Skip to main contentSkip to search
Episciences
Open Access Journals
Sign in(new window)
Journal of Studies of Earth’s Deep Interior logo
Journal of Studies of Earth’s Deep Interior
Journal of Studies of Earth’s Deep Interior logo
Journal of Studies of Earth’s Deep Interior
Sign in(new window)
Articles & Issues
All articlesAll accepted articlesAll volumesLast volumeAuthors
About
The journalNews
Boards
Publish
For authorsEthical charter
Submit
Journal of Studies of Earth’s Deep Interior logo
Journal's leaflet
|
Contact
|
Credits
eISSN 3099-2877
|
RSS
|
Atom
Episciences
Documentation
|
Acknowledgements
|
Publishing policy
Accessibility: non-compliant
|
Legal mentions
|
Privacy statement
|
Terms of use
  1. Home > Articles & Issues >
  2. Articles >
  3. Geodynamo simulation ...
Article

Geodynamo simulations spanning millennia in the physical conditions of Earth's core

Julien Aubert ORCID (1)
(1) Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris
Download article
Open on HAL
Submitted on
March 23, 2026
Accepted on
May 4, 2026
Published on
May 4, 2026
Last modified on
May 7, 2026
Volume 2
Volume 2
DOI
10.46298/jsedi.17790
License
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
Indicators
149
Views
89
Downloads

Geodynamo simulations spanning millennia in the physical conditions of Earth's core

Julien Aubert ORCID (1)
(1) Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris
Abstract
A geodynamo simulation is presented where the Earth's core density, rotation rate, convective power and electrical conductivity are matched, while viscous losses are maintained minor in the force balance and power budget. Improving over earlier preliminary calculations, the simulation is integrated over near 1700 years in physical time, and realistically renders the time scale range between interannual hydromagnetic waves and secular convective motions. The solution has been obtained by gradually approaching these conditions along a path in model parameter space. A quasi-geostrophic, magneto-Archimedes-Coriolis (QG-MAC) force balance is confirmed, with the characteristic length scale of the system remaining near the planetary scale. Without the need for extrapolation, the morphology, variations and dynamics of the velocity, convective density anomaly and magnetic fields are in excellent quantitative agreement with geomagnetic and geodetic observations supplied over the past centuries by navigation, observatories and satellites. In particular, the simulation reveals the contribution of interdecadal magneto-Coriolis waves to geomagnetic variations in the vicinity of 60-yr periods. This direct validation of the convective geodynamo paradigm additionally offers a quantitative and first principle-based physical link between the observable signals and deep Earth geodynamic parameters. The model confirms that a convective power (or Ohmic dissipation) level near 3 TW is needed to account for the observed geomagnetic variations, and that the top of the core should be convectively neutral or unstable. Explaining the core-originated interannual to decadal variations of the length of day through electromagnetic core-mantle coupling requires a lower mantle conductance on the order of 10^9 S. It may also become possible to constrain the outer core electrical conductivity from the observed patterns of interannual magneto-Coriolis waves. Finally, the simulation can be considered a reliable source of prior information for solving geomagnetic inverse and prediction problems.
Keywords
  • [SDU.STU.GP]Sciences of the Universe [physics]/Earth Sciences/Geophysics [physics.geo-ph]
  • Earth's core
  • geodynamo
  • geomagnetism
  • simulation
Linked publications - datasets - software
  • Is supplemented by

    Aubert, J. (2026). Replication Data for: Geodynamo simulations spanning millennia in the physical conditions of Earth’s core [Dataset]. IPGP Research Collection. 10.18715/IPGP.2026.MM0SX2M0

References

  1. Ahrens, T. J. (1995). Global Earth Physics: A Handbook of Physical Constants. Vol. 1. Washington, DC: AGU. doi: 10.1029/RF001.

  2. Alken, P. et al. (2021). International Geomagnetic Reference Field: the thirteenth generation. Earth Planets Space 73.1, 49. doi: 10.1186/s40623-020-01288-x.

    DOI : 10.1186/s40623-020-01288-x

  3. Aubert, J., C. C. Finlay, and A. Fournier (2013). Bottom-up control of geomagnetic secular variation by the Earth's in- ner core. Nature 502, 219-223. doi: 10.1038/nature12574.

