Chapter 6

Visualizing Gravity: the Gravitational Field

Michael Fowler 2/14/06 Introduction Lets begin with the definition of gravitational field: The gravitational field at any point P in space is defined as the gravitational force felt by a tiny unit mass placed at P. So, to visualize the gravitational field, in this room or on a bigger scale such as the whole Solar System, imagine drawing a vector representing the gravitational force on a one kilogram mass at many different points in space, and seeing how the pattern of these vectors varies from one place to another (in the room, of course, they wont vary much!). We say a tiny unit mass because we dont want the gravitational field from the test mass itself to disturb the system. This is clearly not a problem in discussing planetary and solar gravity. To build an intuition of what various gravitational fields look like, well examine a sequence of progressively more interesting systems, beginning with a simple point mass and working up to a hollow spherical shell, this last being what we need to understand the Earths own gravitational field, both outside and inside the Earth. Field from a Single Point Mass This is of course simple: we know this field has strength GM/r2, and points towards the massthe direction of the attraction. Lets draw it anyway, or, at least, lets draw in a few vectors showing its strength at various points:

This is a rather inadequate representation: theres a lot of blank space, and, besides, the field attracts in three dimensions, there should be vectors pointing at the mass in the air above (and below) the paper. But the picture does convey the general idea. A different way to represent a field is to draw field lines, curves such that at every point along the curves length, its direction is the direction of the field at that point. Of course, for our single mass, the field lines add little insight:

The arrowheads indicate the direction of the force, which points the same way all along the field line. A shortcoming of the field lines picture is that although it can give a good general idea of the field, there is no precise indication of the fields strength at any point. However, as is evident in the diagram above, there is a clue: where the lines are closer together, the force is stronger. Obviously, we could put in a spoke-like field line anywhere, but if we want to give an indication of field strength, wed have to have additional lines equally spaced around the mass. Gravitational Field for Two Masses The next simplest case is two equal masses. Let us place them symmetrically above and below the x-axis:

Recall Newtons Universal Law of Gravitation states that any two masses have a mutual gravitational attraction . A point mass m = 1 at P will therefore feel gravitational attraction towards both masses M, and a total gravitational field equal to the vector sum of these two forces, illustrated by the red arrow in the figure. The Principle of Superposition The fact that the total gravitational field is just given by adding the two vectors together is called the Principle of Superposition. This may sound really obvious, but in fact it isnt true for every force found in physics: the strong forces between elementary particles dont obey this principle, neither do the strong gravitational fields

near black holes. But just adding the forces as vectors works fine for gravity almost everywhere away from black holes, and, as you will find later, for electric and magnetic fields too. Finally, superposition works for any number of masses, not just two: the total gravitational field is the vector sum of the gravitational fields from all the individual masses. Newton used this to prove that the gravitational field outside a solid sphere was the same as if all the mass were at the center by imagining the solid sphere to be composed of many small massesin effect, doing an integral, as we shall discuss in detail later. He also invoked superposition in calculating the orbit of the Moon precisely, taking into account gravity from both the Earth and the Sun. Exercise: For the two mass case above, sketch the gravitational field vector at some other points: look first on the x-axis, then away from it. What do the field lines look like for this two mass case? Sketch them in the neighborhood of the origin. Field Strength at a Point Equidistant from the Two Masses It is not difficult to find an exact expression for the gravitational field strength from the two equal masses at an equidistant point P. Choose the x,y axes so that the masses lie on the y-axis at (0, a) and (0,-a). By symmetry, the field at P must point along the x-axis, so all we have to do is compute the strength of the x-component of the gravitational force from one mass, and double it.

If the distance from the point P to one of the masses is s, the gravitational force towards that mass has strength . This force has a component along the x-axis equal to , where is the angle between the line from P to the mass and the x-axis, so the total gravitational force on a small unit mass at P is along the x-axis. From the diagram, the two masses M is directed

, so the force on a unit mass at P from

in the x-direction. Note that the force is exactly zero at the origin, and everywhere else it points towards the origin. Gravitational Field from a Ring of Mass Now, as long as we look only on the x-axis, this identical formula works for a ring of mass 2M in the y, z plane! Its just a threedimensional version of the argument above, and can be visualized by rotating the two-mass diagram above around the x-axis, to give a ring perpendicular to the paper, or by imagining the ring as made up of many beads, and taking the beads in pairs opposite each other.

