FIRST FIELD EXAMINATION OF THE NEAR-SURFACE RIM STRUCTURE ON A LARGE IMPACT CRATER, OPPORTUNITY ROVER, ENDEAVOUR CRATER, MARS

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry S. Crumpler ◽  
◽  
Raymond E. Arvidson ◽  
William H. Farrand ◽  
John A. Grant ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul M. Schenk ◽  
◽  
Britney E. Schmidt ◽  
Hanna G. Sizemore ◽  
Carle M. Pieters ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (11) ◽  
pp. eaar8173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kurt H. Kjær ◽  
Nicolaj K. Larsen ◽  
Tobias Binder ◽  
Anders A. Bjørk ◽  
Olaf Eisen ◽  
...  

We report the discovery of a large impact crater beneath Hiawatha Glacier in northwest Greenland. From airborne radar surveys, we identify a 31-kilometer-wide, circular bedrock depression beneath up to a kilometer of ice. This depression has an elevated rim that cross-cuts tributary subglacial channels and a subdued central uplift that appears to be actively eroding. From ground investigations of the deglaciated foreland, we identify overprinted structures within Precambrian bedrock along the ice margin that strike tangent to the subglacial rim. Glaciofluvial sediment from the largest river draining the crater contains shocked quartz and other impact-related grains. Geochemical analysis of this sediment indicates that the impactor was a fractionated iron asteroid, which must have been more than a kilometer wide to produce the identified crater. Radiostratigraphy of the ice in the crater shows that the Holocene ice is continuous and conformable, but all deeper and older ice appears to be debris rich or heavily disturbed. The age of this impact crater is presently unknown, but from our geological and geophysical evidence, we conclude that it is unlikely to predate the Pleistocene inception of the Greenland Ice Sheet.


Icarus ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 225 (1) ◽  
pp. 173-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart J. Robbins ◽  
Brian M. Hynek ◽  
Robert J. Lillis ◽  
William F. Bottke
Keyword(s):  

Minerals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 1053
Author(s):  
Elizaveta Kovaleva ◽  
Roger Dixon

The Vredefort impact structure in South Africa is deeply eroded to its lowermost levels. However, granophyre (impact melt) dykes in such structures preserve clasts of supracrustal rocks, transported down from the uppermost levels of the initial structure. Studying these clasts is the only way to understand the properties of already eroded impactites. One such lithic clast from the Vredefort impact structure contains a thin pseudotachylite vein and is shown to be derived from the near-surface environment of the impact crater. Traditionally, impact pseudotachylites are referred to as in situ melt rocks with the same chemical and isotopic composition as their host rocks. The composition of the sampled pseudotachylite vein is not identical to its host rock, as shown by the micro-X-ray fluorescence (µXRF) and energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectrometry mapping. Mapping shows that the melt transfer and material mixing within pseudotachylites may have commonly occurred at the upper levels of the structure. The vein is spatially related to shocked zircon and monazite crystals in the sample. Granular zircons with small granules are concentrated within and around the vein (not farther than 6–7 mm from the vein). Zircons with planar fractures and shock microtwins occur farther from the vein (6–12 mm). Zircons with microtwins (65°/{112}) are also found inside the vein, and twinned monazite (180°/[101]) is found very close to the vein. These spatial relationships point to elevated shock pressure and shear stress, concentrated along the vein’s plane during impact.


Author(s):  
Kurt H. Kjaer ◽  
Nicolaj K. Larsen ◽  
Tobias Binder ◽  
Anders A. Bjork ◽  
Olaf Eisen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Boris Ivanov

