困惑是否物理影响“侵蚀”——地球科学堆栈交换江南电子竞技平台江南体育网页版 最近30从www.hoelymoley.com 2023 - 07 - 07 - t12:29:31z //www.hoelymoley.com/feeds/question/13525 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/rdf //www.hoelymoley.com/q/13525 4 困惑是否物理影响“侵蚀” lightning_missile //www.hoelymoley.com/users/12349 2018 - 03 - 03 - t03:31:38z 2018 - 03 - 06 - t15:34:14z < p >当我把一块石头或水晶到地板上,可以视为流失吗?之间的区别是什么岩石破坏由于自然干扰和人类行为?< / p > < p >这是石头/水晶我< / p > < p > < a href = " https://i.stack.imgur.com/2yCZR.jpg " rel = " nofollow noreferrer " > < img src = " https://i.stack.imgur.com/2yCZR.jpg " alt = "一个角" > < / > < a href = " https://i.stack.imgur.com/7SEFf.jpg " rel = " nofollow noreferrer " > < img src = " https://i.stack.imgur.com/7SEFf.jpg " alt = "另一个角度" > < / > < a href = " https://i.stack.imgur.com/7mIt2.jpg " rel = " nofollow noreferrer " > < img src = " https://i.stack.imgur.com/7mIt2.jpg " alt = "另一个角度" > < / > < / p > //www.hoelymoley.com/questions/13525/-/13526 # 13526 7 回答关于物理的影响是否通过桥困惑“侵蚀” //www.hoelymoley.com/users/94 2018 - 03 - 03 - t09:12:59z 2018 - 03 - 05 - t21:39:25z < p >在这里我假设你问你是否可以应用“侵蚀”一词来破坏你的石头,而不是伤害你的地板上了。在这种情况下,这个术语的适用性与其说在于< em >谁做< / em >和< em > < / em >它发生什么。在地质学中,术语“侵蚀”通常是应用于陆地表面而不是个人,松散的岩石。例如,< em >牛津英语词典》< / em >: < / p > < blockquote > < p > < >强侵蚀< / >强,v。< br > 2。青烟。的电流的作用、冰川等。< br >。磨损;出去吃。< br > b。形成(通道等)逐渐磨损。< / p > < /引用> < p >尼科尔斯(2009),更简明地说,< / p > < blockquote > < p >…侵蚀风化层材料的去除。

Once your stone is picked up and taken into your house, it's no longer part of the regolith material, although the surface you took it from was itself eroded by the stone's removal.

In the literature, human influences aren't usually excluded when discussing ‘erosion’. For example, the term is often applied when discussing how footpaths are worn down by human use (see e.g. Coleman, 1981).

So, if your dropped stone chipped a bit out of your floor, you might try to claim that as erosion, but only if you're prepared to argue that your floor constitutes regolith!

If you want a geologically appropriate term for what happened to your stone, abrasion would probably cover it. Allaby (2008) has this definition:

abrasion (corrasion): The erosive action that occurs when rock particles of varying size are dragged over or hurled against a surface.

The use of ‘erosive’ in the definition perhaps doesn't make it entirely clear that this can apply to the particles as well as the surface itself, but it's easy to check that ‘abrasion’ is indeed used in this way in the literature. For example, again from Nichols (2009):

... sharp edges tend to be chipped off first, the abrasion smoothing the surface of the clast.

Responses to comments

Does this mean that when my stone suffers abrasion, it is now destroyed?

No, not at all. ‘Abrasion’ just means that some material has been removed from your stone by mechanical action. Of course it would be possible to abrade your stone so much that it was completely destroyed, but this isn't implied by the term ‘abrasion’ itself.

What would happen to the damage over time? Will weathering try to repair it?

In general, material removed from a piece of rock will not be repaired by natural processes. In some natural environments, new minerals may precipitate in a crack left by abrasive damage, but this won't happen to a piece of rock sitting on a shelf in your house :). In the natural course of the rock cycle, an abraded fragment of rock may eventually be ‘recycled’ rather than being ‘repaired’ -- for example, it may be incorporated into a conglomerate, or buried, melted, and recrystallized as a new igneous rock.


References

Allaby, M. (2008). Oxford Dictionary of Earth Science. Oxford University Press.

Coleman, R. (1981). Footpath erosion in the English Lake District. Applied Geography, 1(2), 121-131.

Nichols, G. (2009). Sedimentology and stratigraphy. John Wiley & Sons.

Baidu
map