The interior of Uranus: Thermal profile, bulk composition and the distribution of rock, water and hydrogen and helium

Fuente: arXiv
Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Morf, Luca, Müller, Simon, Helled, Ravit
Format: Preprint
Published: 2024
Subjects:
Online Access:
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866909967916728320
author Morf, Luca
Müller, Simon
Helled, Ravit
author_facet Morf, Luca
Müller, Simon
Helled, Ravit
contents We present improved empirical density profiles of Uranus and interpret them in terms of their temperature and composition using a new random algorithm. The algorithm to determine the temperature and composition is agnostic with respect to the temperature gradient in non-isentropic regions and chooses randomly amongst all possible gradients that are stable against convection and correspond to an Equation of State compatible composition. Our empirical models are based on an efficient implementation of the Theory of Figures up to 10th order including a proper treatment of the atmosphere. The accuracy of 10th order ToF enables us to present accurate calculations of the gravitational moments of Uranus up to $J_{14}$: $J_{6} = ( 5.3078 \pm 0.3312)\cdot10^{-7}$, $J_{8} = (-1.1114 \pm 0.1391)\cdot10^{-8}$, $J_{10} = ( 2.8616 \pm 0.5466)\cdot10^{-10}$, $J_{12} = (-8.4684 \pm 2.0889)\cdot10^{-12}$ and $J_{14} = ( 2.7508 \pm 0.7944)\cdot10^{-13}$. We consider two interior models of Uranus that differ with respect to the maximal number of materials allowed per layer of Uranus (three vs. four composition components). The case with three materials does not allow Hydrogen and Helium in deeper parts of Uranus and results in a higher water abundance which leads to lower central temperatures. On the other hand, the models with four materials allow H-He to be mixed into the deeper interior and lead to rock-dominated solutions. We find that these four composition components models are less reliable due to the underlying empirical models incompatibility with realistic Brunt frequencies. Most of our models are found to be either purely convective with the exception of boundary layers, or only convective in the outermost region. Almost all of our models possess a region that is convective and consists of ionic H$_{2}$O which could explain the generation of Uranus' magnetic field.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2408_10336
institution arXiv
publishDate 2024
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle The interior of Uranus: Thermal profile, bulk composition and the distribution of rock, water and hydrogen and helium
Morf, Luca
Müller, Simon
Helled, Ravit
Earth and Planetary Astrophysics
We present improved empirical density profiles of Uranus and interpret them in terms of their temperature and composition using a new random algorithm. The algorithm to determine the temperature and composition is agnostic with respect to the temperature gradient in non-isentropic regions and chooses randomly amongst all possible gradients that are stable against convection and correspond to an Equation of State compatible composition. Our empirical models are based on an efficient implementation of the Theory of Figures up to 10th order including a proper treatment of the atmosphere. The accuracy of 10th order ToF enables us to present accurate calculations of the gravitational moments of Uranus up to $J_{14}$: $J_{6} = ( 5.3078 \pm 0.3312)\cdot10^{-7}$, $J_{8} = (-1.1114 \pm 0.1391)\cdot10^{-8}$, $J_{10} = ( 2.8616 \pm 0.5466)\cdot10^{-10}$, $J_{12} = (-8.4684 \pm 2.0889)\cdot10^{-12}$ and $J_{14} = ( 2.7508 \pm 0.7944)\cdot10^{-13}$. We consider two interior models of Uranus that differ with respect to the maximal number of materials allowed per layer of Uranus (three vs. four composition components). The case with three materials does not allow Hydrogen and Helium in deeper parts of Uranus and results in a higher water abundance which leads to lower central temperatures. On the other hand, the models with four materials allow H-He to be mixed into the deeper interior and lead to rock-dominated solutions. We find that these four composition components models are less reliable due to the underlying empirical models incompatibility with realistic Brunt frequencies. Most of our models are found to be either purely convective with the exception of boundary layers, or only convective in the outermost region. Almost all of our models possess a region that is convective and consists of ionic H$_{2}$O which could explain the generation of Uranus' magnetic field.
title The interior of Uranus: Thermal profile, bulk composition and the distribution of rock, water and hydrogen and helium
topic Earth and Planetary Astrophysics
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.10336