DOCSLIB.ORG

Terrestrial Planets (Bennett Et Al

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Terrestrial Planets (Bennett Et Al Earth and the Geology of the Terrestrial Planets (Bennett et al. Ch. 9) Major Ideas In This Chapter ● Terrestrial planets looked (largely) the same when they were formed. Differences due to geological processes. ● Geological activity is driven by internal heat ● Planetary size plays a large role in retaining heat ● Distance from the Sun, rotation affects erosion ● Crater density can indicate surface age ● Earth has a unique geology Terrestrial Planets ● Compared to Jovian planets: – Smaller size/mass – Large “core” to atmosphere ratio – Higher density – Closer to Sun and closer together – Warmer – Few or no moons – No rings (NASA) Planetary Surfaces and Interiors ● Terrestrial planets + Moon were similar when young – Subjected to heavy bombardment – Differences due to processes that occurred after formation ● Understanding the surface features: planetary geology ● Processes in the interior drive activity at the surface Your book uses “terrestrial worlds” to refer to the terrestrial planets + the Moon. (from Bennett et al.) (from Bennett et al.) How Do We Learn About Planetary Interiors? ● Average density determinations ● Local gravity variations as measured with artificial satellites ● Magnetic fields: molten core/convection ● Lava flow: internal composition ● Earthquakes: internal structure Earthquakes: Seismic Waves ● Earthquakes generate vibrations – Typical wavelength ~ several km – Reconstruct interior ● Two types of waves: – P-waves: compressional waves – S-waves: shear waves ● S-waves cannot pass through liquid (from Bennett et al.) – Earth's interior has liquid layer ● Monitoring also done on the Moon (from Morrison and Owen) Interior Structure of Terrestrial Planets crust ● Density stratification – Core ● iron, nickel ● Earth has liquid outer core – Mantle core ● Rocky layer (minerals with silicon, oxygen, ...) – Crust mantle ● granite, basalt lithosphere Interior Strength crust ● Most of earth's interior: solid rock – Rock varies in strength – Can deform and flow ● Lithosphere ● Below lithosphere: higher T → core rock flows easier ● Lithosphere “floats” on the soft rock below mantle ● Thickness important lithosphere How does lithosphere thickness affect volcanic eruptions/mountain formation? Why Layering? ● Differentiation – Gravitational separation of materials with different densities ● Interiors were hot initially → rock/metal molten Why are planets round? Phobos and Deimos (the moons of Mars) (NASA) Planetary Interiors (from Bennett et al.) ● We expect smaller planets to have smaller cores – Mercury? – Moon? ● Small planets = thicker lithospheres What Drives Geological Activity? ● Heat – In general: bigger = more heat ● How do we heat? – Accretion – Differentiation – Radioactivity Which of these processes is still taking place in terrestrial planets? What about sunlight? These processes result in the core/mantle/crust structure What Drives Geological Activity? ● How do we cool? – Convection – Conduction – Radiation ● Example: Earth: – Convection in interior (flowing solid rock) – Above lithosphere, too rigid to flow—conduction takes over – At surface: radiation What Drives Geological Activity? (from Bennett et al.) Planetary Size ● Larger planets remain hotter longer ● Mercury/Moon – Cooled quickly (~ 1 billion years) – Lithosphere thickens, mantle convection stops – Geologically dead ● Venus – Similar in size to Earth, so probably still active ● Mars – Cooled more—unclear if the deep interior is still convecting Cooling Terrestrial Planets Interiors Total store of heat is proportion to the planet's volume, Energy is only lost through the surface—rate of energy loss is proportion to the surface area of the planet, Cooling time is related to the total amount of heat/energy stored / rate of energy loss (volume to surface ratio) Planetary Cores and Magnetic Fields ● Magnetic fields are generated in some planets ● What is needed to generate a magnetic field? B-field why? Mercury yes large metal core (despite slow rotation) Venus no rotation too slow Earth yes molten rock Moon no cooled off Mars no no metallic core or cooled Planetary