If the world have massive single giant world tree can it stop earthquake?Can a planet's axial tilt be changed by carefully planned and set high-energy explosions?Semiliquid atmosphere - Is my premise/conclusions correct; and will it get the result I want?The Reindeer--Let's Get Real, Shall We?What dangerous side effects might occur when using a bubble of spacetime to enter hyperspace?Could an entire civilization live in an upside down forest?How to make my humans more cold-resistant?Only Three Books: Restarting Physics after civilization collapsesIs an offset mountain range plausible?The Biology behind a slime that uses hydrofluoric acid to disable and digest prey.Can Aspen forests have other species of tree present?what effect if the world have a single massive world giant tree?

Inverse-quotes-quine

Why doesn't a marching band have strings?

STM Microcontroller burns every time

Does Marvel have an equivalent of the Green Lantern?

Employer wants to use my work email account after I quit

Is it possible writing coservation of relativistic energy in this naive way?

Is a single radon-daughter atom in air a solid?

Are all instances of trolls turning to stone ultimately references back to Tolkien?

Find the probability that the 8th woman to appear is in 17th position.

Sci fi short story, robot city that nags people about health

How much will studying magic in an academy cost?

Is my Rep in Stack-Exchange Form?

Is there a maximum distance from a planet that a moon can orbit?

How to split an equation in two lines?

Should developer taking test phones home or put in office?

Impossible darts scores

Intuition for capacitors in series

How risky is real estate?

Does x-ray lead paint detection find lead underneath latex topcoats?

Can the negators "jamais, rien, personne, plus, ni, aucun" be used in a single sentence?

How long would it take to cross the Channel in 1890's?

Is there a way to split the metadata to custom folders?

Can Ogre clerics use Purify Food and Drink on humanoid characters?

Do I have any obligations to my PhD supervisor's requests after I have graduated?



If the world have massive single giant world tree can it stop earthquake?


Can a planet's axial tilt be changed by carefully planned and set high-energy explosions?Semiliquid atmosphere - Is my premise/conclusions correct; and will it get the result I want?The Reindeer--Let's Get Real, Shall We?What dangerous side effects might occur when using a bubble of spacetime to enter hyperspace?Could an entire civilization live in an upside down forest?How to make my humans more cold-resistant?Only Three Books: Restarting Physics after civilization collapsesIs an offset mountain range plausible?The Biology behind a slime that uses hydrofluoric acid to disable and digest prey.Can Aspen forests have other species of tree present?what effect if the world have a single massive world giant tree?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








1












$begingroup$


you know stuff like ygdrasil tree but just a normal tree but the biggest and tallest in the world if the root grow to surpass the continental and oceanic plate either it only cover some parts or entire world, can it stop earthquake or make it even worst to the zone covered by the root? or what effect it give?










share|improve this question









$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    What if it isn't one massively tall tree? What about a massive amount of trees springing up from one root system? The outcome will probably be the same as others have explained below, but there is at least an example of it in nature.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree)
    $endgroup$
    – Zillakon
    12 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    ah yeah i was gonna change into that for my world building after the tree collapse just qurious of the effect like earthquake though, thanks for the example.
    $endgroup$
    – Li Jun
    11 hours ago

















1












$begingroup$


you know stuff like ygdrasil tree but just a normal tree but the biggest and tallest in the world if the root grow to surpass the continental and oceanic plate either it only cover some parts or entire world, can it stop earthquake or make it even worst to the zone covered by the root? or what effect it give?










share|improve this question









$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    What if it isn't one massively tall tree? What about a massive amount of trees springing up from one root system? The outcome will probably be the same as others have explained below, but there is at least an example of it in nature.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree)
    $endgroup$
    – Zillakon
    12 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    ah yeah i was gonna change into that for my world building after the tree collapse just qurious of the effect like earthquake though, thanks for the example.
    $endgroup$
    – Li Jun
    11 hours ago













1












1








1





$begingroup$


you know stuff like ygdrasil tree but just a normal tree but the biggest and tallest in the world if the root grow to surpass the continental and oceanic plate either it only cover some parts or entire world, can it stop earthquake or make it even worst to the zone covered by the root? or what effect it give?










share|improve this question









$endgroup$




you know stuff like ygdrasil tree but just a normal tree but the biggest and tallest in the world if the root grow to surpass the continental and oceanic plate either it only cover some parts or entire world, can it stop earthquake or make it even worst to the zone covered by the root? or what effect it give?







biology physics science geophysics






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 14 hours ago









Li JunLi Jun

3162 silver badges15 bronze badges




3162 silver badges15 bronze badges







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    What if it isn't one massively tall tree? What about a massive amount of trees springing up from one root system? The outcome will probably be the same as others have explained below, but there is at least an example of it in nature.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree)
    $endgroup$
    – Zillakon
    12 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    ah yeah i was gonna change into that for my world building after the tree collapse just qurious of the effect like earthquake though, thanks for the example.
    $endgroup$
    – Li Jun
    11 hours ago












  • 1




    $begingroup$
    What if it isn't one massively tall tree? What about a massive amount of trees springing up from one root system? The outcome will probably be the same as others have explained below, but there is at least an example of it in nature.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree)
    $endgroup$
    – Zillakon
    12 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    ah yeah i was gonna change into that for my world building after the tree collapse just qurious of the effect like earthquake though, thanks for the example.
    $endgroup$
    – Li Jun
    11 hours ago







1




1




$begingroup$
What if it isn't one massively tall tree? What about a massive amount of trees springing up from one root system? The outcome will probably be the same as others have explained below, but there is at least an example of it in nature.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree)
$endgroup$
– Zillakon
12 hours ago




$begingroup$
What if it isn't one massively tall tree? What about a massive amount of trees springing up from one root system? The outcome will probably be the same as others have explained below, but there is at least an example of it in nature.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree)
$endgroup$
– Zillakon
12 hours ago












$begingroup$
ah yeah i was gonna change into that for my world building after the tree collapse just qurious of the effect like earthquake though, thanks for the example.
$endgroup$
– Li Jun
11 hours ago




$begingroup$
ah yeah i was gonna change into that for my world building after the tree collapse just qurious of the effect like earthquake though, thanks for the example.
$endgroup$
– Li Jun
11 hours ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















10












$begingroup$

The simple answer is "no"



What we learn from studies like this is that unless the soil is perfect, roots tend to grow out more than they grow down. They would certainly have more trouble getting through solid rock than they would soil, and tend to follow the path of least resistance. Consequently, a super large tree as you describe would have massive stability problems and would easily be blown over in the wind.



