gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.

htm

Historical Perspective

What can we easily observe?

Mountain peaks are still lit by the Sun

Ships sink as they go over the horizon

The moon looks like a disk

The Earth casts a circular shadow during eclipses

These observations were ignored mostly

Greeks - World (Mediterranean) surrounded by Oceanus, origin of all rivers

Anaximander (6th century B.C.) - Flat earth surrounded by Celestial Sphere

Pythogoras (582-507 B.C.), Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) - speculated the Earth was
a sphere, noted eclipses.

First scientific approach

Eratosthenes (275-195 B.C.) - Estimated size of earth.

Biography of Eratosthenes of Cyrene: click h

A traveler one-day told Eratosthenes that at a certain well in

Syene, (Aswan today) on the 21 of June (Summer Solstice) at high
noon, the sun cast no shadow (it lies nearly on the tropic of Cancer).

Eratosthenes figured that Syene was due south of Alexandria.

In Alexandria he measured the length of the shadow of an obelisk

and used this to determine an angle of 7 degrees 14 minutes (~1/50

1 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

of a circle) for the Sun at high noon on June 21 there.

A camel train took ~10 days @ 500 stadia per day (1 stadium =
185 m). Total trip about 5000 stadia. This is 1/50th of a circle.

With this information, he calculated the circumference of the

Earth to be 46250 km (about 15% > than the 40030 km we use
today) and the distance from the Earth and the Sun to be 804000000
stadia and the distance to the Moon as 780000 stadia. I'll let you
check that out!

Little progress till 1662 (Royal Society London) 1666 (Academie Royale des Sciences -
Paris - see http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Longitude1.html)

Jean Picard in 1671 carried out an accurate survey by

triangulation of a degree of meridian arc (around Paris) - obtained a
radius of the earth of 6372 km (close to our value of 6371 km today).

Right away - Problems!

Jean Richer (in 1672) sailed to Cayenne, an island on the equator.

But his pendulum clock had a big error relative to Paris (~2.5
minutes per day slow). Why?

Isaak Newton (1642-1727) - thought the earth should be an 'oblate

spheroid' because it rotates - somewhat flattened at the poles.
Centrifugal force (example from Hyperphysics click here) makes
radius at equator larger, he thought flattening should be about 1:230
(about 0.5%). The flattening is closer to 1:300 (about 0.3%).
Newton's mistake is that he assumed density to be constant
throughout the Earth.

So increased period of the pendulum explained - Cayenne is

further from the center of the earth (of mass) than is Paris. Also,
since Cayenne is closer to equator, centrifugal force is greater,
counteracting the pull from gravity a little more.

If Newton was right then a meridian of arc is longer at the poles

than the equator. That is, the local curvature on the surface is
greater at the poles. There were some errors in determining this and
two camps emerged (flatteners and elongators). This flatteners won
after two surveys (in Lapland (1736-7) and in Peru (equator,
1735-43) showed the equatorial meridian was shorter than the near
polar one and both differed from that at Paris.

The Figure of the Earth - Curre nt De finitions

Earth is Bumpy but we represent it as a smooth surface = Figure of the Earth

First approximation - Earth = sphere (see from Space)

2 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

Second approximation - Earth = oblate spheroid. Geodicists

(Geophysicists who consider the shape of the earth and its gravity in
detail) have developed the International Reference Ellipsoid. The
1980 convention (refined by satellite measurements) is:

1. Equatorial Radius a=6378.137 km

2. Polar Radius b=6356.752 km
3. Radius of Equivalent Sphere (R, same volume) = 6371.000 km
4. Polar flattening f=(a-b)/a = 1/298.252
5. m is the ratio of the equatorial centrifugal acceleration to the equatorial

gravity:

But the Earth is even bumpier - we need to consider gravity and

the earth's rotation before we can revisit this issue.

The Earth is not perfectly

round. Distances measured
through the poles are shorter
than those at the equator.

International Reference Ellipsoid - Gives the change in radius r(&lambda)

as a function of geographic latitude &lambda. It is defined based on a uniform
ellipse of rotation. Given in terms of the flattening f and is determined by (see
class notes):

How gravity varies with latitude: normal gravity formula - Gives the
theoretical change in gravity normal (perpendicular) to the reference ellipsoid. For
a uniform ellipse of rotation, the measured gravity is the resultant of the
gravitational attraction vector and the centrifugal acceleration vector.

The normal gravity formula as a function of latitude &lambda is given in terms of

the total acceleration of gravity at the equator ge and is

3 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

where ge = 9.780327 m s-2, &beta1 = 5.30244 X 10-3, and &beta2 = -5.8 X 10-6.

