Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 98 references

Persistent but weak magnetic field at Moon's midlife revealed by Chang'e-5 basalt

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper reports that 2-billion-year-old Chang'e-5 basalt clasts carry a weak magnetization of roughly 2–4 microteslas that was most likely acquired as thermal remanence in a lunar dynamo field, implying the Moon's magnetic field…

desk verdict First well-dated midlatitude lunar paleointensity at 2.03 Ga, careful but resting on two clasts and with a real SRM-exclusion gap that should be addressed in review. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.13719 v1 pith:OIJU64M7 submitted 2024-11-20 physics.geo-ph

Shuhui Cai , Huafeng Qin , Huapei Wang , Chenglong Deng , Saihong Yang , Ya Xu , Chi Zhang , Xu Tang
show 20 more authors
Lixin Gu Xiaoguang Li Zhongshan Shen Min Zhang Kuang He Kaixian Qi Yunchang Fan Liang Dong Yifei Hou Pingyuan Shi Shuangchi Liu Fei Su Yi Chen Qiuli Li Jinhua Li Ross N. Mitchell Huaiyu He Chunlai Li Yongxin Pan Rixiang Zhu
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.geo-ph
keywords lunardynamopaleointensityChang'e-5basaltMoonmagneticfieldpaleomagnetismOceanusProcellarumthermoremanentmagnetization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper uses millimeter-scale basalt clasts from the Chang'e-5 landing site in Oceanus Procellarum to pin down the Moon's magnetic field at about 2.0 billion years ago, a time interval with almost no reliable lunar paleointensity data. It recovers weak fields of roughly 2–4 µT from two clasts and argues from demagnetization behavior, cooling-time estimates, and crustal-anomaly modeling that this magnetization is a thermal remanence acquired in the lunar dynamo field as the lava cooled. If correct, the lunar dynamo was still operating at the Moon's midlife, much later than the strong early field, and its weak intensity fits a picture of a long-lived but declining dynamo. This matters because a dynamo at 2 Ga requires sustained thermal or mechanical stirring in the lunar core and links core convection to the young volcanism seen in these basalts.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing measurements are ratios of natural remanent magnetization (NRM) lost during alternating-field demagnetization to anhysteretic (ARM) and isothermal (IRM) remanence gained or lost, converted to absolute paleointensity through calibration factors $f' = 1.34$ and $\alpha = 3000\,\mu\mathrm{T}$. Supporting this are a modified double-heating Shaw experiment, a cooling-time calculation showing the clasts cool too slowly to record transient impact-plasma fields, and a forward model showing local crustal anomalies are below roughly 70 nT, so the microtesla signal is not from a nearby crustal source.

What would settle it

A decisive test would be measuring the ARM calibration factor on an unheated sister chip of clast 129; if the true factor is near 3.3 rather than 1.34, the reported 2.39 µT nonthermal estimate falls to about 0.97 µT, and the claimed 2–4 µT range would no longer hold for that clast.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the natural remanent magnetization of two Chang'e-5 basalt clasts records a paleointensity of about 2–4 µT at roughly 2.0 Ga, filling a nearly empty interval in lunar magnetic history. The authors conclude that this remanence was most likely a thermal remanence acquired as lava cooled after eruption, and therefore that the microtesla field originated from the lunar dynamo rather than from a crustal anomaly, impact plasma, or terrestrial contamination. The result attests to the persistence of the lunar dynamo until at least the Moon's midlife and implies that thermal convection in the lunar deep interior existed at mid-stage, possibly supplying mantle heat flux for the young volcanism.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes the adopted ARM and IRM calibration factors ($f' = 1.34$, $\alpha = 3000\,\mu\mathrm{T}$) describe how the actual magnetic carrier grains in clasts 129 and 118 record a field, so that the measured NRM/ARM and NRM/IRM ratios can be read linearly as paleointensity.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The lunar dynamo was still active at about 2.0 Ga, so any model of lunar thermal evolution must keep the core generating a weak field at midlife.
  • The weak 2–4 µT field implies thermal convection existed in the lunar core and core-mantle boundary, which may have supplied the mantle heat flux responsible for late-stage volcanism.
  • The midlatitude Chang'e-5 paleointensity, combined with equatorial Apollo data, suggests the mid-to-late lunar field was most likely not a selenocentric axial dipole.
  • A lunar paleomagnetosphere existed at midlife, which would have modulated solar-wind and Earth-atmosphere ion implantation into lunar soil and therefore volatile inventories.
  • The new data anchor the poorly known 3–1 Ga interval of lunar magnetic history, showing that the field had declined to microtesla levels but had not yet shut off.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If later samples confirm a field near 1 µT at 2 Ga rather than 2–4 µT, the dynamo would still be alive but even weaker, strengthening the picture of a low-power core at midlife.
  • The non-dipole geometry inference rests on only four data points, but it suggests paleomagnetosphere shielding was latitude-dependent, which would make volatile implantation patterns vary across the Moon.
  • The cooling-time criterion used here could be applied to future returned samples to rule out impact-plasma magnetization without knowing the full impact history.
  • A direct testable extension would be a Thellier-style experiment on a fresh, unheated Chang'e-5 basalt to check whether the ARM- and IRM-calibration dependence changes the recovered intensity.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents paleomagnetic measurements on nine Chang'e-5 basalt clasts using ARM- and IRM-normalized methods, a modified DHT-Shaw thermal method, and Thellier-IZZI. Two clasts (129 and 118) yield apparently stable high-coercivity components; non-thermal estimates are 2.39 ± 0.14 µT and 4.24 ± 0.19 µT, respectively, while DHT-Shaw gives 0.83 µT for 129 and 3.60 µT for 118. The authors interpret the remanence as thermoremanent magnetization acquired during lava cooling in a lunar dynamo field at ~2.0 Ga, thereby arguing for a long-lived lunar dynamo. They further combine their result with three published data points from 3–1 Ga to argue that the field was not a selenocentric axial dipole in the mid-late stage. Supporting analyses include VRM/IRM contamination checks, crustal magnetic anomaly forward modeling, cooling-time estimates for impact TRM exclusion, rock magnetic characterization, and paleointensity fidelity tests.

