日本地球惑星科学連合2025年大会

講演情報

[J] 口頭発表

セッション記号 P (宇宙惑星科学) » P-PS 惑星科学

[P-PS08] 月の科学と探査

2025年5月30日(金) 13:45 〜 15:15 302 (幕張メッセ国際会議場)

コンビーナ:仲内 悠祐(立命館大学)、小野寺 圭祐(岡山大学惑星物質研究所)、石原 吉明(宇宙航空研究開発機構)、池田 あやめ(産業技術総合研究所 地質調査総合センター)、座長:池田 あやめ(産業技術総合研究所 地質調査総合センター)、山下 光葉(東京大学理学系研究科地球惑星科学専攻)

13:45 〜 14:00

[PPS08-13] Recent Advances in Understanding the Lunar Dynamo: Insights from Paleomagnetic and Spacecraft Studies

★Invited Papers

*佐藤 雅彦1 (1.東京理科大学)

キーワード:Lunar dynamo、Paleomagnetic study、Magnetic anomaly

Dynamo magnetic fields of terrestrial planets are generated by the convection of electrically conductive liquid metal within planetary cores. These dynamo fields evolve to reflect the dynamic states of planetary interiors. Moreover, the characteristics of the dynamo fields may play a significant role in controlling the surface environment of planets through electromagnetic interactions and other processes with the solar wind. Therefore, understanding the evolution of dynamo fields is crucial for constraining the broader evolution of planetary systems. The evolution of the lunar dynamo has been a topic of debate since the Apollo era. The existence of a lunar core dynamo was initially inferred from the paleomagnetic studies of Apollo samples (e.g., Cisowski & Fuller, 1986; Runcorn, 1996), and later confirmed by globally distributed magnetic anomalies observed by spacecraft such as Lunar Prospector and Kaguya (e.g., Tsunakawa et al., 2009). Paleomagnetic studies of Apollo samples, using modern paleointensity techniques—mainly the non-thermal method—suggested that the lunar dynamo may have persisted until 2–1 billion years ago (e.g., Mighani et al., 2020, and references therein). However, recent studies employing thermal treatments have challenged this, indicating that the Moon did not maintain a long-lived core dynamo (Tarduno et al., 2021). These differences in paleointensity, arising from methodological variations, have been further explored in subsequent studies (e.g., Jung et al., 2024; Zhou et al., 2024), intensifying the debate surrounding the lunar dynamo. In this review, I focus on recently reported paleofield data, particularly from the past decade. This includes paleomagnetic studies of Apollo samples (e.g., Tarduno et al., 2021; Jung et al., 2024; Zhou et al., 2024), paleomagnetic studies of Chang’e samples (e.g., Cai et al., 2025a, 2025b), and spacecraft-based studies of crustal remanences (e.g., Yang & Wieczorek, 2024). I will compare these data with particular attention to the differences in research methods.