Using these definitions, the gravity at the poles is gp = 9.832186 m s-2. This is
larger than at the equator, the difference being &Delta g = gp - ge = 0.05186 m
s-2, or 5186 mGal (see below for the definition of 1 mGal). Gravity is larger at the
pole for two main reasons: (a) pole is closer to center of earth, (b) centrifugal
acceleration is maximum at equator and diminished with latitude. These two
combined effect should make the difference in gravity &Delta g = 9975 mGal, so
larger than observed. The reason is there is 3rd effect: (c) excess mass due to
bulge at equator, which by itself would make gravity larger at the equator.

Problem defining latitude

Geocentric Latitude - Spherical - Reference from Center of Earth

Geographic Latitude - From observations of stars, vertical

direction (defined by gravity) does not necessarily point to center of
the Earth. (Discrepancy of about 0.19 degrees at 45 degrees of
latitude).

The Laws of universal gravitation and of motions

Isaac Newton published his 3-volume book Philosophiae Naturalis Principia

Mathematica in 1687.

2nd Law of Newton - Law of Motion: (force = mass times

acceleration). See Newton's 1-st and 2-nd laws of motion In SI Units: mass (kg),
acceleration (m s-2), force (N -Newton). 1 N= 1 kg m s-2.

Newton's law of gravitation

Newton used Kepler's 3rd empirical law to state the Law of Gravitation: The force
by a mass M acting on a mass m (both assumed to be point masses) separated by a
distance r is directed along the line joining the two masses and has the magnitude:

The Gravitational force (like all forces) is a vector: the force on m is directed
toward the point mass M.

4 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

The Gravitational force between the two masses is proportional to the

Gravitational Constant G = 6.67428 X 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2.

Usually we don't care about the force per se, we are more interested in the
'normalized force per unit mass' - which in our case is the acceleration of gravity
g. Generally, the acceleration a due to a big mass M on our test mass (for example
2
you) is which will be in units of m/s2.

You can show that, amazingly, when you are outside of a spherical object of
mass M the acceleration is identical to that for a point mass with the same mass at
the same radial distance. This gives us one way to estimate the mass of the earth
2
based on the measured gravitational acceleration g at the Earth's
e
surface (radius R).

For later reference: acceleration in the SI system is in units of 10-3

gals = mgal., historically the c.g.s. system was used with units of
cm/s2 = gal. So by definition, 1 m/s2 = 100 gal. As we will see,
geological structures induce local changes on the order of 10-3 gals =
1 mgal. Because there are too many committees around, another
standard is the gravity unit g.u. = mgal/10 due to the accuracy of the
gravimeters of the day. Modern instruments can measure 1 &mu gal
, which is 10-6 gal.

Gravitational acceleration g at the surface of the earth is nominally

9.8 m/s2 as you all know from high school. However, because Earth
is ellipsoid, this value changes as a function of latitude (see above)

Concept of Gravitational Potential

Gravitational potential Ug = the potential energy of a unit mass in

the gravitational attraction field. Energy is expended (or given off) to
move an object up (down) in the Earth's gravitational field. The
gravitational potential is related to the vector gravitational
acceleration g by

so that

If you move around on a surface where Ug = constant then no

change in potential energy occurs. This is called an Equipotential
Surface.

No work (energy) is required to move an object on an

equipotential. This is because the acceleration is perpendicular to an
equipotential surface. The perpendicular direction defines the local

5 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

Plumb Line (or vertical). The plumb line is the direction that a still
pendulum will point. Because the shape of the reference Earth is an
oblate spheroid, the vertical direction does not point to the center of
the Earth (this is the difference between geographic and geocentric
latitude, see above. Additional local variations on the topography of
the equipotential surface also contribute to this (we'll see this later).

The moment of inertia of an object contains information about its internal mass distribution.
For Earth, we define the polar moment of inertia, C, to be aligned with the rotation axis.
Similarly, the two equatorial moments of inertia (A, B) are in the two equatorial direction, as
in the figure below. The equations on the right give the matematical definition, where the
integration is over the Volume and &rho is density.

For a sphere of uniform density, with mass M and external radius R, The moments of inertia
can be easily calculated based on the above definitions: A = B = C = 0.4 M R2.

The moment of inertia of Earth can be calculated based on models of its internal density

6 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

distribution. Since the Earth is close to an oblate sphere, A = B, and C > A.

