Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 417

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Magma ocean formation due to giant impacts

Tonks, W. Brian, Melosh, H. Jay·1993·Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets

Abstract

Current understanding of the last stages of planetary accretion suggests that mass and energy accumulation are dominated by a few large impacts. An important thermal consequence of such impacts is melting and formation of a large melt pond. If the planet's isostatic adjustment time scale is short compared to the magma pond's cooling time scale, the melt may be extruded onto the surface and form a magma ocean of approximately uniform depth. Although a giant impact striking at 10–15 km s−1 deposits enough energy to melt the entire planet, the distribution of that energy is important in determining the thermal outcome of the collision. We examine the thermal effects of giant impacts by estimating the melt volume generated by the initial shock wave and corresponding magma ocean depths. Additionally, we examine the effects of the planet's initial temperature on the generated melt volume. The Hugoniot curve plotted in pressure‐entropy space is used to determine the shock pressure required to completely melt the material. For room temperature dunite, this pressure is about 150 GPa and the partial melt region is narrow. For dunite initially at the solidus temperature, this pressure is about 115 GPa. The partial melt region extends throughout the planet. Once the melting pressure is known, an impact melting model based on the second Hugoniot equation, the linear shock‐particle velocity relationship, and the empirical particle velocity‐distance relationship is used to estimate the radial distance melting occurred from the impact site. Once the distance is found, the melt region's geometry determines the associated melt volume. Partial melt volume is also estimated. The melt fraction that is not excavated during crater formation is estimated and magma ocean depths resulting from both excavated and retained melt are calculated. The model is also used to estimate the fraction of a planet melted by the initial shock wave. Nominal conditions of the Moon‐forming giant impact (projectile/planet mass = 0.14, impact speed = 15 km s−1) generate melting of 30–65% of the planet depending on its initial temperature. Whole planet melting requires projectile/planet mass ratios of > 0.4 for a 15 km s−1 impact if the planet was near its solidus before the impact. Isostatic relaxation may generate a significant volume of additional melting.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/92je02726

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 417

Metadata

Authors
Tonks, W. B., & Melosh, H. J.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets
Published
1993-03-25
Volume
98
Issue
E3
Pages
5319-5333
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2025433765
Cited by
417
References
0
FWCI
4.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Magma ocean formation due to giant impacts. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/92je02726
The paper
Tonks, W. B., & Melosh, H. J. (1993). Magma ocean formation due to giant impacts. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets. https://doi.org/10.1029/92je02726

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.