Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The martian cores state

  1. Aug 26, 2012 #1
    Some say its liquid some say its solid, heres what i think. While i believe about 60-80% is solid, i believe the rest is similar to earths mantle in a sticky molten state. Due to its very slow movemet it would not generate a global magnetic field. It would however generate enough heat to the surface to produce volcanic activity every 100,000- 1 million years or so. Due to the size and the rate of cooling i came to this. Any thoughts on this?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 26, 2012 #2

    Simon Bridge

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    The immediate thought of any sensible physicist - particularly those with an interest in planetary physics - will be to wonder how you are supporting these thoughts. What is the scientific evidence that leads you to these ideas? How did you arrive at the 60-80% figure?
     
  4. Aug 27, 2012 #3
    The fact its 1/2 the size of earth and its 4.6 billion year old history tells it cant be like earths core because its smaller and it cant be completly solid because 4.6 billion years isnt enough time to completely solidify a core 100% so im giving a rough estimate. Plus the minimal volcanic activity, i read they found evidence of a lava flow that occured 2 million years ago and they had a marsquake last year so it must be active in some way or another. But its not as active as earth for obvious reasons like its smaller an less dense so there isnt enough heat to power that much volcanism. Thats all.
     
  5. Aug 27, 2012 #4
    Plus if it were liquid like earths it would have much more heat for the mantle and volcanism.
     
  6. Aug 27, 2012 #5

    Simon Bridge

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    That is actually enough time - however, more recent data suggest an FeS core making it more likely to be at least gooey. A lot depends on the chemistry.

    You may like to see:
    http://cars9.uchicago.edu/gsecars/LVP/publication/News/X-rays%20reveal%20secrets%20of%20Mars'%20core.htm [Broken]

    I take it the 60-80% figure was just a wild guess?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2017
  7. Aug 27, 2012 #6
    Yep a total guess, based on lack of magnetic field.
     
  8. Aug 27, 2012 #7

    Simon Bridge

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    There is a saying along the lines of "67.5% of statistics are made up on the spot" :)
    Not a good idea around scientists - they are all used to peer reviewed articles.

    You'll just get questions like "What was it about the lack of magnetic fields that suggested that particular ratio as a worthwhile guess?" :) On the other hand, it is totally OK to not know.
     
  9. Aug 31, 2012 #8
    In the diagram, they call Mars "nearest neighbour". We had an argument in another thread about that! Similarity to earth != distance from earth.

    It's no surprise the journalists get it wrong when the sources they copy from are ambiguous. Should we write to them?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2017
  10. Aug 31, 2012 #9

    Simon Bridge

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    It's an ambiguous description anyway - the planet physically closest to the Earth changes over time. For all you know they will quote you the parable of the good Samaritan.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: The martian cores state
  1. The core (Replies: 6)

  2. The CORE (Replies: 4)

  3. Martian Mud (Replies: 2)

  4. Martian Archeology? (Replies: 1)

  5. Martian Forest (Replies: 2)

Loading...