A value of C can be determined from observations: it is equal to

where and

H is called the dynamical ellipticity, and this value is known from the rate of precession of
the Earth's rotation axis in space: H = 1/305.457

J2 is called the Earth's coefficient of ellipticity, and this value is known from the rate of
precession of satellites in orbit around the Earth: J2 = 0.00108262

This gives C = 0.33 M a2. So smaller than if Earth's density was uniform. This indicates that
density is not uniform inside the Earth: it should be larger near the center. This is what we
expect: because the Earth's core is made of Iron, density is more concentrated towards the
Earth's center (there is also an effect from compression at depth).

The surface that corresponds to the International Reference Ellipsoid is, by definition, a surface of constant
gravitational potential.

MacCullagh's Formula (1849) can be used to relate the gravitational potential of an oblate spheroid to its
moments of inertia. If C and A are the principal moments of intertia of the Earth through the pole and the
equator, respectively, then

This can written in the alternative forms

The function P2(cos &theta) is the Legendre polynominal of order 2. Here are the definitions of the
Legendre polynomials of order 0, 1, 2 and 3:

7 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

The angle &theta is called co-latitude: it is the angle measured between a point on the Earth's surface and
the axis of rotation.

So, in MacCullagh's formula

1. 1st term describes gravity for a perfect sphere

2. 2nd term describes the correction for the oblateness

But the shape of the Earth is also influenced by the centrifugal acceleration. The total potential of gravity is
the sum of the gravitational and centrifugal potentials. At a point on the surface of the rotating spheroid it
is: Ug=UG+Ucf, where UG is gravitational potential defined by MacCullagh's formula and Ucf is the
centrifugal potential.

If the Earth behaves like a fluid, its surface should coincide with an equipotential surface where
the total potential Ug is constant. Using this potential, we can predict the flattening of the Earth
if it were a fluid. We will do this in class. We will see that indeed, the Earth's shape is pretty
much that of a fluid!!

Ocean Tides: Ocean = hydrostatic equipotential surface - changes a great deal.

Lunar Tides:

Earth (mass ) and Moon (mass ) centres are at distance

e m
rL away from each other. Earth's centre is a distance

from the centre of mass of this

L
system. d = 4600 km. In the Earth-Moon system, both orbit around
this point.

8 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

1. This results in a centrifugal acceleration of each point on the earth away from
the moon along the line connecting the centres of the Earth and Moon. As I
showed on the whiteboard every point of the Earth describes small circle of the
same size and with identical radius. The mechanism id called ‘revolution
without rotation’. The centrifugal acceleration of this motion has the same
magnitude at all points in the Earth and directed away from the Moon.
2. At the Earth's centre centrifugal balanced by Moons pull: .

L L - This then gives the value of the centrifugal force at

every point on the earth.

3. On side facing Moon, Moons pull is greater than the centrifugal acceleration.
Gives some leftover acceleration towards the moon.

On side away from the Moon, Moons pull is less than the centrifugal
acceleration. Gives some leftover acceleration away from the moon.

4. At points on the Earth 90 degrees removed from this, the residual tidal
acceleration is actually pointed towards the centre of the Earth because the
Moon's pull is no longer parallel to the line between the centres.
5. The Tides are a superposition of the Earth's rotation and tidal acceleration; we

9 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

have two tidal cycles per day (semi-diurnal). To see an animation click here.

Complication: Earth's axis of rotation is tilted. Consequently

o At equator both tides are equal.

o At midlatitudes both tides are of different heights

(called the diurnal inequality).

o At high latitudes only one tide per day is seen.

Solar Tides

Can go through same arguments for the Sun. Mass of the Sun is
much larger than the Moon, but it is also much farther away. It turns
out that tidal accelerations from the Sun are about 45% that of the
Moon's.

Superposition of Solar and Lunar Tides

Spring Tide: Every two weeks Sun and Moon in alignment through
the Earth - gives high tides called Spring Tides

Neap Tide: When Moon at 90 degrees with respect to the Sun, the
tides are low and are referred to as Neap Tides.

10 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

Over the course of one month, the combined Lunar and Solar tides
give rise to a beat pattern (see image below), where high amplitude
tides (spring tides) are followed a week later by low amplitude tides
(neap tides).

11 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

What about the other planets? Can they induce tides? - Yes, very sensitive
measurements of gravity can pick up the influence of Jupiter.

Tides in the Solid Earth (Bodily Earth Tides)

Observed oceanic tides only ~70% of that expected.

This is due to tides of the solid earth - The solid portions of the
earth augment the oceanic tides - so what is observed is really only
the difference (sea bottom is also raised). This is because the Earth
behaves like an elastic solid. The whole Earth is deformed by tidal
accelerations.

Combined accelerations of the Sun and Moon are about 0.3 mgal.
This is large compared to the size of gravity anomalies that can
detected in a survey. So tidal accelerations need to be corrected for.

