DOCSLIB.ORG

State of Knowledge of the Ice Giant Interiors

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
State of Knowledge of the Ice Giant Interiors THE STATE OF KNOWLEDGE OF ICE GIANT INTERIORS Brigette Hesman (UMD / NASA GSFC) with significant contributions from: Tristan Guillot (Observatoire de la Cote d’Azur) Nadine Nettelmann (UC Santa Cruz) Ravit Helled (Tel-Aviv University) Workshop on the Study of Ice Giant Planets 7/30/14 1 WHY INTERIORS? • What is the motivation for studying Ice Giant interiors? Two-fold: 1. Interiors of the planets are a historical record of the planetary formation process - we need to investigate the full continuum our solar system’s planetary interiors to build the architecture of the early solar system - these studies provide constraints on the physical and chemical properties of protoplanetary disks 2. Uranus and Neptune are the Super-Earth’s/Mini-Neptune’s of our solar system - a class of exo-planets similar in size to our Ice Giants is continuing to grow due to the highly successful Kepler mission - studying the interiors of our local Ice Giants provides the foundation for entangling the composition of extra-solar planets Workshop on the Study of Ice Giant Planets 7/30/14 2 THE “ICE GIANTS” • Uranus and Neptune were classified as the Ice Giants to distinguish them from the Gas Giants because of their smaller gaseous envelopes (10-20% of their mass as H2 and He) • Uranus and Neptune have historically been thought of as icy twins ➔ Very similar mass, radii, gravitational moments, rotation periods ➔ Assumed to be water rich based on formation theories Uranus: 14.5 M⊕ @ 19.2 AU Neptune: 17.1 M⊕ @ 30 AU THEREFORE, VERY SIMILAR INTERIORS … RIGHT? MAYBE / MAYBE NOT Workshop on the Study of Ice Giant Planets 7/30/14 3 DICHOTOMY URANUS NEPTUNE • Low internal heat flux • Strong internal heat flux • High obliquity (98°) • Saturn-like obliquity • Dense narrow rings • Extended dust disk with diffuse rings • 5 of the largest satellites on • 2 major satellites on irregular regular orbits orbits Different Formation Histories? Different Internal Structures? Workshop on the Study of Ice Giant Planets 7/30/14 4 DIFFERENT FORMATION HISTORIES? Standard Formation Model (Core Accretion): Three phases of formation: Phase 1: Initial core accumulates planetesimals (presumably rocks) by runaway accretion Phase 2: Low rate of accretion of gas and planetesimals Phase 3: Collapse of gas onto core of planet which provides hydrogen envelope • Uranus and Neptune probably never reached phase 3 – “failed giant planets” • Hydrogen and helium in the envelopes of these two planets was probably acquired in stage 2 … therefore, small envelopes BUT • Problems: formation timescales, critical core mass, getting a Uranus-like composition Multiple other models to solve issues: 1. Formation closer to the sun (Nice Model) 2. Disk physics/chemistry – disk evolution, enhancing the solids 3. High accretion rates 4. A combination … All formation models have trouble creating the dichotomy we see in Uranus and Neptune Workshop on the Study of Ice Giant Planets 7/30/14 5 DIFFERENT FORMATION HISTORIES? Standard Formation Model (Core Accretion): Three phases of formation: Phase 1: Initial core accumulates planetesimals (presumably rocks) by runaway accretion Phase 2: Low rate of accretion of gas and planetesimals Phase 3: Collapse of gas onto core of planet which provides hydrogen envelope Maybe Uranus and • Uranus and Neptune probably never reached phase 3 – “failed giant planets” Neptune formed in the • Hydrogen and helium in the envelopes of these two planets was probably acquired in stage 2 … therefore, small envelopes same method and did have similar structures BUT after formation. Then • Problems: formation timescales, critical core mass, getting a Uranus-like composition Multiple other models to solve issues: why the DICHOTOMY? 