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.     

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.     

Coupled Clouds and Chemistry of the Giant Planets— A Case for Multiprobes

In seeking to understand the formation of the giant planets and the origin of their atmospheres, the heavy element abundance in well-mixed atmosphere is key. However, clouds come in the way. Thus, composition and condensation are intimately intertwined with the mystery of planetary formation and atmospheric origin. Clouds also provide important clues to dynamical processes in the atmosphere. In this chapter we discuss the thermochemical processes that determine the composition, structure, and characteristics of the Jovian clouds. We also discuss the significance of clouds in the big picture of the formation of giant planets and their atmospheres. We recommend multiprobes at all four giant planets in order to break new ground.     

Feedstocks of the Terrestrial Planets

The processes of planet formation in our Solar System resulted in a final product of a small number of discreet planets and planetesimals characterized by clear compositional distinctions. A key advance on this subject was provided when nucleosynthetic isotopic variability was discovered between different meteorite groups and the terrestrial planets. This information has now been coupled with theoretical models of planetesimal growth and giant planet migration to better understand the nature of the materials accumulated into the terrestrial planets. First order conclusions include that carbonaceous chondrites appear to contribute a much smaller mass fraction to the terrestrial planets than previously suspected, that gas-driven giant planet migration could have pushed volatile-rich material into the inner Solar System, and that planetesimal formation was occurring on a sufficiently rapid time scale that global melting of asteroid-sized objects was instigated by radioactive decay of ²⁶Al. The isotopic evidence highlights the important role of enstatite chondrites, or something with their mix of nucleosynthetic components, as feedstock for the terrestrial planets. A common degree of depletion of moderately volatile elements in the terrestrial planets points to a mechanism that can effectively separate volatile and refractory elements over a spatial scale the size of the whole inner Solar System. The large variability in iron to silicon ratios between both different meteorite groups and between the terrestrial planets suggests that mechanisms that can segregate iron metal from silicate should be given greater importance in future investigations. Such processes likely include both density separation of small grains in the nebula, but also preferential impact erosion of either the mantle or core from differentiated planets/planetesimals. The latter highlights the important role for giant impacts and collisional erosion during the late stages of planet formation.     

Planetary Magnetic Field Measurements: Missions and Instrumentation

The nature and diversity of the magnetic properties of the planets have been investigated by a large number of space missions over the past 50 years. It is clear that without the magnetic field measurements that have been carried out in the vicinity of all the planets, the state of their interior and their evolution since their formation would not be understood even though questions remain about how the different planetary dynamos (in six of the eight planets) work. This paper describes the motivation for making magnetic field measurements, the instrumentation that has been used and many of the missions that carried out the pioneering observations. Emphasis is given to the historically important early missions even if the results from these have been in some cases bettered by later missions.     

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.     

Neutral Atmospheres of the Giant Planets: An Overview of Composition Measurements

Measurements of the chemical composition of the giant planets provide clues of their formation and evolution processes. According to the currently accepted nucleation model, giant planets formed from the initial accretion of an icy core and the capture of the protosolar gas, mosly composed of hydrogen and helium. In the case of Jupiter and Saturn (the gaseous giants), this gaseous component dominates the composition of the planet, while for Uranus and Neptune (the icy giants) it is only a small fraction of the total mass. The measurement of elemental and isotopic ratios in the giant planets provides key diagnostics of this model, as it implies an enrichment in heavy elements (as well as deuterium) with respect to the cosmic composition. Neutral atmospheric constituents in the giant planets have three possible sources: (1) internal (fromthe bulk composition of the planet), (2) photochemical (fromthe photolysis ofmethane) and(3) external (from meteoritic impacts, of local or interplanetary origin). This paper reviews our present knowledge about the atmospheric composition in the giant planets, and their elemental and istopic composition. Measurements concerning key parameters, like C/H, D/H or rare gases in Jupiter, are analysed in detail. The conclusion addresses open questions and observations to be performed in the future.     