Tides on Earth are not perfectly aligned with the direction of the
Moon - they lag by ~12 minutes. This is because some fristional
energy is involved in the deformation of the Earth.

12 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

The misalignment between the tidal bulges with the Moon results in
a net-torque which acts to slow down Earth's rotation: the days are
getting longer.

This has been checked by using observations of eclipses by ancient

civilizations. These observations suggest that the length of the day
increases by approximately 1.7 millisecond per century (see figure
below). This is close to the average of 1.4 ms/century obtained since
telescopes (1620 AD to present) and clocks have been used directly
to monitor variations in Earth's rotation. The small difference is
because there are lots of decadal fluctuations occuring about this
trend, so it it difficult to isolate the effect of tidal breaking alone from
the modern data. (Modern data, with decadal fluctuations, can be
seen in the right part of the figure below, taken from Stephenson,
Geophysics & Astronomy, 2003.)

Another source of evidence for the gradual lengthening of the day

comes from fossils of Coral reefs and bivalve and from tidal records:

1. 400 Ma Coral Reef Growth Rings - Day about 22 hours (400 days/year).
2. 900 Ma Tidal Records in Sediments - Day about 18 hours

Angular momentum in Earth-Moon system is conserved. This has

13 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

an important consequence: if Earth is slowing down, it looses

angular momentum. The Moon must increase its angular momentum
to compensate. So this implies that angular momentum is transferred
to the moon: it is slowly moving away from the earth! This is
confirmed by Lunar Laser Ranging using retroreflectors left on the
moon. The Moon is receding at about 3.8 cm/year!

The rate of lengthening of the day based on the observed recession

of the Moon's orbit should be 2.3 ms/century. The difference with the
observed 1.7 ms/century is because there is currently another
process at work for the Earth: the Earth is gradually changing
shape, becoming slightly more spherical from the rebound of high
latitude lands (upward motion) that were depressed by glaciers
during the last ice age.

There are changes in the length of the day at daily, seasonal,

annual, decadal and millennial timescales. These are caused by
exchanges of angular momentum between the mantle and the ocean,
atmosphere and core. There are also changes in the direction of the
Earth's rotation axis with respect to a fixed spot on the surface.
These are referred to as Polar motion. Here are the power point
slides I showed in class on Earth's rotation.

14 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

Primary orbital components

The gravitational forces exerted by other celestial bo
affect the shape of the orbit of Earth around the Sun
the orientation of its rotation vector in space with res
to the ecliptic plane (obliquity). As a result, the amou
and, more importantly, the distribution of incoming s
radiation oscillate with time. There are three major
orbital perturbations: change in the eccentricity (with
dominant periods of 400 and 100 ky), change in the
angle of obliquity (41 ky), and the combined effect f
precession of the equinoxes and the apsidal precessio
(with a dominant period of 21 ky).

(A) Eccentricity refers to the shape of Earth’s orbit

around the sun, varying from near circular to elliptic

(B) Obliquity refers to the tilt of Earth’s axis relative

the plane of the ecliptic varying between 22.1° and
24.5°.

(C) Axial precession contains two effect: 1) precessi

of the equinoxes, which refers to the changing
orientation of the rotation axis in space (period of 26
ky); 2) apsidal precession, the rotation of the orienta
of the eccentric orbit (100 ky). Their combined effec
leads to a dominant period of 21 ky.

From http://web.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/milankovitch.h

The marine dO18 record illustrates the transition in the

Pleistocene ~1.2 Ma, from dominant 41-ka glaciation
dominant 100-ka glaciation cycles, which occurred in
absence of any substantial change in climate forcing

15 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

(A) Marine dO18 record of global ice volume from Oc

Drilling Program (Site 849) over the past 2 Ma.

(B) Blue curve is the filtered dO18 record in (A) using

filter. Red curve is the filtered eccentricity index from
1978) obtained by using the same filter as used for the
data (arbitrary scale).

(C) Blue curve is the filtered dO18 record in (A) obtain

using a 41-ky filter. Red curve is the filtered obliquity
from (Berger, 1978) obtained by using the same filter
for the isotope data (arbitrary scale).

From Clark et al. (1999).

How does the marine dO18 record help us to figure out what was a climate in
the past? Click here for the explanation.

Figure below (from Wikipedia) shows the combined effect of these cycles in terms of the solar
insolation at 65 deg N in the summer (black wiggly line). The bottom two curves are dO18
curves from ocean sediments and Antarctic ice-cores. Warm periods match large values of
eccentricity.

16 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

We saw above that we can define an ellipsoid surface - the International Reference
Ellipsoid - representing the shape of the Earth from the combined effect of gravity and
rotation.