1. Formation closer to the sun (Nice Model) 2. Disk physics/chemistry – disk evolution, enhancing the solids 3. High accretion rates 4. A combination … All formation models have trouble creating the dichotomy we see in Uranus and Neptune Workshop on the Study of Ice Giant Planets 7/30/14 6 DIFFERENT INTERNAL STRUCTURE? The Possible Role of Giant Impacts Uranus: Oblique Collision Neptune: Radial Collision Angular momentum deposition causes: Energy of impact causes: 1. Inhibition of core convection 1. Core mixing resulting in an adiabatic and 2. Strong tilt of planet mixed interior 2. Efficient cooling A more thorough understanding of these planets interiors will reveal details about their formation and evolution in our solar system Workshop on the Study of Ice Giant Planets 7/30/14 7 DEFINING THE INTERIOR The gravitational field of a rotating planet: r, θ, φ are spherical polar coordinates M = total planetary mass a = equatorial radius (at the 1bar level) J2n = gravitational moments P2n = Legendre polynomials ω = angular velocity of rotation With M and Jn constrain the INTERIOR DENSITY, ρ(r) Workshop on the Study of Ice Giant Planets 7/30/14 8 The Astrophysical Journal,726:15(7pp),2011January1 Helled et al. Jupiter and Neptune that fit their measured gravitational fields are 4 derived using Monte Carlo searches (Marley et al. 1995;Podolak J6 et al. 2000). This approach is free of preconceived notions about planetary structure and composition and is not limited by the 3 J4 EOSs of assumed materials. Once the density profiles that fit the gravitational coefficients are found, conclusions regarding their nctions u J2 possible compositions can be inferred using theoretical EOSs 2 tion f (Marley et al. 1995). u J0 In this paper, we apply the method previously used in our models of Saturn (Anderson & Schubert 2007; Helled et al. Contrib 1 2009a)toderivecontinuousradialdensityandpressureprofiles core CORE “SAMPLING” that fit the mass, radius, and gravitational moments of Uranus and Neptune. The use of a smooth function for the density 0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 with no discontinuities allows us to test whether Uranus and The Astrophysical Journal,726:15(7pp),2011January1 Helled et al. Helled et al. (2011) Normalized Mean Radius β Neptune could have interiors with no density (and composition) Jupiter and Neptune that fit theirNeptu measuredne gravitational fields are discontinuities. Section 2 summarizes the models and results. In 4 4derived using Monte Carlo searches (Marley et al. 1995;Podolak Section 3,weusephysicalequationofstatetablestoinferwhat J6 et al. 2000). This approach is free of preconceived notions about these density distributions imply about the internal composition J planetary structure and composition and is not6 limited by the of Uranus and Neptune. Conclusions are discussed in Section 4. 3 J4 3 EOSs of assumed materials. Once the densityJ4 profiles that fit the gravitational coefficients are found, conclusions regarding their 2. INTERIOR MODEL: FINDING RADIAL PROFILES OF nctions nctions u DENSITY AND PRESSURE u J2 possible compositions can be inferred using theoretical EOSs 2 2 J2 tion f tion f (Marley et al. 1995). J0 The procedure used to derive the interior model is described in u u J0 In this paper, we apply the method previously used in our detail in Anderson & Schubert (2007)andHelledetal.(2009a). models of Saturn (Anderson & Schubert 2007; Helled et al. Contrib Contrib 1 1 The method is briefly summarized below. 2009a )toderivecontinuousradialdensityandpressureprofiles core core The gravitational field of a rotating planet is given by that fit the mass, radius, and gravitational moments of Uranus 2n and Neptune. The use of a smooth function for the density GM ∞ a 1 2 2 2 0 0 U 1 J2nP2n (cos θ) + ω r sin θ, 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0with no discontinuities 0.2 0.4 allows us 0.6 to test whether 0.8 Uranus 1.0 and = r − r 2 ! n 1 % Normalized Mean Radius β Neptune could haveNormalized interiors Mean with Radi nous β density (and composition) "= # $ (1) Neptune Figurediscontinuities. 