The big island rises 4,207 m above sea level. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaii_(island). )I can not find this 33,000 ft. tall Hawaian mountain of yours on this list of the worlds 25 tallest mountains.
http://list25.com/25-highest-mountains-in-the-world/
Your reply argues that the atmosphere is so thin that it is providing virtually no resistance to the spreading at the base of the volcano. If the atmosphere is providing no resistance it can't be a limiting factor on the height of a volcano. Gravity (along with rock strength and rock fracture density) is the limiting factor and is the reason why volcanoes on Mars can be higher.I can not find this 33,000 ft. tall Hawaian mountain of yours on this list of the worlds 25 tallest mountains.
CC's original point was whether the atmosphere limits how tall mountains can be.
Here's my theory how the atmosphere does in fact limit how tall mountains can be.
The thing that fundamentally limits how tall a mountain can be is the struggle between gravity and the strength of the rock. The higher the mountain, the more its weight makes it bulge and spread at the base, and slump down.
The (extinct) Hawaiian volcano Mauna Kea is only 4000 metres above sea level. But the base of Mauna Kea is 6000 metres below sea level.
The water pressure, down there, is 600 atmospheres (600 bar), pushing in on the rock at the base. So now, the huge water pressure surrounding Mauna Kea squashes the base of the mountain inwards. Or rather, the water pressure provides a large resistance to the tendency of the the mountain to slump and spread itself outwards. The water pressure acts like an iron band wrapped around the base of the mountain.
The base of Mount Everest, on the other hand, is surrounded by air at atmospheric pressure (1 bar) -- which provides zero resistance to spreading and slumping.
Therefore, a mountain with its base in water (at 600 bar) can be taller than a mountain with its base in air (at 1 bar).
The height to which a mountain can grow depends on all sorts of geological factors, strength of rocks, etc, and of course on the force of gravity. But it also depends on whatever pressure is pressing inwards on the base of the mountain. So, the maximum all-land mountain must be smaller than the maximum all-underwater mountain. The maximum for a half-in-air-half-in-water mountain would be half-way between.
Way to go, Ceiling baby! The maximum height to which a mountain can grow is determined by the atmosphere.
While the column of water 5,900 m deep does put a weight of approximately 1,950 m of oceanic crust (specific gravity of 3.0) on the base of the volcano the analysis does not take into account that water has virtually zero shear strength (resistance to shear). The point is moot though as the ocean is not the atmosphere and the atmosphere doesn't put a limit on the height of mountains.
Ceiling's original true/false thing was that the atmosphere limits the size that a mountain can go to. This was greeted by universal cries of false -- that the atmosphere has zero effect when it comes to determining what is the maximum height a mountain can be.Your reply argues that the atmosphere is so thin that it is providing virtually no resistance to the spreading at the base of the volcano. If the atmosphere is providing no resistance it can't be a limiting factor on the height of a volcano. Gravity (along with rock strength and rock fracture density) is the limiting factor and is the reason why volcanoes on Mars can be higher.
While the column of water 5,900 m deep does put a weight of approximately 1,950 m of oceanic crust (specific gravity of 3.0) on the base of the volcano the analysis does not take into account that water has virtually zero shear strength (resistance to shear). The point is moot though as the ocean is not the atmosphere and the atmosphere doesn't put a limit on the height of mountains.
1930's
China
I'm not sure you even read my response fully or perhaps did not understand it. A column of water 5,900 m high has an equivelent weight to a column of sea floor ocean crust of about 1,950 m (SG of 1.0 vs. 3.0) so as you point out there is some significant pressure exerted by the water at that depth. Using your argument the Big island case would be equivalent to a 10,107 - 1950 = 8,157 m (or 26,762 ft.) high mountain in the atmosphere.Ceiling's original true/false thing was that the atmosphere limits the size that a mountain can go to. This was greeted by universal cries of false -- that the atmosphere has zero effect when it comes to determining what is the maximum height a mountain can be.
But the atmosphere does determine maximum mountain size, in the sense I explained -- namely:
If the mountain is immersed in water, the water pressure serves to contain the base of the mountain, and provides some resistance to its tendency to spread and slump. If the mountain is out of the water, it gets no such assistance.
Therefore, an in-water mountain can be higher than an out-of-water mountain. In that sense, whether the mountain is in the atmosphere or is in the sea is one of the many factors that determine the maximum height a mountain can reach.
I'm not sure you even read my response fully or perhaps did not understand it. A column of water 5,900 m high has an equivelent weight to a column of sea floor ocean crust of about 1,950 m (SG of 1.0 vs. 3.0) so as you point out there is some significant pressure exerted by the water at that depth. Using your argument the Big island case would be equivalent to a 10,107 - 1950 = 8,157 m (or 26,762 ft.) high mountain in the atmosphere.
However, the water cannot exert the same confining force equivalent to that much rock. The rock has extreme resistance to shearing and can confine the spreading base of the volcano to a great degree. The water has virtually zero resistance to shear and the spreading base of the volcano can simply and easily shove it out of the way and displace the water to elsewhere in the ocean. The confining force of the water will therefore be very limited. Your explanation does not account for the lack of shear strength of water and the fact that it is not contained against the base of the mountain. It is free to move about the planet.
The fact that the highest point above sea level is currently just over 29,000 ft. does not in any way prove that that is the maximum or limiting height for a mountain (in the atmosphere or not). If you google the topic you will find a wide range of opinion as to what the maximum theoretical height of a mountain can be and many of the proposed solutions greatly exceed 29,000 ft. There is little agreement.
False