DOCSLIB.ORG

Mercury Bin/Tour.Cgi?Link=Windows3.Html&Sw=False&Sn=4444&D=/&Edu=Mid&Br=Graphic&Cd=False&T Our=&Fr=F

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mercury Bin/Tour.Cgi?Link=Windows3.Html&Sw=False&Sn=4444&D=/&Edu=Mid&Br=Graphic&Cd=False&T Our=&Fr=F Mercury http://www.windows.umich.edu/cgi- bin/tour.cgi?link=windows3.html&sw=false&sn=4444&d=/&edu=mid&br=graphic&cd=false&t our=&fr=f Almost everything we know about Mercury comes from the single mission we had to that planet: Mariner 10 (March 23 - April 3) 2000 high-res television pictures (Two more flybys: 9-21-74, and 3-16-75) mapped 45% of Mercury’s surface We’re going back: MESSENGER (2004) MErcury Surface, Space ENvironment, GEochemistry and Ranging closest planet to the Sun, very similar to the Moon Feature Named After Craters authors, artists, and musicians Valleys radio observatories (Arecibo and Goldstone) Scarps ships associated with scientific exploration Plainsthe word “mercury” in various languages with some exceptions: Caloris Basin (basin of heat!) Outline of today’s presentation: I. Overall characteristics II. Atmosphere III. Polar Deposits IV. Magnetic field V. Terranes VI. Chemical and Mineralogical Composition VII. Geologic History I. Overall characteristics Characteristic Relative to Earth Absolute Value (Earth = 1) Mass 0.0553 3.303 x 1026 g Radius 0.382 2,439 km Mean Density Earth: 5.52 g/cm3 5.43 g/cm3 Rotation Period 58.65 Earth days ---- Mean Orbital 0.3871 AU 57.91 x 106 km Distance Orbital Period around Sun 87.9 Earth days ----- Mean Orbital 1.6 47.89 km/s 1 Velocity (112,000 mi/hr) Orbital eccentricity ----- 0.2056 Inclination to ----- 7.004 ecliptic (degrees) Temperature range ------ 360 F (-183C) to 840F (450C) Huge eccentricity in its orbit, so orbital velocity changes a LOT 4.6 x 107 km at perihelion 6.98 x 107 km at aphelion Rotation period = 58.646 Earth days Orbital period = 87.969 Earth days 3 rotations on its axis for every 2 orbits around the Sun http://www.windows.umich.edu/cgi- Obli bin/tour.cgi?link=windows3.html&sw=false&sn=4444&d=/&edu=mid&br=graphic& quit cd=false&tour=&fr=f y very See Mercury’s Orbital Resonance (under Atmosphere of Mercury) clos e to 0, so ther e are no seasons polar regions are always frigid (allowing ice to be preserved at crater bottoms near poles) Not the hottest planet (Venus is hotter), but has greatest T variation: 90-740 K Too dense to be explained by current condensation/accretion models still a mystery... maybe lost its “crust” and got knocked into present orbit 2 II. Atmosphere very tenuous a trillion times less atmosphere than the Earth! H, He, O, Ar detected by Mariner 10's UV spectrometer Na and K not detected until 1985, from Earth-based observations highly variable abundances on short time scales (hours or years) also variable by factor of 5 day/night! Global distribution also changes! Consistent with time scales for photoionization of feldspars: Na (90 min) and K (120 min) ? Na and K photoionization caused by 1. Interactions between surface minerals and solar radiation 2. Impact vaporization of micrometeorites III. Mercury’s Atmosphere Pola r Deposits Polar ice does exist on Mercury found in 1991 by radar images Goldstone radar transmitter in Mohave sent radar pulses to Mercury Very Large Array (VLA) in New Mexico picked up the return pulses “Delay Doppler mapping” mapped surface reflectivity, and found polar ice deposits ice may be H2O, CO2 (dry ice), or other ices - controversial could also be vapor-deposited S interpreted to be ice in small, permanently shadowed craters within 6.5_ of poles with high depth:diameter ratios T = 100 to 60 K (coldest spot inside Saturn’s orbit!) Mass of ice required to explain observations is as low as a few km3 a lot more than that would be deposited over time by comets Short period comets may be the source of the ice Asteroids also possible, but we don’t know much about Mercury-crossing asteroids because they are so low in the sky. IV. Magnetic Field Mercury is the only terrestrial planet (other than Earth) that has a significant magnetic field