1. Normalized integrands Section of2 thesummarizes gravitational the moments models (contribution and results. In 4 functions)Section of Jupiter3,weusephysicalequationofstatetablestoinferwhat (top) and Neptune (bottom). The values are normalized to where (r, θ, φ) are spherical polar coordinates, G is the gravita- Ice Giants have advantage of gravitational moments sampling the core! make the area under each curve equal unity. J is equivalent to the planetary these density distributions imply0 about the internal composition tional constant, M is the total planetary mass, and ω is the angular J6 mass. The range of possible core sizes is indicated. Here, core designates a regionof of Uranus heavy elements and Neptune. below the Conclusions H/He envelope. are It is discussed clear that Neptune’s in Section 4. velocity of rotation. We assume that the planets rotate as solid 3 (Uranus’) interior is better sampled by the gravitational harmonics compared to J4 bodies with Voyager rotation periods (Table 1), although this Jupiter (Saturn).2. INTERIOR MODEL: FINDING RADIAL PROFILES OF assumption is a simplification since the interior rotation profiles nctions u (A color version of this figureDENSITY is available AND in the online PRESSURE journal.) of Uranus and Neptune are actually poorly known and could 2 J2 tion f J0 The procedure used to derive the interior model is described in be more complex (Helled et al. 2010). The potential U is rep- u uses physicaldetail in equationsAnderson of & state Schubert (EOSs) (2007 of the)andHelledetal.( assumed materials2009a). resented as an expansion in even Legendre polynomials, P2n Workshop on the Study of Ice Giant Planets 7/30/14 9 Contrib 1 to deriveThe method a density is briefly(and associated summarized pressure below. and temperature) (Kaula 1968;Zharkov&Trubitsyn1978). The planet is defined core profile thatThe best gravitational fits the measured field of a gravitational rotating planet coefficients. is given by The by its total mass, equatorial radius a at the 1 bar pressure level, physical parameters of the planets, such as mass and equatorial and harmonic coefficients J2n,whichareinferredfromDoppler 2n radius, areGM used as additional∞ a constraints.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Planetary Science in the Eyes of Giant Telescopes
    Planetary Science in the Eyes of Giant Telescopes Franck Marchis (Carl Sagan Center at the SETI Ins<tute) Feeding the Giants Workshop, Ischia, Italy, August 30 2011, Outline ELTs = Extremely Large Telescopes (E-ELT, TMT, GMT) • Solar System Exploraon – Why Exploring the Solar System with ELTs – Space Mission Programs: Why, Who, Where, When? • Poten<al of the ELTs for Solar System Science – High Angular imaging coupled with spectroscopy in the NIR to explore Io, Titan, and TNOs – Low res UV-NIR spectroscopic combined with All-sky surveys 402 Years of Telescopes Why Planetary Science and the ELTs? • Long heritage of telescopic observaons for the study of the Solar System • Started in 1609 with Galileo Galilei – First publicaon in modern astronomy based on telescope data – Discoveries in the field of Planetary Science • Galilean Moons • Roughness of the Moon surface • Disk appearance of planets & phase of Venus • In 2009, 40% of Keck PR and 25% of Keck AO publicaons are based on Planetary Science results • Strong Public Interest for Planetary Science Toys in Japan Pluto protests 51 Years of Space Missions • First aempts to reach Mars (1960) and Venus (1961) • ~200 solar, lunar and interplanetary missions • More reliable technologies -> more space missions • More accessible technologies -> more countries have access to space (e.g. Japan, China, India,…) • Could the ELTs contribute to Planetary Science in this context? 51 Years of Space Missions (2009) Naonal Geographic 51 Years of Space Missions Inner Solar System NEA 51 Years of Space Missions
    [Show full text]
  • Ice Giants As Exoplanet Analogs K.E
    Ice Giants as Exoplanet Analogs K.E. Mandt, O. Mousis, J. Lunine, B. Marty, T. Smith, A. Luspay- Kuti, A. Aguichine @mommascientist Ice Giants as Exoplanet Analogs • Ice Giant mass/radius common among detected exoplanets • Our Ice Giants only explored by single flybys • Major questions remain about formation process, interior structure and composition, energy balance, and interaction with the Sun • Broad international support for a mission to Uranus and/or Neptune What observations of our Ice Giants would help advance Exoplanet characterization efforts? @mommascientist 5 January 2021 2 Big questions about the Ice Giants • Several studies have designed missions to Uranus and/or Neptune • Common Science Goals - How did the Ice Giants form and evolve? - What is the interior structure of the Ice Giants? - How does the planetary dynamo work? - What is the heat balance of the Ice Giants? - What drives atmospheric dynamics? - How did the rings form and evolve? - How did the moons form and evolve? Any mission to the Ice Giants must address system-level goals. The greatest synergy with current exoplanet research is in the origin, evolution, and current state of the planet. 