
Summary: There has been significant progress in the development of numerical geodynamo models over the last five years. Advances in computer technology have made it possible to perform three-dimensional simulations, with thermal or compositional convection as the driving mechanism. These numerical simulations give reasonable results for the morphology and strength of the field at the core-mantle boundary, and the models are also capable of giving reversals and excursions which can be compared with palaeomagnetic observations; they also predict differential rotation between the inner core and the mantle. However, there are still a number of fundamental problems associated with the simulations, which are proving hard to overcome. Despite the advances in computing power, the models are still expensive and take a long time to run. This problem may diminish as faster machines become available and new numerical methods exploit parallelization effectively, but currently there are no practical schemes available which work at low Ekman number. Even with turbulent values of the diffusivities (and the question of whether isotropic diffusivities are appropriate is still unresolved), the appropriate dynamical regime has not yet been reached. In consequence, modelling assumptions about the nature of the flow near the boundaries have to be made, and different choices can have profound effects on the dynamics. The nature of large-scale magnetoconvection at small \(E\) is still not well understood, and until we have more understanding of this issue, it will be difficult to have a great deal of confidence in the predictions of the numerical models.
Geo-electricity and geomagnetism, Earth Core, Magnetohydrodynamics and electrohydrodynamics, Dynamo, Rotating Convection
Geo-electricity and geomagnetism, Earth Core, Magnetohydrodynamics and electrohydrodynamics, Dynamo, Rotating Convection
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 112 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
