adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Mercury's Circumsolar Dust Ring as an Imprint of a Recent Impact
Authors: Petr Pokorný, Ariel N. Deutsch, Marc J. Kuchner
Figure caption: Panel A: a face-on view of the dynamically evolved dust released from parent bodies locked in 1:1 MMR with Mercury. The colors show the normalized dust cross section A. Mercury’s orbit is shown as a dashed cyan ellipse. The line of apses is represented by the white dashed line. Panel B: longitudinal variations of our model for Mercury’s dust ring. The primary x-axis shows the greatest elongation ﹩{ \mathcal E }=\arcsin ({r}_{\mathrm{hel}}/0.96)﹩, the secondary x-axis shows heliocentric distance in au, and the y-axis shows the ecliptic longitude measured from the vernal point. The color coding shows the normalized dust cross section of our model where the contours show 10% increments. The cyan dashed line represents Mercury’s orbit.
Paper: Mercury's Circumsolar Dust Ring as an Imprint of a Recent Impact
Authors: Petr Pokorný, Ariel N. Deutsch, Marc J. Kuchner
Figure caption: Histograms of semimajor axes, a, of model particles for six different sizes and three major source populations: Panel A: main belt asteroid meteoroids; panel B: JFCs; and panel C: LPCs. For each population, we show particles with six different diameters, D = 10,  31.6,  100,  316.2,  1000,  3162 μm (color coded), assuming a bulk density of ρ = 2000 kg m−3. The number of particles shown in the histogram is first divided by the particle semimajor axis a to cancel the effect of resonance-free PR drag on the histogram slope. Then we normalize each histogram by dividing it by the median value of the histogram in the range 0.3 < a < 0.5 au. We also show major MMRs with dashed vertical lines and labels at the top of each panel. There are no increased concentrations close to Mercury’s orbit and only negligible clumping for D = 3162 μm in several MMRs outside Mercury’s orbit.
Paper: Mercury's Circumsolar Dust Ring as an Imprint of a Recent Impact
Authors: Petr Pokorný, Ariel N. Deutsch, Marc J. Kuchner
Figure caption: Panel A: the same as Figure 8(B), but now for our model of the dust ring originating from particles co-orbiting with Mercury, as shown in Section 6.1. The dust ring signature extends up to ϵ ≈ 28° and its observations could provide additional constraints for Mercury’s dust ring. Panel B: the same as panel A but for the best-fit model that combines our dust ring model and the contribution of 2P/Encke. This view shows that the magnitude of the relative brightness increase of 2P/Encke would be easy to constrain if the observation extended beyond ϵ = 24° for 100° < λ < 150° where we expect no signal from the dust co-orbiting with Mercury. Note that the longitude in this figure is comparable to the heliocentric ecliptic longitude, where λ = λ S/C − 70° reflects the 70° shift due to the observational geometry.
Paper: Mercury's Circumsolar Dust Ring as an Imprint of a Recent Impact
Authors: Petr Pokorný, Ariel N. Deutsch, Marc J. Kuchner
Figure caption: Orbits of a selection of small bodies with the largest coverage of Mercury’s orbit. Panel A: three best candidates from all asteroids in the MPCORB database (thin solid lines) and three best candidates with H < 16 (thick solid lines; see Table 1). Panel B: five best cometary candidates analysed here. Both panels show a face-on view of the inner solar system; i.e., a projection onto the ecliptic plane. Each small body orbit is represented by a color-coded solid line and label. The orbits of Mercury (red), Venus (orange), and Earth (blue) are represented by dashed lines. Mercury’s dust ring is shown as a thick gray ellipse around Mercury’s orbit.
