Global Gravity & Geoid

Problems in Interpretation of gravity anomalies:

Non-uniqueness - parameterizing the density distribution and assigning values
to one or more parameters (e.g. geometric shape, density contrast, depth) often
reduce the non-uniqueness to acceptable levels. Ultimately the density model
must be geologically & geophysically reasonable.
generally favors those distributions for which the density contrasts are least.
This will minimize the implication of this density model on other geophysical
observations (e.g. seismic velocity/ temperature variations).
Due to compensation (+ve anomalies overlain by -ve anomalies or vice versa),
surface gravity may be seeing 2nd order effects
Long wavelength gravity anomalies:
wavelength ~10-15% of the planetary radius, for Earth: > 1000 km or
spherical harmonic degree n = 2 R 40.
their origins are due to tectonics (e.g. gravity anomaly across rift system can be
due to upwelling of lower density hot material). Thus gravity can be due to
thermal/compositional variations and deformed surfaces.
the lateral density variations can also act as a load and thus cause stress and
motion inside the earth. Thus, gravity and the state of stress are also closely
related.
What depth is the source of the long wavelength anomalies?
Attenuation of gravity with height depends on the wavelength ( e2 z / for flat
earth and (r / R) n for spherical earth), so long wavelength decay slower than
short wavelengths.
Short wavelength anomalies at great depth cannot be detected at the surface. In
other words, short wavelength anomalies must originate from shallow depths.
Density anomalies in the lithosphere may correlate with topography and surface
geology.
Long wavelength anomalies at great depth can be detected at the surface. But
this does not mean that all long wavelength anomalies originate within the deep
mantle. Long wavelength anomalies can even originate in the lithosphere as
long as the lithosphere has enough strength to support them. Since the breaking
strength of rocks < 80 MPa, the stress induced by the density anomalies must be
below this value.
Sub-lithosphere has little strength, thus density anomalies from this region must
be supported dynamically by convection currents. Near the base of the
lithosphere, there is interaction between lithospheric deformation and
asthenospheric flow, thus interpretation is not simple.

Interpretation of long wavelength gravity anomalies:

Geoid low (negative height anomaly) and negative Free-Air gravity occurs over
regions of mass deficit. Geoid high and positive Free-Air gravity occurs over
regions of mass excess.
The largest and highest amplitude gravity anomalies bear little relationship to
the convection expressed at the surface in plate tectonics
Kaula (1972): for 6 n 16 positive geoid anomalies mark trench and island arc
areas while negative gravity is typical of both oceanic and continental basins,
especially those recently glaciated.
Dziewonski (1977): found negative correlation between velocity anomalies
deeper than 1100 km and n=2 & 3 gravity
Early studies use the spectral approach to estimate the maximum depth for the
source of the anomalies (the slope of the potential spectrum gives some
indication of the depth range in which these anomalies occur). If the earth's
gravitational potential at co-latitude and longitude can be expressed as:
GM
U(r, , ) =
+ U where
r

GM n R
U =

r n=2 m=0 r

[J

m
n cos( m

] P ( cos )

V (U ) = ( J ) + (K ) The

) + Km
n sin( m )

then the power spectrum can be defined as:

m
n

2
n

m 2
n

m 2
n

m=0

spectrum of the Earth's gravitational potential is found to be:

Vn2 (U ) A( 2n +1)10 10 n 4 2 A1010 n 3

Hide & Horai (1968): lowest degrees due to undulations in the CMB
Higbie & Stacey (1970, 1971), Bott(1971): mean depth < 1000 km
Lambeck (1976), Khan (1977): spectrum of the Earth's gravitational potential
can be explained by a random distribution of density anomalies with no spatial
coherence (anomalies in the lower mantle are required to explain the slope of
the low degrees <7). This model is not unique.
Suppose topography is h on the planet. The earth's topographic spectrum can be
A . The potential spectrum due to the topographic
approximated by Vn2 (h ) n (n+1
)
layer is :