Cores and Magnetic Fields (from Bennett et al.) Shaping Surfaces ● Impact Cratering – More small than large craters – All terrestrial planets had impacts – Impact at 40,000 to 250,000 km/h ● Craters are circular ● D ~ 10x impactor size ● Depth ~ 10-20% diameter ● Sometimes: central peak Tycho crater on the Moon ( NASA) (from Bennett et al.) Impact Craters Shaping Surfaces ● Volcanism – The eruption of molten lava onto surface – Magma rises: lower density / trapped gases / squeezed – Result depends on how easily lava flows (from Bennett et al.) Shaping Surfaces ● Volcanism (cont.) – Volcanic plains and shield volcanoes made of basalt (high density, but runny) ● all terrestrial planets and some Jovian moons show volcanic plains or shield volcanoes—basalt common – Stratovolcanoes made of lower-density rock—rare outside of Earth. – Volcanoes outgas atmospheres ● Atmospheres of Venus, Earth, and Mars, and Earth's oceans came from outgassing Solar System Volcanos The Culann Patera volcano on Jupiter's moon Io (Galileo Project, JPL, NASA) Olympus Mons on Mars—the largest volcano in the solar system (Mars Global Surveyor Project, MSSS, JPL, NASA) Shaping Surfaces ● Tectonics – Surface changes due to forces acting on lithosphere – Most tectonic features arise from mantle convection ● Compression features ● Cracks and valleys – Fractured lithosphere → plate tectonics (from Bennett et al.) Shaping Surfaces ● Erosion – Breakdown/transport of rock ● Glaciers ● Rivers ● Wind ● ... – Erosion can build (sand dunes, river deltas, ...) – Erosion makes sedimentary rock Effect of Planetary Properties ● Volcanism/Tectonics – Requires internal heat → planetary size matters ● Which planets had volcanism/tectonics initially? – Moon/Mercury already cooled – Earth large → still active – Venus similar to Earth → still active? – Mars should be cooler inside, much less activity than past Effect of Planetary Properties ● Erosion – Requires weather (wind, rain, ...) – How does planetary size affect an atmosphere? – Distance from Sun (how does this affect things?) – Rotation (why?) – Moon/Mercury: no atmosphere → no erosion – Mars: thin atmosphere → little erosion – Venus/Earth: thick atmospheres ● Earth cooler: oceans form. Still lots of erosion. ● Venus slow rotator: little erosion (from Bennett et al.) (from Bennett et al.) Impact Craters and Age maria highlands ● All planets impacted during heavy bombardment – Old surface = high crater density ● Lunar highlands – Age ~ 4.4 billion years ● Maria – Age ~ 3.0 – 3.9 billion years ● Heavy bombardment ended ~4 billion years ago ● Impact history on moon applies to other planets Apollo 16 image of the moon (mostly far ● Crater counts → geological age side) (NASA) Geology of the Moon and Mercury MESSENGER image of Mercury Apollo 16 image of the moon http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/gallery/sciencePhotos/image.php?page=1 &gallery_id=2&image_id=143 (mostly far side) (NASA) Credit: NASA/Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory/Carnegie Institution of Washington ● Many craters ● Cooled long ago—little recent tectonic/volcanic activity ● No atmospheres—no erosion ● Ancient volcanic features—active when young Terrestrial Planets (from Bennett et al.) Mass Radius Density Mercury 0.055 M 0.382 R 5.43 g cm-3 Venus 0.815 M 0.949 R 5.25 g cm-3 Earth 1.0 M 1.0 R 5.52 g cm-3 Moon 0.012 M 0.272 R 3.34 g cm-3 Mars 0.107 M 0.533 R 3.93 g cm-3 Overview of the Moon ● Smallest of the terrestrial worlds ● Heavily cratered highlands ● Smooth maria: lava plains ● Some tectonic features ● No erosion ● Geologically dead today. Crater counts, calibrated on the Moon, allow us to determine geological age Apollo 15 image of Mare Imbrium (NASA; http://sse.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/display.cfm?IM_ID=863) Geology of Moon ● Highlands: bright, heavily cratered ● Maria: smooth, dark regions ● Craters should be roughly uniform—what happened in Maria? ● Lava very runny—lack of water/trapped gases (NASA/Apollo 17) (Luc Viatour/Wikipedia) Geology of Moon (from Bennett et al.) Geology of Moon ● Tectonic features found in maria – Contraction during cooling (graben) Apollo 15 image of Mare Imbrium (NASA; http://sse.