But, let's assume that our super-tree's roots can wiggle through anything like the proverbial hot knife through butter. Generally speaking, there's as much tree underground as there is above ground. The Earth's mantle is about 2,900 km thick. This would suggest a 2,900 km tall tree. (We'll also ignore the problems with pressure, heat, and simple nutrition as you descend through the mantle.) But at it's greatest extent, Earth's atmosphere is only about 480 km thick, putting most of the tree into the vacuum of space where it would wither and die for a variety of reasons. This would suggest that the largest our super-tree can be is about 300 km, but let's ignore this for the moment, too, and assume we have a powerful super-tree, 2,900 km tall, which we assume could lock fault lines into place and keep tectonic plates from moving.



The real killer with the idea is the tremendous energy involved with tectonic plates. In my answer to another question I pointed out that the magnitude 9 Sumatra earthquake released energy equivalent to a 2,000 megaton explosion with a blast radius that would devastate an entire hemisphere of our planet. This is why my ultimate answer is no, such a tree would not stop an earthquake. The mass of the Earth is considerably greater than the mass of the tree (even one as large as this).



From a simple point of view. There are a few complexities:



  • The tree's weight would cause some earthquakes by pressing down on fault lines. It would likely create new fault lines.


  • The tree's roots would stop small and potentially medium sized earthquakes by locking areas of the earth together.


  • While the tree would offer some protection against tectonic plates that slide against one another (like rubbing your hands back and forth), it would offer only moderate protection to plates that subduct (one slides under another).


  • But ultimately the tree would lose. Unable to lock all the tectonic plates and trying to stave off the force of the Earth's shifting fluid mass (which is much, much, much greater than the tree) would ultimately create an earthquake that would rip the tree (and, to an extent, the planet) apart.


All of which make for cool story plots, in my personally biased opinion!






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    You say that it would stop some by locking areas of the earth together - I'd argue that rather than stoping them, it would probably just shift them. The forces causing earthquakes wouldn't just be stored, they would get released in the nearest spot weak enough to break. Maybe its safe near the tree, but it might be even worse where the roots get more sparse.
    $endgroup$
    – bendl
    13 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @bendl that's a pretty good point. We don't know what the nature of the tree is beyond it's size. If it's an oak or maple, then it's diameter is roughly equal to its height, meaning it's covering a radius of 2,900 km, which would lock the larger faults (think in terms of erosion control), but I hadn't considered that Mother Earth would simply shift the faults to other locations. I believe you're completely correct about that.
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    13 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    The roots of the tree cracking under the immense strain would also be a considerable concern. If the plates store up energy before slipping causes earthquakes, how much worse would it be if a World Tree root broke??
    $endgroup$
    – Joe Bloggs
    13 hours ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    A bit off topic for the question but since the poster mentioned yggdrasil if he's going for a Norse theme it would make for an interesting explanation of Midgard being surrounded by various 'heim's - those areas are more dangerous because of all the weird tectonics
    $endgroup$
    – bendl
    13 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JoeBloggs you're absolutely correct and that was badly intimated in my bullet about subduction. The shearing force is the wrong direction for roots. I also ignored gravity and the fact that so large a biological material is unknown to Real World science. Looking to explain stuff like this in the Real World is always a challenge.
    $endgroup$
    – JBH
    13 hours ago


















4












$begingroup$

It would have no effect at all. Trees are not stronger than rocks (citation needed) and rocks couldn't stop an Earthquake. The Earth is already full, loaded with old roots and trees. Your tree can only grow down so far. Your tree needs 600km long roots to even reach a spot where it might matter. That puts you well into the upper mantle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_of_the_Earth
It's a bit hot down there, but we don't know if there is any life.



So for this to have any measurable effect, your tree would have to have high pressure magma radiation resistant roots that fill the upper and lower mantle of the Earth. And even then, it's still just wood (or is it, if it can withstand magma?)



To put this another way, your tree would need to be strong enough to:
Stop the moons orbit and hold it above the Earth and stop the spin of the Earth. How much energy would that take, someone answered that. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/169589/how-much-energy-would-it-take-to-stop-earths-rotation-on-its-axis/169593 To be clear you don't need to actually stop the Earths spinning, but you need to be able to counter the Earths reaction to it's spinning, which is pretty much the same thing.



TL/DR The Earth is really big and heavy and is moving really fast, and you just have a tree.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$




















    3












    $begingroup$

    It's more likely that it would make the earthquake less destructive.



    We can model the roots in the rocks like a composite material, which will be stressed by the tectonic movement. The more energy the system stores, the more destructive will be the quake when it breaks up.



    A root being less resistant than rock means that the root will break at a lower load, leaving only the rock to resist. Bt having the rock a lower section due to the presence of the root, it means that it will break down earlier.



    This will prevent storing more energy, thus the resulting quake will be less destructive.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$








    • 2




      $begingroup$
      Ooooh. +1 for pointing out that the root, being biological and therefore "squishy" could absorb/resist energy and dampen the earthquakes! Cool!
      $endgroup$
      – JBH
      13 hours ago


















    0












    $begingroup$

    I think the world tree would make earthquakes worse, since as the roots spread, they’d grow into the fault lines since that is the path of least resistance compared to growing into solid rock.



    As the roots in the fault lines grow longer and thicker, they’d let water and other slimy slippery material in. When the faults snapped, these roots, and water and everything would act as lubricant, making more energy available for destruction that would have otherwise been lost to friction.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$















      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "579"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f149289%2fif-the-world-have-massive-single-giant-world-tree-can-it-stop-earthquake%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      10












      $begingroup$

      The simple answer is "no"



      What we learn from studies like this is that unless the soil is perfect, roots tend to grow out more than they grow down. They would certainly have more trouble getting through solid rock than they would soil, and tend to follow the path of least resistance. Consequently, a super large tree as you describe would have massive stability problems and would easily be blown over in the wind.



