Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T16:00:07.826Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Entry and fireball models vs. observations: What have we learned?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 August 2016

Mordecai-Mark Mac Low
Mordecai-Mark Mac Low*
Affiliation:
Astronomy & Astrophysics Center, University of Chicago, 5640 South Ellis Avenue, Chicago, IL 60637, USA Also Department of Astronomy, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This review attempts to give a coherent explanation of the main observations of the entry Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 and the aftermath of the resulting explosions by using models of the tidal breakup of the comet, the entry of individual fragments into the jovian atmosphere, and the resulting fireballs and plumes. A critical review shows that the models appear reasonably well understood. The biggest theoretical uncertainties currently concern how to best tie models of the entry to models of the resulting fireballs. The key unknown before the impact was the size and kinetic energy of the comet fragments. The evidence now available includes the behavior of the chain of fragments, the luminosity of the observed visible fireballs and later infrared emission, the chemistry of the spots, and the lack of seismic waves or perturbations at the water cloud pressure level. These observations point to the fragments having diameters under a kilometer, densities of order 0.5 gem“3, and kinetic energies of order 1027 erg.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 156: The Collision of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 and Jupiter , May 1996 , pp. 157 - 182
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

References

Ahrens, T. J., Takata, T., & O'Keefe, J. D. 1994 Radiative signatures from impact of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 on Jupiter. Geophys. Res. Lett., 21, 1551–1553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asphaug, E. & Benz, W. 1994 Density of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 deduced by modelling breakup of the parent ‘rubble pile’. Nature, 370, 120–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asphaug, E. & Benz, W. 1995 The tidal disruption of strengthless bodies: Lessons from comet Shoemaker-Levy 9. Icarus, submitted.Google Scholar
Biberman, L. M., Bronin, S. Ya., & Brykin, M. V. 1980 Moving of a blunt body through a dense atmosphere under conditions of severe aerodynamic heating and ablation. Ada Astronaut., 7, 53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjoraker, G. L., Stolovy, S. R., Herter, T. L., Gull, G. E., & Pirger, B. E. 1995 Detection of water after the collision of fragments G and K of comet Shomeaker-Levy 9 with Jupiter. Icarus, submitted.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boslough, M. B., Crawford, D. A., Robinson, A. C., & Trucano, T. G. 1994 Mass and penetration depth of Shoemaker-Levy 9 fragments from time-resolved photometry. Geophys. Res. Lett., 21, 1555–1558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boslough, M. B., Crawford, D. A., Trucano, T. G., & Robinson, A. C. 1995 Numerical modeling of Shoemaker-Levy 9 impacts as a framework for interpreting observations. Geophys. Res. Lett., 22, 1821–1824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bronshten, V. A. 1983 Physics of Meteoric Phenomena Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandrasekhar, S. 1961 Hydrodynamic and hydromagnetic stability. Dover.Google Scholar
Chevalier, R. A. & Sarazin, C. L. 1994 Explosions of infalling comets in Jupiter's atmosphere. Astrophys. J., 429, 863–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chyba, C. F., Thomas, P. J., & Zahnle, K. J. 1993 The 1908 Tunguska explosion: Atmospheric disruption of a stony asteroid. Nature, 361, 40–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, D. A. Boslough, M. B., Trucano, T. G., and Robinson, A. H. 1994 The impact of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 on Jupiter. Shock Waves, 4, 47–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, D. A. Boslough, M. B., Trucano, T. G., and Robinson, A. H. 1995 The impact of periodic comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 on Jupiter. Int. J. of Impact Engin., in press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobrovolskis, A. R. 1990 Tidal disruption of solid bodies. Icarus, 88, 24–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, G. B. & Ferrara, A. 1995 The behavior of fragments of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 in the atmosphere of Jupiter. Astrophys. J., 438, 957–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, J. R., De Pater, I., Jernigan, J. G., Liu, M. C., & Brown, M. E. 1995 The fragment R collision: W. M. Keck telescope observations of SL9. Science, 267, 1320–1323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahn, J. M. & Rettig, T. W. 1995 Jeans instability in comet Shoemaker-Levy 9. J. Geophys. Res.-Planets, submitted.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, R. I., McKee, C. F., & Colella, P. 1994 On the hydrodynamic interaction of shock waves with interstellar clouds. I. Nonradiative shocks in small clouds. Astrophys. I., 420, 213–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Logonneé, P., Billebaud, F., Vauglin, I., Merlin, P., Sybille, F., Mosser, B., Lagage, P. O., Gautier, D., & Drossart, P. 1994 Seismic waves generated by the SL-9 impact. Bull. Amer. Astron. Soc, 26, 1580.Google Scholar
