Geoid, Topography, and Convection-driven Crustal Deformation on Venus
M. Simons, Bradford H. Hager, Sean C. Solomon
Abstract
Open-access reader
M. Simons, Bradford H. Hager, Sean C. Solomon
Abstract
Open-access reader
High-resolution Magellan images and altimetry of Venus reveal a wide range of styles and scales of surface deformation that cannot readily be explained within the classical terrestrial plate tectonic paradigm. The high correlation of long-wavelength topography and gravity and the large apparent depths of compensation suggest that Venus lacks an upper-mantle low-viscosity zone. A key difference between Earth and Venus may be the degree of coupling between the convecting mantle and the overlying lithosphere. Mantle flow should then have recognizable signatures in the relationships between surface topography, crustal deformation, and the observed gravity field.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
High-resolution Magellan images and altimetry of Venus reveal a wide range of styles and scales of surface deformation that cannot readily be explained within the classical terrestrial plate tectonic paradigm. The high correlation of long-wavelength topography and gravity and the large apparent depths of compensation suggest that Venus lacks an upper-mantle low-viscosity zone. A key difference between Earth and Venus may be the degree of coupling between the convecting mantle and the overlying lithosphere. Mantle flow should then have recognizable signatures in the relationships between surface topography, crustal deformation, and the observed gravity field.
Key concepts: Geology, Venus, Geoid, Lithosphere, Mantle convection, Mantle (geology), Geophysics, Plate tectonics