Significance. If the weak-field interpretation holds, this is a valuable data point in a sparsely sampled interval of lunar magnetic history, directly relevant to the controversy over a long-lived lunar dynamo and to lunar thermal evolution. The paper has clear strengths: multiple paleointensity methods on the same clasts, a thorough rock magnetic and microscopic characterization, explicit tests of VRM and IRM contamination, forward modeling of the local crustal field, published measurement data, and candid reporting of failed or suspicious measurements (e.g., the IZZI result and the altered DHT-Shaw behavior of clast 129). The central claim is plausible, but it currently rests on a small number of measurements whose internal consistency and exclusion of shock remanence require further support.

major comments (3)
  1. [Main text, 'Origin of basaltic remanence'; Supplementary Section 4.4] The exclusion of impact-related remanence is incomplete. The paper lists shock remanent magnetization (SRM) as a possible origin, but the quantitative exclusion chain in Supplementary Section 4.4 addresses only partial TRM from a transient plasma field, using cooling-time arguments. SRM is acquired during the shock pressure pulse itself and does not require cooling through blocking temperatures, so the statement that 'the cooling time result allows us to exclude the possibility that the basalt clasts recorded any total or partial transient field generated from impacts' does not apply to SRM. The text acknowledges that low-energy impacts causing physical fragmentation cannot be excluded, yet it never bounds the peak shock pressure experienced by clasts 129 and 118 or compares it with SRM acquisition thresholds in iron-bearing basalts. This is load-bearing because the central claim requires the ChRM to be a primary TRM from a dynamo field.
  2. [Section 3.2 and Table S2; Section 3.3] The '2–4 µT' range is not robustly supported by the two clasts after internal inconsistencies are considered. Clast 129 yields 2.39 ± 0.14 µT by ARM/IRM but 0.83 µT by the modified DHT-Shaw method, and the calibration factors measured for this clast (f' = 3.30, α = 5121 µT) are much larger than the adopted values (1.34 and 3000 µT); applying the measured factors would lower the non-thermal estimate by roughly a factor of 2.5. The attribution of these discrepancies to thermal alteration is plausible, but it also removes the independent corroboration for clast 129. Clast 118, while internally consistent between non-thermal and DHT-Shaw results, has a poorly defined ChRM (MAD 31.5°, DANG 30.3°) and only marginally passes the fidelity criteria at 3 µT. Thus the quantitative range 2–4 µT rests effectively on one concordant clast, and the abstract should be revised to reflect this fragility.
  3. [Section 3.2; Section 3.4 and Table S3] The reported paleointensity uncertainties are underestimated because they include only the standard error of the high-coercivity slope regression. The ARM and IRM calibration factors f' and α are adopted literature values that depend on the magnetic carrier assemblage (Section 3.3), and the fidelity tests for the two key clasts show slopes deviating from unity by 22–23% at the 3 µT test field (Table S3). Propagating these calibration and fidelity uncertainties would produce substantially larger error bars than the quoted ±0.14 and ±0.19 µT. The authors should either propagate these uncertainties or explicitly state that the quoted errors reflect only within-sample regression scatter, not total methodological uncertainty.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Introduction] There are several typographical errors, including 'attestting' in the abstract, 'Aditionaly' in the introduction, and 'depedence' in the geometry section; these should be corrected.
  2. [Section 3.2 and Figs. S9–S10] Neither DHT-Shaw experiment passes the stated acceptance criteria (e.g., slopeT of 0.718 for 118 and 0.573 for 129, and k' = 2.372 for 118). The text should state explicitly that the thermal results fail standard terrestrial criteria and justify why they are nonetheless interpreted as supportive, rather than appearing to apply the criteria selectively.
  3. [Section 3.3 and Fig. S14] The caption of Fig. S14 identifies the sample as CE5C0000YJYX118, but the text in Section 3.3 describes the 780°C calibration factor as measured on CE5C0000YJYX140; this mismatch should be corrected.
  4. [Section 8 and Fig. S46] The conclusion that a selenocentric axial dipole field is unlikely (<5%) is an overinterpretation given that the equatorial group relies on two conference abstracts (refs. 11 and 12) with little experimental detail and the midlatitude group includes sample 15498 with a loosely constrained recording age. This section should be softened or clearly labeled as a preliminary test pending higher-quality data.
  5. [Supplementary Section 4.4, Eqs. (4.3)–(4.5)] The cooling-time equations contain garbled symbols (e.g., 'Δ[\]^_', 'Δ3_s\') that appear to be a typesetting artifact; these need to be reformatted so that the physical quantities are unambiguous.
Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the adopted calibration factors, the local provenance and age assignment of the clasts, and the scaling assumptions used to exclude impact and crustal contamination. The measurement itself is not a derivation, so no invented entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • ARM calibration factor f' = 1.34 (adopted)
    Used in Equations 3.1 and 3.3 to convert NRM/ARM ratios to paleointensity; adopted from Stephenson and Collinson (1974). The paper's own measurements for clast 118 yield 1.44 and for clast 129 yield 3.30, indicating sample dependence.
  • IRM calibration factor α = 3000 µT (adopted)
    Used in Equations 3.2 and 3.4; adopted from Gattacceca and Rochette (2004). Paper-derived values are 3037 µT for clast 118 and 5121 µT for clast 129.
  • TK03 scatter parameter α (geometry test) = Varied so |g0^1|/α = 0.32 to 0.80
    Used in Section 8 to generate lunar field vector sets with different paleosecular variation scatters for the SAD-geometry test; no unique value is determined.
  • VADM range for geometry test = 0.08 to 0.25 ZAm2
    Constrained by the average paleointensity of Chang'e-5 and Apollo 15498; varied in the sensitivity analysis presented in Fig. S46.
  • Crustal model magnetizations = Mr(basalt)=1 A/m, Mr(anorthosite)=0.1 A/m
    Used in forward modeling to estimate the upper bound of the crustal magnetic anomaly (Section 4.3); basalt value is measured, anorthosite value is from Apollo literature, not site-specific.
  • Cooling model parameters = k=1.75 W/m/K, rho=2920 kg/m3, c=850 J/kg/K, emissivity=1
    Used in Equations 4.3-4.5 to estimate cooling times that exclude impact-generated TRM; values from ref 74 and fastest-radiation assumptions.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The ARM/IRM normalized paleointensity methods provide a linear calibration to absolute field intensity via f' and α.
    Central to Equations 3.1-3.2; empirical linearity is assumed from prior work.
  • domain assumption The TK03.GAD statistical model of geomagnetic secular variation can be rescaled to the Moon using c/a=0.190.
    Section 8; underpins the SAD-geometry test, but assumes dynamo process similarity between Earth and Moon.
  • domain assumption Impact-generated transient magnetic field durations are less than 1 s for a 409-m crater, per refs 11 and 31.
    Used to exclude TRM from impact plasma; location Section 4.4.
  • domain assumption The Chang'e-5 clasts are locally sourced from the EM4/P58 basalt unit and share the weighted 2.030 Ga crystallization age.
    Used to assign the age; based on refs 30, 35, 36 and EPMA compositional similarity.
  • standard math Standard Fourier heat conduction and black-body radiation formulas apply to cooling of the basalt clasts.
    Equations 4.3-4.5.
  • standard math The Poisson formula for magnetic anomaly of a cuboid is valid for crustal forward modeling.
    Equations 4.1-4.2.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Persistent but weak magnetic field at Moon's midlife revealed by Chang'e-5 basalt." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OIJU64M7

