Jérémy Leconte1. 1. Laboratoire d'astrophysique de Bordeaux, Univ. Bordeaux, CNRS, B18N, alle Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, 33615 Pessac, France.
Abstract
Many known rocky exoplanets are thought to have been spun down by tidal interactions to a state of synchronous rotation, in which a planet's period of rotation equals that of its orbit around its host star. Investigations into atmospheric and surface processes occurring on such exoplanets thus commonly assume that day and night sides are fixed with respect to the surface over geological timescales. Here we use an analytical model to show that true polar wander - where a planetary body's spin axis shifts relative to its surface because of changes in mass distribution - can continuously reorient a synchronous rocky exoplanet. As occurs on Earth, we find that even weak mantle convection in a rocky exoplanet can produce density heterogeneities within the mantle sufficient to reorient the planet. Moreover, we show that this reorientation is made very efficient by the slower rotation rate of a synchronous planet compared to Earth, which limits the stabilizing effect of rotational and tidal deformations. Furthermore, the ability of a lithosphere to support remnant loads and stabilize against reorientation is limited. Although uncertainties exist regarding the mantle and lithospheric evolution of these worlds, we suggest that the axes of smallest and largest moment of inertia of synchronous exoplanets with active mantle convection change continuously over time but remain closely aligned with the star-planet and orbital axes, respectively.
Many known rocky exoplanets are thought to have been spun down by tidal interactions to a state of synchronous rotation, in which a planet's period of rotation equals that of its orbit around its host star. Investigations into atmospheric and surface processes occurring on such exoplanets thus commonly assume that day and night sides are fixed with respect to the surface over geological timescales. Here we use an analytical model to show that true polar wander - where a planetary body's spin axis shifts relative to its surface because of changes in mass distribution - can continuously reorient a synchronous rocky exoplanet. As occurs on Earth, we find that even weak mantle convection in a rocky exoplanet can produce density heterogeneities within the mantle sufficient to reorient the planet. Moreover, we show that this reorientation is made very efficient by the slower rotation rate of a synchronous planet compared to Earth, which limits the stabilizing effect of rotational and tidal deformations. Furthermore, the ability of a lithosphere to support remnant loads and stabilize against reorientation is limited. Although uncertainties exist regarding the mantle and lithospheric evolution of these worlds, we suggest that the axes of smallest and largest moment of inertia of synchronous exoplanets with active mantle convection change continuously over time but remain closely aligned with the star-planet and orbital axes, respectively.
Long before their discovery, it was hypothesized that many exoplanets would be
close enough from their star to undergo tidal synchronization1. This was supported by the synchronous rotation of all major Solar
System satellites, including the Moon.This has quite dramatic implications for the planetary climate. Because one
hemisphere never receives any light from the star, it has been argued that this
night-side could completely trap volatiles such as water2–4,
carbon dioxide5, 6, or even the whole atmosphere7,
8. But the amount of volatiles that can be
trapped depends crucially on various parameters – land/ocean distribution on the
day-side, topography4, geothermal heat flux below
ice caps6, etc. – that themselves depend on
the planetary orientation. Maybe more importantly, the efficiency of the
Carbonate-Silicate cycle9, which may control the
potential presence of liquid water on numerous temperate-to-cold planets around low-mass
stars, strongly depends on the insolation and precipitations over continents. Whether
the substellar point lies above a continent or a large ocean10, and whether it changes over the course of the planet’s
lifetime implies major changes for the atmospheric content and its stability11.To understand the atmospheric and surface processes at play on tidally spun-down
planets, it is crucial to know not only whether they are in what we
usually call a synchronous spin state or not – we do not discuss here
eccentricity or obliquity driven librations – but also if the
orientation of their surface is truly fixed with respect to their star over geological
timescales!Considering the first question, it has been shown that the processes that keep
Mercury and Venus out of synchronicity could be at play on planets with eccentric orbits
or having a dense enough atmosphere12, 13. But this still leaves us expecting plenty of
synchronized close-in exoplanets.Our goal is to address the second question that can be recast as follows: does a
planet that has been tidally synchronized always shows the same face to its star?
