
SLAM DUNKMars may host the solar system’s largest impact structure. The impact itself, illustrated here, may have given Mars its unusual dichotomy of high, cratered crust in one hemisphere and smooth, low crust in the other. This illustration was created from Caltech simulations of the impact, combined with Viking color images and shaded relief maps from the Mars Orbiter Laser Altimeter. M. Marinova et al./Caltech
Mars
has two faces: a northern hemisphere where the ground is smooth and low, and a
southern hemisphere of high elevation and many craters.
“It’s
weird. It’s
one of the really striking things about the planet,” says Steven Squyres, a planetary scientist at Cornell University. “But if we are going to
understand Mars, we need to understand its dichotomy.”
Now,
three papers published in the June 26 Nature
provide an explanation.
“Something
big,” says Francis Nimmo, a lead author on one of the studies and a University of California,
Santa Cruz
planetary scientist, “smacked into Mars and stripped half the crust off the
planet.”
In
1984, Squyres and now retired astrogeologist Don E. Wilhelms suggested that a
single impact could cause the Martian surface to split, almost down the middle.
The impact hypothesis was an alternative to the idea that internal Martian
processes or multiple asteroid impacts made the northern hemisphere 4
kilometers lower and gave it a thinner crust than the southern hemisphere. It
was inspired by a theory developing at the time, and now more widely accepted,
that Earth’s moon formed when a large impact broke off a chunk of the planet.
But,
“we didn’t do any detailed calculations. We simply proposed the impact idea,”
says Squyres, who was not involved in the latest research. “For 25 years, it
just sat there.”

HIDDEN SCARMars may host the largest impact basin in the solar system, named the “Borealis Basin.” These images show the surface of Mars today and in the past lined up next to two cratered surfaces, one on Mars and one on the moon. All display similar elliptical shapes, but the bottom image craters are only a quarter the size of the top ones. J. Andrews-Hanna, MIT
Now,
he explains, the new studies “lend some real quantitative rigor to the idea”
that an asteroid or comet hit Mars roughly 4 billion years ago.
The
first team, using data from two Mars orbiters, mapped the surface elevations,
crustal thicknesses and variations in gravitational pull of the entire planet’s
surface. That analysis enabled the scientists to essentially peel back the
newer layers of volcanic rock and see underneath to the ancient surface of the
Red Planet’s northern hemisphere, says Jeffrey Andrews-Hanna, a postdoctoral
planetary scientist at MIT and lead author on the team’s paper. The results unveiled a gigantic, smooth
pockmark that traces the border between Mars’ two faces and is projected to
cover 40 percent of the planet’s surface.
“Finding
this elliptical boundary is a smoking gun,” Andrews-Hanna says. “There is only
one known way to get a shape like this: Impact.”Projected
to be 10,600 kilometers long and 8,500 kilometers wide — roughly equivalent to
the combined area of Asia, Europe and Australia — this mammoth crater now
takes its place as the largest known crater in the solar system.
It
also looks similar when closely compared with other massive cavities, such as
the Hellas basin on Mars or the South
Pole-Aitken basin on the moon — except that it’s four times larger than either
of them, Andrews-Hanna explains.
When
Squyres and Wilhems identified part of the cavity in the 1980s, they dubbed it Borealis Basin. Because about a third of its edge
is hidden under layers of lava flows, Andrews-Hanna says, no one had mapped the
entire Martian scar, until now.
“This
data should change the tide of scientific opinion about what shaped the surface
of Mars. All the evidence we have now agrees best with the impact scenario,”
the MIT researcher says, “especially after you consider the other two papers.”
The
other two groups aimed to model where an impactor could have hit and how large
it could have been. These two teams knew from observations similar to
Andrews-Hanna’s that they needed to show how an impact event could result in a Martian
surface with a huge cavity in the northern hemisphere. An impact would melt a
planet’s surface wherever it hit, and the simulation would have to leave Mars
with a thin crust in the north and thicker crust in the south, Nimmo, lead
author of the third paper, explains.
Knowing
this, the two teams simulated slamming different-sized objects into Mars to
pinpoint the "sweet spot" conditions that could gouge out such a
large scar but not melt the entire crust of the planet or create a standard
crater rim, says Caltech graduate student Margarita Marinova, lead author on
the other modeling paper.
The
newly identified Martian cavity does not have a crater rim, possibly because
the impactor was so big that, when it hit, it ejected material over a large part
of the Martian surface rather than in just a small ring around the crater, she
says.
Working
independently from Andrews-Hanna, both teams successfully hit the “sweet spot,”
nearly matching the observations of the impact cavity’s size and location that
Andrews-Hanna’s team report.
Also,
the two modeling teams independently concluded that the impactor had to be
between one-tenth and two-thirds the size of the moon to create Mars’ two-faced
surface.
“The
model calculations are solidly done, and the observations are good. They do not
prove by a shadow of a doubt that this is how this planet’s dichotomy formed,”
Squyres says. “But it’s nice to see an old idea dusted off and turned into something with real
physical plausibility.”
Found in: Atom & Cosmos and Planetary Science
Please login or register to participate.