DOCSLIB.ORG

Lunar and Planetary Science XXX 1818.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lunar and Planetary Science XXX 1818.Pdf Lunar and Planetary Science XXX 1818.pdf AGES OF INDIVIDUAL CRATERS ON THE GALILEAN SATELLITES GANYMEDE AND CALLISTO. R. Wagner1, U. Wolf1, G. Neukum1, and the Galileo SSI Team. 1DLR, Institute of Planetary Exploration, Berlin, Germany. E-mail: [email protected] Introduction: Craters, palimpsests and multi-ringed used for modeling crater ages on Galilean satellite surfaces. basins are important stratigraphic markers in establishing Model I, as discussed by [3], assumes a lunar-like, prefer- sequences of geologic events by crosscutting relationships. entially asteroidal bombardment of the jovian satellites, Impact structure forms, hence the style of crustal response with a period of heavy bombardment which ended about towards impact deformation, also may have changed 3.8 billion years (b.y.) ago - forming the youngest large through geologic time. Measurements of crater distribu- multi-ring basins, such as Gilgamesh on Ganymede - and a tions mapped in these impact structures and their sur- more or less constant cratering rate since about 3.3 b.y. rounding terrain provide a valuable tool in order to estab- Cratering Model I ages are derived by solving equation (1) lish an age sequence. From the application of cratering for exposition time t (in b.y.). Coefficients A, B and C for chronology models, absolute ages for these impact struc- all three icy Galilean are given in table 1. Age uncertainties tures can be derived also. In this paper we present ages for are on the order of 0.05 b.y. for surfaces older than 3.3 b.y. impact events which created craters and impact structures but may amount to 0.5 b.y. for surfaces younger than 3.3 on Ganymede and Callisto, based on two impact chronol- b.y. ogy models for the jovian system. Ages of impact features . (B.t) . on Europa are treated in [1]. Ncum(D•1km) = A (exp - 1) + C t (1) Procedure: Geologic mapping and measurements of crater distributions were carried out on Galileo SSI high- Coeff. Europa Ganymede Callisto resolution images with spatial resolutions of less than 100 A 2.173.10-14 1.054.10-14 5.379.10-15 m/pxl, but for some craters and palimpsests Voyager im- B 6.93 6.93 6.93 ages with only 0.9 to 1.5 km/pxl resolution were available. C 3.347.10-4 1.625.10-4 8.28.10-5 Craters were subdivided into geologic units such as (1) continuous ejecta materials, (2) crater floor materials and Table 1: Coefficients used for the lunar-like cratering (3) pit materials. An impact event is reliably given by the chronology (Model I [3]) in equation (1). crater frequencies measured on the ejecta blanket, but cra- ter frequencies on crater floors or pit materials may also be used to date the event unless longer-term resurfacing or Model II, as discussed by [4], assumes impacts prefer- modification subsequent to impact has been going on. For entially by members of the Jupiter-family comet population impact structures such as palimpsests we used the geologic and extrapolates current impact rates of these bodies back- ward in time. For a measured cumulative frequency N for subdivision into (1) interior smooth plains, (2) disorgan- cum ized massif facies, (3) concentric massif facies, and (4) craters •10 km in diameter, and a crater production rate outer deposits, as given by [2]. Uncertainties in measured dC/dt for each satellite, the exposition time t (in b.y.) ac- crater frequencies are on the order of 10-20%. Some craters cording to [4] is given by: do not appear to contain superimposed