The free oscillations of Jupiter and Saturn

The periods and the eigenfunctions have been calculated for the fundamental modes and for the overtones of spheroidal oscillations of Jupiter and Saturn. Along with ordinary oscillations, the core oscillations appear; these eigenfunctions are localized in the planetary core and have an exponential attenuation to the surface. The rotational splittings of the free oscillations have been calculated. Because of rapid planetary rotation, these splittings were found to be of the order of differences between undisturbed frequences. The idea is proposed that the rotational splitting of the spectrum of Saturn may present in the future the unique possibility of determining the bodily rotation period of the planet.     

Jupiter and Saturn rotation periods

Anderson and Schubert [2007. Saturn's Gravitational field, internal rotation, and interior structure. Science 317, 1384-1387 (paper I)] proposed that Saturn's rotation period can be ascertained by minimizing the dynamic heights of the 100 mbar isosurface with respect to the geoid; they derived a rotation period of 10 h 32 m 35 s. We investigate the same approach for Jupiter to see if the Jovian rotation period is predicted by minimizing the dynamical heights of its isobaric (1 bar pressure level) surface using zonal wind data. A rotation period of 9 h 54 m 29.7 s is found. Further, we investigate the minimization method by fitting Pioneer and Voyager occultation radii for both Jupiter and Saturn. Rotation periods of 9 h 55 m 30 s and 10 h 32 m 35 s are found to minimize the dynamical heights for Jupiter and Saturn, respectively. Though there is no dynamical principle requiring the minimization of the dynamical heights of an isobaric surface, the successful application of the method to Jupiter lends support to its relevance for Saturn.We derive Jupiter and Saturn rotation periods using equilibrium theory to explain the difference between equatorial and polar radii. Rotation periods of 9 h 55 m 20 s and 10 h 31 m 49 s are found for Jupiter and Saturn, respectively. We show that both Jupiter's and Saturn's shapes can be derived using solid-body rotation, suggesting that zonal winds have a minor effect on the planetary shape for both planets.The agreement in the values of Saturn's rotation period predicted by the different approaches supports the conclusion that the planet's period of rotation is about 10 h 32 m.     

Comparative evolution of Jupiter and Saturn

We present evolutionary sequences for Jupiter and Saturn, based on new non-gray model atmospheres, which take into account the evolution of the solar luminosity and partitioning of dense components to deeper layers. The results are used to set limits on the extent to which possible interior phase separation of hydrogen and helium may have progressed in the two planets. When combined with static models constrained by the gravity field, our evolutionary calculations constrain the helium mass fraction in Jupiter to be between 0.20 and 0.27, relative to total hydrogen and helium. This is consistent with the Galileo determination. The helium mass fraction in Saturn’s atmosphere lies between 0.11 and 0.21, higher than the Voyager determination. Based on the discrepancy between the Galileo and Voyager results for Jupiter, and our models, we predict that revised observational results for Saturn will yield a higher atmospheric helium mass fraction relative to the Voyager value.     

The structure of the planets Jupiter and Saturn

Planetary models for Jupiter and Saturn are computed using a fourth-order theory and a new molecular equation of state. The equation of state for the molecular hydrogen and helium planetary envelopes is taken from the Monte Carlo calculations of Slattery and Hubbard [Icarus 29, 187–192 (1976)]. Models for Jupiter are found that have a small amount of heavy elements either mixed with hydrogen and helium throughout the interior of the planet or concentrated in a small dense core. Saturn is modeled with a solar-composition hydrogen and helium envelope and a small derse core. We conclude that the molecular equation of state linked with suitable interior equations of state can produce Jovian models which satisfy the observational data. The planetary models show that the enrichment of heavy elements (relative to solar composition) is approximately 3 times for Jupiter and 10 times for Saturn.     

