Formation of the Cores of the Outer Planets

The formation of the giant planets seems to be best explained by accretion of planetesimals to form massive cores, which in the case of Jupiter and Saturn were able to capture nebular gas. However, the timescale for accretion of such cores has been a problem. Accretion in the outer solar system differs qualitatively from planetary growth in the terrestrial region, as the larger embryo masses and lower orbital velocities make bodies more subject to gravitational scattering. The planetesimal swarm in the outer nebula may be seeded by earlier-formed large bodies scattered from the region near the nebular “snow line”. Such a seed body can experience rapid runaway growth undisturbed by competitors; the style of growth is not oligarchy, but monarchy.     

Large-Scale Structure and Dynamics of the Magnetotails of Mercury,Earth, Jupiter and Saturn

Spacecraft observations have established that all known planets with an internal magnetic field, as part of their interaction with the solar wind, possess well-developed magnetic tails, stretching vast distances on the nightside of the planets. In this review paper we focus on the magnetotails of Mercury, Earth, Jupiter and Saturn, four planets which possess well-developed tails and which have been visited by several spacecraft over the years. The fundamental physical processes of reconnection, convection, and charged particle acceleration are common to the magnetic tails of Mercury, Earth, Jupiter and Saturn. The great differences in solar wind conditions, planetary rotation rates, internal plasma sources, ionospheric properties, and physical dimensions from Mercury’s small magnetosphere to the giant magnetospheres of Jupiter and Saturn provide an outstanding opportunity to extend our understanding of the influence of such factors on basic processes. In this review article, we study the four planetary environments of Mercury, Earth, Jupiter and Saturn, comparing their common features and contrasting their unique dynamics.     

A strategy for investigation of the outer solar system

The requirements of systematic exploration of the outer solar system have been intensively studied by a Science Advisory Group (SAG) of consulting scientists for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Comets and Asteroids were excluded from this study, as a separate group is planning missions to these bodies. This paper and accompanying articles on specific related scientific subjects written by members of the SAG, summarize the findings and recommendations of this group. These recommendations should not be interpreted as official NASA policy. Following some general introductory remarks, a brief sketch is given of the development and current status of scientific missions to the inner planets by the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. With this perspective, the development of the U.S. program for investigation of the outer solar system is described. The scientific focus of outer solar system exploration has been studied in detail. The relationship of the outer planetary bodies to one another and to the inner planets, as parts in a unified solar system evolved from a primitive solar nebula, is emphasized. Deductions from outer solar system investigations regarding the conditions of the solar nebula at the time of planetary formation have been considered. Investigations have been proposed that are relevant to studies of the atmospheric structure and dynamics, internal structure of the planets, satellite composition and morphology, and planetary and interplanetary fields and energetic particles. The mission type and sequence required to conduct a systematic exploration of the outer solar system has been developed. Technological rationales for the suggested missions are discussed in general terms. The existing NASA program for outer solar system exploration is comprised of four missions:

1. Pioneer 10 fly-by mission to Jupiter and beyond, currently underway, with launch on 3 March 1972;
2. Pioneer G, intended for a similar mission with planned launch 2–22 April 1973; and
3. Two Mariner Jupiter/Saturn fly-bys in 1977, with experiment selection scheduled for late 1972 and detailed engineering design during 1972–74.

The Science Advisory Group advocates that detailed mission planning be undertaken on the following additional missions for launches during the late 1970's and early 1980's. Together with existing plans, these would provide a balanced, effective exploration program.

1. 1976 Pioneer Jupiter/Out-of-Ecliptic (One Mission)
2. 1979 Mariner Jupiter/Uranus Fly-bys (Two Missions)
3. 1979 Pioneer Entry Probe to Saturn 1980 Pioneer Entry Probe to Uranus via Saturn Fly-by (Three Missions)
4. 1981/1982 Mariner Jupiter Orbiter (Two Missions).