    DOI : 10.1038/nature12574

  4. Aubert, J. (2018). Geomagnetic acceleration and rapid hydro- magnetic wave dynamics in advanced numerical simula- tions of the geodynamo. Geophys. J. Int. 214.1, 531-547. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggy161.

    DOI : 10.1093/gji/ggy161

  5. Aubert, J. (2019). Approaching Earth's core conditions in high-resolution geodynamo simulations. Geophys. J. Int. 219.S1, S137-S151. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggz232.

    DOI : 10.1093/gji/ggz232

  6. Aubert, J. (2020). Recent geomagnetic variations and the force balance in Earth's core. Geophys. J. Int. 221.1, 378- 393. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggaa007.

    DOI : 10.1093/gji/ggaa007

  7. Aubert, J. (2023). State and evolution of the geodynamo from numerical models reaching the physical conditions of Earth's core. Geophys. J. Int. 235.1, 468-487. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggad229.

    DOI : 10.1093/gji/ggad229

  8. Aubert, J. (2025). Rapid geomagnetic variations and stable stratification at the top of Earth's core. Phys. Earth. Planet. Int. 362, 107335. doi: 10.1016/j.pepi.2025.107335.

    DOI : 10.1016/j.pepi.2025.107335

  9. Aubert, J. and C. C. Finlay (2019). Geomagnetic jerks and rapid hydromagnetic waves focusing at Earth's core sur- face. Nature Geosci. 12.5, 393-398. doi: 10.1038/s41561-019-0355-1.

    DOI : 10.1038/s41561-019-0355-1

  10. Aubert, J., T. Gastine, and A. Fournier (2017). Spherical convective dynamos in the rapidly rotating asymptotic regime. J. Fluid. Mech. 813, 558-593. doi: 10.1017/jfm.2016.789.

    DOI : 10.1017/jfm.2016.789

  11. Aubert, J. and N. Gillet (2021). The interplay of fast waves and slow convection in geodynamo simulations nearing Earth's core conditions. Geophys. J. Int. 225, 1854-1873. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggab054.

    DOI : 10.1093/gji/ggab054

  12. Aubert, J., S. Labrosse, and C. Poitou (2009). Modelling the palaeo-evolution of the geodynamo. English. Geophys. J. Int. 179.3, 1414-1428. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2009.04361. x. Aubert, J., M. Landeau, A. Fournier, and T. Gastine (2025). Core-surface kinematic control of polarity reversals in ad- vanced geodynamo simulations. Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 364, 107365. doi: j.pepi.2025.107365.

    DOI : 10.1111/j.1365-246x.2009.04361.x

  13. Aubert, J., P. W. Livermore, C. C. Finlay, A. Fournier, and N. Gillet (2022). A taxonomy of simulated geomagnetic jerks. Geophys. J. Int. 231.1, 650-672. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggac212.

    DOI : 10.1093/gji/ggac212

  14. Aurnou, J., M. Calkins, J. Cheng, K. Julien, E. King, D. Nieves, K. Soderlund, and S. Stellmach (2015). Rotating convec- tive turbulence in Earth and planetary cores. Phys. Earth. Planet. Int. 246, 52-71. doi: 10.1016/j.pepi.2015.07.001.

    DOI : 10.1016/j.pepi.2015.07.001

  15. Barrois, O. and J. Aubert (2024). Characterization of hy- dromagnetic waves propagating over a steady, non- axisymmetric background magnetic field. Proc. Roy. Soc. A 480.2300, 20240067. doi: 10.1098/rspa.2024.0067.

    DOI : 10.1098/rspa.2024.0067

  16. Barrois, O. and J. Aubert (2025). Influence of background magnetic fields on the excitation of Magneto-Coriolis modes inside the Earth's core. J. Stud. Earth Deep Inter. 1, 3. doi: 10.46298/jsedi.15652.

    DOI : 10.46298/jsedi.15652

  17. Berrada, M. and R. A. Secco (2021). Review of Electrical Resis- tivity Measurements and Calculations of Fe and Fe-Alloys Relating to Planetary Cores. Frontiers Earth Sci. Volume 9 -2021. doi: 10.3389/feart.2021.732289.

    DOI : 10.3389/feart.2021.732289

  18. Bizouard, C. and D. Gambis (2009). The Combined Solution C04 for Earth Orientation Parameters Consistent with In- ternational Terrestrial Reference Frame 2005. Geodetic Ref- erence Frames: IAG Symposium Munich, Germany, 9-14 Oc- tober 2006.