      But, let's assume that our super-tree's roots can wiggle through anything like the proverbial hot knife through butter. Generally speaking, there's as much tree underground as there is above ground. The Earth's mantle is about 2,900 km thick. This would suggest a 2,900 km tall tree. (We'll also ignore the problems with pressure, heat, and simple nutrition as you descend through the mantle.) But at it's greatest extent, Earth's atmosphere is only about 480 km thick, putting most of the tree into the vacuum of space where it would wither and die for a variety of reasons. This would suggest that the largest our super-tree can be is about 300 km, but let's ignore this for the moment, too, and assume we have a powerful super-tree, 2,900 km tall, which we assume could lock fault lines into place and keep tectonic plates from moving.



      The real killer with the idea is the tremendous energy involved with tectonic plates. In my answer to another question I pointed out that the magnitude 9 Sumatra earthquake released energy equivalent to a 2,000 megaton explosion with a blast radius that would devastate an entire hemisphere of our planet. This is why my ultimate answer is no, such a tree would not stop an earthquake. The mass of the Earth is considerably greater than the mass of the tree (even one as large as this).



      From a simple point of view. There are a few complexities:



      • The tree's weight would cause some earthquakes by pressing down on fault lines. It would likely create new fault lines.


      • The tree's roots would stop small and potentially medium sized earthquakes by locking areas of the earth together.


      • While the tree would offer some protection against tectonic plates that slide against one another (like rubbing your hands back and forth), it would offer only moderate protection to plates that subduct (one slides under another).


      • But ultimately the tree would lose. Unable to lock all the tectonic plates and trying to stave off the force of the Earth's shifting fluid mass (which is much, much, much greater than the tree) would ultimately create an earthquake that would rip the tree (and, to an extent, the planet) apart.


      All of which make for cool story plots, in my personally biased opinion!






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$








      • 3




        $begingroup$
        You say that it would stop some by locking areas of the earth together - I'd argue that rather than stoping them, it would probably just shift them. The forces causing earthquakes wouldn't just be stored, they would get released in the nearest spot weak enough to break. Maybe its safe near the tree, but it might be even worse where the roots get more sparse.
        $endgroup$
        – bendl
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @bendl that's a pretty good point. We don't know what the nature of the tree is beyond it's size. If it's an oak or maple, then it's diameter is roughly equal to its height, meaning it's covering a radius of 2,900 km, which would lock the larger faults (think in terms of erosion control), but I hadn't considered that Mother Earth would simply shift the faults to other locations. I believe you're completely correct about that.
        $endgroup$
        – JBH
        13 hours ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        The roots of the tree cracking under the immense strain would also be a considerable concern. If the plates store up energy before slipping causes earthquakes, how much worse would it be if a World Tree root broke??
        $endgroup$
        – Joe Bloggs
        13 hours ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        A bit off topic for the question but since the poster mentioned yggdrasil if he's going for a Norse theme it would make for an interesting explanation of Midgard being surrounded by various 'heim's - those areas are more dangerous because of all the weird tectonics
        $endgroup$
        – bendl
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @JoeBloggs you're absolutely correct and that was badly intimated in my bullet about subduction. The shearing force is the wrong direction for roots. I also ignored gravity and the fact that so large a biological material is unknown to Real World science. Looking to explain stuff like this in the Real World is always a challenge.
        $endgroup$
        – JBH
        13 hours ago















      10












      $begingroup$

      The simple answer is "no"



      What we learn from studies like this is that unless the soil is perfect, roots tend to grow out more than they grow down. They would certainly have more trouble getting through solid rock than they would soil, and tend to follow the path of least resistance. Consequently, a super large tree as you describe would have massive stability problems and would easily be blown over in the wind.



      But, let's assume that our super-tree's roots can wiggle through anything like the proverbial hot knife through butter. Generally speaking, there's as much tree underground as there is above ground. The Earth's mantle is about 2,900 km thick. This would suggest a 2,900 km tall tree. (We'll also ignore the problems with pressure, heat, and simple nutrition as you descend through the mantle.) But at it's greatest extent, Earth's atmosphere is only about 480 km thick, putting most of the tree into the vacuum of space where it would wither and die for a variety of reasons. This would suggest that the largest our super-tree can be is about 300 km, but let's ignore this for the moment, too, and assume we have a powerful super-tree, 2,900 km tall, which we assume could lock fault lines into place and keep tectonic plates from moving.



      The real killer with the idea is the tremendous energy involved with tectonic plates. In my answer to another question I pointed out that the magnitude 9 Sumatra earthquake released energy equivalent to a 2,000 megaton explosion with a blast radius that would devastate an entire hemisphere of our planet. This is why my ultimate answer is no, such a tree would not stop an earthquake. The mass of the Earth is considerably greater than the mass of the tree (even one as large as this).



      From a simple point of view. There are a few complexities:



      • The tree's weight would cause some earthquakes by pressing down on fault lines. It would likely create new fault lines.


      • The tree's roots would stop small and potentially medium sized earthquakes by locking areas of the earth together.


      • While the tree would offer some protection against tectonic plates that slide against one another (like rubbing your hands back and forth), it would offer only moderate protection to plates that subduct (one slides under another).


      • But ultimately the tree would lose. Unable to lock all the tectonic plates and trying to stave off the force of the Earth's shifting fluid mass (which is much, much, much greater than the tree) would ultimately create an earthquake that would rip the tree (and, to an extent, the planet) apart.


      All of which make for cool story plots, in my personally biased opinion!






