Searching for buried craters on Mars based on gravity potential field separation method

Liang, Feng; Yan, Jianguo; Zhao, Jiannan; Meng, Zhiguo; Barriot, Jean‐Pierre

doi:10.1016/j.pss.2022.105532

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With the advent of global topography, this hypothesis is mostly argued for by Frey (2006Frey ( , 2008. Specifically, Frey (2006) lists 10 additional possible craters D > 1000 km, and another nine are visible in their Figure 3 with D > 700 km; this work was followed up by Liang et al (2022) who examined gravity anomalies, though their work was for craters D < 500 km. If all of the features identified in Frey (2006) are real impact craters, then there are a total of 23 large, ancient impacts, which is still only half as many as are expected from the Moon:Mars scaling described in previous sections.…”

Section: Mars's Early Crater-based Age Chronology Is Wrongmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inconsistency between the Ancient Mars and Moon Impact Records of Megameter-scale Craters

Robbins¹

2022

Planet. Sci. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impact crater populations provide a record of the bombardment history of a planetary body. These craters reveal an intense bombardment history on Earth's Moon that included significant, large impacts, at least four of which created craters larger than ∼1000 km across more than 3.7 Ga. Scaling the lunar impact crater history to Mars using generally well-established scaling rules indicates Mars should have ∼40–80 similarly sized, ancient craters. However, Mars has roughly seven. This is a nontrivial mismatch between observation and expectation. Possible methods to resolve the mismatch are discussed in this work: small number statistics, incorrect scaling laws, heat flow produced larger-than-expected craters, the ratio of Mars:Moon impactors was different in early solar system history, Mars’s ancient crater chronology is wrong, and/or Mars has hidden a large fraction of its large impacts. None of these scenarios are mutually exclusive. This work details how the different scenarios could work to bring observations more in-line with the scaling expectations, or vice versa. It is posited that the most likely sources of the mismatch are that the initial bolide rate was different (this is a noncontroversial supposition), that lunar heat flow produced larger craters than expected, and the formation of the Martian Borealis basin could have kept the surface warm enough for long enough to prevent large features from forming for an extended period of time. The primary purpose of this work is to present the issue with possible ways to solve it through future efforts.

show abstract

Section: Mars's Early Crater-based Age Chronology Is Wrongmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inconsistency between the Ancient Mars and Moon Impact Records of Megameter-scale Craters

Robbins¹

2022

Planet. Sci. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Searching for buried craters on Mars based on gravity potential field separation method

Cited by 1 publication

References 31 publications

Inconsistency between the Ancient Mars and Moon Impact Records of Megameter-scale Craters

Inconsistency between the Ancient Mars and Moon Impact Records of Megameter-scale Craters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About