    DOI : 10.1007/978-3-642-00860-3_41

  19. Ed. by H. Drewes. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 265-270. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642- 00860-3_41.

    DOI : 10.1007/978-3-642-00860-3_41

  20. Buffett, B. A. (2014). Geomagnetic fluctuations reveal sta- ble stratification at the top of the Earth's core. Nature 507.7493, 484-487. doi: 10.1038/nature13122.

    DOI : 10.1038/nature13122

  21. Buffett, B. (1996). A mechanism for decade fluctuations in the length of day. English. Geophys. Res. Lett. 23.25, 3803-3806. doi: 10.1029/96GL03571.

    DOI : 10.1029/96gl03571

  22. Buffett, B. (1997). Geodynamic estimates of the viscosity of the Earth's inner core. English. Nature 388.6642, 571-573. doi: 10.1038/41534.

    DOI : 10.1038/41534

  23. Christensen, U. and A. Tilgner (2004). Power requirement of the geodynamo from ohmic losses in numerical and laboratory dynamos. Nature 429, 169-171. doi: 10.1038/nature02508.

    DOI : 10.1038/nature02508

  24. Christensen, U. R., J. Aubert, F. H. Busse, P. Cardin, E. Dormy, S. Gibbons, G. A. Glatzmaier, Y. Honkura, C. A. Jones, M. Kono, M. Matsushima, A. Sakuraba, F. Takahashi, A. Tilgner, J. Wicht, and K. Zhang (2001). A numerical dy- namo benchmark. Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 128, 25-34. doi: 10.1016/S0031-9201(01)00275-8.

    DOI : 10.1016/s0031-9201(01)00275-8

  25. Christensen, U. R., J. Aubert, and G. Hulot (2010). Conditions for Earth-like geodynamo models. English. Earth. Plan. Sci. Let. 296.3-4, 487-496. doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2010.06.009.

    DOI : 10.1016/j.epsl.2010.06.009

  26. Christensen, U. R., V. Holzwarth, and A. Reiners (2009). En- ergy flux determines magnetic field strength of planets and stars. Nature 457.7226, 167-169. doi: 10.1038/nature07626.

    DOI : 10.1038/nature07626

  27. Christensen, U. R., I. Wardinski, and V. Lesur (2012). Timescales of geomagnetic secular acceleration in satel- lite field models and geodynamo models. Geophys. J. Int. 190.1, 243-254. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2012.05508.x.

    DOI : 10.1111/j.1365-246x.2012.05508.x

  28. Christensen, U. R. and J. Aubert (2006). Scaling properties of convection-driven dynamos in rotating spherical shells and application to planetary magnetic fields. Geophys. J. Int. 166, 97-114. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2006.03009.x.

    DOI : 10.1111/j.1365-246x.2006.03009.x

  29. Chulliat, A., E. Thebault, and G. Hulot (2010). Core field ac- celeration pulse as a common cause of the 2003 and 2007 geomagnetic jerks. Geophys. Res. Lett. 37. doi: 10 . 1029 / 2009GL042019.

    DOI : 10.1029/2009gl042019

  30. Claveau, R., N. Gillet, P.-O. Amblard, and C. C. Finlay (2025). Broadband a priori temporal cross-covariances for the ge- omagnetic inverse problem: application to the satellite era. Earth Planets Space 77.1, 126. doi: 10 . 1186 / s40623 -025 - 02248-z.

    DOI : 10.1186/s40623-025-02248-z

  31. Davidson, P. A. (2013). Scaling laws for planetary dynamos. Geophys. J. Int. 195.1, 67-74. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggt167.

    DOI : 10.1093/gji/ggt167

  32. Davies, C., M. Pozzo, D. Gubbins, and D. Alfè (2015). Con- straints from material properties on the dynamics and evo- lution of Earth's core. Nature Geosci. 8.9, 678-685. doi: 10.1038/ngeo2492.

    DOI : 10.1038/ngeo2492

  33. Davies, C. J., D. R. Stegman, and M. Dumberry (2014). The strength of gravitational core-mantle coupling. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41.11, 3786-3792. doi: 10.1002/2014GL059836.