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/display.cfm?IM_ID=863) Source: Clementine Project database High iron content in the Maria High in iron the content Maria are composed of basalt. Lunar basalt has a higher iron content than on earth. on than content iron has a higher basalt of basalt. Lunar composed are Maria (NASA/LPI) Lunar far side is at higher elevation than Earth-facing side. Why? Today's Moon ● No geological activity ● Major impacts infrequent ● No wind/weather ● Micrometeorite impacts break up surface rock into powder Apollo 11 footprint. (NASA; Apollo 11, AS11-40-5878) Overview of Mercury ● Lots of craters (lower density than Moon) ● Volcanic resurfacing – Small lava plains ● Cliffs and shrinking of planet ● Geologically dead MESSENGER image of Mercury http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/gallery/sciencePhotos/image .php?page=1&gallery_id=2&image_id=143 Credit: NASA/Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory/Carnegie Institution of Washington Scarp radial to Caloris Basin (NASA/Mariner 10) Mercury ● Innermost planet ● No activity ● No atmosphere ● Hot on day side, cold on night side (100 K) ● Rotates 3 times for every two orbits ● Unusually high density Distance from Sun: 0.39 AU radius: 0.38 R ⊕ mass 0.055 M Mercury as imaged by the MESSENGER ⊕ -3 spacecraft average density: 5.43 g
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Phases of Venus and Galileo
    Galileo and the phases of Venus I) Periods of Venus 1) Synodical period and phases The synodic period1 of Venus is 584 days The superior2 conjunction occured on 11 may 1610. Calculate the date of the quadrature, of the inferior conjunction and of the next superior conjunction, supposing the motions of the Earth and Venus are circular and uniform. In fact the next superior conjunction occured on 11 december 1611 and inferior conjunction on 26 february 1611. 2) Sidereal period The sidereal period of the Earth is 365.25 days. Calculate the sidereal period of Venus. II) Phases on Venus in geo and heliocentric models 1) Phases in differents models 1) Determine the phases of Venus in geocentric models, where the Earth is at the center of the universe and planets orbit around (Venus “above” or “below” the sun) * Pseudo-Aristoteles model : Earth (center)-Moon-Sun-Mercury-Venus-Mars-Jupiter-Saturne * Ptolemeo’s model : Earth (center)-Moon-Mercury-Venus-Sun-Mars-Jupiter-Saturne 2) Determine the phases of Venus in the heliocentric model, where planets orbit around the sun. Copernican system : Sun (center)-Mercury-Venus-Earth-Mars-Jupiter-Saturne 2) Observations of Galileo Galileo (1564-1642) observed Venus in 1610-1611 with a telescope. Read the letters of Galileo. May we conclude that the Copernican model is the only one available ? When did Galileo begins to observe Venus? Give the approximate dates of the quadrature and of the inferior conjunction? What are the approximate dates of the 5 observations of Galileo supposing the figure from the Essayer, was drawn in 1610-1611 1 The synodic period is the time that it takes for the object to reappear at the same point in the sky, relative to the Sun, as observed from Earth; i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • MARS an Overview of the 1985–2006 Mars Orbiter Camera Science
    MARS MARS INFORMATICS The International Journal of Mars Science and Exploration Open Access Journals Science An overview of the 1985–2006 Mars Orbiter Camera science investigation Michael C. Malin1, Kenneth S. Edgett1, Bruce A. Cantor1, Michael A. Caplinger1, G. Edward Danielson2, Elsa H. Jensen1, Michael A. Ravine1, Jennifer L. Sandoval1, and Kimberley D. Supulver1 1Malin Space Science Systems, P.O. Box 910148, San Diego, CA, 92191-0148, USA; 2Deceased, 10 December 2005 Citation: Mars 5, 1-60, 2010; doi:10.1555/mars.2010.0001 History: Submitted: August 5, 2009; Reviewed: October 18, 2009; Accepted: November 15, 2009; Published: January 6, 2010 Editor: Jeffrey B. Plescia, Applied Physics Laboratory, Johns Hopkins University Reviewers: Jeffrey B. Plescia, Applied Physics Laboratory, Johns Hopkins University; R. Aileen Yingst, University of Wisconsin Green Bay Open Access: Copyright 2010 Malin Space Science Systems. This is an open-access paper distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract Background: NASA selected the Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) investigation in 1986 for the Mars Observer mission. The MOC consisted of three elements which shared a common package: a narrow angle camera designed to obtain images with a spatial resolution as high as 1.4 m per pixel from orbit, and two wide angle cameras (one with a red filter, the other blue) for daily global imaging to observe meteorological events, geodesy, and provide context for the narrow angle images. Following the loss of Mars Observer in August 1993, a second MOC was built from flight spare hardware and launched aboard Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) in November 1996.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 1: Venus Missions
    Appendix 1: Venus Missions Sputnik 7 (USSR) Launch 02/04/1961 First attempted Venus atmosphere craft; upper stage failed to leave Earth orbit Venera 1 (USSR) Launch 02/12/1961 First attempted flyby; contact lost en route Mariner 1 (US) Launch 07/22/1961 Attempted flyby; launch failure Sputnik 19 (USSR) Launch 08/25/1962 Attempted flyby, stranded in Earth orbit Mariner 2 (US) Launch 08/27/1962 First successful Venus flyby Sputnik 20 (USSR) Launch 09/01/1962 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Sputnik 21 (USSR) Launch 09/12/1962 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Cosmos 21 (USSR) Launch 11/11/1963 Possible Venera engineering test flight or attempted flyby Venera 1964A (USSR) Launch 02/19/1964 Attempted flyby, launch failure Venera 1964B (USSR) Launch 03/01/1964 Attempted flyby, launch failure Cosmos 27 (USSR) Launch 03/27/1964 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Zond 1 (USSR) Launch 04/02/1964 Venus flyby, contact lost May 14; flyby July 14 Venera 2 (USSR) Launch 11/12/1965 Venus flyby, contact lost en route Venera 3 (USSR) Launch 11/16/1965 Venus lander, contact lost en route, first Venus impact March 1, 1966 Cosmos 96 (USSR) Launch 11/23/1965 Possible attempted landing, craft fragmented in Earth orbit Venera 1965A (USSR) Launch 11/23/1965 Flyby attempt (launch failure) Venera 4 (USSR) Launch 06/12/1967 Successful atmospheric probe, arrived at Venus 10/18/1967 Mariner 5 (US) Launch 06/14/1967 Successful flyby 10/19/1967 Cosmos 167 (USSR) Launch 06/17/1967 Attempted atmospheric probe, stranded in Earth orbit Venera 5 (USSR) Launch 01/05/1969 Returned atmospheric data for 53 min on 05/16/1969 M.
    [Show full text]
  • Martian Crater Morphology
    ANALYSIS OF THE DEPTH-DIAMETER RELATIONSHIP OF MARTIAN CRATERS A Capstone Experience Thesis Presented by Jared Howenstine Completion Date: May 2006 Approved By: Professor M. Darby Dyar, Astronomy Professor Christopher Condit, Geology Professor Judith Young, Astronomy Abstract Title: Analysis of the Depth-Diameter Relationship of Martian Craters Author: Jared Howenstine, Astronomy Approved By: Judith Young, Astronomy Approved By: M. Darby Dyar, Astronomy Approved By: Christopher Condit, Geology CE Type: Departmental Honors Project Using a gridded version of maritan topography with the computer program Gridview, this project studied the depth-diameter relationship of martian impact craters. The work encompasses 361 profiles of impacts with diameters larger than 15 kilometers and is a continuation of work that was started at the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston, Texas under the guidance of Dr. Walter S. Keifer. Using the most ‘pristine,’ or deepest craters in the data a depth-diameter relationship was determined: d = 0.610D 0.327 , where d is the depth of the crater and D is the diameter of the crater, both in kilometers. This relationship can then be used to estimate the theoretical depth of any impact radius, and therefore can be used to estimate the pristine shape of the crater. With a depth-diameter ratio for a particular crater, the measured depth can then be compared to this theoretical value and an estimate of the amount of material within the crater, or fill, can then be calculated. The data includes 140 named impact craters, 3 basins, and 218 other impacts. The named data encompasses all named impact structures of greater than 100 kilometers in diameter.