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$








      • 3




        $begingroup$
        You say that it would stop some by locking areas of the earth together - I'd argue that rather than stoping them, it would probably just shift them. The forces causing earthquakes wouldn't just be stored, they would get released in the nearest spot weak enough to break. Maybe its safe near the tree, but it might be even worse where the roots get more sparse.
        $endgroup$
        – bendl
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @bendl that's a pretty good point. We don't know what the nature of the tree is beyond it's size. If it's an oak or maple, then it's diameter is roughly equal to its height, meaning it's covering a radius of 2,900 km, which would lock the larger faults (think in terms of erosion control), but I hadn't considered that Mother Earth would simply shift the faults to other locations. I believe you're completely correct about that.
        $endgroup$
        – JBH
        13 hours ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        The roots of the tree cracking under the immense strain would also be a considerable concern. If the plates store up energy before slipping causes earthquakes, how much worse would it be if a World Tree root broke??
        $endgroup$
        – Joe Bloggs
        13 hours ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        A bit off topic for the question but since the poster mentioned yggdrasil if he's going for a Norse theme it would make for an interesting explanation of Midgard being surrounded by various 'heim's - those areas are more dangerous because of all the weird tectonics
        $endgroup$
        – bendl
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @JoeBloggs you're absolutely correct and that was badly intimated in my bullet about subduction. The shearing force is the wrong direction for roots. I also ignored gravity and the fact that so large a biological material is unknown to Real World science. Looking to explain stuff like this in the Real World is always a challenge.
        $endgroup$
        – JBH
        13 hours ago













      10












      10








      10





      $begingroup$

      The simple answer is "no"



      What we learn from studies like this is that unless the soil is perfect, roots tend to grow out more than they grow down. They would certainly have more trouble getting through solid rock than they would soil, and tend to follow the path of least resistance. Consequently, a super large tree as you describe would have massive stability problems and would easily be blown over in the wind.



      But, let's assume that our super-tree's roots can wiggle through anything like the proverbial hot knife through butter. Generally speaking, there's as much tree underground as there is above ground. The Earth's mantle is about 2,900 km thick. This would suggest a 2,900 km tall tree. (We'll also ignore the problems with pressure, heat, and simple nutrition as you descend through the mantle.) But at it's greatest extent, Earth's atmosphere is only about 480 km thick, putting most of the tree into the vacuum of space where it would wither and die for a variety of reasons. This would suggest that the largest our super-tree can be is about 300 km, but let's ignore this for the moment, too, and assume we have a powerful super-tree, 2,900 km tall, which we assume could lock fault lines into place and keep tectonic plates from moving.



      The real killer with the idea is the tremendous energy involved with tectonic plates. In my answer to another question I pointed out that the magnitude 9 Sumatra earthquake released energy equivalent to a 2,000 megaton explosion with a blast radius that would devastate an entire hemisphere of our planet. This is why my ultimate answer is no, such a tree would not stop an earthquake. The mass of the Earth is considerably greater than the mass of the tree (even one as large as this).



      From a simple point of view. There are a few complexities:



      • The tree's weight would cause some earthquakes by pressing down on fault lines. It would likely create new fault lines.


      • The tree's roots would stop small and potentially medium sized earthquakes by locking areas of the earth together.


      • While the tree would offer some protection against tectonic plates that slide against one another (like rubbing your hands back and forth), it would offer only moderate protection to plates that subduct (one slides under another).


      • But ultimately the tree would lose. Unable to lock all the tectonic plates and trying to stave off the force of the Earth's shifting fluid mass (which is much, much, much greater than the tree) would ultimately create an earthquake that would rip the tree (and, to an extent, the planet) apart.


      All of which make for cool story plots, in my personally biased opinion!






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$



      The simple answer is "no"



      What we learn from studies like this is that unless the soil is perfect, roots tend to grow out more than they grow down. They would certainly have more trouble getting through solid rock than they would soil, and tend to follow the path of least resistance. Consequently, a super large tree as you describe would have massive stability problems and would easily be blown over in the wind.



      But, let's assume that our super-tree's roots can wiggle through anything like the proverbial hot knife through butter. Generally speaking, there's as much tree underground as there is above ground. The Earth's mantle is about 2,900 km thick. This would suggest a 2,900 km tall tree. (We'll also ignore the problems with pressure, heat, and simple nutrition as you descend through the mantle.) But at it's greatest extent, Earth's atmosphere is only about 480 km thick, putting most of the tree into the vacuum of space where it would wither and die for a variety of reasons. This would suggest that the largest our super-tree can be is about 300 km, but let's ignore this for the moment, too, and assume we have a powerful super-tree, 2,900 km tall, which we assume could lock fault lines into place and keep tectonic plates from moving.



      The real killer with the idea is the tremendous energy involved with tectonic plates. In my answer to another question I pointed out that the magnitude 9 Sumatra earthquake released energy equivalent to a 2,000 megaton explosion with a blast radius that would devastate an entire hemisphere of our planet. This is why my ultimate answer is no, such a tree would not stop an earthquake. The mass of the Earth is considerably greater than the mass of the tree (even one as large as this).



      From a simple point of view. There are a few complexities:



      • The tree's weight would cause some earthquakes by pressing down on fault lines. It would likely create new fault lines.


      • The tree's roots would stop small and potentially medium sized earthquakes by locking areas of the earth together.


      • While the tree would offer some protection against tectonic plates that slide against one another (like rubbing your hands back and forth), it would offer only moderate protection to plates that subduct (one slides under another).


      • But ultimately the tree would lose. Unable to lock all the tectonic plates and trying to stave off the force of the Earth's shifting fluid mass (which is much, much, much greater than the tree) would ultimately create an earthquake that would rip the tree (and, to an extent, the planet) apart.


      All of which make for cool story plots, in my personally biased opinion!