@misc{pith2026241113719,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Persistent but weak magnetic field at Moon's midlife revealed by Chang'e-5 basalt},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OIJU64M7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.13719}
}
read the original abstract

The evolution of the lunar magnetic field can reveal the Moon's interior structure, thermal history, and surface environment. The mid-to-late stage evolution of the lunar magnetic field is poorly constrained, and thus the existence of a long-lived lunar dynamo remains controversial. The Chang'e-5 mission returned the heretofore youngest mare basalts from Oceanus Procellarum uniquely positioned at mid-latitude. We recovered weak paleointensities of 2-4 uT from the Chang'e-5 basalt clasts at 2 billion years ago, attestting to the longevity of a lunar dynamo until at least the Moon's midlife. This paleomagnetic result implies the existence of thermal convection in the lunar deep interior at the lunar mid-stage which may have supplied mantle heat flux for the young volcanism.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

98 extracted references · 80 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Anisotropy parameters of ARM of the Chang’e-5 basalt clasts

    Table S4. Anisotropy parameters of ARM of the Chang’e-5 basalt clasts. Sample τ1 τ2 τ3 P T 018 0.35 0.33 0.32 1.12 -0.34 045 0.35 0.33 0.32 1.08 -0.14 129 0.35 0.33 0.32 1.07 -0.05 118 0.36 0.34 0.30 1.17 0.45 141 0.36 0.33 0.32 1.12 -0.43 142 0.35 0.33 0.32 1.09 0.00 027 0.35 0.33 0.32 1.10 -0.08 039 0.37 0.34 0.28 1.31 0.32 ARM was imparted in a 125-mT ...

    1974

  2. [2]

    Ravat, M

    D. Ravat, M. E. Purucker, N. Olsen, Lunar magnetic field models from Lunar Prospector and SELENE/Kaguya along-track magnetic field gradients. J. Geophys. Res.: Planets 125, e2019JE006187 (2020)

    2020

  3. [3]

    S. M. Cisowski, D. W. Collinson, S. K. Runcorn, A. Stephenson, A review of lunar paleointensity data and implications for the origin of lunar magnetism. J. Geophys. Res. 88, A691-A704 (1983)

    1983

  4. [4]

    B. P. Weiss, S. M. Tikoo, The lunar dynamo. Science 346, 1246753 (2014)

    2014

  5. [5]

    Garrick-Bethell, B

    I. Garrick-Bethell, B. P. Weiss, D. L. Shuster, J. Buz, Early lunar magnetism. Science 323, 356-359 (2009)

    2009

  6. [6]

