[1] In the paper “Possible crippling of the core dynamo of Mars by Borealis impact” by Jafar Arkani‐Hamed (Journal of Geophysical Research, 115, E12021, doi:10.1029/ 2010JE003602, 2010) the impact heating of Mars by the Borealis impact, which likely created the northern lowland basin, was calculated. Using the crater scaling laws [Holsapple, 1993; Melosh, 1989] the basin diameter was related to the size of the impactor. Following the impact, a nearly uniform shock pressurewas generated inside an isobaric region in the mantle, outside which the shock pressure decreased exponentially with distance from the isobaric center following the average model of Pierazzo et al. [1997]. After crossing the core‐mantle boundary, the shock wave travelled in the core where the shock pressure again decayed with distance travelled from the isobaric center according to Pierazzo et al.’s average model but with the physical parameters of the core. The corresponding impact temperature increase is obtained using the Foundering model of Watters et al. [2009]. [2] The impact‐heated core stratified within a few tens of years and the possible pre‐existing core dynamo decayed with the characteristic time of 10–15 kyr [Arkani‐Hamed and Olson, 2010]. Shortly after the stratification, convection started in a thin layer in the outer core, the thickness of which increased in time as convection penetrated to deeper parts of the core until the entire core convected on a global scale. It took ∼60 Myr for the core to develop global convection and power a new core dynamo. [3] Here I describe a correction required in the calculation of the shock pressure distribution in the core. This correction is important because it increases the crippling time of the Martian core dynamo by a factor of larger than 4. The source of the required correction is the transmission coefficient of the shock wave across the core‐mantle boundary (CMB), the ratio of the shock pressure at the top of the core to that at the base of the mantle. The transmission coefficient was determined on the basis of seismic ray theory [Aki and Richards, 2002, section 5.2]. It resulted in a sudden drop of shock pressure as passing from the mantle to the core, in contrast to the sudden jump of the pressure according to recent Hydrocode models [Ivanov et al., 2010; Bierhaus et al., 2011].
Read full abstract