    DOI : 10.1002/2014gl059836

  34. de Wijs, G., G. Kresse, L. Vocadlo, D. Dobson, D. Alfe, M. Gillan, and G. Price (1998). The viscosity of liquid iron at the physical conditions of the Earth's core. Nature 392.6678, 805-807. doi: 10.1038/33905.

    DOI : 10.1038/33905

  35. Dumberry, M. (2025). The mantle-inner core gravitational mode of oscillation in a strong magnetic field regime. J. Stud. Earth Deep Inter. 1, 1. doi: 10.46298/jsedi.15735.

    DOI : 10.46298/jsedi.15735

  36. Finlay, C. C., N. Gillet, J. Aubert, P. W. Livermore, and D. Jault (2023). Gyres, jets and waves in the Earth's core. Nature Re- views Earth & Environ. 4.6, 377-392. doi: 10.1038/s43017-023-00425-w.

    DOI : 10.1038/s43017-023-00425-w

  37. Finlay, C. C. and A. Jackson (2003). Equatorially dominated magnetic field change at the surface of Earth's core. Science 300, 2084-2086. doi: 10.1126/science.1083324.

    DOI : 10.1126/science.1083324

  38. Finlay, C. C., C. Kloss, N. Olsen, M. D. Hammer, L. Tøffner- Clausen, A. Grayver, and A. Kuvshinov (2020). The CHAOS-7 geomagnetic field model and observed changes in the South Atlantic Anomaly. Earth Planets Space 72.1, 156. doi: 10.1186/s40623-020-01252-9.

    DOI : 10.1186/s40623-020-01252-9

  39. Fournier, A., J. Aubert, V. Lesur, and E. Thébault (2021). Physics-based secular variation candidate models for the IGRF. Earth, Planets, Space 73.1, 190. doi: 10.1186/s40623-021-01507-z.

    DOI : 10.1186/s40623-021-01507-z

  40. Frost, D. A., M. S. Avery, B. A. Buffett, B. A. Chidester, J. Deng, S. M. Dorfman, Z. Li, L. Liu, M. Lv, and J. F. Mar- tin (2022). Multidisciplinary Constraints on the Thermal- Chemical Boundary Between Earth's Core and Mantle. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 23.3, e2021GC009764. doi: 10. 1029/2021GC009764.

    DOI : 10.1029/2021gc009764

  41. Gerick, F., D. Jault, and J. Noir (2021). Fast Quasi-Geostrophic Magneto-Coriolis Modes in the Earth's Core. Geophys. Res. Lett. 48.4, e2020GL090803. doi: 10.1029/2020GL090803.

    DOI : 10.1029/2020gl090803

  42. Gillet, N., D. Jault, and E. Canet (2017). Excitation of trav- elling torsional normal modes in an Earth's core model. Geophys. J. Int. 210.3, 1503-1516. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggx237.

    DOI : 10.1093/gji/ggx237

  43. Gillet, N., D. Jault, E. Canet, and A. Fournier (2010). Fast tor- sional waves and strong magnetic field within the Earth's core. Nature 465.7294, 74-77. doi: 10.1038/nature09010.

    DOI : 10.1038/nature09010

  44. Gillet, N., D. Jault, and C. C. Finlay (2015). Planetary gyre, time-dependent eddies, torsional waves and equatorial jets at the Earth's core surface. J. Geophys. Res. 120, 3991-4013. doi: 10.1002/2014JB011786s.

    DOI : 10.1002/2014JB011786s

  45. Gillet, N., D. Jault, C. C. Finlay, and N. Olsen (2013). Stochas- tic modeling of the Earth's magnetic field: Inversion for covariances over the observatory era. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 14.4, 766-786. doi: 10.1002/ggge.20041.

    DOI : 10.1002/ggge.20041

  46. Gillet, N., F. Dall'Asta, P.-o. Amblard, R. Claveau, and J. Aubert (2024). Waves in Earth's core and geomagnetic field forecast. Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 357, 107284. doi: 10.1016/ j.pepi.2024.107284.

    DOI : 10.1016/j.pepi.2024.107284

  47. Gillet, N., F. Gerick, D. Jault, T. Schwaiger, J. Aubert, and M. Istas (2022). Satellite magnetic data reveal interannual waves in Earth's core. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 119.13, e2115258119. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2115258119.

