Title: Francis Nimmo
1ES 290Q OUTER SOLAR SYSTEM
Io against Jupiter, Hubble image, July 1997
2Last Week
- Solar system characteristics and formation Hill
sphere, snow line, timescales - Keplers laws and Newtonian orbits
- Tides
- Synchronous rotation
- Dissipation / heating
- Circularization and orbital migration
3Galilean Satellites
- This week
- Preliminaries, common themes
- Io
- Callisto
- Next week
- Ganymede
- Europa
Callisto
Europa
Ganymede
Io
4Why are they important?
- Life (!?) or sub-surface oceans, at any rate
- Relatively large (2000 km), geologically active
- Very complicated orbital relationships
- Some processes look familiar e.g. plate tectonics
(?) - Future exploration target (maybe)
- Why Galilean? He discovered them (telescope,
1610) - Subsequent exploration Voyagers Pioneers
(1970s), Galileo (ended 2003), Europa Orbiter??
5Galileo
antenna
- More modern (launched 1989) but the high-gain
antenna failed (!) leaving it crippled - Venus-Earth-Earth gravity assist
- En route, it observed the SL9 comet impact into
Jupiter - Arrived at Jupiter in 1995 and deployed probe
into Jupiters atmosphere - Very complex series of fly-bys of all major
Galilean satellites - Deliberately crashed into Jupiter Sept 2003
(why?) - Main source of results
6Where are they?
7Laplace Resonance (1)
- Periods of IoEuropaGanymede are in ratio 124
- This means that successive conjunctions occur at
the same point on the orbit - So the eccentricities get pumped up to much
higher values than if the satellites were not in
a resonance
One of the conjunctions occurring due to the
Laplace resonance. Note that there is never a
triple conjunction.
- High eccentricities mean higher dissipation in
the satellites and a tendency for the orbits to
contract (see earlier) - This tendency is counteracted by dissipation in
Jupiter, which tends to cause the orbits to
expand (like the Moon) - The system is currently (roughly) in equilibrium
8Compositions/Formation
- Surface compositions mainly water ice (except
for Io), plus contaminants (spectroscopy) - Ios surface is silicates sulphur
- Interiors discussed in detail later, but
roughly equal mix of water ice, silicates and
iron (how do we know?) - How did they form?
- Presumably accreted while Jupiter was forming
- Lateral temperature gradient in nebula
- May have been earlier satellites that didnt
survive (why?) - Energy of accretion 0.6 Gms/Rs per unit mass 2
MJ/kg this is enough to heat ice through 1000
K. Why might this present a problem? - Satellites subsequently evolved to their
present-day positions
9Composition (contd)
- Callisto has lower reflectivity and shallower
absorption bands, indicating a higher non-ice
component - Ganymede and Callisto show slight differences
between leading and trailing hemispheres (why?) - Non-ice materials are probably hydrated minerals
(clays)
Earth-based reflectance spectra, from Johnson, in
New Solar System
10Differentiation
- Potential energy of a homogeneous satellite is
reduced if the densest components sink to the
centre differentiation is energetically
favoured - Differentiation is opposed by rigidity of body,
so differentiation is favoured at higher
temperatures - As differentiation proceeds, energy is released,
driving further differentiation potential
runaway - Heat released may generate thermal expansion and
form a source of stress - Sinking materials may undergo phase changes
leading to volume changes and either expansion or
contraction - Not all Galilean satellites appear to have
differentiated (?)
11Ice phase diagram
Ice I
Water
Ice V
- The key point is that because of the densities
involved, we would expect to find liquid water
around the ice I ice V interface (200 km
depth). Why is this important?
12Internal Structures (1)
- Because the satellites are rotating, they are
flattened (oblate) - This means that they do not act as a point mass
the perturbations to the gravity field can be
identified by tracking spacecraft on a close
approach - Potential V at a distance r for axisymmetric body
is given by
- So the coefficients J2, J4 etc. can be determined
from spacecraft observations (higher order terms
require closer approaches why?) - We can relate J2,J4 . . . to the internal
structure of the satellite
13Internal Structures (2)
C
- Mean density and J2 are especially useful
- It turns out that we can rewrite J2 in terms of
the differences in moments of inertia of the
planet (look at the diagram )
R
A
- What we would really like is C/MR2 (why?)