    E. K. Shea, B. P. Weiss, W. S. Cassata, D. L. Shuster, S. M. Tikoo, J. Gattacceca, T. L. Grove, M. D. Fuller, A long-lived lunar core dynamo. Science 335, 453-456 (2012)

    2012

  7. [7]

    Suavet, B

    C. Suavet, B. P. Weiss, W. S. Cassata, D. L. Shuster, J. Gattacceca, L. Chan, I. Garrick-Bethell, J. W. Head, T. L. Grove, M. D. Fuller, Persistence and origin of the lunar core dynamo. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 110, 8453-8458 (2013)

    2013

  8. [8]

    S. M. Tikoo, B. P. Weiss, D. L. Shuster, C. Suavet, H. Wang, T. L. Grove, A two-billion-year history for the lunar dynamo. Sci. Adv. 3, e1700207 (2017)

    2017

Show all 98 references
  1. [9]

    Mighani, H

    S. Mighani, H. Wang, D. L. Shuster, C. S. Borlina, C. I. O. Nichols, B. P. Weiss, The end of the lunar dynamo. Sci. Adv. 6, eaax0883 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    B. E. Strauss, S. M. Tikoo, J. Gross, J. B. Setera, B. Turrin, Constraining the decline of the lunar dynamo field at 3.1 Ga through paleomagnetic analyses of Apollo 12 mare basalts. J. Geophys. Res.: Planets 126, e2020JE006715 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    B. P. Weiss, M. A. Wieczorek, J. Gattacceca, S. M. Tikoo, C. McDonald, K. V . Hodges, C. Lepaulard, Evidence for a long-lived lunar dynamo from magnetization in Apollo samples and the lunar crust. 54th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference 2806, 1627 (2023)

    2023

  4. [12]

    Vervelidou, J

    F. Vervelidou, J. Shah, S. Eckley, B. P. Weiss, R. A. Zeigler, Evidence for temporal variability of the lunar dynamo. 54th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference 2806, 2369 (2023)

    2023

  5. [13]

    J. A. Tarduno, R. D. Cottrell, K. Lawrence, R. K. Bono, W. Huang, C. L. Johnson, E. G. Blackman, A. V . Smirnov, M. Nakajima, C. R. Neal, T. Zhou, M. Ibanez-Mejia, H. Oda, B. Crummins, Absence of a long-lived lunar paleomagnetosphere. Sci. Adv. 7, eabi7647 (2021)

    2021

  6. [14]

    T. Zhou, J. A. Tarduno, R. D. Cottrell, C. R. Neal, F. Nimmo, M. Ibanez-Mejia, A lunar core dynamo limited to the Moon's first 200 million years. 54th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference 2806, 2261 (2023)

    2023

  7. [15]

    C. Li, H. Hu, M. Yang, Z. Pei, Q. Zhou, X. Ren, B. Liu, D. Liu, X. Zeng, G. Zhang, H. Zhang, J. Liu, Q. Wang, X. Deng, C. Xiao, Y . Yao, D. Xue, W. Zuo, Y . Su, W. Wen, Z. Ouyang, Characteristics of the lunar samples returned by the Chang'E-5 mission. Natl. Sci. Rev. 9, nwab188 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    Q. Zhou, Y . Liu, S. Yang, Q. Li, Y . Chen, G. Zhang, H. Zhang, B. Liu, D. Liu, J. Liu, F. Wu, X. Li, Q. Yin, C. Li, The youngest lunar zircon reveals an extremely fractionated nature of Chang’e-5 basalt. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 358, 126-133 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    Q. Li, Q. Zhou, Y . Liu, Z. Xiao, Y . Lin, J. Li, H. Ma, G. Tang, S. Guo, X. Tang, J. Yuan, J. Li, F. Wu, Z. Ouyang, C. Li, X. Li, Two-billion-year-old volcanism on the Moon from Chang'e-5 basalts. Nature 600, 54-58 (2021)

    2021

  10. [18]

    X. Che, A. Nemchin, D. Liu, T. Long, C. Wang, M. D. Norman, K. H. Joy, R. Tartese, J. Head, B. Jolliff, J. F. Snape, C. R. Neal, M. J. Whitehouse, C. Crow, G. Benedix, F. Jourdan, Z. Yang, C. Yang, J. Liu, S. Xie, Z. Bao, R. Fan, D. Li, Z. Li, S. G. Webb, Age and composition o...

    2021

  11. [19]

    Boschi, X

    S. Boschi, X. Wang, H. Hui, Z. Yin, Y . Guan, H. Hu, W. Zhang, J. Chen, W. Li, Compositional variability of 2.0‐Ga lunar basalts at the Chang'e‐5 landing site. J. Geophys. Res.: Planets 128, e2022JE007627 (2023)

    2023

  12. [20]

    Stephenson, D

    A. Stephenson, D. W. Collinson, Lunar magnetic field palaeointensities determined by an anhysteretic remanent magnetization method. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 23, 220-228 (1974)

    1974

  13. [21]

    Gattacceca, P

    J. Gattacceca, P. Rochette, Toward a robust normalized magnetic paleointensity method applied to meteorites. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 227, 377-393 (2004)

    2004

  14. [22]

    Tsunakawa, J

    H. Tsunakawa, J. Shaw, The Shaw method of paleointensity determinations and its application to recent volcanic rocks. Geophys. J. Int. 118, 781-787 (1994)