magnetic sphere is about 7.5 times smaller than Earth’s 3 suggests that Mercury has a fluid outer core, solid inner core Not well characterized because only 2 passes (1st and 3rd) through magnetic field 3 3 Densest known silicate is fayalite (Fe2SiO4) D = 4.2 g/cm , DMercury = 5.43 g/cm so, Mercury must have a larger fraction of Fe than anywhere else in solar system - 70% Fe, 30% silicate we expected core to be Fe due to high density: Earth’s uncompressed density = 5.52 g/cm3 Earth’s core is 54% of diameter, 16% of volume Mercury’s uncompressed density = 5.3 g/cm3 Mercury’s core is 75% of its diameter and 42% of its volume crust is only 100 km thick Problems with an outer Fe core that’s liquid: 1. Mercury rotates too slowly to have a circulation-driven dynamo in core 2. Mercury has been geologically inactive for so long that the core should have cooled off by now! Either you have to enrich the core with radioactive elements OR put something other than pure Fe in the core that would lower its melting point Between 0.2 and 7% sulfur would keep the core liquid based on current thermal models! http://www.windows.umich.edu/cgi- bin/tour.cgi?link=windows3.html&sw=false&sn=4444&d=/&edu=mid&br=graphic& cd=false&tour=&fr=f See structure (under Mercury’s Interior and Surface) 4 V. 1. Impact Craters and Basins We know from the Moon the time scales of meteorite bombardments in our solar system; there was particularly heavy meteoroid bombardment ending about 3.8 m.y. on Moon Bombardment was of objects left over from terrestrial planet formation OR from the formation of Uranus and Neptune DIFFER FROM LUNAR CRATERS IN THREE WAYS: A. For a constant rim diameter, Mercury ejecta blankets are uniformly smaller (by 0.65x) than on Moon AND maximum density of secondary impact craters is closer to crater rims than on Moon (2-2.5 crater radii on Moon vs. 1.5 crater radii on Mercury) This is due to differences in their gravity: Mercury: 3.70 m/s2 Moon: 1.62 m/s2 B. The densely cratered terrain is not saturated with craters ?different densities of meteorites at different places in the solar system - no ?maybe the crust was warmer during impacts (i.e., Mercury cooled more slowly than the Moon), so impacts were erased - maybe ?maybe this bombardment erased all the earlier craters - maybe ?early heavy bombardment craters got covered up by intercrater plains - yes! intercrater plains formed 4.0 -4.2 by ago – end of heavy bombardment C. Mercurian craters are very shallow and ill-defined - they’ve degraded, primarily from ejecta being thrown on them - ejecta doesn’t travel as far because of stronger gravity (2.5x) than on Moon SIMILAR TO LUNAR CRATERS IN THESE WAYS: A. Small craters are all bowl-shaped B. With increasing size, interiors become flatter, craters get rims C. fresh craters all have haloes (bright or dark) and rays Mercury has 22 multiring basins Caloris Basin is 1340 km, ridge is 2 km high ridged floor 2.5 km higher than surrounding plains interior fractures are the only extensional fault on the planet interior covered by smooth plains material Van Eyck Fm. is radially spreading ridges and grooves extends 1,000 km beyond Caloris Mtns. 2nd largest impact on any of the terrestrial planets 5 (S. Pole Aitken basin on Moon, 2,600 km, is biggest) 1 trillion 1-megaton hydrogen bombs http://www.windows.umich.edu/cgi- 2. bin/tour.cgi?link=windows3.html&sw=false&sn=4444&d=/&edu=mid&br=graphic&c Hill d=false&tour=&fr=f y and See Caloris Basin (under Surface Features of Mercury) Line ated Terr ain antipodal p directly opposite Caloris Basin, 500 km across disrupt preexisting landforms such as crater rims hills are 5-10 km wide, 0.1-1.8 km tall similar, smaller features exist on the Moon opposite Orientale and Imbrium 3. Intercrater Plains either impact basin ejecta or lava plains clusters of impact craters common shallow secondary craters, often aligned in long chains topographically very complex oldest surface on Mercury; very similar to lunar highlands records the same bombardment flux as lunar suface dated by analogy with lunar samples widespread volcanism