- If we can observe the precession of the planet,
that gives us (C-A)/C and thus C given J2 (where
can we do this?) - Otherwise, we can assume that the planet has no
strength (hydrostatic) and use theory to infer C
from J2 (is this OK?) - In practice, flybys of the Galilean satellites
were usually equatorial (why?), so we determine
the equivalent equatorial term to J2 which is
called C22 the analysis is similar
14Internal Structures (3)
- How do we know?
- Mean density
- Moment of inertia, derived from J2(C-A)/MR2 and
hydrostatic assumption (is this likely?) - Other observations (magnetometer)
- Expectations of likely components (silicates,
ices, iron) - Tradeoffs we only have two observations (J2 and
r) and have more than two unknowns. Means the
results are non-unique
Fe core
Fe-FeS core
Contours of Europa ice shell thickness giving
correct mean density for indicated core radius
and rock density. Bold line is MoI constraint.
From Anderson et al., Science, 1998
15Io liquid iron core (dynamo), silicate mantle
(partially molten?). No volatiles why not?
Ganymede liquid iron core (dynamo), silicate
mantle and 800 km thick ice shell containing an
ocean (presumably at the I-III/V boundary)
Europa core and mantle similar to Ganymede, but
ice shell much thinner (100-200 km) and mostly
liquid (magnetic induction signature)
Callisto has not differentiated completely (?).
An ice layer 300km thick, containing an ocean
and overlying a mixture of rock-ice. NB the
hydrostatic assumption is particularly dodgy here
why?
16Ice Rheology (1)
- Under applied stress, ice will deform
- At low stresses and strains, elastically
(recoverable) - At low temperature and/or high strain rate,
brittle - At high temperature and/or low strain rate,
ductile
stress
brittle
elastic
depth
ductile
- A good measure of its tendency to deform in a
ductile fashion is the homologous temperature
(ThT/Tmelt) (in K) - Rock at Earth surface Th0.2
- Ice at Galilean satellite surface Th0.4
- Ice in Antarctica/Mars Th0.8
- So ice at the surface of the Galilean satellites
behaves more like rock than ice on Earth
17Orbital Evolution
- Recall dissipation in primary drives satellite
outwards - Dissipation in satellite drives satellite inwards
and circularizes orbit - Possible scenario
- Io causes dissipation in Jupiter, moves outwards
until . . . - It encounters the 21 resonance with Europa the
two bodies then move outwards in step until . . . - They encounter the 21 resonance with Ganymede
- There are alternative scenarios
- The present-day configuration involves a balance
between dissipation in primary (outwards) and
dissipation in satellites (inwards)
18Hypothetical orbital history
from Peale, Celest. Mech. Dyn. Ast. 2003
Note that we dont actually know whether the
orbits are currently expanding or
contracting Also note that during capture into
resonance, eccentricities are transiently excited
to high values so what?
19How fast does it happen?
- The speed of orbital evolution is governed by the
rate at which energy gets dissipated (in primary
or satellite) - Since we dont understand dissipation very well,
we define a parameter Q which conceals our
ignorance - Where DE is the energy dissipated over one cycle
and E is the peak energy stored during the cycle.
Note that low Q means high dissipation!
- It can be shown that Q is related to the phase
lag arising in the tidal torque problem we
studied earlier
e
20How fast does it happen(2)?
- The rate of outwards motion of a satellite is
governed by the dissipation factor in the primary
(Qp)
Here mp and ms are the planet and satellite
masses, a is the semi-major axis, Rp is the
planet radius and k2 is the Love number. Note
that the mean motion n depends on a.
- Does this equation make sense? Recall
- Why is it useful? Mainly because it allows us to
calculate Qp. E.g. since we can observe the rate
of lunar recession now, we can calculate Qp. This
is particularly useful for places like Jupiter. - We can derive a similar equation for the time for
circularization to occur. This depends on Qs
(dissipation in the satellite).
