Earth’s inner core is growing ‘lopsided’

The inner core of our planet is growing more on one side than on the other – so why isn’t it tipping over?

More than 5,000 kilometres beneath us, Earth’s solid metal inner core wasn’t discovered until 1936. Almost a century later, we’re still struggling to answer basic questions about when and how it first formed.

These aren’t easy puzzles to solve. We can’t directly sample the inner core, so the key to unravelling its mysteries lies in collaboration between seismologists, who indirectly sample it with seismic waves, geodynamicists, who create models of its dynamics, and mineral physicists, who study the behaviour of iron alloys at high pressures and temperatures.

Combining these disciplines, scientists have delivered an important clue about what’s happening miles beneath our feet. In a new study, they reveal how Earth’s inner core is growing faster on one side than the other, which could help explain how old the inner core is, and the intriguing history of Earth’s magnetic field.

Early Earth

Earth’s core was formed very early in our planet’s 4.5 billion-year history, within the first 200 million years. Gravity pulled the heavier iron to the centre of the young planet, leaving the rocky, silicate minerals to make up the mantle and crust.

Earth’s formation captured a lot of heat within the planet. The loss of this heat, and heating by ongoing radioactive decay, have since driven our planet’s evolution. Heat loss in Earth’s interior drives the vigorous flow in the liquid iron outer core, which creates Earth’s magnetic field. Meanwhile, cooling within Earth’s deep interior helps power plate tectonics, which shape the surface of our planet.

As Earth cooled over time, the temperature at the centre of the planet eventually dropped below the melting point of iron at extreme pressures, and the inner core started to crystallise. Today, the inner core continues to grow at roughly 1mm in radius each year, which equates to the solidification of 8,000 tonnes of molten iron every second. In billions of years, this cooling will eventually lead to the whole core becoming solid, leaving Earth without its protective magnetic field.

Core issue

One might assume that this solidification creates a homogeneous solid sphere, but this isn’t the case. In the 1990s, scientists realised that the speed of seismic waves travelling through the inner core varied unexpectedly. This suggested that something asymmetrical was happening in the inner core.

Specifically, the eastern and western halves of the inner core showed different seismic wavespeed variations. The eastern part of the inner core is beneath Asia, the Indian Ocean and the western Pacific Ocean, and the west lies under the Americas, the Atlantic Ocean and the eastern Pacific.

The new study probed this mystery, using new seismic observations combined with geodynamic modelling and estimates of how iron alloys behave at high pressure. They found that the eastern inner core located beneath Indonesia’s Banda Sea is growing faster than the western side beneath Brazil.

You can think of this uneven growth as like trying to make ice cream in a freezer that’s only working on one side: ice crystals form only on the side of the ice cream where the cooling is effective. In the Earth, the uneven growth is caused by the rest of the planet sucking heat more quickly from some parts of the inner core than others.

But unlike the ice cream, the solid inner core is subject to gravitational forces which distribute the new growth evenly through a process of creeping interior flow, which maintains the inner core’s spherical shape. This means that Earth is in no danger of tipping, though this uneven growth does get recorded in the seismic wavespeeds in our planet’s inner core.

Dating the core

So does this approach help us understand how old the inner core might be? When the researchers matched their seismic observations with their flow models, they found that it’s likely that the inner core – at the centre of the entire core which formed much earlier – is between 500 million and 1,500 million years old.

The study reports that the younger end of this age range is the better match, although the older end matches an estimate made by measuring changes in the strength of Earth’s magnetic field. Whichever number turns out to be correct, it’s clear that the inner core is a relative youngster, somewhere between a ninth and a third as old as Earth itself.

This new work presents a powerful new model of the inner core. However, a number of physical assumptions the authors made would have to be true for this to be correct. For example, the model only works if the inner core consists of one specific crystalline phase of iron, about which there is some uncertainty.

And does our uneven inner core make the Earth unusual? It turns out that many planetary bodies have two halves which are somehow different to each other. On Mars, the surface of the northern half is lower-lying while the southern half is more mountainous. The Moon’s near-side crust is chemically different to the far-side one. On Mercury and Jupiter it’s not the surface which is uneven but the magnetic field, which doesn’t form a mirror image between north and south.

So while the causes for all of these asymmetries vary, Earth appears to be in good company as a slightly asymmetrical planet in a solar system of lopsided celestial bodies.

See more here: unexplained-mysteries.com

Header image: Deposit Photos

About the author: Jessica Irving, Senior Lecturer in Geophysics, University of Bristol and Sanne Cottaar, Lecturer in Global Seismology, University of Cambridge

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Trackback from your site.

