T E C H N I C A L T R A N S L A T I O N

N A S A TT &701 e. /

LOAN CQPY

AFWL KIRTLAND

THE RINGS OF SATURN
i
I
I

by M a Sa Bobrou
Academy of Sciences USSR, Astronomical Council "Nauka" Press, Moscow, 1970

I
'
i

N A T I O N A L AERONAUTICS A N D SPACE A D M I N I S T R A T I O N

WASHINGTON, D. C.

JUNE 1972

I

THE RINGS OF SATURN

By M. S. Bobrov

Translation of "Kol' tsa Saturna." Academy of Sciences USSR, Astronomical Council, "Nauka" Press, Moscow, 1970

NATIONAL AERONAUT ICs AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
For sale by the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22151

$3.00

Present-day knowledge of Saturn's rings is reflected. The results of observations of Saturn's rings are analyzed in detail, and a number of conclusions as to the nature of the rings are formulated. Particular attention is given to the quantitative theory of change in the brightness of the rings with phase angle, which is then used to estimate the principal physical magnitudes that characterize the rings as a whole, as well as a typical particle of the rings. Questions concerned with the dynamics of the rings are discussed. The book is intended for scientists,graduate students, and students interested in research on objects in the solar system.

iii

............

...............

. . ....

Table of Contents Introduction I

...................................................

1

.

Details of the Structure that Differ from Those

. . #3 .
fl
#2

of the Earth

The zonal structure. More precise detail Ring dimensions

.............................................. "he A . B. and C rings .......... .................................. ......................................

3 3 4

6
7 7 8 9
10 10 10 11 19 21 21

............. .................... ........... ......................... I11. Astrophysical and Radioastronomy Data ..................... #7 . Introductory remarks ................................. # . Linear rotational velocities of the rings ............ 8 # . Visible and near ultra-violet spectral reflectivity ... 9 #10 . Infrared spectrometry ................................ #I1 . Polarization ......................................... #12 . Change in surface luminance with phase angle ......... #13 . Other photometric data ............................... #14 . Optical thickness ..................................... #15 . Radiometric and radioastronomical data ............... IV. Model of the B Ring . Properties of a Typical Particle .................................................. #16 . Absolute surface brightness of the B ring ............ #17 . Model of the ring. Albedo of a particle ............. #18 . The mechanism responsible for the observed ring phase curve .......................................... #19 . Conclusions concerning the structure of the B ring
I1 Changes in Ring Openings View from the Edge #4 Cycle of changes in ring openings #5 Observations of the dark side of the rings #6 "Disappearance" of the rings

.

. . .

.

27 2 9 34
39 39
41

49
51

and properties of a typical particle V

.................

............................................. ................................. ........... ............................... ............................ VI . Ring Dynamics ............................................. #24. Ring rotation law .................................... #25 . Differential rotation and Its Consequence ............ #26 . The physical condition of the ring material .......... #27 . Stability ............................................

.

Analysis of Observations Made During Extremely Small Ring Openings #20 Introductory remarks #21 Illumination of the dark side of the rings #22 Analysis of observations for estimating the physical thickness of the rings #23 "Atmosphere" of the rings

. . . .

53 53
54

60

70

72
72 73 74

#28

.

75
81

Mechanisms that possibly prevent complete flattening of the rings
V

..............................

VI1

. Theory of the Effect of Mutual Shading and Its Comparison with Observations .............................. #29 . Introductory remarks ................................. . The Seeliger approximation ...........................
. #32 . #33 .
#31 #34
#3O

85 85 85

.

The llcone-cylinderll approximation. without varianse in the sizes of particles taken into consideration The "cone-cylinder" approximation with variance in particle size taken into consideration Other solutions Discussion of the results Values of the Principal physical parameters of the rings List of Designations in the Formulas Used in the Theory of the Effect of Mutual Shading

....

87
99 114
114

............... ...................................... . .....................

APPENDIX

.

REFERENCES

.......... .....................................................

118 120

vi

. . .

"When we in fact see how this majestic arc is suspended over the equator of the planet with no visible means of support or connection, our mind can no longer remain at ease. We cannot become reconciled to this phenomenon as if it were some simple fact, we cannot describe it simply as the result of observations, and we cannot accept it without seeking for an explanation for it."

L * 5

James Clerk Maxwell
On the Stability of the Motion _ Saturn's .~ _ of --_ Rinas
~

Introduction

Saturn's rings are, in essence, a satellite object.

At the same time, the

great many bodies that are contained within it, and the comparative shortness
of the distance between those bodies, makes them into a single, compact system

in which the individual satellite loses its individuality. Saturn's rings have a dual interest for the researcher. is the only cosmic formation of its type that we know of. special geometry, dynamics and other features. First of all, it It has its own

Furthermore, it is one of the

elements in the solar system, and in its own way is as characteristic as the ring of asteroids, as the Galilean satellites of Jupiter, or of the moon. In

*

Numbers in the marin indicate pagination in the foreign text.

1

o t h e r words, t h e problem of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s i s n o t one o f a narrow problem o f

a s i n g l e o b j e c t , b u t r a t h e r p a r t o f an incomparably b r o a d e r problem o f p h y s i c s
and cosmogony o f t h e s o l a r system.

It can b e pointed o u t , f o r example, t h a t t h e p a r t i c l e s of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s a r e
s u b j e c t e d t o continuous bombardment by micrometeoric b o d i e s and by c o r p u s c u l a r s o l a r radiation.

A q u a n t i t a t i v e estimate of t h e p i t t i n g of t h e s u r f a c e of a
an i n d i r e c t estimate o f t h e i n -

t y p i c a l r i n g p a r t i c l e i s , a t t h e same t i m e ,

t e n s i t y of t h e flow of micrometeoric b o d i e s and of s o l a r c o r p u s c l e s a t t h e d i s t a n c e of Saturn. Another example of t h e p h y s i c a l connection between S a t u r n ' s r i n g s and t h e environment
s t h e probable i n t e r a c t i o n o f t h e i r m a t e r i a l with t h e magnetic

f i e l d of t h e p l a n e t ( t h e l a t t e r should b e s t r o n g , as can b e a n t i c i p a t e d because of t h e s i m i l a r i t y of S a t u r n t o J u p i t e r ) . The presence of r o t a t i n g r i n g s

i n S a t u r n ' s magnetosphere should deform t h e magnetic l i n e s of f o r c e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y (Zheleznyakov, 1964; Z l o t n i k , 1967). To simply speak of cosmogony m a k e s t h e v e r y f a c t of t h e e x i s t e n c e of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s i n t h e s o l a r system important, and something t h a t cannot b e ignored. The p r o p e r t i e s of a t y p i c a l r i n g p a r t i c l e a r e of p a r t i c u l a r cosmoI n f a c t , according t o contemporary hypotheses, t h e r i n g s are

gonic i n t e r e s t .

t h e zone of t h e p r e s a t e l l i t e c l u s t e r of S a t u r n , w i t h i n which t h e t i d a l f o r c e s prevented t h e m a t e r i a l of t h e c l u s t e r from forming i n t o a s i n g l e s a t e l l i t e . If

t h i s i s so, t h e n t h e zone of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s i s v i r t u a l l y t h e o n l y p l a c e i n t h e s o l a r system where one can f i n d and i n v e s t i g a t e t h e remains of p r e p l a n e t a r y material. S a t u r n ' s r i n g s a s a whole a l s o a r e of c o n s i d e r a b l e i n t e r e s t t o t h e cosmog o n i s t because t h e dynamics of t h e r i n g s are, i n many r e s p e c t s , s i m i l a r t o t h e dynamics of a p r o t o p l a n e t a r y cloud, and can b e d e s c r i b e d by s i m i l a r equations. T h i s monograph a t t e m p t s t o g i v e a s e q u e n t i a l account of a l l of t h e obs e r v a t i o n a l and t h e o r e t i c a l m a t e r i a l b e a r i n g on S a t u r n ' s r i n g s (with t h e exception of t h o s e works t h a t a r e of l i t t l e s i g n i f i c a n c e , o r which a r e obs o l e t e ) and t o p o i n t out t h e c o n c l u s i o n s t h a t can b e drawn a s a r e s u l t conc e r n i n g t h e n a t u r e of t h e r i n g s . Our t a s k was made v e r y much more complicated I n v e s t i g a t i o n of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s

because of t h e complexity of t h e problem.

I

r e q u i r e s t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f many branches o f s c i e n c e ; a s t r o p h y s i c s , c e l e s t i a l mechanics, a s t r o m e t r y , cosmogony, meteor astronomy, t h e p h y s i c s o f t h e i n t e r -

p l a n e t a r y medium, t h e p h y s i c s o f t h e s u r f a c e l a y e r of t h e moon, o p t i c s o f

ice c r y s t a l s and of microscopic p a r t i c l e s o f v a r i o u s shapes, t h e dynamics of
systems w i t h n o t completely e l a s t i c c o l l i s i o n s , and o t h e r s .

So it i s obvious

t h a t one a u t h o r i s i n no p o s i t i o n t o d e a l w i t h a l l s i d e s of t h e problem w i t h t h e same completeness. I n o r d e r t o avoid t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f making s e r i o u s

e r r o r s , w e h e r e have c i t e d o n l y t h o s e f a c t s , d a t a , r e s u l t s , and c o n c l u s i o n s t h a t w e checked p e r s o n a l l y , o r t h a t w e r e completely e v i d e n t t o us. In those

r a r e i n s t a n c e s when w e w e r e f o r c e d t o d e p a r t from t h i s r u l e w e have pointed
t h i s o u t i n t h e t e x t and have i n d i c a t e d t h e s o u r c e s from which t h e materials

w e r e taken, and w e have given o u r views concerning them. W e should add t h a t i t w a s not t h e t a s k o f t h e monograph t o provide p r e c i s e
numerical d a t a . These d a t a can be found q u i t e r e a d i l y i n handbooks.
W e pre-

f e r r e d t o u s e rounded e s t i m a t e s , o r t o i n d i c a t e t h e o r d e r s of magnitude.

I.
#l.
-

D e t a i l s of t h e S t r u c t u r e t h a t D i f f e r from Those of t h e E a r t h The A , B, and C Rings.

The- Zonal S t r u c-~ r e . tu _

The r i n g s t r u c t u r e s u s c e p t i b l e t o r e s o l u t i o n i n t e l e s c o p e s on e a r t h (even i n c l u d i n g t h o s e i n o b s e r v a t o r i e s high i n t h e mountains w i t h e x c e l l e n t
i m a g e q u a l i t y ) i s a b s o l u t e l y c o n c e n t r i c , w i t h no l i g h t o r d a r k d e t a i l s o f any

d e s c r i p t i o n , g i v i n g t h e appearance of r o t a t i o n around t h e p l a n e t .

The r i n g s ,

when t h e y open wide enough, appear i n t h e form o f a system of c o n c e n t r i c zones w i t h d i f f e r e n t b r i g h t n e s s e s ( F i g u r e l a ) . The boundary of a p a r t i c u l a r

zone i s seen a s a s h a r p , r a d i a l change i n b r i g h t n e s s o r a s a narrow, d a r k s l i t ( " d i v i s i o n " ) between t h e r i n g s , a s i f devoid o f m a t t e r . The p r i n c i p a l p a r t s of t h e zonal s t r u c t u r e a r e t h e A r i n g ( t h e o u t e r ) , t h e B r i n g ( t h e middle), and t h e C r i n g ( t h e i n n e r ) . The l a t t e r sometimes

i s c a l l e d t h e "crape" r i n g because of i t s v e r y low b r i g h t n e s s [about -2 1-3-10 bc, where b i s t h e b r i g h t n e s s o f t h e c e n t e r o f S a t u r n ' s d i s k , t h i s i s
C

t h e approximate estimate made by B e l l (1919)l.

