Magnetic field gradients from the ST-5 constellation: Improving magnetic and thermal models of the lithosphere

Geophysical Research Letters

Volumn 34, Issue 24, 2007, Pages

  Purucker, M ^a   Sabaka, T ^a   Le, G ^b   Slavin, J A ^b   Strangeway, R J ^c   Busby, C ^d  

^a RAYTHEON COMPANY   (United States)

^b NASA GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GEOMAGNETISM; MAGNETIC FIELDS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; REMOTE SENSING; SATELLITES;

LITHOSPHERE; LITHOSPHERIC MAGNETIC FIELDS; MAGNETIC FIELD GRADIENTS;

LITHOLOGY;

ALTITUDE; CRUSTAL THICKNESS; LATITUDE; LITHOSPHERE; MAGNETIC FIELD; REMOTE SENSING; SATELLITE MISSION;

COLORADO PLATEAU; MEXICO [NORTH AMERICA]; NORTH AMERICA; SIERRA MADRE; SIERRA MADRE OCCIDENTAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 39549095449     PISSN: 00948276     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1029/2007GL031739     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Chulick, G. S., and W. D. Mooney (2002), Seismic structure of the crust and uppermost mantle of North America and adjacent oceanic basins: A synthesis, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 92(6), 2478-2492.
2. Ferrari, L., M. López-Martínez, and J. Rosas-Elguera (2002), Ignimbrite flare-up and deformation in the southern Sierra Madre Occidental, western Mexico: Implications for the late subduction history of the Farallon plate, Tectonics, 21(4), 1035, doi:10.1029/ 2001TC001302.
3. Fox Maule, C., M. Purucker, N. Olsen, and K. Mosegaard (2005), Heat flux anomalies in Antarctica revealed by satellite magnetic data, Science, 309, 464-467.
4. Hemant, K., and S. Maus (2005), Geological modeling of the new CHAMP magnetic anomaly maps using a geographical information system technique, J. Geophys. Res., 110, B12103, doi:10.1029/2005JB003837.
5. Hunt, C. B. (1956), Cenozoic geology of the Colorado Plateau, U.S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Pap., 279, 99 pp.
6. Jackson, A., A. Jonkers, and M. Walker (2000), Four centuries of geomagnetic secular variation from historical records, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, 358, 957-990.
7. Langel, R. A., and W. J. Hinze (1998), The Magnetic Field of the Earth Lithosphere: The Satellite Perspective, 429 pp., Cambridge Univ. Press, New York.
8. Macmillan, S., and S. Maus (2005), International Geomagnetic Reference Field - The tenth generation, Earth Planets Space, 57(12), 1135-1140.
9. Maus, S., H. Lühr, M. Rother, K. Hemant, G. Balasis, P. Ritter, and C. Stolle (2007), Fifth-generation lithospheric magnetic field model from CHAMP satellite measurements, Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst., 8, Q05013, doi:10.1029/2006GC001521.
10. Nataf, H., and Y. Ricard (1996), 3SMAC: An a priori tomographic model of the upper mantle based on geophysical modeling, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter., 95, 101-122.
11. Olsen, N., R. Haagmans, T. J. Sabaka, A. Kuvshinov, S. Maus, M. Purucker, M. Rother, V. Lesur, and M. Mandea (2006), The Swarm End-to-End mission simulator study: A demonstration of separating the various contributions to Earth's magnetic field using synthetic data, Earth Planets Space, 58(4), 359-370.
12. Parsons, T., J. McCarthy, W. M. Kohler, C. J. Ammon, H. M. Benz, J. A. Hole, and E. E. Criley (1996), Crustal structure of the Colorado Plateau, Arizona: Application of new long-offset seismic data analysis techniques, J. Geophys. Res., 101, 11,173-11,194.
13. Press, W. H., S. A. Teukolsky, W. T. Vetterling, and B. P. Flanney (1992), Numerical Recipes in FORTRAN: The Art of Scientific Computing, 2nd ed., 963 pp, Cambridge Univ. Press, New York.
14. Purucker, M. E. (1990), The computation of vector magnetic anomalies: A comparison of techniques and errors, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter., 62, 231-245.
15. Purucker, M., B. Langlais, N. Olsen, G. Hulot, and M. Mandea (2002), The southern edge of cratonic North America: Evidence from new satellite magnetometer observations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 29(15), 8000, doi:10.1029/2001GL013645.
16. Sabaka, T., N. Olsen, and M. Purucker (2004), Extending comprehensive models of the Earth's magnetic field with Oersted and CHAMP data, Geophys. J. Int., 159, 521-547.