2
3 2
1
2 (h ) 3 c An 4 .
Vn2 (U ) c
V

( 2n +1) 2
2

If this topography is

compensated by the conventional Airy mechanism, then

2

n
1 R Da Vn2 ( h )
( 2n +1) 2 R

3
Vn2 (U ) c

where Da is the compensation depth and c is the density of the crust. The result
for Pratt mechanism is approximately the same with DP =2Da. Combining, we
get for D<<R:

3 D 2
Vn2 (U ) c a An 2
2 R

 In summary, spectral approach found that the sources are predominantly

shallow but deeper sources are required to explain the slope for n<7. Weakness
of spectral approach is that spatial information is lost in forming the spectrum,
thus geography of tectonic features cannot guide the interpretation.
Geoid highs (positive anomalies) are observed over the subduction zones
(trench & island arcs) implying mass excess below.
Several studies use the "equivalent mass" technique to study the geoidal
anomalies due to subduction. Here the density distribution that can explain the
observed anomalies for 2 n 20 is found for an earth that is rigid with no
loading induced viscous deformation. From these studies, it is found that
thermal models over-estimates the amount of excess density detectable in the
geoid by up to a factor of 4 (Chase 1979, Crough & Jurdy 1980).
Warming of the slabs and cooling of the surrounding mantle would decrease the
density excess, but is this not enough to reconcile the thermal model to the
observed geoid because heat conduction in the earth is slow.
Weight of a subducting slab will cause viscous depression of the Earths surface
in a wide area surrounding the subduction zone. The actual gravity or geoid
anomaly that results will depend on a delicate balance between the driving
density contrasts and the warping of density interfaces above and below the
density contrast (Morgan 1965, McKenzie 1977, Parsons & Daly 1983). This
kind of compensation is sufficient to explain the reduction in geoid amplitude
over the convergent zones.
Hager (1984) have calculated geoidal anomalies for global subduction zones
and found good correlation with the observed geoid for 4 n 9. In order to
maintain positive geoid anomalies over the slabs, he found that viscosity has to
increase below the density anomaly. This support to the lower end of the slab
can prevent surface deformation from turning the geoidal anomaly negative. (If
viscosity is uniform in depth, then the depressions at the top and bottom
interfaces are of comparable amplitude and this result in a geoid low at the
surface. On the other hand, if viscosity above the load is much smaller than that
below, then the depression on the top interface will be much smaller than the
one on the bottom - this result in a small positive geoid at the surface.)
Chase (1979) calculated a degree 20 geoid with the slabs removed. He found
that there is the slabs contribute about 70 m of anomaly, but after their removal,
long wavelength anomalies of 40-60 m still remain. Thus, although the slabs are
important, they are by no means the most important contributor to longwavelength geoid.
With geoid anomalies due to subduction removed, Chase (1985) found that the
hot spots show a high tendency to occur in regions of positive geoidal anomaly.