craters at all. In t’ = [N / (dC/dt)] / 109 (2) these cases, crater frequencies can only be estimated. This cum is done as follows: (a) the area of the crater floor or of the and ejecta deposits is measured; (b) for a given spatial image t = t (1 - exp (-t’/t )) (3) resolution S in km/pxl, the smallest recognizable crater o o should have a diameter of about 3.S km; (c) we assume at with t’, t given in years [yr] and t = 4.56 billion years. least one crater to be present with a diameter just below o D=3.S which is the next lower bin diameter since measured Equation (3) is used to correct secular variations in impact . -14 . - craters are always sorted into bins [3]. Images may be rate with time [4]. The values of dC/dt are 2.5 10 , 5.4 10 14 . -13 -2 -1 zoomed up to a factor of 2 or 3 for this estimation in order and 1.0 10 [km yr ] for Callisto, Ganymede and Eu- to simulate the view in the high-resolution stereo com- ropa respectively. Model II has uncertainties in crater pro- parator which is used for our crater counts [3]. The esti- duction rate of a factor of 5 [4], but a smaller uncertainty of mated age obtained by this procedure gives a maximum age a factor of 3 cannot be ruled out [5]. Two features of Model for the impact event since the craters superimposed on II are noteworthy: (1) the shape of the crater distributions is described by a simple power law N ~ D-2.2 [4] [6], ejecta blanket or floor which could be recognized on cum higher-resolution images may still be smaller than the whereas our measurements show that crater distributions threshold diameter chosen by the image resolution limit. measured on Galilean satellite surfaces follow a complex function, as do lunar ones [3]. Thus, Model II ages derived Cratering models in the jovian system: Currently, from measurements using a simple power law may be up to two subtantially different cratering chronologies may be a factor of 2 higher than the values shown in table 2. (2) Lunar and Planetary Science XXX 1818.pdf AGES OF INDIVIDUAL CRATERS ON THE GALILEAN SATELLITES R. Wagner et al Apex-antapex asymmetries for crater frequencies have been distributions could be measured so far are listed in table 3. inferred by [3] and [6]. Such asymmetries, however, could Model I ages for the stratigraphically younger multi-ring not be confirmed in our counts [3] [7]. basins and large impact features such as Valhalla or Lofn of about 4.0 b.y. and 3.9 b.y. resp. are more consistent with a Ganymede: Ages for craters on palimpsests are shown lunar-like bombardment history and a formation of large in table 2. Bright ray craters such as Osiris or Achelous are multi-ring structures that ended about 3.8 b.y. ago. How- relatively young features in Model I, compared to ever it can not be ruled out that at least Lofn was created in Ganymed’s bright and dark terrains (3.6 and 4.2 b.y. resp. more recent times, due to the following reason: The crater according to Model I [3]). The higher age of the presuma- frequency of Lofn’s smooth central plains is very low and bly young bright ray crater Tros results from using Voyager contains only one bright-rimmed crater, maybe 3 or 4 more data rather limited in resolution. In Model II, these bright close to the resolution limit. This larger crater could be a ray craters could be recent features. Palimpsests range from secondary crater from bright young craters superimposed about 4.1 b.y. to 3.8 b.y. in Model I, but may be as young on the (still unnamed) impact structure next to Lofn which as only 0.6 b.y. (Buto Facula) in Model II. Ages of the is seen on low-resolution, highly-foreshortened