    [Show full text]
  • Shallow Crustal Composition of Mercury As Revealed by Spectral Properties and Geological Units of Two Impact Craters
    Planetary and Space Science 119 (2015) 250–263 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Planetary and Space Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/pss Shallow crustal composition of Mercury as revealed by spectral properties and geological units of two impact craters Piero D’Incecco a,n, Jörn Helbert a, Mario D’Amore a, Alessandro Maturilli a, James W. Head b, Rachel L. Klima c, Noam R. Izenberg c, William E. McClintock d, Harald Hiesinger e, Sabrina Ferrari a a Institute of Planetary Research, German Aerospace Center, Rutherfordstrasse 2, D-12489 Berlin, Germany b Department of Geological Sciences, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912, USA c The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, MD 20723, USA d Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80303, USA e Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, Institut für Planetologie, Wilhelm-Klemm Str. 10, D-48149 Münster, Germany article info abstract Article history: We have performed a combined geological and spectral analysis of two impact craters on Mercury: the Received 5 March 2015 15 km diameter Waters crater (106°W; 9°S) and the 62.3 km diameter Kuiper crater (30°W; 11°S). Using Received in revised form the Mercury Dual Imaging System (MDIS) Narrow Angle Camera (NAC) dataset we defined and mapped 9 October 2015 several units for each crater and for an external reference area far from any impact related deposits. For Accepted 12 October 2015 each of these units we extracted all spectra from the MESSENGER Atmosphere and Surface Composition Available online 24 October 2015 Spectrometer (MASCS) Visible-InfraRed Spectrograph (VIRS) applying a first order photometric correc- Keywords: tion.
    [Show full text]
  • SFSC Search Down to 4
    C M Y K www.newssun.com EWS UN NHighlands County’s Hometown-S Newspaper Since 1927 Rivalry rout Deadly wreck in Polk Harris leads Lake 20-year-old woman from Lake Placid to shutout of AP Placid killed in Polk crash SPORTS, B1 PAGE A2 PAGE B14 Friday-Saturday, March 22-23, 2013 www.newssun.com Volume 94/Number 35 | 50 cents Forecast Fire destroys Partly sunny and portable at Fred pleasant High Low Wild Elementary Fire alarms “Myself, Mr. (Wally) 81 62 Cox and other administra- Complete Forecast went off at 2:40 tors were all called about PAGE A14 a.m. Wednesday 3 a.m.,” Waldron said Wednesday morning. Online By SAMANTHA GHOLAR Upon Waldron’s arrival, [email protected] the Sebring Fire SEBRING — Department along with Investigations into a fire DeSoto City Fire early Wednesday morning Department, West Sebring on the Fred Wild Volunteer Fire Department Question: Do you Elementary School cam- and Sebring Police pus are under way. Department were all on think the U.S. govern- The school’s fire alarms the scene. ment would ever News-Sun photo by KATARA SIMMONS Rhoda Ross reads to youngsters Linda Saraniti (from left), Chyanne Carroll and Camdon began going off at approx- State Fire Marshal seize money from pri- Carroll on Wednesday afternoon at the Lake Placid Public Library. Ross was reading from imately 2:40 a.m. and con- investigator Raymond vate bank accounts a children’s book she wrote and illustrated called ‘A Wildflower for all Seasons.’ tinued until about 3 a.m., Miles Davis was on the like is being consid- according to FWE scene for a large part of ered in Cyprus? Principal Laura Waldron.
