相关论文: Thermal evolution of Uranus and Neptune I: adiabat…
We present updated non-adiabatic and inhomogeneous evolution models for Uranus and Neptune, employing an interior composition of methane, ammonia, water, and rocks. Following formation trends of the gas giants, Uranus and Neptune formation…
Thermal evolution models suggest that the luminosities of both Uranus and Neptune are inconsistent with the classical assumption of an adiabatic interior. Such models commonly predict Uranus to be brighter and, recently, Neptune to be…
Since the Voyager fly-bys of Uranus and Neptune, improved gravity field data have been derived from long-term observations of the planets' satellite motions, and modified shape and solid-body rotation periods were suggested. A faster…
The strikingly low luminosity of Uranus (Teff ~ Teq) constitutes a long-standing challenge to our understanding of Ice Giant planets. Here we present the first Uranus structure and evolution models that are constructed to agree with both…
The internal heat flows of both Uranus and Neptune remain major outstanding problems in planetary science. Uranus' surprisingly cold effective temperature is inconsistent with adiabatic thermal evolution models, while Neptune's substantial…
The intrinsic luminosity of Uranus is a factor of 10 less than that of Neptune, an observation that standard giant planetary evolution models, which assume negligible viscosity, fail to capture. Here we show that more than half of the…
It has been a common assumption of interior models that the outer planets of our solar system are convective, and that the internal temperature distributions are therefore adiabatic. This assumption is also often applied to exoplanets.…
The low luminosity of Uranus is a long-standing challenge in planetary science. Simple adiabatic models are inconsistent with the measured luminosity, which indicates that Uranus is non-adiabatic because it has thermal boundary layers…
We compute grids of radiative-convective model atmospheres for Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune over a range of intrinsic fluxes and surface gravities. The atmosphere grids serve as an upper boundary condition for models of the thermal…
Neptunes and sub-Neptunes are typically modeled under the assumption that the interior is adiabatic and consists of distinct layers. However, formation models indicate that composition gradients can exist. Such composition gradients can…
Demixing properties of planetary major constituents influence the interior structure and evolution of planets. Comparing experimental and computational data on the miscibility of hydrogen and water to adiabatic profiles suggests phase…
We examine the comparative thermal evolution of Jupiter and Saturn applying recent theoretical results for helium's immiscibility in fluid metallic hydrogen. The redistribution of helium in their interiors proceeds very differently for the…
Ab initio free energy calculations are employed to derive the entropy of liquid and superionic water over a wide range of conditions in the interiors of Uranus and Neptune. The resulting adiabats are much shallower in pressure-temperature…
'Empirical' models (pressure vs. density) of Uranus and Neptune interiors constrained by the gravitational coefficients J_2, J_4, the planetary radii and masses, and Voyager solid-body rotation periods are presented. The empirical…
There are still many open questions regarding the nature of Uranus and Neptune, the outermost planets in the Solar System. In this review we summarize the current-knowledge about Uranus and Neptune with a focus on their composition and…
Uranus' bulk composition remains unknown. Although there are clear indications that Uranus' interior is not fully convective, and therefore has a non-adiabatic temperature profile, many interior models continue to assume an adiabatic…
The internal structures and compositions of Uranus and Neptune are not well constrained due to the uncertainty in rotation period and flattening, as well as the relatively large error bars on the gravitational coefficients. While Uranus and…
The internal structures of Uranus and Neptune remain unknown. In addition, sub-Neptunes are now thought to be the most common type of exoplanets. Understanding the physical processes that govern the interiors of such planets is therefore…
We present a new framework for constructing agnostic and yet physical models for planetary interiors and apply it to Uranus and Neptune. Unlike previous research that either impose rigid assumptions or rely on simplified empirical profiles,…
The internal structure of gas giant planets may be more complex than the commonly assumed core-envelope structure with an adiabatic temperature profile. Different primordial internal structures as well as various physical processes can lead…