Vesta and Ceres: Crossing the History of the Solar System

The evolution of the Solar System can be schematically divided into three different phases: the Solar Nebula, the Primordial Solar System and the Modern Solar System. These three periods were characterized by very different conditions, both from the point of view of the physical conditions and from that of the processes there were acting through them. Across the Solar Nebula phase, planetesimals and planetary embryos were forming and differentiating due to the decay of short-lived radionuclides. At the same time, giant planets formed their cores and accreted the nebular gas to reach their present masses. After the gas dispersal, the Primordial Solar System began its evolution. In the inner Solar System, planetary embryos formed the terrestrial planets and, in combination with the gravitational perturbations of the giant planets, depleted the residual population of planetesimals. In the outer Solar System, giant planets underwent a violent, chaotic phase of orbital rearrangement which caused the Late Heavy Bombardment. Then the rapid and fierce evolution of the young Solar System left place to the more regular secular evolution of the Modern Solar System. Vesta, through its connection with HED meteorites, and plausibly Ceres too were between the first bodies to form in the history of the Solar System. Here we discuss the timescale of their formation and evolution and how they would have been affected by their passage through the different phases of the history of the Solar System, in order to draw a reference framework to interpret the data that Dawn mission will supply on them.     

From Gas to Satellitesimals: Disk Formation and Evolution

The subject of satellite formation is strictly linked to the one of planetary formation. Giant planets strongly shape the evolution of the circum-planetary disks during their formation and thus, indirectly, influence the initial conditions for the processes governing satellite formation. In order to fully understand the present features of the satellite systems of the giant planets, we need to take into account their formation environments and histories and the role of the different physical parameters. In particular, the pressure and temperature profiles in the circum-planetary nebulae shaped their chemical gradients by allowing for the condensation of ices and noble gases. These chemical gradients, in turn, set the composition of the satellitesimals, which represent the building blocks of the present regular satellites.     

Exoplanet Transit Spectroscopy and Photometry

Photometry and spectroscopy of extrasolar planets provides information about their atmospheres and surfaces. From extrasolar planet spectra and photometry we can infer the composition and temperature of the atmospheres as well as the presence of molecular species, including biosignature gases or surface features. So far photometry has been published for three different transiting hot Jupiters (gas giant planets in short-period orbits), opening the era of comparative exoplanetology.     

The Delivery of Water During Terrestrial Planet Formation

The planetary building blocks that formed in the terrestrial planet region were likely very dry, yet water is comparatively abundant on Earth. Here we review the various mechanisms proposed for the origin of water on the terrestrial planets. Various in-situ mechanisms have been suggested, which allow for the incorporation of water into the local planetesimals in the terrestrial planet region or into the planets themselves from local sources, although all of those mechanisms have difficulties. Comets have also been proposed as a source, although there may be problems fitting isotopic constraints, and the delivery efficiency is very low, such that it may be difficult to deliver even a single Earth ocean of water this way. The most promising route for water delivery is the accretion of material from beyond the snow line, similar to carbonaceous chondrites, that is scattered into the terrestrial planet region as the planets are growing. Two main scenarios are discussed in detail. First is the classical scenario in which the giant planets begin roughly in their final locations and the disk of planetesimals and embryos in the terrestrial planet region extends all the way into the outer asteroid belt region. Second is the Grand Tack scenario, where early inward and outward migration of the giant planets implants material from beyond the snow line into the asteroid belt and terrestrial planet region, where it can be accreted by the growing planets. Sufficient water is delivered to the terrestrial planets in both scenarios. While the Grand Tack scenario provides a better fit to most constraints, namely the small mass of Mars, planets may form too fast in the nominal case discussed here. This discrepancy may be reduced as a wider range of initial conditions is explored. Finally, we discuss several more recent models that may have important implications for water delivery to the terrestrial planets.     

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.     

Infrared Spectroscopy of Solar-System Planets

Most of our knowledge regarding planetary atmospheric composition and structure has been achieved by remote sensing spectroscopy. Planetary spectra strongly differ from one planet to another. CO₂ signatures dominate on Mars, and even more on Venus (where the thermal component is detectable down to 1 μm on the dark side). Spectroscopic monitoring of Venus, Earth and Mars allows us to map temperature fields, wind fields, clouds, aerosols, surface mineralogy (in the case of the Earth and Mars), and to study the planets’ seasonal cycles. Spectra of giant planets are dominated by H₂, CH₄ and other hydrocarbons, NH₃, PH₃ and traces of other minor compounds like CO, H₂O and CO₂. Measurements of the atmospheric composition of giant planets have been used to constrain their formation scenario.     

