Orogenesis: Cause of Sedimentary Formations

doi:10.4236/ojg.2013.32B005

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Open Journal of Geology, 2013, 3, 22-24

doi:10.4236/ojg.2013.32B005 Published Online April 2013 (http://www.scirp.org/journal/ojg)

Orogenesis: Cause of Sedimentary Formations

Guy Berthault

Polytechnique School Engineer, Paris, France, Member of “La Société Géologique de France”

Email: [email protected]

Received 2013

ABSTRACT

Experiments on stratification discussed here have revealed the mechanical nature of lamination as well as the role of

turbulent current as agent of stratification. They challenge Steno’s principle that superposed strata are successive sedi-

mentary layers. They show that relative chronology should not be referred to as “stages” but as “sequences” of series.

The rock formation studied by Lalomov shows that the duration of sedimentation could be considerably shorter than

indicated by the Geological Time Scale. The latter scale corresponds to large marine transgressions and regressions that

can result from the shift of polar axis following such major orogeneses as the Caledonian, Hercynian and Alpine.

Keywords: Stratification; Lamination; Turbulent Flow; Time of Sedimentation; Orogenesis

1. Introduction

Much of sedimentology is based on Nicolas Steno’s

(1669) principle i.e. that sup erposition of strata leads to a

succession of sedimentary layers[1]. However, some

stratification experiments discussed here call for ques-

tioning this principle.

As reported to the Académie des Sciences de Paris by

Professor George Millot, Berthault (1986, 1988) [2,3]

performed several lamination experiments (Figures 1

and 2). In a typical experiment, a sample of friable lami-

nated “Fontainebleau Sandstone” was crushed into sand

particles, which were then dropped into a flask. It was

observed that a laminatio n was i mmediately recon stitu ted

in the ensuing deposit. A reasonable explanation of the

latter is that sand is a hetero-granular powder, the me-

chanics of which is intermediate between solids and dis-

tinct liquids. It is well known that liquids stratify accord-

ing to their density. Moreover, compelling evidence by

McKee et al. (1967) [4] strongly suggests that the

graded-bedding of stratification results from turbulent

flow, the variable velocity of wh ich determining the suc-

cessive dep osit of part icles of di f ferent siz e s.

Figure 1. Sample of diatomite.

Further work by Julien et al. (1993)[5], in which a

pump circulated sand-laden water in a flume, showed

that sand particles indeed deposited accordingly to the

velocity of the turbulent current.(Figures 3-5). The

sedimentary deposit consisted of superposed and juxta-

posed strata which prograded laterally in the direction of

the current.

Thus, the turbulent flow generates graded-bedding.

When the velocity of the current increases, it becomes

erosive, creating erosion surfaces in the deposit. When

the desiccation of sediments occurs, joints appear. These

results show that the current is an essential agent of

stratification, which has been overlooked in conventional

stratigraphy. In order to properly determine the genesis

of sedimentary rocks, modern experiments must include

the role of turbulent flow. Therefore, Steno’s principle

has to be critically reviewed in light of new experimental

data.

Figure 2. Lamination from flowing of dry sediments.

G. BERTHAULT 23

Figure 3. Formation of graded beds.

Figure 4. Cross-sectional view of deposit.

Figure 5. Longitudinal view of deposit.

Golovinski and Walther’s law of sequence stratigraphy

(cf. Middleton, 1973) [6] states: “Only those facies and

facies areas can be superimposed primarily which can be

observed beside each other at the present time”. As

shown in Berthault (2002a, b) [7,8], the superposed and

juxtaposed facies constitute a sequence resulting from a

marine transgression or regression. A succession of se-

quences included between an initial transgression and a

final regression is a “series”.

The data from sequence stratigraphy and the afore-

mentioned experiments show that a series corresponds to

a period. Sedimentation, therefore, must be considered as

the basic reference of relative chronology instead of

stage.

2. How does the above Affect Absolute

Chronology?

Charles Lyell constructed a geological column, based

upon biological ‘revolutions’ and uniformitarian princi-

ples. This was disputed by Gohau (1990) [9] who wrote

“Time is measured by the duration of sedimentation, not

orogenesis and biological ‘revolutions’”.

