Dynamic compensation of Venus's geoid: A comparison with Earth
W. S. Kiefer, Bradford H. Hager, Mark A. Richards
Abstract
W. S. Kiefer, Bradford H. Hager, Mark A. Richards
Abstract
Unlike Earth, on Venus long wavelength geoid anomalies correlate well with topography. Venus's admittance curve between harmonic degrees 3 and 18 is inconsistent with Airy isostasy but is consistent with dynamic support from convection being the dominant mechanism of compensation on Venus. We model dynamic compensation on Venus using simple flow models which assume a spherically symmetric Newtonian mantle viscosity profile. Preliminary models parameterize the viscosity variation with depth as a 2 layer model with a boundary at 720 km depth. A model in which viscosity in the lower mantle is a factor of 10 lower than in the upper mantle can explain Venus's observed admittance curve for degrees 3 through 18. Dynamic models which include a chemical boundary between the upper and lower mantle do not successfully explain the observed admittance curve, indicating that Venus does not have a chemically layered mantle.
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.
Unlike Earth, on Venus long wavelength geoid anomalies correlate well with topography. Venus's admittance curve between harmonic degrees 3 and 18 is inconsistent with Airy isostasy but is consistent with dynamic support from convection being the dominant mechanism of compensation on Venus. We model dynamic compensation on Venus using simple flow models which assume a spherically symmetric Newtonian mantle viscosity profile. Preliminary models parameterize the viscosity variation with depth as a 2 layer model with a boundary at 720 km depth. A model in which viscosity in the lower mantle is a factor of 10 lower than in the upper mantle can explain Venus's observed admittance curve for degrees 3 through 18. Dynamic models which include a chemical boundary between the upper and lower mantle do not successfully explain the observed admittance curve, indicating that Venus does not have a chemically layered mantle.
Key concepts: Venus, Mantle (geology), Geoid, Mantle convection, Geology, Geophysics, Ocean surface topography, Geodesy