Paper: Mercury's Circumsolar Dust Ring as an Imprint of a Recent Impact
Authors: Petr Pokorný, Ariel N. Deutsch, Marc J. Kuchner
Figure caption: Histograms of the semimajor axes a of model particles for three different diameters originating in four external MMRs of Mercury. Panel A: particles with diameters of D = 100 μm; panel B: particles with diameters of D = 681.3 μm; and panel C: particles with diameters of D = 2154 μm. For each particle size, we show their dynamical evolution from the source regions located in four external MMRs (1:2, 3:4, 5:6, and 7:8) (color coded). We also show all major MMRs with dashed vertical lines and labels at the top of each panel. We see no increased concentrations close to Mercury’s orbit and only negligible clumping for D = 2154 μm in several MMRs outside Mercury’s orbit. Panel C also shows that larger particles of D ≥ 1000 μm exhibit temporary stability in their source MMRs, as expected due to the diminishing strength of PR drag.
Paper: Mercury's Circumsolar Dust Ring as an Imprint of a Recent Impact
Authors: Petr Pokorný, Ariel N. Deutsch, Marc J. Kuchner
Figure caption: The same as Figure 5(B), but now zoomed in to the extent of the Stenborg et al. (2018b) observation shown in Figure 1. The main difference between our model and the observed dust ring is the lack of dust around ﹩{ \mathcal E }=22\buildrel{\circ}\over{.} 5﹩ and λ = 115°. We attribute this difference to an additional source of dust originating from 2P/Encke (Figure 8).
Paper: (523599) 2003 RM: The Asteroid that Wanted to be a Comet
Authors: Davide Farnocchia, Darryl Z. Seligman, Mikael Granvik, Olivier Hainaut, Karen J. Meech, Marco Micheli, Robert Weryk, Steven R. Chesley, Eric J. Christensen, Detlef Koschny, Jan T. Kleyna, Daniela Lazzaro, Michael Mommert, Richard J. Wainscoat
Figure caption: Astrometric residuals against the best fit to the astrometry either from 2003 to 2013 (top panel) or from 2008 to 2018 (bottom panel) using a transverse acceleration A 2/r 2. Dots correspond to R.A. and crosses correspond to decl. Outliers rejected from the fit are indicated with circles. The shaded area corresponds to observations not included in the fit. The dashed line and solid line represent the 1σ ephemeris uncertainties of the orbital solution in R.A. and decl., respectively. The residuals in the shaded areas are compatible with the ephemeris prediction and thus suggest that the adopted nongravitational model is compatible with the data set.
Paper: (523599) 2003 RM: The Asteroid that Wanted to be a Comet
Authors: Davide Farnocchia, Darryl Z. Seligman, Mikael Granvik, Olivier Hainaut, Karen J. Meech, Marco Micheli, Robert Weryk, Steven R. Chesley, Eric J. Christensen, Detlef Koschny, Jan T. Kleyna, Daniela Lazzaro, Michael Mommert, Richard J. Wainscoat
Figure caption: Astrometric residuals against the best gravity-only fit to the astrometry from 2003 to 2008 (top panel), from 2008 to 2013 (middle panel), or from 2013 to 2018 (bottom panel). Dots correspond to R.A. and crosses correspond to decl. Outliers rejected from the fit are indicated with circles. The shaded area corresponds to observations not included in the fit. The dashed line and solid line represent the 1σ ephemeris uncertainties of the orbital solution in R.A. and decl., respectively. The large residuals in the shaded areas far exceed the ephemeris prediction uncertainties and thus imply problems in the force model.
Paper: (523599) 2003 RM: The Asteroid that Wanted to be a Comet
Authors: Davide Farnocchia, Darryl Z. Seligman, Mikael Granvik, Olivier Hainaut, Karen J. Meech, Marco Micheli, Robert Weryk, Steven R. Chesley, Eric J. Christensen, Detlef Koschny, Jan T. Kleyna, Daniela Lazzaro, Michael Mommert, Richard J. Wainscoat
Figure caption: Top panel: Δχ 2 of the orbital fit for an orbital solution with an impulsive variation in the velocity Δv as a function of the impulse time relative to the lowest χ 2 = 285.4, which corresponds to a Δv on 2011 August 19. Bottom panel: magnitude of Δv as a function of the impulse time.
