Magnetic Fields Recorded by Chondrules Formed in Nebular Shocks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recent laboratory efforts have constrained the remanent magnetizations of chondrules and the magnetic field strengths to which the chondrules were exposed as they cooled below their Curie points. An outstanding question is whether the inferred paleofields represent the background magnetic field of the solar nebula or were unique to the chondrule-forming environment. We investigate the amplification of the magnetic field above background values for two proposed chondrule formation mechanisms, large-scale nebular shocks and planetary bow shocks. Behind large-scale shocks, the magnetic field parallel to the shock front is amplified by factors of ∼10–30, regardless of the magnetic diffusivity. Therefore, chondrules melted in these shocks probably recorded an amplified magnetic field. Behind planetary bow shocks, the field amplification is sensitive to the magnetic diffusivity. We compute the gas properties behind a bow shock around a 3000 km radius planetary embryo, with and without atmospheres, using hydrodynamics models. We calculate the ionization state of the hot, shocked gas, including thermionic emission from dust, thermal ionization of gas-phase potassium atoms, and the magnetic diffusivity due to Ohmic dissipation and ambipolar diffusion. We find that the diffusivity is sufficiently large that magnetic fields have already relaxed to background values in the shock downstream where chondrules acquire magnetizations, and that these locations are sufficiently far from the planetary embryos that chondrules should not have recorded a significant putative dynamo field generated on these bodies. We conclude that, if melted in planetary bow shocks, chondrules probably recorded the background nebular field.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".