      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered 14 hours ago









      JBHJBH

      55.2k8 gold badges126 silver badges267 bronze badges




      55.2k8 gold badges126 silver badges267 bronze badges







      • 3




        $begingroup$
        You say that it would stop some by locking areas of the earth together - I'd argue that rather than stoping them, it would probably just shift them. The forces causing earthquakes wouldn't just be stored, they would get released in the nearest spot weak enough to break. Maybe its safe near the tree, but it might be even worse where the roots get more sparse.
        $endgroup$
        – bendl
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @bendl that's a pretty good point. We don't know what the nature of the tree is beyond it's size. If it's an oak or maple, then it's diameter is roughly equal to its height, meaning it's covering a radius of 2,900 km, which would lock the larger faults (think in terms of erosion control), but I hadn't considered that Mother Earth would simply shift the faults to other locations. I believe you're completely correct about that.
        $endgroup$
        – JBH
        13 hours ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        The roots of the tree cracking under the immense strain would also be a considerable concern. If the plates store up energy before slipping causes earthquakes, how much worse would it be if a World Tree root broke??
        $endgroup$
        – Joe Bloggs
        13 hours ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        A bit off topic for the question but since the poster mentioned yggdrasil if he's going for a Norse theme it would make for an interesting explanation of Midgard being surrounded by various 'heim's - those areas are more dangerous because of all the weird tectonics
        $endgroup$
        – bendl
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @JoeBloggs you're absolutely correct and that was badly intimated in my bullet about subduction. The shearing force is the wrong direction for roots. I also ignored gravity and the fact that so large a biological material is unknown to Real World science. Looking to explain stuff like this in the Real World is always a challenge.
        $endgroup$
        – JBH
        13 hours ago












      • 3




        $begingroup$
        You say that it would stop some by locking areas of the earth together - I'd argue that rather than stoping them, it would probably just shift them. The forces causing earthquakes wouldn't just be stored, they would get released in the nearest spot weak enough to break. Maybe its safe near the tree, but it might be even worse where the roots get more sparse.
        $endgroup$
        – bendl
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @bendl that's a pretty good point. We don't know what the nature of the tree is beyond it's size. If it's an oak or maple, then it's diameter is roughly equal to its height, meaning it's covering a radius of 2,900 km, which would lock the larger faults (think in terms of erosion control), but I hadn't considered that Mother Earth would simply shift the faults to other locations. I believe you're completely correct about that.
        $endgroup$
        – JBH
        13 hours ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        The roots of the tree cracking under the immense strain would also be a considerable concern. If the plates store up energy before slipping causes earthquakes, how much worse would it be if a World Tree root broke??
        $endgroup$
        – Joe Bloggs
        13 hours ago






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        A bit off topic for the question but since the poster mentioned yggdrasil if he's going for a Norse theme it would make for an interesting explanation of Midgard being surrounded by various 'heim's - those areas are more dangerous because of all the weird tectonics
        $endgroup$
        – bendl
        13 hours ago






      • 1




        $begingroup$
        @JoeBloggs you're absolutely correct and that was badly intimated in my bullet about subduction. The shearing force is the wrong direction for roots. I also ignored gravity and the fact that so large a biological material is unknown to Real World science. Looking to explain stuff like this in the Real World is always a challenge.
        $endgroup$
        – JBH
        13 hours ago







      3




      3




      $begingroup$
      You say that it would stop some by locking areas of the earth together - I'd argue that rather than stoping them, it would probably just shift them. The forces causing earthquakes wouldn't just be stored, they would get released in the nearest spot weak enough to break. Maybe its safe near the tree, but it might be even worse where the roots get more sparse.
      $endgroup$
      – bendl
      13 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      You say that it would stop some by locking areas of the earth together - I'd argue that rather than stoping them, it would probably just shift them. The forces causing earthquakes wouldn't just be stored, they would get released in the nearest spot weak enough to break. Maybe its safe near the tree, but it might be even worse where the roots get more sparse.
      $endgroup$
      – bendl
      13 hours ago




      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      @bendl that's a pretty good point. We don't know what the nature of the tree is beyond it's size. If it's an oak or maple, then it's diameter is roughly equal to its height, meaning it's covering a radius of 2,900 km, which would lock the larger faults (think in terms of erosion control), but I hadn't considered that Mother Earth would simply shift the faults to other locations. I believe you're completely correct about that.
      $endgroup$
      – JBH
      13 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      @bendl that's a pretty good point. We don't know what the nature of the tree is beyond it's size. If it's an oak or maple, then it's diameter is roughly equal to its height, meaning it's covering a radius of 2,900 km, which would lock the larger faults (think in terms of erosion control), but I hadn't considered that Mother Earth would simply shift the faults to other locations. I believe you're completely correct about that.
      $endgroup$
      – JBH
      13 hours ago




      2




      2




      $begingroup$
      The roots of the tree cracking under the immense strain would also be a considerable concern. If the plates store up energy before slipping causes earthquakes, how much worse would it be if a World Tree root broke??
      $endgroup$
      – Joe Bloggs
      13 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      The roots of the tree cracking under the immense strain would also be a considerable concern. If the plates store up energy before slipping causes earthquakes, how much worse would it be if a World Tree root broke??
      $endgroup$
      – Joe Bloggs
      13 hours ago




      2




      2




      $begingroup$
      A bit off topic for the question but since the poster mentioned yggdrasil if he's going for a Norse theme it would make for an interesting explanation of Midgard being surrounded by various 'heim's - those areas are more dangerous because of all the weird tectonics
      $endgroup$
      – bendl
      13 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      A bit off topic for the question but since the poster mentioned yggdrasil if he's going for a Norse theme it would make for an interesting explanation of Midgard being surrounded by various 'heim's - those areas are more dangerous because of all the weird tectonics
      $endgroup$
      – bendl
      13 hours ago




      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      @JoeBloggs you're absolutely correct and that was badly intimated in my bullet about subduction. The shearing force is the wrong direction for roots. I also ignored gravity and the fact that so large a biological material is unknown to Real World science. Looking to explain stuff like this in the Real World is always a challenge.
      $endgroup$
      – JBH
      13 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      @JoeBloggs you're absolutely correct and that was badly intimated in my bullet about subduction. The shearing force is the wrong direction for roots. I also ignored gravity and the fact that so large a biological material is unknown to Real World science. Looking to explain stuff like this in the Real World is always a challenge.
      $endgroup$
      – JBH
      13 hours ago













      4












      $begingroup$

      It would have no effect at all. Trees are not stronger than rocks (citation needed) and rocks couldn't stop an Earthquake. The Earth is already full, loaded with old roots and trees. Your tree can only grow down so far. Your tree needs 600km long roots to even reach a spot where it might matter. That puts you well into the upper mantle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_of_the_Earth
      It's a bit hot down there, but we don't know if there is any life.