We also saw that this surface was a surface of constant potential: an equipotential

17 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

surface.

But the International Reference Ellipsoid is only convenient mathematical first order
description of the true shape of the Earth. Earth is much bumpier.

This is because the Earth has anomalies in density. These produce undulations of the
equipotential surfaces.

Consider the equipotential surfaces in a small section at the Earth surface. The area of
our experiment is small enough that we can neglect the curvature of the Earth and
imagine we are in a section where the underlying density is homogeneous everywhere.
In other words, gravity points straight down. Equipotentials are now parallel to the
surface. Note that gravity is perpendicular to the equipotential.

Now consider the change in equipotential caused by a buried sphere of positive density
anomaly (more mass). The deflection of the equipotentials is illustrated in the figure
below. A greater mass results in a larger pull from gravity. Thus, in order to be on the
same equipotential surface (the one in the absence of this mass), we need to be further
away. This is why the deflection is upward. Note also, that this is consistent with the fact
the the equipotential surface must remain perpendicular to the gravity vector everywhere
and the latter is slightly deflected by the extra mass. Conversely, a negative density
anomaly (mass deficit) would cause a downward deflection of the equipotentials.

18 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

Now consider density variations all over the Earth. These will lead to deflections of
the equipotential surface with respect to the International Reference Ellipsoid on a
global scale

The surface of a fluid is align to an equipotential surfaces. For example, if we fill a

tank with water, the surface of the fluid is parallel to the Earth surface. The reason for
this is because this defines a surface of constant gravitational potential. (If the top
surface of the fluid did not coincide with an equipotential, then two parcels of fluids on
this top surface would have different potential energy, and this would lead to flow).

However, if we place a large mass under the tank, then, as in the example above,
equipotentials are no longer parallel to the Earth’s surface, and so the fluid in the tank
would alter its shape such that its top surface is coincident with the warped
equipotentials.

Of course, for the deformation of this fluid to be visible, we would need to put a very
very big (and concentrated) mass under the tank. This is difficult to see in a lab, or in
common day to day experience. But the sea surface of the Earth is a natural experiment
where we can see this effect. The mean sea surface (if we average out waves, ocean
currents, tides) must coincide with an equipotential surface.

This defines the Geoid. It is the equipotential surface of the Earth gravity field that
most closely approximates the mean sea surface. At every point, the geoid surface is
perpendicular to the local direction of gravity. It is therefore a natural reference for
heights. It is also the most graphical representation of the Earth gravity field.

The image below shows the topography of the mean sea surface. This is obtained by
radar altimetry from satellites. This surface represents the geoid over the oceans. Note
that we can sea a lot of features directly related to the topography at the bottom of the
oceans. This is because a bump on the sea-floor, for example a sea mount, represents a
location where water has been replaced by rocks: the higher density leads to an upward

19 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

deflection of the geoid.

Over land, the solid surface does not coincide with the equipotential as over the
oceans. But we can still define the geoid over land: it is the hypothetical surface of the
water level if we could cut channels across the land. The image below shows the geoid
over the whole Earth (From GRACE satellite mission). (Note that this on this picture, the
smaller length scale features such as those over the oceans have been filtered away).

The differences between the Geoid and International Reference Ellipsoid is called

20 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

Geoid Undulations

1. Positive undulations (Geoid higher) caused by excess mass

2. Negative undulation (Geoid lower) caused by mass deficit

Note that the geoid undulations are of the order of 100 meters. This is much smaller
than the topography of the true surface of the Earth, which is of a few kilometers. Notice
also that the broad variations of the Geoid do not seem to be related to the distribution of
continents. Why is this? Should we expect that since continents are elevated, they have
more mass, and therefore should have geoid highs above them? We will see why this is
not the case when we look at isostasy. The broad changes that we see above are
associated with mass anomalies involved in mantle convection.

Looking over a smaller geographic area, we can see more Geoid structure. It is then
easier to see features in the geoid that correspond to local topographic features such as
mountain ranges, continental shelves, large valleys, etc. Below is a Geoid Map over the
U.S. from the NOAA . Scale, Upper (Red): -7.7 meters, Lower (Magenta) : -52.8 meters.

1. Yellowstone caldera - very high! - Evidence for mantle plume?

2. Ancient suture zone from Lake Superior shows up well
3. Great Valley in California large feature
4. Sea mounts in Pacific (small dots)
5. Geoid Low centered on Hudson's Bay
6. Sharp drop off Eastern Seaboard, limit of the continent.