Paper: (523599) 2003 RM: The Asteroid that Wanted to be a Comet
Authors: Davide Farnocchia, Darryl Z. Seligman, Mikael Granvik, Olivier Hainaut, Karen J. Meech, Marco Micheli, Robert Weryk, Steven R. Chesley, Eric J. Christensen, Detlef Koschny, Jan T. Kleyna, Daniela Lazzaro, Michael Mommert, Richard J. Wainscoat
Figure caption: Astrometric residuals against the best fit to the astrometry from 2008 to 2018 with an impulsive Δv event on 2011 August 9. Dots correspond to R.A. and crosses correspond to decl. Outliers rejected from the fit are indicated with circles. The shaded area corresponds to observations not included in the fit. The dashed line and solid line represent the 1σ ephemeris uncertainties of the orbital solution in R.A. and decl., respectively. The large residuals in the shaded areas far exceed the ephemeris prediction uncertainties and thus imply problems in the force model.
Paper: (523599) 2003 RM: The Asteroid that Wanted to be a Comet
Authors: Davide Farnocchia, Darryl Z. Seligman, Mikael Granvik, Olivier Hainaut, Karen J. Meech, Marco Micheli, Robert Weryk, Steven R. Chesley, Eric J. Christensen, Detlef Koschny, Jan T. Kleyna, Daniela Lazzaro, Michael Mommert, Richard J. Wainscoat
Figure caption:  χ 2 of the orbital fit as a function of the power-law exponent for g(r) = 1/r  m . The full observational arc is included in the fit, and A 2 is the only nongravitational parameter estimated. The dashed line corresponds to the Marsden et al. (1973) g(r).
Paper: (523599) 2003 RM: The Asteroid that Wanted to be a Comet
Authors: Davide Farnocchia, Darryl Z. Seligman, Mikael Granvik, Olivier Hainaut, Karen J. Meech, Marco Micheli, Robert Weryk, Steven R. Chesley, Eric J. Christensen, Detlef Koschny, Jan T. Kleyna, Daniela Lazzaro, Michael Mommert, Richard J. Wainscoat
Figure caption: The best-fitting H2O-sublimation model allows for brightening due to activity consistent with the scatter in the data. The photometric data cover the four observing apparitions from 2003 to 2018 described in Section 2.
Paper: (523599) 2003 RM: The Asteroid that Wanted to be a Comet
Authors: Davide Farnocchia, Darryl Z. Seligman, Mikael Granvik, Olivier Hainaut, Karen J. Meech, Marco Micheli, Robert Weryk, Steven R. Chesley, Eric J. Christensen, Detlef Koschny, Jan T. Kleyna, Daniela Lazzaro, Michael Mommert, Richard J. Wainscoat
Figure caption: H2O production rates required to produce the measured nongravitational acceleration of 2003 RM. We calculate this value using Equations (1) and (2), with ζ = 1, radius of 210 meters, ρ Bulk = 1.9 g cm−3 and A 2 = 213.7 × 10−14 au d−2 for a (r/1 au)−2 dependency on the heliocentric distance r.
Paper: (523599) 2003 RM: The Asteroid that Wanted to be a Comet
Authors: Davide Farnocchia, Darryl Z. Seligman, Mikael Granvik, Olivier Hainaut, Karen J. Meech, Marco Micheli, Robert Weryk, Steven R. Chesley, Eric J. Christensen, Detlef Koschny, Jan T. Kleyna, Daniela Lazzaro, Michael Mommert, Richard J. Wainscoat
Figure caption: 2003 RM (in the center, north is up, east is left) as it appeared on 2013 August 17 from Pan-STARRS1 moving north at 0.62 degrees per day toward a cell gap. Comparison of the FWHM with visible stars in a larger region than shown here indicates it was not active. At the observation time, 2003 RM was at 1.2 au from the Sun and 0.3 au from Earth.