Indeed, all the studies on the rotation of exoplanets have focused on the evolution of
the planetary angular velocity vector (). However,
as is well known in solid mechanics, the axis of rotation of a solid body usually
changes with respect to this body. In other words, in a frame rotating with this fixed
axis of rotation and with an angular velocity ω ≡
‖‖ (in our case the frame
where the star is fixed), the orientation of the solid (in our case the planet) can
change over time.This process, called True Polar Wander (TPW), has happened and is still happening
on Earth, as evidenced by both geological and historical records14, 15. These records show
that Earth’s rotation axis has undergone large excursions (possibly up to
90°) with respect to the planet over geological timescales, thus changing
continuously which parts of the surface were receiving more (equator) or less (poles)
insolation. Although, on Earth, plates motion creates an extra shift of the pole
relative to the surface, this is distinct from TPW. Indeed, reorientation is
also observed on many Solar System bodies16. This
is crucial as many exoplanets may not be subjected to plate tectonics. Finally, note
that TPW has nothing to do with the precession-nutation of the rotation axis with
respect to an inertial reference frame17 that
entails exchange of angular momentum and only add its effects to the aforementioned
one.Here, to assess the presence of TPW on synchronous planets, we will apply a
simple formalism developed for the Earth which will allow us to identify the key
processes and parameters involved. Then we will show how the various stabilization
mechanisms ought to be inefficient on known rocky exoplanets. It results that even a
weak convection in their mantle could create a deformation sufficient to continuously
reorient the planet as the convection pattern evolves.
Dynamics of True Polar Wander
Because of heterogeneities in their interior and deformation due to rotation
and tides, planets are not truly spherically symmetric bodies. The simplest, general
form that the inertia tensor, ℐ̂, can take is thus where the three principal moments of inertia verify
A < B < C. The axes diagonalizing the inertia
tensor are the axes of figure which define a frame attached to the solid planet and
rotating with it. In this frame, the conservation of angular angular momentum,
≡ ℐ̂
· , yields the Liouville equation
where is the external
torque. This equation shows that even without any torque, if
is not collinear to one of the figure
axes, the rotation axis will have to wander with time18.Solving this equation is not trivial. However the end state of the torque
free motion of a viscous planet can be determined by simply minimizing the energy
at constant angular momentum. The lower energy state
thus corresponds to a rotation about the largest moment of inertia, i.e. where the
moment of inertia about the instantaneous rotation axis ℐ
≡ ·
ℐ̂ ·
/‖‖2
equals C, as observed for all Solar System planets. For a
synchronously rotating body, the tidal potential further aligns the axis of smallest
moment of inertia, A, with the tide raising body, as is observed
for all major Solar System moons.However, in determining these axes of largest and smallest moments of
inertia, one should remove the instantaneous rotational and tidal deformations14, 19,
20. This means that the elements of the
inertia tensor should first be decomposed as follows20
where ℐs is the spherically
symmetric component of the moment of inertia, k̂ the
Love number14,
the unit vector directed toward the tide
raising body, ≡
, R the mean
planetary radius, δ the Kronecker symbol, and
G the gravitational constant. The last term accounts for
induced deformation and only affects characteristic TPW timescale
(τTPW)21. Thus, the axes of largest and smallest moments of inertia should be
determined by diagonalizing the intrinsic deformation tensor caused by all
non-hydrostatic effects .
True Polar Wander and convective cycles on Earth
Many processes cause intrinsic deformations but evidence from the gravity
field show that, on Earth, the deformation is dominated by mantle convection21, 22.
Hot rising plumes create negative density anomalies but cause surface uplift, which
results in net positive gravity anomalies22,
23. Cold downwellings have the opposite
effect. Interestingly, this convection pattern evolves over time23 with a characteristic convective timescale
(τc), and so does .So the rotation axis of a planet should follow the axis of largest inertia
created by mantle convection, as observed in Earth geological records15. In particular, major recorded TPW events
seem to be due to the formation of hot upwelling plumes22, 23 which are driven
to the equator (See Fig. 1). While these
convective cycles drive both TPW and the aggregation/dispersal of
supercontinents15, 24, the two latter processes can occur
independently.
Figure 1
Schematic picture of True Polar Wander driven by mantle convection on a
synchronous planet.
A: Hot, low density (lighter shading) upwelling plumes rise and
cause surface uplift. The net effect is a positive geoid/mass anomaly22 (exaggerated here) that coincides with
the axis of the smallest moment of inertia. In contrast, cold downwellings
(darker shading) are negative anomalies where the axis of largest moment of
inertia will lie. B: TPW will tend to align these axes with the
star-planet and rotation axes, respectively. If numerous plumes are present
instead of the 2-cell pattern shown38,
the principal axes will be determined by the resulting degree 2 moment. Surface
topography follows the reorientation. If plate tectonics occurs, continents will
undergo an additional drift with respect to the mantle.