Changes in the gravity vector associated with the geoid undulations represent gravity
anomalies, i.e. differences in gravity from the normal gravity formula that defines the

21 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

first order gravity variation with latitude. Here is a figure of the global gravity
anomalies. The scale is in mgal. So the scale of the anomalies are of the order of 80
mgal. This is roughly 10 000 times smaller than the radial gravity from the
approximately spherical Earth.

Here are the power point slides I showed in class on the Geoid.

Absolute Measurement of Gravity

These measurements are aimed at obtaining a value of gravity at a point on

the Earth's surface. For example, If a pendulum of length L is oscillating at
a period T, then we can get a value of the acceleration of gravity by g = 4
&pi2 L / T2. The more precisely we know L and the more accurate our
measure of the period is, the more accurate our measurement of gravity is.
Below are a few of these instruments.

Free Fall Laser Interferometer - Measures acceleration of gravity

very accurately to better than 1.1 microgal (about 10-9 surface
gravity)

22 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

The Rise and Fall Method - Similar to the above but a

retroreflector is shot up and the time taken for it to go up and down
past an optical beam is recorded accurately - about as accurate as
free fall.

In Canada, Natural Resources Canada maintains a reference system

of absolute gravity stations which are re-measured to microgal
accuracy, see http://www.geod.nrcan.gc.ca/products-produits
/ggns_e.php

Relative Measurement of Gravity

Absolute measurements can give very precise values of g, but they require
very careful setup and it can take a long time to get a good measurement
data. These instruments are typically not very portable so they are no very
useful if one wants to do a field survey. But in a survey, one is not so much
interested in the absolute value of gravity, but more in the relative change
in gravity between different points (caused by variations in subsurface
density).

Relative gravimeter are mostly based on a mass-on-a-spring concept. The

force balance on a mass m attached the spring with spring constant k is m g
= -k s , where g is gravity and s is the stretching distance of the spring. If
we move to a different location, then m (g + &delta g) = -k (s + &delta s),
and the change in gravity &delta g = (k/m) &delta s is obtained by a
measure of the change in the stretching distance &delta s.

Essentially sensitive balances - Use extension of a spring. the

change in extension characterises the change in the pull from gravity.
Below is the Lacoste-Romberg model which uses an 'zero-length'
spring which is preloaded in its manufacture (helical spring where
wire is coiled and also twisted)

23 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

From http://www.lacosteromberg.com/primary.html. A mirror is

attached to the beam and a null deflection is used by rebalancing the
beam after the instrument is moved to a new location. This type of
instruments are accurate to about 0.005 mgal.

Scintrex constructs a similar instrument which uses a fused quartz

spring monitored using a capacitance method (see
http://www.scintrexltd.com/ for details and photo). The fused quartz
spring is less subject to 'drift' than the metal springs.

Superconducting Gravimeter: The instrument consists of a small

superconducting test mass levitated in a magnetic field produced by
a current in a superconducting coil. Change in gravity require a
change in the elctrcal current to maintain the test mass at the same
height. So relative gravity change can be measured. The sensitivity
of these gravimeter is spectacular: one nanogal, or 10-12 of surface
gravity. However, they are not very portable, so not used in the field.
But they can meaure precisely changes in gravity from tides, free
oscillations of the Earth, etc.

Variations in gravity over a given area are referred to as gravity anomalies.

The goal of gravity exploration is to isolate the effect of sub-surface density variations
that are responsible for the observed gravity anomalies.

To be able able to compare gravity values at different points on Earth, the gravity
measurements must be made on the same reference surface, for instance sea-level. If this
is not the case, because gravity changes as R-2, where R is the distance from the Earth's
centre, then a difference in gravity is introduced simply because we are either closer or
farther away from the Earth's center.

When we take gravity measurements on land, we must take into account the fact that

24 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

our measurements are made (usually) at higher elevation than sea-level. This introduces
a change in gravity from the reference gravity that we need to take into account. This is
the free-air correction.

Suppose we make gravity measurements at points A and B on the figure below.

If point A is at sea level, then its distance from the (spherical) Earth's center of mass is
R, and with mass of the Earth given by M, the radial scalar (downward) gravity is go =
gA

As I showed in class, the difference in gravity between point B and point A, &Delta g
= gB - gA , purely from the fact the we have moved a distance h further away from the
center of the Earth is

Because the scalar gravity at sea-level varies as a function of latitude, and R also
varies with latitude &lambda, the numerical value of the change in gravity &Deltag for a
given elevation h depends on latitude and is

In the above equation, the unit of &Deltag is in mgal and the unit of h is in meters.

For surveys of modest latitudinal extent, the second term is unimportant. So in

practice, only a correction of -0.3086 mgal for each meter above the reference geoid is
taken.