Paper: (523599) 2003 RM: The Asteroid that Wanted to be a Comet
Authors: Davide Farnocchia, Darryl Z. Seligman, Mikael Granvik, Olivier Hainaut, Karen J. Meech, Marco Micheli, Robert Weryk, Steven R. Chesley, Eric J. Christensen, Detlef Koschny, Jan T. Kleyna, Daniela Lazzaro, Michael Mommert, Richard J. Wainscoat
Figure caption: Left: Stack of 82 VLT frames totalling a 3280 s exposure time on 2003 RM. The observations were collected on 2018 September 19, when 2003 RM was at 1.2 au from the Sun and 0.3 au from Earth. The image is 20″ wide. The individual frames were subtracted for background objects. Right: Surface brightness profile of 2003 RM (dots) and of a scaled field star (line).
Paper: Pre-landing Assessment of the Surface and Shallow Subsurface Thermal Setting of Mare Crisium of the Moon for the Heat Flow Measurement Planned on the Blue Ghost 1 Mission
Authors: Seiichi Nagihara
Figure caption: Model-estimated regolith temperature vs. time at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, and 3.0 m depths at BG1 for 1992–2021. The long-term average temperatures for these depths are shown as black dashed lines.
Paper: Pre-landing Assessment of the Surface and Shallow Subsurface Thermal Setting of Mare Crisium of the Moon for the Heat Flow Measurement Planned on the Blue Ghost 1 Mission
Authors: Seiichi Nagihara
Figure caption: (A) Contact thermal conductivity (K  c  in Equation (2)) vs. density obtained from the lunar regolith samples from Apollo 11, 12, and 14 (Cremers 1974). (B) Coefficient of the radiative component (B in Equation (2)) vs. density for the same set of regolith samples (Cremers 1974). (C) Ratio of the conductive and radiative components for T = 350 K calculated from K  c  and B vs. density for the same set of regolith samples.
Paper: Pre-landing Assessment of the Surface and Shallow Subsurface Thermal Setting of Mare Crisium of the Moon for the Heat Flow Measurement Planned on the Blue Ghost 1 Mission
Authors: Seiichi Nagihara
Figure caption: (A) Model-estimated regolith temperature vs. time at 1.0 and 1.5 m depths for 2005. (B) Percentage deviation of the thermal gradients for the depth intervals of 1.0–1.5 and 1.5–2.0 m based on the above temperature estimates relative to those based on the long-term average temperatures at these depths (dashed lines in panel (A)).
Paper: Pre-landing Assessment of the Surface and Shallow Subsurface Thermal Setting of Mare Crisium of the Moon for the Heat Flow Measurement Planned on the Blue Ghost 1 Mission
Authors: Seiichi Nagihara
Figure caption: Comparison of the model-estimated surface temperatures (blue line) and Diviner observations (open circles) for the Blue Ghost landing site (Figure 2). The parts indicated by the dashed boxes are shown in Figure 10 in more detail.
Paper: Pre-landing Assessment of the Surface and Shallow Subsurface Thermal Setting of Mare Crisium of the Moon for the Heat Flow Measurement Planned on the Blue Ghost 1 Mission
Authors: Seiichi Nagihara
Figure caption: Magnified views of the parts of Figure 9 that are indicated by the dashed boxes.
Paper: Pre-landing Assessment of the Surface and Shallow Subsurface Thermal Setting of Mare Crisium of the Moon for the Heat Flow Measurement Planned on the Blue Ghost 1 Mission
Authors: Seiichi Nagihara
Figure caption: Contour map of the rms model misfit for a range of Q 0 and K  d .
Paper: Origin-of-life Molecules in the Atmosphere after Big Impacts on the Early Earth
Authors: Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling, Kevin J. Zahnle, Roxana Lupu
Figure caption: Simulated composition and climate of the Hadean atmosphere after a 1.58 × 1021 kg impactor that produces 7.0 bars of H2 once vaporized ocean water condenses. We use the Table 2 model parameters. The blue shaded region labeled “hot steam atmosphere,” also called phase 2 in Figure 1, is simulated by the kinetics-climate model described in Appendix B. After this time period, during phase 3 of a postimpact atmosphere, we evolve the atmosphere with a 1D photochemical-climate model (Appendix C), which maintains 0.018 bar of CH4 between 4 × 103 and ∼106 yr. Dashed lines are referenced to the right axis. Here “HCN rainout” is HCN molecules raining out in droplets of water, and “HCCCN haze rainout” is the rainout rate of HCCCN incorporated into particles formed from the reaction ﹩{{\rm{C}}}_{4}{\rm{H}}+\mathrm{HCCCN}\to \mathrm{polymer}﹩. The CH4 and N2 photochemistry generates HCN and HCCCN for about 1 million yr until the H2 escapes to space.
