JOURNALO•' G•OPHYSlC•.L R•SE•.

RCH

VOLUME 64, No. 1

JANUARY, 1959

Rapid Gravity Computations Two-Dimensional for Bodieswith Application to the MendocinoSubmarine Fracture Zone*

MANIX TALWANI,LAMAR-WORZEL, J. AND MARK LANDISMAN
Lamont Geological Observatory, (Columbia University) Palisades, New York

Abstract--Expressions derivedfor the vertical and horizontalcomponents the gravitaare of
tional attraction due to a two-dimensional body of arbitrary shape by approximating it to an

n-sidedpolygon.Theseexpressions put in forms suitablefor solutionby a high-speed are digital computer. an example the application this method,the crustalsection As of of across Mendocino the fracture zone is deducedfrom the gravity anomalies.Assumingthe crust to consistof a single homogeneous layer, overlain by water and sediment,it is found to be about three km thicker
to the north of the fracture zone than to the south of it.

Many geological structures approximately are linear, and the problemsconnected with them can be solved with two-dimensionalforms of analysis. For gravity computations, Nettleton [1940] has determinedthe criteria for making an adequatetwo-dimensional computation.Various methods existfor the computation the gravitaof tional attraction causedby irregularly shaped
two-dimensional bodies. These methods can be

individual contributionsat distant points are neglectedeven though the total sum of their small contributions is appreciable. This may causeconsiderable error in computations. The periphery of any two-dimensionalbody can be approximated closely by a polygon, by making the number of sides of this polygon
sufficiently large. Analytical expressions can be
obtained for both the vertical and horizontal

divided into two categories. th.efirst category In lie those that involve the use of graticules,dot charts, or other suchgraphicalcomputingaids. While in theory thesemethodscan be made as

components the gravitational attraction due of to this polygonat any givenpoint. Theseexpressions,then, can be usedwithout any limitations to the size or positionof the body. The present

precise onepleases, as merely increasing methodinvolves use of theseexpressions. by the the
scale to which the graticule is constructed,in The accuracydependsonly on how closelythe actual practice this may be difficult, if not polygon the givenbody, and can be increased fits impossible. by increasing numberof sides the polygon. the of In the second categorylie thosemethodsthat It will be recognized that an irregularly shaped involvebreakinguptheirregularlyshapedbodies two-dimensionalbody can be more easily into severalsmallerbodiesof differentsizesbut approximated a polygonthan by rectangular by of shapesthat are regular and for which the blocks. The computationsinvolved in solving gravitationalattractioncan be easilycomputed. the expressions obtain the components to of A convenient form of regularbody to useis the gravitational attractionare lengthyand tedious,

rectangularblock, as proposedby Vening but beingiterativeare readilyprogrammed for
Meinesz and others[1934]. Here againthe method solution a digitalcomputer. programfor use by A can be madeas precise onepleases usinga with the IBM 650 has been made, and. the as by sufficientlylarge number of small blocks [see, machine time required for obtaining both the for example, Shutbet and others,1956].However, vertical and horizontal components grayiraof the computations become increasingly more tional attraction for an n-sided polygon at a tediousas the number of blocksis increased. single point is approximatelyequal to 2.5n Further, the blocksmay be so small that their seconds.

No. 318

* Lamont Geological Observatory ContributionLet ABGDEF (Fig.1) be a given polygon
with n sidesand let P be the point at whichthe
49