occurred at the same time as heaviest bombardment most extensive terrane on Mercury few craters older than plains flows 6 planet was resurfaced during this time fill and are superposed by craters — contemporaneous with craters dated 4-4.2 by high population of craters <15 km diameter — late emplacement source basins are lacking; believed to be fissure flows global distribution implies volcanic origin 4. Smooth Plains/Lowland Plains 40% of Mariner 10 image area associated with large impact basins heaviest concentration in northern hemisphere (like the Moon) fill and surround Caloris Basin — smooth plains are clearly younger than basins —> late volcanic eruptions dated to end of late heavy bombardment (3.8 b.y.) BUT no evidence of fissures or vents ?relatively thin flows – mysterious because no volcanic features no lobes, no domes, no cones ?could possibly be giant sheets of impact melts Compositionally similar to surrounding rocks http://www.windows.umich.edu/cgi- 5. bin/tour.cgi?link=windows3.html&sw=false&sn=4444&d=/&edu=mid&br=graphic&c Shie d=false&tour=&fr=f ld volc See Wrinkle Ridges (under Surface Features of Mercury) ano may also be a large shield volcano on the unimaged side of Mercury 6. Lobate scarps unique to Mercury 20-500 km in length, 100 m - 3 km high random spatial distribution transect fresh and degraded craters extend from pole to pole, trend roughly north-south uniform distribution suggests contraction thrust faults resulting from compressional stress in the crust caused by cooling 1-2 km decrease in radius when core/mantle cooled use them to estimate amount of decrease in radius due to cooling 7 assume fault plane inclination = 25_, ave.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Exploring the Bombardment History of the Moon
    EXPLORING THE BOMBARDMENT HISTORY OF THE MOON Community White Paper to the Planetary Decadal Survey, 2011-2020 September 15, 2009 Primary Author: William F. Bottke Center for Lunar Origin and Evolution (CLOE) NASA Lunar Science Institute at the Southwest Research Institute 1050 Walnut St., Suite 300 Boulder, CO 80302 Tel: (303) 546-6066 [email protected] Co-Authors/Endorsers: Carlton Allen (NASA JSC) Mahesh Anand (Open U., UK) Nadine Barlow (NAU) Donald Bogard (NASA JSC) Gwen Barnes (U. Idaho) Clark Chapman (SwRI) Barbara A. Cohen (NASA MSFC) Ian A. Crawford (Birkbeck College London, UK) Andrew Daga (U. North Dakota) Luke Dones (SwRI) Dean Eppler (NASA JSC) Vera Assis Fernandes (Berkeley Geochronlogy Center and U. Manchester) Bernard H. Foing (SMART-1, ESA RSSD; Dir., Int. Lunar Expl. Work. Group) Lisa R. Gaddis (US Geological Survey) 1 Jim N. Head (Raytheon) Fredrick P. Horz (LZ Technology/ESCG) Brad Jolliff (Washington U., St Louis) Christian Koeberl (U. Vienna, Austria) Michelle Kirchoff (SwRI) David Kring (LPI) Harold F. (Hal) Levison (SwRI) Simone Marchi (U. Padova, Italy) Charles Meyer (NASA JSC) David A. Minton (U. Arizona) Stephen J. Mojzsis (U. Colorado) Clive Neal (U. Notre Dame) Laurence E. Nyquist (NASA JSC) David Nesvorny (SWRI) Anne Peslier (NASA JSC) Noah Petro (GSFC) Carle Pieters (Brown U.) Jeff Plescia (Johns Hopkins U.) Mark Robinson (Arizona State U.) Greg Schmidt (NASA Lunar Science Institute, NASA Ames) Sen. Harrison H. Schmitt (Apollo 17 Astronaut; U. Wisconsin-Madison) John Spray (U. New Brunswick, Canada) Sarah Stewart-Mukhopadhyay (Harvard U.) Timothy Swindle (U. Arizona) Lawrence Taylor (U. Tennessee-Knoxville) Ross Taylor (Australian National U., Australia) Mark Wieczorek (Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, France) Nicolle Zellner (Albion College) Maria Zuber (MIT) 2 The Moon is unique.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning a Mission to the Lunar South Pole
    Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter: (Diviner) Audience Planning a Mission to Grades 9-10 the Lunar South Pole Time Recommended 1-2 hours AAAS STANDARDS Learning Objectives: • 12A/H1: Exhibit traits such as curiosity, honesty, open- • Learn about recent discoveries in lunar science. ness, and skepticism when making investigations, and value those traits in others. • Deduce information from various sources of scientific data. • 12E/H4: Insist that the key assumptions and reasoning in • Use critical thinking to compare and evaluate different datasets. any argument—whether one’s own or that of others—be • Participate in team-based decision-making. made explicit; analyze the arguments for flawed assump- • Use logical arguments and supporting information to justify decisions. tions, flawed reasoning, or both; and be critical of the claims if any flaws in the argument are found. • 4A/H3: Increasingly sophisticated technology is used Preparation: to learn about the universe. Visual, radio, and X-ray See teacher procedure for any details. telescopes collect information from across the entire spectrum of electromagnetic waves; computers handle Background Information: data and complicated computations to interpret them; space probes send back data and materials from The Moon’s surface thermal environment is among the most extreme of any remote parts of the solar system; and accelerators give planetary body in the solar system. With no atmosphere to store heat or filter subatomic particles energies that simulate conditions in the Sun’s radiation, midday temperatures on the Moon’s surface can reach the stars and in the early history of the universe before 127°C (hotter than boiling water) whereas at night they can fall as low as stars formed.
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Astronomical Sights and Sounds
    Jonathan Powell Rare Astronomical Sights and Sounds The Patrick Moore The Patrick Moore Practical Astronomy Series More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/3192 Rare Astronomical Sights and Sounds Jonathan Powell Jonathan Powell Ebbw Vale, United Kingdom ISSN 1431-9756 ISSN 2197-6562 (electronic) The Patrick Moore Practical Astronomy Series ISBN 978-3-319-97700-3 ISBN 978-3-319-97701-0 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97701-0 Library of Congress Control Number: 2018953700 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact Cratering in the Solar System
    Impact Cratering in the Solar System Michelle Kirchoff Lunar and Planetary Institute University of Houston - Clear Lake Physics Seminar March 24, 2008 Outline What is an impact crater? Why should we care about impact craters? Inner Solar System Outer Solar System Conclusions Open Questions What is an impact crater? Basically a hole in the ground… Barringer Meteor Crater (Earth) Bessel Crater (Moon) Diameter = 1.2 km Diameter = 16 km Depth = 200 m Depth = 2 km www.lpi.usra.edu What creates an “impact” crater? •Galileo sees circular features on Moon & realizes they are depressions (1610) •In 1600-1800’s many think they are volcanic features: look similar to extinct volcanoes on Earth; some even claim to see volcanic eruptions; space is empty (meteorites not verified until 1819 by Chladni) •G.K. Gilbert (1893) first serious support for lunar craters from impacts (geology and experiments) •On Earth Barringer (Meteor) crater recognized as created by impact by Barringer (1906) •Opik (1916) - impacts are high velocity, thus create circular craters at most impact angles Melosh, 1989 …High-Velocity Impacts! www.lpl.arizona.edu/SIC/impact_cratering/Chicxulub/Animation.gif Physics of Impact Cratering Understand how stress (or shock) waves propagate through material in 3 stages: 1. Contact and Compression 2. Excavation 3. Modification www.psi.edu/explorecraters/background.htm Hugoniot Equations Derived by P.H. Hugoniot (1887) to describe shock fronts using conservation of mass, momentum and energy across the discontinuity. equation (U-up) = oU of state P-Po = oupU E-Eo = (P+Po)(Vo-V)/2 P - pressure U - shock velocity up - particle velocity E - specific internal energy V = 1/specific volume) Understanding Crater Formation laboratory large simulations explosives (1950’s) (1940’s) www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/ numerical simulations (1960’s) www.lanl.gov/ Crater Morphology • Simple • Complex • Central peak/pit • Peak ring www3.imperial.ac.
