“At this point, it’s worth putting together an accurate equation of state over the entire pressure range for planetary modelers to use,” says Bill Nellis, a physicist at Harvard University. Nellis notes that while the new study has generated reliable data for the conditions in question, more work is needed to determine how the new numbers will tweak existing theories.
That particular part of your article stood out to me at least. AlexG has some validity in the source of this planet's magnetic field, but he's only giving us part of the picture. In fact, if we take into account Mars having no detectable magnetic field and also the lack of magmatic flow, that is seen to hold water (no pun intended.) Mars also has little water compared to the Earth, so your article has some merit as well. The point it makes, though, is that every atom has a magnetic field of some strength and all of them contribute to the field. It is the atoms in motion that generate increased strength in the field, yet more vulnerability to outside influence from other particles in motion.
AlexG does not seem aware that the central core of this planet is a solid iron sphere about 900 Km in diameter. Not unlike the core of the sun, it rotates a bit faster than the surface. The molten magma, on the other hand could be imagined like a river. It has eddy currents only the eddys are also in motion around the iron core, thus the field fluctuates.
It can all be compared to music. When all the notes are complimentary, the instrument resonates in its own local harmony. When a sour note is emitted from say the tea kettle, it affects the resonance of the instrument as well. This is the difference between constructive and destructive resonance... beat frequencies in synch or out of synch.
The way I came up with it was completely different. I came up with it because of how the particles work in my theory. My particles always collapse into magnetism, and then get pushed into space. The particles pushed into space eventually come back again as gravity.