5 January 2021 3 Giant Planet Formation and Evolution • What was the composition of the solid building blocks? • Did the Protosolar Nebula (PSN) composition vary with distance from the Sun? • What contributed to the noble gas isotope mixtures? Heavy elements trace building block formation, PSN composition, planet formation, and planet evolution @mommascientist Image credit: NASA/STScI
    [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]
  • Neptune Polar Orbiter with Probes*
    NEPTUNE POLAR ORBITER WITH PROBES* 2nd INTERNATIONAL PLANETARY PROBE WORKSHOP, AUGUST 2004, USA Bernard Bienstock(1), David Atkinson(2), Kevin Baines(3), Paul Mahaffy(4), Paul Steffes(5), Sushil Atreya(6), Alan Stern(7), Michael Wright(8), Harvey Willenberg(9), David Smith(10), Robert Frampton(11), Steve Sichi(12), Leora Peltz(13), James Masciarelli(14), Jeffrey Van Cleve(15) (1)Boeing Satellite Systems, MC W-S50-X382, P.O. Box 92919, Los Angeles, CA 90009-2919, [email protected] (2)University of Idaho, PO Box 441023, Moscow, ID 83844-1023, [email protected] (3)JPL, 4800 Oak Grove Blvd., Pasadena, CA 91109-8099, [email protected] (4)NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, [email protected] (5)Georgia Institute of Technology, 320 Parian Run, Duluth, GA 30097-2417, [email protected] (6)University of Michigan, Space Research Building, 2455 Haward St., Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2143, [email protected] (7)Southwest Research Institute, Department of Space Studies, 1050 Walnut St., Suite 400, Boulder, CO 80302, [email protected] (8)NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000, [email protected] (9)4723 Slalom Run SE, Owens Cross Roads, AL 35763, [email protected] (10) Boeing NASA Systems, MC H013-A318, 5301 Bolsa Ave., Huntington Beach, CA 92647-2099, [email protected] (11)Boeing NASA Systems, MC H012-C349, 5301 Bolsa Ave., Huntington Beach, CA 92647-2099 [email protected] (12)Boeing Satellite Systems, MC W-S50-X382, P.O. Box 92919, Los Angeles, CA 90009-2919, [email protected] (13) )Boeing NASA Systems, MC H013-C320, 5301 Bolsa Ave., Huntington Beach, CA 92647-2099, [email protected] (14)Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp., P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Abstracts of Extreme Solar Systems 4 (Reykjavik, Iceland)
    Abstracts of Extreme Solar Systems 4 (Reykjavik, Iceland) American Astronomical Society August, 2019 100 — New Discoveries scope (JWST), as well as other large ground-based and space-based telescopes coming online in the next 100.01 — Review of TESS’s First Year Survey and two decades. Future Plans The status of the TESS mission as it completes its first year of survey operations in July 2019 will bere- George Ricker1 viewed. The opportunities enabled by TESS’s unique 1 Kavli Institute, MIT (Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States) lunar-resonant orbit for an extended mission lasting more than a decade will also be presented. Successfully launched in April 2018, NASA’s Tran- siting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) is well on its way to discovering thousands of exoplanets in orbit 100.02 — The Gemini Planet Imager Exoplanet Sur- around the brightest stars in the sky. During its ini- vey: Giant Planet and Brown Dwarf Demographics tial two-year survey mission, TESS will monitor more from 10-100 AU than 200,000 bright stars in the solar neighborhood at Eric Nielsen1; Robert De Rosa1; Bruce Macintosh1; a two minute cadence for drops in brightness caused Jason Wang2; Jean-Baptiste Ruffio1; Eugene Chiang3; by planetary transits. This first-ever spaceborne all- Mark Marley4; Didier Saumon5; Dmitry Savransky6; sky transit survey is identifying planets ranging in Daniel Fabrycky7; Quinn Konopacky8; Jennifer size from Earth-sized to gas giants, orbiting a wide Patience9; Vanessa Bailey10 variety of host stars, from cool M dwarfs to hot O/B 1 KIPAC, Stanford University (Stanford, California, United States) giants. 