Magnetic reversals of Jupiter and Saturn

We propose that the origin and behavior of the internal magnetic fields of Jupiter and Saturn should be much like the Sun's. Jupiter and Saturn are predominantly gaseous, they have significant internal heat sources, and their surface angular rotation rates vary with latitude. There is also empirical evidence showing that the rotation rates of their magnetic fields vary with latitude. This differential rotation is instrumental in producing solar-type dynamos, which are characterized by quasi-periodic field reversals. When we apply the theory and scaling parameters for the reversal period of the magnetic field of the Sun to Jupiter and Saturn, we derive an estimate for the time interval between magnetic reversals to be on the order of centuries. This time scale is consistent with observed changes in Jupiter's magnetic field over the last 2 decades.     

For infrared spectrophotometry of Jupiter and Saturn

Infrared spectral observations of Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn were made from 100 to 470 cm^?1 using NASA's G. P. Kuiper Airborne Observatory. Taking Mars as a calibration source, we determined brightness temperatures of Jupiter and Saturn with approximately 5 cm^?1 resolution. The data are used to determine the internal luminosities of the giant planets, for which more than 75% of the thermally emitted power is estimated to be in the measured bandpass: for Jupiter L_J = (8.0 ± 2.0) × 10^?10L_⊙ and for Saturn L_S = (3.6 ± 0.9) × 10^?10. The ratio R of thermally emitted power to solar power absorbed was estimated to be R_J = 1.6 ± 0.2, and R_S = 2.7 ± 0.8 from the observations when both planets were near perihelion. The Jupiter spectrum clearly shows the presence of the rotational ammonia transitions which strongly influence the opacity at frequencies ?250 cm^?1. Comparison of the data with spectra predicted from current models of Jupiter and Saturn permits inferences regarding the structure of the planetary atmospheres below the temperature inversion. In particular, an opacity source in addition to gaseous hydrogen and ammonia, such as ammonia ice crystals as suggested by Orton, may be necessary to explain the observed Jupiter spectrum in the vicinity of 250 cm^?1.     

Radiative-convective equilibrium models of Jupiter and Saturn

Radiative-convective equilibrium models for Jupiter and Saturn have been produced in a study centered primarily on the stratospheric energy balance and the possible role of aerosol heating. These models are compared directly to the thermal structure profiles obtained from Voyager radio occultation measurements. The method is based on a straightforward flux divergence formulation derived from earlier work (J. S. Hogan, S. I. Rasool, and T. Encrenaz 1969, J. Atmos. Sci.26, 898–905). The balance between absorbed and emitted energies is computed iteratively at each level in the atmosphere, assuming local thermodynamic equilibrium and employing a standard treatment of opacities. Results for Jupiter indicate that a dust-free model (no aerosol heating) furnishes a good mean thermal profile for the stratosphere when compared with the Voyager 1 radio occultation (RSS) measurements. These observations of the equatorial region (0° and 12°S, respectively) exhibit periodic vertical structure. Of course, among many possible complications, the Voyager profiles may not represent typical excursions from the mean. The aerosol heat depositions required to match these profiles exactly, relative to the nominal dust-free model, are reasonably consistent with independent estimates for “continuum” absorbers. Other interpretations are discussed, along with a survey of problems encountered in intercomparing the lower portions (P ? 300 mb) of the models, the RSS profiles, and a recent IRIS equatorial profile. Although aerosol heating cannot be ruled out at low latitudes on Jupiter, our results indicate that it may not be required to reproduce the Voyager 1 RSS profiles. On the other hand, heating by aerosols or some other absorber seems necessary in order to match the high-latitude Voyager 2 RSS temperature profile. The Saturn models are relatively simple and in good-to-excellent agreement with the Voyager 2 RSS profiles at all levels. Our comparisons indicate that aerosol heating played a minor role in Saturn's midlatitude stratospheric energy balance at the time of the Voyager 2 encounter. These models, however, may need to be reassessed once the hydrocarbon concentrations have been more precisely determined.     

Atmospheric superrotation on Saturn and Jupiter

The problem is discussed whether atmospheric superrotation is driven by internal or external torques. An integral constraint is derived which under certain conditions forbids geostrophic flow, and suggests corkscrew-shaped motion along zones of constant latitude. A momentum balance consideration restricts effective viscosities in the upper atmospheres to be much smaller than maximal eddy viscosity, perhaps as small as molecular viscosity.     

