ALBERT

Description: Probes are an essential element in the scientific study of planets with atmospheres. In-situ measurements provide the most accurate determination of composition, winds, temperatures, clouds, and radiative fluxes. They address fundamental NASA objectives concerning volatile compounds, climate, and the origin of life. Probes also deliver landers and aerobots that help in the study of planetary surfaces. This talk focuses on Venus, Titan, and the giant planets. I review the basic science questions and discuss the recommended missions. I stress the need for a balanced program that includes an array of missions that increase in size by factors of two. Gaps in this array lead to failures and cancellations that are harmful to the program and to scientific exploration.

Description: Observations suggest that moist convection plays an important role in the large-scale dynamics of Jupiter s and Saturn s atmospheres. Here we use a reduced-gravity quasigeostrophic model, with a parameterization of moist convection that is based on observations, to study the interaction between moist convection and zonal jets on Jupiter and Saturn. Stable jets with approximately the same width and strength as observations are generated in the model. The observed zonal jets violate the barotropic stability criterion but the modeled jets do so only if the flow in the deep underlying layer is westward. The model results suggest that a length scale and a velocity scale associated with moist convection control the width and strength of the jets. The length scale and velocity scale offer a possible explanation of why the jets of Saturn are stronger and wider than those of Jupiter.

Description: Aptly named, ice giants such as Uranus and Neptune contain significant amounts of water. While this water cannot be present near the cloud tops, it must be abundant in the deep interior. We investigate the likelihood of a liquid water ocean existing in the hydrogen-rich region between the cloud tops and deep interior. Starting from an assumed temperature at a given upper tropospheric pressure (the photosphere), we follow a moist adiabat downward. The mixing ratio of water to hydrogen in the gas phase is small in the photosphere and increases with depth. The mixing ratio in the condensed phase is near unity in the photosphere and decreases with depth; this gives two possible outcomes. If at some pressure level the mixing ratio of water in the gas phase is equal to that in the deep interior, then that level is the cloud base. The gas below the cloud base has constant mixing ratio. Alternately, if the mixing ratio of water in the condensed phase reaches that in the deep interior, then the surface of a liquid ocean will occur. Below this ocean surface, the mixing ratio of water will be constant. A cloud base occurs when the photospheric temperature is high. For a family of ice giants with different photospheric temperatures, the cooler ice giants will have warmer cloud bases. For an ice giant with a cool enough photospheric temperature, the cloud base will exist at the critical temperature. For still cooler ice giants, ocean surfaces will result. A high mixing ratio of water in the deep interior favors a liquid ocean. We find that Neptune is both too warm (photospheric temperature too high) and too dry (mixing ratio of water in the deep interior too low) for liquid oceans to exist at present. To have a liquid ocean, Neptune s deep interior water to gas ratio would have to be higher than current models allow, and the density at 19 kbar would have to be approx. equal to 0.8 g/cu cm. Such a high density is inconsistent with gravitational data obtained during the Voyager flyby. In our model, Neptune s water cloud base occurs around 660 K and 11 kbar, and the density there is consistent with Voyager gravitational data. As Neptune cools, the probability of a liquid ocean increases. Extrasolar "hot Neptunes," which presumably migrate inward toward their parent stars, cannot harbor liquid water oceans unless they have lost almost all of the hydrogen and helium from their deep interiors.

Description: Beebe et al. [Beebe, R.F., et al., 1980. Geophys. Res. Lett. 17, 1-4] and Ingersoll et al. [Ingersoll, A.P., et al., 1981. J. Geophys. Res. 86, 8733-8743] used images from Voyagers 1 and 2 to analyze the interaction between zonal winds and eddies in Jupiter's atmosphere. They reported a high positive correlation between Jupiter's eddy momentum flux, pu'v', and the variation of zonal velocity with latitude, du/dy. This correlation implied a surprisingly high rate of conversion of energy from eddies to zonal flow: approx. 1.5-3.0 W/sq m, a value more than 10% of Jupiter s thermal flux emission. However, Sromovsky et al. [Sromovsky, L.A., et al., 1982. J. Atmos. Sci. 39,1413-1432] argued that possible biases in the analysis could have caused an artificially high correlation. In addition, significant differences in the derived eddy flux between datasets put into question the robustness of any one result. We return to this long-standing puzzle using images of Jupiter from the Cassini flyby of December 2000. Our method is similar to previous analyses, but utilizes an automatic feature tracker instead of the human eye. The number of velocity vectors used in this analysis is over 200,000, compared to the 14,000 vectors used by Ingersoll et al. We also find a positive correlation between u'v' and du/dy and derive a global average power per unit mass, u'v' du/dy, ranging from (7.1-12.3) x 10(exp -5)W/kg. Utilizing Ingersoll et al.'s estimate of the mass per unit area involved in the transport, this would imply a rate of energy conversion of approx.0.7-1.2 W/sq m. We discuss the implications of this result and employ several tests to demonstrate its robustness.