4.5 Article

Monte-Carlo simulation of Callisto's exosphere

期刊

ICARUS
卷 262, 期 -, 页码 14-29

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.icarus.2015.07.035

关键词

Callisto; Atmospheres, composition; Jupiter, satellites; Satellites, atmospheres

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We model Callisto's exosphere based on its ice as well as non-ice surface via the use of a Monte-Carlo exosphere model. For the ice component we implement two putative compositions that have been computed from two possible extreme formation scenarios of the satellite. One composition represents the oxidizing state and is based on the assumption that the building blocks of Callisto were formed in the protosolar nebula and the other represents the reducing state of the gas, based on the assumption that the satellite accreted from solids condensed in the jovian sub-nebula. For the non-ice component we implemented the compositions of typical CI as well as L type chondrites. Both chondrite types have been suggested to represent Callisto's non-ice composition best. As release processes we consider surface sublimation, ion sputtering and photon-stimulated desorption. Particles are followed on their individual trajectories until they either escape Callisto's gravitational attraction, return to the surface, are ionized, or are fragmented. Our density profiles show that whereas the sublimated species dominate close to the surface on the sun-lit side, their density profiles (with the exception of H and H-2) decrease much more rapidly than the sputtered particles. The Neutral gas and Ion Mass (NIM) spectrometer, which is part of the Particle Environment Package (PEP), will investigate Callisto's exosphere during the JUICE mission. Our simulations show that NIM will be able to detect sublimated and sputtered particles from both the ice and non-ice surface. NIM's measured chemical composition will allow us to distinguish between different formation scenarios. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据