On the formation of Jupiter and Saturn

It is proposed that Jupiter and Saturn were initially formed as small rocks which grew into their present sizes as a result of accretion of matter from the gas-dust cloud surrounding the Sun. The energy released by the accretion of Jupiter and Saturn is computed. It is concluded that the ‘excess’ radiation from these planets is due to simple cooling and that the gravitational contraction from initially extended states most probably never occurred.     

Long slit spectropolarimetry of Jupiter and Saturn

We present ground-based limb polarization measurements of Jupiter and Saturn consisting of full disk imaging polarimetry for the wavelength 7300 Å and spatially resolved (long-slit) spectropolarimetry covering the wavelength range 5200-9350 Å.For the polar region of Jupiter we find for λ = 6000 Å a very strong radial (perpendicular to the limb) fractional polarization with a seeing corrected maximum of about +11.5% in the South and +10.0% in the North. This indicates that the polarizing haze layer is thicker at the South pole. The polar haze layers extend down to 58° in latitude. The derived polarization values are much higher than reported in previous studies because of the better spatial resolution of our data and an appropriate consideration of the atmospheric seeing. Model calculations demonstrate that the high limb polarization can be explained by strongly polarizing (p ≈ 1.0), high albedo (ω ≈ 0.98) haze particles with a scattering asymmetry parameter of g ≈ 0.6 as expected for aggregate particles of the type described by West and Smith (West, R.A., Smith, P.H. [1991]. Icarus 90, 330-333). The deduced particle parameters are distinctively different when compared to lower latitude regions.The spectropolarimetry of Jupiter shows a decrease in the polar limb polarization towards longer wavelengths and a significantly enhanced polarization in strong methane bands when compared to the adjacent continuum. This is a natural outcome for a highly polarizing haze layer above an atmosphere where multiple scatterings are suppressed in absorption bands. For lower latitudes the fractional polarization is small, negative, and it depends only little on wavelength except for the strong CH₄-band at 8870 Å.The South pole of Saturn shows a lower polarization (p ≈ 1.0-1.5%) than the poles of Jupiter. The spectropolarimetric signal for Saturn decrease rapidly with wavelength and shows no significant enhancements in the fractional polarization in the absorption bands. These properties can be explained by a vertically extended stratospheric haze region composed of small particles <100 nm as suggested previously by Karkoschka and Tomasko (Karkoschka, E., Tomasko, M. [2005]. Icarus 179, 195-221).In addition we find in the V- and R-band a previously not observed strong polarization feature (p = 1.5-2.0%) near the equator of Saturn. The origin of this polarization signal is unclear but it could be related to a seasonal effect.Finally we discuss the potential of ground-based limb polarization measurements for the investigation of the scattering particles in the atmospheres of Jupiter and Saturn.     

Near-infrared polarization studies of Saturn and Jupiter

Polarization measurements of Jupiter, Saturn, and Saturn's rings from 1 to 3.5 μm are presented. At 1.6 μm on the discs of the two planets, the radially directed limb polarizations observed in the visible undergo, in some cases, a surprising 90° rotation to a tangential direction, particularly on the poles. The only immediate explanation for this effect is double Mie scattering, due to aerosols which must be of the order of a micrometer in size. On Jupiter the patterns are not uniform and are not stable, reflecting variable aerosol concentrations on the two poles. The ring polarization is uniformly negative (E vector parallel to the ecliptic plane) from the visible through 3.5 μm, and is inversely proportional to the albedo. This is as expected from Wolff's model for scattering from rough solid surfaces; but the degree of polarization seems uncommonly high, exceeding 2% at 3.5 μm.     

Stability of jets on Jupiter and Saturn

The linear stability of a zonal jet that decays with depth is investigated under the assumption that the thermal stratification is very small. A westerly cosine jet is found to be more stable than it is in a thin fluid shell with two-dimensional flow. This is in agreement with observations of Jupiter and Saturn, where jet curvature exceeds the barotropic stability criterion. This result constitutes an alternative hypothesis to that of Ingersoll and Pollard [Icarus 52 (1982) 62], who showed that deep jets extending through the interior are also more stable than thin shell jets. The flow regime assumed in the present work requires that a small stratification can exist and persist even in the presence of horizontal temperature gradients. Further work will be needed to test whether this is realistic.     