Bottom line: the field from a ring of total mass M, radius a, at a point P on the axis of the ring distance x from the center of the ring is .

*Field Outside a Massive Spherical Shell This is an optional section: you can safely skip to the result on the last line. In fact, you will learn an easy way to derive this result using Gausss Theorem when you do Electricity and Magnetism. I just put this section in so you can see that this result can be derived by the straightforward, but quite challenging, method of adding the individual gravitational attractions from all the bits making up the spherical shell. What about the gravitational field from a hollow spherical shell of matter? Such a shell can be envisioned as a stack of rings.

To find the gravitational field at the point P, we just add the contributions from all the rings in the stack.

In other words, we divide the spherical shell into narrow zones: imagine chopping an orange into circular slices by parallel cuts,

perpendicular to the axisbut of course our shell is just the skin of the orange! One such slice gives a ring of skin, corresponding to the surface area between two latitudes, the two parallel lines in the diagram above. Notice from the diagram that this ring of skin will have radius , therefore circumference and breadth , where were taking to be very small. This means that the area of the ring of skin is . So, if the shell has mass per unit area, this ring has mass , and the gravitational force at P from this ring will be

. Now, to find the total gravitational force at P from the entire shell we have to add the contributions from each of these rings which, taken together, make up the shell. In other words, we have to integratethe above expression in So the gravitational field is:

. In fact, this is quite a tricky integral: , x and s are all varying! It turns out to be is easiest done by switching variables from to s. Label the distance from P to the center of the sphere by r. Then, from the diagram, , and a, r are constants, so ,

and

Now so and, writing

, and from the diagram , ,

The derivation was rather lengthy, but the answer is simple: The gravitational field outside a uniform spherical shell is GM/r 2 towards the center. And, theres a bonus: for the ring, we only found the field along the axis, but for the spherical shell, once weve found it in one direction, the whole problem is solvedfor the spherical shell, the field must be the same in all directions. Field Outside a Solid Sphere Once we know the gravitational field outside a shell of matter is the same as if all the mass were at a point at the center, its easy to find the field outside a solid sphere: thats just a nesting set of shells, like spherical Russian dolls. Adding them up, The gravitational field outside a uniform sphere is GM/r 2 towards the center. Theres an added bonus: since we found this result be adding uniform spherical shells, it is still true if the shells have different densities, provided the density of each shell is the same in all directions. The inner shells could be much denser than the outer onesas in fact is the case for the Earth.

Field Inside a Spherical Shell

This turns out to be surprisingly simple! We imagine the shell to be very thin, with a mass density kg per square meter of surface. Begin by drawing a two-way cone radiating out from the point P, so that it includes two small areas of the shell on opposite sides: these two areas will exert gravitational attraction on a mass at P in opposite directions. It turns out that they exactly cancel. This is because the ratio of the areas A1 and A2 at distances r1 and r2 are given by : since the cones have the same angle, if one cone has twice the height of the other, its base will have twice the diameter, and therefore four times the area. Since the masses of the bits of the shell are proportional to the areas, the ratio of the masses of the cone bases is also . But the gravitational attraction at P from these masses goes as , and 2 that r term cancels the one in the areas, so the two opposite areas have equal and opposite gravitational forces at P. In fact, the gravitational pull from every small part of the shell is balanced by a part on the opposite sideyou just have to construct a lot of cones going through P to see this. (There is one slightly tricky pointthe line from P to the spheres surface will in general cut the surface at an angle. However, it will cut the opposite bit of sphere at the same angle, because any line passing through a sphere hits the two

surfaces at the same angle, so the effects balance, and the base areas of the two opposite small cones are still in the ratio of the squares of the distances r1, r2.) Field Inside a Sphere: How Does g Vary on Going Down a Mine? This is a practical application of the results for shells. On going down a mine, if we imagine the Earth to be made up of shells, we will be inside a shell of thickness equal to the depth of the mine, so will feel nonet gravity from that part of the Earth. However, we will be closer to the remaining shells, so the force from them will be intensified. suppose we descend from the Earths radius rE to a point distance r from the center of the Earth. What fraction of the Earths mass is still attracting us towards the center? Lets make life simple for now and assume the Earths density is uniform, call it kg per cubic meter.

Then the fraction of the Earths mass that is still attracting us (because its closer to the center than we areinside the red sphere in the diagram) is . The gravitational attraction from this mass at the bottom of the mine, distance r from the center of the Earth, is proportional to mass/r2. We have just seen that the mass is itself proportional to r3, so the actual gravitational force felt must be proportional to .