     

Evolution of the Protosolar Nebula and Formation of the Giant Planets

The formation of planetary systems is intimately tied to the question of the evolution of the gas and solid material in the early nebula. Current models of evolution of circumstellar disks are reviewed here with emphasis on the so-called “alpha models” in which angular momentum is transported outward by turbulent viscosity, parameterized by an dimensionless parameter α. A simple 1D model of protoplanetary disks that includes gas and embedded particles is used to introduce key questions on planetesimal formation. This model includes the aerodynamic properties of solid ice and rock grains to calculate their migration and growth. We show that the evolution of the nebula and migration and growth of its solids proceed on timescales that are generally not much longer than the timescale necessary to fully form the star-disk system from the molecular cloud. Contrary to a widely used approach, planet formation therefore can neither be studied in a static nebula nor in a nebula evolving from an arbitrary initial condition. We propose a simple approach to both account for sedimentation from the molecular cloud onto the disk, disk evolution and migration of solids. Giant planets have key roles in the history of the forming Solar System: they formed relatively early, when a significant amount of hydrogen and helium were still present in the nebula, and have a mass that is a sizable fraction of the disk mass at any given time. Their composition is also of interest because when compared to the solar composition, their enrichment in elements other than hydrogen and helium is a witness of sorting processes that occured in the protosolar nebula. We review likely scenarios capable of explaining both the presence of central dense cores in Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune and their global composition. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Formation and Composition of Planetesimals

The composition of planetesimals depends upon the epoch and the location of their formation in the solar nebula. Meteorites produced in the hot inner nebula contain refractory compounds. Volatiles were present in icy planetesimals and cometesimals produced in the cold outer nebula. However, the mechanism responsible for their trapping is still controversial. We argue for a general scenario valid in all regions of the turbulent nebula where water condensed as a crystalline ice (Hersant et al., 2004). Volatiles were trapped in the form of clathrate hydrates in the continuously cooling nebula. The epoch of clathration of a given species depends upon the temperature and the pressure required for the stability of the clathrate hydrate. The efficiency of the mechanism depends upon the local amount of ice available. This scenario is the only one so far which proposes a quantitative interpretation of the non detection of N₂ in several comets of the Oort cloud (Iro et al., 2003). It may explain the large variation of the CO abundance observed in comets and predicts an Ar/O ratio much less than the upper limit of 0.1 times the solar ratio estimated on C/2001 A2 (Weaver et al., 2002). Under the assumption that the amount of water ice present at 5 AU was higher than the value corresponding to the solar O/H ratio by a factor 2.2 at least, the clathration scenario reproduces the quasi uniform enrichment with respect to solar of the Ar, Kr, Xe, C, N and S elements measured in Jupiter by the Galileo probe. The interpretation of the non-uniform enrichment in C, N and S in Saturn requires that ice was less abundant at 10 AU than at 5 AU so that CO and N₂ were not clathrated in the feeding zone of the planet while CH₄, NH₃ and H₂S were. As a result, the 14N/15N ratio in Saturn should be intermediate between that in Jupiter and the terrestrial ratio. Ar and Kr should be solar while Xe should be enriched by a factor 17. The enrichments in C, N and S in Uranus and Neptune suggest that available ice was able to form clathrates of CH₄, CO and the NH₃ hydrate, but not the clathrate of N₂. The enrichment of oxygen by a factor 440 in Neptune inferred by Lodders and Fegley (1994) from the detection of CO in the troposphere of the planet is higher by at least a factor 2.5 than the lower limit of O/H required for the clathration of CO and CH4 and for the hydration of NH₃. If CO detected by Encrenaz et al. (2004) in Uranus originates from the interior of the planet, the O/H ratio in the envelope must be around of order of 260 times the solar ratio, then also consistent with the trapping of detected volatiles by clathration. It is predicted that Ar and Kr are solar in the two planets while Xe would be enriched by a factor 30 to 70. Observational tests of the validity of the clathration scenario are proposed.     

Formation of the Outer Planets

Models of the origins of gas giant planets and ‘ice’ giant planets are discussed and related to formation theories of both smaller objects (terrestrial planets) and larger bodies (stars). The most detailed models of planetary formation are based upon observations of our own Solar System, of young stars and their environments, and of extrasolar planets. Stars form from the collapse, and sometimes fragmentation, of molecular cloud cores. Terrestrial planets are formed within disks around young stars via the accumulation of small dust grains into larger and larger bodies until the planetary orbits become well enough separated that the configuration is stable for the lifetime of the system. Uranus and Neptune almost certainly formed via a bottom-up (terrestrial planet-like) mechanism; such a mechanism is also the most likely origin scenario for Saturn and Jupiter.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Wave observations in outer planet magnetospheres

The first measurements of plasma waves and wave-particle interactions in the magnetospheres of the outer planets were provided by instruments on Voyager 1 and 2. At Jupiter, the observations yielded new information on upstream electrons and ions, bow shock dissipation processes, trapped radio waves in the magnetospheres and extended Jovian magnetotail, pitch angle diffusion mechanisms and whistlers from atmospheric lightning. Many of these same emissions were detected at Saturn. In addition, the Voyager plasma wave instruments detected dust particles associated with the tenuous outer rings of Saturn as they impacted the spacecraft. Most of the plasma wave activity at Jupiter and Saturn is in the audio range, and recordings of the wave observations have been useful for analysis.     