    [Show full text]
  • March 21–25, 2016
    FORTY-SEVENTH LUNAR AND PLANETARY SCIENCE CONFERENCE PROGRAM OF TECHNICAL SESSIONS MARCH 21–25, 2016 The Woodlands Waterway Marriott Hotel and Convention Center The Woodlands, Texas INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT Universities Space Research Association Lunar and Planetary Institute National Aeronautics and Space Administration CONFERENCE CO-CHAIRS Stephen Mackwell, Lunar and Planetary Institute Eileen Stansbery, NASA Johnson Space Center PROGRAM COMMITTEE CHAIRS David Draper, NASA Johnson Space Center Walter Kiefer, Lunar and Planetary Institute PROGRAM COMMITTEE P. Doug Archer, NASA Johnson Space Center Nicolas LeCorvec, Lunar and Planetary Institute Katherine Bermingham, University of Maryland Yo Matsubara, Smithsonian Institute Janice Bishop, SETI and NASA Ames Research Center Francis McCubbin, NASA Johnson Space Center Jeremy Boyce, University of California, Los Angeles Andrew Needham, Carnegie Institution of Washington Lisa Danielson, NASA Johnson Space Center Lan-Anh Nguyen, NASA Johnson Space Center Deepak Dhingra, University of Idaho Paul Niles, NASA Johnson Space Center Stephen Elardo, Carnegie Institution of Washington Dorothy Oehler, NASA Johnson Space Center Marc Fries, NASA Johnson Space Center D. Alex Patthoff, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Cyrena Goodrich, Lunar and Planetary Institute Elizabeth Rampe, Aerodyne Industries, Jacobs JETS at John Gruener, NASA Johnson Space Center NASA Johnson Space Center Justin Hagerty, U.S. Geological Survey Carol Raymond, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Lindsay Hays, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Paul Schenk,
    [Show full text]
  • Glossary of Lunar Terminology
    Glossary of Lunar Terminology albedo A measure of the reflectivity of the Moon's gabbro A coarse crystalline rock, often found in the visible surface. The Moon's albedo averages 0.07, which lunar highlands, containing plagioclase and pyroxene. means that its surface reflects, on average, 7% of the Anorthositic gabbros contain 65-78% calcium feldspar. light falling on it. gardening The process by which the Moon's surface is anorthosite A coarse-grained rock, largely composed of mixed with deeper layers, mainly as a result of meteor­ calcium feldspar, common on the Moon. itic bombardment. basalt A type of fine-grained volcanic rock containing ghost crater (ruined crater) The faint outline that remains the minerals pyroxene and plagioclase (calcium of a lunar crater that has been largely erased by some feldspar). Mare basalts are rich in iron and titanium, later action, usually lava flooding. while highland basalts are high in aluminum. glacis A gently sloping bank; an old term for the outer breccia A rock composed of a matrix oflarger, angular slope of a crater's walls. stony fragments and a finer, binding component. graben A sunken area between faults. caldera A type of volcanic crater formed primarily by a highlands The Moon's lighter-colored regions, which sinking of its floor rather than by the ejection of lava. are higher than their surroundings and thus not central peak A mountainous landform at or near the covered by dark lavas. Most highland features are the center of certain lunar craters, possibly formed by an rims or central peaks of impact sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Mercury Friday, February 23
    ASTRONOMY 161 Introduction to Solar System Astronomy Class 18 Mercury Friday, February 23 Mercury: Basic characteristics Mass = 3.302×1023 kg (0.055 Earth) Radius = 2,440 km (0.383 Earth) Density = 5,427 kg/m³ Sidereal rotation period = 58.6462 d Albedo = 0.11 (Earth = 0.39) Average distance from Sun = 0.387 A.U. Mercury: Key Concepts (1) Mercury has a 3-to-2 spin-orbit coupling (not synchronous rotation). (2) Mercury has no permanent atmosphere because it is too hot. (3) Like the Moon, Mercury has cratered highlands and smooth plains. (4) Mercury has an extremely large iron-rich core. (1) Mercury has a 3-to-2 spin-orbit coupling (not synchronous rotation). Mercury is hard to observe from the Earth (because it is so close to the Sun). Its rotation speed can be found from Doppler shift of radar signals. Mercury’s unusual orbit Orbital period = 87.969 days Rotation period = 58.646 days = (2/3) x 87.969 days Mercury is NOT in synchronous rotation (1 rotation per orbit). Instead, it has 3-to-2 spin-orbit coupling (3 rotations for 2 orbits). Synchronous rotation (WRONG!) 3-to-2 spin-orbit coupling (RIGHT!) Time between one noon and the next is 176 days. Sun is above the horizon for 88 days at the time. Daytime temperatures reach as high as: 700 Kelvin (800 degrees F). Nighttime temperatures drops as low as: 100 Kelvin (-270 degrees F). (2) Mercury has no permanent atmosphere because it is too hot (and has low escape speed). Temperature is a measure of the 3kT v = random speed of m atoms (or v typical speed of atom molecules).