    [Show full text]
  • Jjmonl 1603.Pmd
    alactic Observer GJohn J. McCarthy Observatory Volume 9, No. 3 March 2016 GRAIL - On the Trail of the Moon's Missing Mass GRAIL (Gravity Recovery and Interior Laboratory) was a NASA scientific mission in 2011/12 to map the surface of the moon and collect data on gravitational anomalies. The image here is an artist's impres- sion of the twin satellites (Ebb and Flow) orbiting in tandem above a gravitational image of the moon. See inside, page 4 for information on gravitational anomalies (mascons) or visit http://solarsystem. nasa.gov/grail. The John J. McCarthy Observatory Galactic Observer New Milford High School Editorial Committee 388 Danbury Road Managing Editor New Milford, CT 06776 Bill Cloutier Phone/Voice: (860) 210-4117 Production & Design Phone/Fax: (860) 354-1595 www.mccarthyobservatory.org Allan Ostergren Website Development JJMO Staff Marc Polansky It is through their efforts that the McCarthy Observatory Technical Support has established itself as a significant educational and Bob Lambert recreational resource within the western Connecticut Dr. Parker Moreland community. Steve Barone Jim Johnstone Colin Campbell Carly KleinStern Dennis Cartolano Bob Lambert Mike Chiarella Roger Moore Route Jeff Chodak Parker Moreland, PhD Bill Cloutier Allan Ostergren Cecilia Dietrich Marc Polansky Dirk Feather Joe Privitera Randy Fender Monty Robson Randy Finden Don Ross John Gebauer Gene Schilling Elaine Green Katie Shusdock Tina Hartzell Paul Woodell Tom Heydenburg Amy Ziffer In This Issue "OUT THE WINDOW ON YOUR LEFT" ............................... 4 SUNRISE AND SUNSET ...................................................... 13 MARE HUMBOLDTIANIUM AND THE NORTHEAST LIMB ......... 5 JUPITER AND ITS MOONS ................................................. 13 ONE YEAR IN SPACE ....................................................... 6 TRANSIT OF JUPITER'S RED SPOT ....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Histories of Mars and Venus, and the Habitability of Planets
    CLIMATE HISTORIES OF MARS AND VENUS, AND THE HABITABILITY OF PLANETS In the temporal sequence that Part III of the book has ¡NTRODUCT¡ON 15.1 been following, we stand near the end of the Archean eon. Earth at the close of the Archean,2.5 billion years ago, By this point in time, the evolution of Venus and its atmo- was a world in which life had arisen and plate tectonics sphere almost certainly had diverged from that of Earth, dominated, the evolution of the crust and the recycling of and Mars was on its way to being a cold, dry world, if volatiles. Yet oxygen (Oz) still was not prevalent in the it had not already become one. This is the appropriate atmosphere, which was richer in COz than at present. In moment in geologic time, then, to consider how Earth's this last respect, Earth's atmosphere was somewhat like neighboring planets diverged so greatly in climate, and to that of its neighbors, Mars and Venus, which today retain ponder the implications for habitable planets throughout this more primitive kind of atmosphere. the cosmos. In the following chapter, we consider why Speculations on the nature of Mars and Venus were, Earth became dominated by plate tectonics, but Venus prior to the space program, heavily influenced by Earth- and Mars did not. Understanding this is part of the key centered biases and the poor quality of telescopic observa- to understanding Earth's clement climate as discussed in tions (figure 15.1). Thirty years of U.S. and Soviet robotic chapter 1.4.
    [Show full text]
  • Mariner to Mercury, Venus and Mars
    NASA Facts National Aeronautics and Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CA 91109 Mariner to Mercury, Venus and Mars Between 1962 and late 1973, NASA’s Jet carry a host of scientific instruments. Some of the Propulsion Laboratory designed and built 10 space- instruments, such as cameras, would need to be point- craft named Mariner to explore the inner solar system ed at the target body it was studying. Other instru- -- visiting the planets Venus, Mars and Mercury for ments were non-directional and studied phenomena the first time, and returning to Venus and Mars for such as magnetic fields and charged particles. JPL additional close observations. The final mission in the engineers proposed to make the Mariners “three-axis- series, Mariner 10, flew past Venus before going on to stabilized,” meaning that unlike other space probes encounter Mercury, after which it returned to Mercury they would not spin. for a total of three flybys. The next-to-last, Mariner Each of the Mariner projects was designed to have 9, became the first ever to orbit another planet when two spacecraft launched on separate rockets, in case it rached Mars for about a year of mapping and mea- of difficulties with the nearly untried launch vehicles. surement. Mariner 1, Mariner 3, and Mariner 8 were in fact lost The Mariners were all relatively small robotic during launch, but their backups were successful. No explorers, each launched on an Atlas rocket with Mariners were lost in later flight to their destination either an Agena or Centaur upper-stage booster, and planets or before completing their scientific missions.