      So for this to have any measurable effect, your tree would have to have high pressure magma radiation resistant roots that fill the upper and lower mantle of the Earth. And even then, it's still just wood (or is it, if it can withstand magma?)



      To put this another way, your tree would need to be strong enough to:
      Stop the moons orbit and hold it above the Earth and stop the spin of the Earth. How much energy would that take, someone answered that. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/169589/how-much-energy-would-it-take-to-stop-earths-rotation-on-its-axis/169593 To be clear you don't need to actually stop the Earths spinning, but you need to be able to counter the Earths reaction to it's spinning, which is pretty much the same thing.



      TL/DR The Earth is really big and heavy and is moving really fast, and you just have a tree.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$

















        4












        $begingroup$

        It would have no effect at all. Trees are not stronger than rocks (citation needed) and rocks couldn't stop an Earthquake. The Earth is already full, loaded with old roots and trees. Your tree can only grow down so far. Your tree needs 600km long roots to even reach a spot where it might matter. That puts you well into the upper mantle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_of_the_Earth
        It's a bit hot down there, but we don't know if there is any life.



        So for this to have any measurable effect, your tree would have to have high pressure magma radiation resistant roots that fill the upper and lower mantle of the Earth. And even then, it's still just wood (or is it, if it can withstand magma?)



        To put this another way, your tree would need to be strong enough to:
        Stop the moons orbit and hold it above the Earth and stop the spin of the Earth. How much energy would that take, someone answered that. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/169589/how-much-energy-would-it-take-to-stop-earths-rotation-on-its-axis/169593 To be clear you don't need to actually stop the Earths spinning, but you need to be able to counter the Earths reaction to it's spinning, which is pretty much the same thing.



        TL/DR The Earth is really big and heavy and is moving really fast, and you just have a tree.






        share|improve this answer











        $endgroup$















          4












          4








          4





          $begingroup$

          It would have no effect at all. Trees are not stronger than rocks (citation needed) and rocks couldn't stop an Earthquake. The Earth is already full, loaded with old roots and trees. Your tree can only grow down so far. Your tree needs 600km long roots to even reach a spot where it might matter. That puts you well into the upper mantle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_of_the_Earth
          It's a bit hot down there, but we don't know if there is any life.



          So for this to have any measurable effect, your tree would have to have high pressure magma radiation resistant roots that fill the upper and lower mantle of the Earth. And even then, it's still just wood (or is it, if it can withstand magma?)



          To put this another way, your tree would need to be strong enough to:
          Stop the moons orbit and hold it above the Earth and stop the spin of the Earth. How much energy would that take, someone answered that. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/169589/how-much-energy-would-it-take-to-stop-earths-rotation-on-its-axis/169593 To be clear you don't need to actually stop the Earths spinning, but you need to be able to counter the Earths reaction to it's spinning, which is pretty much the same thing.



          TL/DR The Earth is really big and heavy and is moving really fast, and you just have a tree.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          It would have no effect at all. Trees are not stronger than rocks (citation needed) and rocks couldn't stop an Earthquake. The Earth is already full, loaded with old roots and trees. Your tree can only grow down so far. Your tree needs 600km long roots to even reach a spot where it might matter. That puts you well into the upper mantle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_of_the_Earth
          It's a bit hot down there, but we don't know if there is any life.



          So for this to have any measurable effect, your tree would have to have high pressure magma radiation resistant roots that fill the upper and lower mantle of the Earth. And even then, it's still just wood (or is it, if it can withstand magma?)



          To put this another way, your tree would need to be strong enough to:
          Stop the moons orbit and hold it above the Earth and stop the spin of the Earth. How much energy would that take, someone answered that. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/169589/how-much-energy-would-it-take-to-stop-earths-rotation-on-its-axis/169593 To be clear you don't need to actually stop the Earths spinning, but you need to be able to counter the Earths reaction to it's spinning, which is pretty much the same thing.



          TL/DR The Earth is really big and heavy and is moving really fast, and you just have a tree.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 11 hours ago

























          answered 14 hours ago









          Trevor DTrevor D

          3,0143 silver badges20 bronze badges




          3,0143 silver badges20 bronze badges





















              3












              $begingroup$

              It's more likely that it would make the earthquake less destructive.



              We can model the roots in the rocks like a composite material, which will be stressed by the tectonic movement. The more energy the system stores, the more destructive will be the quake when it breaks up.



              A root being less resistant than rock means that the root will break at a lower load, leaving only the rock to resist. Bt having the rock a lower section due to the presence of the root, it means that it will break down earlier.



              This will prevent storing more energy, thus the resulting quake will be less destructive.






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$








              • 2




                $begingroup$
                Ooooh. +1 for pointing out that the root, being biological and therefore "squishy" could absorb/resist energy and dampen the earthquakes! Cool!
                $endgroup$
                – JBH
                13 hours ago















              3












              $begingroup$

              It's more likely that it would make the earthquake less destructive.



              We can model the roots in the rocks like a composite material, which will be stressed by the tectonic movement. The more energy the system stores, the more destructive will be the quake when it breaks up.



              A root being less resistant than rock means that the root will break at a lower load, leaving only the rock to resist. Bt having the rock a lower section due to the presence of the root, it means that it will break down earlier.



              This will prevent storing more energy, thus the resulting quake will be less destructive.






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$








              • 2




                $begingroup$
                Ooooh. +1 for pointing out that the root, being biological and therefore "squishy" could absorb/resist energy and dampen the earthquakes! Cool!
                $endgroup$
                – JBH
                13 hours ago













              3












              3








              3





              $begingroup$

              It's more likely that it would make the earthquake less destructive.



              We can model the roots in the rocks like a composite material, which will be stressed by the tectonic movement. The more energy the system stores, the more destructive will be the quake when it breaks up.



              A root being less resistant than rock means that the root will break at a lower load, leaving only the rock to resist. Bt having the rock a lower section due to the presence of the root, it means that it will break down earlier.



