Talk:Compression (geology)
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Need for article
[edit]Do we really need an article on compression that is specific to geology? I don't see how it differs from the usage in physics or engineering, apart from the fact that we use a different sign convention of course. Mikenorton (talk) 17:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- Further to that, I think that Strength of materials has everything you would need to understand the concept. Mikenorton (talk) 19:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- I think that it could be useful if it explained different compressive structures, and the relationships between stress and strain and rheology. But as it is, it seems to be way too vague and scattered to be useful, and as far as I know, practially all rocks (except water-rich clay-ey rocks) tend to stay pretty much isovolumetric under compression. Awickert (talk) 00:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
I think this stub should be merged to Tectonic uplift / Orogenic uplift. Wikipedia should be cleaned of stubs without references. I do not see how you can expand this article, leaving enough material for the Tectonic uplift and Orogeny pages. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 07:09, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
- I just removed the specific merger proposal because I think the scopes of the articles are different. But I would be in support of making this a redirect per Mike, above. Awickert (talk) 08:06, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
- This page doesn't really contain any information not already implied by the article on Tectonic uplift, though I would personally find Thrust tectonics a more useful redirect. As a stub, it just makes finding information on compressional geology more convoluted.Elriana (talk) 01:49, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
- I quite like the redirect to strength of materials that User:Mikenorton suggests above, though obviously that article lacks any geological examples so I'm trying to think of ways this article might contain something different in order to make it worth being a viable standalone article. the only thing I can think of that doesn't appear obviously somewhere else is compression as a constraining feature for magma chambers with that limit preventing eruptions (and other intrusions) until pressure changes (reduced compression for some reason or fresh magma injections). Lithification, decompression melting, folding, faulting, horst/graben all seem to be covered elsewhere - as do extensional tectonics, and thrust tectonics. EdwardLane (talk) 10:08, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- Actually the current compression (physics) article might be a better bet. As to what keeps magma confined, that's more the overburden pressure. Mikenorton (talk) 12:28, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- yes good shout EdwardLane (talk) 21:37, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
- Actually the current compression (physics) article might be a better bet. As to what keeps magma confined, that's more the overburden pressure. Mikenorton (talk) 12:28, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- I quite like the redirect to strength of materials that User:Mikenorton suggests above, though obviously that article lacks any geological examples so I'm trying to think of ways this article might contain something different in order to make it worth being a viable standalone article. the only thing I can think of that doesn't appear obviously somewhere else is compression as a constraining feature for magma chambers with that limit preventing eruptions (and other intrusions) until pressure changes (reduced compression for some reason or fresh magma injections). Lithification, decompression melting, folding, faulting, horst/graben all seem to be covered elsewhere - as do extensional tectonics, and thrust tectonics. EdwardLane (talk) 10:08, 21 November 2019 (UTC)