    [Show full text]
  • South Pole-Aitken Basin
    Feasibility Assessment of All Science Concepts within South Pole-Aitken Basin INTRODUCTION While most of the NRC 2007 Science Concepts can be investigated across the Moon, this chapter will focus on specifically how they can be addressed in the South Pole-Aitken Basin (SPA). SPA is potentially the largest impact crater in the Solar System (Stuart-Alexander, 1978), and covers most of the central southern farside (see Fig. 8.1). SPA is both topographically and compositionally distinct from the rest of the Moon, as well as potentially being the oldest identifiable structure on the surface (e.g., Jolliff et al., 2003). Determining the age of SPA was explicitly cited by the National Research Council (2007) as their second priority out of 35 goals. A major finding of our study is that nearly all science goals can be addressed within SPA. As the lunar south pole has many engineering advantages over other locations (e.g., areas with enhanced illumination and little temperature variation, hydrogen deposits), it has been proposed as a site for a future human lunar outpost. If this were to be the case, SPA would be the closest major geologic feature, and thus the primary target for long-distance traverses from the outpost. Clark et al. (2008) described four long traverses from the center of SPA going to Olivine Hill (Pieters et al., 2001), Oppenheimer Basin, Mare Ingenii, and Schrödinger Basin, with a stop at the South Pole. This chapter will identify other potential sites for future exploration across SPA, highlighting sites with both great scientific potential and proximity to the lunar South Pole.
    [Show full text]
  • Mariner 10 Observations of Field-Aligned Currents at Mercury
    Planet. Space Sci., Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 133-141, 1997 Pergamon #I? 1997 Published bv Elsevier Science Ltd P&ted in Great Brit& All rights reserved 0032-0633/97 $17.00+0.00 PII: S0032-0633(96)00104-3 Mariner 10 observations of field-aligned currents at Mercury J. A. Slavin,’ J. C. J. Owen,’ J. E. P. Connerney’ and S. P. Christon ‘Laboratory for Extraterrestrial Physics, NASA/GSFC, Greenbelt, MD 20771, U.S.A. ‘Astronomy Unit, Queen Mary and Westfield College, London, U.K. 3Department of Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, U.S.A. Received 5 October 1995; revised 11 April 1996; accepted 13 April 1996 magnetic field at Mercury with a dipole moment of about 300nT R& (see review by Connerney and Ness (1988)). This magnetic field is sufficient to stand-off the average solar wind at an altitude of about 1 RM as depicted in Fig. 1 (see review by Russell et al. (1988)). For the purposes of comparison the diameter of the Earth is indicated at the bottom of the figure (i.e. 1 RE = 6380 km ; 1 RM = 2439 km). Whether or not the solar wind is ever able to compress and/or erode the dayside magnetosphere to the point where solar wind ions could directly impact the surface remains a topic of considerable controversy (Siscoe and Christopher, 1975 ; Slavin and Holzer, 1979 ; Hood and Schubert, 1979; Suess and Goldstein, 1979; Goldstein et al., 1981). Overall, the basic morphology of this small mag- netosphere appears quite similar to that of the Earth.