That is to say, the gravitational force on going down inside the Earth is linearly proportional to distance from the center. Since we already know that the gravitational force on a mass m at the Earths surface is mg, it follows immediately that in the mine the gravitational force must be . So theres no force at all at the center of the Earthas we would expect, the masses are attracting equally in all directions.
previous index next PDF

2 2 The Earths Thermal Structure As the Earths thermal Regime is governed by both the available heat and the environment in which it is stored, this chapter begins with a brief review of the Earths heat budget with respect to the contributions of various external and internal sources and sinks. This is followed by a discussion of the thermal regime of the Earths crust and the associated physical storage and transport properties specific heat capacity, thermal conductivity, and diffusivity .Our information on the internal structure of the Earth and the variation of its physical properties (pressure, temperature, density, and seismic velocities) and chemical composition are derived from seismology, i.e. the interpretation of travel time curves of earthquakes which passed through the Earth. The variation with depth of the observed seismic velocities and elastic constants combined with Maxwells four thermodynamic relations between pressure P, volume V, entropy S (S=Q/T; Q: heat), and temperature T yield the predominantly radial structure of the Earth. From Maxwells relation (T/P)S=(V/S)P one obtains an expression for the adiabatic temperature gradient in terms of temperature, the volume coefficient of

thermal expansion =(V/T)P/V, and the isobaric specific heat capacity cP:( )SPT gTz c= ,(1)where g is gravity and subscripts P and S refer to isobaric and adiabatic conditions, respectively, i.e. constant pressure and constant entropy. Assuming lower mantle values (at about 1500 km depth) of T=2400 K, g=9.9 m s -2, cP=1200 J kg -1K-1, and =14 K-1 , yields an adiabatic temperature gradient of about 0.3 K km -1; the corresponding values for the outer core (at about 3500 km depth) of T=4000 K, g=10.1 m s -2, cP=700 J kg-1K-1, and =14 K-1 yield an adiabatic temperature gradient of about 0.8 K km -1 (see e.g. Clauser, 2006).Approximate estimates for the adiabatic temperature inside the Earth can be obtained with theaid of the dimensionless thermodynamic Grneisen parameter =KS/ (cP), where KS is the adiabatic incompressibility or bulk modulus and is density:00T d, o r : T T T = = 3 7300 C 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 0 0 0 T (K) 600050004000300020001000 Depth (km) 100020003000400050006000 R ad i us ( k m) 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 0 0 0 T (C)

0 5

0 0

0 0

3 0

0 5

0 0

0 0

3 0

L: Lithosphere (0-80 km)A: Asthenosphere (80-220 km)TZ: Transition Zone (220-670 km)D'': D'' layer (27412891 km)400 km: Phase transition olivine-spinel670 km: Phase transition spinel-perovskite D'' InnerCore OuterCoreLowerMantle TZA S o l i d u s L63715150289167080 T e m p e r a t u r e UpperMantle 8000 C220 Fig. 1. Variation of estimated temperature and melting point in the Earth with depth (Clauser, 2006, redrawn afterLowrie, 1997); Data: Stacey (1992) and Dziewonski & Anderson (1981). Temperature is poorly constrained in thedeeper sections, indicated by large error bars (Brown, 1993). From a known temperature T=0 and density=0 at a given depth, eq. (2) allows computing the adiabatic temperature from the density profile in a region where the Grneisen parameter is known (for details: see e.g. Clauser, 2006).Fortunately, the Grneisen parameter varies only mildly between 0.5 and 1.5 within largeregions of the Earths interior. The currently accepted estimate of the temperature profile is characterized by steep gradients in the lithosphere, asthenosphere and in the lower mantlesD layer (immediately above the core-mantle boundary). Neglecting large lateral variations in the crust and lithosphere it indicates, on average, temperatures of less than 1000 K in the lithosphere, close to 3750 K at the core-mantle boundary, and around 5100 K at the centre of the Earth (Fig. 1) (Stacey, 1992; Lowrie, 1997).However, there are large uncertainties, particularly in the mantle and core (Brown, 1993;Beardsmore & Cull, 2001), indicating ranges for conceivable minimum and maximum

temperatures of 3000 C4500 C at the core-mantle boundary, 4400 C7300 C at the transition between outer and inner core, and a maximum temperature at the centre of the Earth of less than 8000 C (Fig. 1). From another one of Maxwells thermodynamic relations,(S/P)T=-(V/T)P , one may derive the fractional variation of the melting point temperature T mp with depth within the Earth:

Geoid
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Geodesy

Fundamentals Geodesy Geodynamics Geomatics Cartography

Concepts Datum Distance Geoid Figure of the Earth Geodetic system Geog. coord. system Hor. pos. representation Map projection Reference ellipsoid Satellite geodesy Spatial reference system

Technologies

GNSS GPS ...