Imagine P to be the origin of an xz the summationsbeing made over the n sidesof system of coordinates. WORZEL. Also z = (x -.• 0 dO---tan X• . It can be shown by a method similar to Hubbert's that the corresponding expression the horizontal where for component of gravitational attraction is given by 2Gpf x dO. 1--Geometrical elements involved in the gravitational attraction of an n-sided polygon and H = 2Gp • attraction due to this polygonhas to be determined.tan 0' Also seeFigure 1. -.tanb. In the most general caseit can be shown that It has been shownby Hubbert[1948] that the vertical component of gravitational attraction due to such a two-dimensional body is. at the origin. Let us evaluate the two integralsf z dOand f x dOfor the above polygon. Now z = x tan 0 Z• a• cos•. lies in the xz plane.log• Oi= tan z__• -• . say.50 TALWANI. Let PQ = a•.IO•= sinai Oi+l q. for the positivex axis towardsthe positivez axis. equal to 2GpdO. fz the line integral beingtaken alongits periphery.where the polygon also the polygon. tan -1 Zi + • -ß i+• -- Zi Xi Oi+• tan Zi+l = -• (1) and Xi+l for any arbitrary point R on BC. Let z be defined positive It now remainsto solvethe integralsinvolved downwards(vertical) and let 0 be measuredfrom in the expressions Zi and X•. where G is the universal constantof gravitation and p is the volume densityof the body. c tan The verticalcomponent gravitationalattracof tion V andthe horizontal component dueto H.) Og(tan ]' -q. the sideBC of the polygon can be first computed.a. then givenrespectively are by z V.The contribution to f z dOfrom. the wholepolygon.• log• O•(tan•) ] tan cosO•+•(tan0•+• --tan cos O• tan b•) -X• a• b• b•[tan--03 = sin cos b•(O•+• cos O.2Gp"•Z• i--1 Fro. AND LANDISMAN or f•c zdOf• tan•tantan •idOZi.ProduceCB to meet the x axis at Q at an angle•. The expressions Z• and X• reduceto simpler for expressions the followingcases: in .) tan From (1) and (2) Z -- (2) ai = •i+1 + Zi+l •i+1 Zi -- -- •i ' Zi+• a• tan 0 tan •i tan• -.ai --O 0 _-tan Similarly it can be shownthat fs xdOfr tan•a'-.

0.G. 1957].Xi ]og• Xi -- cos 8• cos Redfish (first cruise) --29 --44 --17 --46 - --38 --12 --15 --19 Case E--If 0• = Zi=O --22 --19 +1 -]-11 Case F--If x• = Z•=0 Zi = 0 Harrison --44 --19 and others +13 +19 +4 --79 Case xi+• z•+. tan -. are listed in Table CaseC--if zi = Zi+l = •o Cruise TABLE lqGravity stations • Free-air sin •+• X• = zi log• sin 8• Case D--If x• = anomaly mgal Zi -. These are the coordinates and z•'s usedin the computation.loge{cos 8•+.0 z•'s.0 Z• : --a• sin • cos • 2 + X• = a• sin• og. of course. a• all explicitlyexpressed terms of the x•'s and the in [1957]. O.. • Based on soundings from U.S.• • (•)i log•8. The map in Figure 2 showsthe and on the USS Rasher and USS Raton in 1954 submarinegravity stationsin the area made on USS Redfish in 1952 [Worzel and others.S.+. tan]. This is especially advantageous. and can be that •b•.(tan { 0.S.+. Chart 9000. The gravity values at the Redfish stations and at those of the Harrison stations that were used in this study 1.(tan 8•+. • Based on soundings from U. 0 G--If = = Zi=O [19571 --63 --45 --17 X•=O. -.it is necessary specify to the density of the body and the positionof the pointsat which the attraction is to be calculated.G. This method is illustrated by the following example in which the crustal structure along a profile in the Pacific crossing the Mendocino fracture The zone has been deduced.C. Chart 5002. Io• 7r = Sin •b•-cos tan {cos 0• tan] positionof the Mendocinoescarpmentand the •b. sinceone of the simplest ways of defining the periphery of a body is to specify the coordinatesof adjacent points at the verticesof the body.C. we are able to obtain expressions both for V and H solely in terms of the x•'s and the z•'s.S. a For other stations in this area see Harrison and others Noting 8•. •b•)} cos• 2 CaseB--If x•+.• •.(tan•b•)} loge ---a•sin cos[tan [•i-.GRAVITY COMPUTATIONS FOR TWO-DIMENSIONAL BODIES 51 CaseA--If x• -. . x•'s In addition. 1955] [Harrison and others.8•+. Mendocino fracture zone has been de- gi a• qb.(tan {cos 0• tan -scribed by Menard and Dietz [1952] and by Menard [1955].

