A sawtooth-like timeline for the first billion years of lunar bombardment

By A. Morbidelli, Simone Marchi, William Bottke, D. Kring. 2012

256 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract We revisit the early evolution of the Moon's bombardment. Our work combines modeling (based on plausible projectile sources and their dynamical decay rates) with constraints from the lunar crater record, radiometric ages of the youngest lunar basins, and the abundance of highly siderophile elements in the lunar crust and mantle. We deduce that the evolution of the impact flux did not decline exponentially over the first billion years of lunar history, but also there was no prominent and narrow impact spike ∼ 3.9 Gy ago, unlike that typically envisioned in the lunar cataclysm scenario. Instead, we show the timeline of the lunar bombardment has a sawtooth-like profile, with an uptick in the impact flux near ∼ 4.1 Gy ago. The impact flux at the beginning of this weaker cataclysm was 5–10 times higher than the immediately preceding period. The Nectaris basin should have been one of the first basins formed at the sawtooth. We predict the bombardment rate since ∼ 4.1 Gy ago declined slowly and adhered relatively close to classic crater chronology models ( Neukum and Ivanov, 1994 ). Overall we expect that the sawtooth event accounted for about one-fourth of the total bombardment suffered by the Moon since its formation. Consequently, considering that ∼ 12 – 14 basins formed during the sawtooth event, we expect that the net number of basins formed on the Moon was ∼ 45 – 50 . From our expected bombardment timeline, we derived a new and improved lunar chronology suitable for use on pre-Nectarian surface units. According to this chronology, a significant portion of the oldest lunar cratered terrains has an age of 4.38–4.42 Gyr. Moreover, the largest lunar basin, South Pole Aitken, is older than 4.3 Gy, and therefore was not produced during the lunar cataclysm.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Atmospheric Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b158d9dc4d1bb0a8a54d4332e557e72990aa52a0

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. A. Morbidelli
  2. D. Nesvorný
  3. William Bottke
  4. Kevin J. Walsh
  5. David Vokrouhlický
  6. Harold Levison
  7. Mark A. Wieczorek
  8. F. DeMeo

In Atmospheric Science

  1. William Bottke
  2. D. Nesvorný
  3. A. Morbidelli
  4. David Vokrouhlický
  5. Kevin J. Walsh
  6. Stuart J. Robbins
  7. Harold Levison
  8. Mark A. Wieczorek

Citations in the corpus