Standards ED50 ETRS89 NAD83 NAVD88 SAD69 SRID UTM WGS84 ...

History History of geodesy NAVD29 ...

v

The geoid is that equipotential surface which would coincide exactly with the mean ocean surface of the Earth, if the oceans were in equilibrium, at rest (relative to the rotating Earth[citation needed]), and extended through the continents (such as with very narrow canals). According to C.F. Gauss, who first described it, it is the "mathematical figure of the Earth", a smooth but highly irregular surface that corresponds not to the actual surface of the Earth's crust, but to a surface which can only be known through extensive gravitational measurements and calculations. Despite being an important concept for almost two hundred years in the history of geodesy and geophysics, it has only been defined to high precision in recent decades, for instance by works of Petr Vanek and others. It is often described as the true physical figure of the Earth, in contrast to the idealized geometrical figure of a reference ellipsoid.

Map of the undulation of the geoid, in meters (based on the EGM96gravity model and the WGS84 reference ellipsoid).[1]

Description

1. Ocean 2. Reference ellipsoid 3. Local plumb line 4. Continent 5. Geoid

The geoid surface is irregular, unlike the reference ellipsoid which is a mathematical idealized representation of the physical Earth, but considerably smoother than Earth's physical surface. Although the physical Earth has excursions of +8,000 m (Mount Everest) and 11,000 m (Mariana Trench), the geoid's total variation is less than 200 m (106 to +85 m)[2] compared to a perfect mathematical ellipsoid. Sea level, if undisturbed by tides, currents and weather, would assume a surface equal to the geoid. If the continental land masses were crisscrossed by a series of tunnels or narrow canals, the sea level in these canals would also coincide with the geoid. In reality the geoid does not

have a physical meaning under the continents, but geodesists are able to derive the heights of continental points above this imaginary, yet physically defined, surface by a technique called spirit leveling. Being an equipotential surface, the geoid is by definition a surface to which the force of gravity is everywhere perpendicular. This means that when travelling by ship, one does not notice the undulations of the geoid; the local vertical (plumb line) is always perpendicular to the geoid and the local horizon tangential to it. Likewise, spirit levels will always be parallel to the geoid. Note that a GPS receiver on a ship may, during the course of a long voyage, indicate height variations, even though the ship will always be at sea level (tides not considered). This is because GPS satellites, orbiting about the center of gravity of the Earth, can only measure heights relative to a geocentric reference ellipsoid. To obtain one's geoidal height, a raw GPS reading must be corrected. Conversely, height determined by spirit leveling from a tidal measurement station, as in traditional land surveying, will always be geoidal height. Modern GPS receivers have a grid implemented inside where they obtain the geoid (e.g. EGM-96) height over the WGS ellipsoid from the current position. Then they are able to correct the height above WGS ellipsoid to the height above WGS84 geoid. In that case when the height is not zero on a ship it is because of the tides. [edit]Simplified

Example

The gravity field of the earth is neither perfect nor uniform. A flattened ellipsoid is typically used as the idealized earth, but even if the earth were perfectly spherical, the strength of gravity would not be the same everywhere, because density (and therefore mass) varies throughout the planet. This is due to magma distributions, mountain ranges, deep sea trenches, and so on. If that perfect sphere were then covered in water, the water would not be the same height everywhere. Instead, the water level would be higher or lower depending on the particular strength of gravity in that location.