              This will prevent storing more energy, thus the resulting quake will be less destructive.






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$



              It's more likely that it would make the earthquake less destructive.



              We can model the roots in the rocks like a composite material, which will be stressed by the tectonic movement. The more energy the system stores, the more destructive will be the quake when it breaks up.



              A root being less resistant than rock means that the root will break at a lower load, leaving only the rock to resist. Bt having the rock a lower section due to the presence of the root, it means that it will break down earlier.



              This will prevent storing more energy, thus the resulting quake will be less destructive.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered 13 hours ago









              L.DutchL.Dutch

              99.7k31 gold badges234 silver badges482 bronze badges




              99.7k31 gold badges234 silver badges482 bronze badges







              • 2




                $begingroup$
                Ooooh. +1 for pointing out that the root, being biological and therefore "squishy" could absorb/resist energy and dampen the earthquakes! Cool!
                $endgroup$
                – JBH
                13 hours ago












              • 2




                $begingroup$
                Ooooh. +1 for pointing out that the root, being biological and therefore "squishy" could absorb/resist energy and dampen the earthquakes! Cool!
                $endgroup$
                – JBH
                13 hours ago







              2




              2




              $begingroup$
              Ooooh. +1 for pointing out that the root, being biological and therefore "squishy" could absorb/resist energy and dampen the earthquakes! Cool!
              $endgroup$
              – JBH
              13 hours ago




              $begingroup$
              Ooooh. +1 for pointing out that the root, being biological and therefore "squishy" could absorb/resist energy and dampen the earthquakes! Cool!
              $endgroup$
              – JBH
              13 hours ago











              0












              $begingroup$

              I think the world tree would make earthquakes worse, since as the roots spread, they’d grow into the fault lines since that is the path of least resistance compared to growing into solid rock.



              As the roots in the fault lines grow longer and thicker, they’d let water and other slimy slippery material in. When the faults snapped, these roots, and water and everything would act as lubricant, making more energy available for destruction that would have otherwise been lost to friction.






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$

















                0












                $begingroup$

                I think the world tree would make earthquakes worse, since as the roots spread, they’d grow into the fault lines since that is the path of least resistance compared to growing into solid rock.



                As the roots in the fault lines grow longer and thicker, they’d let water and other slimy slippery material in. When the faults snapped, these roots, and water and everything would act as lubricant, making more energy available for destruction that would have otherwise been lost to friction.






                share|improve this answer









                $endgroup$















                  0












                  0








                  0





                  $begingroup$

                  I think the world tree would make earthquakes worse, since as the roots spread, they’d grow into the fault lines since that is the path of least resistance compared to growing into solid rock.



                  As the roots in the fault lines grow longer and thicker, they’d let water and other slimy slippery material in. When the faults snapped, these roots, and water and everything would act as lubricant, making more energy available for destruction that would have otherwise been lost to friction.






                  share|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  I think the world tree would make earthquakes worse, since as the roots spread, they’d grow into the fault lines since that is the path of least resistance compared to growing into solid rock.



                  As the roots in the fault lines grow longer and thicker, they’d let water and other slimy slippery material in. When the faults snapped, these roots, and water and everything would act as lubricant, making more energy available for destruction that would have otherwise been lost to friction.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 13 mins ago









                  EDLEDL

                  2,1493 silver badges11 bronze badges




                  2,1493 silver badges11 bronze badges



























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded
















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f149289%2fif-the-world-have-massive-single-giant-world-tree-can-it-stop-earthquake%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      19. јануар Садржај Догађаји Рођења Смрти Празници и дани сећања Види још Референце Мени за навигацијуу

