Melting and mixing states of the Earth’s mantle after the Moon-forming impact

By M. Nakajima, D. Stevenson. 2015

183 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The Earth's Moon is thought to have formed by an impact between the Earth and an impactor around 4.5 billion years ago. This impact could have been so energetic that it could have mixed and homogenized the Earth's mantle. However, this view appears to be inconsistent with geochemical studies that suggest that the Earth's mantle was not mixed by the impact. Another outcome of the impact is that this energetic impact melted the whole mantle, but the extent of mantle melting is not well understood even though it must have had a significant effect on the subsequent evolution of the Earth's interior and atmosphere. To understand the initial state of the Earth's mantle, we perform giant impact simulations using smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) for three different models: (a) standard: a Mars-sized impactor hits the proto-Earth, (b) fast-spinning Earth: a small impactor hits a rapidly rotating proto-Earth, and (c) sub-Earths: two half Earth-sized planets collide. We use two types of equations of state (MgSiO_3 liquid and forsterite) to describe the Earth's mantle. We find that the mantle remains unmixed in (a), but it may be mixed in (b) and (c). The extent of mixing is most extensive in (c). Therefore, (a) is most consistent and (c) may be least consistent with the preservation of the mantle heterogeneity, while (b) may fall between. We determine that the Earth's mantle becomes mostly molten by the impact in all of the models. The choice of the equation of state does not affect these outcomes. Additionally, our results indicate that entropy gains of the mantle materials by a giant impact cannot be predicted well by the Rankine–Hugoniot equations. Moreover, we show that the mantle can remain unmixed on a Moon-forming timescale if it does not become mixed by the impact.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Atmospheric Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9e26f966321bb3b8698340a6a84122008f2fa268

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

  1. Z. Leinhardt
  2. S. Stewart
  3. M. Mace
  4. Simon J. Lock
  5. M. Petaev
  6. M. Ćuk
  7. S. Jacobsen
  8. Derek C. Richardson

In Atmospheric Science

  1. Z. Leinhardt
  2. S. Stewart
  3. Brad M. S. Hansen
  4. Derek C. Richardson
  5. N. Dauphas
  6. M. Chaussidon

Citations in the corpus