What is the Logic behind Pangea?

Question

I can understand why Pangea broke up, because it was allowing the land to go to a lower energy state.
But why when Earth formed, was there one giant island on one side and water on the opposite side?
I was thinking that the formation of the moon must have happened not long after the Earth, so that the moons gravitation pull would cause land to bulge on the side closest to earth. But that means at that time, the Earths rotation must have been equal to the moons revolution, which is very possible since the moon is gradually moving away from us, hence changing its period of revolution.

Any Legitimate reasons are greatly appreciated.

And another thing. Is it just a coincidence that the Moons period of rotation is equivalent to its period of revolution?

Another thing to think about..

what if the Moon gradually getting further away increased the Period of its revolution. (which is very believable and probably easily proven)
This resulted in the gravitational force from the moon to gradually revolve around Earth.
This Net force on the Earth (and thus Pangea) gradually broke the Big island apart by a Rotating Gravitational Pull.

I think I got something here.

Patent Pending.. HAha

Answer 1

The first reference explains the current favorite theory on the formation of the moon. If correct, it would have left a significant asymmetry on earth, 4.533 billion years ago.

Whatever the initial spin of the moon, tidal locking (second reference) probably accounts for the synchronization of the moon's rotation to its orbital period.

If anything, I would expect the orbit of the moon to be decaying, not increasing.

According to the third reference, Pangea formed roughly 250 million years ago and broke up 180 million years ago. Both are much later than the estimated formation of the moon.

Answer 2

The most logical cause, to me, is the one first proposed by Charles Hapgood in 1958, called Earth's Shifting Crust. Since Hapgood lacks a PhD, he's not a member of the club; therefore nothing he says has any merit in the scientific community.

His theory is basically that the Earth's crust somehow gets out of balance to such an extent that it breaks loose from the mantle. As the crust moves faster, a thin layer between the crust and mantle becomes hotter and more fluid; so the movement accelerates. It might take only centuries for the whole crust to move up to 40 degrees, relative to the mantle.

When such an event occurs, due to the equatorial bulge, the parts of the crust that move toward the poles are crunched together, and the parts moving away from the poles are torn apart.

Hapgood believes the last great shift, maybe 10,000 years ago, moved Atlantis from a temperate area into the Antarctic Circle.

Answer 3

I will answer the main gist of your question.

The logic behind Pangea is that all of the countries can essentially be formed into place as puzzle pieces. Not perfectly, but there's reason to see them together.

At the points of "puzzle" connection. Many similarities in ground/rocks are found that suggest that they were once connected.

(as for why, I am researching that right now, I am very curious to the answer of this question as well)