An explanation for the shape of Earth's gravity spectrum based on viscous mantle flow models

The Earth's gravity spectrum can be used as an observational constraint on geophysical modelling. Here we show how the spectrum up to degree l = 31 can be explained to a large part by viscous mantle flow in combination with a very simple model of random mantle density anomalies. Efforts to make the calculation more “realistic” by considering effects of thermal boundary layers, or using density anomalies based on tomography, or geodynamic modelling, tend to worsen the fit. Results are rather sensitive to assumptions on density anomalies in the upper thermal boundary layer. We suggest that, in combination with other observations, the shape of the Earth's gravity spectrum can serve to better constrain radial viscosity structure, density anomalies and flow in the Earth's mantle. Appropriate treatment of the lithosphere and of lateral viscosity variations will be the main challenges in modelling this spectrum.

[1]  Gabi Laske,et al.  The Relative Behavior of Shear Velocity, Bulk Sound Speed, and Compressional Velocity in the Mantle: Implications for Chemical and Thermal Structure , 2013 .

[2]  Lapo Boschi,et al.  A comparison of tomographic and geodynamic mantle models , 2002 .

[3]  R. Hipkin.  The statistics of pink noise on a sphere: applications to mantle density anomalies , 2001 .

[4]  Barbara Romanowicz,et al.  The three‐dimensional shear velocity structure of the mantle from the inversion of body, surface and higher‐mode waveforms , 2000 .

[5]  B. Hager,et al.  Inversion for mantle viscosity profiles constrained by dynamic topography and the geoid, and their estimated errors , 2000 .

[6]  B. Steinberger.  Slabs in the lower mantle — results of dynamic modelling compared with tomographic images and the geoid , 2000 .

[7]  B. Steinberger,et al.  Advection of plumes in mantle flow: implications for hotspot motion, mantle viscosity and plume distribution , 1998 .

[8]  Sri Widiyantoro,et al.  Global seismic tomography: A snapshot of convection in the Earth: GSA Today , 1997 .

[9]  M. Richards,et al.  The geoid constraint in global geodynamics: viscosity structure, mantle heterogeneity models and boundary conditions , 1997 .

[10]  Walter H. F. Smith,et al.  New version of the generic mapping tools , 1995 .

[11]  Bob E. Schutz,et al.  Gravity model development for TOPEX/POSEIDON: Joint gravity models 1 and 2 , 1994 .

[12]  Wei-jia Su,et al.  Degree 12 model of shear velocity heterogeneity in the mantle , 1994 .

[13]  S. Karato,et al.  Importance of anelasticity in the interpretation of seismic tomography , 1993 .

[14]  B. Hager,et al.  Long-wavelength variations in Earth’s geoid: physical models and dynamical implications , 1989, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences.

[15]  B. Hager,et al.  Geoid Anomalies in a Dynamic Earth , 1984 .

[16]  D. L. Anderson,et al.  Preliminary reference earth model , 1981 .

[17]  W. M. Kaula.  Material properties for mantle convection consistent with observed surface fields , 1980 .

[18]  J. Ritsema,et al.  Seismic imaging of structural heterogeneity in Earth's mantle: evidence for large-scale mantle flow. , 2000, Science progress.