Regolith Growth and Darkening of Saturn Ring Particles Larry W. Esposito

advertisement
Regolith Growth and
Darkening of Saturn Ring
Particles
Larry W. Esposito
Joshua P. Elliott
LASP, University of Colorado
21 April 2009
Are Saturn’s Rings Young or Old?
• Voyager found active processes and short
inferred lifetimes: we concluded the rings
were created recently
• It is highly unlikely a comet or moon as big as
Mimas was shattered recently to produce
Saturn’s rings; Are we very fortunate?
• Cassini observations show a range of ages,
some even shorter… and even more massive
rings!
Key Cassini Observations
•
•
•
•
Changes since Voyager and even since SOI
F ring clumps and moonlets
Propellers in A ring
Under-dense ringmoons with equatorial
bulges
• Self-gravity wakes and auto-covariance show
heterogeneous rings
• Low mass density in Cassini Division gives
gross erosion time of 30,000 years
F Ring Search Method
• Search
tuned for 1
VIMSconfirmed
event
– Optimal
data-bin
size
– min
VIMS
UVIS
Pywacket
-15 km
0
15 km
Shadows at B ring edge show clumps like in F ring? The
F ring is relevant to similar processes in main rings!
Key Model Results
• Ring dynamics: Temporary aggregations form
• Competition between fragmentation and
accretion produces bi-modal distribution
• Meteor impacts can explain the color and
morphology if rings are about 108 years old
• Aggregates mean that if ring mass was
under-estimated, pollution would be less:
Recycling of ring material can extend the ring
lifetime
• “Nice” model of solar system evolution can
produce the rings by shattering a moon
during LHB
Robbins & Stewart simulation grows clumps!
Are ancient rings possible?
Regolith model for pollution:
Consider an infinite slab of depth, D
The regolith depth at time t: h(t)
For a moonlet or ring particle, D corresponds to the diameter.
Physical approach
• Meteorites strike surface element
• If the impact penetrates the regolith, it
breaks and excavates new material
• For any impactor size distribution, only
impactors larger than a(h) will penetrate
a regolith of present depth h(t)
• The ejecta are emplaced on the surface
uniformly: every surface element is
equally likely to recapture ejecta
Mathematical approach
• Take h(t), regolith depth, as a stochastic
variable
• This is a Markov chain: discrete values of h
are the states of the chain; transitions occur
when a meteorite strikes; transition
probabilities can be calculated from the mass
flux and size distribution
• We do not need to know the exact strike
location, just that the strikes are uniformly
distributed
• D drops out, since the probability of a strike
and the area its ejecta cover both scale as D2
Realistic case for Saturn
• Use Cuzzi and Estrada (1998) impactor
size distribution, extended to 100m
• Allow for disruption of ring bodies by
largest impactors: redistribute ejecta
among surviving bodies
• Model the size distribution with a broken
power law to improve numerical
performance
Larger ring particles grow deeper regoliths
10 meter ring particles reach 1% pollution in 2x109 years
Spectral time variation for 1m moonlets
More massive rings show insignificant spectral changes
Conclusions
• Saturn’s rings appear young… but may
confuse ‘age’ with most recent renewal!
• Cassini shows ring heterogeneity and
more massive rings, consistent with little
observed pollution in ring B
• Detailed regolith models predict
insignificant UV spectral differences for
10m particles (this is 10x current mass
estimate from Esposito etal 1983)
Backup Slides
Self-Gravity “Wake” Model
Reinterpretation of P-11 results:
Colwell’s ‘Granola Bar’ Model
• Cooper etal 1983 assumed a uniform ring to calculate
secondary fluxes from GCR flux
• But, secondary fluxes are double-valued!
• Self-gravity wakes say B ring density is also…
• Instead, assume surface density ring C = ring A =
60g/cm2. For ring B: 80% with 500g/cm2, 20% with
60g/cm2, consistent with Colwell etal 2007.
• This yields predicted fluxes (Cooper Fig 5):
– Protons 40 (measured 50 +/- 11)
– Gammas 118 (measured 180 +/- 45) in ( m2-sec-ster)-1
Ring Age Tracebility
Ring Featu re
Inf erred/observed
age
Notes
N arrow ringlets
in gaps
F ring clumps
months
F ring moonlets
tens to millions of
years
100 ,000 years
V ariable during C as s in
i
mis sion
Sizes not a c ollisional
dis tribution
C reate fans and jets
C as sin
i Division
dens ity waves
E mbedded
moonlets
"P ropeller"
objects
Ring pollution
(from color)
A
B
C olor/s pectrum
varies in A
Shepherd moons
Self-gravity
wakes
months
millions of years
millions of years
107 - 1 08 years
108 - 1 09 years
106 - 1 07 years
Breakup: 1 07 years
M omentum: 107
years
days
OLD
YOUNG
RENEWED
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
Low mass quickly ground to
dust
Low bulk density s hows
ac cretion
Steep size distribution from
recent disruption
NO
OK
NO
OK
E xpected more polluted than B
M eteoroid flux not s o high?
M ore massive?
Ring c omposition not
homogenized
NO
NO
OK
OK
NO
OK if
massive
OK
NO
OK
OK
OK
Breakup/momentum: N o
c ontradiction in ages !
Partic les c ontinually c ollide;
s elf-gravity and adhesion
enhance aggregation
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
Table LWE 2. Inferred ages of various ring features and consistency with 3
models for ring formation. OK: Can be accommodated; NO: Serious
contradiction; Blank : Unclear, or deserves more study. Adopted from Esposito
2006, presented at Montana Rings Workshop.
Download