    DOI : 10.1073/pnas.2115258119

  48. Gillet, N., Z. Martinec, T. Lepage, and D. Jault (2025). Con- straints on the lower mantle electrical conductivity from length-of-day changes. J. Stud. Earth Deep Inter. 1, 4. doi: 10.46298/jsedi.16005.

    DOI : 10.46298/jsedi.16005

  49. Glatzmaier, G. and P. Roberts (1995). A 3-dimensional self- consistent computer simulation of a geomagnetic field re- versal. Nature 377.6546, 203-209. doi: 10.1038/377203a0.

    DOI : 10.1038/377203a0

  50. Glatzmaier, G. A. (2002). Geodynamo Simulations-How Re- alistic Are They? Ann. Rev. Earth. Plan. Sci. 30, 237-257. doi: 10.1146/annurev.earth.30.091201.140817.

    DOI : 10.1146/annurev.earth.30.091201.140817

  51. Gomi, H., K. Ohta, K. Hirose, S. Labrosse, R. Caracas, M. J. Verstraete, and J. W. Hernlund (2013). The high conduc- tivity of iron and thermal evolution of the Earth's core. Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 224, 88-103. doi: 10.1016/j.pepi.2013.07.010.

    DOI : 10.1016/j.pepi.2013.07.010

  52. Gross, R. S. (2001). A combined length-of-day series spanning 1832-1997: LUNAR97. Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 123.1, 65-76. doi: 10.1016/S0031-9201(00)00217-X.

    DOI : 10.1016/s0031-9201(00)00217-x

  53. Gubbins, D. (2001). The Rayleigh number for convection in the Earth's core. Phys. Earth. Planet. Int. 128.1, 3-12. doi: 10.1016/S0031-9201(01)00273-4.

    DOI : 10.1016/s0031-9201(01)00273-4

  54. Holme, R. (1998). Electromagnetic core-mantle coupling -I. Explaining decadal changes in the length of day. Geophys. J. Int. 132, 167-180. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-246x.1998.00424.x.

    DOI : 10.1046/j.1365-246x.1998.00424.x

  55. Istas, M., N. Gillet, C. C. Finlay, M. D. Hammer, and L. Huder (2023). Transient core surface dynamics from ground and satellite geomagnetic data. Geophys. J. Int. 233.3, 1890- 1915. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggad039.

    DOI : 10.1093/gji/ggad039

  56. Jones, C. A. and Y.-K. Tsang (2025). Low inertia reversing geodynamos. Phys. Earth. Planet. Int. 360, 107303. doi: 10. 1016/j.pepi.2024.107303.

    DOI : 10.1016/j.pepi.2024.107303

  57. Kageyama, A., T. Miyagoshi, and T. Sato (2008). Formation of current coils in geodynamo simulations. Nature 454.7208, 1106-1109. doi: 10.1038/nature07227.

    DOI : 10.1038/nature07227

  58. Kageyama, A., T. Sato, and the Complexity Simulation Group (1995). Computer simulation of a magnetohydrodynamic dynamo. II. Physics of Plasmas 2.5, 1421-1431. doi: 10.1063/ 1.871485.

    DOI : 10.1063/1.871485

  59. Kloss, C., C. C. Finlay, N. Olsen, L. Tøffner-Clausen, N. Gillet, and A. Grayver (2026). The CHAOS-8 geomagnetic field model. Earth Planets Space 78.1, 21. doi: 10.1186/s40623- 025-02352-0.

    DOI : 10.1186/s40623-025-02352-0

  60. Kuang, W. and J. Bloxham (1997). An Earth-like numerical dynamo model. Nature 389.6649, 371-374. doi: 10 . 1038 / 38712.

    DOI : 10.1038/38712

  61. Kutzner, C. and U. Christensen (2002). From stable dipolar to reversing numerical dynamos. Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 131, 29-45. doi: 10.1016/S0031-9201(02)00016-X.

    DOI : 10.1016/s0031-9201(02)00016-x

  62. Labrosse, S. (2015). Thermal evolution of the core with a high thermal conductivity. Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 247, 36-55. doi: 10.1016/j.pepi.2015.02.002.

    DOI : 10.1016/j.pepi.2015.02.002

  63. Le Bars, M. and D. Lemasquerier (2026). Laboratory Experi- ments in Geophysical and Astrophysical Fluid Dynamics. Ann. Rev. Fluid. Mech. 58.Volume 58, 2026, 301-329. doi: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-112723-053838.