only the westernmost one (Stations comparativelysmooth topography.soon passesinto the "Ridge and The minimumdepthat the top of the escarpment Trough Province" [Menard and Dietz..The topographic profilealongthis Fig..But it runs 61 to 67 and 85 to 90) can be considered typical in a NW-SE direction.. AND LANDISMAN o H(•rris•n-•-•-•-hers(1957) _ •.52 TALWANI.:' 38 ø 134 ø 1320.... 1951]..•½ • N''%3 ½"'!¾':' CAPE 40 ø •'. 2). • I• ol46 k_: . WORZEL..S.: J' OREGON •6•. by is graphyin this area seems trend in an approxi.using gravity 143 to 149 were also'. the main Redfishprofile (Sta.. IqlIIIlll[ •• I/I •l• '""'"" I 'O'l&lI I•111IIII•IlII•••(?'MENDOCINO I •65 I 15e •66 ol48 79• •0• I ' I •62 u. escarpmentat an acute angle. % O. REDFISH 1952 os? o 145 "• •'• • •/.S. would be profile.sponding their respective to positions along the . 62 and the RedfishStations 146 and 147 are at However. •1• ¾:. ' /!'.. The Harrison stationsand the Redfish direction.and the othercrosses Gordaescarpment jecting' the Redfishgravity profile on to a the rather than the Mendocino escarpment (see line (130øW).. and the maximumdepthat province very roughtopography. •2 42 ø o.projectedon to the same values obtained in such an area. a is 3100m (1700fm). This. of The situation the foot of the escarpment 4900 m (2700 fm). some distance to the west of the considerably different depthsthan those correHarrison profile.'"... 2iposition of Mendocino and Gordaescarpments (modified from Menardand Dietz [1952]. the Harrison Stations 61 and inadequate. is Of the remainingtwo profiles. A deduction of structure based on a stations from the profile that containsStations two-dimensional gravity analysis... thosegiven by Menard and Dietz [1952]for their 1952].': •:•'ALI FORNIA ol7 . escarpment. A compromise was effected by 'proedge.. Even the first profile.the tectonictrendsas described Heezen profiles along the latitudes (128ø 12'W and by (personal communication) run in a NW-SE 131øW).. t' :'": • . a crossing E-W trending the gravity profileacross Mendocino the escarpment..The averageslopeof the escarpment about 6ø.':' 44 ø.2•8• • • • •• • •o • • •'•. U. north of the line was also made up from Redfish soundings. However. 130 ø 128 ø 126ø 124ø 122 ø Fzo. again. is is complicated the fact that while the topo.' /:-'::.. :'.. I/lI' MENDOCI NO • Ol44 ESCARPMENT • • GORDA ESCARPMENT .one crosses the not very suitable for a two-dimensional gravity Mendocino escarpmentat its extreme eastern analysis..)gravity stationswithin the box are used in this study While there are three N-S Harrison profiles ticns 12 to 21) lies north of the escarpment in in this area.These figuresare in reasonable to agreement with mately SW-NE direction [Menard and Dietz.