25 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

To eliminate the effect on gravity anomalies produced by changes in elevation we

must apply a correction. So for example, in the figure above, we must "correct" the data
at B for the effect of elevation: we must add the gravity change that would would be
observed at B, if we had been able to take the measurement at the same level as A (the
reference level). So we apply the correction:

This is known as the free-air correction. It is the gravity change that would occur if no
mass were to be present between the observation point and sea level (hence, free-air).

After we have corrected for elevation using the free-air correction, the remainder of
gravity anomalies is called the free-air gravity anomaly, and is given by

In the above expression, gobs is the data (the observed gravity value), gn is the normal
gravity (the gravity at sea-level on the reference ellipsoidal Earth). In general, any
reference level could be chosen, but sea level is commonly chosen. Point A is already at
the reference level, so no correction is needed.

The previous discussion ignores the fact that between the observation point ‘B’ and
the reference level, there is material that will increase g at the observation point ‘B’
compared to ‘A’. This extra mass is depicted in red in the figure below

We approximate this mass as an infinite horizontal plate of density &rho and thickness
h. This gives

26 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

Thus, the slab raises the value of g observed at B is by an amount gB, compared to
measurements at A. To remove this effect we need to subtract gB from the gravity
measurement at B. This is called the Bouguer correction. With the known value of the
gravitational constant G, we write it as

In the abobe equation, the unit of gB is in mgal, the unit of h is in meters and the unit
of &rho is in kg m-3

To apply the correction we need to know the density that lies between B and the
reference plane. There are methods to do this, but we won't see it in this class. If we take
the average density of crustal rocks, 2670 kg m-3, this gives

Thus, the gravity effect of the mass between B and the reference level (Bouguer
correction) is smaller in magnitude than the gravity effect from changing the distance
from center of mass (free-air correction).

The remainder of gravity (if any), after removing the reference normal gravity at the
given latitude, after the free-air correction has been applied, and after the Bouguer
correction has been applied is called the Bouguer gravity anomaly, and is given by

Note that the Bouguer correction is approximate in two ways:

1. The density is not known exactly

2. In general, a mountain is not an infinite slab!

The Bouguer correction can be improved by taking topography better into account
(terrain correction), and thus to have a better determination of the gravity caused by mass
at each measurement point.

The goal of both the free-air and Bouguer correction is to try to isolate the effect of
gravity that are caused by subsurface variations in density, and so to eliminate the effect
caused by topography. If the Bouguer anomaly is zero, it means the density of the
subsurface is uniform.

The folowing two synthetic examples show cases where there are no density variations

27 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

in the subsurface. The gravity measurements, after removing normal gravity, do have
variations caused by the elevation on which measurements have been made. In both
cases, The Bouguer anomaly is zero, meaning there is no gravity anomaly (i.e. uniform
density) after elevation is corrected for.

Below is an example of a global free-air gravity anomaly map. This is a map produced

28 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

with data acquired by the satellite mission GRACE. The free-air anomaly is built from
measuring subtle changes in the shape of the satllite orbit around the Earth. We then
apply a free-air correction, correcting for the small change in satellite elevation about a
mean orbit value (reference level). Since this is in space, there is no mass between
elevation and the reference level: no Bouguer correction. The scale is in mgal.

Below are the Bouguer anomaly map of Canada and Alberta. Note the low values of
gravity centered on the Rocky Mountains and the high anomalies over the continental
shelf. These appear because we do not take root effects into account when taking the
Bouguer correction.

29 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

30 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

How should these maps be interpeted? The picture below, taken from Lowrie textbook
gives a hint to what is happening. a) is a fully supported mountain range and b) is
compensated by a lower density root which extends into the mantle.

31 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

1. Left hand case - Free air high because of elevation, Bouguer removes effect
completely.
2. Right hand case, Mountain chain has a root of low density. Observed gravity is
lower than normal and Bouguer anomaly is strongly negative while in the centre of
the mountain range the free air anomaly is amost zero. Note also the the sharp
change from negative to positive free-air anomaly at the edge of the mountain.

Roots under mountains are what we expect if continents float over the lithosphere like
iceberg do in water. This is the concept of isostasy.

Pierre Bouguer's 1700's (Peru) and Everest's 1800's (Himalayas) did not see as
large a deflection towards mountain ranges as expected - Why??

Two ideas - both rely on the concept of 'depth of compensation'. This is the
depth within the earth at which the pressure from all the above mass is not
changing laterally (constant).

32 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

Pratt's Theory: 'Compensation' is a result of lateral variations in the density of the

crust. For example, density of crust over mountains is smaller.

