3

I am working on constructing a world which is basically (from the northern pole to the southern pole):

  • smallish frozen over ocean
  • huge land mass encompassing the northern hemisphere
  • tremendous ocean forming an effective 'belt' dividing the planet in two halves
  • slightly smaller land mass than the northern hemisphere (about 2/3 to 3/4 of it), encompassing the southern hemisphere

The planet itself will have about 1.1 times the size of earth and slightly more landmass (about 35% landmass to 65% waters), it will have 3 moons/satellites orbiting it:

Tectonic movement of plates moves from the equator to the poles, the north continent consists of roughly 3 or 4 big plates, the southern continent of about twice that amount.

The only invented material on the whole world will be a sort of crystal/compound which produces a gas when in contact with sulfuric hot water. Said gas will provide a high lifting capacity about roughly 4 to 5 times that of helium or hydrogen.

  • biggest moon, about the size of earth's moon (maybe a trifle bigger) will orbit the planet along its equator
  • the two smaller moons will orbit the planet at about a 60° and 70° degree inclination relative to the plane of the biggest moon (both having a mass of roughly one third of the big moon)

I'm neither a geologist nor biologist nor anything fancy myself sadly. So my questions are (This question originally involved a set of 5 questions, all but question 4 were removed to be asked in other questions; see related questions):

  1. Is it a fair assumption for me to have most big mountain ranges positioned roughly parallel to the equator?
dot_Sp0T
  • 12,111
  • 3
  • 54
  • 105
  • 1
    just on the lifting capacity of that gas, that is only possible if it was hydrogen and the atmosphere was denser – ratchet freak Nov 04 '14 at 09:54
  • @ratchetfreak as written, that is the only thing where I will admittedly 'cheat' :) - the produced gas will not be a noble gas either though (Although that'll go into another question) – dot_Sp0T Nov 04 '14 at 09:58
  • This question seems a bit broad to me as it is. I would recommend cutting it up in more manageable chunks. I would also like to point you in the direction of this question and its follow-ups by TimB about landmasses, weather patterns, ocean currents, erosion and more. – overactor Nov 04 '14 at 10:03
  • I'll vote to close this question so you can edit the question (with our help) to fit the site better so it can get the answers it deserves when it gets reopened. Welcome to the site by the way. :) – overactor Nov 04 '14 at 10:04
  • @overactor thanks for the welcome :) Although I'm not sure splitting the question down into chunks would do it any better as from my point of view the 4 questions are only different aspects of the title question. – dot_Sp0T Nov 04 '14 at 10:06
  • 2
    Hi, this is an interesting question but at the moment you are asking about too many things at once. Since you already have an answer to part 4 I suggest changing this question to ask about that. You can then ask follow on questions for each of the other aspects of the world. – Tim B Nov 04 '14 at 10:09
  • There's also this question about tides with multiple moons – overactor Nov 04 '14 at 10:09
  • 1
    Thanks to all, I'll take some time to rephrase part of the question and also split it down / create follow ups. | I guess I have to make it clearer that questions 2 to 4 are mainly thought of as aspects of question 1 (e.g. the question about tides is in regard to flooding > changes of fertility of the ground) – dot_Sp0T Nov 04 '14 at 10:13
  • If you want some help rewriting your question, you can come and join us in the chat. – overactor Nov 04 '14 at 10:40
  • I am not sure what you mean by the water is smallish frozen. Unless you have a very particular characteristic to your world, it is not possible for water to freeze on all the surface at the same time unless the average temperature is very low. Ice sheets might form during the cold season if the water currents are not too strong. – Vincent Nov 04 '14 at 16:44
  • You mentioned 2 continents with an ocean between them. Do you have polar oceans as well. And are there other oceans in the world? I mean, the north and south continent could stretch all around Earth, thus blocking the heat exchange between the poles and the equator because there is no North to South ocean. – Vincent Nov 04 '14 at 16:47
  • Questions 1 and 2 could fit into the same question. 3 has already been asked as Overactor pointed. 4 was answered by sydan. 5 is another question, mayvbe you could find the answer by searching airship, flight or steampunk. – Vincent Nov 04 '14 at 16:53
  • Tides would depend critically on the size and distance of the moon(s). Three tiny and distant moons would provide essentially no tides. Large and close moons would make ferocious tides. – Oldcat Nov 19 '14 at 02:09
  • I think tectonics are more a function of the planet's crust and not dependent on the land mass above sea level. You'll notice that many of the earthquakes on our planet are referenced in terms of "such-and-such occurred (some distance) off the coast of (some location)". – Zhro Aug 13 '18 at 02:16
  • Regarding the lifting gas, your options are to make the atmosphere denser, or give the gas negative mass. The lifting power of a gas is the weight of the air it displaces, minus its own weight. This is why hydrogen and helium don't actually differ much in lifting power. – AI0867 Mar 17 '20 at 15:45

2 Answers2

4

I'm going to attempt to answer question 4 as I'm neither a biologist nor an expert on tides. I have however studied geology and physics.

Firstly though, rachet freak is very correct in saying that you can't have a gas with more lifting power than hydrogen, unless magic is involved, you would have to increase the density of the atmosphere. This effect in it self might make air a more likely travel option than the land or the ocean but it's unlikely. The main issue with making airships is the material needed to construct them. A civilization would need large amounts of a strong, lightweight substance. I'll leave you to think about that one.

As for mountains, one very important factor is used to decide where mountains form: tectonics. Tectonic plates cause immense land warping forces that are capable of forming mountains such as Mount Everest. This happens either when one plate moves under another (often making volcanoes) or when two plates move towards each other and buckle.

To get the ocean ring around the centre of your planet it is likely that there is a fault line splitting two tectonic plates running around the equator of the planet. The northern and southern plates could be moving apart much like how the Americas and the Eastern continents are moving apart. If these northern and southern plates are in turn moving under further norther and southern plates there could be two rings of large mountains and volcanoes parallel to the equator.

I would suggest making a plate tectonics map of your planet to decide how oceans and mountains are being formed.

EDIT

A note going back to your question on plants, a possible idea would be to have a mountain+volcano range on one continent and not the other, leading to more fertile ground on that continent and therefore differing or more abundant plant life.

sydan
  • 698
  • 4
  • 11
0

If you have control of the tectonic plates then you control the mountain ranges

As mountains are an emergent feature from the shape, position and motion of tectonic plates, you, the author, are free to set up the mountains ranges however you please.

Without a specific map describing the tectonic plates, their shape and motion, we can't offer specific verifications. However, it's plausible to setup tectonics to create arbitrary mountain ranges.

Green
  • 52,750
  • 10
  • 130
  • 260