Voyager younger palimpsests are comparable to those of young images only. Thus, Lofn could postdate the period of Late bright sulci in both chronology models. According to Heavy Bombardment (Model I age: < 3.4 b.y.; Modell II Model I, tectonic activity on Ganymede should have ceased age: < 0.22 b.y. / 0.98 - 0.04). Young bright craters on Cal- about 3.6 b.y. ago (youngest bright sulci [3]), with listo have not been measured yet - mostly due to insuffi- Ganymede’s surface having been modified only by impacts cient medium- and high-resolution image coverage - but ever since, whereas in Model II tectonic deformation as should be present as they are on Ganymede and Europa [1]. well as palimpsest formation could have been going on Galileo’s orbit C20 provides an opportunity to obtain high- until only 500 Million years ago [4]. resolution images of at least one bright ray crater - Bran (ca. 100 km diameter) - during the entire Galileo mission. Impact feature Model I ages Model II ages / (b.y.) range Impact feature Model I ages Modell II ages / range (b.y.) (b.y.) (b.y.) Craters: Craters: OsirisE,V 0.26 0.007 / 0.03 - 0.001 Tindr 3.87 1.35 / 3.77 - 0.31 AchelousE 0.41 0.01 / 0.05 - 0.002 Jalkr 3.96 2.09 / 4.35 - 0.53 TrosE,V 2.89 0.08 / 0.37 - 0.02 G2 palimpsestU 3.98 2.31 / 4.42 - 0.60 Gula 3.70 0.37 / 1.57 - 0.08 Har 4.07 3.32 / 4.55 - 1.04 Neith 3.91 0.99 / 3.23 - 0.22 Basins (MRB): Palimpsests: Lofn 3.88 1.39 / 3.83 - 0.32 Buto Facula 3.82 0.59 / 2.29 - 0.12 Valhalla 3.98 2.31 / 4.45 - 0.60 Zakar 3.83 0.61 / 2.34 - 0.13 Asgard 4.19 4.32 / 4.56 - 2.02 Memphis Facula 4.02 1.80 / 4.19 - 0.44 V Edfu Facula 4.12 2.86 / 4.53 - 0.82 Table 3: Absolute ages for craters, palimpsests and the V Siwah Facula 4.22 3.88 / 4.56 - 1.45 major multi-ring structures (MRB) on Callisto.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Planets BIBLIOGRAPHY 3–1
    3–1 The Planets BIBLIOGRAPHY 3–1 The aim of this chapter is to introduce the physics of planetary motion and the general properties of the planets. Useful background reading includes: • Young & Freedman: – section 12.1 (Newton’s Law of Gravitation), – section 12.3 (Gravitational Potential Energy), – section 12.4 (The Motion of Satellites), – section 12.5 (Kepler’s Laws and the Motion of Planets) • Zeilik & Gregory: – chapter P1 (Orbits in the Solar System), – chapter 1 (Celestial Mechanics and the Solar System), – chapter 2 (The Solar System in Perspective), – section 4-3 (Interiors), – section 4-5 (Atmospheres), – chapter 5 (The Terrestrial Planets), – chapter 6 (The Jovian Planets and Pluto). • Kutner: – chapter 22 (Overview of the Solar System), – section 23.3 (The atmosphere), – chapter 24 (The inner planets, especially section 24.3), – chapter 25 (The outer planets). Relative sizes of the Sun and the planets Venus Transit, 2004 June 8 Elio Daniele, Palermo The Inner Planets (SSE, NASA) The Outer Planets (SSE, NASA) 3–6 Planets: Properties ◦ a [AU] Porb [yr] i [ ] e Prot M/M R/R Mercury ' 0.387 0.241 7.00 0.205 58.8d 0.055 0.383 Venus ♀ 0.723 0.615 3.40 0.007 −243.0d 0.815 0.949 Earth 1.000 1.000 0.00 0.017 23.9h 1.000 1.00 Mars ♂ 1.52 1.88 1.90 0.094 24.6h 0.107 0.533 Jupiter X 5.20 11.9 1.30 0.049 9.9h 318 11.2 Saturn Y 9.58 29.4 2.50 0.057 10.7h 95.2 9.45 Uranus Z 19.2 83.7 0.78 0.046 −17.2h 14.5 4.01 Neptune [ 30.1 163.7 1.78 0.011 16.1h 17.1 3.88 (Pluto \ 39.2 248 17.2 0.244 6.39d 0.002 0.19) After Kutner, Appendix D; a: semi-major axis Porb: orbital period i: orbital inclination (wrt Earth’s orbit) e: eccentricity of the orbit Prot: rotational period M: mass R: equatorial radius 1 AU = 1.496 × 1011 m.
    [Show full text]
  • JUICE Red Book
    ESA/SRE(2014)1 September 2014 JUICE JUpiter ICy moons Explorer Exploring the emergence of habitable worlds around gas giants Definition Study Report European Space Agency 1 This page left intentionally blank 2 Mission Description Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer Key science goals The emergence of habitable worlds around gas giants Characterise Ganymede, Europa and Callisto as planetary objects and potential habitats Explore the Jupiter system as an archetype for gas giants Payload Ten instruments Laser Altimeter Radio Science Experiment Ice Penetrating Radar Visible-Infrared Hyperspectral Imaging Spectrometer Ultraviolet Imaging Spectrograph Imaging System Magnetometer Particle Package Submillimetre Wave Instrument Radio and Plasma Wave Instrument Overall mission profile 06/2022 - Launch by Ariane-5 ECA + EVEE Cruise 01/2030 - Jupiter orbit insertion Jupiter tour Transfer to Callisto (11 months) Europa phase: 2 Europa and 3 Callisto flybys (1 month) Jupiter High Latitude Phase: 9 Callisto flybys (9 months) Transfer to Ganymede (11 months) 09/2032 – Ganymede orbit insertion Ganymede tour Elliptical and high altitude circular phases (5 months) Low altitude (500 km) circular orbit (4 months) 06/2033 – End of nominal mission Spacecraft 3-axis stabilised Power: solar panels: ~900 W HGA: ~3 m, body fixed X and Ka bands Downlink ≥ 1.4 Gbit/day High Δv capability (2700 m/s) Radiation tolerance: 50 krad at equipment level Dry mass: ~1800 kg Ground TM stations ESTRAC network Key mission drivers Radiation tolerance and technology Power budget and solar arrays challenges Mass budget Responsibilities ESA: manufacturing, launch, operations of the spacecraft and data archiving PI Teams: science payload provision, operations, and data analysis 3 Foreword The JUICE (JUpiter ICy moon Explorer) mission, selected by ESA in May 2012 to be the first large mission within the Cosmic Vision Program 2015–2025, will provide the most comprehensive exploration to date of the Jovian system in all its complexity, with particular emphasis on Ganymede as a planetary body and potential habitat.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Document Overview 1.2 Software Overview
    625-645-234011, Rev. A TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Document Overview 1.2 Software Overview 1.3 System Hardware/Software Requirements 1.3.1 SUN 1.3.2 Windows 3.1 or Macintosh 1.4 Packaging 1.4.1 MIRAGE System Files 1.4.2 MIRAGE Data Files 1.4.3 Sequence Delivery Directories 1.5 Typographical Conventions 2 SETTING UP TO RUN MIRAGE 2.1 Obtaining a Unix Account 2.2 Installing the X terminal Server 2.2.1 MacIntosh 2.2.2 Windows 3.1 2.2.3 What's your IP Address? 2.3 Starting and Exiting MIRAGE 2.3.1 From Donatello 2.3.2 From a MAC 2.3.3 From Windows 2.3.4 From a Sun Workstation (e.g. POINTER) 3 MIRAGE INTERFACE BASICS 3.1 The MIRAGE Display 3.1.1 Command Pane 3.1.2 History Pane 3.1.3 Display Work Area 3.1.4 The Legend 3.2 Configuring MIRAGE 3.2.1 Changing Legends 3.2.2 Zooming and Scaling 625-645-234011, Rev. A 3.2.3 Vertical Ruler 3.3 MIRAGE Commands 3.3.1 Aborting Commands 3.3.2 Command Help 3.3.3 Mouse Command Sets 3.4 The MIRAGE Menus 4 MODELING IN MIRAGE 4.1 Multi Use Buffer 4.1.1 Buffer High and Low Water Marks 4.1.2 Filling the Buffer 4.1.3 Draining the Buffer 4.1.4 Modeling the Effects of Real Time Activities on the MUB 4.1.5 Modeling the Effect of Buffer Dump to Tape on the MUB 4.1.6 Modeling the Effect of Playback on the MUB 4.1.7 Modeling the Effect of Telemetry on the MUB 4.1.8 User Control of the MUB Level 4.2 Priority Buffer 4.3 DMS 4.4 Running the Models 4.5 How Modeling Results are Displayed 4.6 OAPEL-level Resource Conflict Checking 4.7 How OAPEL-level Conflict Checking Results are Displayed 5 USING MIRAGE 5.1 Starting MIRAGE 5.1.1 Miscellaneous (But Useful) Commands 5.1.2 Moving around the screen 5.2 Create OAPEL 5.2.1 Activity ID Usage 5.2.2 Adding PAs to an OAPEL 5.3 Edit OAPEL 5.4 Create PA 5.5 Edit PA 625-645-234011, Rev.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact Cratering