Planetary ionospheres

Experimental results on the ionospheres of Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus are reviewed, especially from space missions like Pioneer Venus, Viking-1, and -2, Pioneer-10 and -11, and Voyager-1 and -2. Our emphasis has been on Venus, since most of the observational material pertains to it. On the outer planets, where the observations are rather modest, more emphasis is given on theoretical modelling.     

Radio science investigations with Voyager

The planned radio science investigations during the Voyager missions to the outer planets involve: (1) the use of the radio links to and from the spacecraft for occultation measurements of planetary and satellite atmospheres and ionospheres, the rings of Saturn, the solar corona, and the general-relativistic time delay for radiowave propagation through the Sun's gravity field; (2) radio link measurements of true or apparent spacecraft motion caused by the gravity fields of the planets, the masses of their larger satellites, and characteristics of the interplanetary medium; and (3) related measurements which could provide results in other areas, including the possible detection of long-wavelength gravitational radiation propagating through the Solar System. The measurements will be used to study: atmospheric and ionospheric structure, constituents, and dynamics; the sizes, radial distribution, total mass, and other characteristics of the particles in the rings of Saturn; interior models for the major planets and the mean density and bulk composition of a number of their satellites; the plasma density and dynamics of the solar corona and interplanetary medium; and certain fundamental questions involving gravitation and relativity. The instrumentation for these experiments is the same ground-based and spacecraft radio systems as will be used for tracking and communicating with the Voyager spacecraft, although several important features of these systems have been provided primarily for the radio science investigations.     

Irregular Satellites in the Context of Planet Formation

All four giant planets in the solar system possess irregular satellites, characterized by large, highly eccentric and/or highly inclined orbits. These bodies were likely captured from heliocentric orbit, probably in association with planet formation itself. Enabled by the use of large-format digital imagers on ground-based telescopes, new observational work has dramatically increased the known populations of irregular satellites, with 74 discoveries in the last few years. A new perspective on the irregular satellite systems is beginning to emerge.We find that the number of irregular satellites measured to a given diameter is approximately constant from planet to planet. This is surprising, given the radically different formation scenarios envisioned for the gas giants Jupiter and Saturn compared to the (much less massive and compositionally distinct) ice giants Uranus and Neptune. We discuss the new results on the irregular satellites and show how these objects might be used to discriminate amongst models of giant planet formation.     

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.     

Imaging of the outer planets and satellites

Imaging is the most widely applicable single means of exploring the outer planets and their satellites and also complements other planet-oriented instruments. Imaging generally is more effectively carried out from a three-axis stabilized spacecraft than from a spinning one.Both specific experimental and broader exploratory goals must be recognized. Photography of Jupiter from terrestrial telescopes has revealed features which were neither predictable or predicted. Close-up imaging from fly-bys and orbiters affords the opportunity for discovery of atmospheric phenomena on the outer planets forever beyond the reach of terrestrial laboratories and intuition. On the other hand, a large number of specific applications of close-up imaging to study the giant planets are suggested by experience in photography from Earth and Mars orbit, and by ground-based telescopic studies of Jupiter and Saturn. Photographic observations of horizontal and vertical cloud structure at both global and finer scale, and motions and other time changes, will be essential for the study of atmospheric circulation. Size and composition of cloud particles also is a credible objective of fly-by and orbiter missions carrying both imaging and photo-polarimeter experiments.The satellites of the outer planets actually constitute three distinct classes: lunar-sized objects, asteroidal-sized objects, and particulate rings. Imaging promises to be the primary observational tool for each category with results that could impact scientific thinking in the late 70's and 80's as significantly as has close-up photography of Mars and the Moon in the last 10 yr.Finally, it should be recognized that photography occupies a unique role in the interaction between science and the popular mind. This popular, educational aspect of imaging constitutes a unique aspect of 20th Century culture. Imaging therefore is not only a primary basis for scientific discovery in the exploration of the outer planets, but an important human endeavor of enduring significance.Contribution No. 2163 of the Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91109.This is one of the publications by the Science Advisory Group.