21Estimating Q
- Recall that the rate of outwards motion of a
satellite depends on planetary dissipation Qp - If we assume that Io formed 4.5 Gyr B.P., and has
been moving outwards ever since, we get a lower
bound on Jupiters Q of 105 (why a lower bound?) - This value is typical of gas giants, but is much
higher than for silicate bodies (102) - The Earths Q is anomalously high (12) because
the current continental configuration means
oceanic tides are close to resonance lots of
dissipation - Well calculate the rate of dissipation in a
second
22Tidal Deformation Recap.
- Satellite in synchronous rotation period of
rotation equals orbital period - Eccentric orbit (due to Laplace resonance)
amplitude and direction of tidal bulge changes,
so surface experiences changing stresses and
strains - These diurnal tidal strains lead to friction and
thus tidal dissipation (heating)
Diurnal tides can be large e.g. 30m on Europa
Satellite
Jupiter
Eccentric orbit
23Tidal Heating (1)
- Recall diurnal tidal amplitude goes as
in the limit when rigidity dominates (
) - So strain goes as
- Energy stored per unit volume stress x strain
- In an elastic body, stress strain x m
(rigidity) - So total rate of work goes as me2H2Rs/
- For tide raised on satellite HRs(mp/ms)(Rs/a)3
- From the above, we expect the energy stored E to
go as
Note that here we have used
24Tidal heating (2)
- From the definition of Q, we have
- Weve just calculated the energy stored E, so
given Qs and n we can thus calculate the heating
rate dE/dt - The actual answer (for uniform bodies) is
- But the main point is that you should now
understand where this equation comes from - Example Io
- We get 80 mW/m2, about the same as for Earth (!)
- This is actually an underestimate why?
25How do we calculate Q?
- For solid bodies, we assume a viscoelastic
rheology - Such a body has a rigidity m, a viscosity h and a
characteristic relaxation (Maxwell) timescale
tmh/m - The body behaves elastically at timescales ltlttm
and in a viscous fashion at timescales gtgt tm
- Dissipation is maximized when timescale tm
Tobie et al. JGR 2003
26Calculating Q (contd)
- Ice has rigidity 109 Pa and viscosity 1014 Pa
s, so the Maxwell time is 105s which is
comparable to the orbital period, so we expect
dissipation in the ice shells - Silicates m1011 Pa, h1021 Pa s, so less
dissipation - But silicate viscosity decreases significantly if
melting occurs, which will lead to an increase in
dissipation, and thus a feedback effect - This runaway situation was first identified by
Peale et al. (1979), who predicted massive
volcanism on Io two weeks before it was observed
for the first time - A similar feedback effect may also occur in ice
(see previous diagram)
27Tidal Energy and Stress
- Tidal stresses and heating decrease markedly with
distance - Radiogenic heating is dominant in Callisto and
Ganymede (now), secondary in Europa, and
insignificant for Io
H is static tidal bulge for a fluid body, 3eH
gives peak-to-peak diurnal tidal amplitude, dW/dt
is tidal dissipation rate for a uniform body with
Jupiters mass1.899x1027 kg, k3/2 and Q100,
dWR/dt is radiogenic heat production within
silicate portion of body assuming a heating rate
of 3.5x10-12 W/kg, EeH/Rs gives the approximate
stresses due to diurnal tides with E10 GPa,
C/msRs2 gives the normalized moment of inertia
(Anderson et al. 1996,1998b,2001a,b) and 3Gms/5Rs
gives the energy delived during homogeneous
accretion. A uniform body has a normalized MoI of
0.4.
28Non-synchronous rotation (1)
- From the satellites point of view, the planet
travels in the opposite direction round the sky
to the satellite itself - The tidal bulge always lags the planets motion
- In an eccentric orbit the amplitude of the tidal
bulge varies and is largest at the periapse - The result of the varying bulge is a varying
torque, which turns out to be positive i.e. it
should increase the satellites rotation rate
slightly above synchronous
Eccentric orbit
satellite
Apoapse
Periapse
planet
Torque opposes spin Smaller
Torque increases spin Larger
29Impact Cratering
- Main source of impact craters in outer solar
system is comets - Synchronously rotating satellite will be
preferentially cratered on its leading hemisphere
(think raindrops) - So distribution of impact craters on surface can
be used to test whether NSR has occurred - Density of impact craters can be used to infer
surface age - Obtaining absolute surface ages requires the
impact rate to be derived, from a combination of
current and historical astronomical observations,
and models. Uncertainties are currently large. - Note that the impact rate will increase for
satellites closer to the primary (effect of
gravitational focusing)
30Cratering Statistics
Zahnle et al. Icarus 1997
Expected curves if NSR is not occurring
Absolute ages have been revised upwards since
(Zahnle et al. Icarus 2003)
31Cratering Statistics - Results
- Io no impact craters observed (!) so surface is
very young (lt 1 Myr) - Europa few impact craters, surface age 50 Myr.
