The atmospheric influence, size and possible asteroidal nature of the July 2009 Jupiter impactor

Orton, Glenn S.; Fletcher, Leigh N.; Lisse, C. M.; Chodas, P. W.; Cheng, A. F.; Yanamandra-Fisher, P.; Baines, K. H.; Fisher, B.; Wesley, A.; Pérez‐Hoyos, S.; Pater, Imke de; Hammel, Heidi B.; Edwards, Michelle L.; Ingersoll, Andrew P.; Mousis, O.; Marchis, Franck; Golisch, W.; Sánchez‐Lavega, A.; Simon-Miller, A. A.; Hueso, R.; Momary, T.; Greene, Z.; Reshetnikov, N.; Otto, E.; Villar, Gregorio; Lai, Shuyue; Wong, Michael H.

doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2010.10.010

Cited by 31 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This contrasted with expectations from the experience gathered in visible and infrared observations of SL9 (Harrington et al 2004) and 2009 (Hammel et al 2010;Orton et al 2011;Fletcher et al 2010Fletcher et al , 2011 impacts that produced extense debris fields of aerosols, as well as alterations in NH3 content and the thermal field observable in the mid-infrared (see for instance Table 2 presents a summary of the high-resolution observations performed with top-class observatories after the 2010 and 2012 impacts (Figs. 3 and 4), along with a summary of the sensitivity of each observation to different atmospheric properties.…”

Section: Searches Of Atmospheric Debriscontrasting

confidence: 56%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact flux on Jupiter: From superbolides to large-scale collisions

Hueso

Pérez‐Hoyos

Sánchez‐Lavega

et al. 2013

A&A

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context. Regular observations of Jupiter by a large number of amateur astronomers have resulted in the serendipitous discovery of short bright flashes in its atmosphere, which have been proposed as being caused by impacts of small objects. Three flashes were detected: one on June 3, 2010, one on August 20, 2010, and one on September 10, 2012. Aims. We show that the flashes are caused by impacting objects that we characterize in terms of their size, and we study the flux of small impacts on Jupiter. Methods. We measured the light curves of these atmospheric airbursts to extract their luminous energy and computed the masses and sizes of the objects. We ran simulations of impacts and compared them with the light curves. We analyzed the statistical significance of these events in the large pool of Jupiter observations. Results. All three objects are in the 5−20 m size category depending on their density, and they released energy comparable to the recent Chelyabinsk airburst. Model simulations approximately agree with the interpretation of the limited observations. Biases in observations of Jupiter suggest a rate of 12−60 similar impacts per year and we provide software tools for amateurs to examine the faint signature of impacts in their data to increase the number of detected collisions. Conclusions. The impact rate agrees with dynamical models of comets. More massive objects (a few 100 m) should impact with Jupiter every few years leaving atmospheric dark debris features that could be detectable about once per decade.

show abstract

Section: Searches Of Atmospheric Debriscontrasting

confidence: 56%

“…The nature of this object is being debated because spectral signatures showed hints of a possible asteroidal origin Orton et al 2011). Although smaller than the SL9 comet, this impact hinted at a higher than expected impact rate on Jupiter.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Impact flux on Jupiter: From superbolides to large-scale collisions

Hueso

Pérez‐Hoyos

Sánchez‐Lavega

et al. 2013

A&A

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• S (Sánchez-Lavega et al 2010;Orton et al 2011). Interestingly, the second observed impact occurred on June 3, 2010, at a planetocentric latitude of 14.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial distribution of water in the stratosphere of Jupiter fromHerschelHIFI and PACS observations

Cavalié

Feuchtgruber

Lellouch

et al. 2013

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context. In the past 15 years, several studies suggested that water in the stratosphere of Jupiter originated from the ShoemakerLevy 9 (SL9) comet impacts in July 1994, but a direct proof was missing. Only a very sensitive instrument observing with high spectral/spatial resolution can help to solve this problem. This is the case of the Herschel Space Observatory, which is the first telescope capable of mapping water in Jupiter's stratosphere. Aims. We observed the spatial distribution of the water emission in Jupiter's stratosphere with the Heterodyne Instrument for the Far Infrared (HIFI) and the Photodetector Array Camera and Spectrometer (PACS) onboard Herschel to constrain its origin. In parallel, we monitored Jupiter's stratospheric temperature with the NASA Infrared Telescope Facility (IRTF) to separate temperature from water variability. Methods. We obtained a 25-point map of the 1669.9 GHz water line with HIFI in July 2010 and several maps with PACS in October 2009 and December 2010. The 2010 PACS map is a 400-point raster of the water 66.4 μm emission. Additionally, we mapped the methane ν 4 band emission to constrain the stratospheric temperature in Jupiter in the same periods with the IRTF. Results. Water is found to be restricted to pressures lower than 2 mbar. Its column density decreases by a factor of 2−3 between southern and northern latitudes, consistently between the HIFI and the PACS 66.4 μm maps. We infer that an emission maximum seen around 15• S is caused by a warm stratospheric belt detected in the IRTF data. Conclusions. Latitudinal temperature variability cannot explain the global north-south asymmetry in the water maps. From the latitudinal and vertical distributions of water in Jupiter's stratosphere, we rule out interplanetary dust particles as its main source. Furthermore, we demonstrate that Jupiter's stratospheric water was delivered by the SL9 comet and that more than 95% of the observed water comes from the comet according to our models.

show abstract

“…While the size of the 2009 impactor (∼ 0.5 km) made the impact look like one of the main SL9 impacts, the high abundance of silica and the lack of spectroscopic evidence of cometary-derived species like CO, CS, and HCN, favor an asteroidal origin rather than a cometary origin for this impactor (Orton et al 2011).…”

Section: New Impacts?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Constraints from Comets on the Formation and Volatile Acquisition of the Planets and Satellites

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comets play a dual role in understanding the formation and evolution of the solar system. First, the composition of comets provides information about the origin of the giant planets and their moons because comets formed early and their composition is not expected to have evolved significantly since formation. They, therefore serve as a record of conditions during the early stages of solar system formation. Once comets had formed, their orbits were perturbed allowing them to travel into the inner solar system and impact the planets. In this way they contributed to the volatile inventory of planetary atmospheres. We review here how knowledge of comet composition up to the time of the Rosetta mission has contributed to understanding the formation processes of the giant planets, their moons and small icy bodies in the solar system. We also discuss how comets contributed to the volatile inventories of the giant and terrestrial planets.

show abstract

The atmospheric influence, size and possible asteroidal nature of the July 2009 Jupiter impactor

Cited by 31 publications

References 58 publications

Impact flux on Jupiter: From superbolides to large-scale collisions

Impact flux on Jupiter: From superbolides to large-scale collisions

Spatial distribution of water in the stratosphere of Jupiter fromHerschelHIFI and PACS observations

Constraints from Comets on the Formation and Volatile Acquisition of the Planets and Satellites

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About