This qualitative behavior follows well the quantitative theory outlined
above. Following Tsai & Stevenson21,
one can construct a figure of merit, XTPW, estimating
the ability of a planet to undergo TPW. Then, the maximum TPW reached for a forcing
of period τ (hereafter equal to convective period
τc) is where
and γ =
ℐs/(MR2) are
respectively the effective viscous relaxation timescale, mass, gravity, fluid Love
number, and inertia factor of the planet, and η and
ρm the effective viscosity and density of its
mantle.XTPW is the ratio of the characteristic
amplitude of the driving non-hydrostatic inertia anomaly (〈〉) times the forcing timescale over the stabilizing hydrostatic
rotational bulge times the relaxation timescale. When
XTPW ≪ 1, TPWmax is small
(~ XTPW). When XTPW
≳ 3, the pole can shift by 90° during a single convective cycle. On
Earth, the convective timescale and amplitude seem to be on the order21 of τc
~ 100 Myr, and 〈〉/ℐs ~ 10−5. Using the
parameters from Table S1
yields τR ≈ 3 ×
104 yr and XTPW ≈ 1 – 2,
meaning that large TPW events can arise over timescales ≳100 Myr, but
rotation drastically filters out shorter events.
The case of synchronous terrestrial exoplanets
What is the efficiency of TPW on synchronous planets? Of course, very little
is known about these objects beyond a few global parameters. Fortunately our
analysis reveals that the most important parameter is the rotation period, which is
equal to the orbital one for a synchronous planet.Indeed, simple boundary layer scaling arguments predict that
τc ~
δ2/κ, where
δ =
5(ηconvκ/ρmgαΔT)1/3
is the boundary layer depth, κ the thermal diffusivity,
ηconv the effective viscosity for convection,
α the thermal expansion coefficient and
ΔT the temperature difference driving the convection.
The convective inertia anomaly can be roughly estimated using 〈〉conv/ℐs ~
0.1αΔTδ/R which gives
reasonable values for Earth21.Interestingly, combining these scalings yields where all internal parameters have disappeared except
for the ratio ηconv/η
(≈1/30 for the Earth21; see Methods). So TPW efficiency is determined
only by measurable quantities along with the viscosity structure. As the
absolute viscosity does not appear, global variations in viscosity due to a
hotter/colder interiors should not substantially affect our results21, 22.Fig. 2 shows the TPW efficiency for all
known transiting planets with R < 1.6
R⊕ to select terrestrial bodies25. As anticipated, rotation rate is the
determining factor, planetary density not varying much in the range of radii
considered. It demonstrates that planets with an orbital period ≳1-2 days
offer very favorable conditions for TPW, like Solar System moons16. Because the TPW timescale is shorter than
the convective one, we can expect the reorientation to follow the convective pattern
quasi-statically.
Figure 2
Efficiency of true polar wander (XTPW) on known
rocky exoplanets as a function of their orbital period (dots).
The
⊕ symbol shows the value of XTPW for the
Earth. The color of the dots refers to the equilibrium blackbody temperature of
the planet (TBB) determined assuming a complete
redistribution of the incoming stellar energy (See Methods). As expected, cooler planets have longer orbital periods.
All synchronous planets with an orbital period above 1-2 days should undergo
true polar wander very easily. The right ordinate axis shows the timescale at
which the pole is able to follow the axis of largest moment of inertia
(τTPW; See Methods).
One limitation of our calculation is that our convective contribution to the
inertia anomaly is scaled on the Earth, where plate tectonics is strongly coupled to
mantle convection24. While there would be no
continental motions on a planet without plate tectonics, there is no reason that
convection could not distort its crust, or simply cause sufficient density
heterogeneities within the mantle. To quantify this we computed the minimal inertia
anomaly that would have to be created by mantle convection to excite TPW (See Methods). Fig.
3 shows that the absence of moving plates would have to reduce the
distortion by two to three orders of magnitude to suppress TPW which seems unlikely.
Indeed Venus’ triaxiality is only about a factor two smaller than the Earth
one despite its absence of plate tectonics.
Figure 3
Minimal inertia anomaly (〈〉min/ℐs) needed to excite
significant polar wander as a function of the planetary temperature
(TBB).