Not enough craters to detect if NSR is happening - Ganymede bimodal surface, ages 2 Gyr and 4
Gyr (uncertainties large). Spatial distribution
flatter than expected, suggests NSR has occurred. - Callisto very ancient surface, 4.5 Gyr.
Spatial distribution very flat, but may be
because crater population is saturated everywhere
(i.e. one crater is destroyed for every new one
produced)
32Thermal Orbital Evolution
- We would like to be able to answer the question
how have the satellites orbits and interiors
evolved over solar system history? - This is difficult because
- Observations are severely limited (e.g. cratering
evidence is not much use on Io or Europa) - Important parameters (such as Q) are uncertain
- The theoretical problem is difficult. Why?
- Feedbacks. Orbital evolution, NSR and tidal
dissipation all depend on Q, but Q is dependent
on the internal structure of the satellite, which
depends on tidal dissipation . . . - Coupling. The satellites cant be treated as
isolated objects, because of the Laplace
resonance. So you have to model their evolution
simultaneously . . .
33Summary
- Tides are important in determining spin state,
orbital evolution and heating of satellite - Ice rheology is complicated
- Near-surface, it will behave like rock on Earth
- At depth, it will flow at a geologically rapid
rate - Cratering observations can provide us with
relative surface ages, but absolute ages are
subject to large uncertainties - Satellite internal structures are constrained by
a mixture of observations (C/MR2, mean density,
magnetometer) and reasonable expectations
34Io
35Basic Parameters
- Note the likely structural similarities with the
Moon
36Whats it like?
- Volcanically very active (see later)
- Cold surface temperature about 130K, but
variable (due to volcanism) - Very tenuous atmosphere (volcanic)
- Sulphur-rich surface deduced from ground-based
spectroscopic observations (different colours are
different sulphur allotropes) - Very hostile environment (for people or
spacecraft) charged particles accelerated by
Jupiters large magnetic field - Not clear whether Io has an internal magnetic
field (Kivelson et al. JGR 2001) interactions
with Jupiters field make identification difficult
37Landforms
- Three main types Volcanoes, Mountains and
Paterae (irregular depressions, similar to
calderas)
200km
350km
flow
patera
Low-sun angle shadow measurements give mountain
elevations of up to 4km. Lobate flows are large
landslides. Mountains show no signs of volcanic
activity and appear to be fault-bounded.
volcano
38Lava flows
Amirani lava flow, Io
500km
- Dark flows are the most recent (still too hot for
sulphur to condense on them) - Flows appear relatively thin, suggesting low
viscosity
500km
Comparably-sized lava flow on Venus (Magellan
radar image)
39Time-Variability
- Changes detected from Voyager to Galileo missions
and within Galileo mission
Lava flow erupted at Prometheus between Voyager
and Galileo missions (Davies JGR 2003)
April 1997
July 1999
Sept 1997
Pillan
Galileo images of overlapping deposits at Pillan
and Pele
400km
Pele
40Volcanic activity (1)
Voyager image of eruption plume, approximately
300 km high
Fire fountain(?)
- Galileo image of Tvashtar, apparently in the
process of erupting - The CCD was overloaded by the eruption, but it
has been interpreted as a fire-fountain 1.5 km
high
41Volcanic activity (2)
Galieo nightside image of Pele, SSI clear filter.
Radebaugh et al. 2004
Erta Ale lava lake, Ethiopia. Lake is 100m across.