The B r i n g i s t h e b r i g h t e s t

p a r t o f t h e system ( i n o p p o s i t i o n approximately equal t o t h e c e n t e r of S a t u r n ' s disk i n brightness. The A r i n g v i s u a l l y i s 0.6 weaker (Schoenberg, 1921) and Hepburn (1914), s t u d y i n g images of S a t u r n on p l a t e s

m

is p a r t i a l l y transparent.

3

i
!

__ _.__ ..

....

.

~ . % .

.

t a k e n by Barnard (19141, w a s a b l e t o

/a

see S a t u r n ' s d i s k , t r a n s l u c e n t through
t h e A r i n g a t t h e i r edges. ring is very transparent. The c r a p e The b a l l o f

t h e planet i s r e a d i l y distinguishable through it when observed v i s u a l l y (it

I -

-. .-

,

.

.

. . .. . .

- .-

goes without saying t h a t t h e s e observ a t i o n s r e q u i r e t h e corresponding obj e c t i v e l e n s opening and a good q u a l i t y

i-

i m a g e , because t h e c r a p e r i n g i t s e l f i s
an almost i n a c c e s s i b l e o b j e c t ) . The main d i v i s i o n i n t h e system i s l o c a t e d between t h e A and B r i n g s .

It

h a s been named t h e "Cassini d i v i s i o n " from t h e name of i t s d i s c o v e r e r i n
.

1675,

.._
C

Jean Dominique C a s s i n i , t h e f i r s t d i r e c t o r o f t h e P a r i s Observatory ( s e e Berry, 1964).
-

The width of t h e C a s s i n i

d i v i s i o n i s about 5,000 k i l o m e t e r s , according t o Barnard (1914). #2. More P r e c i s e D e t a i l . Lyot (19531, observing S a t u r n

/9

F i g u r e 1. a S a t u r n w i t h r i n g s opened w i d e (photograph by Camichel, 1958). Ring A i s somewhat underexposed and r i n g C can b e seen i n a p r o j e c t i o n on t h e d i s k of Saturn. Resolution i s "0.411;b The r i n g s of S a t u r n from v i s u a l o b s e r v a t i o n s from P i c du Midi ( s k e t c h by Lyot, 1953). Contrast i s somewhat overdrawn; c Distribution of b r i g h t n e s s i n t h e eye of t h e r i n g s of Saturn along the major axisof t h e r i n g s (from v i s u a l o b s e r v a t i o n s made by D o l l f u s , 1963). The a n g u l a r dimensions t h e rings of are &own f o r t h e mean d i s t a n c e of S a t u r n from t h e sun (9.539 A U ) .

-

visually i n a

60 c e n t i m e t e r t e l e s c o p e

from t h e P i c du M i d i Observatory, w i t h r e s o l u t i o n approximately t h a t of t h e o r itical (0.2'j1'), w a s a b l e t o d i s t i n g u i s h

-

some 10 d i v i s i o n s with d i f f e r e n t de-

-

grees Of darkening Of the rings (Figure l b ) . D o l l f u s made s i m i l a r observations

(1936 b ) i n l a r g e t e l e s c o p e s

i n France and i n t h e United S t a t e s , enabling him t o c o n s t r u c t an approxi-

m a t e c u r v e of b r i g h t n e s s d i s t r i b u t i o n

4

along t h e major axis o f t h e r i n g s ( F i g u r e I C ) . The c u r v e shows t h a t i n e s s e n c e t h e system b r i g h t n e s s changes w i t h d i s t a n c e from S a t u r n , and t h a t it i s s o l e l y t h e presence o f minima c r e a t e d by t h e d i v i s i o n s t h a t l e a d t o t h e conventional s e p a r a t i o n o f t h e system i n t o t h e l l i n d i v i d u a l f fA, B, and C r i n g s . Comparing D o l l f u s ' c u r v e w i t h L y o t ' s s k e t c h , ane i s r e a d i l y persuaded A t t e n t i o n i s drawn t o t h e wide zone of

t h a t t h e y are i n good concordance.

reduced b r i g h t n e s s n e a r t h e middle o f t h e A r i n g c r e a t e d by t h e t h r e e c l o s e minima. E a r l i e r o b s e r v e r s , , working under c o n d i t i o n s o f l e s s e r r e s o l u t i o n , "Encke d i v i s i o n " ) .

took t h i s t o be a s i n g l e d i v i s i o n ( t h e so-called

Kuiper (1957 a ) i s of t h e o p i n i o n t h a t o n l y t h e C a s s i n i d i v i s i o n i s a

real lane, c o n t a i n i n g v e r y l i t t l e material, and t h a t a l l o f t h e o t h e r d i v i s i o n s
recorded i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e on t h e s u b j e c t a r e zones of somewhat reduced b r i g h t n e s s (by 10 t o 15 p e r c e n t ) , o r a r e f i c t i c i o u s . K u i p e r ' s c o n c l u s i o n i s based

on a s i n g l e v i s u a l o b s e r v a t i o n h e made of t h e r i n g s i n t h e Mount Palomar Obs e r v a t o r y ' s 5 m e t e r r e f l e c t o r w i t h a m a g n i f i c a t i o n o f 1170. Atmospheric

t u r b u l e n c e on t h e n i g h t o f t h e o b s e r v a t i o n w a s u n u s u a l l y low and t h e r e s o l u t i o n w a s 0.051' t o 0.10". Three zones of darkening w e r e seen i n t h e B r i n g . The

zone t h a t d i v i d e s t h e B and C r i n g s w a s not observed ( d e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t

i t s e x i s t e n c e had been noted by Lyot, as w e l l as by many o t h e r o b s e r v e r s ; some
weak d i v i s i o n s can change i n t e n s i t y markedly, o u t , however).

so t h e p o s s i b i l i t y i s not r u l e d

Kuiper e s t i m a t e d t h e width o f C a s s i n i ' s d i v i s i o n as o n e - f i f t h
A r e g i o n o f darkening t h a t w a s ,

t h e width o f t h e A r i n g .

a t t h e same t i m e ,

the

r e g i o n of an a b r u p t change i n t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e A r i n g w a s seen a t t h e s i t e of t h e "Encke d i v i s i o n . " Observation o f a s t a r o c c u l t e d by t h e r i n g s i s an

e f f e c t i v e method t o u s e t o o b t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e w i d t h , p o s i t i o n , and o p t i c a l thickness of t h e divisions.
W e s h a l l d i s c u s s t h i s method i n #14.

The

mean t i m e i n t e r v a l between two s u c c e s s i v e o c c u l t a t i o n s of up t o 9& magnitude

s t a r s by S a t u r n i s 1.9 y e a r s .

( S e e l i g e r , 1881).

The elements of t h e occula-

t i o n s o f stars by p l a n e t s a r e computed r e g u l a r l y by t h e B r i t i s h Astronomical A s s o c i a t i o n , and are p u b l i s h e d on a s y s t e m a t i c b a s i s i n t h a t o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s annual. Kirkwood (1884) w a s t h e f i r s t t o e x p l a i n t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e d i v i s i o n s by resonant p e r t u r b a t i o n s i n t h e o r b i t s of t h e p a r t i c l e s of S a t u r n ' s s a t e l l i t e s . A c t u a l l y , t h e p e r i o d of r e v o l u t i o n o f a p a r t i c l e i n s i d e any of t h e d i v i s i o n s

5

i s very c l o s e t o 1/2,

1/3,

...

t h e s i d e r e a l p e r i o d of one, o r of s e v e r a l This

in-

t e r n a l s a t e l l i t e s of S a t u r n , o r of t h e most massive of them, T i t a n . q u e s t i o n h a s been d i s c u s s e d a s w e l l by Lowell and Greaves (1922 a , 1922 b ) .

(19101, Goldsbrough (1921, l 9 2 2 ) ,

#3.

Ring Dimensions. S a t u r n ' s r i n g s have been measured by many a u t h o r s (with micrometers,

w i t h h e l i o m e t e r s , and by measuring t h e images of t h e p l a n e t s on n e g a t i v e s ) . Halation

i s t h e p r i n c i p a l cause o f f i x e d e r r o r s .

I n view of t h i s , i t i s

d e s i r a b l e i n t h e n e a r f u t u r e t o check accepted dimensions by u s i n g o b s e r v a t i o n s made of t h e o c c u l t a t i o n s of s t a r s by t h e r i n g s . Table 1 l i s t s t h e r i n g dimensions, according t o Rabe (1928). TABLE 1
.~ ~.I__...

.-

..

.

. .-

-

.

.-

.

Detail

Visible radius (distance 9.5388 AU) seconds of a r c 20.14

Wj t h
Actual r a d i u s , k i1 omet ers
~_ _ -~_ _
.

Seconds of A r c

K i 1omet e r s
. .-

--

A r i n g , o u t e r edge A r i n g , i n n e r edge

139,300
122,200 117,200

17,100
5,000
27,900

17.68
16.95
12.91 10.42 8.72

B ring, outer edge
C r i n g , o u t e r edge C r i n g , i n n e r edge
Equatorial r a d i u s of S a t u r n

89,300
72, ooo

17,300

60,300

Barabashov and Semeykin (19331, using photographic photometry and l i g h t

f i l t e r s , and excluding i n s t r u m e n t a l e r r o r by t h e " a r t i f i c i a l p l a n e t " method

(see #9), found t h a t i n b l u e l i g h t t h e space between t h e v i s i b l e , i n s i d e
boundary of t h e C r i n g and S a t u r n ' s e q u a t o r is n o t completely dark. obtained i n r e d and yellow l i g h t s h o w no such e f f e c t . Negatives

The a u t h o r s i n t e r p r e t e d

t h e i r r e s u l t s a s i n d i c a t i v e of t h e f a c t t h a t t h i s space i s f i l l e d with r a r e f i e d material s t r e t c h i n g t o t h e b a l l of Saturn i t s e l f . Consequently, it can be

s a i d t h a t t h e i n n e r edge of t h e C r i n g c o i n c i d e s w i t h t h e e x t e r n a l , v i s i b l e , boundary of t h e p l a n e t s b a l l .

6

1. 1

Changes i n Ring Openings. -~__

V i e w from t h e Edge.

/11

#4.

.-

Cycle of Changes i n Ring Openings.

The p l a n e of t h e r i n g s c o i n c i d e s very p r e c i s e l y w i t h t h e p l a n e of S a t u r n ' s equator. The l a t t e r i s t i l t e d t o t h e plane of S a t u r n ' s o r b i t by 26.7", and t o

t h e plane of t h e e a r t h ' s o r b i t by 28.1".

A s t h e p l a n e t moves i n i t s o r b i t , t h e

p l a n e o f i t s e q u a t o r , and t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s , move p a r a l l e l t o each o t h e r . The r e s u l t i s t h a t t h e a n g l e s o f e l e v a t i o n o f t h e sun and of t h e e a r t h above t h e plane of t h e r i n g s , A and A ' , of Saturn i n its o r b i t . olution change c o n s t a n t l y , depending on t h e p o s i t i o n

There are, i n t h e c o u r s e o f one s i d e r e a l p e r i o d o f rev-

of S a t u r n (29.46 y e a r s ) , two t i m e s of maximum opening of t h e r i n g s ,

and two t i m e s when t h e r i n g s a r e t u r n e d t o t h e sun p r e c i s e l y on edge ( o r , i n o t h e r words, t h e sun i n t e r s e c t s t h e plane of t h e r i n g s ) . T h i s i s what t h e ob-

s e r v e r on e a r t h sees, b a s i c a l l y , b u t it must b e remembered t h a t t h e e a r t h does not c o i n c i d e w i t h t h e sun, b u t i n s t e a d h a s i t s own o r b i t a l motion. speaking, t h e r e f o r e , A ' Generally

#

A.

h g l e A ' w i l l change w i t h t h e s i d e r e a l p e r i o d

of Saturn, and t h e r e w i l l b e small changes i n i t s synodic period a s w e l l . These l a t t e r a r e more s i g n i f i c a n t n e a r t h e t i m e s when A = 0.
A s w i l l b e seen

from F i g u r e 2 , a f i x e d t i m e ( t h a t i s , 360 days) i s r e q u i r e d f o r t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n of t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s by t h e e a r t h o r b i t .
A more d e t a i l e d examin-

a t i o n of t h e q u e s t i o n shows t h a t during t h i s p e r i o d of t i m e t h e e a r t h can i n t e r -

sect t h e plane of t h e r i n g s once, o r t h r e e t i m e s ( t h e number of i n t e r s e c t i o n s
must b e odd because t h e e a r t h , i n t h e f i n a l a n a l y s i s , w i l l b e moving from one s i d e of t h e plane of t h e r i n g s t o t h e o t h e r ) . I n extremely r a r e c a s e s two of

t h e s e t h r e e i n t e r s e c t i o n s can take p l a c e almost simultaneously ( c a s e e q u i v a l e n t t o two i n t e r s e c t i o n s ) . I n c e r t a i n o t h e r c a s e s t h e e a r t h can i n t e r s e c t t h e p l a n e

of t h e r i n g s once, and i n p l a c e o f t h e o t h e r two i n t e r s e c t i o n s t h e r e i s simply

a more o r l e s s c l o s e approach t o t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s .

