There are smaller planets or moons that don't have tectonic activity because the cores aren't liquid or plastic enough for much convection to occur. They have very different landforms. If Earth had a "still core", while having oceans (which are of cometary origin anyway), we'd still have weather and seasons, rain, rivers, lakes and erosion. We'd still have beaches, and we'd still PROBABLY have life and biomass, such as forests. What would be missing would be a lot of mountains, volcanoes, rift zones, uplifts and plateaus.. Both Mars and Venus are examples of planets with only limited amount of tectonic activity, with more sameness of surface features but not devoid of them. One thing that would be missing for sure would be spectacularly craggy mountains, like the Grand Tetons, or the Alps, or the Himalayas, because they are young, fast-rising mountains and erosion can't keep up.
2007-02-03 06:02:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by Scythian1950 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
no volanic eruptions, no earthquakes, no tsunamis, Europe won't be pushed over by Africa(it's true, the African plate is moving directly at Europe! Within 100million years, Europe might be gone!), no mountain ranges and chains, and there would be less ppl dieing due to the natural disasters.
2007-02-03 14:37:51
·
answer #2
·
answered by Shine 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Pangaea
2007-02-03 13:46:35
·
answer #3
·
answered by c.j. 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would guess that because of erosion, the land would appear very flat...or expressionless in topographic terms....of course, that is assuming that there is land above sea level.
2007-02-03 13:58:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by TheBodyElectric 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Static, and less volcanoes and earthquakes. It would also be dead, because the core would not be molten.
2007-02-03 13:35:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I guess continents would have nothing to "sit on" so they'd sink
2007-02-03 13:38:09
·
answer #6
·
answered by robert43041 7
·
0⤊
0⤋