- Images suggest molten magma immediately beneath
the surface (at least in some places) - Volcanic activity erupts about 1 tonne / second
sulphur into the atmosphere, some of which may
end up on Europa (contaminants have been detected
there)
42Ground-based observations
- Have the advantage of longer observation periods
and better spectral resolution than spacecraft - Spatial resolution is also getting much better
thanks to adaptive optics and Hubble - The sequence below shows a hot spot which flares
up to equal the brightness of Loki (spot 2) over
a few days
1 arcsecond
From Macintosh et al., Icarus 2003
July 12 1998
July 28 1998
Aug 4 1998
Keck interferometer
43Energetics (1)
- We can measure the power output of Io by looking
at its infra-red spectrum - Heat flux is appx. 2.5 W m-2 .This is 30 times
the Earths global heat flux.
- Assume low rigidity ( ) why?. To
balance the heat being produced requires Qs90.
Is this reasonable? What does it imply about
viscosity? - Where does the power ultimately come from?
- A heat loss of 2.5 Wm-2 over 4.5 Gyr is
equivalent to 0.03 of Jupiters rotational energy
44Energetics (2)
- How do we get 2.5 Wm-2 out of the ground?
- A conductive layer (or convective stagnant lid)
would need to be 1 km thick. Reasonable? - What about magma transport (advection)?
- Silicate magma generates 5 GJ/m3 on cooling
1000K and solidifying - A resurfacing rate of 1 cm/yr can account for
the observed surface heat flux - This resurfacing rate is also consistent with
estimates based on impact craters and IR cooling
models - So Io is unique among the solar system in that
its heat flux is dominated by advection
45Interior Structure
After Anderson et al., JGR 2001
- Lacks outer ice layer (in contrast to other
Galilean satellites). Why? - Even though sulphur is abundant at the surface,
the bulk of the interior must be silicates/iron
from simple cosmochemistry
Silicates 3500 kg m-3
1821 km
700 km
Fe-FeS 5150 kg m-3
Remember these structures are non-unique the
ones shown assume plausible but not necessarily
correct densities.
- Io likely has a crust, but we cant detect it
with current data - We cant tell (directly) whether the core or the
mantle are partially or completely liquid. - Ios k21.29. What is this telling us? (rigidity
or mass concn.)
46Interior Structure(?)
- Rigid lid is required by high mountains and is a
result of rapid burial of cooled surface material - Bulk of dissipation occurs in partially molten
mantle - Magma percolates through mantle and ascends
through cold lid in discrete fractures i.e. dikes - Erupted material cools by radiation and is
re-buried
After Moore, Icarus, 2001
47Consequences of resurfacing
- Burial leads to large compressive stresses due to
change in radius - Stress E DR/R 100 MPa for 2 km burial
- Easily large enough to initiate faulting
- Additional compressive stresses may arise from
reheating the base of the crust
DR
After McKinnon et al., Geology 2001
stereo
Low-angle (why?) thrust faulting is probably
responsible for many of the mountain ranges seen
on Io
550 km
10km
Schenk and Bulmer, Science 1998
48Eruption Spectra
- Recall Wiens law lmax a 1/T
- So infra-red spectra give temperature information
- Single temperature curve provides poor fit
- Two-temperature curve provides much better fit
- Short-wavelength hump requires temperatures
gt1400K - So silicate volcanism must be involved
- Voyager could not resolve this issue
- Time-evolution gives cooling history
Davies, JGR 2003
49Plumes
- Whats the exit velocity?
- How do speeds like this get generated?
- Most likely explanation is sulphur geysers
decompression of sulphur leads to phase change
and volatile release, driving flow
Loki
Pele
500 K
Constant entropy (adiabatic)
Energy available per unit mass is given by change
in enthalpy (internal energy PV term). Typical
enthalpy changes 100 kJ/kg, which results in
velocities of 400 m/s
Liq.
Vap.
Pressure decreases
LV
200 K
SV
0 K
Entropy (J kg-1 K-1)
After Smith et al., Nature 1979
50Callisto
51Basic Parameters
Anderson et al. JGR 2001
Anderson et al. Icarus 2001
- Note the lower density and the fact that Callisto
is more centrally concentrated than Io (see
later)
52Geological Observations
- Very heavily cratered probably saturated
- No obvious non-crater landforms tectonically
dead - Some impact basins very large e.g. Valhalla
- Also several crater chains (catenae). How did
they form? Why are they useful?