A t y p i c a l example

o f t h e t r i p l e i n t e r s e c t i o n of t h e p l a n e o f t h e r i n g s by t h e e a r t h i s t h e one t h a t t o o k p l a c e i n 1966 ( F i g u r e 3 ) . L e t u s add t h a t t h e i n t e r v a l s between t h e s u c c e s s i v e i n t e r s e c t i o n s of t h e p l a n e of S a t u r n by t h e sun are not equal. T h i s can be explained by t h e d i f /12

f e r e n c e i n t h e o r b i t a l v e l o c i t y of S a t u r n n e a r t h e p e r i h e l i o n and n e a r t h e aphelion. The rounded, r e s p e c t i v e i n t e r v a l s a r e 13.75 and 15.75 years.

7

P

0
I

( p l a n e of S a t u r n ’ s r i n g s ) F i g u r e 2. Northern hemisphere of t h e c e l e s t i a l s p h e r e i n t h e case o f an o b s e r v e r s t a n d i n g on t h e s i d e o f S a t u r n ‘ s r i n g s i l l u m i n a t e d by t h e sun ( n e a r t h e t i m e of i n t e r s e c t i o n of t h e plane of t h e r i n g s by t h e s u n ) .

If66 fl

m

y

mag

M B7

/f67

Figure 3. Change i n t h e a n g l e s o f e l e v a t i o n o f t h e sun and t h e e a r t h , A and A ’ , above t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s i n 1966. The e a r t h i n t e r sected t h e plane of t h e r i n g s t h r e e

times.

#5.

Observations o f t h e Dark S i d e of t . . . .Rings. h e . -F i g u r e 2 can b e used t o f i n d I A

-

All

2

3.5”.

What f o l l o w s i n p a r t i c u l a r

i s t h a t n e a r t i m e A = 0 (when I A

-

A’I

h a s i t s g r e a t e s t v a l u e ) t h e s i g n s of

a n g l e s A and A ’ c a n b e o p p o s i t e , t h a t i s , t h e e a r t h can b e over t h e d a r k s i d e of t h e r i n g s ( F i g u r e 3 ) . Despite t h e fact t h a t a t t h i s t i m e t h e surface of

t h e r i n g s turned t o t h e o b s e r v e r i s not i l l u m i n a t e d by t h e d i r e c t r a y s of t h e sun, t h e narrow e l l i p s e o f t h e r i n g s i s seen q u i t e w e l l , given a good q u a l i t y

i m a g e and not t o o s m a l l a t e l e s c o p e a p e r t u r e .

Russel

(1908) p o i n t e d

QUt

that

t h e i l l u m i n a t i o n o f t h e r i n g s by t h e b a l l of S a t u r n i s i n t e n s e enough f o r t h e i r d a r k s i d e t o b e s e e n v i s u a l l y by an o b s e r v e r i n a t e l e s c o p e on e a r t h . r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e q u e s t i o n ( s e e #21) A recent

leads t o t h e conclusion t h a t t h e r e solar light

must be a n o t h e r s o u r c e o f d a r k s i d e i l l u m i n a t i o n , s p e c i f i c a l l y d i f f u s e d through t h e r i n g s i n o p t i c a l l y t h i n zones.

The b r i g h t n e s s of t h e

d a r k s i d e i s l e s s t h a n t h a t o f t h e c e n t e r o f S a t u r n ’ s d i s k by a f a c t o r o f between 2 and 2 . 5 . Barnard (1908 a ) d e s c r i b e d t h e view of t h e d a r k s i d e i n d e t a i l . graphy of t h e d a r k s i d e h a s n o t y e t been published. Photo-

/I3

All t h a t i s a v a i l a b l e
F i g u r e 4 i s an

a r e drawings, and t h e b e s t o f them w e r e made by Barnard.
example.

A t y p i c a l f e a t u r e o f t h e d a r k s i d e i s t h e two p a i r s o f b r i g h t

“condensations” (Bardnard’s expression).

The o u t e r condensations c o i n c i d e

8

with t h e Cassini d i v i s i o n s , t h e inner with t h e crape ring.

They are a t t r i b u t a b l e

t o s o l a r l i g h t f i l t e r i n g through t h e corresponding zones of t h e r i n g s (#21).

F i g u r e 4.

Drawing of t h e d a r k s i d e of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s (Barnard, 1.908 a ) .

#6.

"Disappearance" of t h e Rings. Many s o u r c e s c o n t a i n t h e a s s e r t i o n t h a t t h e gaps of t h e r i n g s d i s a p p e a r

/14
i s zero.

completely when one of t h e a n g l e s of e l e v a t i o n ( A o r A ' ) obvious t h a t when A = 0, g e n e r a l l y speaking, A '

But it i s ob-

#

0, s o t h e earth-bound

s e r v e r w i l l see t h e d a r k s i d e of t h e r i n g s i l l u m i n a t e d by t h e b a l l of Saturn. Accordingly, t h e gaps w i l l b e seen (#5), so long a s a n g l e A ' i s not t o o s m a l l .

The case when A = 0 , t h a t i s , t h e t i m e of i n t e r s e c t i o n of t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s by t h e e a r t h , a c t u a l l y h a s not been observed under c o n d i t i o n s n e c e s s a r y f o r t h i s t o o c c u r up t o a s l a t e as 1966. t h a t f o l l o w , a r e c o n t a i n e d i n Chapter V. F u r t h e r d e t a i l s , and t h e r e s u l t s

9

1 1 1 .

Astrophysical . ~. . . . . . . . . and Radioastronop-y D a t a -.__I
I _

/15

#7.

I n t r o d u c t o r y Remarks. The a n g u l a r width of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s (see Table 1) i s s m a l l , making it v e r y

d i f f i c u l t t o i n v e s t i g a t e them.

Ring B, because of i t s b r i g h t n e s s ,

and because

it i s l o c a t e d i n t h e c e n t e r o f t h e system, i s r e l a t i v e l y more a c c e s s i b l e f o r
a s t r o p h y s i c a l work. Study of t h e A r i n g r e q u i r e s g r e a t e r s k i l l because it i s n o t as b r i g h t and because it i s a d j a c e n t t o t h e d a r k background o f t h e s u r rounding sky. The c r a p e r i n g i s weaker t h a n t h e B r i n g by approximately one and

a h a l f o r d e r s of magnitude, and i s l o c a t e d between t h e B r i n g and S a t u r n ' s d i s k . The n e a r n e s s o f t h e s e b r i g h t o b j e c t s m a k e s f o r v e r y s e r i o u s d i f f i c u l t i e s . A s t r o p h y s i c i s t s o r d i n a r i l y cannot be c e r t a i n t h a t t h e y a r e studying t h e l i g h t r e f l e c t e d by t h e C r i n g , o r t h e l i g h t t h a t i s s c a t t e r e d by t h e B r i n g which

i s d i r e c t l y contiguous t o i t , and by t h e d i s k o f t h e p l a n e t .
T h i s i s why most of t h e a s t r o p h y s i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n s made t o d a t e o f t h e r i n g s of S a t u r n i n v o l v e t h e B r i n g . Data on t h e A r i n g are v e r y m e a g e r , and

t h e c r a p e r i n g i s , f o r a l l p r a c t i c a l purposes, t e r r a incognita.

#8.

Linear R o t a t i o n a l V_e l o c i t. e- of t h e Rings. - .- - i s .- __ One of t h e e a r l i e s t a p p l i c a t i o n s of s p e c t r a l a n a l y s i s t o t h e p h y s i c s of

t h e p l a n e t w a s t h e s t u d y of t h e law o f r o t a t i o n o f S a t u r n ' s r i n g s by measuring t h e Doppler s h i f t of t h e l i n e s i n t h e spectrum of t h e gaps of t h e r i n g s . Observations w e r e made independently by B e l o p o l ' s k i y (1895) i n Pulkovo, by Deslandres (1895) i n P a r i s , and by K e e l e r (1895) i n t h e Licks Observatory. The p r i n c i p l e s involved i n making t h e measurements are c l e a r i n F i g u r e Table 2 l i s t s t h e numerical r e s u l t s (Sharonov, 1958). A s w i l l b e seen from t h e d a t a i n Table 2 , t h e measured v e l o c i t i e s are i n good concordance w i t h K e p l e r ' s . Consequently, any r i n g p a r t i c l e can be con-

5.

s i d e r e d a s e p a r a t e , .independent, s a t e l l i t e of S a t u r n , moving around t h e planet
P

i n a c i r c u l a r o r b i t a t Keplerian v e l o c i t y .

I n f a c t , however, t h i s i s Perturbations

I

/16

j u s t t h e f i r s t approximation o f t h e real motion of t h e p a r t i c l e s . by s a t e l l i t e s , mutual p e r t u r b a t i o n s , o s c i l l a t e n e a r t h e i r mean p o s i t i o n s .

and c o l l i s i o n s f o r c e t h e p a r t i c l e s t o But t h e r i n g s are s o t h i n when compared

w i t h t h e i r r a d i a l di.stances t h a t t h e v e l o c i t i e s a t which t h e p a r t i c l e s os-

c i l l a t e are many o r d e r s o f magnitude below t h e i r K e p l e r i a n v e l o c i t i e s .
10

The

problems a l l u d e d t o h e r e w i l l b e discussed i n Chapter VI.

Detail

I
- _ - _

Linear v e l o c i t y , km/s
( Kepl e r )

A r i n g , o u t e r boundary Middle of t h e r i n g

15.4

B r i n g , inner boundary

I
I

21.0

20.5

, . P o s i t i o n of s l i t

.....

1

.._._, .

.Ii ..

.....

/.

1

t

.......

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

i

. . .d

2 . '

Figure 5.

P o s i t i o n o f t h e spectrograph s l i t and t h e Doppler s h i f t o f t h e l i n e s i n t h e s p e c t r a of t h e eyes of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s and of t h e p l a n e t ' s d i s k caused by r o t a t i o n (from Belopol 1 s k i y , Deslandres, and K e e l e r ) .
~~

#9.

V i s i b l e and Near U l t r a - v i o l e t S p e c t r a l R e f l e c t i v i t y . The pioneering r e s e a r c h on t h i s q u e s t i o n w a s done by B e l o p o l l s k i y and

Tikhov i n Pulkovo.

B e l o p o l ' s k i y e a r l i e r (1896) had noted t h a t t h e spectrum

of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s ( t h e r e f e r e n c e i s t o t h e more i n t e n s e B r i n g zone) extends
11

toward t h e v i o l e t s i d e much f u r t h e r t h a n does t h e spectrum o f t h e e q u a t o r i a l b e l t of t h e p l a n e t ' s disk. Thus, i n t h e April

13, 1895, photograph t h e d i s k
t h e r i n g spectrum extends Consequently, t h e l i g h t from Tikhov (1911)

spectrum i s extremely f a i n t when A = to

4100

1, whereas

1 = 4000

1, v i r t u a l l y

without a t t e n u a t i o n .

