GeoMapX

Link:  https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-gravity-correction-latitudefree-airbouguerterrain-pechnikov/ Traditional geophysics uses a set of corrections (reduction) for the observed gravity measurements (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouguer_anomaly). But what they mean? In terms of common physics these are just products of spatial bandpass filtering. However geophysics still based on these rough coefficients instead of using spatial bandpass filters. That’s really nonsense when these common tables of coefficients applied to high-resolution data observations! As example we have subcentimeter accuracy and ~100m spatial resolution of altimeter satellite measurements to calculate gravity on the sea surface level. In fact the table-based corrections are only tribute to traditions and these are absolutely useless. Let’s use spatial filters to extract the anomalies of all spatial scales.

Link:  https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/pearson-correlation-between-spatial-harmonics-gravity-pechnikov/ We consider Free-air gravity anomaly and ETOPO1 topography in WGM2012 Earth's gravity anomalies datasets (see references below). There is high correlation (0.80) between topography and free air gravity for small areas only: For relatively large areas the correlation is low (0.41) but the scatter plot looks strange. Let's decompose in spatial domain the topography and the free air gravity and check the spatial harmonics. Pixel resolution of these datasets is about 3.7km. For spatial band pass pixel-wise filters 1-4px, 4-8px, 8-12px, 12-16px, 16-20px we have spatial scales 3.7-14.8km, and so on. We see on the pictures above that the correlation between the same spatial harmonics of topography and free air gravity is very high for as small as large areas. In fact we have the same results by all spatial harmonics based methods on topography and free air gra