    6 Impact cratering The dominant surface features of the Moon are approximately circular depressions, which may be designated by the general term craters … Solution of the origin of the lunar craters is fundamental to the unravel- ing of the history of the Moon and may shed much light on the history of the terrestrial planets as well. E. M. Shoemaker (1962) Impact craters are the dominant landform on the surface of the Moon, Mercury, and many satellites of the giant planets in the outer Solar System. The southern hemisphere of Mars is heavily affected by impact cratering. From a planetary perspective, the rarity or absence of impact craters on a planet’s surface is the exceptional state, one that needs further explanation, such as on the Earth, Io, or Europa. The process of impact cratering has touched every aspect of planetary evolution, from planetary accretion out of dust or planetesimals, to the course of biological evolution. The importance of impact cratering has been recognized only recently. E. M. Shoemaker (1928–1997), a geologist, was one of the irst to recognize the importance of this process and a major contributor to its elucidation. A few older geologists still resist the notion that important changes in the Earth’s structure and history are the consequences of extraterres- trial impact events. The decades of lunar and planetary exploration since 1970 have, how- ever, brought a new perspective into view, one in which it is clear that high-velocity impacts have, at one time or another, affected nearly every atom that is part of our planetary system.
    [Show full text]
  • Hermeticism Pt 1\374
    "I wish to learn about the things that are, to understand their nature and to know God. How much I want to hear!" from [Discourse] of Hermes Trismegistus : Poimandres Hermeticism "The fifteen tractates of the Corpus Hermeticum, along with the Perfect Sermon or Asclepius, are the foundation documents of the Hermetic tradition. Written by unknown authors in Egypt sometime before the end of the third century C.E., they were part of a once substantial literature attributed to the mythic figure of Hermes Trismegistus, a Hellenistic fusion of the Greek god Hermes and the Egyptian god Thoth. This literature came out of the same religious and philosophical ferment that produced Neoplatonism, Christianity, and the diverse collection of teachings usually lumped together under the label "Gnosticism": a ferment which had its roots in the impact of Platonic thought on the older traditions of the Hellenized East. There are obvious connections and common themes linking each of these traditions, although each had its own answer to the major questions of the time." John Michael Greer : An Introduction to the Corpus Hermeticum "The Corpus Hermeticum landed like a well-aimed bomb amid the philosophical systems of late medieval Europe. Quotations from the Hermetic literature in the Church Fathers (who were never shy of leaning on pagan sources to prove a point) accepted a traditional chronology which dated "Hermes Trismegistus," as a historical figure, to the time of Moses. As a result, the Hermetic tractates' borrowings from Jewish scripture and Platonic philosophy were seen, in the Renaissance, as evidence that the Corpus Hermeticum had anticipated and influenced both.