Comments (13)

  • Avatar

    Herb Rose

    |

    What do they mean by “tipping over”? Down for the Earth is towards the sun.

    Reply

    • Avatar

      sir_isO

      |

      “Down for the Earth is towards the sun.”

      When you say “down for earth” you mean the side closest to the sun, whichever that side is?

      Because afaik, the earth slightly wobbles vertically along with its rotation relative to the sun, but (not only) geometric center of gravity being pulled to the sun, so it’s always lopsided by virtue of physics (unless Nibiru made an appearance).

      Though, I guess, if you transpose the axes, vertical and horizontal are the same thing, just a matter of perspective.

      Reply

      • Avatar

        sir_isO

        |

        Or do you mean like “Mess with the earth and the sun manifests in the world to put you the fuck down”

        Reply

  • Avatar

    Jerry Krause

    |

    Hi Herb and PSI Readers,

    When you read: “We can’t directly sample the inner core, so the key to unravelling its mysteries lies in collaboration between seismologists, who indirectly sample it with seismic waves, geodynamicists, who create models of its dynamics, and mineral physicists, who study the behaviour of iron alloys at high pressures and temperatures.”, you might recognize you are reading STUPIDITY in ACTION!!!

    And review the simple actual observations that Einstein that analyzed using the clearly stated assumption that that the speed of light is finite and constant. Which mathematical analysis using this assumption produced the result that E = M C^2. For which result there has been no observations (measurements) which question the validity of this result.

    Have a good day, Jerry

    Have a good day, Jerry

    Reply

  • Avatar

    sir_isO

    |

    There have been, both with sound and relative light speed.

    E=mc2, but the speed of light is never constant.

    You know, otherwise you couldn’t slow light down, have refraction, etc.

    So the thing is, Einstein makes the same mistake Maxwell did, an observation limitation.

    Maxwell considered the aether constant, Einstein considers the speed of light constant. Both, failing to recognize they observe from limited perspective, from a frame of reference, on earth, with significant brain failure (resulting from institutional coercion).

    Light is considered the speed limit, because on the EM spectrum, it’s the “lightest” biased towards energy rather than matter) material considered. Ironically, what’s deemed sound, is mostly considered as being matterless.

    It’s fucking funny.

    Coz the best way to propagate through the universe is with low frequency. Just ask Barbie…I ken, the denser she is, the quicker the effect. No matter how distant.

    Reply

    • Avatar

      sir_isO

      |

      Sorry, meant as a reply. Implicitly.

      Reply

    • Avatar

      sir_isO

      |

      Reanalyze Maxwell’s concept of aether (along with the use of quaternions).

      Then, consider the aether is variable, depending on your observational reference. Like a voronoi diagram.

      Any “space” is defined by something encapsulating it (ironically). so the “aether” closer to a planet’s surface is “thicker”. Imagine core, vs the ocean, vs the air, vs what’s deemed space. But more generalized.

      Reply

      • Avatar

        sir_isO

        |

        If you didn’t quite get that, Einstein is wrong, Maxwell is wrong and even you can figure that out.

        Reply

        • Avatar

          sir_isO

          |

          Basically, imagine you have some material.

          Let’s start with a point.

          From the point you draw a line, that line, the space in it (the delimitation) is defined by two points.

          From the line, you draw a triangle, three lines.

          So you had 1 point , 2 points (line), 3 lines (triangle). Woohoo. Pretty soon you h ave a ponzi scheme. Looks like you’re winning.

          Very simplex.

          It might come as a surprise, but I love tetrahedra (both round and flat earthers are wrong, btw, considering the earth is a semi-concave compound of convex simplices).

          You should totally listen to this song, it even has spiders speaking to you:
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tAbcWrrIQU

          Maybe I’ll say something interesting soon and stop trolling?

          Reply

          • Avatar

            sir_isO

            |

            That voronoi diagram, is your universe.

            You know, the universe of you.

          • Avatar

            sir_isO

            |

            Learn to divide by zero.

      • Avatar

        Herb Rose

        |

        Hi Sir-iso,
        Light is an electromagnetic wave or a disturbance traveling in the electric field (produced by matter) and magnetic field (produced by energy) that are radiated by all objects. These fields are constitutes the aether and they and the speed of any disturbance (light) traveling in them will decease, with increasing distance from the object and increase as they approach another object.
        Herb

        Reply

        • Avatar

          sir_isO

          |

          Well, that depends on how many derivatives you consider.

          First, there’s -1, then there’s position, which you used, to establish momentum with the force, because you’re a jerk, and…unfortunately, that causes you to snap, crackle and pop.

          I’m not your “ordinary” friend.

          Reply

Leave a comment

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Share via