S a t u r n ' s r i n g s should d i f f e r from t h e l i g h t from i t s d i s k .

made a d e t a i l e d check o f t h e e f f e c t , u s i n g a g r e a t d e a l o f material o b t a i n e d from o b s e r v a t i o n s ( s p e c t r a o f S a t u r n and o f t h e r i n g s , t a k e n by B e l o p o l ' s k i y i n 1906 and 1909, n e g a t i v e of S a t u r n w i t h moderately open r i n g s made by Tikhov i n 1909 and by B e l o p o l ' s k i y i n 1911, u s i n g t h e

30 i n c h F'ulkovo rethe Tikhov

f r a c t o r with l i g h t f i l t e r s t o s e p a r a t e , r e s p e c t i v e l y , t h e red-orange, yellow-green, t h e green, and t h e b l u e - v i o l e t p a r t s of t h e spectrum).

found t h a t t h e d i s k could b e seen up t o 6950

1

a t t h e r e d end o f t h e spectrum,

b u t t h a t t h e r i n g spectrum could o n l y b e seen t o 6800

1 .

The d i s k spectrum

w a s b r i g h t e r t h a n t h a t o f t h e r i n g s over v i r t u a l l y a l l of t h e v i s i b l e p a r t ,
b u t t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n b r i g h t n e s s g r a d u a l l y decreased w i t h r e d u c t i o n i n A.

N e a r 4500 %, t h e b r i g h t n e s s o f t h e s p e c t r a was

t h e same, a f t e r which t h e The r i n g spectrum

r i n g spectrum b r i g h t e n e d as compared w i t h t h e d i s k spectrum. could b e t r a c e d t o 3970

B,

t h a t o f t h e d i s k spectrum o n l y t o 4020

a.

The r e s u l t s of t h e examination made of t h e photographs t a k e n using l i g h t

f i l t e r s w e r e i n good concordance w i t h t h e s e conclusions.

It w a s e s t a b l i s h e d

t h a t S a t u r n ' s e q u a t o r i a l b e l t g r a d u a l l y a t t e n u a t e d w i t h t r a n s i t i o n from t h e r e d t o t h e v i o l e t , w i t h t h e b r i g h t e r p a r t of t h e d i s k i n t h e r e d , a n d t h e darker i n t h e v i o l e t . opposite; The change i n t h e b r i g h t n e s s o f t h e r i n g s i s t h e d i r e c t

i t w a s l e s s t h a n t h e mean b r i g h t n e s s o f t h e d i s k i n t h e red, then in-

creased and became much b r i g h t e r than t h e mean b r i g h t n e s s o f t h e d i s k i n t h e v i o l e t . Tikhov's work, t a k e n i n t h e whole, e s t a b l i s h e s t h e f a c t t h a t t h e b l u e i s t h e most i n t e n s e zone o f t h e B r i n g i n S a t u r n ' s e q u a t o r i a l b e l t . Lack o f a

t i e w i t h t h e sun, o r w i t h stars of t h e sun class, m a k e s it impossible t o exp l a i n whether o r n o t t h e s c a t t e r i n g of s o l a r l i g h t by t h e B r i n g i s n e u t r a l ,

o r selective.

Tikhov w a s i n c l i n e d t o t h e l a t t e r view, and based it on t h e

following c o n s i d e r a t i o n s .

H e found t h a t darkening o f S a t u r n ' s d i s k a t t h e

/18

edges, s u b s t a n t i a l i n t h e r e d , g r a d u a l l y became unremarkable w i t h d e c r e a s e i n

A , and disappeared n e a r t h e G band.
r e d u c t i o n i n t h e wavelength.

According t o Tikhov, t h i s could b e ex-

p l a i n e d by t h e i n c r e a s e i n t h e r e f l e c t i v i t y o f t h e atmosphere of S a t u r n w i t h Furthermore, it w a s found t h a t t h e b r i g h t n e s s

12

of t h e B r i n g n e a r t h e p o i n t s of i t s meeting w i t h t h e p l a n e t ' s d i s k w a s t h e equal of t h a t a t t h e edges of S a t u r n ' s d i s k , and t h i s w a s t h e case f o r a l l rays. This t h e n l e d Tikhov t o conclude t h a t i t w a s p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e

m a t e r i a l of t h e r i n g w a s v e r y s i m i l a r i n i t s r e f l e c t i v i t y t o t h a t o f S a t u r n ' s atmosphere, t h a t i s , t h a t t h e m e a n d i a m e t e r of t h e r i n g p a r t i c l e s w a s l e s s t h a n t h e l e n g t h o f t h e l i g h t wave (recognizing however t h a t s p e c i a l r e s e a r c h would b e r e q u i r e d t o a r r i v e a t a f i n a l answer t o t h i s q u e s t i o n ) . never been confirmed. This conclusion h a s

L a t e r on t h e famous American o p t i c i s t Robert Wood (1916) used l i g h t
f i l t e r s t o o b t a i n photographs of S a t u r n i n t h e Mount Wilson Observatory (60 i n c h r e f l e c t o r ) , as d i d a s t r o p h y s i c i s t Wright i n t h e Lick Observatory (1927). The new approach, as compared w i t h t h a t used by Tikhov and B e l o p o l l s k i y , w a s t h e u s e of i n f r a r e d and u l t r a v i o l e t f i l t e r s . scales. There s t i l l w e r e no photometric

The e q u a t o r i a l b e l t on t h e d i s k o f S a t u r n w a s p a r t i c u l a r l y d a r k i n Wood r a i s e d t h e q u e s t i o n ,

the ultraviolet.

"Is t h i s e f f e c t due ( a l b e i t i n
I n p o i n t of f a c t , t h e geometry

p a r t ) t o t h e h y p o t h e t i c a l cloud of m a t e r i a l f i l l i n g t h e space between t h e c r a p e r i n g and t h e spheroid of t h e p l a n e t ? "

of t h e e q u a t o r i a l b e l t i s such t h a t such i n t e r p r e t a t i o n cannot be precluded. However, Wright found t h a t on h i s photographs t h e c r a p e r i n g made a d a r k b e l t on t h e d i s k o n l y i n t h e r e d , whereas t h e r e was no shadow of t h e c r a p e r i n g on t h e d i s k i n t h e u l t r a v i o l e t . Consequently, if t h e darkening of t h e equator-

i a l b e l t i n t h e u l t r a v i o l e t w a s i n f a c t connected t o w i t h t h e above-mentioned cloud o f m a t e r i a l , it would b e necessary, a t t h e very l e a s t , t o postulate t h a t

i t s l i g h t s c a t t e r i n g p r o p e r t i e s d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from t h e l i g h t s c a t t e r i n g p r o p e r t i e s of t h e c r a p e r i n g . Wood's photographs t o o show a gradual r e d u c t i o n i n t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e A and B r i n g s w i t h r e d u c t i o n i n t h e wavelength, w i t h A much weaker t h a n B i n t h e i n f r a r e d and yellow, b u t o n l y s l i g h t l y weaker t h a n B i n t h e v i o l e t and u l t r a v i o l e t . Wright l s photographs, on t h e o t h e r hand, show P r e s e n t day

approximately t h e same r a t i o of r i n g b r i g h t n e s s f o r a l l f i l t e r s .

d a t a on t h e s p e c t r a l r e f l e c t i v i t y of t h e A and B r i n g s show t h a t Wright's results were close t o the true results. The r e s u l t s obtained by Wood are t h e

r e s u l t of simple overexposure of t h e B r i n g i m a g e i n t h e v i o l e t and u l t r a -

e v i 0 1 t photo graphs.

It would b e n e c e s s a r y t o u s e l i g h t f i l t e r s f o r t h e photography, t o p r i n t
photometric scales, and, i f p o s s i b l e , t o e l i m i n a t e i n s t r u m e n t a l e f f e c t s , i n o r d e r t o judge t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e r e f l e c t i v i t y of t h e A and B r i n g s and t h a t o f S a t u r n ’ s d i s k i n v a r i o u s p a r t s o f t h e spectrum. Barabashov and Saturn

Semeykin (1933) d i d j u s t t h i s i n t h e i r work, a l r e a d y mentioned i n #3.

/19 -

w a s photographed t h r o u g h r e d , yellow, and b l u e f i l t e r s i n t h e 20 c e n t i m e t e r
r e f r a c t o r i n t h e Khar’kov Astmnomical Observatory, system.
An “ a r t i f i c i a l S a t u r n , ” t h a t o f t h e i m a g e of t h e p l a n e t w i t h open r i n g s

using a m a g n i f i c a t i o n

corresponding t o t h e real i m a g e , b u t w i t h no g r a d a t i o n s of b r i g h t n e s s , w a s c u t from t h i c k w h i t e paper, and w a s photographed p a r a l l e l t o t h e instrument i n o r d e r t o exclude i n s t r u m e n t a l e r r o r s ( d i f f r a c t i o n , chromatic a b b e r a t i o n , scatt e r i n g i n t h e photographic l a y e r , e r r o r s i n t h e microphotometer, and o t h e r s ) . The a r t i f i c i a l p l a n e t w a s photographed through t h e same f i l t e r s , and w i t h t h e

same exposures, as w a s t h e r e a l Saturn.

Lighting of t h e a r t i f i c i a l p l a n e t w a s

s e l e c t e d s o t h a t t h e background and t h e d e n s i t y of t h e i m a g e on t h e n e g a t i v e s would be a s c l o s e a s p o s s i b l e t o t h e r e a l Saturn. The d e n s i t y d r o p a t t h e boundaries of t h e i m a g e on t h e microphotograms o f t h e a r t i f i c i a l p l a n e t w a s more o r l e s s smooth, r a t h e r t h a n s t e p - l i k e . This w a s

t h e n used t o c o r r e c t t h e microphotograms o f t h e real S a t u r n f o r e r r o r s a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e p l a t e s u s e d , t o t h e microphotometer, and t o t h e i n s t r u m e n t , and

t o o b t a i n a b r i g h t n e s s d i s t r i b u t i o n along t h e c e n t r a l meridian and along t h e i n t e n s i t y equator. The second of t h e s e g r a p h i c s ( F i g u r e 6 ) p r o v i d e s , i n p a r t i c u l a r , the

r a d i a l p r o g r e s s of b r i g h t n e s s i n t h e eyes o f t h e r i n g s along t h e i r major axes. The completeness w i t h which i n s t r u m e n t a l e r r o r s w e r e e l i m i n a t e d can b e judged by t h e p o s i t i o n and depth of t h e minimum, corresponding t o t h e C a s s i n i d i v i s i o n , and by t h e r a t i o of th.e A and B r i n g b r i g h t n e s s e s . The p o s i t i o n of t h e minimum The

c o i n c i d e s extremely w e l l w i t h t h e accepted d i s t a n c e o f t h e C a s s i n i d i v i s i o n . b r i g h t n e s s a t t h e minimum d i f f e r s somewhat from z e r o , and i n c r e a s e s w i t h de-

crease i n t h e wavelength, r e a c h i n g 0.08 t h e b r i g t n e s s o f t h e c e n t e r of t h e d i s k
i n t h e blue. The A r i n g b r i g h t n e s s w a s d e f i n i t e l y underestimated [ i n t h e yellow

by 2..06 below t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e B r i n g , whereas t h e v i s u a l s u r f a c e photo-

m

14

metry provided by Schoenberg (19211, t h e photographic photometry provided by Camichel (1958) using a yellow f i l t e r , and t h e photographic photometry of F r a n k l i n and Cook (1965), provide magnitudes of 0.59, tively].

m

0.47,

m

and 1.00 respec-

m

Thus, t h e e f f e c t of f u z z i n e s s of t h e image i s n o t done away w i t h

e n t i r e l y ( a p p a r e n t l y because t h e a r t i f i c i a l p l a n e t method does n o t c o r r e c t f o r d r i v e and atmospheric f l i c k e r e r r o r s ) and t h i s should b e remembered during i n t e r p r e t a t ion. The a u t h o r s found t h a t t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e most i n t e n s e A r i n g zone changed from 0.129 t o 0.150 and

0.154

( i n t e r m s of t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e c e n t e r The corresponding From

of t h e d i s k ) w i t h t r a n s i t i o n from r e d t o yellow and blue. magnitudes w e r e 0.585,

0.775,

and 0.862

f o r t h e most i n t e n s e B r i n g zone.

whence t h e r a t i o o f A and B r i n g b r i g h t n e s s e s i n t h e r e d , yellow, and b l u e , were 0.221,

0.194,

and 0.179.