    [Show full text]
  • High-Resolution Mosaics of the Galilean Satellites from Galileo SSI
    Lunar and Planetary Science XXIX 1833.pdf High-Resolution Mosaics of the Galilean Satellites from Galileo SSI. M. Milazzo, A. McEwen, C. B. Phillips, N. Dieter, J. Plassmann. Planetary Image Research Laboratory, LPL, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721; [email protected] The Galileo Spacecraft began mapping the Jovian orthographic projection centered at the latitude and system in June 1996. Twelve orbits of Jupiter and more longitude coordinates of the sub-spacecraft point to than 1000 images later, the Solid State Imager (SSI) is still preserve their perspective. Depending on the photometric collecting images, most far superior in resolution to geometry and scale, it may be necessary to apply a anything collected by the Voyager spacecraft. The data photometric normalization to the images. Next, the collected includes: low to medium resolution color data, individual frames are mosaicked together, and mosaicked medium resolution data to fill gaps in Voyager coverage, and onto a portion of the base map for regional context. Once very high-resolution data over selected areas. We have the mosaic is finished, it is checked to make sure that the tie been systematically processing the SSI images of the and match points were correct, and that the frames mesh. Galilean satellites to produce high-resolution mosaics and to We produce 3 final products: (i) an SSI-only mosaic, (ii) SSI place them into the regional context provided by medium- images mosaicked onto regional context, and (iii) the resolution mosaics from Voyager and/or Galileo. addition of a latitude-longitude grid to the context mosaic. Production of medium-resolution global mosaics is The purpose of this poster is to show the mosa- described in a companion abstract [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Lunar and Planetary Science XXIX 1866.Pdf
    Lunar and Planetary Science XXIX 1866.pdf GALILEO AT CALLISTO: OVERVIEW OF NOMINAL MISSION RESULTS. J. E. Klemaszewski, R. Greeley, K.S. Homan, K.C. Bender, F.C. Chuang, S. Kadel;1 R.J. Sullivan;2 C. Chapman, W.J. Merline;3 J. Moore;4 R. Wagner, T. Denk, G. Neukum;5 J. Head, R. Pappalardo, L. Prockter;6 M. Belton;7 T.V. Johnson;8 C. Pilcher9 and the Galileo SSI Team. 1Dept. of Geology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 871404; 2Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY; 3SWRI, Boulder, CO; 4NASA Ames, Moffett Field, CA; 5DLR, Berlin, Germany; 6Brown Univ., Providence, RI; 7NOAO, Tucson, AZ; 8JPL, Pasadena, CA; 9NASA HQ, Washington, DC. The solid-state imaging (SSI) system on board the over 4000 and 1600 km in diameter; their Galileo orbiter acquired 118 images of the Jovian morphologies and theories concerning their origin satellite Callisto on 8 of its 11 nominal mission orbits. have been described by many investigators [e.g. On three of these orbits clear-filter imaging data were 2,3,6,8,9]. Whether or not Callisto is differentiated acquired at resolutions of 150 m/pxl or better, and on could not be determined from Voyager data [6]. five orbits color data were acquired at resolutions Galileo mission objectives for Callisto [10] include (a) between 13.7 and 1.1 km/pixel. Galileo images reveal the characterization of surface processes and that degradational processes have acted on the surface materials, (b) impact craters morphologies and of Callisto causing the erosion of crater walls and rims. evolution, (c) the search for evidence of endogenic This degradation is most likely responsible for the activity, (d) the determination of the origin and production of the dark material that appears to blanket morphology of multi-ring structures, and (e) Callisto’s surface, resulting in a lack of small (<10 km comparison of Callisto and Ganymede.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix Contains a Timeline, Galileo Mission Overview (June 1996–December 1997), and a Set of Quick–Look Orbit Facts Sheets