•o -]. to be in accordwith of the standard section of Worzel and Shutbet [1955]. then.•o -]. Figure 3d may now be used to obtain the variations in crustal thickness.Stationseast of 127øW were also not usedin the composite profile. an approximate estimate of thickness is made along the Depth kra -.) Assumingan actual density of 1. They are discussed separately.whenjoinedtogether of consecutively. It remainsto assigna density to this layer.86 3.then. Theecomposite profile was terminated on the north at 42øN..1.. These are listed in Table 2. The massdistribution is interpretedas beingdueto the undulations of a surface.GRAVITY COMPUTATIONS FOR TWO-DIMENSIONAL BODIES 53 profile.asmentioned earlier. The differences can be treated as 'residual anomahes' and can be ascribed to variations in the thickness of the crust.84 gm/cc.40 4.03 gin/co for sea water. is to compute the attraction of the water layer and subtract this from the observed anomalies.80 3. whichin this case the Mohorovicic is discontinuity).• z.• 4.27 gm/cc.The first step is to computethe attraction due to the water layer abcd. have to make any calculationsfor it. The main Redfishprofile north of here divergesconsiderably from the line of projection. The residualanomalies plotted in Figure 3d are obtained by adding the correctioncurve to the observed free-air anomalies.84 gm/co. The crust is taken as the layer bounded at the bottom by the Mohorovicic discontinuity.•o z• z6 z7 zs zg z•0 z.The problem. i . To the north of the section it is assumed that Figure 3a showsthe observedfree-air anomalies.Thereforeit was decided not to usethese stations in making up the compositeprofile.•o 330 z• z•. one has to specify the coordinates pointswhich. In the following calculations.00 0. The depthsalongthe discontinuity werethenmodified .•o. was It found that there was some disagreement. These latter are points taken at small intervals along the length of the profile. Using this as a fixed level. The IBM 650 is used for this calculation also.The computedcurveis plotted in Figure 3c.74 4. Thesedata are punched cardsand fed into on the IBM 650..03 -. and one doesnot.64 3. to of 3. The gravity effect of this estimated crustal •14 .the crust is assumed consistof the water layer underlain to by a single homogeneous layer of density 2.0 kin.48 4.will define the boundary of this TABLE 2--List o! coordinates usedin the deduction the gravitationaleffecto! the water layer Distance kra Xl the water depth is constantat 3.40 x• •1o •12 274 219 202 198 189 184 174 145 102 54 0 -. layer. This value and the coordinates the points of at which the attraction is to be computed are also punchedon cards. z8 z4 0.Z" 0.81 gm/cc.00 4.90 4.. It is found convenientto subtract the densitiesof all the layers from a constant densityof 2.64 3.Beneath the crust. (This reduces density the of the crustal layer to zero. The estimated depths to the Mohorovicic discontinuity as determined by Tsuboi's method are shown as the dashed curve in Figure 3e. but of variable thickness.1. and the Harrisonprofile. It shouldbe noticed that in this particular instance the coordinates most of the pointsare determined of by the actual corrected soundings and the positions which thesesoundings at were made. This would require a depth to the Mohorovicic discontinuity 17.77 3.• z• z• zu z.84 -. Figure 3b showsthe topography. the reduced density assignedto the layer abcdis 2.It wasfelt that the proximity of the continentaledge significantly affectedthe gravity valuesat thesestations.80 entire sectionby the sin x/x method developed by Tsuboiand Fuchida [1938] and Tomodaand Aki [1955].the mantleis assumed havea density.00 thickness was evaluatedby the polygonmethod and compared with the residualanomalies.10 3. This is the correction curvefor the water layer. entersthe very roughRidge and Trough Province.32 3.To do this. (In the sin x/x method the gravity anomalies chosen along a profile at constant intervals are directly attributed to a mass distributionat a fixed depth.75 3.8 km and that the free-air anomaliesare constantat --20 regal.z16 3•17 -.

AND LANDISMAN PROJECTED ' D/STANCE KILOMETERS /N ALONG /50øW 0 i i i i i i /00 i I i I i 200 i i i i i 500 i i i i i 400 .AIR ß ß ß e ANOMALIES • ee -50 50 . . -o... USS REDFISH 1952 • Harm'son oIh•rs and /00 I09 TOPOGRAPHY .......3--Various steps involved thededuction thedepth theMohorovicic in of to discontinuity the from free-air anomalies ...... • (c) C O RREG T/ON FOR WATER .. ... .... .... .... .... I I FIG.. (•) DEPTH _ MOHO RO VI O I O TSUBOI'S CURVE DISCONTINUITY - ... •\ VERTICAL EXAGGERATION I0 I I ..54 TALWANI.. • FIRST ESTIMATE MODIFIED METHOD . • a/o . •74oo• LAYER 500 250 550 550 1550 •00 250 (d} • R E S I D U A L A NO MA L Y • OOMPU TED A NOMALY 550 250 500 1 c • TO FINAL ... (o} O- FREE .. 40ø1 I I I .• c •_ -o-. 42 ø ... .•øl.WORZEL. . 800 VERTICALEXAGGERATIONI 20 .

