= Solution
The supplied south–north profile has a large southern/interior negative trough and a sharp positive peak toward the northern rim. That is opposite to the simplest positive, presently induced magnetic body in question 5(d). It therefore does \b[not] justify interpreting the crater as a concentration of strongly magnetic meteorite material.
A negative <magnetization contrast> from replacing magnetic <basalt> already reverses the simple induced-body response. In addition, the target <Deccan Traps> can retain strong <remanent magnetization> whose direction differs from the present <geomagnetic field>; crater excavation and rim geometry then produce a strong <magnetic topographic effect>. Rock-magnetic measurements and forward modelling distinguish these contributions. A primary study of this crater attributes most of its anomaly to magnetized target <basalts> and topography, with a comparatively small contribution from the breccia and post-impact <sediment>.<Magnetic Anomaly and Model of the Lonar Meteorite Impact Crater in Maharashtra, India by Kalle Kiik and others>[Sections 4.2, 5 and 6: target-rock remanence, terrain modelling and weak infill contribution]{ref}
\b[The curve alone is not a unique diagnosis of reversed polarity, impact-induced <magnetization> or a buried iron mass.] The physical conclusion supported by the comparison is that a positive induced-body model is inadequate; inherited target-rock <magnetization>, its removal and geometry must be modelled.
Back to article page
