4.7 Article

RESET: A Method to Monitor Thermoremanent Alteration in Thellier-Series Paleointensity Experiments

期刊

GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS
卷 48, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2020GL091617

关键词

-

资金

  1. Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDA17010403, XDB41010304]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41874079]
  3. United States National Science Foundation [EAR-1113569]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study developed an experimental approach to monitor the thermal alterations that may occur during laboratory heating to specimens used in Thellier-series paleointensity experiments, addressing the issue of incomplete detection of thermal alterations.
Accurately estimating the paleomagnetic field intensity recorded in terrestrial and planetary materials is the key to understanding dynamo processes. Thellier-series stepwise-heating methods with partial thermoremanent magnetization (pTRM) checks for alteration are considered the most reliable technique even though pTRM checks are shown to be incapable of detecting the entirety of thermal alteration. We utilize a recently developed multidomain-correction experiment (or RESET) to monitor thermally induced magnetic property alteration that may happen to the very specimen used in Thellier-series experiments. We also use rock magnetic property changes to track the physicochemical alteration of fresh companion specimens of Galapagos lavas that were previously used for paleointensity determinations. Our results show that laboratory heating induced thermal alteration of a typical Galapagos lava sample starts to occur at around 500 degrees C. It escaped detection by pTRM checks but was caught by our RESET method. Plain Language Summary To date, there has been no way to detect the entirety of thermal alterations that may happen during laboratory heating to specimens used in Thellier-series paleointensity experiments. This study develops an experimental approach to address this issue.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据