+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from MESSENGER’s MASCS UVVS instrument

Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from MESSENGER’s MASCS UVVS instrument

Date post: 25-Feb-2016
Category:
Upload: shino
View: 39 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from MESSENGER’s MASCS UVVS instrument. Tim Cassidy, Aimee Merkel, Bill McClintock, Matt Burger Menelaos Sarantos , Rosemary Killen, Ron Vervack , Ann Sprague. Just how bright is the Na exosphere?. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Popular Tags:
30
Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from MESSENGER’s MASCS UVVS instrument Tim Cassidy, Aimee Merkel, Bill McClintock, Matt Burger Menelaos Sarantos, Rosemary Killen, Ron Vervack, Ann Sprague
Transcript
Page 1: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere

Data from MESSENGER’s MASCS UVVS instrument

Tim Cassidy, Aimee Merkel, Bill McClintock, Matt BurgerMenelaos Sarantos, Rosemary Killen, Ron Vervack, Ann Sprague

Page 2: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

From http://www.ips.gov.au/Category/Educational/Space%20Weather/The%20Aurora/Aurora.pdf

Potter et.al. (2001)

Just how bright is the Na exosphere?

We see the Na exosphere because Na scatters sunlight ~589 nm (yellow)

Page 3: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

Messenger limb scan

vs.

Earth-based Na observations

Messenger UVVS data is especially valuable because it gives high resolution vertical profiles (‘limb scans’) of the atmosphere

Potter andMorgan, 1990

Killen et al., 2008

Page 4: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

column densityor

radiance

Altitude

For Na, we will focus on near-surface (<1000 km) limb scans

Of particular interest is the slope of the limb scan—which tells us the energy of ejected Na

Gravity acts as an energy spectrometer.

hot

cold

What is a limb scan and why is it useful?

lines of sight

Page 5: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

This talk is about the dayside, which is typically probed near the equator:

Note: poles are harder to investigate with MESSENGER’s orbit. MESSENGER also has a lot of tail data, not presented here.

Page 6: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

Chamberlain model:density ~ n0e-U/kT where U is the potential energy(times another factor called zeta…)

−MmG /r +mracos(χ)

Radiation acceleration term, analogous to U = -mgh

χ

Gravitational potentialsunlight

To get atmospheric properties we have fitted limb scans with a simple function, called a Chamberlain model.

Chamberlain model fits give us two parameters: surface density and temperature

Note: Radiation acceleration is up to ½ Mercury’s gravity

Page 7: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

lines of sight

Need to account for line of sight:

line of sight column density =Integral of density over line of sight≈ surface density*2*K*H

where K~Sqrt(pi*r/2H)

H = kT/mg

where g is the sum of gravitational and radial photon acceleration

Page 8: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

I am going to focus on the dense lower exosphere in this talk

What is it’s temperature? What is its density? How does it vary?And what do these tell us about the process that launches molecules off the the surface?

Example limb scan fits:

Page 9: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

Temperature is roughly constant

Results, part I: Na temperature

This excludes the high temperature ‘tail’ at high altitudes mentioned earlier.Modelers predicted a more variable temperature…

Example: temperature at noon local time

TAA0°180°

Data from over 6 Mercury years

Page 10: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

(some data points randomly excluded for clarity)

And temperature is the same across dayside:

Page 11: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

Killen et al., 1999:1500 K (at equator)

Compared with ground-based observations of the temperature: 700-1500 K

2008

Page 12: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

We can compare with possible ejection mechanisms

Thermal Desorption<700 K(and thermal accommodation)

PSDPhoton Stimulated Desorptionsimilar to ESD, electron stimulateddesorption

Meteorite Impact Vaporization1000s degrees

Sputteringthousands to 10s of thousands of degrees

Molecular dissociation(e.g. CaXCa + X + energy)10s of thousands of degrees

Experimental Data (Yakshinskiy and Madey, 1999 & 2004) 900 K Maxwellian

PSD from ice Johnson et al., (2002)

Conclusion: PSD is the best match to supply the near-surface exosphere temperature

The temperatures we derive are similar to, but slightly colder, than Earth-based observations (Killen et al., 2008)

There is no evidence of thermal desorption

Page 13: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

But PSD would quickly deplete surface of Na, Na must be continually resupplied to surface by other processes such as impacts or ion-enhanced diffusion (e.g., Killen et al., 2008).

Page 14: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

Results, part II: Na density

Page 15: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

Plotting vs true anomaly angle shows pattern:(for this example, we use limbscans at 10:00 local time)

Perihelion

Perihelion

Aphelion

TAA0°180°

Data from over 6 Mercury years

Page 16: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

Different local times have similar (but distinct) patterns

(some data points randomly excluded for clarity)

Page 17: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

Suggests correlation with radiation acceleration, as some ground based observations suggest

TAA0°180°

Potter et al., 2009

Page 18: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

TAA0°180°

Compared with ground-based data (Potter et al 2007)

Lines show model of Smyth and Marconi (2005)

It’s difficult to compare with ground based data, which tends to report disk-averaged quantities. A large effort would be required to do this.

Page 19: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

TAA0°180°

Exosphere content from ‘PSD enhanced’ modeling

scenario

Leblanc and Johnson, 2010

But perhaps the closest model:

Page 20: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

Conclusions about Dayside Na

•These trends are consistentThese limb scan column densities don’t change much from year to year: 20% standard deviation

•Strong evidence that PSD supplies lower dayside atmosphere-temperature (~1200K)-variation in noon density with TAA like Leblanc predicted in

his ‘enhanced PSD’ simulation-no evidence of thermal accommodation/thermal

desorption

E.g., Noon,TAA 150-170°

• There is no detailed comparison with models.

• Ground-based data does not seem to match our results. Observation geometry?

•Na has abundance comparable to O.

Page 21: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

• extra slides

Page 22: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

Compared to atomic oxygenEstimate of O vertical column density:If O is hot (10's of thousands of degrees), then the vertical column density is of the same order as the line-of-sight density near the surface, which can found from the observed O emissions, about 4 Rayleighs, and the O g value (~1E-4/sec, Killen et al., 2009):=4 Rayleighs/g value*1E6 (/cm2) = 4E10 cm-2

(regardless of the O temperature, this is an upper limit)

vs Na:

Page 23: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

Ca

•Ejected mostly from dawn and density peaks near perihelion—impact vaporization?•High temperature (15,000-25,000 K): molecular dissociation of impact vapor

Mg

•Uncertain mix of temperatures•Nightside source needed

Compared to Other Species

NaMgCa

Observed column densities:Na has a two components, two temperatures. It dominates near surface.Mg and Ca have single temperature. Mg dominates further from the surface.

Page 24: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument
Page 25: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

Others suggested that same correlation

Killen et al. (2008)

Others did not:

Page 26: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

--- Chamberlain with photon pressure3000 K1500 K900 K

Test: comparison of Chamberlain model with Matt’s Monte Carlo model, the gold standard

Chamberlain model overestimates densities near dawn and dusk, where the Chamberlain model assumes no photon pressure effects (cos(chi)~0 in previous slide).

Page 27: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

validating optical thickness correction

Page 28: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument
Page 29: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument
Page 30: Mercury’s Seasonal Na Exosphere Data from  MESSENGER’s  MASCS UVVS instrument

Recommended