Simple scaling relations in geodynamics: The role of pressure in mantle convection and plume formation
- 52 Downloads
Scaling relations are important in extrapolating laboratory experiments to the Earth’s mantle. In planetary interiors, compression becomes an important parameter and it is useful to explore scalings that involve volume. I use simple volume scaling relations that allow one to extrapolate laboratory experiments and upper mantle behavior, in a thermodynamically self-consistent way, to predict lower mantle behavior. The relations are similar to the quasi-harmonic approximation. Slabs and plates have characteristic dimensions of hundreds of kilometers and time constants of 100 million years, but the volume scalings predict order of magnitude higher values in the deep mantle. The scaling relations imply that the deep mantle is a sluggish system with ancient features. They imply irreversible chemical stratification and do not favor the plume hypothesis.
Keywordsscaling relations volume-dependent properties sluggish flow in deep mantle chemical stratification no mantle plumes
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.Anderson, Don L., Theory of the Earth, Boston: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1989, 366. http://resolver.caltech.edu/CaltechBOOK: 1989.001Google Scholar
- 4.Elder, J., The Bowels of the Earth, Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1976.Google Scholar
- 5.Dziewonski, A., Global seismic tomography: past, present and future, in Problems in Geophysics for the New Millennium (eds. Boschi, E., Ekstrom, G., Morelli, A.), Bologna: Editrice Compositori, 2000.Google Scholar
- 13.Tackley, P., Three dimensional simulations of mantle convection with a thermo-chemical basal boundary layer, in the Core-Mantle Boundary Region, Geodynamics Series (eds. Gurnis, M., Wysession, M. E., Knittle, E. et al.), Washington, D.C.: American Geophysical Union, 1998, 28: 231–353.Google Scholar
- 14.Morgan, W. J., Deep mantle convection plumes and plate motions, Bulletin of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, 1972, 56: 203–213.Google Scholar