Giant Planet Ionospheres and Thermospheres: The Importance of Ion-Neutral Coupling

Planetary upper atmospheres-coexisting thermospheres and ionospheres-form an important boundary between the planet itself and interplanetary space. The solar wind and radiation from the Sun may react with the upper atmosphere directly, as in the case of Venus. If the planet has a magnetic field, however, such interactions are mediated by the magnetosphere, as in the case of the Earth. All of the Solar System’s giant planets have magnetic fields of various strengths, and interactions with their space environments are thus mediated by their respective magnetospheres. This article concentrates on the consequences of magnetosphere-atmosphere interactions for the physical conditions of the thermosphere and ionosphere. In particular, we wish to highlight important new considerations concerning the energy balance in the upper atmosphere of Jupiter and Saturn, and the role that coupling between the ionosphere and thermosphere may play in establishing and regulating energy flows and temperatures there. This article also compares the auroral activity of Earth, Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus. The Earth’s behaviour is controlled, externally, by the solar wind. But Jupiter’s is determined by the co-rotation or otherwise of the equatorial plasmasheet, which is internal to the planet’s magnetosphere. Despite being rapid rotators, like Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus appear to have auroral emissions that are mainly under solar (wind) control. For Jupiter and Saturn, it is shown that Joule heating and “frictional” effects, due to ion-neutral coupling can produce large amounts of energy that may account for their high exospheric temperatures.     

Magnetic Fields of the Outer Planets

The rapidly rotating giant planets of the outer solar system all possess strong dynamo-driven magnetic fields that carve a large cavity in the flowing magnetized solar wind. Each planet brings a unique facet to the study of planetary magnetism. Jupiter possesses the largest planetary magnetic moment, 1.55×10²⁰ Tm³, 2×10⁴ times larger than the terrestrial magnetic moment whose axis of symmetry is offset about 10° from the rotation axis, a tilt angle very similar to that of the Earth. Saturn has a dipole magnetic moment of 4.6×10¹⁸ Tm³ or 600 times that of the Earth, but unlike the Earth and Jupiter, the tilt of this magnetic moment is less than 1° to the rotation axis. The other two gas giants, Uranus and Neptune, have unusual magnetic fields as well, not only because of their tilts but also because of the harmonic content of their internal fields. Uranus has two anomalous tilts, of its rotation axis and of its dipole axis. Unlike the other planets, the rotation axis of Uranus is tilted 97.5° to the normal to its orbital plane. Its magnetic dipole moment of 3.9×10¹⁷ Tm³ is about 50 times the terrestrial moment with a tilt angle of close to 60° to the rotation axis of the planet. In contrast, Neptune with a more normal obliquity has a magnetic moment of 2.2×10¹⁷ Tm³ or slightly over 25 times the terrestrial moment. The tilt angle of this moment is 47°, smaller than that of Uranus but much larger than those of the Earth, Jupiter and Saturn. These two planets have such high harmonic content in their fields that the single flyby of Voyager was unable to resolve the higher degree coefficients accurately. The four gas giants have no apparent surface features that reflect the motion of the deep interior, so the magnetic field has been used to attempt to provide this information. This approach works very well at Jupiter where there is a significant tilt of the dipole and a long baseline of magnetic field measurements (Pioneer 10 to Galileo). The rotation rate is 870.536° per day corresponding to a (System III) period of 9 h 55 min 26.704 s. At Saturn, it has been much more difficult to determine the equivalent rotation period. The most probable rotation period of the interior is close to 10 h 33 min, but at this writing, the number is still uncertain. For Uranus and Neptune, the magnetic field is better suited for the determination of the planetary rotation period but the baseline is too short. While it is possible that the smaller planetary bodies of the outer solar system, too, have magnetic fields or once had, but the current missions to Vesta, Ceres and Pluto do not include magnetic measurements.     

Formation of the outer planets

A discussion is given of a number of physical processes which were probably important during the formation of the outer planets if these formed from a gaseous solar nebula in which magnetic effects were not important. Arguments are given that large-scale gravitational instabilities in the solar nebula did not occur. Qualitative consideration is given to the conditions in which dynamical capture of gas onto a planetary core may take place; this may have played a major role in the formation of Jupiter and Saturn. Because of the great difficulty of fractionating hydrogen from helium in the assembly of the outer planets, it is argued that a new approach should be made to the construction of planetary models. Conditions which may lead to the formation of the regular satellite systems are discussed, and the associated problem of removal of primordial angular momentum from Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus.This is one of the publications by the Science Advisory Group.     