The size of the dot is
proportional to the size of the planet. The ⊕ and ♀ symbols show
the convective inertia anomaly for the Earth and Venus. The shaded area
illustrates the range of convective contribution predicted by our simple scaling
by varying the radius of the planet between 0.5 and 1.6
R⊕ and the convective viscosity within
two orders of magnitude. For temperate planets, mantle convection would have to
be two to three orders of magnitude less vigorous than on Earth to suppress
TPW.
Another impediment to a truly continuous reorientation would be a
lithosphere with a permanent elasticity20,
26. For Mars, the stabilizing effect of
the remnant rotational bulge inherited from the solidification of the lithosphere
plays an important role in the TPW event that followed the formation of Tharsis26, 27.
The lithosphere being strong enough to support part of the Tharsis load once at the
equator, the load itself became a stabilizing factor against subsequent TPW events,
strongly decoupling the motion of the pole from the convective cycle.Do we expect an equivalent stabilization by the lithosphere of exoplanets?
Importantly, Earth’s lithosphere does not seem able to support such loads
permanently28. This is demonstrated by
the absence of a geoid signature of a remnant rotational bulge inherited from a
faster, past rotation and by the weakness of the topography to geoid correlation at
long wavelengths. This difference is easily explained by estimating the
dimensionless rigidity of a spherical lithosphere due to membrane stresses28, 29
where ℰ and d are the Young
modulus and thickness of the lithosphere, and
ρ⋆ a density characterizing the load.
Decreasing with planetary mass, the rigidity is sufficient to support massives loads
on Mars (ϵ ~ 0.5), but not on Earth
(ϵ ~ 0.02)28, and even less on larger planetsThe effect of an elastic lithosphere is assessed in Fig. 4. It shows the contribution of a potential remnant
rotational/tidal bulge frozen-in during the formation of the lithosphere16, 20,
26, 29 (See Methods), and how it
compares to the convective contribution. Except for the hottest planets, the elastic
bulge is much weaker than the convective one. This results from both the low
rotation rate of these objects and their lower rigidity. For the same reason, the
stabilizing effect of a topographic load such as Tharsis would be reduced by orders
of magnitude.
Figure 4
Dimensionless contribution of the elastic remnant bulge to the inertia
deformation tensor as a function of the planet radius for all known rocky
exoplanets
(〈〉lit/ℐs); See Methods). The color of the dot shows the
equilibrium temperature of the planet. For comparison, the dashed black line
shows the contribution of convective motions to the inertia tensor expected from
our simple scaling (〈〉conv/ℐs; See text). The shaded
area illustrates the uncertainty on this prediction by varying the convective
viscosity within two orders of magnitude. For all warm and temperate planets,
the deformation is expected to be dominated by convective motions.
Our findings collectively suggest that reorientation of warm to temperate
rocky exoplanets should be continuous and controlled by mantle convection, as on
Earth. Hence, it should still occur today, except for the smallest bodies devoid of
tidal heating for which fast interior cooling may have shut down convection.
Conclusion
There is ample evidence that Earth underwent several episodes of large TPW.
It is thus sensible to assume that many rocky exoplanets undergo TPW as well. Our
analysis reveals that synchronous planets should exhibit efficient TPW because the
stabilization by their hydrostatic and elastic bulges is weak. Interestingly, if
plate tectonics does occur on these planets, we predict that supercontinents should
be either at the sub-stellar or anti-stellar point – depending on the initial
conditions – during their formation. Facilitating the formation of hot
upwellings beneath them23, 24, supercontinent are indeed expected to sit
on the axis of smallest moment of inertia15,
22 which should align with the star.Knowing that, it would be interesting to quantify how the partitioning of
volatiles between the atmosphere, surface, and mantle varies over time. By simply
affecting the day side ocean/land fraction, TPW periodically changes, among other
things, the heat redistribution efficiency of the atmosphere and ocean toward the
night side, the weathering efficiency10,
11, and thus the planetary global
greenhouse gas content, temperature, and climate. Changes in the orientation of the
large scale topography and geologically active regions may play a role as well4, 6.
Generally, when studying geological processes linked to the orientation of the
planet, the carbonate-silicate cycle being one example10, one should consider that this orientation can evolve as
fast or faster than the processes studied.
Methods
Mass-Radius relationship
The mass of rocky bodies discovered by transit surveys is often
difficult to measure. To infer it from a given measured radius, we use the mass
radius relationship from ref.30 which
reads where rmf is the rock mass fraction taken to be
0.67 as for the Earth. Being a degree 2 polynomial in log10
M, this equation can be inverted analytically.
