Viscoelastic Relaxation within the Moon and the Phase Lead of Its Cassini State
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Analyses of Lunar Laser Ranging data show that the spin symmetry axis of the Moon is ahead of its expected Cassini state by an angle of ϕ p = 0.27 arcsec. This indicates the presence of one or more dissipation mechanisms acting on the lunar rotation. A combination of solid‐body tides and viscous core‐mantle coupling have been proposed in previous studies. Here, we investigate whether viscoelastic deformation within a solid inner core at the center of the Moon can also account for a part of the observed phase lead angle ϕ p . We build a rotational dynamic model of the Cassini state of the Moon that comprises an inner core, a fluid core, and a mantle and where solid regions are allowed to deform viscoelastically in response to an applied forcing. We show that the presence of an inner core does not change the global monthly Q of the Moon and, hence, that the contribution from solid‐body tides to ϕ p is largely unaffected by an inner core. However, we also show that viscoelastic deformation within the inner core, acting to realign its figure axis with that of the mantle, can contribute significantly to ϕ p through inner core‐mantle gravitational coupling. We show that the contribution to ϕ p is largest when the inner core viscosity is in the range of 10 13 to 10 14 Pa s, when the inner core radius is large and when the free inner core nutation frequency approaches a resonance with the precession frequency of 2 π /18.6 yr −1 .
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".