-5 . . .GRAVITY COMPUTATIONS FOR TWO-DIMENSIONAL BODIES 55 .. The computed residual usedin the profile. . I KM 200 i .. ALONG ....84 . . • • = 2... The This has to be subtracted from the value of the . The curve in Figure 3e.00 ... anomalies as well as was desired. ' • • ..... latter is obtained by subtractingthe water layer Alterations of crustal thickness were continued correction curve from the final curve computed until the computed curve fitted the residual to fit the residualanomaly.81 gm/cc. P=I... 4--Free-air anomalies and the deduced crustal structure (a) under the Mendocino fracture zone (with no sedimentarylayer) in such a way as to reduce the disagreement.IO 15- 2oVe•cel g5 P =3..) It is emphasized here that while Tsuboi's 3750 m.. . DEDUCED S Tt•UC TUtOr- 5'EC TION (a) (with no sedimentary layer) Fro. I-Iere the the large negativeanomaly here seemsto be of local depth read off from the topographicprofile is origin. because unusually would be at 137 km south of 42øN. It is quite feasible to guessat an approximate The gravity effect of this layer (computedin the same way as the simple Bouguer correction).we can imagine a uniform plate of of it means essentialto the solution of the problem.. . which gives a differenceof 420 m..27 Exoggerefion: I0 I .. The final modified crustal thickness is shown as the solid The Harrison Stations 61 and 62 and the Redfish Stations 146 and 147. . DISTANCE IOO ß . which were not next. Figure 4 shows the final deduced structure (a) using a density defect of 1.. to Figure3d andis seento fit mostof the pointsfairly and the free-air anomaly is •-13 regal. .. ..• . can be considered anomaly curve corresponding this is shownin soundingfor the Harrison Station 61 is 3330 m.03 5IO - . crustalthickness proceed and from there.. In method is very usefulin making an approximate order to make a rough allowancefor this depth estimate the crustalthickness. i W 4. and the computed free-air anomalycurve.. . ... (No attempt was made to fit the gravity positionof this stationalongthe projectedprofile valueat Redfish Station 13... 42 ø 41 ø 40 ø 59 ø o ß ! .. I Ft•-•- A I t• A NOMA œI•S -50 O m•ly •• _• Computed oho ßß ObserVed U•dfish1952 anomaly Obse•ed anomaly ' -' 0 . . IJOø 300 .. The well. is by no difference. water 420 m thick and of infinite areal extent...50 0 Harrison others and •957) 0 . is 32 mgal..

