Plate-tectonics is rarely mentioned in terms of Mars, except to say that it has some tectonic characteristics, like volcanoes, but has no evidence of plate boundaries. The volcanoes have grown to enormous proportions partly because of an absence of crustal movement, and its weak magnetic field suggests that its interior convection currents aren't strong enough to either generate a stronger magnetic field or drive crustal movement. It is generally understood that any tectonic activity would have ceased very early in the planet's life and its influence on surface characteristics long ceased, as Mars, being a smaller world, would have cooled earlier.

However, one of the key elements of my hypothesis is the questioning of this understanding that celestial bodies retain the diameters at which they originally form. Here I should re-iterate some thoughts I expressed in 'About This Site', in relation to what I think the essential problem I am actually trying to address is - compartmentalization of disciplines, and consequently, working with plate-tectonics on the basis of accepting Accretion as the main process in planet formation in Astro-physics, which is the main reason it is believed that Mars, and all planets, were always the size they are now.

I would like to instead look at the positioning of water-ice and hydrated minerals in terms of crustal movement and the concept of a contracting sphere, and Mars as a contracted Earth, formerly having the same continent pattern.