4.8 Article

Archaeomagnetic results from Cambodia in Southeast Asia: Evidence for possible low-latitude flux expulsion

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2022490118

关键词

archaeology; archaeomagnetism; geomagnetic field behavior

资金

  1. National Nature Science Foundation of China [41888101, 41974077, 41621004]
  2. NSF [EAR1550850, EAR1547263]
  3. CAS [GJHZ1776]
  4. Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) Pioneer Hundred Talents Program
  5. Institute of Geology and Geophysics (CAS) [IGGCAS-201904]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study conducted geomagnetic research at the Tonle Bak site in Cambodia, recovering geomagnetic information from the 11th to 14th centuries. It revealed a sharp change in the geomagnetic field between 1200 and 1300 CE, providing evidence for the possible existence of low-latitude flux expulsion. The study suggests a new focus on detailed geomagnetic research in low-latitude areas around the equator and exploration of related dynamic processes.
Extensive spatial and temporal distribution of high-quality data are essential for understanding regional and global behaviors of the geomagnetic field. We carried out chronological and archaeomagnetic studies at the Angkor-era iron-smelting site of Tonle Bak in Cambodia in Southeast Asia, an area with no data available to date. We recovered high-fidelity full-vector geomagnetic information from the 11th to 14th century for this region, which fill gaps in the global distribution of data and will significantly improve the global models. These results reveal a sharp directional change of the geomagnetic field between 1200 and 1300 CE, accompanied by an intensity dip between 1100 and 1300 CE. The fast geomagnetic variation recorded by our data provides evidence for the possible existence of low-latitude flux expulsion. Related discussions in this paper will inspire a new focus on detailed geomagnetic research in low-latitude areas around the equator, and exploration of related dynamic processes.

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

4.8
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