Correlation of the hotspot location imply deep origin of these anomalies. This is
supported by the good fit between seismic velocity distributions in the lower
mantle and the degree 2 & 3 gravity potential (Hager & Richards 1984).
Both +ve and ve long wavelength anomalies seem to correspond to ancient
plate positions 125 million years ago. Highs over the Pangea continent , lows
over past subduction zones (Chase 1985). The gravity lows over past
subduction zones could be due to the sinking of the earths surface driven by
the weight of the cold, dead lithospheric slabs in the middle mantle (Hager
1984) or a closer thermal and/or mechanically coupling of plate motions to
lower-mantle convection. Gurnis (e.g. 2001 SciAm) argued that the large scale
bobbing and sinking motions of the continents (e.g. Australia, N. America)
could be due to their passing over hotspts and ancient subducted zones.
Anderson (1982) suggested that the African high reflect upper mantle
overheating caused by thermal insulation by the Pangean continental
assemblage and that the Pacific high might be related to since-dispersed
continental fragments.
The n=2 harmonics of the Earths gravity field are closely associated with its
rotational history (since the earth rotates about the principal axis of maximum
momentum which is determined by the equatorial bulge which in turn is a result
of rotation). If the nonhydrostatic figure of inertia evolves as a consequence of
convection or other causes, the planet will move relative to its rotational axis
(fixed in space) to keep the maximum nonhydrostatic moment aligned with the
pole. This is True Polar Wander.
Dynamic geoid resulting from density anomalies in the Earth's deep interior
inferred from seismic tomography has been calculated (Hager et al. 1985). This
is useful in constraining mantle dynamics. However, one must remove the much
larger "noise" due to isostatic compensation of density contrasts within the
lithosphere. (Panasyuk & Hager 2000)
Hager & Clayton (1989) Le Stunff & Ricard (1995) presented the first global
estimate of dynamic topography resulting from sub-lithospheric density
contrasts.
Davis & Pribac (1993): 1 km elevation excess in Darwin rise is dynamically
maintained by flow beneath the lithosphere.
Peltier et al (1992): negative free air gravity anomaly over Hudson Bay is not
due to glacial rebound but is dynamic topography induced. Pari & Peltier
(2000): continents are found to systematically reside in topographic depressions
of the order of 1-2 km and is consistent with the hypothesis of continental
interior residing over dense sub-continental down-welling currents which
provide an attractive explanation of the low heat fluxes measured over these
regions.

Gravity and Geoid:

For:

GM n R
U =

r n=2 m=0 r

[J

m
n cos( m

g = g (n 1) J n cos( m
n=2 m=0

] P ( cos )
sin( m )] P (cos )

) + Km
n sin( m )

)+Km
n

m
n

m
n

Thus, gravity magnifies the n-degree harmonics of the potential. In addition,

geoid anomalies decay less rapidly with distance away from the mass anomaly
than gravity anomalies, thus geoid anomalies are more sensitive to deep sources
whereas gravity anomalies are more sensitive to near surface sources. Geoid
and gravity data thus complement each other.
Airy Compensation with surface topography h gives root thickness HR :
HR =

ch
m

If topography is below sea-level (h is negative), then

HR =

w )h
.
m c

These results are for a Flat-Earth.

For a spherical earth, where H is the thickness of the crust for zero h:
R 2
ch if topography is positive and
HR =

R H m c
R 2 ( c w )h
if topography is negative.
HR =

R H

m
c

The condition of isostasy requires that the total mass in vertical columns be
equal, i.e. the mass excess due to the topography at the surface h is
h

compensated by mass deficiencies at depth so that

dz = 0 (z=-H is the

H'

depth of compensation). Thus, the nearly zero value of Free-Air gravity in

isostatically compensated regions tells us little about the density distribution
(z) except that there are infinite number of density distribution that satisfy this
integral constraint.
On the other hand, geoid anomalies are non-zero in isostatically compensated
regions and that they measure the dipole moment of the density distribution
h

2 G h
.
In
other
words,
the
geoid
height
anomalies
z
dz
=
0
N
=

z (z )dz
g
H'
H'

 Thus, for Airy Compensation with depth of the normal crust at H, surface
c h , (taking vertical downwards):
topography h and root HR =
m c

H+H

0
R

2 G
G c
m

2Hh +
N =
z ( c m )dz + z c dz =
h2

g H

g
m c
h

For topography below sea-level (h negative):

N =

G( c w )
w 2
2Hh + m
h
g

m c

For Pratt Compensation with depth of compensation H and normal density

o , the geoid anomaly associated with positive topography is:
N =

G
g

and for topography below sea-level: N =

Hh

G(

w)
Hh

Thus, geoid anomaly for Pratt mechanism is linearly dependent on the

topography h.
For Thermal Isostasy under the cooling oceanic lithosphere:
N =

2 G m
g

(Tm Ts )

1+

( Tm Ts )
t
( m c )

2 m

Thus, the geoid anomaly is a linear function of the age of the sea-floor t.