![]() |
Figure 1:
The real (solid) and imaginary (dotted) part of the polarizability per unit volume for the various components included in the aggregates in the ![]() |
Open with DEXTER |
![]() |
Figure 2:
The total mass aborption coefficients for the aggregates with crystalline silicate fraction (forsterite + enstatite) of 2% ( left panels), 10% ( middle panels), and 20% ( right panels). The volume equivalent radii of the aggregates are ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Open with DEXTER |
![]() |
Figure 3: The effective mass absorption coefficient of the amorphous silicate component in the aggregates (full lines). The plots are organized as in Fig. 2. As a reference we also plot the mass absorption coefficients for an aggregate with the same size but composed of pure amorphous silicate, i.e. no carbon or crystalline silicates in the aggregate (dashed line). |
Open with DEXTER |
![]() |
Figure 4: The effective mass absorption coefficient of the crystalline forsterite component in the aggregates (full lines). The plots are organized as in Fig. 2. As a reference we also plot the mass absorption coefficients for an aggregate with the same size but composed of pure crystalline forsterite (dashed line). |
Open with DEXTER |
![]() |
Figure 5: The fitted apparent size for the different materials inside the aggregate as functions of the aggregate size for a crystallinity of 20%. Results for crystallinities of 2 and 10% show similar trends. Along the horizontal axis we plot the volume equivalent radius of the inhomogeneous aggregates. Along the vertical axis we plot the volume equivalent radius of the best fit homogeneous aggregate. |
Open with DEXTER |
![]() |
Figure 6: A comparison of the spectra computed using the CDA computations and the effective medium approximation (APMR) for various values of the crystallinity (forsterite + enstatite volume fraction). The solid line represents the CDA computations while the dashed line respresents the resulting opacities from the effective medium approximation. Below each panel the relative error between the two curves is shown. The scale in these panels runs from -10% to +10%. The differences are in all cases less than 6%. |
Open with DEXTER |