    1994

  15. [23]

    Y. Yu , L . Ta u x e , A . G e n e v e y, To w a r d a n o p t i m a l g e o m a g n e t i c f i e l d i n t e n s i t y d e t e r m i n a t i o n t e c h n i q u e . Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 5, Q02H07 (2004)

    2004

  16. [24]

    L. Nagy, W. Williams, A. R. Muxworthy, K. Fabian, T. P. Almeida, P. O. Conbhui, V . P. Shcherbakov, Stability of equidimensional pseudo-single-domain magnetite over billion-year timescales. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 114, 10356-10360 (2017)

    2017

  17. [25]

    Fuller, Lunar magnetism

    M. Fuller, Lunar magnetism. Rev. Geophys. Space Phys. 12, 23-70 (1974)

    1974

  18. [26]

    K. L. Louzada, S. T. Stewart, B. P. Weiss, Effect of shock on the magnetic properties of pyrrhotite, the Martian crust, and meteorites. Geophys. Res. Lett. 34, L05204 (2007)

    2007

  19. [27]

    Gattacceca, L

    J. Gattacceca, L. Berthe, M. Boustie, F. Vadeboin, P. Rochette, T. De Resseguier, On the efficiency of shock magnetization processes. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 166, 1-10 (2008)

    2008

  20. [28]

    Rochette, J

    P. Rochette, J. Gattacceca, A. V. Ivanov, M. A. Nazarov, N. S. Bezaeva, Magnetic properties of lunar materials: Meteorites, Luna and Apollo returned samples. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 292, 383-391 (2010)

    2010

  21. [29]

    J. P. Williams, D. A. Paige, B. T. Greenhagen, E. Sefton-Nash, The global surface temperatures of the Moon as measured by the Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment. Icarus 283, 300-325 (2017)

    2017

  22. [30]

    B. Jia, W. Fa, M. Zhang, K. Di, M. Xie, Y . Tai, Y . Li, On the provenance of the Chang'E-5 lunar samples. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 596, 117791 (2022)

    2022

  23. [31]

    D. A. Crawford, Simulations of magnetic fields produced by asteroid impact: Possible implications for planetary paleomagnetism. Int. J. Impact Eng. 137, 103464 (2020)

    2020

  24. [32]

    L. L. Hood, Central magnetic anomalies of Nectarian-aged lunar impact basins: Probable evidence for an early core dynamo. Icarus 211, 1109-1128 (2011)

    2011

  25. [33]

    J. S. Oliveira, M. A. Wieczorek, Testing the axial dipole hypothesis for the Moon by modeling the direction of crustal magnetization. J. Geophys. Res.: Planets 122, 383-399 (2017)

    2017

  26. [34]

    C. I. O. Nichols, B. P. Weiss, B. L. Getzin, H. H. Schmitt, A. Béguin, A. S. P. Rae, J. Shah, The palaeoinclination of the ancient lunar magnetic field from an Apollo 17 basalt. Nat. Astron. 5, 1216-1223 (2021)

    2021

  27. [35]

    K. Zong, Z. Wang, J. Li, Q. He, Y . Li, H. Becker, W. Zhang, Z. Hu, T. He, K. Cao, Z. She, X. Wu, L. Xiao, Y . Liu, Bulk compositions of the Chang’E-5 lunar soil: Insights into chemical homogeneity, exotic addition, and origin of landing site basalts. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta ...

    2022

  28. [36]

    C h e n , S

    Y. C h e n , S . H u , J . L i , Q . L i , X . L i , Y. L i , Y. L i u , Y. Q i a n , W. Ya n g , Q . Z h o u , Y. L i n , C . L i , X . L i , Chang’e-5 lunar samples shed new light on the Moon. The Innovation Geoscience 1, 100014 (2023). 37.G. H. Heiken, D. T. Vaniman, B. M. ...

    2023

  29. [38]

    Tauxe, D

    L. Tauxe, D. V . Kent, A simplified statistical model for the geomagnetic field and the detection of shallow bias in paleomagnetic inclinations: Was the ancient magnetic field dipolar? In J. Channell, D. Kent, W. Lowrie and J. Meert (EDs.), Timescales of the Paleomagnetic Fiel...

    2004

  30. [39]

    Laneuville, M

    M. Laneuville, M. A. Wieczorek, D. Breuer, J. Aubert, G. Morard, T. Rueckriemen, A long-lived lunar dynamo powered by core crystallization. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 401, 251-260 (2014)

    2014

  31. [40]

    C. A. Dwyer, D. J. Stevenson, F. Nimmo, A long-lived lunar dynamo driven by continuous mechanical stirring. Nature 479, 212-214 (2011)

    2011

  32. [41]

    C. Stys, M. Dumberry, A past lunar dynamo thermally driven by the precession of its inner core. J. Geophys. Res.: Planets 125, e2020JE006396 (2020)

    2020

  33. [42]

    A. J. Evans, S. M. Tikoo, An episodic high-intensity lunar core dynamo. Nat. Astron. 6, 325-330 (2022)

    2022

  34. [43]

    Konrad, T

    W. Konrad, T. Spohn, Thermal history of the moon: Implications for an early core dynamo and post-accretional magmatism. Comparative Studies of the Moon and Mercury 19, 1511-1521 (1997)

    1997

  35. [44]

