having bet against him )

No, they got out electoral colleged. As Ten oz pointed out, trump was outvoted. This is not contesting he won the election. What I am contesting is your 'if they did vote' and 'All these women ( led by privileged celebrities who are used to getting their own way ) who marched in protest yesterday should, maybe, have gotten off their asses and voted.' Millions of women -and men- protested; how many were not celebrities?

Hi Acme, the Columbia river huh?

 

Canada to Frisco?

Hi Studiot. Erhm, Canada to Portland Oregon, thence a jog and wiggle to Pacifica Oceana.

 

You don't give any clue as to whereabouts, but the CR is an very important north american river and could easily move such a boulder many miles when in spate.

The exact location is on a preserve so I'm not inclined to give it as entry is restricted. (Yes, I have permission. ) However, the area is in Washington state more-or-less across the Columbia from Portland.

 

Do you know where the parent rock is located?

I do not, other than likely the Cascade mountain range. My geology chemistry is rather rusty, and it wasn't all that shiny when I was studying. I'm hoping Ophiolite happens by and shares his wisdom.

 

I do have something of an hypothesis, but I didn't give it as I didn't recall the terms. Anyway, I went looking and that terminology would be granular convection. Even so, this is an awful big rock and I'm not confident such convection could lift something this big.

 

Granular Convection and Size Separation

 

(Inverse)Graded bedding

...Now, I've made it clear I dislike D Trump, but a few of the things he says do make sense...

All these women ( led by privileged celebrities who are used to getting their own way ) who marched in protest yesterday should, maybe, have gotten off their asses and voted. Those extra votes may have made a difference and we wouldn't be in this situation.

Maybe they should have cared BEFORE the election.

Erhm... how do you know they didn't vote? Oh that's right; Donny said so.

So there is this boulder about 7 ft. tall, 8 ft. wide, and 13 ft. long sitting in a depression of a wet prairie remnant 5 miles from the Columbia River.

 

 

The constituent rock is porphyritic and I'm thinking andesite.

 

 

1/2 mile NE of the boulder is a cinder cone dated at 575+-7KA and classified by geological study as "Olivine phyric basaltic andesite erupted from cinder cone... Light-gray, microvesicular, generally platy lava flow, consists of olivine phenocrysts (2-4 percent; 0.5 to 3 mm across; contains inclusions of chromian spinel; rims variably replaced by iddingsite) in a fine-grained trachytic groundmass of plagioclase, clinopyroxene, orthopyroxene, and Fe-Ti oxide; locally contains quartzite pebbles and small, dark, fine-grained clots that may be sedimentary xenoliths, both presumably derived from underlying gravels." (I have looked at samples of rock from the cinder cone stump and they do not resemble the boulder rock)

 

The material underlying the boulder is described as "Lake deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene) Unconsolidated black to gray silt, mud, and organic debris underlying wide flat valley; grade into fine-grained alluvium (Qa) and peat deposits (Qp); overlie gravel probably deposited by cataclysmic floods (Qfg) and hyaloclastic sedimentary rocks (Ttfh); lower part may include Missoula-flood slack-water deposits (Qfs). Sparse well logs indicate deposit is less than 5 m thick."

 

I am mystified as to how such a large and old boulder is sitting atop such fine, deep, and young sediments. ?

How is private plumbing any business of Minnesota? Does anyone know why they would regulate something like that?

...

Sewer gas can be hazardous. Sewer gas

...Health effects

In most homes, sewer gas may have a slightly unpleasant odor, but does not often pose a significant health hazard.[6] Residential sewer pipes primarily contain the gases found in air (nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide, etc.).[7] Often, methane is the gas of next highest concentration, but typically remains at nontoxic levels, especially in properly vented systems. However, if sewer gas has a distinct rotten egg smell, especially in sewage mains, septic tanks, or other sewage treatment facilities, it may be due to hydrogen sulfide content, which can be detected by human olfactory senses in concentrations as low as parts per billion. Exposure to low levels of this chemical can irritate the eyes, cause a cough or sore throat, shortness of breath, and fluid accumulation in the lungs. Prolonged low-level exposure may cause fatigue, pneumonia, loss of appetite, headaches, irritability, poor memory, and dizziness. High concentrations of hydrogen sulfide (>150 ppm) can produce olfactory fatigue, whereby the scent becomes undetectable. At higher concentrations (>300 ppm), hydrogen sulfide can cause loss of consciousness and death. Very high concentrations (>1000 ppm) can result in immediate collapse, occurring after a single breath.