1500km
600km
53Mass Wasting
- Lobate features associated with steep crater
walls - Triggered by impacts or devolatilization?
- Plot in similar parameter space to terrestrial
landslides, despite different materials and
gravity why?
From Moore et al. Icarus 1999
54Degradation / Sublimation
- Callisto systematically lacks small (lt1km)
craters relative to Ganymede - Craters show significant degradation on Callisto
- This may be due to the presence of a highly
volatile ice (e.g. CO2) which is subliming over
time - Evidence for (thin) atmospheric CO2 supports this
hypothesis
Moore et al. Icarus 1999
55Internal Structure
- Two interesting inferences
- It has an ocean
- It is only partly differentiated
- Where do these inferences come from?
Probable ocean location
- Ocean detected with magnetometer data
- Partial differentiation is the only way to fit
the MoI and density data (see )
Anderson et al. Icarus 2001. Two layer model of
Callisto showing inner and outer shell densities
which match observations
56An Ocean?
- We can (potentially) detect such an ocean because
it allows the shell to flex more than it would do
if it were overlying a solid interior - Thermal evolution of an ocean will be controlled
by balance between heat added (from below) and
heat transported to the surface - Present-day chondritic heat flux 5 mW/m2
- Heat flux k DT/z (k3 W/mK, DT100 K)
- So equilibrium conductive shell thickness 60 km
- This seems reasonable but what happens if the
ice shell starts to convect?
57An Aside on Convection (1)
- Convective vigour (and whether it occurs) is
governed by the Rayleigh number - Convection initiates for Ra gt 1000
- Is Callisto convecting?
- So the answer is probably yes
- This creates a problem Convective heat transport
is much more efficient than conduction, and so we
would expect any ocean to have frozen long ago - How much heat is transported by convection?
r is density, a thermal expansivity, DT
temperature drop across the layer, k thermal
diffusivity, h viscosity, d layer thickness
Where does this come from?
58An Aside on Convection (2)
- For a temperature-dependent viscosity material, a
stagnant lid develops on top of a roughly
isothermal, convecting interior - The viscosity is given by hoexp(-gT-To) where
ho is the reference viscosity at To and g is a
constant (K-1) set by the rheology
Convection
- The stagnant lid thickness d is given by
- And so the heat flux across the stagnant lid is
Note that this heat flux is independent of shell
thickness and DT
59Convecting ice shells (contd)
- For likely parameters, we get a convective heat
flux of - 70 (1014 Pa s /h)1/3 mWm-2
- This value is independent of shell thickness and
exceeds the radiogenic contribution if h lt 3x1017
Pa s (which would result in the ocean freezing) - Tidal contribution to heating is negligible
- Most likely way of maintaining an ocean is by
increasing the viscosity. Possibilities - Antifreeze e.g. NH3 lowers temperature of ocean
(and convecting ice) (see Spohn and Schubert
Icarus 2003) - Silicate particles in ice increase its viscosity
- Very large ice grains (?)
- Non-Newtonian convection less efficient (?)(Ruiz,
Nature 2001)
60Partially differentiated?
- Partial differentiation implies that the interior
of Callisto never got above 270K (why?) - 1) How do we stop melting during accretion?
- Accretion energy 0.6 GM2/R 1.7 MJ/kg
- This would give rise to 850 K temperature
increase - The nebular temperatures might also cause melting
- 2) How do we stop melting thereafter?
- Chondritic heating 3.5pW/kg now, x3 over 4.5
Gyr - Total 1.5 MJ/kg 750 K temperature increase
- Possible answers (or maybe it is
differentiated?) - 1) Accrete Callisto slowly (so that the energy
can radiate) - 2) Get rid of the heat rapidly enough to avoid
deep melting (but slowly enough so that the
shallow ocean survives)
61Slow Accretion (?)
- If we assume that satellites accrete from small
bodies, the temperature rise of the satellite is
determined by the accretion rate (slower rate
colder temperature) - Canup and Ward (A.J. 2002) postulate an accretion
disk round Jupiter which is supplied at a low
rate, resulting in a low density, low disk
temperatures and slow formation timescale (gt105
yrs) of the satellites - These characteristics would all help to generate
a partially undifferentiated Callisto - The low disk density also means that the
satellites can survive disk torques which move
them towards Jupiter - Is it reasonable to assume that accretion
involved only small objects, and not large
collisions?