Precise geoid
The 1990s saw important discoveries in theory of geoid computation. The Precise Geoid Solution by Vanek and co-workers improved on the Stokesian approach to geoid computation.[7] Their solution enables

millimetre-to-centimetre accuracy in geoid computation, an order-ofmagnitude improvement from previous classical solutions.[8][9][10] [edit]Time-variability Recent satellite missions, such as GOCE and GRACE, have enabled the study of time-variable geoid signals. The first products based on GOCE satellite data became available online in June, 2010, through the European Space Agency (ESA)s Earth observation user services tools.[11][12] ESA launched the satellite in March 2009 on a mission to map Earth's gravity with unprecedented accuracy and spatial resolution. On 31 March 2011, the new geoid was unveiled at the Fourth International GOCE User Workshop hosted at the Technische Universitt Mnchen in Munich, Germany.[13] Studies using the timevariable geoid computed from GRACE data have provided information on global hydrologic cycles,[14] mass balances of ice sheets,[15] and postglacial rebound.[16] From postglacial rebound measurements, time-variable GRACE data can be used to deduce the viscosity of Earth's mantle.[17]

Spheroid
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

oblate spheroid

prolate spheroid

A spheroid, or ellipsoid of revolution is a quadric surface obtained by rotating an ellipse about one of its principal axes; in other words, an ellipsoid with two equal semi-diameters. If the ellipse is rotated about its major axis, the result is a prolate (elongated) spheroid, like a rugby ball. If the ellipse is rotated about its minor axis, the result is

an oblate (flattened) spheroid, like a lentil. If the generating ellipse is a circle, the result is a sphere. Because of the combined effects of gravitation and rotation, the Earth's shape is roughly that of a sphere slightly flattened in the direction of its axis. For that reason, in cartography the Earth is often approximated by an oblate spheroid instead of a sphere. The current World Geodetic System model uses a spheroid whose radius is 6,378.137 km at the equator and 6,356.752 km at the poles.

Equation
A spheroid centered at the "y" origin and rotated about the z axis is defined by the implicit equation

where a is the horizontal, transverse radius at the equator, and b is the vertical, conjugate radius.[1] [edit]Surface

area

A prolate spheroid has surface area

where is the angular eccentricity of the prolate spheroid, and e = sin() is its (ordinary) eccentricity. An oblate spheroid has surface area where the angular eccentricity of the oblate spheroid. [edit]Volume The volume of a spheroid (of any kind) is If A=2a is the equatorial diameter, and B=2b is the polar diameter, the volume is [edit]Curvature If a spheroid is parameterized as . . is

where

is the reduced or parametric latitude, and

is , then

the longitude, and its Gaussian curvature is

and its mean curvature is

Both of these curvatures are always positive, so that every point on a spheroid is elliptic.

Isostasy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Isostasy (Greek sos "equal", stsis "standstill") is a term used in geology to refer to the state of gravitational equilibrium between the earth's lithosphere and asthenosphere such that the tectonic plates "float" at an elevation which depends on their thickness and density. This concept is invoked to explain how different topographic heights can exist at the Earth's surface. When a certain area of lithosphere reaches the state of isostasy, it is said to be in isostatic equilibrium. Isostasy is not a process that upsets equilibrium, but rather one which restores it (a negative feedback). It is generally accepted that the earth is a dynamic system that responds to loads in many different ways. However, isostasy provides an important 'view' of the processes that are happening in areas that are experiencing vertical movement. Certain areas (such as the Himalayas) are not in isostatic equilibrium, which has forced researchers to identify other reasons to explain their topographic heights (in the case of the Himalayas, which are still rising, by proposing that their elevation is being "propped-up" by the force of the impacting Indian plate).

In the simplest example, isostasy is the principle of buoyancy where an object immersed in a liquid is buoyed with a force equal to the weight of the displaced liquid. On a geological scale, isostasy can be observed where the Earth's strong lithosphere exerts stress on the weaker asthenosphere which, over geological time flows laterally such that the load of the lithosphere is accommodated by height adjustments. The general term 'isostasy' was coined in 1889 by the American geologist Clarence Dutton.

Isostatic models
Three principal models of isostasy are used:

The Airy-Heiskanen Model - where different topographic heights are accommodated by changes in crustal thickness, in which the crust has a constant density

The Pratt-Hayford Model - where different topographic heights are accommodated by lateral changes in rock density. The Vening Meinesz, or Flexural Model - where the lithosphere acts as an elastic plate and its inherent rigidity distributes local topographic loads over a broad region by bending. Airy and Pratt isostasy are statements of buoyancy, while flexural isostasy is a statement of buoyancy while deflecting a sheet of finite elastic strength.

[edit]Airy

Airy isostasy, in which a constant-density crust floats on a higher-density mantle, and topography is determined by the thickness of the crust.