Definition of the black body temperature scale
For most known transiting planets, the exoplanets.org catalog provides
the stellar radius, mass, and effective temperature, along with the orbital
semi-major axis (respectively R⋆,
M⋆,
T⋆, and a). The total power
received by the planet is thus given by where σsb is
the Stefan-Boltzmann constant. As we only want a ”flux
temperature”, we equate this incoming power with the power
emitted by the planet if it were a black body with a uniform temperature
(TBB) which yields This gives us a temperature scale more than an
accurate idea about the real temperature at the surface that can be affected by
both albedo and greenhouse effect. With these conventions, the equilibrium
temperatures are 279 K and 330 K for the Earth and Venus, respectively. The fact
that TBB depends strongly on the stellar type
explains the huge scatter observed in the orbital period / temperatures relation
(See Fig. 2).
Limit period for synchronization
One can have a rough estimate of the maximal distance at which planets
are synchronized by tides over a time τtid by
equating the angular momentum to be removed (~
ℐsω0) to the integrated
tidal torque over that time. Assuming a simple constant phase lag model, one
finds where k and
Q is the effective tidal Love number and quality factor.
Interestingly, using Kepler third law, one can get rid of stellar parameters
which yields where Porb is the
orbital period. This stems from the fact that the tidal and rotational potential
have very similar forms when the rotation rate is replaced by the orbital mean
motion. This entails that we can find the orbital period at which a planet will
be synchronized independently of the stellar type. This limit orbital period
below which planets are expected to be synchronous is given by where the numerical estimate is for a planet the
size of the Earth starting with a 1 day rotation period. The Q
≈ 13 seems appropriate for Earth31. As the oceans are expected to generate about 90% of the dissipation,
we can expect Q ≈ 100 for a dry planet like Venus,
lowering the critical period to ~150 days. Because of the crude
dissipation model, and the assumptions needed on the initial spin, this should
be regarded as a guide rather than a hard limit. Indeed, Venus as been
efficiently spun down despite its ~225 day orbital period. This suggests
that all the rocky planets shown in Fig. 2
could potentially be synchronous if no other process is at play.
Effective viscosity and viscosity structure in the mantle
In our analysis, we differentiate the viscosity that is supposed to be
representative of convective processes
(ηconv) from the effective viscosity entering
the relaxation timescale of the mantle (η). This might
be needed as viscosity varies over several orders of magnitude throughout the
mantle32
and has a non-Newtonian behavior. Different processes,
exerting different stresses and being affected differently by
the viscosity structure of the mantle, may thus exhibit different effective
viscosities.Empirically, a low convective viscosity on the order of
η ~ 1021 Pa s is needed to recover
a convective timescale on the order of 100 Myr for the Earth, and is consistent
with the viscosities inferred in the upper mantle32. However, using this viscosity to compute the viscous relaxation
timescale of the mantle yields a timescale ~ 100 yr which is very short
compared to the observed timescales for the postglacial rebounds. The difference
can be understood by saying that relaxation has occurred only when the slower,
more viscous, deep mantle has relaxed, but non-Newtonian effects can be at
play as well33. Following Tsai
& Stevenson21, we thus use a value
of η ~ 30
ηconv, keeping in mind that this
may vary in a complex manner from one planet to the other. Note that
reducing the difference between the two values here would only increase the
efficiency of polar wander.
Efficiency of true polar wander of a Maxwell Earth and limitations
The ability of a planet to undergo fast true polar wander can be
quantified through different means. In Fig.