Planetary Dynamos from a Solar Perspective

Direct numerical simulations of the geodynamo and other planetary dynamos have been successful in reproducing the observed magnetic fields. We first give an overview on the fundamental properties of planetary magnetism. We review the concepts and main results of planetary dynamo modeling, contrasting them with the solar dynamo. In planetary dynamos the density stratification plays no major role and the magnetic Reynolds number is low enough to allow a direct simulation of the magnetic induction process using microscopic values of the magnetic diffusivity. The small-scale turbulence of the flow cannot be resolved and is suppressed by assuming a viscosity far in excess of the microscopic value. Systematic parameter studies lead to scaling laws for the magnetic field strength or the flow velocity that are independent of viscosity, indicating that the models are in the same dynamical regime as the flow in planetary cores. Helical flow in convection columns that are aligned with the rotation axis play an important role for magnetic field generation and forms the basis for a macroscopic α-effect. Depending on the importance of inertial forces relative to rotational forces, either dynamos with a dominant axial dipole or with a small-scale multipolar magnetic field are found. Earth is predicted to lie close to the transition point between both classes, which may explain why the dipole undergoes reversals. Some models fit the properties of the geomagnetic field in terms of spatial power spectra, magnetic field morphology and details of the reversal behavior remarkably well. Magnetic field strength in the dipolar dynamo regime is controlled by the available power and found to be independent of rotation rate. Predictions for the dipole moment agree well with the observed field strength of Earth and Jupiter and moderately well for other planets. Dedicated dynamo models for Mercury, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune, which assume stably stratified layers above or below the dynamo region, can explain some of the unusual field properties of these planets.     

Ion Energization and Escape on Mars and Venus

Mars and Venus do not have a global magnetic field and as a result solar wind interacts directly with their ionospheres and upper atmospheres. Neutral atoms ionized by solar UV, charge exchange and electron impact, are extracted and scavenged by solar wind providing a significant loss of planetary volatiles. There are different channels and routes through which the ionized planetary matter escapes from the planets. Processes of ion energization driven by direct solar wind forcing and their escape are intimately related. Forces responsible for ion energization in different channels are different and, correspondingly, the effectiveness of escape is also different. Classification of the energization processes and escape channels on Mars and Venus and also their variability with solar wind parameters is the main topic of our review. We will distinguish between classical pickup and ??mass-loaded?? pickup processes, energization in boundary layer and plasma sheet, polar winds on unmagnetized planets with magnetized ionospheres and enhanced escape flows from localized auroral regions in the regions filled by strong crustal magnetic fields.     

The Interior Structure, Composition, and Evolution of Giant Planets

We discuss our current understanding of the interior structure and thermal evolution of giant planets. This includes the gas giants, such as Jupiter and Saturn, that are primarily composed of hydrogen and helium, as well as the “ice giants,” such as Uranus and Neptune, which are primarily composed of elements heavier than H/He. The effect of different hydrogen equations of state (including new first-principles computations) on Jupiter’s core mass and heavy element distribution is detailed. This variety of the hydrogen equations of state translate into an uncertainty in Jupiter’s core mass of 18M _⊕ . For Uranus and Neptune we find deep envelope metallicities up to 0.95, perhaps indicating the existence of an eroded core, as also supported by their low luminosity. We discuss the results of simple cooling models of our solar system’s planets, and show that more complex thermal evolution models may be necessary to understand their cooling history. We review how measurements of the masses and radii of the nearly 50 transiting extrasolar giant planets are changing our understanding of giant planets. In particular a fraction of these planets appear to be larger than can be accommodated by standard models of planetary contraction. We review the proposed explanations for the radii of these planets. We also discuss very young giant planets, which are being directly imaged with ground- and space-based telescopes.     