    [Show full text]
  • Make up Lab: Phases of Venus Introduction Galileo Is Justifiably Famous for Many Discoveries in Both Physics and Astronomy
    PHYS 1401: Descriptive Astronomy Summer 2016 Make Up Lab: Phases of Venus Introduction Galileo is justifiably famous for many discoveries in both physics and astronomy. While he was fascinated by gravity and kinematics, his most valuable discovery is arguably the phases of Venus. By carefully observing and recording the progression of Venus through phases similar to our own moon, he was able to demonstrate the impossibility of the Ptolemy’s increasingly complicated geocentric model. 4. Orient yourself: Toggle on the constellation outlines and labels. Locate one or two constellations whose shapes you know. Are the constellations of 1610 recognizable to you? Face north and locate Polaris. Comment on the location of Polaris compared to its position today. Synodic Period of Venus The synodic period of an object is a measure of its motion with respect to Earth. We are most familiar with this idea as applied to the moon: to measure its synodic period, we count the time between successive full moons (or new moons, or whichever phase you like). As Galileo discovered, we can do precisely the same thing for Venus. 5. Change the date and locate Venus: Advance your date to May 01, 1610. Keep the time set to 00:00:00. Locate Venus, and zoom in to notice its phase. Advance your day until Venus Using the Stellarium program, we can replicate his is fully illuminated (100.0%) and record the date. Use the table observations by placing ourselves in the same time and place below as a model for recording your data. as Galileo himself. 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2012.11628V3 [Astro-Ph.EP] 26 Jan 2021
    manuscript submitted to JGR: Planets The Fundamental Connections Between the Solar System and Exoplanetary Science Stephen R. Kane1, Giada N. Arney2, Paul K. Byrne3, Paul A. Dalba1∗, Steven J. Desch4, Jonti Horner5, Noam R. Izenberg6, Kathleen E. Mandt6, Victoria S. Meadows7, Lynnae C. Quick8 1Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA 2Planetary Systems Laboratory, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA 3Planetary Research Group, Department of Marine, Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA 4School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA 5Centre for Astrophysics, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia 6Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, MD 20723, USA 7Department of Astronomy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA 8Planetary Geology, Geophysics and Geochemistry Laboratory, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA Key Points: • Exoplanetary science is rapidly expanding towards characterization of atmospheres and interiors. • Planetary science has similarly undergone rapid expansion of understanding plan- etary processes and evolution. • Effective studies of exoplanets require models and in-situ data derived from plan- etary science observations and exploration. arXiv:2012.11628v4 [astro-ph.EP] 8 Aug 2021 ∗NSF Astronomy and Astrophysics Postdoctoral Fellow Corresponding author: Stephen R. Kane, [email protected] {1{ manuscript submitted to JGR: Planets Abstract Over the past several decades, thousands of planets have been discovered outside of our Solar System. These planets exhibit enormous diversity, and their large numbers provide a statistical opportunity to place our Solar System within the broader context of planetary structure, atmospheres, architectures, formation, and evolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Martian Subsurface Properties and Crater Formation Processes Inferred from Fresh Impact Crater Geometries
    Martian Subsurface Properties and Crater Formation Processes Inferred From Fresh Impact Crater Geometries The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Stewart, Sarah T., and Gregory J. Valiant. 2006. Martian subsurface properties and crater formation processes inferred from fresh impact crater geometries. Meteoritics and Planetary Sciences 41: 1509-1537. Published Version http://meteoritics.org/ Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:4727301 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA Meteoritics & Planetary Science 41, Nr 10, 1509–1537 (2006) Abstract available online at http://meteoritics.org Martian subsurface properties and crater formation processes inferred from fresh impact crater geometries Sarah T. STEWART* and Gregory J. VALIANT Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University, 20 Oxford Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, USA *Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] (Received 22 October 2005; revision accepted 30 June 2006) Abstract–The geometry of simple impact craters reflects the properties of the target materials, and the diverse range of fluidized morphologies observed in Martian ejecta blankets are controlled by the near-surface composition and the climate at the time of impact. Using the Mars Orbiter Laser Altimeter (MOLA) data set, quantitative information about the strength of the upper crust and the dynamics of Martian ejecta blankets may be derived from crater geometry measurements.
    [Show full text]