I n o t h e r words, t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e A r i n g

changed l e s s t h a n d i d t h a t o f t h e B r i n g a s t h e wavelength decreased when

F i g u r e 6.

D i s t r i b u t i o n of b r i g h t n e s s along t h e i n t e n s i t y e q u a t o r f o r S a t u r n and f o r f u z z i n e s s of t h e image by t h e a r t i f i c i a l p l a n e t method (Barabashov and Semeykin, 1933).

r/R i s t h e d i s t a n c e from t h e c e n t e r of t h e d i s k i n p a r t s of t h e b/bc i s t h e b r i g h t n e s s as a percentage e q u a t o r i a l r a d i u s of t h e p l a n e t . of t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e c e n t e r o f t h e d i s k . Curves 1, 2, and 3 were c o n s t r u c t e d f o r photographs i n which r e d , yellow, and b l u e f i l t e r s , r e s p e c t i v e l y , had been used.

15

equated t o t h e c e n t e r o f t h e d i s k .

Note t h a t F r a n k l i n and Cook (1965) o b t a i n e d f o r t h e r a t i o of A and B r i n g

0.398 and 0.403, w i t h a probable e r r o r o f 0.003,
brightnesses,

t h a t is, f o r a l l p r a c t i c a l purposes t h e r e w a s no d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e This

observed c o u r s e of t h e r e f l e c t i v i t y of b o t h b r i g h t r i n g s w i t h wavelength. q u e s t i o n , it would appear, i s i n need of f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n .

The B r i n g b r i g h t n e s s i n t e r m s of t h e c e n t e r o f S a t u r n ' s d i s k i n c r e a s e d g r e a t l y w i t h d e c r e a s e i n t h e wavelength, i n complete concordance w i t h t h e res u l t s o b t a i n e d by B e l o p o l ' s k i y and Tikhov. F i n a l l y , it w a s found (and t h i s a l r e a d y h a s been pointed o u t i n #3) t h a t i n b l u e l i g h t t h e space between t h e i n n e r edge of t h e C r i n g and t h e b a l l of S a t u r n h a s a b r i g h t n e s s d i f f e r i n g s i g n i f i c a n t l y from z e r o , i n d i c a t i v e of t h e presence i n t h i s space of evacuated, s e l e c t i v e l y d i f f u s i n g matter. This r e g i o n i s com-

p l e t e l y d a r k i n yellow and r e d l i g h t s , i n d i c a t i n g a s t r o n g dependence of b r i g h t n e s s on A , particles. and, as a r e s u l t , on t h e smallness o f t h e s i z e s of t h e d i f f u s i n g

It even i s p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e m a t t e r discovered i s gaseous i n n a t u r e .
r e f l e c t o r i n t h e Simeiz Observatory f o r

Shayn (1935) used t h e one-meter

spectrophotometry of t h e B r i n g w i t h a t i e - i n t o t h e sun, and t o c l a s s G s t a r s . S p e c t r a of S a t u r n ( d i s k and r i n g s ) , t h e Moon, t h e Sun, and of two c l a s s G dwarf

stars, 9 C e t i

and 51 P e g a s i ,

w e r e obtained.

The a u t h o r comments t h a t because

of t h e low a l t i t u d e of S a t u r n above t h e h o r i z o n ( t h e d e c l i n a t i o n of t h e body

w a s about -16") t h e image w a s n o t s u f f i c i e n t l y s t i l l .
2" t o

D e t a i l s of t h e o r d e r of
H e w a s un-

3" w e r e p a r t i a l l y washed out by nearby, b r i g h t e r , d e t a i l s .

s u c c e s s f u l i n o b t a i n i n g A and C r i n g s p e c t r a s u i t a b l e f o r measurement purposes. The spectrophotometric measurements w e r e made i n two s t a g e s : (1) comparison

of t h e d i s k and B r i n g s p e c t r a (using spectrograms w i t h a d i s p e r s i o n of

36 i / m m n e a r H 1;

Y

( 2 ) comparison of t h e s p e c t r a of Saturn, of t h e Sun, a n d

of 9 C e t i

(using spectrograms with low d i s p e r s i o n ) .

High d i s p e r s i o n spectrograms o f S a t u r n w e r e t a k e n f o r phase a n g l e s = O " . F J ~ . ~ ,O " 3 7 I . 7 , and 2'38l.5. Comparison w i t h t h e d i s k showed t h e marked

m e f f e c t of t h e phase of t h e B r i n g , comprising almost 0.30 i n t h i s cy i n t e r v a l (see #12 f o r a d e t a i l e d e x p l a n a t i o n of t h e e f f e c t of t h e phase of t h e r i n g s ) .

I t w a s discovered t h a t i n t h e i n t e r v a l o f wavelengths i n v e s t i g a t e d , (4260-6500
t h e magnitude of t h e e f f e c t of t h e phase d i d not depend on A , and t h a t t h i s w a s

1)

16

so w i t h t h e accuracy o f w i t h i n 0.01.

m

T h i s i s a n important c o n c l u s i o n f o r The measurement d a t a w e r e t h e n re-

i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e mechanism o f t h e effect. duced t o a s i n g l e & v a l u e and averaged.

The t i e - i n t o t h e sun and t o t h e stars p r e s e n t e d g r e a t e r d i f f i c u l t i e s . Without going i n t o d e t a i l , l e t u s simply p o i n t o u t t h a t t h e average from t h e comparisons made o f t h e spectrum o f S a t u r n ' s d i s k w i t h t h e s p e c t r a of t h e Sun, Moon, and 9 C e t i , w i t h A.

w a s t a k e n as t h e f i n a l behavior o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e s mQ ' % The v a l u e s o b t a i n e d f o r 9 Cetus w e r e c o n s i d e r e d t o be t h e ones most

f r e e o f s y s t e m a t i c e r r o r s , and w e r e t a k e n w i t h a weight of 2 i n t h e averaging. The c o n t r o l comparison o f t h e 9 C e t i and 51 P e g a s i s p e c t r a showed good

concordance i n t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e i r b r i g h t n e s s e s o v e r t h e spectrum. Knowing mB difference it i s e a s y t o f i n d t h e unknown 0 ' F i g u r e 7 shows t h i s g r a p h i c a l l y . A s w i l l b e seen, m - m does not
R + ,

-

and m

m

- mB' 8 depend on A i n t h e i n t e r v a l 4000
r i s e , ending n e a r 5700
t h a n t h e sun. ring.

-

@

B

4600 1, and f o r l a r g e 1 t h e r e i s a s l i g h t

1 .

Consequently, t h e B r i n g i s somewhat more yellow

The d i s k of S a t u r n , i n t u r n , i s much more yellow than t h e B

I n f a c t , as w i l l b e seen from F i g u r e

7, i n t h e i n t e r v a l of change i n

A i n v e s t i g a t e d (4000- 6500

1)
0

t h e magnitude mg

-

mh

changes

1.5, whereas t h e

m

change i n t h e magnitude o f m

-

mB i s 0.5.

m

The w i d e l y h e l d view a s t o t h e b l u e

c o l o r of t h e B r i n g i s based on i t s comparison w i t h t h e d i s k o f S a t u r n , which

i s much more yellow t h a n t h e sun.

From a l l of t h i s , Shayn came t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n

t h a t t h e B r i n g p a r t i c l e s should b e l o n g e r o r even much l o n g e r , t h a n t h e l e n g t h o f t h e l i g h t wave. There is no more r e c e n t work i n spectrophotometry o f S a t u r n ' s r i n g s . Cook

and F r a n k l i n (1965) found t h e b l u e and v i s u a l b r i g h t n e s s of t h e A and B r i n g s i n s t e l l a r magnitudes p e r s q u a r e second of arc i n t h e s o - c a l l e d UBV* system. m The r e s u l t was t h e same v a l u e f o r t h e c o l o r index, B V = +0.86, f o r b o t h m V = +0.64 ( S t e b b i n s and Kron, 1956), f o r S a t u r n rings. F o r t h e sun B m m +0.98, according t o F r a n k l i n and Cook (19651, and +1.04, according t o H a r r i s

/22

-

-

(1963).

Giving p r e f e r e n c e t o t h e d a t a f u r n i s h e d by Cook and F r a n k l i n i n t h e

case o f S a t u r n , w e come t o t h e c o l o r d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e o b j e c t s w e are i n t e r e s t e d i n a s compared w i t h t h e sun (see Table 3 ; t h e moon h a s been added a s a -- - _ _ - _ _ _ _ *UBV ( u l t r a v i o l e t blue v i s u a l ) i s a photometric system i n which t h e s t e l l a r magnitude i s found f o r each body i n t h r e e p a r t s of t h e spectrum, t h e u l t r a v i o l e t , t h e b l u e , and t h e v i s u a l .

-

-

17

t y p i c a l body i n t h e s o l a r system devoid of atmosphere).

I"o0

f

-

v e r y good concordance w i t h Shayn's s p e c t r o 0

..
0 0

photometry ( h i s c o l o r d i f f e r e n c e s f o r S a t u r n and f o r t h e B r i n g i n b l u e l i g h t a r e

./,n3U 4'TU -

OY77

and

- -la
t ! -

O?b,
0

r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , but h i s chief conclusion

0

: l

0

0

remains v a l i d from a q u a l i t a t i v e s t a n d p o i n t ; t h e B r i n g , i n any e v e n t , i s n o t b l u e because

. -

,'

CJJJ

LilU

SflJff G'i'Y3

6JJff

2

o f i t s i l l u m i n a t i o n by t h e sun. The s l i g h t i n c r e a s e i n t h e s p e c t r a l ref l e c t i v i t y of t h e B r i n g with increase i n

F i g u r e 7. Spectral r e f l e c t i v i t y and Of Saturn's disk o f t h e B r i n g ( s q u a r e s ) from Shayn's o b s e r v a t i o n s (1935).

1

noted i n t h e s e p a p e r s i s n o t , i n any e v e n t , Calculations

connected w i t h t h e i l l u m i n a t i o n o f t h e r i n g by S a t u r n ' s d i s k .

(see #21) show t h a t t h e i n t e n s i t y o f t h e i l l u m i n a t i o n by S a t u r n i s a t l e a s t
two o r d e r s of magnitude lower t h a n t h e i n t e n s i t y of t h e d i r e c t s o l a r l i g h t .
An

independent c o n f i r m a t i o n of t h i s f a c t i s Shayn's o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t no traces o f even t h e most powerful a b s o r p t i o n b e l t s observed i n t h e spectrum o f S a t u r n ' s d i s k w e r e discovered i n t h e spectrum of t h e r i n g .

TABLE 3

__
Saturn's disk A and B r i n g s Moon

Reference - -

~

__

____ -

+Of34
+0.22 +0.29

of00
0.00 0.00

Cook and F r a n k l i n (1965) Same H a r r i s (1963)

Nor can t h e evacuated "atmosphere"

( d u s t o r g a s ; see #13) b l a n k e t i n g t h e Maggini (1937) e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t

r i n g b e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e e f f e c t discussed.

