Planetary atmosphere observation analysis

Abstract:

The modern world is increasingly computerised and, as more functionality is shifted to the edges of systems in bids to reduce latency or energy consumption, the Internet of Things (IoT) increasingly includes safety-critical systems. A typical such system is 'functionally dense,' with a time-shared processing element (PE) carrying out many tasks; we believe that they should instead be functionally sparse, with many small PEs dedicated to single tasks. We present case studies of this design approach and introduce FUNK, our effort to build the tools that will support the development of hard real-time, functionally safe systems that follow this approach.

Abstract:

Abstract The Hubble Space Telescope collected imaging data spanning the full lifetime of Neptune's dark spot NDS‐2018, which is the sixth large, persistent dark spot seen in the planet's atmosphere. Neptune's dark spots are thought to be anticyclonic vortices, although internal flows have never been directly measured to confirm their rotation. Previous reports covered the formation and evolution of the mature NDS‐2018, while here we report that the contrast weakened over the 2021 to 2022 period, while the feature rapidly drifted equatorward from 14 deg N to 6–7 deg N planetographic latitude. The persistence of the spot so close to the equator is surprising, and represents a challenge for numerical models which find anticyclones to be disrupted within 15 deg of the equator. The changing contrast of the dark spot constrains changes in the aerosols over time, but the link between dynamical and microphysical properties of dark vortices is not known. Plain Language Summary The Hubble Space Telescope collected images spanning the full lifetime of Neptune's dark spot NDS‐2018, which is the sixth large, persistent dark spot seen in the planet's atmosphere. Neptune's dark spots are thought to be high‐pressure rotating storms, although internal flows have never been directly measured to confirm the direction of their rotation. Previous reports covered the formation and evolution of the mature NDS‐2018, while here we report that the contrast weakened over the 2021 to 2022 period, while the feature rapidly drifted equatorward from 14 deg N to 6–7 deg N planetographic latitude. The persistence of the spot so close to the equator is surprising, and represents a challenge for numerical models which find these storms to be disrupted within 15 deg of the equator. The changing contrast of the dark spot provides information on changes in the cloud particles over time, but it is not known what is the link between how the storm works and what are the properties of cloud particles in the dark spots. Key Points Dark spot NDS‐2018 was observed on Neptune over its full lifespan, between 3.7 and 4.9 years In 2022, NDS‐2018 remained within 8 deg of the equator as it faded away Secondary dark features had morphologies of discrete spots in 2019–2020 and extended arms in 2022

Abstract:

Cassini observed Jupiter during its 2000–2001 gravity-assist flyby, acquiring a valuable set of Visible and Infrared Mapping Spectrometer (VIMS) observations over a wide range of viewing geometries and observing conditions. These data comprise visible and infrared spectral cubes covering the VIS channel from 0.35 to 1.05 µm and the IR channel from 0.9 to 5.1 µm. We present a calibrated catalog of these Jupiter VIMS observations,  excluding satellite-targeted observations, designed to provide a homogeneous and validated set of spectral products for future Jovian studies.Starting from the raw archive cubes, we developed a processing workflow that combines ISIS/SPICE-based geometry recovery with dedicated radiometric calibration procedures for both VIMS channels. The final products are delivered as multi-extension FITS files containing calibrated I/F spectral cubes, wavelength and FWHM vectors, and geometry backplanes for incidence, emission, and phase angles, planetocentric latitude, positive-east longitude, pixel resolution, and azimuth angle. The workflow also addresses several issues affecting the original data set, including saturation, VIS pointing-related offsets between radiometric cubes and geometric backplanes, channel-dependent dark-signal artifacts, and a subset of IR approach-phase for which the standard ISIS calibration pipeline can produce over-scaled reflected spectra.The resulting catalog provides a uniform, documented, validated, and publicly available set of Cassini/VIMS Jupiter products. By combining calibrated VIS and IR cubes with wavelength information and geometry backplanes, these products facilitate a wide range of applications in the study of Jupiter and its atmosphere.

