explain how the theory of plate tectonics differs from the continental drift hypothesis?

Answer 1

The idea of Continental Drift was the forerunner of Plate Tectonics Theory. At the time that Wegener proposed the idea of Continental Drift, he did not have sufficient information to explain the physical mechanisms that would have allowed continents to break apart and drift apart. He did have fossil evidence, and shape-of-the continents evidence, and matching-rocks-on-both-sides evidence that the continents had indeed been juxtaposed. "A fatal weakness in Wegener's theory was that it could not satisfactorily answer the most fundamental question raised by his critics: What kind of forces could be strong enough to move such large masses of solid rock over such great distances? Wegener suggested that the continents simply plowed through the ocean floor, but Harold Jeffreys, a noted English geophysicist, argued correctly that it was physically impossible for a large mass of solid rock to plow through the ocean floor without breaking up."http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/dynamic/historical.html

Later, when scientists discovered magnetic striped on the ocean floor, learned more about the seismicity at trenches, and so forth, they were able to put together a more comprehensive model of the actual physical processes that could and do cause the continents to "drift" apart, or collide together. These processes come under the heading of Plate Tectonics--which includes the ideas of three types of plate boundaries, including the divergent boundaries with spreading ridges required for continents to "drift" apart.

"From seismic and other geophysical evidence and laboratory experiments, scientists generally agree with Harry Hess' theory that the plate-driving force is the slow movement of hot, softened mantle that lies below the rigid plates. This idea was first considered in the 1930s by Arthur Holmes, the English geologist who later influenced Harry Hess' thinking about seafloor spreading. Holmes speculated that the circular motion of the mantle carried the continents along in much the same way as a conveyor belt. However, at the time that Wegener proposed his theory of continental drift, most scientists still believed the Earth was a solid, motionless body. We now know better. As J. Tuzo Wilson eloquently stated in 1968, "The earth, instead of appearing as an inert statue, is a living, mobile thing." Both the Earth's surface and its interior are in motion. Below the lithospheric plates, at some depth the mantle is partially molten and can flow, albeit slowly, in response to steady forces applied for long periods of time. Just as a solid metal like steel, when exposed to heat and pressure, can be softened and take different shapes, so too can solid rock in the mantle when subjected to heat and pressure in the Earth's interior over millions of years."http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/dynamic/unanswered.html
The website below will give you illustrations and discusses both continental drift and plate tectonics.

Answer 2

They are practically the same. Plate tectonics provides the mechanism for continental drift.

Answer 3

It's like viewing pieces of a LARGE jigsaw puzzle, and you can see how the continents use to fit together,(Pangaea) but have drifted apart.

Answer 4

there the same, the plates go under and push againts and the continents drift on tpo