Imaging spectrometer study of Jupiter and Saturn

Observations with a new near infrared imaging spectrometer with ～15 Å resolution are presented. Twelve spectral images of Saturn in the vicinity of the 8900 Å CH₄ absorption complex were obtained and their interpretation discussed. Spectral images of Jupiter were also obtained and several of these at widely separated wavelengths were subjected to a Minnaert analysis.     

Monochromatic brightness factors of Jupiter and Saturn

The monochromatic brightness factors for morphologically nonuniform cloudy surface fields of Jupiter and Saturn in the visible wavelength range were calculated. In the spectra of both giant planets, the combination (Raman) light scattering feature (a pseudoemission peak) was detected in the range of a strong Fraunhofer line H Ca II; and its intensity was estimated.     

Search for HD in Jupiter and Saturn

Upper limits are placed on the D/H ratio in the observed portions of the atmospheres of Jupiter and Saturn from observations at high S/N over the region of the 5-0 R(1) line of HD. The upper limits of 4 × 10^?5 and 6 × 10^?5 D/H on Jupiter and Saturn, respectively, are not inconsistent with present models for abundance ratios in the primitive solar nebula or with other estimates of this quantity from observations.     

Jupiter and Saturn: Near-infrared spectral albedos

The near-infrared (0.65–2.5μm) spectral albedo of Jupiter and Saturn with 1.5% spectral resolution is presented for the center of disk and for the limb. There is a distinct difference in the continuum slope between Jupiter and Saturn which may be attributed to a difference in the dust content or composition of the two atmospheres. There is an indication of limb brightening in the deepest CH₄ bands on Saturn. No limb brightening is found for Jupiter.     

Third-order Jupiter — Saturn planetary theory

The construction of a third order J-S theory is presented. The Hori theory of planetary perturbations is employed. No Critical J-S terms due to the 2:5 commensurabilities and its multiples exist, when we take into account the periodic terms of order 0, 1, 2 with respect to the eccentricity- inclination. In this case the Lie series transformation degenerates and is meaningless. The J-S equations of motion for secular perturbations are solved when we neglect in our treatment, the Poisson terms of degree > 2 in the Poincaré canonical variables H _u , K _u , P _u Q _u (u = 1, 2). The Jacobi-Radau referential is adopted, and the theory is expressed in terms of the canonical variables of H. Poincaré.Now at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, U.S.A.     

Models of Jupiter and Saturn after Galileo mission

New models of Jupiter are based on observational data provided by the Galileo spaceprobe, which considerably improved previously existing estimates of the helium abundance in the atmosphere of Jupiter. These data yield for Jupiter’s atmosphere 20% of the solar oxygen abundance and do not agree with the results of the analysis of the collision of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 with Jupiter (10 times the solar value). Therefore, both the models of Jupiter with water-depleted and water-enriched atmosphere are considered. By analogy with Jupiter, trial models of Saturn with a water-depleted external envelope are also developed. The molecular-metallic phase transition pressure of hydrogen P_m was taken to be 1.5, 2 and 3 Mbar. Since Saturn’s internal molecular envelope is noticeably enriched in the IR-component (its weight concentration, 0.25–0.30, being by a factor of 3–4 higher than in Jupiter), the phase transition pressure in Saturn can be lower than in Jupiter. In the constructed models, the IR-core masses are 3–3.5 M_⊕ for Jupiter and 3–5.5 M_⊕ for Saturn. Jupiter’s and Saturn’s IR-cores can be considered embryos onto which the accretion of the gas occurred during the formation of the planets. The mass of the hydrogen–helium component dispersed in the zone of planetary formation constitutes ≈2–5 planetary masses for Jupiter and ≈11–14 planetary masses for Saturn.     