Impacts of small celestial bodies, in terms of energy density, occupy the range between ordinary chemical high explosives and nuclear explosions. The high initial energy density of impact gives them some features of an explosion (shock waves, melting and vaporization, mechanical disruption of target rocks). A near-surface burst creates an explosion crater, and an impact often results in the creation of an impact crater. The chain of processes connected to an impact crater’s formation is named “impact cratering” or simply “cratering.” The initial kinetic energy and momenta of the impacting body (“projectile”) generates shock waves (decaying with propagation to seismic waves), heats the material (at high impact velocities, to melt or to boil target rocks). A part of the kinetic energy is converted to target material motion, creating the crater cavity. The final crater geometry depends on the scale of event—while small craters are simple bowl-shaped cavities, large enough crater transient cavities collapse in the gravity field. If collapse takes place, the final crater has a complex geometry with central peaks and concentric inner rings. The boundary crater diameter, dividing simple and complex craters, varies with target body gravity and rock strength. Comparison of a crater’s morphology on remote planets and asteroids allows us to make some estimates about their mechanical parameters (e.g., strength and friction) even before future sample return missions. On many planets large impact craters can be seen, preserved much better than on the geologically active Earth. These observations help researchers to interpret the geological and geophysical data obtained for the relatively few and heavily modified large impact craters found on continents and (rarely) at the sea bottom.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Lagain ◽  
Misha Kreslavsky ◽  
Gretchen Benedix ◽  
David Baratoux ◽  
Phil Bland ◽  
...  

<p>Knowledge of collision rates through time and space is essential because meteoritic impact crater counting is the only way to determine the ages of surface geological units and processes on the solid bodies of our Solar System. All chronology models assume a constant size distribution of impactors and an exponential decay of the impact flux between 4 Ga and 2.5 Ga before the present followed by a constant rate over the last 2.5 Ga. These two assumptions are challenged by recent evidence for an increase of the impact flux on the Moon and the Earth and probably on Mars associated with a decoupling between the flux of small and large impactors over the last billion years. Here, using the results of an automatic crater detection algorithm, we investigate the evolution of the rate of formation of large impact craters (Dc ≥ 20km) on Mars and thus infer the evolution of the flux of large impactors (Di > 5km) from the size-frequency distribution of small craters superposed to the ejecta blankets of large ones.</p><p>The dating of large impact craters on Mars is limited by several factors such as the degradation of ejecta blankets and the retention rate of small craters superposed to their ejecta. We therefore focused on craters ≥20km in diameter exhibiting an ejecta blanket according to the crater database and located on a latitudinal band between ±35°. We then selected those whom their ejecta are not affected by volcanic/tectonic processes or by the formation of another large nearby impact crater. The final set includes 590 impact craters.</p><p>If one can argue the impact flux cannot be fully recorded for the last 4Ga due to resurfacing processes erasing progressively the ejecta blanket and large craters themselves, Hesperian and Noachian terrains within the 35° latitudinal band should nevertheless have retained all D≥20km craters over a portion of the Amazonian period. The CSFD of craters younger than 600Ma (113 craters) superposed to these terrains is consistent with the 600Ma isochron, supporting the fact that the entire population of craters ≥20km formed over the last 600 million years on this portion of the Martian surface has been counted completely. We therefore focused on the analysis of the impact rate evolution over this range of time from this crater sub-sample.</p><p>The formation of large impact craters is not homogeneously distributed over the time range investigated here. Our data suggest an inconsistency between the flux used to date each crater and the rate inferred from these datings, thus implying that the small and large body impact fluxes are decoupled from one another. We note also sharp peaks centered around 480, 280 and 100Ma. Preliminary statistical test show that 280Ma peak is marginally significant whereas the two others are too small to be statistically significant. This pattern would be consistent with other independent arguments for increased rate with similar intensity and timing on the Moon and Mars for which the causes are probably collisions and potentially formation of asteroid families within the main asteroid belt.</p>


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huadong Dian Zhao ◽  
Weigao Li ◽  
Haishan Dang ◽  
Jundong Tian

For an impact crater on land, scientists often need to estimate the impact energyaccording to the diameter of the impact crater. Since there is no unified formula to describe thecomplex physical process of impact, the results estimated by different scholars are quitedifferent, which makes it difficult to judge which one is more consistent with the facts. Forimpact craters in the history of the earth, which have been unable to know the impact angle, thereis an urgent need for a unified formula to obtain a more pertinent calculation result.Aftercomparing and analyzing several formulas put forward by previous scientists, we think thatEugene Shoemaker's formula in 1990 is better. We simplify and improve it in order to make itadapt to the calculation of very large impact energy, so as to avoid fallacies. At the end of thepaper, we also give a general method to estimate the mass and volume of meteorites afterobtaining the impact energy. The improved formula and method proposed in this paper can beused for reference by scholars and science lovers, and may need further research to improve it inthe future.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document