/2 -3

it can o n l y r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e i n t h e c o l o r i n d e x f o r t h e r i n g s i n
t h e case o f extremely s m a l l e l e v a t i o n s o f t h e sun o v e r t h e i r p l a n e ( A

Z

1.5").

I t t h e r e f o r e i s more p l a u s i b l e t o a s s o c i a t e t h e c o l o r o f t h e B r i n g d i r e c t l y
w i t h t h e c o l o r of t h e s u r f a c e o f t h e r i n g p a r t i c l e s . vations Although i n f r a r e d obsert h e reflec-

(#lo)

show t h a t t h e p a r t i c l e s a r e covered w i t h h o a r f r o s t ,

t i v i t y o f i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c l e s (#19) i s not so h i g h t h a t it can be c o n s i d e r e d t h a t t h e h o a r f r o s t completely c o v e r s t h e i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c l e . Also p o s s i b l e i s

t h e f a c t t h a t t h e c o l o r of t h e p a r t i c l e i s a f f e c t e d by c o n s t a n t bombardment by micrometeorites and s o l a r corpuscles.

#lo.

I-f r a r e d Spectrometry n Kuiper

(1951) found t h a t a t 1 - 1.5 microns, t h e r e f l e c t i v i t y of t h e
Additional l a b o r a t o r y r e s e a r c h by t h i s same a u t h o r showed t h a t

r i n g s dropped s i g n i f i c a n t l y , and t h a t t h e i n t e n s i t y o f t h e spectrum w a s low f o r

1 > 1.5 microns.
( t = -78OC).

t h i s spectrum i s t y p i c a l o f a t h i n l a y e r of h o a r f r o s t d e p o s i t e d on d r y i c e I n terms o f magnitude of a b s o r p t i o n , t h i s i s t h e e q u i v a l e n t of a These f a c t s w e r e i n t e r p r e t e d by t h e o b s e r v e r

w a t e r f i l t e r 2/3 mm i n t h i c k n e s s .

a s t h e r e s u l t o f t h e presence o f h o a r f r o s t , o r of snow, on t h e s u r f a c e of t h e particles. Some y e a r s l a t e r Kuiper (1957 b ) made a second s e r i e s of o b s e r v a t i o n s

w i t h b e t t e r equipment, and t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s confirmed t h e previous r e s u l t s . Not t o o long ago t h e i n f r a r e d spectrum of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s was once a g a i n

i n v e s t i g a t e d by Moroz (1961) a n d by t h e team o f Shnyrev, Grechushnikov, and Moroz (1964). The former i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e i n t e g r a l r a d i a t i o n from S a t u r n , i n -

c l u d i n g t h e d i s k , and t h e widely opened r i n g s , i n t h e 0.9 t o 2.5 micron range. The t r a c e s showed i n t e n s i t y maxima a t 1.63 t o 1.80 and 2.0 t o 2.5 microns. Comparison w i t h t h e i n f r a r e d t r a c e o f J u p i t e r , o b t a i n e d using t h e same i n strument, l e d t o t h e conclusion t h a t t h e s e m a x i m a are a t t r i b u t a b l e t o S a t u r n ' s r i n g s , and n o t t o i t s d i s k . The r e f l e c t e d s p e c t r a of snow and h o a r f r o s t w e r e Hoarfrost c r y s t a l s are s m a l l e r t h a n snow The i n f r a r e d

s t u d i e d as p a r t o f t h e program.

c r y s t a l s , and a r e of t h e o r d e r o f 0.1 mm, o r s m a l l e r , i n s i z e . spectrum of t h e r i n g s i s c l o s e r t o t h e h o a r f r o s t spectrum.

Shnyrev, Grechushnikov, and Moroz used t h e i n f r a r e d i n t e r f e r o m e t r i c technique and obtained s e p a r a t e i n t e r f e r e n c e p a t t e r n s f o r t h e d i s k and f o r t h e rings. The a u t h o r s a p p l i e d t h e F o u r i e r transform t o t h e s e p a t t e r n s and The

c o n s t r u c t e d spectrograms of t h e s e o b j e c t s ( F i g u r e 8a).

1.4 micron band
The i n -

i n t h e r i n g spectrum t u r n e d out t o b e wider t h a n i n d i s k spectrum.

t e n s i t y a t 1.5 microns i n t h e r i n g spectrum was lower t h a n i n t h e d i s k spectrum. S i m i l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s could b e p r e s e n t i f t h e r i n g p a r t i c l e s con-

s i s t e d of i c e , o r w e r e covered by i c e . O t h e o t h e r hand, Mertz and Coleman (1966), who used a spectrometer n

19

I
F i g u r e 8.

L I

/micron

2

CJ

/micron

a I n f r a r e d s p e c t r a of r i n g s ( s o l i d l i n e s ) and o f S a t u r n ' s d i s k (dashed l i n e s ) , a c c o r d i n g t o Shnyrev, e t a l , (1964); b i n f r a r e d spectrum o f S a t u r n ' s r i n g s according t o Mertz and Coleman (1966); c and d l a b o r a t o r y s p e c t r a of i c e ( h o a r f r o s t ) and ,paraformaldehyde (powder), according t o Mertz and Coleman (1966).

-

-

-

w i t h a F o u r i e r t r a n s f o r m (Mertz, 1965) coupled t o a 61 inch t e l e s c o p e , a r e v e r y hard pressed t o f i n d agreement between t h e r i n g spectrum and t h e i c e p a r t i c l e hypothesis. These a u t h o r s found heavy a b s o r p t i o n i n t h e r i n g spec-

trum a t A = 1.66 microns ( F i g u r e 8 b ) , and t h i s w a s a s c r i b e d t o paraformaldehyde ( t h e spectrum of r e f l e c t i o n o f t h e l a t t e r h a s a s i m i l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c ; Figure 8d).

see

The a u t h o r s a r e not e n t i r e l y c o n f i d e n t t h a t t h e i r r e s u l t s a r e

c o r r e c t because t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s w e r e made when t h e r i n g openings w e r e very

s m a l l (16-17 October 1965, A = 3.6',

A' =

5.6'1,

s o t h e f a c t t h a t some p a r t

of t h e "spectrum o f t h e r i n g s " a c t u a l l y i s a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e h a l o of t h e d i s k cannot be excluded.

It i s proposed t h a t t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s be r e p e a t e d d u r i n g

t h e n e x t epoch o f l a r g e r i n g openings.

A s a m a t t e r of f a c t , t h e r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d by Mertz and Coleman a r e ext r e m e l y doubtful. F i r s t of a l l , t h e spectrum o f t h e r i n g s o b t a i n e d by

/25

Shnyrev, et a1 ( d u r i n g l a r g e opening) showed no t r a c e s o f a b s o r p t i o n a t 1.66 microns. Second, i f one makes a g r a p h i c a l summation o f t h e t r a c e s of t h e in-

f r a r e d s p e c t r a of r i n g s and d i s k , one e a s i l y o b t a i n s t h e 1.66 micron minimum observed by Mertz and Coleman ( a s w i l l b e seen q u i t e w e l l i n F i g u r e 8a). t e n d t o t h e view t h a t t h e e f f e c t of t h e s c a t t e r e d l i g h t from t h e d i s k w a s a c t u a l l y s u b s t a n t i a l d u r i n g t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s , and t h a t t h e r e is no b a s i s

We

20

- ... . . . . .

.. .

I I.

I

f o r t h e r e j e c t i o n of t h e i c e p a r t i c l e ( o r of p a r t i c l e s covered w i t h a l a y e r of

i c e ) hypothesis.

It might appear s t r a n g e t h a t t h e l a y e r of i c e c r y s t a l s h a s n o t y e t evaporated. Kuiper (1951) a n t i c i p a t e d t h i s o b j e c t i o n . Using t h e d a t a i n t h e I n t e r -

n a t i o n a l C r i t i c a l Tables, he e x t r a p o l a t e d t h e r a t e of evaporation of i c e a t t h e extremely low t e m p e r a t u r e s t h a t could b e p r e s e n t on t h e s u r f a c e of t h e p a r t i c l e s ( n e a r 60 t o 8OOK).

It w a s found t h a t when T = 70°K t h e evaporation

r a t e i s e x c e p t i o n a l l y low ( t h e p r e s s u r e of w a t e r vapor i s of t h e o r d e r of

mm H g ) .

A t t h e t i m e o f t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s (see

#15, below) t h e information

i s t h a t t h e t e m p e r a t u r e of t h e s u r f a c e of t h e p a r t i c l e s w a s about 65OK. #11.

-~

Polarization.
~

Lyot

(1929) found t h a t t h e A and B r i n g s w e r e not i d e n t i c a l i n terms of Ring B i s c l o s e t o e a r t h m a t e r i a l s , b u t t h e A r i n g

polarization properties.

h a s many s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The r e c e n t o b s e r v a t i o n s made by D o l l f u s (1963a) r e v e a l e d t h a t t h e l i g h t
r e f l e c t e d by t h e B r i n g i s p a r t i a l l y (1

-

6-10-3) p o l a r i z e d i n a p l a n e passing

through t h e sun and t h e e a r t h .

T h i s t y p e of p o l a r i z a t i o n i s i n concordance w i t h

t h e conclusion t h a t t h e p a r t i c l e s a r e covered w i t h i c e c r y s t a l s , or w i t h t h e more general i d e a t h a t t h e s u r f a c e l a y e r of a t y p i c a l p a r t i c l e c o n s i s t s of some t y p e of good r e f l e c t i n g powder. normal t o t h a t i n d i c a t e d above. There a l s o i s p a r t i a l p o l a r i z a t i o n i n a p l a n e This t y p e of p o l a r i z a t i o n i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e

p a r t i c l e s are e l o n g a t e d , or s t r i a t e d i n t h e d i r e c t i o n of t h e i r o r b i t a l motion. The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e p o l a r i z a t i o n of t h e A r i n g a r e more complex. #12. Luminance w i t h Phase Angle. Change i n -S u r f a c e ~~

Although the.maximum phase a n g l e a t S a t u r n ( t h e a n g l e Sun-Saturn-Earth)

i s not i n e x c e s s of 6.5",
g r e a t l y with phase.

t h e s u r f a c e luminance of t h e r i n g s changes very

The f i n d i n g of t h e phase f u n c t i o n of t h e luminance of In

t h e r i n g s w a s t h e purpose o f s e v e r a l series of photometric o b s e r v a t i o n s .

astronomy, o b s e r v e r s u s u a l l y e x p r e s s s u r f a c e luminance i n s t e l l a r magnitudes p e r u n i t a r e a ( p e r s q u a r e second o f a r c , f o r example) and p l o t it on a graph a s a f u n c t i o n of t h e phase a n g l e T h i s graph i s known as t h e phase curve.

-6 /2

Knowledge of phase c u r v e s f o r S a t u r n ' s r i n g s

i s as important as a knowledge of

21

t h e l i g h t curves f o r e c l i p s i n g double stars.

I n both c a s e s w e o b t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n

t h a t , a f t e r it has been d e c i p h e r e d , provides d a t a on t h e f e a t u r e s of s t r u c t u r e beyond t h e l i m i t s of r e s o l u t i o n of earth-bound t e l e s c o p e s , The first s y s t e m a t i c measurements of t h e s u r f a c e luminance of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s as a f u n c t i o n of
Cy

w e r e made p h o t o g r a p h i c a l l y by Hertzsprung (1919), and

v i s u a l l y by Schoenberg (1921) ( w i t h t h e a i d of h i s ffmicrophotometerrr;see Schoenberg,

1917).