the only difference being that the sedimentarylayer as well as the water Then the approximate residualanomalyat the layer had to be removed.26 km and of assumed seismic 1. it was not possible introduceany complex to 0. the crust is allowing for the fact that they have used a thickerto the north of the scarpthan to the south different crustal density in making their com. whichis expected sincethe stationis at seismicrefraction stations. are at a considerable This alsopointsto the infeasibility usingboth profile.It shouldbe noted that the presenceof such layers could alter the deduced section considerably.of it by about three kin. If allowance madefor an additional is of this sedimentary layer wasassumed be sedimentary layer of density 2. --13. onecanconsider re-doneafter a sedimentary layer of density2. AND LANDISMAN in the previouscase.93 km and velocity 5.8 kin.40 kin. Accordingly. and --8 mgal respectively. 2.) The thickness 2. comparatively large difference for Station 146 therefore.The depthsto the Mohorovicic between these crustal thicknesses and those in (a) discontinuitywere obtainedin the sameway as deduced the gravitysections" and (b).24 km and velocity 6. even though these distancefrom the gravity sucha greatdistance fromthe main Redfish line. The free-air anomalies north in a singlecomposite profile. (The samenumbercan be obtained from sedimentarylayer taken into account.18 kin.the order of --20 mgal (unpublished Lamont gravity effectof suchlayerscouldbe 'removed' Observatory data).28632 = 267 deducedcrustal section (b) with the assumed regal.84gm/cc. The only published determinations of the Redfishand the Harrison stations further available to the authors were Raitt's Stations M• and M2 [Raitt. and a simple chosen the basisof curvesgiven by Nafe and calculation shows that a balance with the on Drake [1957] which relate the compressional seismicallydeterminedsectionat M• requiresa velocityanddensity ocean of sediments.27 gm/cc for the materialbelow would make the section geologically more the Mohorovicicdiscontinuity. and of 3. Similarly. a 1-km thickness sediment density2. are-]-1.65 (A of 2. the modificationsto the deduced structure.1 gm/cc of of wouldrequirethe crustto be thinnerby about with either end of the gravity profileis in order. andnegligible reducedto 10. Figure 5 showsthe Harrison Station 61 is 13-].96 kin/sec.1 the isostatic balance of this sectionagainst the gm/ccwasaddedto the section the base the sectionat the south end of the gravity profile.1. value depth to the Mohorovicicdiscontinuityof 11. At Station M• (27ø 24' N. 2.84 gm/cc for the three layers respecfelt that an assumption a sedimentary of layer tively.)This number differs by only --5 of the crust may be subject to someuncertainty mgal from the value of the computed curveat because the values chosen for the densities and 137kin. Raitt finds the following structure beneath the water layer: A first layer of thickness 0. to compare the crustal thickness can be attributed to an actual difference in strucobtained here with those obtained at the closest ture.41 kin/sec. Below the Mohorovicicdiscontinuitythe .6.as in the case Harrison and others [1957] at Station 61 after without the sedimentarylayer. It is of some interest.56 TALWANI. Thus a direct comparison in the sameway as the water layer was removed in the above example. the depthto the discontinuity is than«km at the footof the scarp. The minations in the area.somewhat of greater thickness kin.7 km in order to reconcile the computed velocity2. The absolutethickness putations. it was gravity curvewith the observed points. The latter can be read in Figure 3c as 286 mgal. WORZEL. If additional data were available about further in the vicinity of both these stationsare of the layers(asfor example sedimentary a layer).For instance.the computationswere the water depth hereis 4. the value given for the Bougueranomaly by It can be seenthat in this case.88 kin/see.15 km/sec for the compressional velocity km• considering singlecrustallayer of density a was assumedafter Raitt [1956]. and a third layer of thickness 6.1 gm/cc and to « is • km overareas smallrelief. in the absence any seismic of determinationsof depth and velocity in this region. which ø lies in Menard and Dietz's Baja California sea mount province. 1956]. at of waterlayer.15 km/sec. There the water depth is 4. and noting that probable. Assumingdensitiesof 2. a second layer of thickness velocity is 8. While. 121 35'W).This wasan average valueof density. A discrepancy apparent on the scarpitself. differences theHarrison the layer thicknessesare based on a standard the for Station 62 and the Redfish Stations146 and 147 oceanic sectionrather than on any seismic deter- correction due to the water layer at 137 km.