2, we chose to represent the dimensionless efficiency
XTPW given by Equation 6 which quantifies the maximum polar motion over
one excitation period (τc) through Equation 5. But TPW can also be
seen as a low-pass filter, all perturbations with a timescale below
τTPW being damped. This timescale can be
defined through yielding It is a useful timescale as it also tells us at
which rate the pole can adapt to a change in the inertia tensor. Particularly
relevant here is the fact that the pole will follow the axis of maximum inertia
closely if τc ≫
τTPW (See Fig. 2).Another metric, used in Fig. 3, is
the minimum characteristic amplitude of the inertia deformation needed to cause
a significant shift over one convective period. It can be defined as
which yieldsIn their analysis, Tsai and Stevenson21 disregarded a term of order
C/(ωτR(C
– A)), because it is indeed very small for the Earth. For
very slow rotation rates, this term starts to be significant. Indeed it has been
shown that for Venus, this term is responsible for the observed wobble of the
rotation axis of about 0.5° around the axis of maximum moment of
inertia34. For the planets with the
largest orbital periods in our sample (≳ 100 – 200 day), we can
thus expect such small deviations from a true alignement.Another limitation of this analysis is that the effect of the tidal
bulge is neglected, as appropriate for an application to the Earth. However we
are interested only in the timescale involved and not the precise trajectory
followed by the planet during TPW events. To estimate the impact of the tidal
bulge on this timescale, it is important to remember that for a synchronous
planet, the magnitude of the tidal and rotational bulges are about equal. This
stems from the fact that the tidal bulge scales as
M⋆R5/a3,
which is equal to
ω2R5/G
for a synchronous planet. From Equation
4 we can therefore show that the stabilizing bulge is equal to
We thus expect the tidal bulge to impact the
order of magnitude estimates presented here only by a factor of order unity
which is acceptable considering the other sources of uncertainty.
Remnant rotational bulge supported by an elastic lithosphere
Before a planet has cooled down sufficiently to form an elastic
lithosphere, it responds to a static deforming potential hydrostatically and the
final deformation is given by the last term in Eq. (4) where the Love number is taken equal to the
secular, hydrostatic tidal Love number which depends on the density profile alone. For
an isodensity planet Once a lithosphere forms, the secular Tidal
Love number changes to account for its elasticity. This also creates a remnant
inertia bulge supported by the lithosphere which is given by16, 20
Here and
are the unit vectors directed toward
the tide raising body and the rotation pole at the moment of the lithosphere
formation.The difficulty generally lies in the determination of
k that must account for the rheology of the
whole planet. As we are concerned with order of magnitude estimates, we will
assume that only the thin lithosphere supports the remnant bulge26, 29. It can then be shown from equation 1-3
and 16 of ref.26 that for the rotational part
where c is the degree of
compensation that measures the resistance of the lithosphere to deformation26, 29
In this formula, ν is the
Poisson ratio of the lithosphere, and ρ̄ the mean
density of the planet. The dimensionless rigidity, ϵ, is
given by Equation 8. This formula
neglects the effect of bending stresses that have been shown to be unimportant
for the degree-2 perturbations considered here28. It is however valid for topographic loads as well as tidal and
rotational deformations as long as the right definition of
ρ⋆ is taken in
ϵ. For topographic loads,
ρ⋆ must be equal to the density
difference between the mantle and the load above. To compute the effect of
rotation and tidal deformation, one must use29
ρ⋆ =
ρm.By identification, this simply yields
Care should be taken when using this expression as Willemann &
Turcotte29 use a thin shell
approximation which is most valid in the case of a homogeneous,
incompressible planet. We thus test the validity of this formula by
comparing the prediction for the secular Love number of Mars to published
models27, 35 for various lithospheric thicknesses.
Discrepancies are found to be below the 15% level (see Sup. Fig. S1).As a result, the characteristic amplitude of the dimensionless inertia
anomaly linked to the remnant stabilizing bulge is given by26
where factors of order unity due to the geometry
of the tidal and rotational bulges have been discarded. This is the quantity
shown in Fig. 4. In this context, the
values calculated for supersede the value shown in Table S1.Our estimate is conservative in several ways. First, the results in
Fig. 4 assume a constant lithospheric
thickness for all planets equal to 50 km, which is commonly used value for the
Earth28. It can be argued that this
value should be smaller for larger and/or hotter planets because of the higher
temperatures in the crust and mantle due to both the larger irradiation and the
larger geothermal flux. Mars, for example, is observed to have a much thicker
lithosphere. In addition, higher temperatures should tend to decrease the Young
modulus of the lithosphere, further weakening the latter. Hence, for the hottest
planets in our sample the increase in the size of the remnant bulge visible in
Fig. 4 could be offset by these
effects. These rough trends however do not hold if the internal heating is
sufficient to initiate a heat-pipe type of cooling36. In this case, the lithosphere can
be larger than predicted for a conductive, stagnant lid planet. The effect
of such heat-pipe lithospheres on TPW is however subtle to predict because
they tend toward an equilibrium shape as they are recycled over time.
Heat-pipe cooling also reduces the convective stress in the mantle37. The overall effect of the regime of
heat transfer on the properties of the elastic lithosphere and on TPW in
general should be further studied using more realistic thermal/rheological
models.