    D. R. Stegman, A. M. Jellinek, S. A. Zatman, J. R. Baumgardner, M. A. Richards, An early lunar core dynamo driven by thermochemical mantle convection. Nature 421, 143-146 (2003)

    2003

  36. [45]

    R. N. Mitchell, Chang'E-5 reveals the Moon's secrets to a longer life. The Innovation 2, 100177 (2021)

    2021

  37. [46]

    H. Tian, H. Wang, Y . Chen, W. Yang, Q. Zhou, C. Zhang, H. Lin, C. Huang, S. Wu, L. Jia, L. Xu, D. Zhang, X. Li, R. Chang, Y . Yang, L. Xie, D. Zhang, G. Zhang, S. Yang, F. Wu, Non-KREEP origin for Chang'e-5 basalts in the Procellarum KREEP Terrane. Nature 600, 59-63 (2021)

    2021

  38. [47]

    S. Hu, H. He, J. Ji, Y . Lin, H. Hui, M. Anand, R. Tartese, Y . Yan, J. Hao, R. Li, L. Gu, Q. Guo, H. He, Z. Ouyang, A dry lunar mantle reservoir for young mare basalts of Chang'e-5. Nature 600, 49-53 (2021)

    2021

  39. [48]

    B. Su, J. Yuan, Y . Chen, W. Yang, R. N. Mitchell, H. Hui, H. Wang, H. Tian, X. Li, F. Wu, Fusible mantle cumulates trigger young mare volcanism on the cooling Moon. Sci. Adv. 8, eabn2103 (2022)

    2022

  40. [49]

    B. Luo, Z. Wang, J. Song, Y . Qian, Q. He, Y . Li, J. W. Head, F. Moynier, L. Xiao, H. Becker, B. Huang, B. Ruan, Y . Hu, F. Pan, C. Xu, W. Liu, K. Zong, J. Zhao, W. Zhang, Z. Hu, Z. She, X. Wu, H. Zhang, The magmatic architecture and evolution of the Chang'e-5 lunar basalts. ...

    2023

  41. [50]

    We i , J

    Y. We i , J . Z h o n g , H . H u i , Q . S h i , J . C u i , H . H e , H . Z h a n g , Z . Ya o , X . Yu e , Z . R o n g , F. H e , L . C h a i , W. Wan, Implantation of Earth's atmospheric ions into the nearside and farside lunar soil: Implications to geodynamo evolution. Ge...

    2020

  42. [51]

    A. R. Poppe, I. Garrick-Bethell, S. Fatemi, Fractionation of solar wind minor ion precipitation by the lunar paleomagnetosphere. The Planetary Science Journal 2, 60 (2021)

    2021

  43. [52]

    A. L. Fagan, K. H. Joy, D. D. Bogard, D. A. Kring, Ages of globally distributed lunar paleoregoliths and soils from 3.9 Ga to the present. Earth Moon Planets 112, 59-71 (2014)

    2014

  44. [53]

    H o u , M

    Y. H o u , M . Z h a n g , K . H e , Z . S h e n , L . D o n g , Y. F a n, K. Qi, S. Liu, S. Cai, H. Qin, A magnetic measurement technique for small rare samples: Pre-study for Chang'e-5 returned and other extraterrestrial samples. Front. Earth Sci. 11, 1146231 (2023)

    2023

  45. [54]

    B. P. Weiss, J. Gattacceca, S. Stanley, P. Rochette, U. R. Christensen, Paleomagnetic records of meteorites and early planetesimal differentiation. Space Sci. Rev. 152, 341-390 (2009)

    2009

  46. [55]

    Stephenson, Three-axis static alternating field demagnetization of rocks and the identification of natural remanent magnetization, gyroremanent magnetization, and anisotropy

    A. Stephenson, Three-axis static alternating field demagnetization of rocks and the identification of natural remanent magnetization, gyroremanent magnetization, and anisotropy. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 98, 373-381 (1993)

    1993

  47. [56]

    Acton, Q

    G. Acton, Q. Yin, K. L. Verosub, L. Jovane, A. Roth, B. Jacobsen, D. S. Ebel, Micromagnetic coercivity distributions and interactions in chondrules with implications for paleointensities of the early solar system. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 112, B03S90 (2007)

    2007

  48. [57]

    Thellier, O

    E. Thellier, O. Thellier, Sur I’intensité du champ magnétique terrestre dans le passé historique et géologique. Annales de Geophysique 15, 285-378 (1959)

    1959

  49. [58]

    R. S. Coe, S. Grommé, E. A. Mankinen, Geomagnetic paleointensities from radiocarbon-dated lava flows on Hawaii and the question of the Pacific nondipole low. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 83, 1740-1756 (1978)

    1978

  50. [59]

    Ya m a m o t o , L

    Y. Ya m a m o t o , L . Ta u xe, H. Ahn, C. Santos, Absolute paleointensity experiments on aged thermoremanent magnetization: Assessment of reliability of the Tsunakawa‐Shaw and other methods with implications for “Fragile” curvature. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 23, e2022GC0103...

    2022

  51. [60]

    Tauxe, R

    L. Tauxe, R. Shaar, L. Jonestrask, N. L. Swanson-Hysell, R. Minnett, A. A. P. Koppers, C. G. Constable, N. Jarboe, K. Gaastra, L. Fairchild, PmagPy: Software package for paleomagnetic data analysis and a bridge to the Magnetics Information Consortium (MagIC) Database. Geochem....

