评论
打印
Even the model supporters are uncomfortable claiming that it explains every volcanic anomaly,
虽然这个模型的支持者们都不愿宣称这个理论能解释所有异常的火山，
and like any popular theory, I suppose, it has some determined critics.
像所有的流行理论一样，我认为它也有一些很坚决的批评家。
These critics have put forth a number of alternative theories, all unproven so far.
这些批评家提出了大量的可替代理论，所有的这些理论目前都未得到证明。
But one well-regarded theory is the Crack Hypothesis,
不过有一个很值得考虑的理论，那就是裂缝理论，
which assumes that hot spots are created when a piece of the crust gets stretched thinner and thinner and the resulting stress causes small cracks
这一理论认为当一块地壳被拉伸得越来越薄时就产生了热点，同时产生的压力导致小裂缝
to open up at weak spots in the crust,
在地壳不牢固的地点打开，
and it’s through these cracks that magma pushes up to form volcanoes.
而岩浆正是通过这些裂缝上涌形成火山的。
Proponents of the crack hypothesis consider this a widespread phenomenon and believe that magma’s not coming up from deep within the Earth’s interior,
裂缝理论的支持者们认为这是一个广泛分布的现象，并相信岩浆不是从深层的地球内部出来的，
but rather from just beneath the surface crust.
而只是从表面的地壳下喷涌而出的。
This hypothesis is attractive, because
这个理论很有吸引力，因为
it fits with what we already know about plate tectonics and it fits what we know about some secondary smaller hot spots, but
它符合我们已知的关于板块构造论的知识，而且符合我们对一些次要的更小的热点的了解，但是
how well does it explain the Hawaiian Islands?
它在解释夏威夷群岛方面表现如何呢？
Could a series of random cracks produce that same particular string of Islands that’s sequenced so neatly from old to young?
一系列杂乱的裂缝能产生同样特殊的按照形成时间长短排列得如此有序的岛屿群吗？
You know, it worries me when a theory depends on coincidence to produce results.
当一个理论要依靠巧合才能得出结果时，真的令我忧心忡忡。
