Premium
Reply to “Comments on ‘FMR Thermomagnetic…’” by D. L. Griscom
Author(s) -
Morris Richard V.
Publication year - 1976
Publication title -
geophysical research letters
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.007
H-Index - 273
eISSN - 1944-8007
pISSN - 0094-8276
DOI - 10.1029/gl003i004p00235
Subject(s) - thermomagnetic convection , magnetite , curie temperature , metal , curie , phase (matter) , materials science , condensed matter physics , ferromagnetic resonance , marie curie , ferromagnetism , nuclear magnetic resonance , mineralogy , analytical chemistry (journal) , chemistry , magnetization , metallurgy , physics , magnetic field , environmental chemistry , organic chemistry , quantum mechanics , business , european union , economic policy
The arguments presented by Griscom (1975) in response to our paper (Morris et al., 1975) require a magnetite‐like phase and an equivalent or larger amount of metallic iron to be the components that are observed in the ferromagnetic resonance (FMR) spectra of lunar soils. In addition Griscom et al. (1975) concluded from FMR studies up to ∼300°C that mature lunar soils contain 0.1 to 0.5 wt. % of a magnetite‐like phase. It seems highly unlikely that a Curie point for such a large amount of a magnetite‐like phase would not be observed in the FMR thermomagnetic studies (ie, both (ΔH)²A and ΔH versus T) up to 900°C of Morris et al. (1975). That is, the only Curie point observed in both the (ΔH)²A and ΔH data of Morris et al. (1975) was at 770°C, which was attributed to pure or nearly pure metallic iron. The irreversible loss of intensity is thus best attributed to oxidation of metallic iron to FeO.