                      Israel Cuprins Etimologie | Istorie | Geografie | Politică | Demografie | Educație | Economie | Cultură | Note explicative | Note bibliografice | Bibliografie | Legături externe | Meniu de navigaresite web oficialfacebooktweeterGoogle+Instagramcanal YouTubeInstagramtextmodificaremodificarewww.technion.ac.ilnew.huji.ac.ilwww.weizmann.ac.ilwww1.biu.ac.ilenglish.tau.ac.ilwww.haifa.ac.ilin.bgu.ac.ilwww.openu.ac.ilwww.ariel.ac.ilCIA FactbookHarta Israelului"Negotiating Jerusalem," Palestine–Israel JournalThe Schizoid Nature of Modern Hebrew: A Slavic Language in Search of a Semitic Past„Arabic in Israel: an official language and a cultural bridge”„Latest Population Statistics for Israel”„Israel Population”„Tables”„Report for Selected Countries and Subjects”Human Development Report 2016: Human Development for Everyone„Distribution of family income - Gini index”The World FactbookJerusalem Law„Israel”„Israel”„Zionist Leaders: David Ben-Gurion 1886–1973”„The status of Jerusalem”„Analysis: Kadima's big plans”„Israel's Hard-Learned Lessons”„The Legacy of Undefined Borders, Tel Aviv Notes No. 40, 5 iunie 2002”„Israel Journal: A Land Without Borders”„Population”„Israel closes decade with population of 7.5 million”Time Series-DataBank„Selected Statistics on Jerusalem Day 2007 (Hebrew)”Golan belongs to Syria, Druze protestGlobal Survey 2006: Middle East Progress Amid Global Gains in FreedomWHO: Life expectancy in Israel among highest in the worldInternational Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2011: Nominal GDP list of countries. Data for the year 2010.„Israel's accession to the OECD”Popular Opinion„On the Move”Hosea 12:5„Walking the Bible Timeline”„Palestine: History”„Return to Zion”An invention called 'the Jewish people' – Haaretz – Israel NewsoriginalJewish and Non-Jewish Population of Palestine-Israel (1517–2004)ImmigrationJewishvirtuallibrary.orgChapter One: The Heralders of Zionism„The birth of modern Israel: A scrap of paper that changed history”„League of Nations: The Mandate for Palestine, 24 iulie 1922”The Population of Palestine Prior to 1948originalBackground Paper No. 47 (ST/DPI/SER.A/47)History: Foreign DominationTwo Hundred and Seventh Plenary Meeting„Israel (Labor Zionism)”Population, by Religion and Population GroupThe Suez CrisisAdolf EichmannJustice Ministry Reply to Amnesty International Report„The Interregnum”Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs – The Palestinian National Covenant- July 1968Research on terrorism: trends, achievements & failuresThe Routledge Atlas of the Arab–Israeli conflict: The Complete History of the Struggle and the Efforts to Resolve It"George Habash, Palestinian Terrorism Tactician, Dies at 82."„1973: Arab states attack Israeli forces”Agranat Commission„Has Israel Annexed East Jerusalem?”original„After 4 Years, Intifada Still Smolders”From the End of the Cold War to 2001originalThe Oslo Accords, 1993Israel-PLO Recognition – Exchange of Letters between PM Rabin and Chairman Arafat – Sept 9- 1993Foundation for Middle East PeaceSources of Population Growth: Total Israeli Population and Settler Population, 1991–2003original„Israel marks Rabin assassination”The Wye River Memorandumoriginal„West Bank barrier route disputed, Israeli missile kills 2”"Permanent Ceasefire to Be Based on Creation Of Buffer Zone Free of Armed Personnel Other than UN, Lebanese Forces"„Hezbollah kills 8 soldiers, kidnaps two in offensive on northern border”„Olmert confirms peace talks with Syria”„Battleground Gaza: Israeli ground forces invade the strip”„IDF begins Gaza troop withdrawal, hours after ending 3-week offensive”„THE LAND: Geography and Climate”„Area of districts, sub-districts, natural regions and lakes”„Israel - Geography”„Makhteshim Country”Israel and the Palestinian Territories„Makhtesh Ramon”„The Living Dead Sea”„Temperatures reach record high in Pakistan”„Climate Extremes In Israel”Israel in figures„Deuteronom”„JNF: 240 million trees planted since 1901”„Vegetation of Israel and Neighboring Countries”Environmental Law in Israel„Executive branch”„Israel's election process explained”„The Electoral System in Israel”„Constitution for Israel”„All 120 incoming Knesset members”„Statul ISRAEL”„The Judiciary: The Court System”„Israel's high court unique in region”„Israel and the International Criminal Court: A Legal Battlefield”„Localities and population, by population group, district, sub-district and natural region”„Israel: Districts, Major Cities, Urban Localities & Metropolitan Areas”„Israel-Egypt Relations: Background & Overview of Peace Treaty”„Solana to Haaretz: New Rules of War Needed for Age of Terror”„Israel's Announcement Regarding Settlements”„United Nations Security Council Resolution 497”„Security Council resolution 478 (1980) on the status of Jerusalem”„Arabs will ask U.N. to seek razing of Israeli wall”„Olmert: Willing to trade land for peace”„Mapping Peace between Syria and Israel”„Egypt: Israel must accept the land-for-peace formula”„Israel: Age structure from 2005 to 2015”„Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 306 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 188 countries, 1990–2013: quantifying the epidemiological transition”10.1016/S0140-6736(15)61340-X„World Health Statistics 2014”„Life expectancy for Israeli men world's 4th highest”„Family Structure and Well-Being Across Israel's Diverse Population”„Fertility among Jewish and Muslim Women in Israel, by Level of Religiosity, 1979-2009”„Israel leaders in birth rate, but poverty major challenge”„Ethnic Groups”„Israel's population: Over 8.5 million”„Israel - Ethnic groups”„Jews, by country of origin and age”„Minority Communities in Israel: Background & Overview”„Israel”„Language in Israel”„Selected Data from the 2011 Social Survey on Mastery of the Hebrew Language and Usage of Languages”„Religions”„5 facts about Israeli Druze, a unique religious and ethnic group”„Israël”Israel Country Study Guide„Haredi city in Negev – blessing or curse?”„New town Harish harbors hopes of being more than another Pleasantville”„List of localities, in alphabetical order”„Muncitorii români, doriți în Israel”„Prietenia româno-israeliană la nevoie se cunoaște”„The Higher Education System in Israel”„Middle East”„Academic Ranking of World Universities 2016”„Israel”„Israel”„Jewish Nobel Prize Winners”„All Nobel Prizes in Literature”„All Nobel Peace Prizes”„All Prizes in Economic Sciences”„All Nobel Prizes in Chemistry”„List of Fields Medallists”„Sakharov Prize”„Țara care și-a sfidat "destinul" și se bate umăr la umăr cu Silicon Valley”„Apple's R&D center in Israel grew to about 800 employees”„Tim Cook: Apple's Herzliya R&D center second-largest in world”„Lecții de economie de la Israel”„Land use”Israel Investment and Business GuideA Country Study: IsraelCentral Bureau of StatisticsFlorin Diaconu, „Kadima: Flexibilitate și pragmatism, dar nici un compromis în chestiuni vitale", în Revista Institutului Diplomatic Român, anul I, numărul I, semestrul I, 2006, pp. 71-72Florin Diaconu, „Likud: Dreapta israeliană constant opusă retrocedării teritoriilor cureite prin luptă în 1967", în Revista Institutului Diplomatic Român, anul I, numărul I, semestrul I, 2006, pp. 73-74MassadaIsraelul a crescut in 50 de ani cât alte state intr-un mileniuIsrael Government PortalIsraelIsraelIsraelmmmmmXX451232cb118646298(data)4027808-634110000 0004 0372 0767n7900328503691455-bb46-37e3-91d2-cb064a35ffcc1003570400564274ge1294033523775214929302638955X146498911146498911

                      Кастелфранко ди Сопра Становништво Референце Спољашње везе Мени за навигацију43°37′18″ СГШ; 11°33′32″ ИГД / 43.62156° СГШ; 11.55885° ИГД / 43.62156; 11.5588543°37′18″ СГШ; 11°33′32″ ИГД / 43.62156° СГШ; 11.55885° ИГД / 43.62156; 11.558853179688„The GeoNames geographical database”„Istituto Nazionale di Statistica”проширитиууWorldCat156923403n850174324558639-1cb14643287r(подаци)