2 Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology TESS stars are typically 30–100 times brighter than (Pasadena, California, United States) those surveyed by the Kepler satellite; thus, TESS 3 Astronomy, California Institute of Technology (Pasadena, Califor- planets are proving far easier to characterize with nia, United States) follow-up observations than those from prior mis- 4 Astronomy, U.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Formation of Telluric Planets and the Origin of Terrestrial Water
    BIO Web of Conferences 2, 01003 (2014) DOI: 10.1051/bioconf/20140201003 C Owned by the authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2014 Formation of telluric planets and the origin of terrestrial water Sean Raymond1;a 1Laboratoire d’Astrophysique de Bordeaux, UMR 5804 Abstract. Simulations of planet formation have failed to reproduce Mars’ small mass (compared with Earth) for 20 years. Here I will present a solution to the Mars problem that invokes large-scale migration of Jupiter and Saturn while they were still embedded in the gaseous protoplanetary disk. Jupiter first migrated inward, then "tacked" and migrated back outward when Saturn caught up to it and became trapped in resonance. If this tack occurred when Jupiter was at 1.5 AU then the inner disk of rocky planetesimals and em- bryos is truncated and the masses and orbits of all four terrestrial planet are quantitatively reproduced. As the giant planets migrate back outward they re-populate the asteroid belt from two different source populations, matching the structure of the current belt. C-type material is also scattered inward to the terrestrial planet-forming zone, delivering about the right amount of water to Earth on 10-50 Myr timescales. 1 Introduction 2 The formation of terrestrial planets As described in the Introduction, the final stages of terrestrial planet formation take place in the presence of any giant planets that may have formed. In addition, it is during this phase that bodies are large enough that during gravitational close encounters they can obtain large eccentricities. Thus, the feeding zones of the terrestrial planets are determined during their final accretion.
    [Show full text]
  • Solar System Interiors, Atmospheres, and Surfaces Investigations Via Radio Links: Goals for the Next Decade
    White Paper for the Planetary Science and Astrobiology Decadal Survey 2023-2032 The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Solar System Interiors, Atmospheres, and Surfaces Investigations via Radio Links: Goals for the Next Decade SW Asmar1 ([email protected], 818-354-6288), RA Preston1, P Vergados1, DH Atkinson1, T Andert2, H Ando3, CO Ao1, JW Armstrong1, N Ashby4, J-P Barriot5, PM Beauchamp1, DJ Bell1, PL Bender6, M Di Benedetto7, BG Bills1, MK Bird8, TM Bocanegra-Bahamon1, GK Botteon1, S Bruinsma9, DR Buccino1, KL Cahoy10, P Cappuccio7, RK Choudhary11, V Dehant12, C Dumoulin13, D Durante7, CD Edwards1, HM Elliott1, TA Ely1, AI Ermakov14, F Ferri15, FM Flasar16, RG French17, A Genova7, SJ Goossens16,18, B Häusler2, R Helled19, DP Hinson20, MD Hofstadter1, L Iess7, T Imamura21, AP Jongeling1, Ö Karatekin12, Y Kaspi22, MM Kobayashi1, A Komjathy1, AS Konopliv1, ER Kursinski23, TJW Lazio1, S Le Maistre12, FG Lemoine16, RJ Lillis14, IR Linscott24, AJ Mannucci1, EA Marouf25, J-C Marty9, SE Matousek1, K Matsumoto26, EM Mazarico16, V Notaro7, M Parisi1, RS Park1, M Pätzold8, GG Peytaví2, MP Pugh1, NO Rennó27, P Rosenblatt13, D Serra28, RA Simpson20,24, DE Smith10, PG Steffes29, BD Tapley30, S Tellmann8, P Tortora31, SG Turyshev1, T Van Hoolst12, AK Verma32, MM Watkins1, W Williamson1, MA Wieczorek33, P Withers34, M Yseboodt12, N Yu1, M Zannoni31, MT Zuber10 1: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology 18. University of Maryland 2: Universität der Bundeswehr München, Germany 19. Universität Zürich, Switzerland 3. Kyoto Sangyo University, Japan 20. SETI Institute 4. National Institute of Standards & Technology 21. The University of Tokyo, Japan 5.
