1 / 27

Pluto occultation 2006 June 12 from Australia & New Zealand

Pluto occultation 2006 June 12 from Australia & New Zealand. Leslie Young, Eliot Young, Catherine Ruhland, Catherine Olkin (SwRI)

nyla
Download Presentation

Pluto occultation 2006 June 12 from Australia & New Zealand

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Pluto occultation 2006 June 12from Australia & New Zealand Leslie Young, Eliot Young, Catherine Ruhland, Catherine Olkin (SwRI) Richard French (Wellesley College)Marc Buie (Lowell Observatory)Jeff Regester (Greensboro Day School, NC)Kevin Shoemaker (Shoemaker Labs, Longmont CO)Martin George (Launceston Planetarium, Tasmania)John Broughton (Reedy Creek, Australia)Grant Christie,Tim Natusch (Auckland Observatory)Ross Dickie, Peter Jaquiery, Graham Blow (RASNZ)Dave Gault (Hawkesbury Heights, Australia)Blair Lade (Stockport Observatory, Australia)

  2. Occultation Overview Temperature Pressure Extinction Flux Position in shadow Bending angle => => Refractivity =>

  3. Occultation:Reconstructed Shadow Path

  4. Reedy Creek 0.51 m (20")John Broughton

  5. Anglo-Australian Telescope 4-m (163 ")Dick French, Kevin Shoemaker

  6. Hawkesbury Heights 0.25 m (10")Dave Gault

  7. Stockport Observatory 0.51 m (20")Blair Lade

  8. Longford Farm 0.36 m (14")Eliot Young, Jeff Register

  9. Auckland Observatory 0.36 m (14")Grant Christie, Tim Natusch

  10. Carter Observatory 0.41 m (16")Marc Buie, Trina Ruhland

  11. Farm near Wanaka, 0.36 m (14")Leslie Young, Cathy Olkin, Peter Jaquirey, Ross Dickie

  12. Geometric Solution

  13. Geometric Solution

  14. Change in Shadow Radius: 1988 to 2002: 2.74 ± 1.36 km/yr (increase) 2002 to 2006: 1.17 ± 4.31 km/yr (consistent with no change)

  15. Frame Rate: 10 Hz SNR per point: 62 SNR per 60 km: 331 GPS-based absolute timing accuracy better than 100 µsecond. Spikes are resolved, differ in detail between ingress/egress

  16. T0

  17. Lower Atmosphere Inversion(Ref: Elliot, Person and Qu 2003) • Small Planet Case • No Ray Crossing • Geometric Optics • Clear Atmosphere

  18. Immersion R (km) v. dT/dr (K/km) R (km) v. T (K) dry adiabat

  19. Emersion R (km) v. T (K) R (km) v. dT/dr (K/km) dry adiabat

  20. Monte Carlo-Based Error Estimates R (km) v. T (K) - Nominal Case - 1-sigma env. • Monte Carlo errors based on 100 simulated lightcurves with appropriate noise. • The Temperature Inversions: Similar overall shape, similar wiggles, but largest errors (up to ±18 K) above the temperature inversion at 1240 km.

  21. Effects of an example haze layer Consider the effects of sudden haze onset at 1263 km with a scale height of 15 km. R (km) v. T (K) • Haze dramatically changes the lower temperature profile. • Brings dT/dr closer to a dry adiabat. dry adiabat R (km) v. dT/dr (K/km)

  22. Conclusions • Pluto's bulk atmosphere (geometry): • 1988 to 2006, pressure has increased by 0.98 ± 0.09 µbar, a factor of 2.17±0.21 • For N2 surface vapor pressure equilibrium, this implies an increase in surface temperature of 1.2-1.7 K. • Pressures consistant between 2002 and 2006 • Pluto’s upper atmosphere (model fit): • Non-isothermal. dT/dr = -0.127±0.028 K/km • Average (103.9±3.2 K) same as 2002 (104±2 K, isothermal fit), and 1988 (104.0±7.3 K). • 99.4±3.1 K (ingress, 30.0 S, summer), 105.5±3.5 K (egress, 53.2 N, winter) dispite ~1500 less insolation averaged over the winter latitude, so not tied to insolation (in a straightforward way) • Pluto’s lower atm, clear assumption (inversion): • As in 1988 & 2002, not isothermal. • Temperature inversion around 1210 - 1220 km. • Ingress & Egress are qualitatively similar, but the density perturbations differ in detail. • Pluto’s lower atm, haze assumption (inversion, removing haze from model fit) • Top of haze poorly constrained. • Temperature purturbations qualitatively similar to those seen on Earth, Jupiter, Titan

More Related