• DEDUCED STRUCTURE (with ossurned sedimentary Ioyer ) (with assumed sedimentarylayer) latter giving depths of 15... .60 gm/cc and a prismatic shape should be . ! Ft• •-•O- A l t• ß A NO MA I I•-S -0 _• -5o J ---. ..5o..it can as be shownthat the sectionat M• is 'equivalent' to a section at the south end of the gravity profile having a total crustal thicknessof 13.. the Mohorovicic discontinuity here seems have a very steepslopejust south to of the scarp. 40* •.Computed ano .. the continental edge. ß - Observed •edfish anomaly 1952 USS •// ?=1. .5 km and 14. 200 ! .") Sincethe crustalthickness as deducedhere would be in even better agreement with Raitt's seismicdeterminations the deep at oceanstations.. If a volcaniclayer of density 2.) However...-5o Observed anomaly Harrison o nd others(1957) • -I00 .'.84 IO- -P: 2. ioo ! . 25 ... (Menard terms this the "Deep Plains Province.as has been proposed Menard.. rather than M•.65 km respectively. We note that. • .. and of 12. P:2.27 Vertical Exaggeration = I0 I .. .. Some of this may possiblybe a spuriouseffect arising out of the attempt to explaina gravity anomalyof shalloworigin by deeperstructure.2 I--"' ••••--"•• --'ø 5 - 202..GRAVITY COMPUTATIONS FOR TWO-DIMENSIONAL N BODIES S 42' 41' 40' 39' • o ! .. as determined from the gravity computations. (His choice of densities and the different water depthsin the areas for which he has made the comparison leadshim to an even greater discrepancy. This discrepancy has also been pointed out by Menard [1955]. if the comparisonis made with Raitt's Station M•. The crustal thickness determination under the Mendocinoscarp itself is also of interest... of The southend of the gravity profileliesin the abyssalplain. * .. ..-I00 0 .8 km in the presence one. ' •.& . 41 ø .03 ... 0 5.this might suggest that it is not the deepstructureunder the abyssal plain that is unusual.. 5oo i .5 P :5. More seismic work in both areasis needed beforethis point can be definitely settled.. SECTION (b) ... ....Proceeding before.. but by that it is the deep structure under the Baja California sea mount province that might be considered especiallyas one approaches so. the situation is somewhat improved..6 km in the absence a sedimentary of layer.

it should be noted that the mass deficiencyor 'root' is somewhatdisplaced from the theoretical'root' whichcan be computed from the topography on the Airy hypothesis. 3).58 TALWANI. one involving more layers. It would be of someinterest to seeif variationsof densityin the mantle could account for these anomaliesequally well. the gravity curve was computed for the mantle configurationoutlined above (Fig. across the Mendocino escarpment have their origin in the crust. would require correspondingly more time. We notice that it fails to fit the anomalies large amountsin the vicinity of the by Mendocino scarp. and wouldreducethe southernslope of the discontinuity. this would obviate the necessityof thickening the crust under the escarpment.9 ø 4O0 Fro.the runningtime would be reducedby a factor of at least 30. it is clear that a change of density in the mantle alone cannot account for the observed anomalies. In any event.00583 gm/cc is requiredto accountfor the difference residual of anomaly at large distanceson either side. On a faster computer. can probably be made to fit the residualanomalycurve. for instance.in addition to the density changein the mantle. it seems and probablethat the depth at which this deficiency existsis not greater than the depth to the Mohorovicicdiscontinuity.This should be taken into consideration in any theoriesexplainingthe origin of the Mendocino escarpment. AND LANDISMAN interposedin the section (with the narrow edge of the prism outcropping at the scarp and the base about 100 km wide extending down to the Mohorovicic discontinuity). A simple calculation can then be made to show that a density difference of 0. 6--Attempt to fit the residual anomaliesacrossthe Mendocino scarp by a changeof density in the mantle (extendingto a depth of 200 km) . Using this density contrast. Let us assume that a constantchangeof density in the mantle occursacrossa vertical interface directly below the Mendocino scarp and extendsfrom a depth of 20 km to 200 kin. Undoubtedly. for instance. So far we have assumed that the anomalies Fig. the IBM 704. 6). it is clear that a massdeficiency existsunder the Mendocino escarpment. WORZEL. Also. Of course. N 42 ø i • i 4/ø I 40 ø i J• ø I S i i P/•OJEC?ED o ß DISTANCE I00 IN 200 HILOMETE/•S •LONG 300 130 ø 4oo • • F•e•/dual •4nornal/ Cornpuled •4nornaly ( Var/a//on of densi/y /n Manile) • •o• 350 0 42 ø • 0 41 ø 2 0 40 ø 3. While complexmodificationof the crust. At the two endsof the profilethere is a difference of 44 mgal in the residual anomaly (see The actual running time for the computations made in this problem on the IBM 650 was three hours. This further showsthat these anomalies must have a shallow origin. this is the cause of the large isostatic anomalies computed for Stations 64 and 65 by Harrison and others [1957]. more corna plicated problem.

