Seven more craters have been plotted in my ongoing illustration of Mercurian crater melts vs RCL. Not only that, but I also managed to create a melts-vs-rays illustration using the five (yes…only five of my 36 craters show the asymmetric ray pattern that allows me to estimate direction of impact) rayed craters at my disposal.
Both Mercury plots follow the same trend, where the highest crater population lies “Within 45*”, more reflecting of the Moon; the second-highest population lies “>90*”, which is more in line with Venus.
It seems to me that topography is less important for Mercury than it is for the Moon, likely because of Mercury’s higher gravity; on the other hand, Mercury’s topography is comparable to the Moon’s and so becomes more important than for Venus. Because Mercury’s plot resembles more Venus’ than the Moon’s, it implies gravity is likely to be more important in melt emplacement for sufficiently large solid bodies than topography is likely to be; Perhaps, for solid bodies with lower gravity fields topography is indeed the more important factor. Perhaps, a transition exists at around 20-40% Earth’s gravity where topography and gravity become equally important (where one factor is transitioning in importance into the other).
I recently participated in a week-long field course at Sudbury, ON., taking a good look at one of Earth’s largest and oldest impact craters — the Sudbury Basin. As a result, I haven’t been able to work on my Thesis terribly much the past month or so. With one more important assignment due for that course a month from now, I suspect I will continue not being able to work as much as I’d like on my Thesis until December.
I have 31 craters I can start calculating ratios and what-not on, so I should still be able to complete virtually all that by Christmas. That’s my hope, anyway!