Did the Moon ever have a strong magnetic field? Here’s what modern geophysics tells us
The Moon lacked a magnetic field for nearly all its history – New research resolves mystery sparked by rocks brought back on Apollo
Why a magnetic Moon?
Certain rocks have the extraordinary ability to preserve records of past magnetic fields when they contain minerals with iron atoms thatalign with a magnetic fieldas the rock cools and solidifies.The best magnetic minerals at preserving evidence of a fieldare tiny – a thousand times smaller than the width of a human hair – because it takes a lot of energy to rearrange their atoms.
Geophysicists who study ancient magnetism recreate this process, reheating rock samples in the presence of known magnetic fields and comparing the new alignment of the iron atoms with the orientation of iron atoms before the rock was reheated. This allows researchers tolearn about past magnetic fields.
Early researchers studying the first rocks brought back from the Moon by U.S. astronauts wanted to use this method to study the Moon’s magnetism. But they faced problems. Lunar rocks contain a certain type of iron – called native iron – thatis easily altered by heat. Additionally, the native iron grains in lunar rocksare sometimes relatively large, making them less likely to reliably record past magnetic fields.
From the 1970s onward, geophysicists used alternative, nonheating methods to study the Moon’s magnetism. Theyfound that some lunar sampleshadrecorded strong magnetic fields, suggesting that the Moon had a magnetic fieldfor over 2 billion years.
But this result only deepened the conundrum. The question of how the Moon’s core could produce a strong magnetic fieldremained unsolved.
An alternative theory
In the experiments, some Apollo samples showed evidence of strong magnetic fields butother samples did not. Some researchers attributed the missing magnetization to the presence of large native iron grains that were poor magnetic recorders. But many of the samples also contained small iron grains that should have recorded a field.
There have beenlong-standing doubts about the nonheating techniquesresearchers used on the Apollo samples. Some scientists have called them methods of “last resort” and conclude that the uncertainties in data collected in this way were so large that any interpretationmust be viewed as speculation.
Alternatively, another group of scientists has suggested for decades that when meteorites strike the Moon, they create a dusty plasma – a gas of ions and electrons – thatcould generate a strong magnetic fieldand magnetize lunar rocks near the impact zone.
In 2008, geophysicistKristin Lawrencedecided to revisit the question of lunar magnetization using an improved reheating technique. In contrast to the researchers who originally studied the samples, she was unable to detect anydefinitive evidence for a past magnetic field. The approach Lawrence and her team used was better than the nonheating tests, but her results were still not conclusive. She felt she was on to something, though, and that is when she turned to me and my lab for help.
In 2011, Lawrence brought us a collection of lunar samples to test. We had been developing techniques toidentify individual millimeter-size silicate crystalsthat contain only very small iron grains and have ideal recording properties. We then used an ultrasensitive superconducting magnetometer and a special carbon dioxide laser to rapidly heat those samples in a way that avoids altering their iron minerals. We found that nearly all the rocks had profoundly weak magnetic signals.
At the time of this first test we were still improving the method, so we couldn’t say with certainty whether the samples had formed on a Moon without a magnetic field. But we have been improving our testing methods, and last year we decided to revisit the Apollo samples.
We definitively found that some of the samples did indeed contain magnetic minerals capable of preserving high-fidelity signals of ancient magnetic fields. But the rocks had recorded no such signals. This suggests that the Moon lacked a magnetic field for nearly all of its history.
So, what explains the previous findings of a magnetic Moon? The answer was in one of the samples: a small, dark piece of glass containing tiny iron-nickel particles.
The glass was made by a meteorite impact and showed clear evidence of a strong magnetic field. But it was formed only about 2 million years ago. Nearly all geophysicists agreethe Moon did not have a magnetic fieldat that time, because after 4.5 billion years of cooling there was not enough heat left to power the churning of iron in the Moon’s core to generate a field. The magnetic signature of the glass matched simulations of magnetic fields that can begenerated by meteor impacts. This showed that meteorite impacts alone can create strong magnetic fields that magnetize rocks nearby. This could explain the high values previously reported from some Apollo rocks.
Taken together, I believe these findings resolve the mystery of a seemingly magnetic Moon.
Magnetic shielding and lunar resources
This new view of lunar magnetism has huge implications for the potential presence of valuable resources as well as information about the ancient Sun and Earth that may be buried in lunar soils.
Magnetic fields act as shields thatprevent solar particles from reaching a planet or moon. Without a magnetic field, solar wind can hit the surface of the Moon directly and implant elements like helium-3 and hydrogen into the soil.
Helium-3 has many applications, but importantly, it could be afuel source for nuclear fusion and future planetary exploration. The value of hydrogen comes from the fact that it can combine with oxygen toform water, another crucial resource in space.
Since the Moon did not have a long-lived magnetic field, these elements could havebeen accumulating in soilsfor billions of years longer than previously thought.
There is also scientific value. Elements embedded by solar wind could shed light on the evolution of the Sun. And as the Moon passes through Earth’s magnetic field, elements from Earth’s atmospherecan be deposited on the lunar surface, and these may hold clues about the earliest Earth.
The absence of a long-lived magnetic field on the Moon might strike some as a loss, but I believe it may unlock a scientific bonanza and a valuable stash of potential resources.
This article byJohn Tarduno, Professor of Geophysics,University of Rochester, is republished fromThe Conversationunder a Creative Commons license. Read theoriginal article.
Story byThe Conversation
An independent news and commentary website produced by academics and journalists.An independent news and commentary website produced by academics and journalists.
Get the TNW newsletter
Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week.