H. 55. vol.AND r. TSUBOI. RUSSEL W. Union. Amer.) . LYNN SHURBET. August 15. L. 1955. MENARD. Bul. Amer. AND KEIITI AKI. and GeorgeSutton for critically reading the manuscript and making many valuable suggestions. 1938. i•UCHIDA. Geol. Amer. LAMAR. Spec. AND T. YOSHIBUlVII. 1149-1198. H. F..Geophysics. 1529- 1536. The computations were made on an IBM 650. Bruce Heezen interested himself keenly in the paper and the authors are indebted to him for many profitable discussions. 87-100. as well as for the use of other facilities. TOlVIODA. Pub. 215-225. Seismic-refraction studiesof the Pacific Ocean basin. J. In conclusion. J. Bul. Variation L. Submarine and. Jack Oliver.. Trans. AND R. Comm. 443-448. L.Department of the Navy. Bul. and Annette E. 57. Geol.Though this is not a serious submarine escarpment. Relations between gravity anomalies and the corresponding subterranean mass distribution (II). N afe. 57. 1955. Trefzer drafted the illustrations. 1957.. LAMAR WORZEL. AND G. S. 523-552. 835-840.it might be a handicapfor small scale NAFE. Task Order 8.. part I. SPIESS. A line-integral method of WORZEL. Amer. HUSSER?. Bul. 1955. Bul. as revised. SHURBET.ocean trenches. JOHNE.. (Communicated manuscriptreceivedApril 16. C. N. ranges. J. under Contract N6-Onr-271. made available by the Watson Scientific Computing Laboratory. 273-284. Drake. 444 pp. H. 22. Geod. Soc. W. 1958. Soc. BROWN. Japan Acad. Deformation of the northeastern Amer. Gravity expedition at sea. MENAR•). DIE?Z. AND R. 1958. Elizabeth S. Soc. Geol. 1948.. MSNARD. HAaP•SON. J. A similar method for rapid calculationof with depth in shallow and deep water marine the gravitational attraction of three-dimensional sediments of porosity. Geol. A mer. Geophys. Res. work. UMBGROVE. Gravity measurements in the Virgin Islands. The researchwas supported by the Office of Naval Research.GRAVITY COMPUTATIONS FOR TWO-DIMENSIONAL BODIES limitation 1952. J.. the authors wish to expresstheir grateful appreciation. 1623-1639.Geophysics. 1956.. Mendocino dimensionaltry. 13.. density and the velocities bodies beingdeveloped. AND CHARLES DRAKE. AND MAURICE EWING. Geol. 1263-1285. W... 1956. AND PH. 1940.. AND Gravity measurements in the northeastern MAURICE EWING. Inst. J. REFERENCES 1923-1932. Netherl. KUENEN. Use of the function sin x/x in gravity problems. Proc. Geophysical or McGraw-Mill. Trans. Crustal thickness of the central equatorial Pacific. H. 1952 and 1953. 1934. LYNN.. geology of the Gulf of Alaska. H. 15. S. 266-278. M.. 35. A. RAITT. and continental crustal sections. F. Pap. L. 1951.. Maurice Ewing. 208 pp. Pacific basin and the west coastof North America. Soc. A mer.J.... Soc. DIE?Z. VENING MEINESZ. G. continental margins. G.one must point out that a of this method is the assumed two- Acknowledgments--Theauthors wish to thank Charles L.. mountain NE•rLE?ON. KING. Geol. WORZEL. 52. For that. LAMAR. 1957.Union. 326-334. C. Gravity measurementsat sea. is of compressional and shearwaves.. 2. 31. Skinner helped in making the computations. problemfor a large numberof structures suchas prospecting [or oil. 62. G. 1955. E. Geophys. W. LYNN SHURBET. 50. computing the gravimetric effects of two-dimenGravity interpretations from standard oceanic siona• masses. Earthq. 38. and Betty Quest. Pacific Ocean.