    A P P E N D I X This appendix contains a timeline, Galileo Mission Overview (June 1996–December 1997), and a set of Quick–Look Orbit Facts sheets. The essentials of each orbit are listed. We have provided them as a handy reference while the orbiter’s tour progresses in the months to come. Appendix • Page A-1 Project Galileo Quick-Look Orbit Facts Appendix • Page A- 5 PROJECT GALILEO QUICK-LOOK ORBIT FACTS Fact Sheet Guide Title Quick Facts Indicates the target satellite and the number of the This section provides a summary listing of the orbit in the satellite tour. In this example, Ganymede is characteristics of the target satellite encounter as well the target satellite on the first orbit of the orbital tour. as the Jupiter encounter. PROJECT GALILEO QUICK-LOOK ORBIT FACTS PROJECT GALILEO QUICK-LOOK ORBIT FACTS Ganymede - Orbit 1 Ganymede - Orbit 1 Encounter Trajectory Quick Facts Ganymede Flyby Geometry +30 min Ganymede Encounter Earth Sun 27 June 1996 Ganymede C/A +15 min 06:29 UTC Ganymede C/A Altitude: 844 km Jupiter 6/27 6/26 133 times closer than VGR1 70 times closer than VGR2 Earth Speed: 7.8 km/s 0W -15 min Sun Jupiter C/A 6/28 Latitude: 30 deg N Longitude: 112 deg W 270W -30 min Perijove Io 28 June 1996 00:31 UTC Europa Jupiter Range: 11.0 Rj Time Ordered Listing Ganymede 6/29 Earth Range: 4.2 AU EVENT TIME (PDT-SCET) EVENT (continued) TIME (PDT-SCET) OWLT: 35 min Start Encounter 23 June 96 09:00 Europa C/A (156000 km) 18:22 Callisto Start Ganymede-1 real-time survey (F&P) 09:02 Europa global observation (NIMS/SSI) 18:43
    [Show full text]
  • Rampart Craters on Ganymede: Their Implications for Fluidized Ejecta Emplacement
    Meteoritics & Planetary Science 45, Nr 4, 638–661 (2010) doi: 10.1111/j.1945-5100.2010.01044.x Rampart craters on Ganymede: Their implications for fluidized ejecta emplacement Joseph BOYCE1*, Nadine BARLOW2, Peter MOUGINIS-MARK1, and Sarah STEWART3 1Hawaii Institute of Geophysics and Planetology, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii 96922, USA 2Department of Physics and Astronomy, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona 86001, USA 3Department of Earth and Planetary Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, USA *Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] (Received 03 December 2008; revision accepted 12 February 2010) Abstract–Some fresh impact craters on Ganymede have the overall ejecta morphology similar to Martian double-layer ejecta (DLE), with the exception of the crater Nergal that is most like Martian single layer ejecta (SLE) craters (as is the terrestrial crater Lonar). Similar craters also have been identified on Europa, but no outer ejecta layer has been found on these craters. The morphometry of these craters suggests that the types of layered ejecta craters identified by Barlow et al. (2000) are fundamental. In addition, the mere existence of these craters on Ganymede and Europa suggests that an atmosphere is not required for ejecta fluidization, nor can ejecta fluidization be explained by the flow of dry ejecta. Moreover, the absence of fluidized ejecta on other icy bodies suggests that abundant volatiles in the target also may not be the sole cause of ejecta fluidization. The restriction of these craters to the grooved terrain of Ganymede and the concentration of Martian DLE craters on the northern lowlands suggests that these terrains may share key characteristics that control the development of the ejecta of these craters.
    [Show full text]
  • Rituals for the Northern Tradition
    Horn and Banner Horn and Banner Rituals for the Northern Tradition Compiled by Raven Kaldera Hubbardston, Massachusetts Asphodel Press 12 Simond Hill Road Hubbardston, MA 01452 Horn and Banner: Rituals for the Northern Tradition © 2012 Raven Kaldera ISBN: 978-0-9825798-9-3 Cover Photo © 2011 Thorskegga Thorn All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, no part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means without the permission of the author. Printed in cooperation with Lulu Enterprises, Inc. 860 Aviation Parkway, Suite 300 Morrisville, NC 27560 To all the good folk of Iron Wood Kindred, past and present, and especially for Jon Norman whose innocence and enthusiasm we will miss forever. Rest in Hela’s arms, Jon, And may you find peace. Contents Beginnings Creating Sacred Space: Opening Rites ................................... 1 World Creation Opening ....................................................... 