The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Variations in the geomagnetic dipole 1: The past 50,000 years.
Open accessAbstract
An analysis has been made of all archeomagnetic intensity data for the past 50, 000 years. There are 1, 175 results from different parts of the world covering the past 12, 000 years but these are heavily biased to the region of the northern hemisphere between 0° and 90°E (64% of data). The global means show a broad maximum about 6, 500 years B. P. There is no evidence from data older than 7, 000 years that a quasi-cyclic variation with period about 104 years exists.A careful analysis of 472 dipole moments covering the 2, 000 year period between 1000 A. D. and 1000 B. C. shows that they have a normal distribution with standard deviation of 19.7%. The estimate of the standard deviation of results within each 1, 000-year-interval for the past 10, 000 years is 21.2%. Analysis of the present field suggests a standard deviation of dipole moments of 17.5% would apply if the present field is representative of the past. This suggests the standard deviation due to experimental errors in archeomagnetic results is about 10%, a value that concurs with independent analysis. The ten 1, 000-year-mean dipole moments have mean 8.75×1022Am2 and estimated standard deviation 18.0% which may be attributed to dipole intensity fluctuations.Over the period 15, 000 to 50, 000 years B. P. the earth's dipole moment was low, the 14 results available having mean value 4.44×1022Am2 with estimated standard deviation 26.5%. This is precisely the scatter to be expected from a combination of dipole intensity fluctuations of 18.0% non-dipole variations of 17.5% and experimental errors of 10% as deduced for the past 10, 000 years. The conclusion therefore is that variations in the non-dipole field always remain in the same proportion to the dipole field irrespective of its magnitude. Furthermore, the time scale of changes in the earth's dipole moment must be very much longer than has previously been supposed and must be at least 105 years.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Coe, R. S., Grommé, S., & Mankinen, E. A. (1978) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth · doi:10.1029/jb083ib04p01740 · Cited by 774
Cited by
Terrestrial in situ cosmogenic nuclides: theory and application
Gosse, J. C., & Phillips, F. M. (2001) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0277-3791(00)00171-2 · Cited by 2,051
Geomagnetic field intensity and reversals during the past four million years
Valet, J.-P., & Meynadier, L. (1993) · Nature · doi:10.1038/366234a0 · Cited by 405
Continuous geomagnetic field models for the past 7 millennia: 2. CALS7K
Korte, M., & Constable, C. G. (2005) · Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems · doi:10.1029/2004gc000801 · Cited by 307
Ezekiel and the Northern Lights: Biblical aurora seems plausible
Siscoe, G. L., Silverman, S. M., & Siebert, K. D. (2002) · Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union · doi:10.1029/2002eo000113 · Cited by 19
Ezekiel's vision: Visual evidence of Sterno‐Etrussia geomagnetic excursion?
Raspopov, O. M., Dergachev, V. A., & Goos'kova, E. G. (2003) · Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union · doi:10.1029/2003eo090001 · Cited by 16
Metadata
- Authors
- MCELHINNY, M. W., & SENANAYAKE, W. E.
- Venue
- Journal of geomagnetism and geoelectricity
- Published
- 1982
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 39-51
- ISSN
- 0022-1392 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2001873873
- Cited by
- 294
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 2.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Variations in the geomagnetic dipole 1: The past 50,000 years. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5636/jgg.34.39
- The paper
- MCELHINNY, M. W., & SENANAYAKE, W. E. (1982). Variations in the geomagnetic dipole 1: The past 50,000 years. Journal of geomagnetism and geoelectricity. https://doi.org/10.5636/jgg.34.39
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.