-Apologies for multiple postings-
Dear colleagues,
We would like to remind you of our EGU session on "Recent advances in analogue and numerical modeling of tectonic processes" and invite you to submit an abstract before the deadline of 17 January:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TS9.1/GD8.5
Recent advances in analogue and numerical modeling of tectonic processes
Conveners: Marcel Frehner, Matthias Rosenau and Guido Schreurs
EGU General Assembly in Vienna: 22 - 27 April 2012
Our solicited speaker is Claudio Faccenna (University Roma Tre)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More information on this session is given below and on:
http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2012/session/9428
Looking forward to seeing you in Vienna,
Marcel, Matthias and Guido
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geodynamic processes are generally too slow, too rare or too deep to be observed in situ. Understandably, conceptional simulation has become an integral part of the Earth explorer's toolbox to select, formulate and test hypotheses on the origin and evolution of geodynamic processes. However, experimental and computer simulations using analogue and numerical models, respectively, have evolved rather separately and independently, often without much interaction of the respective communities. Only in recent years, efforts have been made to combine the two simulation techniques and to investigate in more detail approach-inherent advantages and disadvantages.
Numerical models are inherently deterministic, precisely controllable and allow for a wide parameter space to be mapped, but suffer from space-time discretization limited by computer power or code-controlled artifacts. In contrast, analogue models are real physical objects subjected to the same laws (and flaws) of nature as the Earth, including the time-space continuum and randomness, but they are limited in parameter space, less controllable and similarly dependent on experimentalist performance and laboratory boundary conditions. Both numerical and analogue simulations yield results that compare favorably with geological structures in nature. However, it is often uncertain and in many cases a question of faith rather than a well-reflected position, whether necessary model simplifications are appropriate, mathematical descriptions accurate or upscaling of laboratory observations meaningful.
|