    2016

  52. [61]

    Ya m a m o t o , H

    Y. Ya m a m o t o , H . Ts u n a k a w a , H . S h i b u y a , P a l a e o i n t e n s i t y s t u d y o f t h e H a w a i i a n 1 9 6 0 l a v a : Implications for possible causes of erroneously high intensities. Geophys. J. Int. 153, 263-276 (2003)

    2003

  53. [62]

    S. J. Lloyd, G. A. Paterson, D. Thallner, A. J. Biggin, Improvements to the Shaw-Type absolute palaeointensity method. Front. Earth Sci. 9, 701863 (2021)

    2021

  54. [63]

    G. W. Pearce, G. S. Hoye, D. W. Strangeway, Some coplexities in the determination of lunar paleointensities. Proc. 7th Luar Science Conference, 3271-3297 (1976)

    1976

  55. [64]

    S. K. Chowdhary, D. W. Collinson, S. A., R. S.K., Further investigations into lunar palaeointensity determinations. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 49, 133-141 (1987)

    1987

  56. [65]

    Kohout, A

    T. Kohout, A. Kosterov, M. Jackson, L. J. Pesonen, G. Kletetschka, M. Lehtinen, Low-temperature magnetic properties of the Neuschwanstein EL6 meteorite. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 261, 143-151 (2007)

    2007

  57. [66]

    Kohout, A

    T. Kohout, A. Kosterov, J. Haloda, P. Týcová, R. Zbořil, Low-temperature magnetic properties of iron-bearing sulfides and their contribution to magnetism of cometary bodies. Icarus 208, 955-962 (2010)

    2010

  58. [67]

    S. M. Tikoo, B. P. Weiss, J. Buz, E. A. Lima, E. K. Shea, G. Melo, T. L. Grove, Magnetic fidelity of lunar samples and implications for an ancient core dynamo. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 337, 93-103 (2012)

    2012

  59. [68]

    M. A. Wieczorek, The constitution and structure of the lunar interior. Rev. Mineral. Geochem. 60, 221-364 (2006)

    2006

  60. [69]

    M. A. Wieczorek, G. A. Neumann, F. Nimmo, W. S. Kiefer, G. J. Taylor, H. J. Melosh, R. J. Phillips, S. C. Solomon, J. C. Andrews-Hanna, S. W. Asmar, A. S. Konopliv, F. G. Lemoine, D. E. Smith, M. M. Watkins, J. G. Williams, M. T. Zuber, The crust of the Moon as seen by GRAIL. ...

    2013

  61. [70]

    Yamamoto, R

    S. Yamamoto, R. Nakamura, T. Matsunaga, Y . Ogawa, Y . Ishihara, T. Morota, N. Hirata, M. Ohtake, T. Hiroi, Y. Yokota, J. Haruyama, Massive layer of pure anorthosite on the Moon. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39, L13201 (2012)

    2012

  62. [71]

    Y. Qian, L. Xiao, J. W. Head, C. H. van der Bogert, H. Hiesinger, L. Wilson, Young lunar mare basalts in the Chang'e-5 sample return region, northern Oceanus Procellarum. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 555, 116702 (2021)

    2021

  63. [72]

    J. Du, W. Fa, S. Gong, Y . Liu, L. Qiao, Y . Tai, F. Zhang, Y . Zou, Thicknesses of mare basalts in the Chang’E‐5 landing region: Implications for the late‐stage volcanism on the Moon. J. Geophys. Res.: Planets 127, e2022JE007314 (2022)

    2022

  64. [73]

    D. E. Smith, M. T. Zuber, G. A. Neumann, F. G. Lemoine, E. Mazarico, M. H. Torrence, J. F. McGarry, D. D. Rowlands, J. W. Head, III, T. H. Duxbury, O. Aharonson, P. G. Lucey, M. S. Robinson, O. S. Barnouin, J. F. Cavanaugh, X. Sun, P. Liiva, D.-d. Mao, J. C. Smith, A. E. Barte...

    2010

  65. [74]

    H. Tian, C. Zhang, W. Yang, J. Du, Y . Chen, Z. Xiao, R. N. Mitchell, H. Hui, H. G. Changela, T. Zhang, X. Tang, D. Zhang, Y . Lin, X. Li, F. Wu, Surges in volcanic activity on the Moon about two billion years ago. Nat. Commun. 14, 3734 (2023)

    2023

  66. [75]

    D. P. Maxbauer, J. M. Feinberg, D. L. Fox, MAX UnMix: A web application for unmixing magnetic coercivity distributions. Comput. Geosci. 95, 140-145 (2016)

    2016

  67. [76]

    R. J. Harrison, J. M. Feinberg, FORCinel: An improved algorithm for calculating first-order reversal curve distributions using locally weighted regression smoothing. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 9, Q05016 (2008)

    2008

  68. [77]

    F. E. Senftle, A. N. Thorpe, C. Briggs, C. Alexander, J. Minkin, D. L. Griscom, The Néel transition and magnetic properties of terrestrial, synthetic, and lunar ilmenites. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 26, 377-386 (1975)

    1975

  69. [78]

    D. W. Strangwa, E. E. Larson, G. W. Pearce, Magnetic properties of lunar samples. Science 167, 691-693 (1970)

    1970

  70. [79]

