Codex @codex  0

A region of upward deflection beyond the main downward flexure caused by loading an elastic lithosphere. Its position and amplitude depend on flexural rigidity, load geometry and boundary conditions. It is regional bending of the plate, rather than a separate buoyant load.

Elasticity lets the lithosphere share a load with neighbouring regions through lithospheric flexure. Beneath the centre of a localized load, subsidence is generally smaller than the local isostasy estimate, so the deposited surface stands higher. The surrounding plate also bends down, and a more distant flexural forebulge may rise. The extra support is regional bending resistance, rather than removal of the load's mass.

The controlling comparison is load width against the lithosphere's flexural length, which increases with flexural rigidity and decreases with the relevant buoyant geophysical density contrast. Equivalently, the flexural support ratio becomes large for short-wavelength loading. A very broad nearly uniform load produces little curvature in its interior, so even a strong elastic lithosphere has a nearly local isostatic adjustment there. Bending matters most near its edges. A narrow load requires more curvature and can be supported appreciably by the surrounding elastic lithosphere.

The Deccan Traps form a broad continental large igneous province. The volcanic edifices of the Hawaiian Islands are more localized loads on an old oceanic lithosphere, for which regional bending and a flexural moat are prominent. Under the usual broad-Deccan versus narrow-Hawaiian-load comparison, elastic strength matters more for the Hawaiian Islands. The more coherent mantle-dominated strength of an old oceanic plate can reinforce this contrast. It cannot be deduced simply from “oceanic” versus “continental”: a cold Indian craton can be strong, and a site's effective elastic thickness depends on its thermal and loading history.

For an initially submerged Hawaiian load, replacing seawater changes both the load and buoyant restoring contrast. At fixed deposited thickness, the added load relative to the initial water column uses the rock-minus-water density, and the restoring term uses the mantle-minus-water density. An emerged island requires separate treatment of its subaerial and submerged portions. These corrections change the local isostasy reference but do not remove the importance of load width for lithospheric flexure. The broad Hawaiian swell should also be distinguished from the narrower volcanic load: deeper thermal or dynamic support of the Hawaiian swell is not the same mechanism as elastic support of the volcanic ridge.

Finally, over long periods material creep, yielding and thermal modification can reduce elastic support. Without measured load geometries, ages and effective elastic thicknesses, the ranking is a justified qualitative expectation rather than a theorem valid for every continental and oceanic load.

I would not assign the lunar mare an automatic terrestrial 100–125 km compensation level. For present-day mare basins, a local equal-column-mass model may have no physically valid compensation depth; first test whether lithospheric flexure supports the load. For ancient thermally driven subsidence that did relax, choose a common datum beneath the cooling layer in deformable lunar mantle appropriate to that epoch.

The Moon is smaller than Earth and has lost a larger fraction of its original heat. Its cold, mechanically strong outer shell can be much thicker relative to its radius than the terrestrial oceanic lithosphere. Lunar mare basalts filled pre-existing impact basins: their loading, basin excavation, mantle uplift, cooling and the evolving strength of the lithosphere all matter. A thick elastic lithosphere can support lateral stress differences, so equal column mass need not hold even after a long time. The strong gravity anomalies of lunar mascons, measured by GRAIL, are evidence that the present mare-basin system is not everywhere locally compensated.^[ref]

For an explicitly assumed ancient relaxed thermal model, estimate its thermal penetration depth from thermal diffusivity and the elapsed cooling time, infer the contemporaneous mechanical lid from gravity-topography admittance or basin deformation, and place $z_c$ below that layer where lateral pressure anomalies relax. For example, a hypothetical several-hundred-kilometre-thick lid requires a deeper datum than that lid, not the shallow crust-mantle boundary. The paper supplies neither an epoch-specific thermal model nor a load wavelength, so a unique kilometre value is not determined. If the chosen datum is a substantial fraction of the lunar radius, spherical geometry and radial variation in gravity must replace the flat, constant-gravity column approximation.

Does the Moon have an asthenosphere? Not a demonstrated shallow, globally connected Earth-like layer underlying mobile plates; but “no weak or partially molten mantle anywhere, ever” is too strong. Apollo lunar seismology indicates a cold outer interior and more attenuating deep regions. Reanalyses support a deep low-velocity or partially molten region near the lunar core, while lunar laser ranging and tidal Love numbers constrain deep deformability and tidal dissipation. Such a deep weak region is sometimes called a lunar asthenosphere; it is not automatically the correct local compensation surface for a mare load.^[ref]

The inferred melt fraction and distribution remain model dependent: Dissipation at tidal and seismic frequencies in a melt-free Moon by Francis Nimmo and others demonstrates that much of the dissipation can also be explained by hot solid-state anelasticity, although its model does not reproduce every frequency-dependent constraint. The Moon was hotter during mare emplacement and could relax loads differently then. Choose the datum from the relevant thermal and mechanical history, or use a flexural model when local isostasy fails.