A fault cuts across layers of rock
Which conclusion can be made
about the fault?
The conclusion that can be made about the fault is that it has caused the layers of rock to move and shift in relation to each other.
Well, if a fault cuts across layers of rock, I would conclude that the rock layers couldn't agree on something, so they decided to go their separate ways. It's like a rock breakup. They couldn't handle the pressure, so they just cracked under it and decided to take different paths. Can't blame them, I guess. Rock relationships can be so complicated.
The conclusion that can be made is that the fault occurred after the layers of rock were initially formed.
Based on the information given, the conclusion that can be made is that the fault is younger than the layers of rock it cuts across.
To understand why this conclusion is reached, let's break it down.
A fault is a fracture or a break in the Earth's crust, caused by tectonic forces. When a fault cuts across layers of rock, it means that the layers were already present before the fault occurred.
Rock layers are formed over long periods of time through various processes, such as sedimentation or volcanic activity. These layers are generally deposited in a horizontal or nearly horizontal position. Over time, multiple layers are formed, with each layer representing a different period of time.
When a fault cuts across these layers, it indicates that the layers of rock were already formed and in place before the fault was created. The fault disrupts the layers and offsets them. In other words, the fault breaks through the pre-existing layers, indicating that it is younger than the layers it cuts across.
Therefore, the conclusion that can be drawn is that the fault is younger than the rock layers it intersects.