h a l f b a k e r yOutside the bag the box came in.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
5 million visitors make a pilgrimage to
the
Grand Canyon in Arizona, US, every year.
Despite its size, its majesty and beauty,
the average stay is just 45 minutes long.
Its size means that most visitors only
ever
visit the rim to gaze in and the canyon is
dangerous - some 600 people
have died
there since the 1870s.
The Grand Tourism Canyon is an
altogether safer, smaller place, just as
educational, much easier to explore and
still able to convey the sense of size of
the
real thing.
Situated close by to ensure the same
geology, the GT Canyon is a 50metre
wide, 1600 metre long and 1600 metre
deep slot cut into the Arizona petrology.
A
sample of each metre removed from the
slot, is placed along the GT canyon rim in
order.
A tourist to the GT canyon can now walk
the rim and walk through time as they
go,
getting hands on to the stone that would
otherwise elude them in the true canyon.
A timestrip on the walkway, talks
through
history, from the 2billion year old Vishnu
Schist to the 230million year Kaibab
Limestone - a one mile walk
(1600metres)
for 1.8billion years of history.
The slightly more adventurous can take
advantage of the new canyon itself with
the 3 journeys through Earth history.
The slowest journey sees passengers
descend at leisure via a glass lift
(elevator)
from the surface to the canyon floor, tour
guides talk through the history as they
go.
The next fastest journey is via an
'inverted
rollercoaster' style ride (see link). The
ride
takes full advantage of the space in the
new canyon, with tourists wearing
headphones for commentary ... if they
can
concentrate.
Finally, the ultimate thrill is available at
one end of the GT Canyon : the billion
year
bungee. Depending on the length of your
bungee cord, thrill-seekers can jump
from
modernity into the depths - 1600metres,
a mile if you will, from the surface. Folks
at the bottom pull you from your cord
and
put you in the glass lift back to the
surface.
The Grand Canyon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Canyon
... the GT Canyon bigger brother [jonthegeologist, Dec 04 2006]
Inverted Rollercoaster format
http://en.wikipedia...rted_roller_coaster
... for a fast ride through history [jonthegeologist, Dec 04 2006]
The bungee sport
http://en.wikipedia...wiki/Bungee_jumping
... creating the Billion Year Bungee in the GT Canyon [jonthegeologist, Dec 04 2006]
Wilma Flintstone
http://www.johnrozum.com/images/wilma.jpg
[normzone, Dec 05 2006]
[link]
|
| |
[phlish] edited, let's make it 50metres. |
|
| |
Jon, did you even read the description? This is meant to be a direct alternative to the Grand Canyon, so there's no point posting a link telling him that the Grand Canyon exists. Also note that your links are non functional because you pasted ones with '...' in the middle instead of the full address.. |
|
| |
[phlish] there will be lights right to the bottom or the glass elevator experience will be wasted. I'll still call it a canyon ... hope you'll forgive me. |
|
| |
[pie] I have no idea what you are talking about! I, Jon, have read the idea at roughly the same time as I wrote it. |
|
| |
And yes, there is a link to the Grand Canyon, just for those people who'd like to read up more on its size and geology. Thought I'd save people the trouble. |
|
| |
... and yes, all the link *descriptions* do have ellipses in them, but the hyperlinks work perfectly well. Maybe you'd like to try them? |
|
| |
//Jon, did you even read the description? // love it :) |
|
| |
[phlish] allow me to enlighten you. |
|
| |
// consider the possibility that some of
those sandy strata won't be able to
support the virtical weight of the
mile // Those stratae already do
support the weight of rocks above it.
There is no difference in the vertical
stresses on the rock be it in the canyon
or in the new carved out slot. |
|
| |
The reason that the Grand Canyon and
others have that 45degree slope is due
to erosion - in the case of the GC, from
the Colorado River. There is no erosion
in that sense here - and if you're
worried, I'll stick a roof over it and
gulleys either side to ensure water
doesn't flow down its 1mile high sides. |
|
| |
I'm not ignoring any professional
realities. It's perfectly possible. You can
fish me for the idea, but its unjustified
for the science. |
|
| |
[po] I've seen some odd annotated
challenges in my time, but being accused
of not reading *my own idea* is a new one
on me! |
|
| |
I'm reminded of an old Flintstones episode. The family is on vacation, and they stop to see the Grand Canyon. |
|
| |
They stand and look at a tiny rivulet a few inches across, and Wilma Flintstone says "They say it's really going to be something someday". |
|
| |
sand and sandstones are not the same
thing - that's why one collapses and the
other does not. Keep the rain off (and
this is Arizona), then all should be well. |
|
| |
The water in the real canyon was (is) a
swirling, moving body of water, with
eddying pools. This is what creates the
cut of the rock. You'll note that the
canyon's sides change angle - some
almost sheer, some with shallow slopes.
The angle here is defined almost
entirely by the geology - the harder the
rock, the sharper the drop. The water
has cut different shapes into the rock. |
|
| |
Keep the water off the new canyon and
all will be well. Hey, not convinced? Add
steel to support the walls. I don't think
it'll need it. |
|
| |
Canyon rockfalls can be seriously deadly.
Couple years back a rockslide killed about
20 people about 5 minutes from my
house. If there is doubt, just don't try it. |
|
| |