    DOI : 10.1146/annurev-fluid-112723-053838

  64. Lhuillier, F., A. Fournier, G. Hulot, and J. Aubert (2011). The geomagnetic secular-variation timescale in observa- tions and numerical dynamo models. Geophys. Res. Lett. 38, L09306. doi: 10.1029/2011GL047356.

    DOI : 10.1029/2011gl047356

  65. Lister, J. R. (2003). Expressions for the dissipation driven by convection in the Earth's core. Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 140.1-3, 145-158. doi: 10.1016/j.pepi.2003.07.007.

    DOI : 10.1016/j.pepi.2003.07.007

  66. Menu, M. D., L. Petitdemange, and S. Galtier (2020). Magnetic effects on fields morphologies and reversals in geodynamo simulations. Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 307, 106542. doi: 10 . 1016/j.pepi.2020.106542.

    DOI : 10.1016/j.pepi.2020.106542

  67. Miyagoshi, T., A. Kageyama, and T. Sato (2010). Zonal flow formation in the Earth's core. Nature 463.7282, 793-796. doi: 10.1038/nature08754.

    DOI : 10.1038/nature08754

  68. Nataf, H.-C. and N. Schaeffer (2015). Turbulence in the Core. Treatise on Geophysics. Elsevier BV, pp. 161-181. doi: 10. 1016/b978-0-444-53802-4.00142-1.

    DOI : 10.1016/b978-0-444-53802-4.00142-1

  69. Nimmo, F. (2015). Energetics of the Core. Treatise on Geo- physics (Second Edition). Ed. by G. Schubert. Second Edi- tion. Oxford: Elsevier, pp. 27-55. doi: 10 . 1016 / B978 -0 - 444-53802-4.00139-1.

    DOI : 10.1016/b978-0-444-53802-4.00139-1

  70. Ohta, K., H. Inoue, S. Suehiro, K. Hirose, S. Kawaguchi-Imada, and H. Dekura (2025). Electrical and thermal conductivi- ties of Fe-Ni-Si alloy under core conditions: A reevalua- tion. Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 363, 107531. doi: 10 . 1016 / j . pepi.2025.107351.

    DOI : 10.1016/j.pepi.2025.107351

  71. Olson, P., U. Christensen, and G. A. Glatzmaier (1999). Numerical modelling of the geodynamo: mechanisms of field generation and equilibration. J. Geophys. Res. 104.B5, 10383-10404. doi: 10.1029/1999JB900013.

    DOI : 10.1029/1999jb900013

  72. Olson, P. and H. Amit (2006). Changes in Earth's dipole. Naturwissenschaften 93.11, 519-542. doi: 10.1007/s00114- 006-0138-6.

    DOI : 10.1007/s00114-006-0138-6

  73. Pichon, G., J. Aubert, and A. Fournier (2016). Coupled dy- namics of Earth's geomagnetic westward drift and inner core super-rotation. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 437, 114-126. doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2016.01.004.

    DOI : 10.1016/j.epsl.2016.01.004

  74. Pozzo, M., C. J. Davies, D. Gubbins, and D. Alfè (2012). Thermal and electrical conductivity of iron at Earth's core conditions. Nature 485.7398, 355-358. doi: 10.1038/ nature11031.

    DOI : 10.1038/nature11031

  75. Pozzo, M., C. J. Davies, and D. Alfè (2022). Towards recon- ciling experimental and computational determinations of Earth's core thermal conductivity. Earth. Planet. Sci. Lett. 584, 117466. doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2022.117466.

    DOI : 10.1016/j.epsl.2022.117466

  76. Rochester, M. G. (1962). Geomagnetic core-mantle cou- pling. J. Geophys. Res. 67.12, 4833-4836. doi: 10 . 1029 / JZ067i012p04833.

    DOI : 10.1029/jz067i012p04833

  77. Rosat, S. and N. Gillet (2023). Intradecadal variations in length of day: Coherence with models of the Earth's core dynamics. Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 341, 107053. doi: 10.1016/ j.pepi.2023.107053.

    DOI : 10.1016/j.pepi.2023.107053

  78. Sakuraba, A. (2002). Linear magnetoconvection in rotating fluid spheres permeated by a uniform axial magnetic field. Geophys. Astrophys. Fluid Dyn. 96.4, 291-318. doi: 10.1080/ 03091920290024234.