A plasma wave investigation for the Voyager Mission

The Voyager Plasma Wave System (PWS) will provide the first direct information on wave-particle interactions and their effects at the outer planets. The data will give answers to fundamental questions on the dynamics of the Jupiter and Saturn magnetospheres and the properties of the distant interplanetary medium. Basic planetary dynamical processes are known to be associated with wave-particle interactions (for instance, solar wind particle heating at the bow shock, diffusion effects that allow magnetosheath plasma to populate the magnetospheres, various energization phenomena that convert thermal plasma of solar wind origin into trapped radiation, and precipitation mechanisms that limit the trapped particle populations). At Jupiter, plasma wave measurements will also lead to understanding of the key processes known to be involved in the decameter bursts such as the cooperative mechanisms that yield the intense radiation, the observed millisecond fine-structure, and the Io modulation effect. Similar phenomena should be associated with other planetary satellites or with Saturn's rings. Local diagnostic information (such as plasma densities) will be obtained from wave observations, and the PWS may detect lightning whistler evidence of atmospheric electrical discharges. The Voyager Plasma Wave System shares the 10-meter PRA antenna elements, and the signals are processed with a 16-channel spectrum analyzer, covering the range 10 Hz to 56 kHz. At selected times during the planetary encounters, the PWS broadband channel will operate with the Voyager video telemetry link to give complete electric field waveforms over the frequency range 50 Hz to 10 kHz.     

Updated Review of Planetary Atmospheric Electricity

This paper reviews the progress achieved in planetary atmospheric electricity, with focus on lightning observations by present operational spacecraft, aiming to fill the hiatus from the latest review published by Desch et al. (Rep. Prog. Phys. 65:955–997, 2002). The information is organized according to solid surface bodies (Earth, Venus, Mars and Titan) and gaseous planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune), and each section presents the latest results from space-based and ground-based observations as well as laboratory experiments. Finally, we review planned future space missions to Earth and other planets that will address some of the existing gaps in our knowledge.     

Crustal Magnetic Fields of Terrestrial Planets

Magnetic field measurements are very valuable, as they provide constraints on the interior of the telluric planets and Moon. The Earth possesses a planetary scale magnetic field, generated in the conductive and convective outer core. This global magnetic field is superimposed on the magnetic field generated by the rocks of the crust, of induced (i.e. aligned on the current main field) or remanent (i.e. aligned on the past magnetic field). The crustal magnetic field on the Earth is very small scale, reflecting the processes (internal or external) that shaped the Earth. At spacecraft altitude, it reaches an amplitude of about 20 nT. Mars, on the contrary, lacks today a magnetic field of core origin. Instead, there is only a remanent magnetic field, which is one to two orders of magnitude larger than the terrestrial one at spacecraft altitude. The heterogeneous distribution of the Martian magnetic anomalies reflects the processes that built the Martian crust, dominated by igneous and cratering processes. These latter processes seem to be the driving ones in building the lunar magnetic field. As Mars, the Moon has no core-generated magnetic field. Crustal magnetic features are very weak, reaching only 30 nT at 30-km altitude. Their distribution is heterogeneous too, but the most intense anomalies are located at the antipodes of the largest impact basins. The picture is completed with Mercury, which seems to possess an Earth-like, global magnetic field, which however is weaker than expected. Magnetic exploration of Mercury is underway, and will possibly allow the Hermean crustal field to be characterized. This paper presents recent advances in our understanding and interpretation of the crustal magnetic field of the telluric planets and Moon.     

Planetary Magnetic Fields and Solar Forcing: Implications for Atmospheric Evolution

