Universal viscosity growth in metallic melts at megabar pressures: the vitreous state of the Earth's inner core

Бражкин, В. В.; Lyapin, A.G.

doi:10.3367/ufnr.0170.200005c.0535

Cited by 34 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 81 publications

(25 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Brazhkin & Lyapin (2000) have recently questioned the validity of the Arrhenius rate-activated model of viscosity at the pressures of planetary and stellar cores and suggested a strong pressure dependence of the dynamic viscosity of metallic liquids. This suggestion together with a reported observation of the translational (Slichter) modes of the inner core led Smylie et al (2009) to estimate a viscosity of 1.2 × 10 11 Pa s near the inner core boundary (ICB), having a loglinear increase from 2.4 Pa s near the core-mantle boundary.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

A glassy lowermost outer core

Cormier

2009

Geophysical Journal International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

A glassy lowermost outer core

Cormier

2009

Geophysical Journal International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Therefore, the pressure difference ΔP and the viscosity μ m can hardly be below 10 -1 Mbar and 10 11 Pa s, respectively. This indicates that global nonturbulent circulation should occur in the liquid core [13,22]. 3 Thus, we can speak about two different viscosity coef ficients, μ l and μ m , which are related to different sub stances: heavy melt in the liquid core and light liquid in the solid core with a low porosity ε.…”

Section: Characteristics Of the Outer Core And The Mushy Layer Of Thementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Then, based on (2), one can estimate the distance ξ μ m 2 (ΔPρL) -1 ≈ 100 m. Generally the melt viscosity is estimated as μ m ≈ 10 7 -10 11 Pa s [13] on the assumption that it is high near the interface between the solid and liquid cores [14]. It follows from [5] that the viscosity μ m is on the order of 10 9 Pa s, assuming that the Ekman number Е = μ m /ρωD 2 ~ 3 × 10 -4 where ω is the angu lar velocity of the Earth (about 7.3 × 10 -5 1/s) and D is the liquid core thickness (about 2000 km).…”

Section: Characteristics Of the Outer Core And The Mushy Layer Of Thementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the inhomogeneity of the transition surface layer of the solid core of the earth

Pikin

2012

Crystallogr. Rep.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different geophysical data and conclusions of theoretical models, which can give information about the behavior of the solid and liquid cores of the Earth as well as about the existence of a transition layer as a temperature hysteresis region at a relatively weak first order phase transition, are compared. It is con cluded that liquid inclusions inevitably exist in this region; these inclusions are involved (due to the complex convective processes occurring in the liquid core) in the transport of light materials from some areas of the solid core surface. The porosity and permeability of the transition layer determine the seismic acoustic inho mogeneities in these areas, which contact the convective flows in the liquid core. In particular, this explains the well known "east-west" effect. Obviously, the model of the crystalline core is not the only possible alter native for a model of a core with a metallic glasslike structure.

show abstract

“…A preliminary treatment [49][50][51][52] has demonstrated that, in moving along the melting line, the liquid becomes more viscous with increase in temperature. For several substances, the behavior of η in the initial segment of the melting line is shown in Fig.…”

Section: Viscosity Of a Liquid Along The Curves Of Equilibrium With Cmentioning

confidence: 99%

Solid‐Liquid and Liquid‐Vapor Phase Transitions: Similarities and Differences

Faĭzullin

Skripov

2005

Nucleation Theory and Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Every theory, whether in the physical or biological or social sciences, distorts reality in that it oversimplifies. But if it is a good theory, what is omitted is outweighted by the beam of light and understanding thrown over diverse facts. Paul A. SamuelsonA comparison has been made between the behavior of the thermodynamic properties of simple substances along the curves of solid-liquid and liquid-vapor phase equilibrium. Hereby the attention is concentrated on the internal pressure p i , the isothermal elasticity −(∂ p/∂v) T , the surface energy of the interfacial boundary σ , and the viscosity of the liquid, η. The mentioned curves have been extended beyond the triple point into the region of coexistence of metastable phases. Both phase transitions considered approach here the boundaries of stability of the liquid, but in opposite directions from the triple point with respect to variations of temperature and pressure. Among other consequences, the difference in the thermodynamic behavior of one-component systems for both types of phase transformations, as established in the analysis, gives support to the theoretical idea of the absence of a critical point for the solid-liquid phase equilibrium curve.where s SL = s L − s S , v SL = v L − v S are entropy and volume changes during melting, respectively. But there are also significant qualitative distinctions between the behavior of the liquidvapor and solid-liquid equilibrium coexistence curves. One of them consists in the fact that the phase coexistence curve for liquid-vapor equilibrium p = p LV (T ) has a lower limit at pressure p = 0, whereas the solid-liquid coexistence curve may be extended into the region Nucleation Theory and Applications. edited by J. W. P. Schmelzer

show abstract

Universal viscosity growth in metallic melts at megabar pressures: the vitreous state of the Earth's inner core

Cited by 34 publications

References 81 publications

A glassy lowermost outer core

A glassy lowermost outer core

On the inhomogeneity of the transition surface layer of the solid core of the earth

Solid‐Liquid and Liquid‐Vapor Phase Transitions: Similarities and Differences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About