Mac Low, M.-M. & Zahnle, K. 1994 Explosion of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 on entry into the jovian atmosphere. Astrophys. J. 434, L33–L36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marley, M. S., Dayal, A., Deutsch, L. K., Fazio, G. G., Hoffmann, W. F., Hora, J. L., Hunten, D. M., Sprague, A. L., Sykes, M. V., Walter, C., & Wells, K. W. 1994 A search for seismic waves launched by the impact of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9. Bull. Amer. Astron. Soc, 26, 1580.Google Scholar
Moran, B. & Tipton, R. 1993 Simulation of a comet impact on Jupiter. Eos, 74, 43, 389.Google Scholar
Reads, K. I. 1984 Experimental investigation of turbulent mixing by Rayleigh-Taylor instability. Physica, 12D, 45–58.Google Scholar
Richardson, D., Asphaug, E., & Benner, L. 1995 Precise orbital integration of the self-gravitational clustering of SL9 debris. Bull. Amer. Astron. Soc, in press.Google Scholar
Schenk, P., Asphaug, E., McKinnon, W., Melosh, H. J., & Weissman, P. 1995 Cometary nuclei and tidal disruption: The geologic record of crater chains on Callisto and Ganymede. Icarus, submitted.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scotti, J. V., & Melosh, H. J. 1993 Tidal breakup and dispersion of P/Shoemaker-Levy 9: Estimate of progenitor size. Nature, 365, 7333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sekanina, Z. 1993 Disintegration phenomena expected during collision of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 with Jupiter. Science, 262, 382–387.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sekanina, Z. 1996 Preprint Astronomy & Astrophysics, in press.Google Scholar
Sekanina, Z., Chodas, P. W., & Yeomans, D. K. 1994 Tidal disruption and the appearance of periodic comet Shoemaker-Levy 9. Astron. Astrophys., 289, 607–636.Google Scholar
Shoemaker, E. M., Hassig, P. J., & Roddy, D. J. 1995 Numerical simulations of the Shoemaker-Levy 9 impact plumes and clouds: A progress report. Geophys. Res. Lett., 22, 1825–1828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solem, J. 1994 Density and size of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 deduced from a tidal breakup model. Nature, 370, 349–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sridhar, S., Li Tremaine, S. 1992 Tidal disruption of viscous bodies. Icarus, 95, 86–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svetsov, V. V., Nemtchinov, I. V., & Teterev, A. V. 1995 Disintegration of large mete-oroids in Earth's atmosphere: Theoretical models. Icarus, 116, 131–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, J. M. & Norman, M. L. 1992 Zeus-2D: A radiation magnetohydrodynamics code for astrophysical flows in two space dimensions. I. The hydrodynamic algorithms and tests. Astrophys. J. Supp., 80, 753–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takata, T., O'Keefe, J. D., Ahrens, T. J., & Orton, G. S. 1994 Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9: Impact on Jupiter and plume evolution. Icarus 109, 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takata, T., Ahrens, T. J., Harris, A. W. 1995 Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9: Fragment and Progenitor Energy. Geophys. Res. Lett., 22, 2429–2432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Leer, B. 1977 Towards the ultimate conservative difference scheme. IV. A new approach to numerical convection. J. Comp. Phys., 23, 276–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vickery, A. M. 1993 Numerical simulation of a comet impact on Jupiter. Eos, 74, 43, 391.Google Scholar
Weaver, H. A., Feldman, P. D., A'Hearn, M. F., & Arpigny, C. 1994 Hubble Space Telescope observations of comet P/Shoemaker-Levy 9 (I993e). Science, 263, 787–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weidenschilling, S. J. 1994 Origin of cometary nuclei as ‘rubble piles’. Nature, 368, 721–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West, R. A., Karkoschka, E., Friedson, A. J., Seymour, M., Baines, K. H., & Hammel, H. B. 1995 Impact debris particles in Jupiter's stratosphere. Science, 267, 1296–1301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wingate, C. A., Hoffman, N. M., & Stellingwerf, R. F. 1994 SPH calculations of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9/Jupiter impact. Bull. Amer. Astron. Soc, 26, 879–880.Google Scholar
Xu, J. & Stone, J. M. 1995 The hydrodynamics of shock-cloud interactions in three dimensions. Astrophys. J., in press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yabe, T., Xiao, F., Zhang, D., Sasaki, S., Abe, Y., Kobayashi, N., & Terasawa, T. 1994 Effect of EOS on break-up of Shoemaker-Levy 9 entering jovian atmosphere. J. Geomag. Geoelectr., 46, 657–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Youngs, D. L. 1984 Numerical simulation of turbulent mixing by Rayleigh-Taylor instability. Physica, 12D, 32–44.Google Scholar
Zahnle, K. J. 1992 Airburst origin of dark shadows on Venus. J. Geophys. Res., 97, 10243–10255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zahnle, K. & Mac Low, M.-M. 1994 The collision of Jupiter and comet Shoemaker-Levy 9. Icarus, 108, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zahnle, K. & Mac Low, M.-M. 1995 A simple model for the light curve generated by a Shoemaker-Levy 9 impact. J. Geophys. Res.-Planets, in press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zahnle, K. & Mac Low, M.-M., Lodders, K., & Fegley, B. 1995 Sulfur chemistry in the wake of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9. Geophys. Res. Lett., 22, 1593–1596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar