1978Journal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresRequires access

Monte Carlo modeling of exospheric bodies: Mercury

Gerald R. Smith, D. E. Shemansky, A. L. Broadfoot, Lloyd Wallace

Open publisher page 60 citations

Abstract

Previous model calculations of the helium exospheres of Mercury and the moon have been based on a regime in which each helium atom impact with the surface results in the selection of a new particle chosen from a given source distribution. The particular velocity space distribution in the source particles was chosen with the implied intent that the resulting atmosphere would be barometric under ideal conditions. In effect, two particle source distributions have been used in the published calculations, which we describe here as Maxwell‐Boltzmann (M‐B), and Maxwell‐Boltzmann flux (M‐B‐F). In the instances in which the atmospheric distribution has been calculated for regions above the surface, the resulting model atmosphere represents a mixture of the M‐B and M‐B‐F sources. We suggest that none of the published exospheric calculations for the two bodies represent atmospheres produced by a barometric source of particles. Although a barometric source of particles cannot be justified in terms of surface physics, an exosphere produced by such a source is a valuable point of reference for calculations based on more realistic conditions. According to the analysis presented below, the appropriate source distribution should be M‐B‐F if the particles in the distribution are to be treated as components of flux. Monte Carlo calculations with an M‐B‐F source are compared with Mariner 10 ultraviolet spectrometer data. The comparison suggests that present models are incapable of fitting the observed Mercury exosphere.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Previous model calculations of the helium exospheres of Mercury and the moon have been based on a regime in which each helium atom impact with the surface results in the selection of a new particle chosen from a given source distribution. The particular velocity space distribution in the source particles was chosen with the implied intent that the resulting atmosphere would be barometric under ideal conditions. In effect, two particle source distributions have been used in the published calculations, which we describe here as Maxwell‐Boltzmann (M‐B), and Maxwell‐Boltzmann flux (M‐B‐F). In the instances in which the atmospheric distribution has been calculated for regions above the surface, the resulting model atmosphere represents a mixture of the M‐B and M‐B‐F sources. We suggest that none of the published exospheric calculations for the two bodies represent atmospheres produced by a barometric source of particles. Although a barometric source of particles cannot be justified in terms of surface physics, an exosphere produced by such a source is a valuable point of reference for calculations based on more realistic conditions. According to the analysis presented below, the appropriate source distribution should be M‐B‐F if the particles in the distribution are to be treated as components of flux. Monte Carlo calculations with an M‐B‐F source are compared with Mariner 10 ultraviolet spectrometer data. The comparison suggests that present models are incapable of fitting the observed Mercury exosphere.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 60 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Previous model calculations of the helium exospheres of Mercury and the moon have been based on a regime in which each helium atom impact with the surface results in the selection of a new particle chosen from a given source distribution. The particular velocity space distribution in the source particles was chosen with the implied intent that the resulting atmosphere would be barometric under ideal conditions. In effect, two particle source distributions have been used in the published calculations, which we describe here as Maxwell‐Boltzmann (M‐B), and Maxwell‐Boltzmann flux (M‐B‐F). In the instances in which the atmospheric distribution has been calculated for regions above the surface, the resulting model atmosphere represents a mixture of the M‐B and M‐B‐F sources. We suggest that none of the published exospheric calculations for the two bodies represent atmospheres produced by a barometric source of particles. Although a barometric source of particles cannot be justified in terms of surface physics, an exosphere produced by such a source is a valuable point of reference for calculations based on more realistic conditions. According to the analysis presented below, the appropriate source distribution should be M‐B‐F if the particles in the distribution are to be treated as components of flux. Monte Carlo calculations with an M‐B‐F source are compared with Mariner 10 ultraviolet spectrometer data. The comparison suggests that present models are incapable of fitting the observed Mercury exosphere.

Key concepts: Exosphere, Physics, Monte Carlo method, Helium, Computational physics, Flux (metallurgy), Atmospheric models, Atmosphere (unit)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Monte Carlo modeling of exospheric bodies: Mercury — Research Paper | ScholarLens