3 ms·
Yes, I also noticed it. It's too large a difference to be some miles to km conversion mistake. There is nothing 1600 km wide inside [1], not even the distance b
by pmontra 4y ago
Yes, I also noticed it. It's too large a difference to be some miles to km conversion mistake. There is nothing 1600 km wide inside [1], not even the distance between the inner core and this new inner-inner core boundaries.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core%E2%80%93mantle_boundary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core%E2%80%93mantle_boundary
- marginalia_nu 4y agoI do think conversion is involved in generating these odd figures somehow. May not be the sole part, but the figure in the title is definitely an conversion that's sprouted additional sigfigs. 644 km is 400,000 miles (within 0.04% error).
- mkl 4y agoTypo there: 400 miles. The actual paper's abstract [1] says "~650-km". In a skim through I didn't see anything that might correspond to the strange 1600km depth. [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-36074-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-36074-2