Pressure at compensation depth is:

P = g &rho1 D
= g &rho2 (D + h2 )
= g &rho3 (D + h1 )
= g &rhoo (D - d) + g &rhowater d

In above equ., g is the acceleration of gravity. The pressure is equal everywhere

at the compensation depth. So given variations in topography, changes in densities
must be such to maintain the equality.

Airy's Theory: 'Compensation' results from the thickness of the continental crust.
Over mountains, the lower density crust is thicker.

Continents float on the mantle like icebergs in water - the higher the mountain,
the deeper the 'root'.

33 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

Pressure at compensation depth is:

P = g &rhor t + g &rhom r1
= g &rhor (t + r2 + h2 ) + g &rhom (r1 - r2 )
= g &rhor (t + r1 + h1 )
= g &rhor (t - ro - d) + g &rhom (r1 + ro ) + g &rhowater d

Again, the pressure is equal everywhere at the compensation depth. So given

variations in topography, compensation is achieved by variations in the 'root'
thickness.

Which hypothesis is correct? Bit of both. Depends where we look on Earth. It is easier
to consider whether a region is compensated - or in Isostatic Equilibrium. When this is
the case, its free-air anomaly is zero.

Complete Compensation: Topography and roots/density in complete balance.

Over- Compensation: Root is too large - in order to go toward equilibrium, there

must be vertical upwards motion. This is what's happening in post-glacial rebound
(see below)

Under-Compensation: Material added to surface or tectonic compressive

stresses add additional support. Root too small.

How might these circumstances be detected? Use the Isostatic Gravity Anomaly:

1. Use topography to predict the root for isostatic equilibrium.

2. Using this presumed root calculate what the expected Bouguer anomaly gR will be.
3. Calculate the Isostatic Gravity Anomaly gI = gB-gR , where gB is the Bouguer

34 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

anomaly and gR is the anomaly of the root.

Below is an example from The Lowrie textbook:A) is a fully compensated

mountain range supported by its root. A large negative Bouguer anomaly is
observed over it but if properly corrected for gI is zero. B) is an overcompensated
mountain range with a root which is too deep, the gI remains negative. C) is an
undercompensated mountain range which is supported by additional forces. gI
will be positive.

Here are the power point slides I showed in class on gravity anomalies.

An example of overcompensation is Post-glacial rebound. Large continental size

glaciers covered North America and Northern Europe during the last ice age 20,000
years ago. These glaciers pushed down on the surface, which was depressed until

35 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

isostatic equilibrium was achieved. After removal of the glaciers, which happened
relatively fast (1000 yr or so), the northern continents were no longer at isostatic
equilibrium and so they started to uplift. They still do today, at rates of a few
millimeter/yr (see image below for Scandinavia, from http://www.oso.chalmers.se
/~hgs/docent/docans.html).

We can also measure the effect of post-glacial rebound over the shape of the Earth.
Since the uplift is near the pole, it means that with time the planet is becoming just a
little bit less oblate! We can measure this in terms of changes in the ellipticity coefficient
J2. Below is a figure from a paper by Cox & Chao, (Science, 2002) showing the decrease
in J2 (red line) measured by satellites.

36 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

This is the usual way we have learned to solve physics problems.

Suppose you know the density everywhere inside the Earth (or in the subsurface of a
local region), then you can calculate the acceleration of gravity everywhere exactly.

From the known model of density, there is unique solution of the gravitational
acceleration. So we can make a prediction of the gravity variations.

In gravity exploration though, the situation is reversed. We have gravity data, from
which we want to determine the variations in density in the subsurface.

37 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM
gravity http://www.ualberta.ca/~dumberry/geoph110/gravity.htm

However, as I showed in class, there is an infinite number of density distribution that

can produce the same gravity anomaly!

So given gravity data, a priori we have no way of determining which of these density
distribution is the correct one. This is referred to as non-uniqueness.

Non-uniqueness makes solving the inverse problem completely different than solving
the forward problem.

Non-uniqueness can arise from two distinct factors

1. The basic physics

2. Noise (errors) in the data

Example of 1: In gravity exploration, we can only determine the excess mass of a

buried sphere. We cannot determine the density and radius that combine to give this
value of excess mass. This type of non-uniqueness cannot be overcome, not even with
expensive computer packages. However, additional (independent) data can be used to
address non-uniqueness. For example, if we have density measurements of the target, we
could determine the radius of the sphere.

Example of 2: In gravity exploration noise in the data will introduce more possible
models of density that can fit the observations to the level of errors. This type of
non-uniqueness can be overcome by improving data quality and quantity.

38 de 38 01/07/2013 8:27 PM