A&A 410, 337-341 (2003)
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030959
R. Vasundhara1 - J.-E. Arlot2 - V. Lainey2 - W. Thuillot2
1 - Indian Institute of Astrophysics, Bangalore, India
2 -
Institut de mécanique céleste et de calcul des éphémérides - Observatoire de
Paris, UMR 8028 CNRS, 77 avenue Denfert-Rochereau, 75014 Paris, France
Received 5 February 2003 / Accepted 16 April 2003
Abstract
Astrometric results of observations of the mutual events of the Galilean
satellites of Jupiter of the PHEMU97 campaign by the
Institut de Mécanique Céleste et de
Calcul des Éphémérides
are presented.
These astrometric positions can be
directly utilized in the construction of future ephemerides. We attempt here to
compare the residuals of the relative astrometric positions of satellites with respect to the E3, G5,
E5 and L1 ephemerides. The model to fit the observed light curves includes the intensity
variations on the surface of satellites using the mosaics constructed by the
teams at the US Geological Survey from Voyager and Galileo
imagery.
Key words: occultations - eclipses - planets and satellites: general - astrometry - ephemerides
The four major satellites of Jupiter occult and eclipse each other
twice during the orbital period of Jupiter of about 11.6 yrs.
The astrometric results of mutual events are capable of yielding
accuracies of the order of
.
This data set therefore
has great potential in studies of secular variations in mean motion
of the satellites. Of utmost importance is the evaluation
of
(Aksnes & Franklin 2001;
de Sitter 1928; Goldstein & Jacobs 1986;
Goldstein & Jacobs 1995; Greenberg et al. 1986;
Lieske 1998; Vasundhara et al. 1996).
Addition of the mutual event data of the 1997 apparition to the
earlier series of 1973, 1979, 1985 and 1991 apparitions will extend
the existing time base of these data sets from 18 yrs (1973-1991)
to 24 yrs. Such a data set will be helpful to re-investigate
the secular variation of the mean motion of these satellites.
We present here the astrometric positions derived by fitting the
mutual event light curves collected during the observational campaign
PHEMU97. These
may be directly utilized for further upgrading the
ephemerides.
The observations of the mutual events were made in 1997,
taking opportunity of the transit of the Sun and
the Earth through the equatorial plane of Jupiter. At
that time, a large number of mutual occultations and eclipses
occurred. These observations were carried out photometrically
to obtain the light curves to determine the magnitude
drop during the events. Each observation has been carefully
referred to UTC, allowing astrometric use. Since the
events occurred at specific dates, we organized a worldwide
campaign of observations allowing to record 275 light curves
for 148 events from 42 sites. All these data will be published
in a catalogue and are
available at the website of the Institut de Mécanique Céleste et de
Calcul des Éphémérides.
In the past, we used these observations only to evaluate the
shift of the dynamical model. However, a photometric analysis
made for astrometric purposes will provide results of high
interest.
The light curves were fitted using the model presented in Vasundhara
(1994).
Hapke's photometric function with corrections for macroscopic
roughness (Hapke 1984) was used to describe the limb
darkening on the satellites for the occultation events.
The values of the Hapke's parameters were adopted from McEwen et al.
(1988) for Io and
from Domingue & Verbiscer
(1997) for the other satellites.
For the eclipse events, the gradient of the penumbral intensity may play
a more dominant role in determining the shape of the light curves
than the variations in limb darkening due to surface roughness. These light
curves were therefore
modeled assuming a smooth photometric
function (Hapke 1981) to evaluate the limb darkening.
The intensity variations on the surface of the satellites were taken into account by using the
mosaics of the satellites constructed using Voyager and Galileo imagery
made by various groups. The mosaics of Io at 5 km/pixel through green
and near
infrared filters (NIR) were constructed by Geissler et al. (1999)
using images obtained by
Galileo's Solid State Imaging System (SSI) at lowest phase angles ranging
from
to
.
A simple Lunar-Lambert phase dependent
photometric function from McEwen (1991) was used to account for limb
darkening. The medium
phase angle images (
)
were directly mosaicked
while the low phase
angle (
)
and higher phase angle (
)
images were corrected
to account for variation with phase angle by these authors.
For Europa, the mosaic constructed by the United States Geological Survey
(USGS) team using Voyager 1 & 2 and
Galileo images was used. Their image processing included
corrections for limb darkening using modified Hapke function
and normalizing brightness variations due to differences in Sun angle and
viewing geometry (Phillips et al. 1997). Considering the lower
contrast of features on Europa, a lower resolution of 8 km/pixel
was considered adequate. The mosaics of Ganymede (at 2 km/pixel)
and Callisto (at 4 km/pixel) constructed by the USGS team
were down loaded from the website of the United States Geological Survey,
Astrogeology Program, Flagstaff, Arizona
.
The construction of the mosaics as described by Becker et al. (1999)
involved radiometric
calibration, photometric normalization by applying the Lunar-Lambert values
that were derived from empirical fits to Hapke's functions
(McEwen 1991). All these
mosaics are thus well calibrated and ideally suited for modeling low phase
angle ground based observations as in the present case.
The impact parameter and the time difference between the observation
and the prediction were derived
as free parameters by fitting the observed light curves to the model
using "Grid Search'' technique (Bevington 1969).
