 |
 |
Hi Aydin, Yeah, sounds like these definitions seem reasonable. They are definitely two different things. I'd say Tectonics studies a process, structural geology describes a phenomenon. It's impossible to study Tectonics without Structural Geology, but it's equally impossible to fully characterize Tectonic processes by only studying the structural aspect of it (without, e.g. geochronology, stratigraphy, sedimentology, paleomagnetism, seismology, etc). Microtectonics would simply study the processes at a small scale, not just structure, but also rheology, fluid-rock chemical interaction, etc etc. Kind of the similar to the difference between micropaleontology and paleoclimate: you need the former to study the latter, but micropaleontology won't give you a full representation of paleoclimate evolution. Cheers Douwe On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 10:37 AM, aydin CICEK < [log in to unmask]> wrote: > Dear Ladies and Gentilmen, > > What is the difference between Structural Geology and Tectonics? > > If you say scaling is the main criteria to differentiate them. Then, what > is a microtectonics? > > I found some definitions: > > *Tectonics:* Geodynamic processes such as subduction, continental > collision, extension, lithospheric delamination... etc. > *Structural Geology:* Any geological feature having a definable geometry. > > Are they ok or not? > > I realized that the majority of my collugues confuse them. They use the > terms as the same except scaling. > > Full definitions will be great by giving references. > > kind regards, > -- http://www.geologist.nl Douwe J.J. van Hinsbergen, PhD Physics of Geological Processes (PGP) University of Oslo Sem Sælands vei 24 NO-0316 Oslo Norway Tel: +47 22856487 [log in to unmask]