    [Show full text]
  • The Comparative Exploration of the Ice Giant Planets with Twin Spacecraft
    The Comparative Exploration of the Ice Giant Planets with Twin Spacecraft The Comparative Exploration of the Ice Giant Planets with Twin Spacecraft: Unveiling the History of our Solar System Diego Turrini1*, Romolo Politi1, Roberto Peron1, Davide Grassi1, Christina Plainaki1, Mauro Barbieri2, David M. Lucchesi1, Gianfranco Magni1, Francesca Altieri1, Valeria Cottini3, Nicolas Gorius4, Patrick Gaulme5,6, François-Xavier Schmider7, Alberto Adriani1, Giuseppe Piccioni1 1 Institute for Space Astrophysics and Planetology INAF-IAPS, Italy. 2 Center of Studies and Activities for Space CISAS, University of Padova, Italy. 3 University of Maryland, USA. 4 Catholic University of America, USA 5 Department of Astronomy, New Mexico State University, P.O. Box 30001, MSC 4500, Las Cruces, NM 88003-8001, USA 6 Apache Point Observatory, 2001 Apache Point Road, P.O. Box 59, Sunspot, NM 88349, USA 7 Laboratoire Lagrange, Observatoire de la Côte d'Azur, France Abstract In the course of the selection of the scientific themes for the second and third L-class missions of the Cosmic Vision 2015-2025 program of the European Space Agency, the exploration of the ice giant planets Uranus and Neptune was defined “a timely milestone, fully appropriate for an L class mission”. Among the proposed scientific themes, we presented the scientific case of exploring both planets and their satellites in the framework of a single L-class mission and proposed a mission scenario that could allow to achieve this result. In this work we present an updated and more complete discussion of the scientific rationale and of the mission concept for a comparative exploration of the ice giant planets Uranus and Neptune and of their satellite systems with twin spacecraft.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploration of the Ice Giant Systems
    Exploration of the Ice Giant Systems A White Paper for NASA's Planetary Science and Astrobiology Decadal Survey 2023-2032 Uranus (left) [1] and Neptune (right) (NASA) Lead Authors: Chloe B. Beddingfield1,2 1The SETI Institute 2NASA Ames Research Center [email protected] (972) 415-7604 Cheng Li3 3University of California, Berkeley [email protected] Primary Co-Authors: Sushil Atreya4 Patricia Beauchamp5 Ian Cohen6 Jonathan Fortney7 Heidi Hammel8 Matthew Hedman9 Mark Hofstadter5 Abigail Rymer6 Paul Schenk10 Mark Showalter1 4University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 5Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 6Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, 7University of California, Santa Cruz, 8Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, 9University of Idaho, 10Lunar and Planetary Institute Additional Coauthors and Endorsers: For a full list of the 145 authors and endorsers, see the following link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/158h8ZK0HXp- DSQqVhV7gcGzjHqhUJ_2MzQAsRg3sxXw/edit?usp=sharing Motivation Ice giants are the only unexplored class of planet in our Solar System. Much that we currently know about these systems challenges our understanding of how planets, rings, satellites, and magnetospheres form and evolve. We assert that an ice giant Flagship mission with an atmospheric probe should be a priority for the decade 2023-2032. Investigation of Uranus or Neptune would advance fundamental understanding of many key issues in Solar System formation: 1) how ice giants formed and migrated through the Solar System; 2) what processes control the current conditions of this class of planet, its rings, satellites, and magnetospheres; 3) how the rings and satellites formed and evolved, and how Triton was captured from the Kuiper Belt; 4) whether the large satellites of the ice giants are ocean worlds that may harbor life now or in the past; and 5) the range of possible characteristics for exoplanets.