The solar wind and the solar XUV/EUV radiation constitute a permanent forcing of the upper atmosphere of the planets in our solar system, thereby affecting the habitability and chances for life to emerge on a planet. The forcing is essentially inversely proportional to the square of the distance to the Sun and, therefore, is most important for the innermost planets in our solar system—the Earth-like planets. The effect of these two forcing terms is to ionize, heat, chemically modify, and slowly erode the upper atmosphere throughout the lifetime of a planet. The closer to the Sun, the more efficient are these process. Atmospheric erosion is due to thermal and non-thermal escape. Gravity constitutes the major protection mechanism for thermal escape, while the non-thermal escape caused by the ionizing X-rays and EUV radiation and the solar wind require other means of protection. Ionospheric plasma energization and ion pickup represent two categories of non-thermal escape processes that may bring matter up to high velocities, well beyond escape velocity. These energization processes have now been studied by a number of plasma instruments orbiting Earth, Mars, and Venus for decades. Plasma measurement results therefore constitute the most useful empirical data basis for the subject under discussion. This does not imply that ionospheric plasma energization and ion pickup are the main processes for the atmospheric escape, but they remain processes that can be most easily tested against empirical data. Shielding the upper atmosphere of a planet against solar XUV, EUV, and solar wind forcing requires strong gravity and a strong intrinsic dipole magnetic field. For instance, the strong dipole magnetic field of the Earth provides a “magnetic umbrella”, fending of the solar wind at a distance of 10 Earth radii. Conversely, the lack of a strong intrinsic magnetic field at Mars and Venus means that the solar wind has more direct access to their topside atmosphere, the reason that Mars and Venus, planets lacking strong intrinsic magnetic fields, have so much less water than the Earth? Climatologic and atmospheric loss process over evolutionary timescales of planetary atmospheres can only be understood if one considers the fact that the radiation and plasma environment of the Sun has changed substantially with time. Standard stellar evolutionary models indicate that the Sun after its arrival at the Zero-Age Main Sequence (ZAMS) 4.5 Gyr ago had a total luminosity of ≈70% of the present Sun. This should have led to a much cooler Earth in the past, while geological and fossil evidence indicate otherwise. In addition, observations by various satellites and studies of solar proxies (Sun-like stars with different age) indicate that the young Sun was rotating more than 10 times its present rate and had correspondingly strong dynamo-driven high-energy emissions which resulted in strong X-ray and extreme ultraviolet (XUV) emissions, up to several 100 times stronger than the present Sun. Further, evidence of a much denser early solar wind and the mass loss rate of the young Sun can be determined from collision of ionized stellar winds of the solar proxies, with the partially ionized gas in the interstellar medium. Empirical correlations of stellar mass loss rates with X-ray surface flux values allows one to estimate the solar wind mass flux at earlier times, when the solar wind may have been more than 1000 times more massive. The main conclusions drawn on basis of the Sun-in-time-, and a time-dependent model of plasma energization/escape is that:

1. Solar forcing is effective in removing volatiles, primarily water, from planets,
2. planets orbiting close to the early Sun were subject to a heavy loss of water, the effect being most profound for Venus and Mars, and
3. a persistent planetary magnetic field, like the Earth’s dipole field, provides a shield against solar wind scavenging.

     

Planetesimals and Satellitesimals: Formation of the Satellite Systems

The origin of the regular satellites ties directly to planetary formation in that the satellites form in gas and dust disks around the giant planets and may be viewed as mini-solar systems, involving a number of closely related underlying physical processes. The regular satellites of Jupiter and Saturn share a number of remarkable similarities that taken together make a compelling case for a deep-seated order and structure governing their origin. Furthermore, the similarities in the mass ratio of the largest satellites to their primaries, the specific angular momenta, and the bulk compositions of the two satellite systems are significant and in need of explanation. Yet, the differences are also striking. We advance a common framework for the origin of the regular satellites of Jupiter and Saturn and discuss the accretion of satellites in gaseous, circumplanetary disks. Following giant planet formation, planetesimals in the planet’s feeding zone undergo a brief period of intense collisional grinding. Mass delivery to the circumplanetary disk via ablation of planetesimal fragments has implications for a host of satellite observations, tying the history of planetesimals to that of satellitesimals and ultimately that of the satellites themselves. By contrast, irregular satellites are objects captured during the final stages of planetary formation or the early evolution of the Solar System; their distinct origin is reflected in their physical properties, which has implications for the subsequent evolution of the satellites systems.     

Dynamo Models for Planets Other Than Earth

Observations from planetary spacecraft missions have demonstrated a spectrum of dynamo behaviour in planets. From currently active dynamos, to remanent crustal fields from past dynamo action, to no observed magnetization, the planets and moons in our solar system offer magnetic clues to their interior structure and evolution. Here we review numerical dynamo simulations for planets other than Earth. For the terrestrial planets and satellites, we discuss specific magnetic field oddities that dynamo models attempt to explain. For the giant planets, we discuss both non-magnetic and magnetic convection models and their ability to reproduce observations of surface zonal flows and magnetic field morphology. Future improvements to numerical models and new missions to collect planetary magnetic data will continue to improve our understanding of the magnetic field generation process inside planets.     