The basis of the model is the Pascal's law, and particularly its consequence that, within a fluid in static equilibrium, the hydrostatic pressure is the same on every point at the same elevation (surface of hydrostatic compensation). In other words: h11 = h22 = h33 = ... hnn For the simplified picture shown the depth of the mountain belt roots (b1) are:

(h1 + c + b1)c = (cc) + (b1m) b1(m c) = h1c

where m is the density of the mantle (ca. 3,300 kg m-3) and c is the density of the crust (ca. 2,750 kg m-3). Thus, we may generally consider: b1 5h1
In the case of negative topography (i.e., a marine basin), the balancing of lithospheric columns gives:

cc = (hww) + (b2m) + [(c hw b2)c] b2(m c) = hw(c w)

where m is the density of the mantle (ca. 3,300

kg m-3), c is the density of the crust (ca. 2,750 kg m-3) and w is the density of the water (ca. 1,000 kg m-3). Thus, we may generally consider: b2 3.2hw [edit]Pratt
For the simplified model shown the new density is given by: , where h1 is the height of the mountain and c the thickness of the crust. [edit]Vening

Meinesz / flexural

This hypothesis was suggested to explain how large topographic loads such as seamounts (e.g. Hawaiian Islands) could be compensated by regional rather than local displacement of the lithosphere. This is the more general solution for flexure, as it approaches the locally-compensated models above as the load becomes much larger than a flexural wavelength or the flexural rigidity of the lithosphere approaches 0. [edit]Isostatic

effects of deposition and

erosion
When large amounts of sediment are deposited on a particular region, the immense weight of the new sediment may cause the crust below to sink. Similarly, when large amounts of material are eroded away from a region, the land may rise to compensate. Therefore, as a mountain range is eroded down, the (reduced) range rebounds upwards (to a certain extent) to be eroded further. Some of the rock strata now visible at the ground surface may have spent much of their history at great depths below the surface buried under other strata, to be eventually exposed as those other strata are eroded away and the lower layers rebound upwards again. An analogy may be made with an iceberg - it always floats with a certain proportion of its mass below the surface of the water. If more ice is added to the top of the iceberg, the iceberg will sink lower in the water. If a layer of ice is somehow sliced off the top of the iceberg, the remaining iceberg will rise. Similarly, the Earth's lithosphere "floats" in the asthenosphere.

[edit]Isostatic

effects of plate tectonics

When continents collide, the continental crust may thicken at their edges in the collision. If this happens, much of the thickened crust may move downwards rather than up as with the iceberg analogy. The idea of continental collisions building mountains "up" is therefore rather a simplification. Instead, the crust thickens and the upper part of the thickened crust may become a mountain range. However, some continental collisions are far more complex than this, and the region may not be in isostatic equilibrium, so this subject has to be treated with caution. [edit]Isostatic

effects of ice sheets

Main article: post-glacial rebound The formation of ice sheets can cause the Earth's surface to sink. Conversely, isostatic post-glacial rebound is observed in areas once covered by ice sheets that have now melted, such as around the Baltic Sea and Hudson Bay. As the ice retreats, the load on the lithosphere and asthenosphere is reduced and they rebound back towards their equilibrium levels. In this way, it is possible to find former sea cliffs and associated wave-cut platforms hundreds of metres above present-day sea level. The rebound movements are so slow that the uplift caused by the ending of the last glacial period is still continuing. In addition to the vertical movement of the land and sea, isostatic adjustment of the Earth also involves horizontal movements. It can cause changes in the gravitational field and rotation rate of the Earth, polar wander, and earthquakes. [edit]Eustasy

and relative sea level change

Main article: Eustasy Eustasy is another cause of relative sea level change quite different from isostatic causes. The term eustasy or eustatic refers to changes in the amount of water in the oceans, usually due to global climate change. When the Earth's climate cools, a greater proportion of water is stored on land masses in the form of glaciers, snow, etc. This results in falling global sea levels (relative to a stable land

mass). The refilling of ocean basins by glacial meltwater at the end of ice ages is an example of eustatic sea level rise. A second significant cause of eustatic sea level rise is thermal expansion of sea water when the Earth's mean temperature increases. Current estimates of global eustatic rise from tide gauge records and satellite altimetry is about +3 mm/a (see 2007 IPCC report). Global sea level is also affected by vertical crustal movements, changes in the rotational rate of the Earth, large scale changes in continental margins and changes in the spreading rate of the ocean floor. When the term relative is used in context with sea level change, the implication is that both eustasy and isostasy are at work, or that the author does not know which cause to invoke. [edit]Further

reading