Origin of planetary atmospheres

The near absence of noble gases on earth, other than those of radioactive origin, indicates that the earth was formed by the accumulation of planetesimals; this process systematically excluded all constituents that did not enter into the solid phase. The atmosphere and the ocean with many of its dissolved salts have arisen from gases emitted from the earth's interior, a process that continues today. The oxygen in the earth's atmosphere plus a greater quantity that has been removed from the atmosphere to oxidize geologic materials, has arisen mainly from a small excess of photosynthesis over decay of organic material. The atmospheres of Mars and Venus have probably arisen in a manner similar to the atmosphere on earth, by emission from the planetary interiors. However, they have not received any oxygen from photosynthesis and so are nearly oxygen free. Mars has very little water in its atmosphere, and this can be explained by its lower than freezing average surface temperature. Venus also has very little water, and this requires an ad hoc explanation; one possibility is that Venus was formed from much drier planetesimals than was the earth. Mercury and the moon are virtually without atmospheres. Although some gases may be emitted from their interiors, they are presumably rapidly lost by escape. Whatever atmosphere they possess is probably due to the neutralized solar wind that impinges upon them. The outer planets retained volatiles, including hydrogen and helium, to a much greater extent than did the terrestrial planets.     

Future Space Missions to Search for Terrestrial Planets

Since the first exoplanet was discovered more than 10 years ago, this field has developed rapidly. Currently we know of more than 200 external systems of stars and planets, apart from our own, but what has become the ‘holy grail’ of exoplanetary research is still eluding us. Here we are, of course, referring to solar systems like our own, containing a number of terrestrial or ‘rocky’ planets orbiting within the so-called ‘habitable zone’, and with giant planets such as Jupiter and Saturn—which mostly or totally consist of elements as H or He—at distance much further out from the central star. No such system have to date been discovered around anything resembling our Sun, albeit because of observational biases. Nevertheless, in order to develop the emerging science discipline of Comparative Planetology, we will have to utilize new techniques that will enable us to search for, and then study in detail such systems in an un-biased fashion. This paper describes the emerging techniques and space missions that will allow, finally, the investigation of planets capable of hosting life as we know it.     

Mercury’s Interior Structure, Rotation, and Tides

This review addresses the deep interior structure of Mercury. Mercury is thought to consist of similar chemical reservoirs (core, mantle, crust) as the other terrestrial planets, but with a relatively much larger core. Constraints on Mercury’s composition and internal structure are reviewed, and possible interior models are described. Large advances in our knowledge of Mercury’s interior are not only expected from imaging of characteristic surface features but particularly from geodetic observations of the gravity field, the rotation, and the tides of Mercury. The low-degree gravity field of Mercury gives information on the differences of the principal moments of inertia, which are a measure of the mass concentration toward the center of the planet. Mercury’s unique rotation presents several clues to the deep interior. From observations of the mean obliquity of Mercury and the low-degree gravity data, the moments of inertia can be obtained, and deviations from the mean rotation speed (librations) offer an exciting possibility to determine the moment of inertia of the mantle. Due to its proximity to the Sun, Mercury has the largest tides of the Solar System planets. Since tides are sensitive to the existence and location of liquid layers, tidal observations are ideally suited to study the physical state and size of the core of Mercury.     

Aeronomy of Extra-Solar Giant Planets

The intense stellar UV radiation field incident upon extra-solar giant planets causes profound changes to their upper atmospheres. Upper atmospheric temperatures can be tens of thousands of kelvins, causing thermal dissociation of H₂ to H. The stellar ionizing flux converts H to H⁺. The high temperatures also drive large escape rates of H, but for all but the planets with the smallest orbits, this flux is not large enough to affect planet evolution. The escape rate is large enough to drag off heavier atoms such as C and O. For very small orbits, when the hill sphere is inside the atmosphere, escape is unfettered and can affect planet evolution.     

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.     

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.     

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.