Planetary radio astronomy experiment for Voyager missions

The planetary radio astronomy experiment will measure radio spectra of planetary emissions in the range 1.2 kHz to 40.5 MHz. These emissions result from wave-particle-plasma interactions in the magnetospheres and ionospheres of the planets. At Jupiter, they are strongly modulated by the Galilean satellite Io.As the spacecraft leave the Earth's vicinity, we will observe terrestrial kilometric radiation, and for the first time, determine its polarization (RH and LH power separately). At the giant planets, the source of radio emission at low frequencies is not understood, but will be defined through comparison of the radio emission data with other particles and fields experiments aboard Voyager, as well as with optical data. Since, for Jupiter, as for the Earth, the radio data quite probably relate to particle precipitation, and to magnetic field strength and orientation in the polar ionosphere, we hope to be able to elucidate some characteristics of Jupiter auroras.Together with the plasma wave experiment, and possibly several optical experiments, our data can demonstrate the existence of lightning on the giant planets and on the satellite Titan, should it exist. Finally, the Voyager missions occur near maximum of the sunspot cycle. Solar outburst types can be identified through the radio measurements; when the spacecraft are on the opposite side of the Sun from the Earth we can identify solar flare-related events otherwise invisible on the Earth.     

Planetary Magnetic Fields: Achievements and Prospects

The past decade has seen a wealth of new data, mainly from the Galilean satellites and Mars, but also new information on Mercury, the Moon and asteroids (meteorites). In parallel, there have been advances in our understanding of dynamo theory, new ideas on the scaling laws for field amplitudes, and a deeper appreciation on the diversity and complexity of planetary interior properties and evolutions. Most planetary magnetic fields arise from dynamos, past or present, and planetary dynamos generally arise from thermal or compositional convection in fluid regions of large radial extent. The relevant electrical conductivities range from metallic values to values that may be only about one percent or less that of a typical metal, appropriate to ionic fluids and semiconductors. In all planetary liquid cores, the Coriolis force is dynamically important. The maintenance and persistence of convection appears to be easy in gas giants and ice-rich giants, but is not assured in terrestrial planets because the quite high electrical conductivity of an iron-rich core guarantees a high thermal conductivity (through the Wiedemann-Franz law), which allows for a large core heat flow by conduction alone. This has led to an emphasis on the possible role of ongoing differentiation (growth of an inner core or “snow”). Although planetary dynamos mostly appear to operate with an internal field that is not very different from (2ρΩ/σ)^1/2 in SI units where ρ is the fluid density, Ω is the planetary rotation rate and σ is the conductivity, theoretical arguments and stellar observations suggest that there may be better justification for a scaling law that emphasizes the buoyancy flux. Earth, Ganymede, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and probably Mercury have dynamos, Mars has large remanent magnetism from an ancient dynamo, and the Moon might also require an ancient dynamo. Venus is devoid of a detectable global field but may have had a dynamo in the past. Even small, differentiated planetesimals (asteroids) may have been capable of dynamo action early in the solar system history. Induced fields observed in Europa and Callisto indicate the strong likelihood of water oceans in these bodies. The presence or absence of a dynamo in a terrestrial body (including Ganymede) appears to depend mainly on the thermal histories and energy sources of these bodies, especially the convective state of the silicate mantle and the existence and history of a growing inner solid core. As a consequence, the understanding of planetary magnetic fields depends as much on our understanding of the history and material properties of planets as it does on our understanding of the dynamo process. Future developments can be expected in our understanding of the criterion for a dynamo and on planetary properties, through a combination of theoretical work, numerical simulations, planetary missions (MESSENGER, Juno, etc.) and laboratory experiments.     

Solar System Magnetospheres

This article proposes a short review of our present knowledge of solar system magnetospheres, with the purpose of placing the study of Saturn’s magnetosphere in the context of a comparative approach. We describe the diversity of solar system magnetospheres and the underlying causes of this diversity: nature and magnetization state of the planetary obstacle, presence or not of a dense atmosphere, rotation state of the planet, existence of a system of satellites, rings and neutral gas populations in orbit around the planet. We follow the “russian doll” hierarchy of solar system magnetospheres to briefly describe the different objects of this family: the heliosphere, which is the Sun’s magnetosphere; the “elementary” magnetospheres of the inner planets, Earth and Mercury; the “complex” magnetospheres of the giant planets, dominated by planetary rotation and the presence of interacting objects within their magnetospheric cavities, some of which, like Ganymede, Io or Titan, produce small intrinsic or induced magnetospheres inside the large one.We finally describe the main original features of Saturn’s magnetosphere as we see them after the Voyager fly-bys and before the arrival of Cassini at Saturn, and list some of the key questions which Cassini will have to address during its four-year orbital tour.     