Abstract:

JWST-NIRSpec observations are providing our first detailed view of the Ice Giants in the 5-micron spectral window [1]. Observations of Jupiter and Saturn (see Figure) at 5 microns have historically revealed important insights into their tropospheric composition, along with striking images of clouds silhouetted against the glowing thermal emission from deeper atmospheric layers [2]. Comparable observations of the colder Ice Giants, however, have long remained beyond observational reach—until now.In this talk, we present JWST-NIRSpec 5-micron observations of the Ice Giants and discuss their implications. We examine what these observations reveal about the tropospheric temperatures, clouds, and composition of Uranus and Neptune, as well as what they may imply for current radiative transfer models at these wavelengths.In particular, we find that the JWST data may suggest sub-adiabatic temperature gradients near the cloud layers, resulting in colder temperatures in the deeper atmosphere. However, these conclusions depend sensitively on the scattering properties of Ice Giant clouds and on accurate modelling of the gaseous opacity, both of which, we argue, remain uncertain under these conditions.Figure: Saturn at 5 microns (left, in red) from Cassini, with hazes shown in green (Image credits: NASA/JPL-Caltech/University of Arizona), compared to Uranus at 5 microns from JWST-NIRSpec [1].[1] Roman, M.T., et al., The Infrared Spectrum of Uranus Revealed with JWST (submitted)[2] Wong, M.H., Bjoraker, G.L., Goullaud, C., Stephens, A.W., Luszcz-Cook, S.H.,1047Atreya, S.K., Pater, I., Brown, S.T.: Deep clouds on jupiter. Remote Sensing104815(3), 702 (2023) 

Abstract:

During its flyby of Titan in 1980, Voyager 1 unveiled an atmosphere thick with an opaque, orange haze that completely obscured the surface, and provide  the first close-up images of its vertical layering (Smith et al. 1981, Hanel et al 1981). Subsequent observations from the Cassini-Huygens mission (Flasar et al. 2004) expanded this view, revealing a world dominated by photochemical hydrocarbons and nitriles with lakes of methane  (Stofan et al. 2007, Mastrogiuseppe et al. 2019), tholin-like organic sand (Lorenz et al. 2006), and seasonally evolving ice clouds (Jennings et al. 2012, West et al. 2016) as seen in Figure 1. While recent observations and laboratory studies (Anderson et al. 2011, Chatain et al. 2020) have provided greater insights into the physical properties of these aerosols and how they form, their composition and complexity remain a mystery.Figure 1: Image taken by Cassini Imaging Science Subsystem (Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Space Science Institute) showing a large ice cloud possibly made of HCN at 300km in Titan’s south pole, 2012 (West et. 2016, Vinatier et al. 2018)In the upper atmosphere, nitrogen and methane are photodissociated by UV radiation and energetic particles to produce ions which act as embryos for the growth of large organic molecules (Vuitton et al. 2024). As these molecules sink through the atmosphere, they recombine, coagulate, and accumulate into larger aerosol particles, onto which trace species can condense, forming both photochemical hazes and stratospheric ice clouds (Vuitton et al. 2024). Cassini CIRS (Composite Infrared Spectrometer) far infra-red spectra (FP1) exhibit four types of hazes: Haze 0, Haze A, Haze B (otherwise known as the “Haystack”) and Haze C (de Kok et al. 2007). While Haze 0 is present throughout the CIRS spectral range and affects the spectral continuum, Haze A, B and C appear as broad features in the far-infrared range. Relatively little is known about these hazes, making their features difficult to fit and estimate. In addition, their signatures overlap with H2O, C4H2, C2N2 and CH4 rotational lines, complicating retrievals of these gases (Sylvestre et al.2017).  Among these hazes, Haze B exhibits the strongest spectral signature. Anderson et al. 2018 suggested that the composition must be a mixture of more than one chemical compound due to its magnitude, breadth and opacity. Haze B is observed to only be present at the winter poles, forming and dissipating with the changing seasons, most likely caused by reduced sunlight and temperature (Jennings et al. 2012a,b , Anderson et al 2018).To enable accurate fitting of water features, Ford et al. (in review) retrieved an effective spectral cross-section of Cassini CIRS FP1 spectra between 147-257cm-1 of 156 FIRNADCMP 0.5cm-1 observations (Figure 2) across different latitudes and times (see also Ford et al. 2025). This was achieved by scaling gaussian basis functions to fit Haze A, B and C (and any other unknown aerosols) in the spectra baselines using the NEMESIS radiative transfer code (Irwin et al. 2008). Previous aerosol cross-sections did not account for latitude or time variation and therefore this technique empirically and agnostically modelled the changing baseline.  In this study, we decomposed those 156 effective spectral cross-sections and extrapolated unique Haze B cross-sections for latitudes of -89° to 88° from June 2004 to April 2017.  We used principal component analysis to determine the number of complete hazes present in the spectral range, finding that Haze B accounts for 98% of the observed variation. We then applied non-negative matrix factorisation to seperate the spectra into two unique and stable components: one representing Haze B, and a second representing a mixture of other haze contributions, along with numerical and spectral noise.Figure 2: Effective spectral cross-section of all 156 Cassini CIRS FIRNADCMP 0.5cm-1 observations before decomposition. Each colour represents a different observation. The plot shows the variation extent of the Haze B feature at ~220cm-1. Using the maximum Haze B cross-section of each observation as proxy, we find a large increase at the winter poles with the increase during northern spring being nearly twice that of northern winter, consistent with previous investigations. We also find Haze B extends to 60°, different to 70° proposed by Anderson et al. 2018. The results also give an insight into the time of formation/dispersion of Haze B at the poles. We see that Haze B at the south pole forms around 2013, reaching its peak during the summer solstice. The final dissipation of Haze B at the north pole cannot be determined due to limited data. ReferencesAnderson, C.M. et al. (2011), Icarus,  212.2, 762-778. DOI: 10.1016/j.pss.2010.10.009Anderson, C.M. et al. (2018), Organic Ices in Titan’s Stratosphere in Space Science Reviews, 214.8, 125  DOI: 10.1007/s11214-018-0559-5Chatain, A.  et al. (2020), Icarus, 345, 113741. DOI: 10.1016/j.icarus/2020.113741Coustenis, A. et al. (1999), Planet Space Science, 47, 1305-1329. DOI:  10.1016/S0032-0633(99)00053-7de Kok, R. et al. (2007), Icarus, 191, 223. DOI:10.1016/j.icarus.2007.04.003Flasar, F.M. et al. (2004), Space Science Reviews, 115, 169–297. DOI: 10.1007/s11214-004-1454-9Ford, J.S. et al. (2025),  EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, EGU25-3741. DOI: 10.5194/egusphere-egu25-3741Ford, J.S. et al. In review. Titan’s Stratospheric Water: Latitudinal and Seasonal Variation from Cassini CIRS Data and Implications for External Oxygen Sources. PSJHanel, R.A. et al. (1981), Science, 212, 192–200. DOI: 10.1126/science.212.4491.192Irwin, P.G.J et al. (2008), JQSRT, 109, 1136. DOI: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2007.11.006Jennings, D.E. et al. (2012), The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 754, L3. DOI: 10.1088/2041-8205/754/1/L3Khanna, R.K. (2005), Icarus, 178,165-170. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2005.03.011Lorenz, R. et al. (2006), Science, 312, 724–727. DOI: 10.1126/science.1123257Mastrogiuseppe, M. et al. (2019), Nature Astronomy, 3, 535, DOI: 10.1038/s41550-019-0714-2Samuelson, R.E. Clouds and aerosols of Titan’s atmosphere, in The Atmospheres of Saturn and Titan. Proc.Int. Workshop, vol. ESA SP-241 (1985)Smith, B.A. et al. (1981), Science, 212, 163–191. DOI: 10.1126/science.212.4491.163Stofan, E.R. et al. (2007), Nature, 445, 61–64. DOI: 10.1038/nature05438Sylvestre, M. et al. (2017), A&A, 609:A64. DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201630255Vinatier, S. et al. (2018),  Icarus, 310, 89-104. DOI: 10.1016/j.icarus.2017.12.040Vuitton, V. et al. (2024), Chapter 6:Titan’s Atmospheric Structure, Composition, Haze, and Dynamics in Titan after Cassini–Huygens, COSPAR Scientific Symposium Series.West, R.A. et al, (2016), Icarus, 270, 399-408. DOI: 10.1016/j.icarus.2014.11.038