Paper detail

Tidal dissipation compared to seismic dissipation: in small bodies, in earths, and in superearths

While the seismic quality factor and phase lag are defined solely by the bulk properties of the mantle, their tidal counterparts are determined both by the bulk properties and self-gravitation of a body as a whole. For a qualitative estimate, we model the body with a homogeneous sphere and express the tidal phase lag through the lag in a sample of material. Although simplistic, our model is sufficient to understand that the lags are not identical. The difference emerges because self-gravitation pulls the tidal bulge down. At low frequencies, this reduces strain and makes tidal damping less efficient in larger bodies. At high frequencies, competition between self-gravitation and rheology becomes more complex, though for sufficiently large superearths the same rule works: the larger the body, the weaker tidal damping in it. Being negligible for small terrestrial planets and moons, the difference between the seismic and tidal lagging (and likewise between the seismic and tidal damping) becomes very considerable for superearths. In those, it is much lower than what one might expect from using a seismic quality factor. The tidal damping rate deviates from the seismic damping rate especially in the zero-frequency limit, and this difference takes place for bodies of any size. So the equal in magnitude but opposite in sign tidal torques, exerted on one another by the primary and the secondary, go smoothly through zero as the secondary crosses the synchronous orbit. We describe the mantle rheology with the Andrade model, allowing it to lean towards the Maxwell model at the lowest frequencies. To implement this additional flexibility, we reformulate the Andrade model by endowing it with a free parameter which is the ratio of the anelastic timescale to the viscoelastic Maxwell time of the mantle. Some uncertainty in this parameter's frequency-dependence does not influence our principal conclusions.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.