    [Show full text]
  • Origin and Evolution of the Moon's Procellarum KREEP
    Decadal Survey 2023 White Paper: Origin and Evolution of the Procellarum KREEP Terrane Origin and Evolution of the Moon’s Procellarum KREEP Terrane A White Paper submitted to the 2023 Planetary Science Decadal Survey, July 15, 2020 Authorship Brad Jolliff, Washington University in St. Louis, [email protected] Mark Robinson, Arizona State University, [email protected] Srinidhi Ravi, Arizona State University, [email protected] Co-signatories on the last page The Procellarum KREEP Terrane on the Moon’s nearside is a unique province that produced volcanism over an extended period of the Moon’s history. Thermal evolution of the lunar mantle in this region may have been driven by a high concentration of radiogenic heat-producing elements. This region is key to unlocking the thermal evolution of the Moon and may have implications for our understanding of extensive volcanism on other inner Solar System bodies such as Mercury and Mars. Major volcanic features of this terrane could be explored by a long-distance rover in a New Frontiers class mission to answer questions about how this planetary asymmetry formed, why volcanism was so voluminous in this region, and how it persisted for nearly 4 billion years. Introduction. The Moon displays a fundamental asymmetry that has been evident since the first images of the farside revealed an ancient, mountainous, heavily cratered feldspathic highlands but very little of the low-lying, dark basaltic plains that are prominent on the nearside, especially the western regions that incorporate Oceanus Procellarum, Imbrium, and several other nearside impact basins. Apollo orbital remote sensing revealed the first glimpses of compositional variations that corresponded to the hemispheric asymmetry, but only in narrow, near-equatorial orbital swaths.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Lifecycle of Hollows on Mercury
    The Lifecycle of Hollows on Mercury: An Evaluation of Candidate Volatile Phases and a Novel Model of Formation. 1 1 2 3 M. S. Phillips , J. E. Moersch , C. E. Viviano , J. P. Emery 1Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of Tennessee, Knoxville 2Planetary Exploration Group, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory 3Department of Astronomy and Planetary Sciences, Northern Arizona University Corresponding author: Michael Phillips ([email protected]) Keywords: Mercury, hollows, thermal model, fumarole. Abstract On Mercury, high-reflectance, flat-floored depressions called hollows are observed nearly globally within low-reflectance material, one of Mercury’s major color units. Hollows are thought to be young, or even currently active, features that form via sublimation, or a “sublimation-like” process. The apparent abundance of sulfides within LRM combined with spectral detections of sulfides associated with hollows suggests that sulfides may be the phase responsible for hollow formation. Despite the association of sulfides with hollows, it is still not clear whether sulfides are the hollow-forming phase. To better understand which phase(s) might be responsible for hollow formation, we calculated sublimation rates for 57 candidate hollow-forming volatile phases from the surface of Mercury and as a function of depth beneath regolith lag deposits of various thicknesses. We found that stearic acid (C18H36O2), fullerenes (C60, C70), and elemental sulfur (S) have the appropriate thermophysical properties to explain hollow formation. Stearic acid and fullerenes are implausible hollow-forming phases because they are unlikely to have been delivered to or generated on Mercury in high enough volume to account for hollows.
    [Show full text]
  • Late Heavy Bombardment
    Late Heavy Bombardment The Late Heavy Bombardment (abbreviated LHB and also known as the lunar cataclysm) is an event thought to have occurred approximately 4.1 to 3.8 billion years (Ga) ago,[1] at a time corresponding to the Neohadean and Eoarchean eras on Earth. During this interval, a disproportionately large number of asteroids are theorized to have collided with the early terrestrial planets in the inner Solar System, including Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars.[2] The Late Heavy Bombardment happened after the Earth and other rocky planets had formed and accreted most of their mass, but still quite early in Earth's history. Evidence for the LHB derives from lunar samples brought back by the Apollo astronauts. Isotopic dating of Moon rocks implies that most impact melts occurred in a rather narrow interval of time. Several hypotheses attempt to explain the apparent spike in the flux of impactors (i.e. asteroids and comets) in the inner Solar System, but no consensus yet exists. The Nice model, popular among planetary scientists, postulates that the giant planets underwent orbital Artist's impression of the Moon during the Late Heavy Bombardment (above) migration and in doing so, scattered objects in the asteroid and/or Kuiper belts and today (below). into eccentric orbits, and into the path of the terrestrial planets. Other researchers argue that the lunar sample data do not require a ataclysmicc cratering event near 3.9 Ga, and that the apparent clustering of impact-melt ages near this time is an artifact of sampling materials retrieved
    [Show full text]