In case of occultations
and also for eclipse events close to opposition the two satellites are
very close in the aperture for photometry using photoelectric photometry
as well as aperture photometry
of CCD data. Ideally, the contribution of the two satellites should be
measured just before/after the event. This was not carried out in the
majority of the cases. Hence the contribution "r''
of the eclipsing/occulting satellite to the total flux
r=IS1/(IS1+IS2) | (1) |
![]() |
(2) |
![]() |
Figure 1:
O-C in ![]() ![]() |
Open with DEXTER |
![]() |
Figure 2:
O-C in
![]() |
Open with DEXTER |
![]() |
Figure 3: Satellite positions at the time of events involving different pairs of satellites during the mutual event series of 1997. |
Open with DEXTER |
The (O-C) in differential coordinates
and
of the pairs of
satellites are plotted in Figs. 1 and 2 respectively
with respect to E3, G5, E5 and L1 (see references below).
The symbols used for the different events are as follows:
1E2: open triangles, 1O3/1E3: stars, 1E4: open stars.
2E1: filled triangles, 2O3: open circles,
3O1/3E1: crosses, 3O2/3E2: filled circles,
3O4/3E4: open hexagons, 4O1/4E1: filled hexagons,
4O2/4E2: open squares and 4O3/4E3: filled squares.
Due to differences in the data
sets that went into generation of these ephemerides, it is of interest to
look for existence of general trends if any, in the residuals. For instance,
Lieske progressively updated Sampson's (1921) theory starting
from E1 (Lieske 1977)
using the eclipse data of 1878-1903 to generate E2 (Lieske 1980)
by adding visual eclipses between 1903 and 1972, photographic
data between 1967 and 1978, and mutual events of 1973. The E3
(Lieske 1987) ephemerides was derived by further
mutual event pairs from 1979, 183 pairs of data from
Voyager optical navigation images and 15 711 classical eclipses from
1652-1983. Arlot (1982) used 8856 individual
photographic observations between 1891 to 1978 to derive the G5
ephemeris. The E5 sets of constants were derived by Lieske by adding to
the data set the mutual event astrometric positions of 1985 and 1991,
recent photographic observations from Pascu (1994) covering 1980-1991
and Jovian eclipse timings.
Lainey (2002) used all the observations used in the construction
of G5, 200 photographic positions by Pascu (1994) made during the years 1986 to 1990,
astrometric positions of the 1985 and 1991 mutual event series, and 200 CCD observations from
Flagstaff (Stone & Harris 2000; Stone 2001) to
construct the first version of the ephemerides L1.
Thus, a comparison of E3 with E5 will help to
investigate the influence of mutual events in the construction of new
ephemerides and the ability of the dynamical model to fit all the data.
The ephemeride G5 was generated using only photographic data,
hence its comparison with E3 and G5 will be interesting to see how the
eclipse timings and the mutual event data have influenced E3 and E5.
Unlike the mutual events of the 1991 series which were predominant in the
2O1/2E1 events, the present series
provided a good opportunity to record events between different pairs of
satellites. The longitude of the satellites at the time of the events are shown
in Fig. 3. The same symbols are used for different events
as used in Figs. 1 and 2. The mean and rms of the residuals in the relative right ascensions
and declinations are given in Table 2. The rms of the residuals with respect
to the four ephemerides are very
nearly the same for different pairs of satellites .
The light curves were also fitted without considering the intensity variations
due to surface features (model-WOIV). The rms residuals of the fits using
this model are marginally larger compared to the corresponding
values derived using the model-WIV by
i.e.
35 km.
This is much lower than the rms of the residuals which are in the range
.
It may be noted that
the light curves were obtained by
a diverse section of observers and instruments, errors in the observed depths of the
light curves are transmitted in the determination of the impact parameters.
Although as mentioned in
Sect. 3, the parameter "r'' was derived as a free parameter to take into
account these uncertainties,
fits using the model-WIV will help in better constraining this parameter
and the impact parameter compared to the fits using the model-WOIV because
the former takes into advantage the subtle asymmetries in the light
curves due to surface features. The full potential of this model can
best be realized with high quality light curves, as the genuine asymmetries
may otherwise be lost in noise.
Interesting trends in the residuals of the relative right ascensions
between different pairs of satellites compared to the ephemerides
E3, G5, E5 and L1 (Sect. 4) are noticed. The events involving J4 are
delayed by
compared to E3. Lowest residuals
are obtained with respect to G5 both in right ascension and
declination. Thus J4 related events
appear to be best represented by G5 and closely followed by L1.
As shown in Figs. 1 and 2, O-C in RA and Dec with respect to these four ephemerides for the occultation and eclipse events between Io and Ganymede (1O3/1E3 and 3O1/3E1) do not differ significantly. On the other hand, significant differences are noticed for the eclipse events between Io and Europa (1E2 and 2E1) These are more for the former type of events, which occurred when Io was closer to western elongation and hence the timings of the events are more susceptible to the constants of Europa (Fig. 3).
In any given mutual event series, as the inter-combination of events is limited, inclusion of data sets of several apparitions will help to simultaneously improve the constants of motions of these satellites. The astrometric positions presented in the present work will therefore substantially increase the mutual event data set. Improvements in the residuals by including the intensity variations on the surface of the satellites in the fit to the light curves has been demonstrated in the present investigation. A re-analysis of all the mutual event light curves of the previous series using this model will help in removing systematic shifts in the relative right ascensions of a given satellite pair, which otherwise might be misinterpreted as real longitude residuals.
Acknowledgements
This work has been made possible thanks to all the observatories where observations were made and has been supported by CNRS and PNP (Programme National de Planétologie).
Table 1: Astrometric results of the 1997 events.
Table 2: Residuals.