6 ms·

Earth's inner core may have changed shape, say scientists

52 points by neversaydie 2y ago

spants 2y ago
[flagged]
- GenerocUsername 2y ago
  [flagged]
ryao 2y ago
> The inner core is usually thought to be shaped like a ball, but its edges may actually have deformed by 100m or more in height in places, according to Prof John Vidale who led the research. Is this not within the margin of error for our understanding of the boundary? It would not surprise me if the boundary is a place where there is no clear difference between solid and liquid, such that the solid edges of the core are always transient. Phase change diagrams in chemistry show regions where matter is simultaneously a liquid and a solid at temperatures and pressures that do not occur in daily life. Presumably, under immense pressure and temperature, the core's boundary would be a place where this occurs. I am not an expert in physics, so take what I say here with a grain of salt.
- lupusreal 2y ago
  It makes some intuitive sense to me that the boundary between the solid(ish) mantle and the liquid outer core would be fuzzy, while the boundary between the liquid outer core and the solid inner core would be rather crisp. Not sure how to explain why I think of it that way, it just seems like the way it should work for some reason.
  - marcosdumay 2y ago
    A high enough pressure makes the transition between gases, liquids, and solids all very fuzzy. I do think Earth is not large enough for that, but it's certainly not as crisp as you would assume if you only know how matter behaves at the surface.
duxup 2y ago
Growing up I was very interested in space and I had come to think of planetary evolution to be just sort of a process that reaches a natural balance that is "now". These days a lot of the science I consume seems to have a better understanding of the past and that "balance" is just seen as a stage in ongoing planetary change. Of course I thought of that evolution as just the outside of a planet, but it makes sense that the inside matters too. It's interesting how different things can be along various stages and dynamics at play.
npongratz 2y ago
Quite an understatement: > The core is about 4,000 miles from the Earth's surface and, despite best efforts, scientists have so far been unable to reach it.
- robotnikman 2y ago
  To put things into perspective, the deepest hole drilled, the The Kola Superdeep Borehole, is only 7.6 miles deep. Our deepest hold did not get anywhere near close to the core. We know there is a core thousands of miles beneath our very feet, and we can only guess as to what exactly it is, a mystery beneath us our entire lives.
  - jsbisviewtiful 2y ago
    Only making it down .19% before being outmatched is quite humbling for the human species.
    - Terr_ 2y ago
      Look man, we may have taken the multicellular title from the frick'n worms [0], to say nothing of utterly trouncing our mole-brethren, so as far as I'm concerned we are winning. :p [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halicephalobus_mephisto https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halicephalobus_mephisto
- tsujamin 2y ago
  Necessary quote from my favourite movie > Dr. Josh Keyes: The core is the size of Mars. You're talking about jump-starting a planet. This is a superheated hyper-fluid of molten iron and nickel at 9,000 degrees Fahrenheit. And the deepest we've ever been is... 7 miles, with a two-inch drill bit. Space is easy. It's empty. We're talking about millions of pounds of pressure per square inch. Even if we somehow came up with a brilliant plan to fix the core, we just can't get there. > Dr Conrad Zimsky: ...But what if we could? [1]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0298814/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0298814/
  - 2y ago
flkiwi 2y ago
The CNN article I just skimmed about this has a very interesting science communication issue. It notes that originally the solid inner core rotated faster than the rest of the planet, but that in 2010 it rotated slower than the rest of the planet. It's not clear from CNN's article: 1. Whether the inner core was or was not observed to spin faster than the rest of the planet 2. Whether the inner core changed (relative?) speed in 2010 or whether its behavior was confirmed in 2010, or 3. Perhaps most interestingly, whether the inner core had spun faster than the rest of the planet and we happened to be alive at the time when, for the first time in our planet's 4.6 billion year history, that changed in 2010, or whether they swap rotation rates now and then. This is not really criticism. Science communication is hard. Hell, I've probably misrepresented CNN's representation 2-3 times in this comment.
- taneq 2y ago
  Just another piece of evidence that the world really did end in 2012 and we’ve been in a simulation ever since. ;)
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
holoduke 2y ago
What would happen with society if we find out that we have avout 500 years before our magnetic shield disappears and the atmosphere will be gone 200 years later. Would we finally work together to somehow try to find a fix or will the world turn into anarchy?
- lukan 2y ago
  Look how we react to climate change.
- rurp 2y ago
  Interesting question. I think there would be a bit of both but the most common reaction by far would be to do nothing. There would be a lot of disinformation questioning the scientists and science behind the findings, and any politician trying to direct significant money towards adressing the problem would be attacked by all of the politicians who would rather use those funds for their own benefit. I think the modern era has shown that most people put very little value on future lives or the lives of people outside of their tribe. Plenty of propoganda would spring up to justify inaction and alleviate any guilt.
  - foxglacier 2y ago
    You make it sound like there'll be a simple right way to respond but you might be ignoring most of the practices we already have which benefit current people at the expense of future people. It's not so easy to decide when the future is so far off and often uncertain. We've tried eugenics but as you say, that's political suicide now. We can't seem to ban antibiotics despite them causing anti-biotic resistant bacteria. We're happy to wipe out thousands of years of cultural beliefs that have a proven history of survivability in favor of modern ideas that have only lasted a couple of generations. We keep on using medical interventions to save the lives of babies and allow them to grow up and reproduce with their defective genes. There's even popular opposition to Musk's plan to colonize Mars despite the real risk of a meteor eventually wiping out all humans on Earth. That said, there's also value in selfishly taking what we can for our present selves and maybe future generations will be able to maintain that standard or even develop technology to clean up the mess. After-all, humans already mostly depend on technology like clothing, shelter, and cooking but we've evolved to cope with those limitations.
egypturnash 2y ago
oh good it's finally gonna hatch, our time is up
- shagie 2y ago
  Dr. Who - Kill the Moon. (Spoilers) https://youtu.be/pHOnGSFzd3Y https://youtu.be/pHOnGSFzd3Y
spicy-punk-fog 2y ago
[flagged]
- jeksicjjdjisos 2y ago
  [flagged]
wslh 2y ago
Isn't this Nature article more accurate? https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00395-7 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00395-7
waste_monk 2y ago
We have folk who believe in a flat earth, I wonder if there is also a "flat core society"...

