Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-03T00:26:01.130Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On uncertainty of Jupiter's core mass due to observational errors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2007

Yasunori Hori ,
Takayoshi Sano ,
Masahiro Ikoma  and
Shigeru Ida
Yasunori Hori
Affiliation:
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Ookayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 152-8551, Japan email: [email protected]
Takayoshi Sano
Affiliation:
Institute of Laser Engineering, Osaka University, Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japan
Masahiro Ikoma
Affiliation:
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Ookayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 152-8551, Japan email: [email protected]
Shigeru Ida
Affiliation:
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Ookayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 152-8551, Japan email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

The origins of extrasolar gas giant planets have been discussed, based on our understanding of the gas giant planets in the solar system, Jupiter and Saturn. However, how Jupiter and Saturn formed is still uncertain because of the uncertainty in their interiors, especially the core mass (Mc). The uncertainty in Mc is partly due to those in observational data such as gravitational moments (J2n), equatorial radius (Req) and 1-bar temperatures (T1bar). New frontiers mission to Jupiter by NASA (JUNO) launched in 2011 is expected to reduce the observational errors. However, it is not necessarily clear yet which observational uncertainty dominates and how accurate observation is needed to constrain Mc enough to know the origin of Jupiter. Thus, modeling the interior of Jupiter, we evaluate each effect on Mc and required precision. We have found that the observational error of 5% in T1bar yields an error of several M⊕ in Mc. We have also found that the values of J6 of our successful models are confined in a narrow range compared to its observational error. This implies that comparison between the values of J6 of our successful models and the J6 value obtained from JUNO mission helps us to know whether the present theoretical model is valid.

Keywords

gas giant planetinterior structurecore massgravitational moment
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 3 , Symposium S249: Exoplanets: Detection, Formation and Dynamics , October 2007 , pp. 163 - 166
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2008

References

Butler, R. P., Wright, J. T., Marcy, G. W., Fischer, D. A., Vogt, S. S., Tinney, C. G., Jones, H. R. A., Carter, B. D., Johnson, J. A., McCarthy, C. & Penny, A. J. 2006, ApJ, 646, 505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guillot, T. 1999, Plan. Space. Sci. 47, 1183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guillot, T. 2005, Ann. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci., 33, 493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guillot, T. & Morel, P. 1995, ApJS, 109, 109Google Scholar
Guillot, T., Stevenson, D. J., Hubbard, W. B. & Saumon, D. 2004, Bagenal, F. et al. ed., Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Hubbard, W. B. & Marley, M. S. 1989, Icarus, 78, 102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollack, J. B., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., Lissauer, J. J., Podolak, M. & Greenzweig, Y. 1996, Icarus, 124, 62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saumon, D., Chabrier, G., & Van Horn, H. M. 1995, ApJS, 99, 713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saumon, D. & Guillot, T. 2004, ApJ, 609, 1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar