Statistical palaeomagnetic field modelling and symmetry considerations

In the present paper, we address symmetry issues in the context of the so-called giant gaussian process (GGP) modelling approach, currently used to statistically analyse the present and past magnetic field of the Earth at times of stable polarity. We first recall the principle of GGP modelling , and for the first time derive the complete and exact constraints a GGP model should satisfy if it is to satisfy statistical spherical, axisymmetrical or equatorially symmetric properties. We note that as often correctly claimed by the authors, many simplifying assumptions used so far to ease the GGP modelling amount to make symmetry assumptions, but not always exactly so, because previous studies did not recognize that symmetry assumptions do not systematically require a lack of cross-correlations between Gauss coefficients. We further note that GGP models obtained so far for the field over the past 5 Myr clearly reveal some spherical symmetry breaking properties in both the mean and the fluctuating field (as defined by the covariance matrix of the model) and some equatorial symmetry breaking properties in the mean field. Non-zonal terms found in the mean field of some models and mismatches between variances defining the fluctuating field (in models however not defined in a consistent way) would further suggest that axial symmetry also is broken. The meaning of this is discussed. Spherical symmetry breaking trivially testifies for the influence of the rotation of the Earth on the geodynamo (a long-recognized fact). Axial symmetry breaking, if confirmed, could hardly be attributed to anything else but some influence of the core–mantle boundary (CMB) conditions on the geodynamo (also a well-known fact). By contrast, equatorial symmetry breaking (in particular the persistence of an axial mean quadrupole) may not trivially be considered as evidence of some influence of CMB conditions. To establish this, one would need to better investigate whether or not this axial quadrupole has systematically reversed its polarity with the axial dipole in the past and whether dynamo simulations run under equatorial symmetric CMB conditions display additional transitions (mirror transitions, which we describe) only allowed in such instances. This remains to be fully investigated.

[1]  Michael W. McElhinny,et al.  The Magnetic Field of the Earth: Paleomagnetism, the Core, and the Deep Mantle , 1997 .

[2]  P. L. Mcfadden,et al.  Secular variation and the origin of geomagnetic field reversals , 1988 .

[3]  Catherine Constable,et al.  The time‐averaged geomagnetic field: global and regional biases for 0–5 Ma , 1997 .

[4]  Masaru Kono,et al.  Mapping the Gauss Coefficients to the Pole and the Models of Paleosecular Variation , 1995 .

[5]  Catherine Constable,et al.  Continuous global geomagnetic field models for the past 3000 years , 2003 .

[6]  M. McElhinny,et al.  Dipole/quadrupole family modeling of paleosecular variation , 1988 .

[7]  D. Kent,et al.  Inclination anomalies from Indian Ocean sediments and the possibility of a standing nondipole field , 1988 .

[8]  Gauthier Hulot,et al.  An analysis of the geomagnetic field over the past 2000 years , 1998 .

[9]  Gauthier Hulot,et al.  Long‐term geometry of the geomagnetic field for the last five million years: An updated secular variation database , 1994 .

[10]  G. Glatzmaier,et al.  Simulating the geodynamo , 1997 .

[11]  Masaru Kono,et al.  Spherical harmonic analysis of paleomagnetic data: The case of linear mapping , 2000 .

[12]  Masaru Kono,et al.  Shift of the mean magnetic field values: Effect of scatter due to secular variation and errors , 2001 .

[13]  David Gubbins,et al.  Persistent patterns in the geomagnetic field over the past 2.5 Myr , 1993, Nature.

[14]  Masaru Kono,et al.  Some global features of palaeointensity in geological time , 1995 .

[15]  N. I︠a︡. Vilenkin,et al.  Fonctions spéciales et théorie de la représentation des groupes , 1969 .

[16]  A. Izenman Introduction to Random Processes, With Applications to Signals and Systems , 1987 .

[17]  Gauthier Hulot,et al.  Towards a self-consistent approach to palaeomagnetic field modelling , 2001 .

[18]  Gauthier Hulot,et al.  Statistical palaeomagnetic field modelling and dynamo numerical simulation , 2005 .

[19]  Catherine Constable,et al.  Anisotropic paleosecular variation models: implications for geomagnetic field observables , 1999 .

[20]  D. Gubbins,et al.  Symmetry properties of the dynamo equations for palaeomagnetism and geomagnetism , 1993 .

[21]  Vincent Courtillot,et al.  How complex is the time-averaged geomagnetic field over the past 5 Myr? , 1998 .

[22]  B. Langlais,et al.  High-resolution magnetic field modeling: application to MAGSAT and Ørsted data , 2003 .

[23]  Catherine Constable,et al.  Gaussian statistics for palaeomagnetic vectors , 2003 .

[24]  Matthew R. Walker,et al.  Four centuries of geomagnetic secular variation from historical records , 2000, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[25]  Mioara Mandea,et al.  Small-scale structure of the geodynamo inferred from Oersted and Magsat satellite data , 2002, Nature.

[26]  Catherine Constable,et al.  Palaeosecular variation recorded by lava flows over the past five million years , 1996, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[27]  Lisa Tauxe,et al.  A Simplified Statistical Model for the Geomagnetic Field and the Detection of Shallow Bias in Paleomagnetic Inclinations: was the Ancient Magnetic Field Dipolar? , 2004 .

[28]  Michael W. McElhinny,et al.  The time-averaged paleomagnetic field 0–5 Ma , 1996 .

[29]  David A. Schneider,et al.  The time‐averaged paleomagnetic field , 1990 .

[30]  Gauthier Hulot,et al.  On the interpretation of virtual geomagnetic pole (VGP) scatter curves , 1996 .

[31]  Paul H. Roberts,et al.  The role of the Earth's mantle in controlling the frequency of geomagnetic reversals , 1999, Nature.

[32]  Michael W. McElhinny,et al.  Palaeosecular variation over the past 5 Myr based on a new generalized database , 1997 .

[33]  G. Glatzmaier,et al.  A three-dimensional convective dynamo solution with rotating and finitely conducting inner core and mantle , 1995 .

[34]  Masaru Kono,et al.  Geomagnetic field model for the last 5 My: time-averaged field and secular variation , 2002 .

[35]  Vincent Courtillot,et al.  On low-degree spherical harmonic models of paleosecular variation , 1996 .

[36]  William A. Gardner,et al.  Introduction to random processes with applications to signals and systems: Reviewer: D. W. Clarke Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PK, England , 1988, Autom..

[37]  Gauthier Hulot,et al.  A statistical approach to the Earth's main magnetic field , 1994 .

[38]  P. Roberts,et al.  An anelastic evolutionary geodynamo simulation driven by compositional and thermal convection , 1996 .

[39]  Catherine Constable,et al.  Statistics of the geomagnetic secular variation for the past 5 m.y. , 1988 .