
Image 1 - The topographic dichotomy of Mars (Source: Wikipedia)
The red planet, Mars, does not have a global magnetic field as the Earth does, and, as a consequence, there is no protection from solar wind or coronal mass ejections.
Scientists think that this was not always the case and that Mars had had a global magnetic field, but that this was destroyed in a catastrophic event.
Whoever takes a look at the geography of planet Mars will note that the topography in the northern hemisphere is markedly different from the topography in the southern hemisphere. This phenomenon is called the topographical dichotomy of Mars (image 1).
In the north plains dominate and there are little impact craters (blue region in image 1). In the south mountains dominate and there are many impact craters. The two hemispheres also have a difference in elevation. The south is on average one to three kilometres higher than the north. The average thickness of the crust is 32 kilometres in the north and 58 kilometres in the south. The region in the northern hemisphere covers around one-third of the surface of the planet.
How did this topography come into being? That is not clear, but there are three major theories about the subject: The single impact theory, the multiple impact theory and the endogenous process theory.
Here only the single impact theory will be discussed. Other models how the dichotomy was created are discussed in [2].
There are three major critiques of this theory. The first, that the relevant energy of such an impact would have disturbed the planet enough to wipe out all evidence of this event, the second, that all the impact craters are circular, with the exception of those with a highly oblique impact angle, and the third, is the absence of any crustal thickening, which is typical for smaller impacts, around the rim of the basin.
In an article from 2008 in Nature with the title Mega-impact formation of the Mars hemispheric dichotomy[1], the authors describe a possible solution which explains the dichotomy and responds to the criticisms.
(more…)
VN:F [1.9.14_1148]
Rating: 0.0/6 (0 votes cast)