Oxygen Isotopes and Sampling of the Solar System

The atmospheres of the four giant planets of our Solar System share a common and well-observed characteristic: they each display patterns of planetary banding, with regions of different temperatures, composition, aerosol properties and dynamics separated by strong meridional and vertical gradients in the zonal (i.e., east-west) winds. Remote sensing observations, from both visiting spacecraft and Earth-based astronomical facilities, have revealed the significant variation in environmental conditions from one band to the next. On Jupiter, the reflective white bands of low temperatures, elevated aerosol opacities, and enhancements of quasi-conserved chemical tracers are referred to as ‘zones.’ Conversely, the darker bands of warmer temperatures, depleted aerosols, and reductions of chemical tracers are known as ‘belts.’ On Saturn, we define cyclonic belts and anticyclonic zones via their temperature and wind characteristics, although their relation to Saturn’s albedo is not as clear as on Jupiter. On distant Uranus and Neptune, the exact relationships between the banded albedo contrasts and the environmental properties is a topic of active study. This review is an attempt to reconcile the observed properties of belts and zones with (i) the meridional overturning inferred from the convergence of eddy angular momentum into the eastward zonal jets at the cloud level on Jupiter and Saturn and the prevalence of moist convective activity in belts; and (ii) the opposing meridional motions inferred from the upper tropospheric temperature structure, which implies decay and dissipation of the zonal jets with altitude above the clouds. These two scenarios suggest meridional circulations in opposing directions, the former suggesting upwelling in belts, the latter suggesting upwelling in zones. Numerical simulations successfully reproduce the former, whereas there is a wealth of observational evidence in support of the latter. This presents an unresolved paradox for our current understanding of the banded structure of giant planet atmospheres, that could be addressed via a multi-tiered vertical structure of “stacked circulation cells,” with a natural transition from zonal jet pumping to dissipation as we move from the convectively-unstable mid-troposphere into the stably-stratified upper troposphere.

     

Water Reservoirs in Small Planetary Bodies: Meteorites,Asteroids, and Comets

Asteroids and comets are the remnants of the swarm of planetesimals from which the planets ultimately formed, and they retain records of processes that operated prior to and during planet formation. They are also likely the sources of most of the water and other volatiles accreted by Earth. In this review, we discuss the nature and probable origins of asteroids and comets based on data from remote observations, in situ measurements by spacecraft, and laboratory analyses of meteorites derived from asteroids. The asteroidal parent bodies of meteorites formed \(\leq 4\) Ma after Solar System formation while there was still a gas disk present. It seems increasingly likely that the parent bodies of meteorites spectroscopically linked with the E-, S-, M- and V-type asteroids formed sunward of Jupiter’s orbit, while those associated with C- and, possibly, D-type asteroids formed further out, beyond Jupiter but probably not beyond Saturn’s orbit. Comets formed further from the Sun than any of the meteorite parent bodies, and retain much higher abundances of interstellar material. CI and CM group meteorites are probably related to the most common C-type asteroids, and based on isotopic evidence they, rather than comets, are the most likely sources of the H and N accreted by the terrestrial planets. However, comets may have been major sources of the noble gases accreted by Earth and Venus. Possible constraints that these observations can place on models of giant planet formation and migration are explored.     

Structure of Jupiter and Saturn

Understanding of the planetary interiors depends upon our knowledge of the equations of state and of the transport properties of matter at high pressures and temperatures. The present status of this knowledge in relation to hydrogen and helium is discussed in detail including electrical and thermal conductivity, viscosity, diffusivity, etc. On this basis the various possible models of the internal structure of Jupiter and of Saturn are presented and their agreement with observational constraints such as the multipole gravitational coefficients analyzed. Relevance of planetary magnetic fields, basic atmospheric information and the Great Red Spot of Jupiter to the models of the interiors are discussed.     

Separation of the Magnetic Field into External and Internal Parts

The magnetic field of a planet or a planetary moon contains contributions from a variety of sources in the environment of the body (external sources) and its interior (internal sources). This chapter describes different methods that have been developed for the separation of external and internal source contributions, and their application to selected planets and one of Jupiter’s moons, Ganymede.