Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T10:16:26.693Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

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

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 September 2009

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
Keith S. Noll
Affiliation:
Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore
Harold A. Weaver
Affiliation:
Applied Research Corporation, Landover, Maryland
Paul D. Feldman
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins University
Get access

Summary

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 g cm−3, and kinetic energies of order 1027 erg.

Introduction

In this review and in the review by Zahnle (this volume; hereafter “the plume review”), we make the argument that the fragments of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 that hit Jupiter were quite small, with diameters of under a kilometer and densities of order 0.5 g cm−3. The largest fragments probably had kinetic energies of order 1027 ergs.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×