Explosion risk

If mixed with air, sewer gas may explode. ...

I suspect, but have no evidence, that insurance companies may be responsible for promoting bans on bottle traps. The key complaint from my reading is that bottle traps are not self-scouring and so more prone to failure than P-traps which are self-scouring. Whether the risk is health or property damage related, less risk is better risk from an insurer's point of view.

Thank you again Acme, now that the tone of the discussion has definitely taken a turn for the better.

...

My pleasure.

Rephrasing... Is there any predator animal that visually follows prey footprints on snow ?

I am not aware of any. I don't think animals have the reasoning ability to associate a track with any animal, let alone distinguish prey animals.

In what jurisdiction are they illegal? Because they're not where I live.

State of Minnesota for example.

Illegal Plumbing Products in Minnesota

 

Even if quantum physics is a waste of time, so what? Peoples' time is theirs to waste and there is no end of works that don't 'benefit' humanity. Knitting doilies comes to mind. Damnable doily knitters anyway! No skin off my shins.

And this is the way I see it as well. Though you must admit that Dr. Hawkings is rather up a tree seeing his life's work go up in smoke with the discovery of particles that do not fit his standard models.

 

Boy, you had to go back a ways to find that quote. As the old saying goes, if you see a theoretical physicist in a wheel chair up a tree, you know he didn't get there by himself.

Hi.

Animals use vision, smell, hearing when looking for their meals. Never seen reference of a predator tracking prints in the snow, which seems a smarter/simpler/easier way to follow 'a meal passed here'

Can smell the scent left in the snow, but seems that visually, print paths are not a clue to follow. Do you know anything about ?

Hi.

Human sense of smell is nowhere as keen as that of most predators.

Smell - Human Vs. Animal Smell

...Yet some olfactory abilities of animals are probably beyond humans. Most vertebrates have many more olfactory nerve cells in a proportionately larger olfactory epithelium than humans, which probably gives them much more sensitivity to odors. The olfactory bulb in these animals takes up a much larger proportion of the brain than humans, giving them more ability to process and analyze olfactory information.

 

In addition, most land vertebrates have a specialized scent organ in the roof of their mouth called the vomeronasal organ (also known as the Jacobson's organ or the accessory olfactory organ). This organ, believed to be vestigial in humans, is a pit lined by a layer of cells with a similar structure to the olfactory epithelium, which feeds into its own processing part of the brain, called the accessory olfactory bulb (an area of the brain absent in humans).

 

The vomeronasal sense appears to be sensitive to odor molecules with a less volatile, possibly more complex molecular structure than the odorants to which humans are sensitive. This sense is important in reproduction, allowing many animals to sense sexual attractant odors, or pheromones, thus governing mating behavior. It is also used by reptilian and mammalian predators in tracking prey. ...

Olfaction @ Wiki

...

In plants and animals

...

Scenthounds as a group can smell one- to ten-million times more acutely than a human, and Bloodhounds, which have the keenest sense of smell of any dogs,[citation needed] have noses ten- to one-hundred-million times more sensitive than a human's. They were bred for the specific purpose of tracking humans, and can detect a scent trail a few days old. The second-most-sensitive nose is possessed by the Basset Hound, which was bred to track and hunt rabbits and other small animals.

 

Bears, such as the Silvertip Grizzly found in parts of North America, have a sense of smell seven times stronger than that of the bloodhound, essential for locating food underground. Using their elongated claws, bears dig deep trenches in search of burrowing animals and nests as well as roots, bulbs, and insects. Bears can detect the scent of food from up to 18 miles away; because of their immense size, they often scavenge new kills, driving away the predators (including packs of wolves and human hunters) in the process.

I'm having the strangest problem with my kitchen sink ... one that seems to defy the laws of physics!

 

...But here's the weirdest part: If I put water in my sink, it will take about 10 minutes to go down the drain. That's slow, but at least it gets the job done.

 

But when I took the pipes apart to attempt (in vein) to scoop out the crud, I noticed that the water in the bottom pipe (the only pipe I can't unscrew) just doesn't want to go down. At all. I can leave it there overnight, and the water in the bottom pipe is still there!...I'm about to call my landlord for help. But this is weird! Does anyone have an explanation as to how this could possibly be happening?

Not sure of the setup you described, but it sounds like the pressure of the additional head from the sink slowly pushes the water through the clog...but not when the additional head is not present.

 

Or are you describing a clogged trap. The trap always maintains some water to seal sewage gases from venting back into your house...normal operation it holds some water whether clogged or not, as the water has to go uphill to get further down the system, and can only do this with at least a small amount of head.

No doubt the clog has been fixed, but I think an illustration of a P-trap will clarify J.C.MacSwell's explanation for seeing water in the lower pipe. Whether the clog is in, or downstream of, the P-trap is a matter of plumbing, whereas why a P-trap works is a matter of physics.

 

Purposeful Plumbing: What is a P-trap?

Pascal's Law

 

 

Pascal's law or the principle of transmission of fluid-pressure (also Pascal's Principle) is a principle in fluid mechanics that states that a pressure change occurring anywhere in a confined incompressible fluid is transmitted throughout the fluid such that the same change occurs everywhere.

...

This principle is stated mathematically as:

Δ P = ρ g ( Δ h )

Δ P is the hydrostatic pressure (given in pascals in the SI system), or the difference in pressure at two points within a fluid column, due to the weight of the fluid; ρ is the fluid density (in kilograms per cubic meter in the SI system); g is acceleration due to gravity (normally using the sea level acceleration due to Earth's gravity, in SI in metres per second squared); Δ h is the height of fluid above the point of measurement, or the difference in elevation between the two points within the fluid column (in metres in SI). ...

We aren't talking about a single civilization...We are talking about tens of thousands of years and the difference between cultural evidence of complex symbolism/art and complex tool development. Neanderthals and archaic 'humans' were around for hundreds of thousands of years, yet they did not develop the same kind of culture as the Cromagnon man...What else can you say about that other than Neanderthal/archaic humans were almost undoubtedly not cognitively the same as modern humans who can and do develop mind blowing art and technology in only a few decades...And that's not something that humans just "can" do, it's something that we intrinsically do as a species, (starting evidently around 45,000 years ago.)...

Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies [A Review]

 

 

This book is inspired by just such a cross-cultural encounter as that between Kamal the border raider and the Colonels son of the Guides. In the first chapter the author recounts a conversation that he, a biologist studying bird evolution, had in New Guinea in 1972 with Yali, a local politician preparing his people for self-government, which culminated in the searching question Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo [goods] and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had little cargo of our own [p. 14]. Yalis question plays a central role in Professor Diamonds enquiry into a short history of everybody for the last 13,000 years, leading him into a wide-ranging discussion of the history of human evolution and diversity through a study of migration, socio-economic and cultural adaptation to environmental conditions, and technological diffusion. The result is an exciting and absorbing account of human history since the Pleistocene age, which culminates in a sketch of a future scientific basis for studying the history of humans that will command the same intellectual respect as current scientific studies of the history of other natural phenomena such as dinosaurs, nebulas and glaciers.

...

The development of surplus food-producing societies with high population densities provided humans with resistance to the diseases carried by their domesticated flocks, and facilitated other technological changes - especially the development of systems of specialised knowledge that led to advances in metallurgy, literacy and socio-economic organisation - primarily within the Eurasian supercontinent, and its outlying regions in the western Pacific and northern Africa, where the environment, and the geographical networks of migration, trade and communication, most favoured their spread. Diffusion is the key concept here - some continents and regions were more favourable than others, because of internal or external connections. As a result, when the scattered branches of the human species were reunited by trans-oceanic voyages and mercantile capitalism after 1500, Old World invaders had a decisive advantage over their New World cousins - the development of guns, germs and steel ensured that Europeans settled the Americas, Oceania and Southern Africa, eliminating or subduing local populations unable to resist them.