Paper: Origin-of-life Molecules in the Atmosphere after Big Impacts on the Early Earth
Authors: Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling, Kevin J. Zahnle, Roxana Lupu
Figure caption: State of the Hadean postimpact atmospheres 10,000 yr after steam condenses to an ocean. This time period is within phase 3 of a postimpact atmosphere indicated in Figure 1. The simulations assume the Table 2 parameters and gas-phase reactions during the cooling steam atmosphere. (a) Surface HCN pressure and timescale of H2 escape, which can be interpreted as the approximate duration of HCN and HCCCN production. (b) HCCCN surface pressure. (c) Surface temperature and pressure. (d) HCN deposition rate in the ocean and the rate at which HCN leaves the atmosphere in rain drops; “HCN haze rainout” is the rainout rate of an aerosol created via the reaction ﹩{{\rm{H}}}_{2}\mathrm{CN}+\mathrm{HCN}\to \mathrm{polymer}﹩. (e) Rainout rate of an aerosol formed from the reaction ﹩{{\rm{C}}}_{4}{\rm{H}}+\mathrm{HCCCN}\to \mathrm{polymer}﹩. (f) The <250 nm photons hitting the surface and the total hydrocarbon haze column abundance. Impactors larger than 1021 kg produce haze-rich atmospheres and a stepwise increase in HCN and HCCCN production.
Paper: Origin-of-life Molecules in the Atmosphere after Big Impacts on the Early Earth
Authors: Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling, Kevin J. Zahnle, Roxana Lupu
Figure caption: Identical to Figure 7, except that the simulations account for nickel-surface reactions that catalyze methane production as the steam atmosphere cools (Schmider et al. 2021). We assume a nickel surface area of 10 cm2 nickel cm−2 Earth (for context, see Figure 5). Nickel catalysts cause more efficient CH4 generation, permitting greater HCN and HCCCN production for smaller impactors compared to the gas phase–only scenario (Figure 7).
Paper: Origin-of-life Molecules in the Atmosphere after Big Impacts on the Early Earth
Authors: Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling, Kevin J. Zahnle, Roxana Lupu
Figure caption: Predicted atmospheric composition as a function of impactor mass after steam has condensed to an ocean. We use our nominal modeling assumptions (Table 2), as well as gas-phase kinetics. Most CO2 is converted to CH4 for impactors larger than 1.6 × 1021 kg.
Paper: Origin-of-life Molecules in the Atmosphere after Big Impacts on the Early Earth
Authors: Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling, Kevin J. Zahnle, Roxana Lupu
Figure caption: Surface temperature of a postimpact atmosphere as a function of stratosphere temperature, relative humidity, and surface clouds, which we crudely approximate with the surface albedo (A  b ). The atmosphere has 5.9 mol cm−2 CO2, 5.6 mol cm−2 CH4, 35.8 mol cm−2 N2, 556 mol cm−2 H2, 0.01 mol cm−2 CO, 0.3 mol cm−2 NH3, and a liquid water ocean at the surface. This is the same composition of the atmosphere after a 5 × 1020 kg impact in Figure 9 once steam has condensed to an ocean. The gray shaded region labeled “no steady-state” has no steady-state climate solutions that balance incoming shortwave and outgoing longwave energy. Uncertainties in our assumed stratosphere temperature, relative humidity, and the effects of low-altitude clouds predict surface temperatures from ∼330 to ∼390 K with a nominal value of 361 K.