52 points by neversaydie 2y ago

spants 2y ago

[flagged]

GenerocUsername 2y ago
[flagged]

ryao 2y ago

> The inner core is usually thought to be shaped like a ball, but its edges may actually have deformed by 100m or more in height in places, according to Prof John Vidale who led the research. Is this not within the margin of error for our understanding of the boundary? It would not surprise me if the boundary is a place where there is no clear difference between solid and liquid, such that the solid edges of the core are always transient. Phase change diagrams in chemistry show regions where matter is simultaneously a liquid and a solid at temperatures and pressures that do not occur in daily life. Presumably, under immense pressure and temperature, the core's boundary would be a place where this occurs. I am not an expert in physics, so take what I say here with a grain of salt.

lupusreal 2y ago
It makes some intuitive sense to me that the boundary between the solid(ish) mantle and the liquid outer core would be fuzzy, while the boundary between the liquid outer core and the solid inner core would be rather crisp. Not sure how to explain why I think of it that way, it just seems like the way it should work for some reason.
- marcosdumay 2y ago
  A high enough pressure makes the transition between gases, liquids, and solids all very fuzzy. I do think Earth is not large enough for that, but it's certainly not as crisp as you would assume if you only know how matter behaves at the surface.

duxup 2y ago

Growing up I was very interested in space and I had come to think of planetary evolution to be just sort of a process that reaches a natural balance that is "now". These days a lot of the science I consume seems to have a better understanding of the past and that "balance" is just seen as a stage in ongoing planetary change. Of course I thought of that evolution as just the outside of a planet, but it makes sense that the inside matters too. It's interesting how different things can be along various stages and dynamics at play.

npongratz 2y ago

Quite an understatement: > The core is about 4,000 miles from the Earth's surface and, despite best efforts, scientists have so far been unable to reach it.

robotnikman 2y ago
To put things into perspective, the deepest hole drilled, the The Kola Superdeep Borehole, is only 7.6 miles deep. Our deepest hold did not get anywhere near close to the core. We know there is a core thousands of miles beneath our very feet, and we can only guess as to what exactly it is, a mystery beneath us our entire lives.
- jsbisviewtiful 2y ago
  Only making it down .19% before being outmatched is quite humbling for the human species.
  - Terr_ 2y ago
    Look man, we may have taken the multicellular title from the frick'n worms [0], to say nothing of utterly trouncing our mole-brethren, so as far as I'm concerned we are winning. :p [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halicephalobus_mephisto https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halicephalobus_mephisto
tsujamin 2y ago
Necessary quote from my favourite movie > Dr. Josh Keyes: The core is the size of Mars. You're talking about jump-starting a planet. This is a superheated hyper-fluid of molten iron and nickel at 9,000 degrees Fahrenheit. And the deepest we've ever been is... 7 miles, with a two-inch drill bit. Space is easy. It's empty. We're talking about millions of pounds of pressure per square inch. Even if we somehow came up with a brilliant plan to fix the core, we just can't get there. > Dr Conrad Zimsky: ...But what if we could? [1]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0298814/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0298814/
- 2y ago

flkiwi 2y ago

The CNN article I just skimmed about this has a very interesting science communication issue. It notes that originally the solid inner core rotated faster than the rest of the planet, but that in 2010 it rotated slower than the rest of the planet. It's not clear from CNN's article: 1. Whether the inner core was or was not observed to spin faster than the rest of the planet 2. Whether the inner core changed (relative?) speed in 2010 or whether its behavior was confirmed in 2010, or 3. Perhaps most interestingly, whether the inner core had spun faster than the rest of the planet and we happened to be alive at the time when, for the first time in our planet's 4.6 billion year history, that changed in 2010, or whether they swap rotation rates now and then. This is not really criticism. Science communication is hard. Hell, I've probably misrepresented CNN's representation 2-3 times in this comment.

taneq 2y ago
Just another piece of evidence that the world really did end in 2012 and we’ve been in a simulation ever since. ;)

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

holoduke 2y ago

What would happen with society if we find out that we have avout 500 years before our magnetic shield disappears and the atmosphere will be gone 200 years later. Would we finally work together to somehow try to find a fix or will the world turn into anarchy?

lukan 2y ago
Look how we react to climate change.
rurp 2y ago
Interesting question. I think there would be a bit of both but the most common reaction by far would be to do nothing. There would be a lot of disinformation questioning the scientists and science behind the findings, and any politician trying to direct significant money towards adressing the problem would be attacked by all of the politicians who would rather use those funds for their own benefit. I think the modern era has shown that most people put very little value on future lives or the lives of people outside of their tribe. Plenty of propoganda would spring up to justify inaction and alleviate any guilt.
- foxglacier 2y ago
  You make it sound like there'll be a simple right way to respond but you might be ignoring most of the practices we already have which benefit current people at the expense of future people. It's not so easy to decide when the future is so far off and often uncertain. We've tried eugenics but as you say, that's political suicide now. We can't seem to ban antibiotics despite them causing anti-biotic resistant bacteria. We're happy to wipe out thousands of years of cultural beliefs that have a proven history of survivability in favor of modern ideas that have only lasted a couple of generations. We keep on using medical interventions to save the lives of babies and allow them to grow up and reproduce with their defective genes. There's even popular opposition to Musk's plan to colonize Mars despite the real risk of a meteor eventually wiping out all humans on Earth. That said, there's also value in selfishly taking what we can for our present selves and maybe future generations will be able to maintain that standard or even develop technology to clean up the mess. After-all, humans already mostly depend on technology like clothing, shelter, and cooking but we've evolved to cope with those limitations.

egypturnash 2y ago

oh good it's finally gonna hatch, our time is up

shagie 2y ago
Dr. Who - Kill the Moon. (Spoilers) https://youtu.be/pHOnGSFzd3Y https://youtu.be/pHOnGSFzd3Y

spicy-punk-fog 2y ago

[flagged]

jeksicjjdjisos 2y ago
[flagged]

wslh 2y ago

Isn't this Nature article more accurate? https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00395-7 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00395-7

waste_monk 2y ago

We have folk who believe in a flat earth, I wonder if there is also a "flat core society"...