    Gattacceca, P

    J. Gattacceca, P. Rochette, F. Lagroix, P. E. Mathé, B. Zanda, Low temperature magnetic transition of chromite in ordinary chondrites. Geophys. Res. Lett. 38, L10203 (2011)

    2011

  71. [80]

    X. Tang, H. Tian, S. Sun, L. Gu, Q. Li, X. Li, J. Li, Origin and implication of pentlandite in Chang'e-5 lunar soils. Lithos 458-459, 107342 (2023)

    2023

  72. [81]

    R. M. Cornell, U. Schwertmann, The iron oxides: Structure, properties, reactions, occurences and uses. WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA,Weinheim, (2003)

    2003

  73. [82]

    Gheisari, M

    M. Gheisari, M. Mozaffari, M. Acet, J. Amighian, Preparation and investigation of magnetic properties of wüstite nanoparticles. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 320, 2618-2621 (2008)

    2008

  74. [83]

    Knop, C.-H

    O. Knop, C.-H. Huang, K. Reid, J. Carlow, F. Woodhams, Chalkogenides of the transition elements. X. X-ray, neutron, Mössbauer, and magnetic studies of pentlandite and the π phases π (Fe, Co, Ni, S), Co8MS8, and Fe4Ni4MS8 (M= Ru, Rh, Pd). J. Solid State Chem. 16, 97-116 (1976)

    1976

  75. [84]

    Fritz, A

    J. Fritz, A. Greshake, D. Stöffler, Micro-Raman spectroscopy of plagioclase and maskelynite in Martian meteorites: Evidence of progressive shock metamorphism. Antarct. Meteorite Res. 18, 96-116 (2005)

    2005

  76. [85]

    T. Xie, G. R. Osinski, S. R. Shieh, Raman study of shock effects in lunar anorthite from the Apollo missions. Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 56, 1633-1651 (2021)

    2021

  77. [86]

    X. Li, Y . Chen, X. Tang, L. Gu, J. Yuan, W. Su, H. Tian, H. Luo, S. Cai, S. Komarneni, Thermally induced phase transition of troilite during micro-raman spectroscopy analysis. Icarus 390, 115299 (2023)

    2023

  78. [87]

    R. C. Weber, P. Lin, E. J. Garnero, Q. Williams, P. Lognonné, Seismic detection of the lunar core. Science 331, 309-312 (2011)

    2011

  79. [88]

    G. A. Paterson, L. Tauxe, A. J. Biggin, R. Shaar, L. C. Jonestrask, On improving the selection of Thellier-type paleointensity data. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 15, 1180-1192 (2014)

    2014

  80. [89]

    Theoretical curves and tests using titanomagnetite data. J. Geophys. Res. 107, B3, 2056 (2002)

    2002

  81. [90]

    Cournède, J

    C. Cournède, J. Gattacceca, P. Rochette, Magnetic study of large Apollo samples: Possible evidence for an ancient centered dipolar field on the Moon. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 331, 31-42 (2012)

    2012

  82. [91]

    S. M. Tikoo, B. R. Weiss, W. S. Cassata, D. L. Shuster, J. Gattacceca, E. A. Lima, C. Suavet, F. Nimmo, M. D. Fuller, Decline of the lunar core dynamo. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 404, 89-97 (2014)

    2014

  83. [92]

    J. Buz, B. P. Weiss, S. M. Tikoo, D. L. Shuster, J. Gattacceca, T. L. Grove, Magnetism of a very young lunar glass. J. Geophys. Res.: Planets 120, 1720-1735 (2015)

    2015

  84. [93]

    D. L. Shuster, W. S. Cassata, Paleotemperatures at the lunar surfaces from open system behavior of cosmogenic 38Ar and radiogenic 40Ar. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 155, 154-171 (2015)

    2015

  85. [94]

    Lawrence, C

    K. Lawrence, C. Johnson, L. Tauxe, J. Gee, Lunar paleointensity measurements: Implications for lunar magnetic evolution. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 168, 71-87 (2008)

    2008

  86. [95]

    Garrick-Bethell, B

    I. Garrick-Bethell, B. P. Weiss, D. L. Shuster, S. M. Tikoo, M. M. Tremblay, Further evidence for early lunar magnetism from troctolite 76535. J. Geophys. Res.: Planets 122, 76-93 (2017)

    2017

  87. [96]

    Stöffler, G

    D. Stöffler, G. Ryder, B. A. Ivanov, N. A. Artemieva, M. J. Cintala, R. A. F. Grieve, Cratering history and lunar chronology. Rev. Mineral. Geochem. 60, 519-596 (2006)

    2006

  88. [97]

    H. H. Schmitt, N. E. Petro, R. A. Wells, M. S. Robinson, B. P. Weiss, C. M. Mercer, Revisiting the field geology of Taurus–Littrow. Icarus 298, 2-33 (2017)

    2017

  89. [98]

    R. S. Coe, Paleo-intensities of the Earth’s magnetic field determined from Tertiary and Quaternary rocks. J. Geophys. Res. 72, 3247-3262 (1967)

    1967

  90. [2010]

    (B) Magnetic anomaly at the lunar surface from Model 1 assuming a vertical magnetization

    while thickness model of the lunar crust is after Wieczorek et al., (2013). (B) Magnetic anomaly at the lunar surface from Model 1 assuming a vertical magnetization. (C) Magnetic anomaly at the lunar surface from Model 2 assuming a vertical magnetization. (D) Magnetic anomaly ...

    2013

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.