Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byJulian Walton Modified over 8 years ago
1
Boom and Bust Cycles in Saturn’s rings? Larry W. Esposito, Bonnie Meinke, Nicole Albers, Miodrag Sremcevic LASP/University of Colorado DPS Pasadena 5 October 2010
2
Cassini UVIS occultations UVIS has observed over 100 star occultations by Saturn’s rings Time resolution of 1-2 msec allows diffraction- limited spatial resolution of tens of meters in the ring plane Multiple occultations provide a 3D ‘CAT scan’ of the ring structure Spectral analysis gives characteristics of ring structures and their dimensions
3
F ring Kittens UVIS occultations initially found 13 statistically significant features Interpreted as temporary clumps and a possible moonlet, ‘Mittens’ Meinke etal (2010) now catalog 25 features from the first 102 stellar occultations For every feature, we have a location, width, maximum optical depth (opacity), nickname
4
New Features
5
I Gatti di Roma
6
We identify our ‘kittens’ as temporary clumps
7
Features Lag Prometheus 12 of 25 features have =180º ± 20º The maximum optical depth is at =161º Sinusoidal fit gives Δλ=191º but r 2 only 0.1
8
Sub-km structure seen in wavelet analysis varies with longitude Wavelet analysis from multiple occultations is co-added to give a significance estimate For the B ring edge, the significance of features with sizes 200-2000m shows maxima at 90 and 270 degrees ahead of Mimas For density waves, significance correlated to resonance torque from the perturbing moon
11
Observational Findings F ring kittens more opaque trailing Prom by π Sub-km structure, which is seen by wavelet analysis at strongest density waves and at B ring edge, is correlated with torque (for density waves) and longitude (B ring edge) Structure leads Mimas by π/2, equivalent to π in the m=2 forcing frame The largest structures could be visible to ISS: we thought they might be the equinox objects
14
Do Saturn’s rings resemble a system of foxes and hares? In absence of interaction between size and velocity, prey (mean aggregate mass) grows; predator (velocity) decays When they interact, a stable equilibrium exists with an equilibrium for the size distribution and a thermal equilibrium
16
Model Approach We model accretion/fragmentation balance as a predator-prey model Prey: Mean aggregate mass Predator: Mean random velocity (it ‘feeds’ off the mean mass) Calculate the system dynamics Compare to UVIS HSP data: wavelet analysis (B-ring), kittens (F-ring) Relate to Equinox aggregate images
17
Predator-Prey Model Simplify accretion/fragmentation balance equations, similar to approach used for plasma instabilities Include accretional aggregate growth, collisional disruption, dissipation, viscous stirring Different from Showalter & Burns (1982) moons perturb the system, not just the orbits
18
V2V2 M Phase plane trajectory
19
Amplitude proportional to forcing
20
Wavelet power seen is proportional to resonance torques
21
Predicted Phase Lag Moon flyby or density wave passage excites forced eccentricity; streamlines crowd; relative velocity is damped by successive passes through crests This drives the collective aggregation/ dis-aggregation system at a frequency below its natural limit-cycle frequency Model: Impulse, crowding, damping, aggregation, stirring, disaggregation Aggregate M(t) lags moon by roughly π
23
What Happens at Higher Amplitudes? The moonlet perturbations may be strong enough to force the system into chaotic behavior or into a different basin of attraction around another fixed point (see Wisdom for driven pendulum); or Individual aggregates in the Roche zone may suffer random events that cause them to accrete: then the solid body would orbit at the Kepler rate
24
Conclusions UVIS sees aggregation/disaggregation In a predator-prey model, moon perturbations excite cyclic aggregation at the B ring edge and in the F ring; this explains phase lag Stochastic events in this agitated system can lead to accreted bodies that orbit at Kepler rate: equinox objects (ISS), ring renewal (Charnoz)? Not shown yet…
25
Backup Slides
26
Lotka-Volterra equations describe a predator-prey system This system is neutrally stable around the non-trivial fixed point Near the fixed point, the level curves are ellipses, same as for pendulum The size and shape of the level curves depend on size of the initial impulse The system limit cycles with fixed period Predators lag prey by π/2
27
Lotka-Volterra Equations M= ∫ n(m) m 2 ; V rel 2 = ∫ n(m) V rel 2 dm dM/dt= M/T acc – V rel 2 /v th 2 * M/T coll dV rel 2 /dt= (1-ε 2 )V rel 2 /T coll + M 2 /M 0 2 *V rel 2 /T stir M: mean aggregate mass; V rel 2 : velocity dispersion; V th : fragmentation threshold; ε: restitution coeff; M 0 : reference mass (10m); T acc : accretion; T coll : collision; T stir : viscous stirring timescales
29
Better Model dM/dt= M/T acc – V rel 2 /v th 2 * M/T coll dV rel 2 /dt= (1-ε 2 )V rel 2 /T coll + M 2 /M 0 2 *V esc 2 /T stir In the second equation, we replaced V rel 2 by V esc 2 : This is equivalent to viscous stirring by aggregates of mass M. This is no longer a pure predator-prey model, but it better mimics the ring dynamics.
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.