Core–mantle topographic coupling: a parametric approach and implications for the formulation of a triaxial three-layered Earth rotation

Abstract

Summary We propose a parametric approach to the topographic (TOP) coupling between the mantle and outer core for refinement of the latest triaxial three-layered Earth rotation theory. Based on three models of the core-mantle boundary (CMB) topography, we obtain the axial components of the TOP torque as −2.08 × 1019 Nm, −2.72 × 1018 Nm and −1.97 × 1017 Nm, respectively. Under the frame of the triaxial three-layered Earth rotation theory, we solve the corresponding periods of Free Core Nutation as −(329.83 ± 28.12), −(457.54 ± −) and −(428.23 ± 1.09) mean solar days (d), respectively. The other three normal modes, namely, Chandler Wobble, Inner Core Wobble and Free Inner Core Nutation, are almost not affected by the TOP coupling of the CMB, their period values being 433.24, 2718.69 and 934.02 d, respectively. Calculations show that the TOP torque is highly sensitive to the adopted model of the topography, which is known to be robust. Taking into account the normal modes of the triaxial three-layered Earth rotation, the results of the CMB topography obtained by seismic tomography can be constrained in the future to a certain extent. In this study, considering the TOP coupling with the appropriate topography model, the estimates for the dynamic ellipticity ef of the fluid core lie between 0.0026340 and 0.0026430, values that are 3.56 per cent higher than the hydrostatic equilibrium value.

Inner core static tilt inferred from intradecadal oscillation in the Earth’s rotation

“…Our observed ICW period is slightly larger than the theoretical values (6.6–7.8 yr) 3 , 7 – 9 , but considering that even the generally accepted Chandler wobble observation period of prograde ~430 days is ~30 days longer than its theoretical periods 28 – 30 , free core nutation observation period of retrograde ~430 days is ~20 days shorter than its theoretical periods 49 , 50 , and that the density jump Δ ρ ICB at the ICB was also poorly determined 6 , 51 , this deviation is accepted. Considering this newly determined period of the ICW, we can also invert the density jump Δ ρ ICB .…”