The radioactive dating of eruptive rocks is based on

the phenomenon of spontaneous decay of a radioactive

element from a “parent” element into its “daughter” ele-

ment. A well-known example is uranium (the parent

element) which decays into lead (the daughter element).

By measuring the quantity of parent element and com-

paring it to the daughter element, the age of a lava rock

can be estimated. But radioactive decay exists in the liq-

uid magma, where gravity exerts a differential separation

between parents and daughters according to their density.

When the magma erupts on to the Earth’s surface, it so-

lidifies into rock. A sample taken from this rock could

therefore include unrelated parents and daughters. Moreover,

the respective quantity of daughter decay elements pro-

duced in the magma cannot be distinguished from those

produced in the rock. As a result, the age of the rock

cannot be determined confid ently. This is why a revision

of time based on duration of sedimentation is necessary.

A process to determine sedimentation duration is as

follows:

The “Lischtvan-Lebediev” (1959) [10] table gives the

critical velocity of current below which particles fall ac-

cording to their size and the depth of water. Thus, it is

possible, from the sizes of particles in a sedimentary rock

formation, to determine the velocities of the paleo-cur-

rents. These velocities, integrated into the formula of

sedimentary mechanics, give the sedimentary transport

capacity by units of time and volume. Dividing the vol-

ume of the formation under study by this capacity, the

time of sedimentation of the formation is obtained (H.A.

Einstein). Lalomov (2007) [11] used this technique to

estimate the sedimentation duration of various forma-

tions in Russia. In particular, Berthault et al. (2011) [12]

showed that Cambrian Ordovician sandstone in the St.

Petersburg region represents less than 0.05% of the time

attributed to it by the stratigraphic time scale.

This result of 0.05% does not take into account the

velocity of the erosive curr ents which created such rocks

as conglomerates. Experiments on sedimentary slabs

(sandstone, shale, limestone) were performed at the Saint

Petersburg Institute of Hydrology (Berthault et al., 2010)

[13]. Erosion started wh en the velocity of current reached

27 m/s. Further experiments are envisioned which should

show the time of sedimentation to be faster.

Importantly, Marchal (1996)[14] has demonstrated

that mountain orogenesis provoked a shift of the axis of

rotation of the Earth triggering large marine series. It is

G. BERTHAULT

significant that, in the geological column since the Cam-

brian period, eighteen marine series, or systems, are in-

ter-bedded between nineteen orogeneses, which occurred

in different places around the Earth.

As reported in the Bulletin of the Museum of Natural

History of Paris (1996-1997), the North Pole in the Eo-

cene, before the Himalayan orogenesis, was off the

mouth of the river Ienissei in Siberia, by 72 degrees lati-

tude (cf. Marchal, 1996) [14]. After the orogenesis, it

was near to its present position resulting in an eighteen

degree polar shift.

The direction of transgressions and regressions fol-

lowing each orogenesis corresponds to the succession of

resulting sequential facies, such as sandstone, shale and

limestone as seen from the surface of the deposit. An

example was given in Berthault (2004) [15]. The Tonto

group is assigned to Cambrian. It proceeded from the

Cadomian orogenesis, at the beginning of the Cambrian;

and resulted from a transgression going from the Pacific

Ocean in the west to New Mexico in the east. Other di-

rections can be determined from other orogenesis which

occurred elsewhere around the Earth.

Contemporaneous marine fauna vary according to

depth, latitude, and longitude and such ecological diver-

sification exists in the geological column. The apparent

change of fossilized marine organisms from one series to

another following an orogenesis can result from different

fauna, transported by water flows from different loca-

tions resulting from successive orogeneses. What has

been attributed to biological change could be ecological

in nature explained by fauna coming from different oro-

geneses, taking into account th e short time of sedimenta-

tion.

3. Conclusions

In conclusion, a relationship can be established between

cause and effect. Orogenesis, which can result from pe-

riodic mantle plumes (Rampino & Prokoph, 2013) [16],

causes shifting of the polar axes, which then leads to

consecutive marine series and sedimentary deposits. The

duration of the latter is much shorter than given by the

stratigraphic time scale and so calls for a serious revision

of the foundation of historical geology (Berthault,

2012)[17].