    DOI : 10.1080/03091920290024234

  79. Sakuraba, A. and P. H. Roberts (2009). Generation of a strong magnetic field using uniform heat flux at the surface of the core. English. Nature Geosci. 2.11, 802-805. doi: 10.1038/ NGEO643.

    DOI : 10.1038/ngeo643

  80. Schaeffer, N. (2013). Efficient spherical harmonic transforms aimed at pseudospectral numerical simulations. Geophys. Geochem. Geosystems. 14.3, 751-758. doi: 10 . 1002 / ggge . 20071.

    DOI : 10.1002/ggge.20071

  81. Schaeffer, N., D. Jault, H.-C. Nataf, and A. Fournier (2017). Turbulent geodynamo simulations: a leap towards Earth's core. Geophys. J. Int. 211.1, 1-29. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggx265.

    DOI : 10.1093/gji/ggx265

  82. Schaeffer, N. and D. Jault (2016). Electrical conductivity of the lowermost mantle explains absorption of core torsional waves at the equator. Geophys. Res. Lett. 43.10, 4922-4928. doi: 10.1002/2016gl068301.

    DOI : 10.1002/2016gl068301

  83. Schwaiger, T., T. Gastine, and J. Aubert (2019). Force balance in numerical geodynamo simulations: a systematic study. Geophys. J. Int. 219.S1, S101-S114. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggz192.

    DOI : 10.1093/gji/ggz192

  84. Schwaiger, T., T. Gastine, and J. Aubert (2021). Relating force balances and flow length scales in geodynamo simulations. Geophys. J. Int. 224.3, 1890-1904. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggaa545.

    DOI : 10.1093/gji/ggaa545

  85. Sheyko, A., C. Finlay, J. Favre, and A. Jackson (2018). Scale separated low viscosity dynamos and dissipation within the Earth's core. Sci. Rep. 8.1, 12566. doi: 10.1038/s41598- 018-30864-1.

    DOI : 10.1038/s41598-018-30864-1

  86. Soderlund, K. M., A. Sheyko, E. M. King, and J. M. Au- rnou (2015). The competition between Lorentz and Corio- lis forces in planetary dynamos. Prog. Earth. Plan. Sci. 2.1, 1-10. doi: 10.1186/s40645-015-0054-5.

    DOI : 10.1186/s40645-015-0054-5

  87. Starchenko, S. and C. Jones (2002). Typical Velocities and Magnetic Field Strengths in Planetary Interiors. Icarus 157.2, 426-435. doi: 10.1006/icar.2002.6842.

    DOI : 10.1006/icar.2002.6842

  88. Takahashi, F., M. Matsushima, and Y. Honkura (2005). Simu- lations of a quasi-Taylor state geomagnetic field including polarity reversals on the Earth Simulator. English. Science 309.5733, 459-461. doi: 10.1126/science.1111831.

    DOI : 10.1126/science.1111831

  89. Tassin, T., T. Gastine, and A. Fournier (2021). Geomagnetic semblance and dipolar-multipolar transition in top-heavy double-diffusive geodynamo models. Geophys. J. Int. 226.3, 1897-1919. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggab161.

    DOI : 10.1093/gji/ggab161

  90. Taylor, J. (1963). The magneto-hydrodynamics of a rotating fluid and the Earth's dynamo problem. English. Proc. Roy. Soc. A 9, 274-283. doi: 10.1098/rspa.1963.0130.

    DOI : 10.1098/rspa.1963.0130

  91. Teed, R. J. and E. Dormy (2025). Scaling of Strong- Field Spherical Dynamos. Geophys. Res. Lett. 52.20. e2025GL118078 2025GL118078, e2025GL118078. doi: 10 . 1029/2025GL118078.

    DOI : 10.1029/2025gl118078

  92. Yadav, R. K., T. Gastine, U. R. Christensen, S. J. Wolk, and K. Poppenhaeger (2016). Approaching a realistic force balance in geodynamo simulations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 113.43, 12065-12070. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1608998113.

    DOI : 10.1073/pnas.1608998113

  93. Zatman, S. and J. Bloxham (1997). Torsional oscillations and the magnetic field within the Earth's Core. Nature 388, 760-763. doi: 10.1038/41987.

    DOI : 10.1038/41987
Preview
Loading PDF preview...