62Removing heat
- A rock-silicate mixture will tend to separate
over time as the rock heats the surrounding ice - Areas with a higher rock fraction will have a
higher viscosity and thus a lower heat flux - Near-surface cold ice will retain its rock and
act as an insulator for any underlying ocean
- A shallow ocean but absence of deep melting is
probably a consequence of - 1) the pressure-dependence of ice melting
temperature - 2) accretion leads to radially increasing
temperatures
63Orbital evolution
- Recall dissipation in satellite leads to
circularization - Assume no torque from primary, so momentum
conserved - In this case, it can be shown that
- We have previously calculated (see Io), and
so we can obtain and circularization
timescale te -e/ directly
Why?
At the present day, this gives us (8 )
Myr. For a solid rock-ice mixture, 15 and
100 so te12 Gyr. But, if there really is
an ocean present, then dissipation will be
amplified, Qs reduced and te reduced, leading to
potential problems . . .
64Summary
- Ios silicate volcanic activity is driven by
tidal heating of a partially molten mantle
feedback between temperature, viscosity and
heating - Callisto, by contrast, has experienced no
significant tidal heating over its history - Nonetheless, Callisto has an ocean, probably as a
result of incorporating antifreeze e.g. NH3 - How did it develop an ocean and yet (apparently)
retain an undifferentiated interior ?! - Next time Europa and Ganymede
65(No Transcript)
66Non-synchronous rotation (2)
- For an eccentric satellite, the net tidal torque
should lead to non-synchronous rotation - But the torque may be balanced by a frozen-in
mass asymmetry, leading to synchronous rotation - A frozen-in mass asymmetry requires a relatively
rigid body
(See Greenberg and Weidenschilling, Icarus 1984)
Mass torque
Tidal torque
- Both the rigidity of the satellite and Q depend
on its internal structure, so there are potential
feedbacks between orbital evolution and rotation
state - Internal structure Orbital behaviour
67Ice Rheology (2)
- Ductile deformation is important because it
controls convection, topographic relaxation and
tidal dissipation (see later) - But ice deformation is complicated and involves
multiple mechanisms (see Goldsby and Kohlstedt
JGR 2001) - Each mechanism obeys the same equation
Here is strain rate, A is a constant, s is
stress, gs is grain size, T is temperature, Q is
activation energy, R is the gas constant and n
and p are constants. A Newtonian rheology has n1
and a grain-size independent rheology has p0.
Increasing stress / strain rate
Grain-boundary sliding (ngt1, grain-size
dependent) Actually two mechanisms, slower one
dominates
Diffusion creep (n1, grain-size dependent)
Dislocation creep (ngt1,p0)
68Thermal Orbital Evolution (contd)
- Nonetheless, progress is being made, both on the
observational and the theoretical front. Well
discuss examples of both later in the course.
This is an example of Europas shell thickness
evolution with time, from Hussmann and Spohn,
Europas Ice Shell Meeting, LPI, 2004. The
periodicity arises because Io and Europas
eccentricities change over time, which changes
the dissipation in Europas ice shell and thus
the shell thickness. In this model the shell is
convecting.
69Magnetometer (1)
- Jupiters magnetic pole is offset from its
rotation pole - So as Jupiter rotates (10 hour period),
satellites experience a time-varying magnetic
field
- A time varying magnetic field induces eddy
currents in a conductor - These currents generate a secondary (induced)
magnetic field - The amplitude of the secondary magnetic field
tells us about the conductor, in particular its
conductivity and thickness
70Magnetometer (2)
- Strong induced signatures have been detected at
Europa, Ganymede and Callisto, indicating a layer
of high conductivity - A relatively near-surface ocean at least a few km
thick satisfies these observations - The direction of the induced signal depends on
the orbital geometry but permanent (static)
signals have also been detected at Ganymede and
(possibly) Io - These static fields are presumably generated by
convection within an iron core, just like the
Earth - We can combine the magnetometer constraints with
the geodetic constraints to infer internal
structures . . .