REFERENCES

[1] N. Steno and N. Stensen, “Canis Carchariae Dissectum

Caput,KIU” Aus., lat. u. engl. The earliest geological

treatise, 1667.

[2] B. G. Sedimentology, “Experiments on Lamination of

Sediments, Resulting from a Periodic Graded-Bedding

Subsequent to Deposit,” Comptes Rendus De L Academie

Sciences, Paris, t. 303, Série ii, No. 17, 1986.

[3] G. Berthault, “Sedimentation of a Heterogranular Mixture.

Experimental Lamination in Still and Running Water,”

Comptes Rendus De L Academie Sciences, Paris, t. 306,

Série ii, 1988, pp. 717-724.

[4] E. D. McKee, E. J. Crosby, H. L. Berryhill, Jr, “Flood

Deposits, Bijou Creek, Colorado, June 1965,” Journal of

Sedimentary Petrology, Vol. 37, No. 3, 1967, pp.

829-851.

[5] F. Y. Julien and L. Y. Berthault G, “Experiments on

Stratification of Heterogeneous Sand Mixtures,” Bulletin

Société Géologique de France, 1993, Vol. 164. No. 5, pp

649-660.

[6] G. V. Middleton, “Johannes Walther’s law of the correla-

tion of facies,”Geological Society of America Bulletin,

1973 - Geological Soc America.

[7] G. Berthault, “Analysis of Main Principles of Stratigra-

phy,” Lithology and Mineral Resources, Vol. 37, No. 5,

2002, pp. 509-515. doi:10.1023/A:1020220232661

[8] G. Berthault, “Geological Dating Principles Questioned

Paleohydraulics a New Approach,”Journal of Geodesy

and Geodynamics, Vol. 22,No. 3, 2002, pp. 19-26.

[9] G. Gohau, Une histoire de la géologie. Paris : Seuil, P.277.

1990.

[10] Lischtvan-Lebediev, “Gidrologia i gidraulika v mostovom

doroshnom. Straitielvie”, Leningrad,1959.

[11] A. Lalomov, “Reconstruction of Paleohydrodynamic

Conditions during the Formation of Upper Jurassic Con-

glomerates of the Crimean Peninsula,” Lithology and

Mineral Resources,Vol. 42, No. 3, 2007, pp. 268-280.

doi:10.1134/S0024490207030066

[12] G. Berthault, A. Lalomov and M. A. Tugarova, “Recon-

struction of Paleolithodynamic Formation Conditions of

Cambrian-Ordovician Sandstones in the Northwestern

Russian Platform,” Lithology and Mineral Resources, Vol.

46, No. 1, 2011, pp. 60-70.

doi:10.1134/S0024490211010020

[13] G. Berthault, A. L. Veksler, V. M. Donenberg and A.

Lalomov, “Research on Erosion of Consolidated and

Semi-Consolidated Soils by High Speed Water Flow,”

Izvestia VMG , Vol. 257, 2010, pp. 10-22.

[14] C. Marchal, “Earth's Polar Displacements of Large Am-

plitude. A Possible Mechanism,” Bulletin du Museum

National d'Histoire Naturelle. Paris.4th, 18, Errata Geo-

diversitas , Vol . 19, No. 1, 1997, p. 139.

[15] G. Berthault, “Sedimentological Interpretation of the

Tonto Group Stratigraphy. Grand Canyon Colorado

River,” Lithology and Mineral Resources, Vol. 39, No. 5,

2004, pp. 504-508.

doi:10.1023/B:LIMI.0000040737.85572.4c

[16] M. R. Rampino and A. Prokoph, “Are Mantle Plumes

Periodic?” EOS Transactions American Geophsical Un-

ion, Vol. 94, No. 12, 2013, pp. 113-120.

doi:10.1002/2013EO120001

[17] G. Berthault, “Towards a Refoundation of Historical Ge-

ology,” Georesources, 2012, pp. 4-36.