Can Shock Remanent Magnetization be Distinguished from Thermal Remanent Magnetization in the Natural Remanent Magnetization (NRM) of Apollo Samples?

Other

Scientific paper

Rate now

  [ 0.00 ] – not rated yet Voters 0   Comments 0

Details

1521 Paleointensity, 1595 Planetary Magnetism: All Frequencies And Wavelengths

Scientific paper

The ages of lunar samples, whose NRM appears to require relatively strong lunar surface fields, shows a peak between ~3.65 and ~3.9 Gyrs., e.g Cisowski et al., (1983). However, it has been pointed out that none of these samples, with the possible exception of 62235, satisfy minimal requirement criteria for classical paleointensity determinations (Lawrence et al., 2008). Without successful paleointensity experiments, it is not clear what the peak in the age distribution of samples giving strong field estimates means. The use of AF demagnetization characteristics of remanent magnetizations can be a powerful aid in the interpretation of the NRM of lunar samples. Moreover, the origin of the NRM of samples such as 62235, which are comparatively well behaved in classical paleointensity experiments is not necessarily determined by these techniques. AF demagnetization characteristics can help to show whether the NRM of Melt Rocks and Mare Basalts is predominantly primary, acquired during initial cooling, or is secondary, having been acquired in impact related shock. Examples will be given of the use of AF demagnetization characteristics to attempt to distinguish between NRM whose origin is a Shock Remanent Magnetization and a Thermal Remanent Magnetization. This type of analysis suggests that the NRM of a number of Mare Basalts may have been acquired as they initially cooled and recorded lunar surface fields, as suggested for example by Stephenson and Collinson (1974). If the NRM of these Mare basalts can be demonstrated to have been acquired during cooling, then the recorded field must have been present over a significant period of time and the case for a lunar dynamo is strengthened, If on the other hand, their magnetization has a shock origin, there is always the possibility that a transient field associated with an impact event has been recorded.

No associations

LandOfFree

Say what you really think

Search LandOfFree.com for scientists and scientific papers. Rate them and share your experience with other people.

Rating

Can Shock Remanent Magnetization be Distinguished from Thermal Remanent Magnetization in the Natural Remanent Magnetization (NRM) of Apollo Samples? does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.

If you have personal experience with Can Shock Remanent Magnetization be Distinguished from Thermal Remanent Magnetization in the Natural Remanent Magnetization (NRM) of Apollo Samples?, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Can Shock Remanent Magnetization be Distinguished from Thermal Remanent Magnetization in the Natural Remanent Magnetization (NRM) of Apollo Samples? will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

     

Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-1242168

  Search
All data on this website is collected from public sources. Our data reflects the most accurate information available at the time of publication.