The dynamics of Jupiter and Saturn in the gaseous protoplanetary disk

We study the possibility that the mutual interactions between Jupiter and Saturn prevented Type II migration from driving these planets much closer to the Sun. Our work extends previous results by Masset and Snellgrove [Masset, F., Snellgrove, M., 2001. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 320, L55-L59], by exploring a wider set of initial conditions and disk parameters, and by using a new hydrodynamical code that properly describes for the global viscous evolution of the disk. Initially both planets migrate towards the Sun, and Saturn's migration tends to be faster. As a consequence, they eventually end up locked in a mean motion resonance. If this happens in the 2:3 resonance, the resonant motion is particularly stable, and the gaps opened by the planets in the disk may overlap. This causes a drastic change in the torque balance for the two planets, which substantially slows down the planets' inward migration. If the gap overlap is substantial, planet migration may even be stopped or reversed. As the widths of the gaps depend on disk viscosity and scale height, this mechanism is particularly efficient in low viscosity, cool disks. The initial locking of the planets in the 2:3 resonance is a likely outcome if Saturn formed at the edge of Jupiter's gap, but also if Saturn initially migrated rapidly from further away. We also explore the possibility of trapping in other resonances, and the subsequent evolutions. We discuss the compatibility of our results with the initial conditions adopted in Tsiganis et al. [Tsiganis, K., Gomes, R., Morbidelli, A., Levison, H.F., 2005. Nature 435, 459-461] and Gomes et al. [Gomes, R., Levison, H.F., Tsiganis, K., Morbidelli, A., 2005. Nature 435, 466-469] to explain the current orbital architecture of the giant planets and the origin of the Late Heavy Bombardment of the Moon.     

A comparison of the interiors of Jupiter and Saturn

Interior models of Jupiter and Saturn are calculated and compared in the framework of the three-layer assumption, which rely on the perception that both planets consist of three globally homogeneous regions: a dense core, a metallic hydrogen envelope, and a molecular hydrogen envelope. Within this framework, constraints on the core mass and abundance of heavy elements (i.e. elements other than hydrogen and helium) are given by accounting for uncertainties on the measured gravitational moments, surface temperature, surface helium abundance, and on the inferred protosolar helium abundance, equations of state, temperature profile and solid/differential interior rotation. Results obtained solely from static models matching the measured gravitational fields indicate that the mass of Jupiter’s dense core is less than 14 M_⊕ (Earth masses), but that models with no core are possible given the current uncertainties on the hydrogen–helium equation of state. Similarly, Saturn’s core mass is less than 22 M_⊕ but no lower limit can be inferred. The total mass of heavy elements (including that in the core) is constrained to lie between 11 and 42 M_⊕ in Jupiter, and between 19 and 31 M_⊕ in Saturn. The enrichment in heavy elements of their molecular envelopes is 1–6.5, and 0.5–12 times the solar value, respectively. Additional constraints from evolution models accounting for the progressive differentiation of helium (Hubbard WB, Guillot T, Marley MS, Burrows A, Lunine JI, Saumon D, 1999. Comparative evolution of Jupiter and Saturn. Planet. Space Sci. 47, 1175–1182) are used to obtain tighter, albeit less robust, constraints. The resulting core masses are then expected to be in the range 0–10 M_⊕, and 6–17 M_⊕ for Jupiter and Saturn, respectively. Furthermore, it is shown that Saturn’s atmospheric helium mass mixing ratio, as derived from Voyager, Y=0.06±0.05, is probably too low. Static and evolution models favor a value of Y=0.11−0.25. Using, Y=0.16±0.05, Saturn’s molecular region is found to be enriched in heavy elements by 3.5 to 10 times the solar value, in relatively good agreement with the measured methane abundance. Finally, in all cases, the gravitational moment J₆ of models matching all the constraints are found to lie between 0.35 and 0.38×10⁻⁴ for Jupiter, and between 0.90 and 0.98×10⁻⁴ for Saturn, assuming solid rotation. For comparison, the uncertainties on the measured J₆ are about 10 times larger. More accurate measurements of J₆ (as expected from the Cassini orbiter for Saturn) will therefore permit to test the validity of interior models calculations and the magnitude of differential rotation in the planetary interior.