Haskell [1935] revisited

The Haskell [1935] value of 1021 Pa s for mantle viscosity is a classic and enduring constraint on the rheology of the Earth's interior. We revisit this inference using spherically symmetric, self-gravitating, Maxwell viscoelastic Earth models. Our inference is based on both forward and inverse analyses of decay times associated with uplift at two sites considered by Haskell, Angerman River, Sweden, and Oslo, Norway, rather than the raw relative sea level (RSL) data at these sites. We demonstrate that predictions of the decay time associated with the Angerman River data are insensitive to variations in both the late Pleistocene ice load history and the lithospheric thickness of the Earth model (the predictions at Oslo are sensitive to both these inputs), and hence decay times at this site provide a remarkably robust constraint on mantle viscosity. We derive a constraint on the “average” viscosity of the mantle of 0.65 − 1.10 × 1021 Pa s, where the “average” resolved by the data encompasses a region which extends from the base of the lithosphere to a depth of near 1400 km. This indicates that many previous analyses which have invoked the Haskell value of 1021 Pa s as a constraint on the average upper mantle (i.e., above 670 km depth) viscosity alone have misinterpreted the resolving power of the inference. Furthermore, our analysis indicates that a number of apparently contradictory inferences of viscosity based on Fennoscandian data satisfy the new, rigorous, interpretation of the Haskell constraint. Finally, we demonstrate how the ambiguity in the upper mantle/lower mantle viscosity contrast associated with the Haskell “average” may be reduced by invoking decay time constraints estimated from RSL curves in Hudson Bay. A preliminary inversion of decay times at Angerman River and Richmond Gulf (in Hudson Bay) suggests a contrast of approximately an order of magnitude between the average viscosities of the upper mantle and the top 1000 km of the lower mantle; however, a conclusive analysis in this regard must await the determination of consistent decay time estimates for the Hudson Bay region.

[1]  W. R. Peltier,et al.  The LAGEOS constraint on deep mantle viscosity: Results from a new normal mode method for the inversion of viscoelastic relaxation spectra , 1985 .

[2]  D. Yuen,et al.  Effects on post-glacial rebound from the hard rheology in the transition zone , 1992 .

[3]  N. A. Haskell.  The Motion of a Viscous Fluid Under a Surface Load. Part II , 1936 .

[4]  W. Peltier.  Ice Age Geodynamics , 1981 .

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

[6]  D. Wolf.  An upper bound on lithosphere thickness from glacio-isostatic adjustment in Fennoscandia , 1987 .

[7]  A. Toomre,et al.  Some remarks on polar wandering , 1969 .

[8]  D. Yuen,et al.  Viscosity of the lower mantle as inferred from rotational data , 1982 .

[9]  J. Wahr,et al.  The viscoelastic relaxation of a realistically stratified earth, and a further analysis of postglacial rebound , 1995 .

[10]  W. Peltier,et al.  A new formalism for inferring mantle viscosity based on estimates of post glacial decay Times: Application to RSL variations in N.E. Hudson Bay , 1993 .

[11]  T. James.  The Hudson Bay free‐air gravity anomaly and glacial rebound , 1992 .

[12]  W. Fjeldskaar.  Viscosity and thickness of the asthenosphere detected from the Fennoscandian uplift , 1994 .

[13]  A. Tarantola,et al.  Generalized Nonlinear Inverse Problems Solved Using the Least Squares Criterion (Paper 1R1855) , 1982 .

[14]  W. Peltier,et al.  On postglacial geoid subsidence over the equatorial oceans , 1991 .

[15]  G. Backus,et al.  Inference from Inadequate and Inaccurate Data, III. , 1970, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  R. O’Connell.  Pleistocene Glaciation and the Viscosity of the Lower Mantle , 1971 .

[17]  D. McKenzie.  The viscosity of the lower mantle , 1966 .

[18]  W. Peltier.  The impulse response of a Maxwell Earth , 1974 .

[19]  J. Mitrovica,et al.  The influence of a finite glaciation phase on predictions of post-glacial isostatic adjustment , 1995 .

[20]  L. Cathles,et al.  The Viscosity of the Earth's Mantle , 1975 .

[21]  K. Lambeck,et al.  Holocene glacial rebound and sea-level change in NW Europe , 1990 .

[22]  W. Peltier,et al.  ICE-3G: A new global model of late Pleistocene deglaciation based upon geophysical predictions of po , 1991 .

[23]  W. Peltier,et al.  A complete formalism for the inversion of post-glacial rebound data: resolving power analysis , 1991 .

[24]  W. Peltier,et al.  Constraints on mantle viscosity based upon the inversion of post-glacial uplift data from the Hudson Bay region , 1995 .

[25]  W. Peltier,et al.  Pleistocene deglaciation and the Earth's rotation: a new analysis , 1984 .

[26]  D. Yuen,et al.  Secular rotational motions and the mechanical structure of a dynamical viscoelastic Earth , 1984 .

[27]  M. Fang,et al.  A singularity free approach to post glacial rebound calculations , 1994 .

[28]  K. Lambeck,et al.  Late Pleistocene and Holocene sea‐level change in the Australian region and mantle rheology , 1989 .

[29]  M. Manga,et al.  The tectosphere and postglacial rebound , 1995 .

[30]  Richard Peltier,et al.  Dynamics of the Ice Age Earth , 1982 .

[31]  P. Gasperini,et al.  Lateral heterogeneities in mantle viscosity and post‐glacial rebound , 1989 .

[32]  W. Peltier,et al.  Pleistocene deglaciation and the global gravity field , 1989 .

[33]  W. R. Peltier,et al.  Validation of the ICE‐3G Model of Würm‐Wisconsin Deglaciation using a global data base of relative sea level histories , 1992 .

[34]  N. A. Haskell.  The Motion of a Viscous Fluid Under a Surface Load , 1935 .

[35]  W. R. Peltier,et al.  Glacial isostatic adjustment and the free air gravity anomaly as a constraint on deep mantle viscosity , 1983 .

[36]  J. Wahr,et al.  Effect of melting glaciers on the Earth's rotation and gravitational field: 1965–1984 , 1992 .

[37]  R. Walcott.  Structure of the Earth from Glacio-Isostatic Rebound , 1973 .

[38]  W. Peltier,et al.  Glacial isostasy and relative sea level: A global finite element model , 1978 .

[39]  J. Mitrovica.  Reply to comment by L. Cathles and W. Fjeldskaar on 'The inference of mantle viscosity from an inversion of the Fennoscandian relaxation spectrum' , 1993 .

[40]  D. L. Anderson.  Earth's Viscosity , 1966, Science.

[41]  R. McConnell,et al.  Viscosity of the mantle from relaxation time spectra of isostatic adjustment , 1968 .

[42]  N. A. Haskell.  The Viscosity of the Asthenosphere , 1937 .

[43]  R. Daly.  Pleistocene changes of level , 1925 .

[44]  W. Peltier,et al.  Present-day secular variations in the zonal harmonics of earth's geopotential , 1993 .

[45]  Ragnar. Lidén.  Den senkvartära strandförskjutningens förlopp och kronologi i Ångermanland , 1938 .

[46]  L. Cathles,et al.  The present rate of uplift of Fennoscandia implies a low‐viscosity asthenosphere , 1991 .

[47]  D. Yuen,et al.  The effects of upper‐mantle lateral heterogeneities on postglacial rebound , 1986 .

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