3 Jormundgand Opening Ritual ................................................ 4 Four Directions and Nine Worlds: ........................................ 5 Cosmological Opening Rite .................................................... 5 Warding Rite of the Four Directions ..................................... 7 Divide And Conquer: Advanced Group Liturgical Design. 11 Rites of Passage Ritual to Bless a Newborn .................................................... 25 Seven-Year Rite ..................................................................... 28 A Note On Coming-Of-Age Rites .......................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Vi Report of Divisions, Commissions, and Working
    CHAPTER VI REPORT OF DIVISIONS, COMMISSIONS, AND WORKING GROUPS Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.33.42, on 24 Sep 2021 at 09:23:58, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0251107X00011937 DIVISION I FUNDAMENTAL ASTRONOMY Division I provides a focus for astronomers studying a wide range of problems related to fundamental physical phenomena such as time, the intertial reference frame, positions and proper motions of celestial objects, and precise dynamical computation of the motions of bodies in stellar or planetary systems in the Universe. PRESIDENT: P. Kenneth Seidelmann U.S. Naval Observatory, 3450 Massachusetts Ave NW Washington, DC 20392-5100, US Tel. + 1 202 762 1441 Fax. +1 202 762 1516 E-mail: [email protected] BOARD E.M. Standish President Commission 4 C. Froeschle President Commisison 7 H. Schwan President Commisison 8 D.D. McCarthy President Commisison 19 E. Schilbach President Commisison 24 T. Fukushima President Commisison 31 J. Kovalevsky Past President Division I PARTICIPATING COMMISSIONS: COMMISSION 4 EPHEMERIDES COMMISSION 7 CELESTIAL MECHANICS AND DYNAMICAL ASTRONOMY COMMISSION 8 POSITIONAL ASTRONOMY COMMISSION 19 ROTATION OF THE EARTH COMMISSION 24 PHOTOGRAPHIC ASTROMETRY COMMISSION 31 TIME Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.33.42, on 24 Sep 2021 at 09:23:58, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0251107X00011937 COMMISSION 4: EPHEMERIDES President: H. Kinoshita Secretary: C.Y. Hohenkerk Commission 4 held one business meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • 5. Die Jupitersatelliten Im ¨Uberblick
    5. Die Jupitersatelliten im Uberblick¨ 5.1. Entdeckung der Jupitersatelliten und Bahnparameter Nach der Erfindung des Fernrohrs entdeckten Galileo Galilei und Simon Marius unabh¨angig voneinander im Jahre 1610 die vier gr¨oßten Jupitermonde. Der Mitentdecker, Simon Marius, regte an, diese vier Galileischen Satelliten nach Personen aus der griechisch-r¨omischen My- thologie zu benennen. Die vier Satelliten erhielten von innen nach außen die Namen Io (J1), Europa (J2), Ganymed (J3) und Callisto (J4)13. Erst 180 Jahre nach ihrer Entdeckung fand E. Barnard 1892 den innerhalb der Io-Bahn kreisen- den funften¨ Mond Amalthea (J5). Sieben weitere noch kleinere Monde (J6 bis J12) wurden zwischen 1904 und 1951 nachgewiesen. Kowal entdeckte 1974 einen dreizehnten Satelliten. Alle diese kleinen K¨orper befinden sich außerhalb der Callisto-Bahn. Diese dreizehn Monde (J1 bis J13) waren die ”klassischen” bekannten Jupitersatelliten vor der Voyager-Mission 1979. Auf den Voyager-Aufnahmen konnten drei weitere Satelliten (Metis, Adrastea und Thebe) identifiziert werden, die alle innerhalb der Io-Bahn kreisen. Auf den Galileo-Aufnahmen wurden keine weiteren Jupitersatelliten gefunden. Seit 1999 bis heute (Stand: zweites Halbjahr 2006) hat sich durch intensive Beobachtungen mit leistungsstarken Teleskopen die Zahl der bekannten Jupitersatelliten auf 63 erh¨oht, die meisten sehr kleine Objekte mit nur wenigen Kilometern Durchmesser14. Alle Satelliten k¨onnen wenigstens funf¨ verschiedenen Gruppen zugeordnet wer- den, die durch bestimmte Bahnelemente (Exzentrizit¨at, Inklination, prograde oder retrograde Rotationsrichtung) gekennzeichnet sind. Die beiden innersten Gruppen bestehen aus den kleinen Monden Metis, Adrastea, Amalthea und Thebe sowie aus den vier Galileischen Monden. Diese Monde rotieren prograd, d. h. im gleichen Sinn wie sich Jupiter selbst um seine Achse und um die Sonne dreht.
    [Show full text]