    [Show full text]
  • 9:00 Pm SFAA ANNUAL AWARDS and MEMBERSHIP DINNER MARIPOSA HUNTER’S POINT YACHT CLUB 405 Terry A
    Vol. 64, No. 1 – January2016 FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 2015 - 5:00 pm – 9:00 pm SFAA ANNUAL AWARDS AND MEMBERSHIP DINNER MARIPOSA HUNTER’S POINT YACHT CLUB 405 Terry A. Francois Boulevard San Francisco Directions: http://www.yelp.com/map/mariposa-hunters-point-yacht-club-san-francisco Dear Members, our Annual January get-together will be Friday, January 22nd, 2016 from 5:00 to 9:00 at the Mariposa, Hunter's Point Yacht Club. There are many things to celebrate in this fun atmosphere, with tacos served by El Tonayense, salads & more, along with a full cash bar. All members are invited and SFAA will be paying for food. Non-members are welcome at a cost of $25. Telescopes will be set up on the patio, which provides beautiful views of the bay. We will be celebrating a year when we have made a successful transition to the Presidio, have continued the success of the sharing and viewing we have on Mt Tam, expanded and strengthened our City Star Parties and volunteered at many schools. Our Yosemite trip was very successful and the opportunity to tour Lick Observatory will not be soon forgotten. We will also be welcoming new members to our board and commending those whose work and commitment, our club could not function without. We look forward to enjoying the evening with all those who enjoy the night sky with the San Francisco Amateur Astronomers. There is plenty of parking, as well as easy access from the KT line and the 22 bus. Please RSVP at [email protected] Anil Chopra 2016 SAN FRANCISCO AMATEUR ASTRONOMERS GENERAL ELECTION The following members have been elected to serve as San Francisco Amateur Astronomers’ Officers and Directors for calendar year 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Astro2020 Science White Paper Solar System Ice Giants
    Solar System Exoplanets White Paper Astro2020 Science White Paper Solar System Ice Giants: Exoplanets in our Backyard. Thematic Areas: ☒ Planetary Systems ☐ Star and Planet Formation ☐Formation and Evolution of Compact Objects ☐ Cosmology and Fundamental Physics ☐Stars and Stellar Evolution ☐Resolved Stellar Populations and their Environments ☐Galaxy Evolution ☐Multi‐Messenger Astronomy and Astrophysics Principal Author: Name: Abigail Rymer Institution: Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory Email: [email protected] Phone: 443‐778‐2736 Co‐authors: Kathleen Mandt1, Dana Hurley1, Carey Lisse1, Noam Izenberg1, H.Todd Smith1, Joseph Westlake1, Emma Bunce2, Christopher Arridge3, Adam Masters4, Mark Hofstadter5, Amy Simon6, Pontus Brandt1, George Clark1, Ian Cohen1, Robert Allen1, Sarah Vine1, Kenneth Hansen7, George Hospodarsky8, William Kurth8, Paul Romani6, Laurent Lamy9, Philippe Zarka9, Hao Cao10, Carol Paty11, Matthew Hedman12, Elias Roussos13, Dale Cruikshank14, William Farrell6, Paul Fieseler5, Andrew Coates15, Roger Yelle16, Christopher Parkinson7, Burkhard Militzer17, Denis Grodent18, Peter Kollmann1, Ralph McNutt1, Nicolas André19, Nathan Strange5, Jason Barnes20, Luke Dones21, Tilmann Denk22, Julie Rathbun23, Jonathan Lunine12, Ravi Desai4, Corey Cochrane5, Kunio M. Sayanagi24, Frank Postberg25, Robert Ebert21, Thomas Hill26, Ingo Mueller- Wodarg4, Leonardo Regoli7, Duane Pontius27, Sabine Stanley1,49, Thomas Greathouse21, Joachim Saur28, Essam Marouf29, Jan Bergman30, Chuck Higgins31, Robert Johnson32, Michelle Thomsen23,
    [Show full text]
  • In Situ Probes in the Atmospheres of the Ice Giants
    In Situ Probes in the Atmospheres of the Ice Giants Principal Author: Glenn Orton Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California 91109, USA ([email protected]) Co-Authors: David Atkinson1, Tibor Balint1, Mark Hofstadter1, Olivier Mousis2, Kunio Sayanagi3, Tom Spilker4 1JPL/Caltech, USA, 2Aix-Marseille Univ., France, 3Hampton Univ. USA, 4Independent consultant, USA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California 91109, USA Abstract This paper describes atmospheric entry and descent probe missions in the atmospheres of the ice giants, Uranus and Neptune, targeting a minimum depth at the 10-bar level. In situ exploration of ice giant atmospheres addresses two broad themes: i) the formation history of the ice-giant planets and their role in the evolution of the solar system, and ii) the structure, dynamics, and processes in their atmospheres. An ice giant probe descending under parachute can measure abundances of key atmospheric constituents, deep thermal structure, dynamics, and processes, with data returned to Earth by a Carrier Relay Spacecraft. An atmospheric probe is an essential element of a possible future NASA Ice Giant New Frontier or Flagship mission. 1. Introduction The gas giant planets, Jupiter and Saturn, and the ice giant planets, Uranus and Neptune, contain most of the non-solar mass of the solar system and have played a significant role in shaping solar system evolution [1], influencing its current structure and affecting delivery of volatiles to the inner (terrestrial) planets [2]. Understanding the formation, evolution, and ultimate location of the giant planets is key to understanding the formation and evolution of the solar system as a whole.
    [Show full text]