Paper: Origin-of-life Molecules in the Atmosphere after Big Impacts on the Early Earth
Authors: Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling, Kevin J. Zahnle, Roxana Lupu
Figure caption: Effect of nickel catalysts on postimpact methane production. The calculations use the Table 2 model parameters and the Schmider et al. (2021) surface reaction network. Nickel areas larger than 0.1 cm2 nickel cm−2 Earth generate more methane than our model that uses gas-phase reactions, e.g., Figure 4.
Paper: Origin-of-life Molecules in the Atmosphere after Big Impacts on the Early Earth
Authors: Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling, Kevin J. Zahnle, Roxana Lupu
Figure caption: Effect of the preimpact CO2 abundance on HCN and HCCCN production in postimpact atmospheres. All values are for the atmosphere 10,000 yr after the steam condenses to an ocean, which is within phase 3 of a postimpact atmosphere (Figure 1). The simulations assume the Table 1 parameters but vary the preimpact CO2 inventory between 0.01 (triangles), 0.5 (circles), and 10 bars (squares). The calculations use gas-phase chemistry during the cooling steam atmosphere. Panels (a)–(d) show the surface HCN abundance and fluxes, while panels (e)–(g) show HCCCN production. Our model assumes that HCCCN is not soluble in water and does not rain out; therefore, we omit a panel showing HCCCN rainout. Prebiotic nitrile production is directly correlated with the preimpact CO2 inventory.
Paper: Origin-of-life Molecules in the Atmosphere after Big Impacts on the Early Earth
Authors: Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling, Kevin J. Zahnle, Roxana Lupu
Figure caption: The HCN rainout and HCCCN haze rainout as a function of the CH4/CO2 mole ratio in all simulated postimpact atmospheres. This figure considers the simulations shown in Figures 7, 8, 9, A6, and A7. All values are for the atmosphere 10,000 yr after the steam has condensed to an ocean. The HCN and HCCCN haze production is significantly larger for atmospheres with CH4/CO2 ≳ 0.1.
Paper: Origin-of-life Molecules in the Atmosphere after Big Impacts on the Early Earth
Authors: Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling, Kevin J. Zahnle, Roxana Lupu
Figure caption: Interpolation and extrapolation of the Citron & Stewart (2022) SPH simulations of impacts that collide with Earth at a 45° angle and with a velocity of twice Earth’s escape velocity. Panel (a) is the mass fraction of iron that reacts with the atmosphere, and panel (b) is the mass of the melt pool produced by an impact. These interpolations are relevant to Figure 2 in the main text and Appendix Figures A2, A3, A6, and A7.
Paper: Preatmospheric Detection of a Meter-sized Earth Impactor
Authors: David L. Clark, Paul A. Wiegert, Peter G. Brown, Denis Vida, Aren Heinze, Larry Denneau
Figure caption: A simulation of ATLAS image 02a59110o0264c showing the predicted path of the USG fireball on the image based on a trajectory integration backward in time from the meteoroid contact state reported by the USG. The white arrow represents the predicted motion of the nominal object between the start and end of the exposure. Green dots represent the end of exposure positions of 1000 clones generated using standard deviations of 0.1°, 0.1 km, and 0.1 km s−1 on the USG-reported values. The position of the the actual image streak is shown in white at the left between its north-northeast and south-southwest endpoints. Shown in blue are the paths of the three cataloged satellites that crossed the field of view of the image, object 26583, appearing in the actual image in Figure 2, and objects 21253 and 44525, which were in the Earth’s shadow and not imaged. Note the image size is 5.5° on a side.
Paper: Preatmospheric Detection of a Meter-sized Earth Impactor
Authors: David L. Clark, Paul A. Wiegert, Peter G. Brown, Denis Vida, Aren Heinze, Larry Denneau
Figure caption: ATLAS image 02a59110o0264c, with cutouts showing the location of the USG 20200918 object streak (right) and the Kosmos 2319 SL-12 rocket body, both at the eastern (left) edge of the image.