Both o b s e r v e r s used t h e c e n t e r of t h e d i s k as t h e photoHertzsprung o b t a i n e d t h e s u r f a c e luminance of t h e A and B

m e t r i c standard.

r i n g s i n d i v i d u a l l y , and Schoenberg obtained t h e mean luminance of t h e A and B r i n g s (some s u b j e c t i v e magnitude n o t s t r i c t l y d e f i n e d by t h e o b s e r v e r ) . Schoenberg w a s n o t s a t i s f i e d w i t h h i s r e s u l t s and l a t e r on made a second series of o b s e r v a t i o n s (Schoenberg 1933), using t h e same photometer. d i f f e r e d from t h e .first i n many r e s p e c t s : and b l u e ) w e r e u s e d ; The second series

(1) f o u r f i l t e r s ( r e d , yellow, g r e e n ,

( 2 ) many more p o i n t s n e a r CY = 0;

(3) t h e o b j e c t measured

was t h e s u r f a c e luminance of t h e most i n t e n s e zone of t h e B r i n g . The observer found t h a t t h e phase curves o b t a i n e d using t h e d i f f e r e n t f i l t e r s showed no s y s t e m a t i c d i f f e r e n c e s . This opened up t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of p r e s e n t i n g

Schoenberg's d a t a i n t h e form of a s i n g l e phase curve less s u s c e p t i b l e t o random e r r o r s t h a n t h e c u r v e s o b t a i n e d when t h e f i l t e r s were used. o b s e r v a t i o n s of s u r f a c e luminance values w e r e n o t published. Complete t a b l e s of Schoenberg's

a r t i c l e c o n t a i n s b u t seven averages of t h e v a l u e s f o r each f i l t e r , and i n d i c a t e s t h e number of observed v a l u e s f o r each average, These averages m a k e it

p o s s i b l e t o compute t h e mean weighted luminance f o r a l l f o u r f i l t e r s as a f u n c t i o n of
(Y

(weight t a k e n i n accordance with t h e number of observed v a l u e s This mean v i s u a l phase curve f o r t h e B r i n g is one of t h e

f o r each f i l t e r ) . b e s t t o date.

Its e m p i r i c a l e q u a t i o n is i n t h e form
(12.1)

where

$ ,

is t h e s t e l l a r magnitude of t h e luminance* of t h e B r i n g ( s t e l l a r
~-~
~

-

The f r s t e l l a r magnitude of luminance" p, f r e q u e n t l y r e q u i r e d i n astrophotometry, is a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e conventional s u r f a c e luminance, b , by t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p $ = -2.5i0g b + c, where t h e value of t h e c o n s t a n t C depends on t h e u n i t s chosen. S p e c i f i c a l l y , i f b is expressed i n a p o s t i l b s ("white luxest'), and i f B is expressed i n s t e l l a r magnitudes p e r s q u a r e second of a r c , t h e n C = 13-92 22

*

I

II I

111

I

II

I1 I 111 1111111 I I1

magnitude/ square second of a r c ) ;
(Y

is t h e phase a n g l e a t S a t u r n (minutes of a r c ) .

H e r e w e have taken i t t h a t

c e n t e r ' where ' c e n t e r tude of t h e luminance of t h e c e n t e r of t h e d i s k of Saturn.

BB( 0 )

=

'

is t h e s t e l l a r magniEq.

L7 2

(12.1)

provides

a good approximation of Schoenbergls phase curve i n t h e i n t e r v a l (0°201 2
W should p o i n t o u t t h a t E q . e r i n g phase curve; (12.1) r e v e a l s an i n t e r e s t i n g f e a t u r e of t h e B
Cy,

2 6O30').

it is l i n e a r i n t h e c o o r d i n a t e s ( l o g

B B 1.

More r e c e n t photometric measurements of s u r f a c e luminance of t h e B r i n g a s a f u n c t i o n of 12 have been made by Lebedinets (1957) and F r a n k l i n and Cook

(1965).
Lebedinets used t h e photographic photometry methodology i n t h e form developed by Barabashov i n t h e Khar'kov Observatory. values a s f u n c t i o n s of
Cy

H e found 20 B r i n g s u r f a c e luminance

between oO.167.6 and 60.01.

The r e s u l t s are q u i t e depend-

a b l e , although random s c a t t e r i n g of t h e p o i n t s is q u i t e broad. F r a n k l i n and Cook measured t h e t o t a l luminous f l u x f o r S a t u r n , and f o r t h e widely opened r i n g s , and d i d so p h o t o e l e c t r i c a l l y . u l t r a v i o l e t , and r e d , were used. Four f i l t e r s , yellow, b l u e ,

I n o r d e r t o e v a l u a t e t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n of

f l u x e s from t h e d i s k and from t h e A and B r i n g s , t h e observers simultaneously obtained a s e r i e s of l a r g e - s c a l e , p h o t o m e t r i c a l l y c a l i b r a t e d n e g a t i v e s of S a t u r n on e f f e c t i v e wavelengths extremely c l o s e t o those f o r t h e p h o t o e l e c t r i c observations. These l a t t e r w e r e obtained by using a n o t h e r t e l e s c o p e . The photo-

graphs taken with t h e r e d and u l t r a v i o l e t f i l t e r s were u n s a t i s f a c t o r y , hence t h e observers s e l e c t e d only t h e yellow and blue (some 20 of t h e b e s t n e g a t i v e s i n each c o l o r ) . Without going i n t o f u r t h e r d e t a i l , l e t us simply p o i n t out t h a t t h e measurement of t h e o p t i c a l d e n s i t y of t h e r i n g s and of t h e d i s k appearing on t h e negat i v e s s e l e c t e d made i t p o s s i b l e t o determine (as a f u n c t i o n of CY) t h e percentage of luminous f l u x a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e d i s k and t o t h e r i n g s i n d i v i d u a l l y . nances t h e n were expressed i n B and V u n i t s on t h e UBV scale.* Lumi-

*

See t h e f o o t n o t e on page 17.

23

A obvious shortcoming i n t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s made by F r a n k l i n and Cook is n t h e i n d i r e c t method t h e y used t o o b t a i n t h e surface luminance of t h e r i n g s . The c a l c u l a t i o n of f i n a l luminance v a l u e s r e q u i r e d many i n t e r m e d i a t e r e d u c t i o n s t h a t could have i n t r o d u c e d s y s t e m a t i c e r r o r s , and t h e u s e of photographic photometry i n c r e a s e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y t h e p r o b a b l e e r r o r s i n t h e measurements. I n our view, t h e b e s t way t o i n d i c a t e t h e magnitude of t h e probable e r r o r s would be t o c o n s t r u c t A and B r i n g luminance phase curves d i r e c t l y from t h e photographic d a t a . The a u t h o r s d i d not do t h i s , u n f o r t u n a t e l y , and a l l of t h i s

d e t r a c t s from t h e c o n f i d e n c e o n e h a s i n t h e i r r e s u l t s , d e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t t h e d e v i a t i o n of t h e computed p o i n t s from t h e meancurve is s m a l l . The advantage

of t h e work done by F r a n k l i n and Cook however, l i e s i n t h e great number of observed luminance v a l u e s t h a t are more o r less uniformly d i s t r i b u t e d over t h e e n t i r e phase curve. The B r i n g phase c u r v e s obtained by Lebedinets, l i k e t h o s e of F r a n k l i n and Cook, a r e i n good concordance w i t h Schoenberg's curve

(1933), so it can
L8 2

be a s s e r t e d t h a t t h e b a s i c f e a t u r e s of t h e B r i n g phase curve now a r e q u i t e w e l l

known.

A t t h e s a m e t i m e , it is extremely d e s i r a b l e t o have a t least one s e r i e s

of p u r e l y p h o t o e l e c t r i c measurements of t h e s u r f a c e luminance of t h e A and B r i n g s i n d i v i d u a l l y , because such a s e r i e s would be a b l e t o d e t e c t f i n e r e f f e c t s t h a t now are masked by random and s y s t e m a t i c e r r o r s ,

L t us h a s t e n t o add t h a t t h e r e is no s a t i s f a c t o r y A r i n g phase curve i n e
e x i s t e n c e , and t h e s i t u a t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e c r a p e r i n g is even worse, because t h e r e is nothing a v a i l a b l e t h a t remotely resembles p r e c i s e measurements of i t s s u r f a c e luminance. Turning once a g a i n t o t h e observed B r i n g phase c u r v e , w encounter t h e e need t o reduce a l l t h e c u r v e s t o a s i n g l e z e r o [or t o a s i n g l e amplitude of phase changes i n t h e i n t e r v a l ( 0 , max t h a t no one has observed t h e r i n g when
Cy

Q

)I,
Q

The s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f i c u l t y h e r e is = 0, s o t h e only way t h e s u r f a c e b r i g h t -

n e s s , b B ( 0 ) , of t h e B r i n g when Schoenberg

= 0, can be o b t a i n e d is by e x t r a p o l a t i o n .

is t h e b r i g h t center ness of t h e c e n t e r of t h e d i s k , but i n e a r l i e r work he took b ( 0 ) as 1.10b B center'
where b The d a t a provided by F r a n k l i n and Cook, i n c l u d i n g a c e r t a i n number of

(1933) took it t h a t b B ( 0 ) = bcenter,

p o i n t s extremely c l o s e t o

= 0 , show t h a t e v i d e n t l y $,(O)

'center

Om. 06,

24

where $ is t h e s t e l l a r magnitude of t h e b r i g h t n e s s (see t h e f o o t n o t e page 22.) Taking a l l of t h i s i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n , w e can reduce a l l B r i n g phase curve o b s e r v a t i o n s t o a s i n g l e z e r o by comparing them w i t h Eq. comparison on t h e assumption t h a t @ B ( 0 ) = assumption, namely, t h a t @,(O) = @ center E q . (12.1), w e come t o t h e e x p r e s s i o n
$,(CY)

(12.11,

and basing t h e

-

Today t h e r e is a more b a s i c center' m 0 .06, i n which c a s e , r a t h e r than

- $,(O)

= 0.270

m

log

Cy

-

0?153
N w l e t u s change t h e o

(12.2)

where CY, as b e f o r e , is expressed i n minutes of a r c .

o r d i n a t e s of t h e Lebedinets and F r a n k l i n and Cook phase curves i n such a way t h a t f o r a s i n g l e , d e f i n i t e v a l u e of CY, w i t h t h o s e of Eq. (12.2). s a y J a , t h e y have

$,(a) values i d e n t i c a l
As will

W e a r r i v e a t t h e curve shown i n F i g u r e 9a.

be s e e n q u i t e r e a d i l y , t h e phase curves d e r i v e d by a l l t h e a u t h o r s are i n good concordance each with t h e o t h e r . The phase curve shape is very c h a r a c t e r i s t i c . down, somewhat c o n v e n t i o n a l l y , i n t o t h r e e s e c t i o n s : The curve can be broken
(1) t h e i n i t i a l s e c t i o n

(Oo 2

Cy

2 0'25')

w i t h a s t e e p , almost l i n e a r rise i n t h e s t e l l a r magnitude with

a;

( 2 ) t h e t r a n s i t i o n s e c t i o n (0'25'

<

- e 3'); Cy

and ( 3 ) t h e s a t u r a t i o n s e c t i o n ,

which, once a g a i n is almost a s t r a i g h t l i n e , but has a phase c o e f f i c i e n t t h a t

is much s m a l l e r t h a n i s t h e case f o r t h e i n i t i a l s e c t i o n .
L e t u s p o i n t o u t f u r t h e r t h e extreme a c u t e n e s s of t h e maximum f o r the b r i g h t -

n e s s CY = 0.

This p r o p e r t y s t a n d s o u t p a r t i c u l a r l y s h a r p l y i f p o l a r c o o r d i n a t e s

a r e used t o p l o t t h e phase f u n c t i o n curve (Figure 9b).

It s u g g e s t s t h a t w i t h i n

/30

t h e narrow i n t e r v a l of phase a n g l e s i n which t h e ground o b s e r v e r can i n v e s t i g a t e t h e r e f l e c t i v i t y of t h e r i n g s t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n of m u l t i p l e s c a t t e r i n g t o t h e r e s u l t a n t b r i g h t n e s s is small. A c t u a l l y , i n t h e m a j o r i t y of systems of m u l t i p l e

s c a t t e r i n g encountered i n n a t u r e , t h e tendency is toward s e v e r e smoothing of t h e f i r s t o r d e r phase f u n c t i o n maximum. The s h a r p e r t h e maximum, t h e f i r m e r t h e

b a s i s f o r supposing t h a t f i r s t o r d e r s c a t t e r i n g is I1operatinglt f o r t h e most part i n the particular direction. I n o r d e r t o e s t a b l i s h whether or n o t t h i s

argument is a p p l i c a b l e t o S a t u r n ' s r i n g s , w e m u s t know t h e mechanism respons i b l e f o r t h e observed change i n b r i g h t n e s s of t h e r i n g s w i t h phase.
As will

be p o i n t e d o u t i n #18, t h i s mechanism is t h e mutual shading of t h e p a r t i c l e s , one by t h e o t h e r . I n t h i s case m u l t i p l e s c a t t e r i n g is not s h a r p l y d i r e c t i o n a l 25

a

Figure 9.

Observed B r i n g phase curves ( a ) reduced t o a s i n g l e z e r o

[l

-

Schoenberg (1933; mean weighted v a l u e s f o r f o u r f i l t e r s ) ; 2

-

Lebedinets

(1957); 3 and 4

-

F r a n k l i n and Cook

(1965; blue and v i s u a l s t e l l a r magnitudes,

r e s p e c t i v e l y ) ] ; Luminance of B r i n g ( i n polar c o o r d i n a t e s ) .

(a) as a f u n c t i o n of t h e phase a n g l e

cy

The extreme a c u t e n e s s of t h e maximum when 1 = 0 2

f o r c e s one t o conclude t h a t i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n of s c a t t e r i n g of t h e h i g h e s t o r d e r s t o t h e t o t a l b r i g h t n e s s

is s m a l l .

26

i n nature.

Its r o l e reduces t o one of a t t e n u a t i n g t h e deepness of t h e shadows,
Cy

o r , and t h i s is t h e same t h i n g , of reducing t h e s h a r p n e s s of t h e peak when

= 0.

Q u a n t i t a t i v e e v a l u a t i o n s l e a d t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t i n t h e r e g i o n of t h e peak shown i n Figure 9b t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n of m u l t i p l e s c a t t e r i n g is n o t i n excess of 10 p e r c e n t , something t h a t h e n c e f o r t h w i l l s i m p l i f y g r e a t l y o u r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of observed facts.

#13.

Other Photometric Data Schoenberg (1921) d e t e c t e d a s y s t e m a t i c d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e luminance of

t h e eyes of t h e r i n g s .

The e a s t e r n eye w a s s t e a d i l y more luminous t h a n t h e The mean d i f f e r e n c e

western f o r one whole p e r i o d of o b s e r v a t i o n s (1913-1918).

m i n luminances w a s o .039.

This e f f e c t w a s confirmed by Fesenkov (1926, 1927,

19281, who found t h e e a s t e r n eye t o be more luminous t h a n t h e western by from
Om.06

t o Om.20.

D i f f e r e n c e i n luminances decreased w i t h i n c r e a s e i n r i n g open-

ing. Fesenkov used a r e v e r s i n g prism t o show t h a t t h i s e f f e c t is not physiol o g i c a l i n nature. The d i r e c t cause of t h e e f f e c t is unknown, but it should

be remembered t h a t t h e e a s t e r n eye d i f f e r s from t h e western i n terms of t i m e of i n s o l a t i o n . The p a r t i c l e s of t h e e a s t e r n eye only come o u t of t h e shadow

of t h e b a l l of S a t u r n , whereas t h e r e g i o n of t h e western eye is occupied by p a r t i c l e s s u b j e c t e d t o t h e e f f e c t of d i r e c t s o l a r r a d i a t i o n f o r approximately h a l f t h e p e r i o d of r e v o l u t i o n . The dependence of t h e s u r f a c e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e r i n g s on t h e a n g l e s of e l e v a t i o n of t h e sun and of t h e e a r t h , A and A ' , above t h e plane of t h e r i n g s was t h e s u b j e c t of wide-ranging i n v e s t i g a t i o n by Camichel (19581, who used t h e photographic method, and by Maggini (19371, who used t h e p h o t o e l e c t r i c method. Camichel's r e s e a r c h was conducted under e x c e l l e n t astronomical c l i m a t i c coriditions from t h e P i c du Midi Observatory. The s e r i e s of photographs (taken

w i t h a yellow f i l t e r ) cover t h e p e r i o d 1943-1957, or approximately h a l f of t h e o r b i t a l p e r i o d of Saturn. between 26 t o 27Q. The change i n A and A ' w a s from between 2 t o 3" t o

L31

R e s o l u t i o n , e s t i m a t e d by photographing double stars, w a s

01t.4.

Microphotographs t a k e n along t h e major a x i s of t h e r i n g s d e t e c t e d a conThis i n d i c a t e s

s i d e r a b l e amount of r e s i d u a l luminance i n t h e C a s s i n i d i v i s i o n . t h a t t h e i n f l u e n c e of halation

is n o t n e g l i g i b l y s m a l l .

F i g u r e 10 shows t h e 27

luminance of t h e A and B r i n g s , as c o r r e c t e d by u s f o r t h e phase dependence by using Eq. (12.11, and p l o t t e d as a f u n c t i o n of A. Despite t h e considerable

s c a t t e r i n g of t h e p o i n t s , t h e r e d u c t i o n i n t h e B r i n g luminance w i t h r e d u c t i o n i n t h e a n g l e of e l e v a t i o n A , is r e a d i l y s e e n . effect

.

The o t h e r r i n g shows no marked

F i g u r e 10.

Luminance of t h e A ( c r o s s e s ) and B ( c i r c l e s ) r i n g s as a f u n c t i o n of t h e a n g l e of e l e v a t i o n of t h e sun above t h e i r p l a n e (Camichel, 1958).

I n t h i s r e g a r d , l e t u s n o t e t h e v i s u a l r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d by Barnard

(1909),

i n accordance w i t h which t h e A r i n g can be more luminous t h a n t h e B r i n g when openings a r e s m a l l . The luminance v a l u e s o b t a i n e d by Camichel n e a r A = 2 t o underestimated because of halation,

3" are s i g n i f i c a n t l y
Maggini The r e s u l t s

s o a r e n o t completely dependable.

s t u d i e d t h e r e g i o n of v e r y s m a l l values of A p h o t o e l e c t r i c a l l y .

( a l s o c o r r e c t e d by us f o r phase e f f e c t ) a r e shown i n F i g u r e 1 as a f u n c t i o n of 1 A. A decreased from 2"06' t o 1'01' over t h e p e r i o d of o b s e r v a t i o n and A '

i n c r e a s e d from 0'38'

t o 3"Ol'.

Maggini noted a s h a r p d e c r e a s e i n r i n g lumi-

nance with r e d u c t i o n i n A .

Dependence of luminance on t h e angle of e l e v a t i o n This f a c t , as w e l l as t h e i n c r e a s e i n t h e

of t h e e a r t h , A ' , w a s n o t observed.

v i s i b l e opening over t h e p e r i o d of o b s e r v a t i o n , shows t h a t t h e darkening of t h e r i n g s w i t h r e d u c t i o n i n A is a r e a l e f f e c t , and is n o t t h e r e s u l t of i r r a d i a t i o n , The c o r r e c t n e s s of t h i s c o n c l u s i o n can be confirmed independently by t h e simultaneous i n c r e a s e i n t h e c o l o r e q u i v a l e n t f o r t h e r i n g s (curve J i n Figure 11). A t t h e s a m e t i m e , no d e f i n i t e dependence of J on A ' w a s observed, Coloration

of t h e r i n g s a t extremely s m a l l values of a n g l e of e l e v a t i o n of t h e sun probably

is i n d i c a t i v e of t h e s t r a t i f i c a t i o n of t h e r i n g p a r t i c l e s i n terms of s i z e along
t h e z - c o o r d i n a t e ; t h e percentage of s m a l l p a r t i c l e s i n c r e a s e s w i t h d i s t a n c e 28

from t h e mean p l a n e of t h e r i n g s .

I n o t h e r words, it is p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e r i n g s The f a c t t h a t it can c o n t a i n

are surrounded by t h e i r own type of ttatmosphere.lt a g a s component is n o t precluded.

W e s h a l l r e t u r n t o t h i s q u e s t i o n i n #23.

h fJUU

F i g u r e 11.

4200 - m5300 Om.75 and r i n g b r i g h t g e s s when = 4200 and 5300 A a s a f u n c t i o n

Color e q u i v a l e n t J = m

+

‘eff of t h e a n g l e of e l e v a t i o n of t h e sun (processed Maggini d a t a , 1937).

Camichel n o t only found a dependence of s u r f a c e luminance on a n g l e of e l e v a t i o n A , but a l s o some i n t e r e s t i n g azimuthal e f f e c t s : (1) t h e s u r f a c e lumi( 2 ) t h e r e is a

nance of t h e B r i n g d e c r e a s e s from t h e eyes t o t h e minor a x i s ;

s y s t e m a t i c d i f f e r e n c e between t h e n e a r e s t and f a r t h e s t ( w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e e a r t h ) branches of t h e A r i n g ; t h e n e a r e s t branch is more luminous i n t h e c a s e of t h e e a s t e r n e y e , and weaker i n t h e c a s e of t h e western.

#14.

-t i c a l Op

Thickness*

L33
( a ) observations

There a r e two methodsthat can be used t o a s s e s s t h i s important parameter, one t h a t c h a r a c t e r i z e s t h e degree of t r a n s p a r e n c y of t h e r i n g s : of t h e v i s i b i l i t y of S a t u r n ‘ s d i s k through t h e r i n g s ; o c c u l t a t i o n s of s t a r s by t h e r i n g s . The s t a r t i n g p o i n t f o r method ( a ) is t h e obvious r e l a t i o n s h i p

( b ) o b s e r v a t i o n s of t h e

* L e t u s r e c a l l t h a t t h e o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s of a p l a n e - p a r a l l e l l a y e r f o r a normally i n c i d e n t beam can be d e f i n e d by t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p To = - l n ( I / I o ) , w h e r e Io and I are l i g h t i n t e n s i t i e s b e f o r e and a f t e r t h e beam has passed through t h e = exp To. Payer. I n o t h e r words, ( P / I o )

-

29

l111111llI I

b'=bexp-( where

sin A + sin : A sin A sin A '

' 0

(14.1)

b'

is the visible surface brightness of that part of Saturn's disk covered by the ring under consideration and illuminated by the sun through this ring;

b

is the surface brightness of that part of Saturn's disk when it is not covered by the ring and is illuminated by the sun directly;

A and A'

are the angles of elevation of sun and earth above the pane of the rings;

To

is the optical thickness of the ring in a direction normal to its plane ,

Camichel's data (1958) permit the use of this formula to evaluate TOA, the optical thickness of the A ring. where b This observer found a mean of b

A = 0.57be,

and b are the surface brightness of the A ring and of Saturn's equae torial zone, respectively. The A ring is partially transparent, and Saturn's

A

polar zone can be seen through it,

Polar zone brightness i equal to 0,87b s when not occulted, sponding to 0.08b e e' From whence, and in accordance with Q. (14.1)

.

This creates additional brightness come-

= 2,30 (Ig 0, 37 2

0 420.0,426 - 18 0.08) A - _-- Oe5' 0,429 + 0,426
- - - --

(14.2)

where

0 4 9 and 0 4 6 are the mean values of the sines of angles A and .2 .2
timeof the observations used here. Evaluation of E q .

A0

at the

(14.2) will yield a correct order of magnitude, but can conhalation, and for which Camichel's

tain some degree of error attributable to data were not corrected (see #l3).

Let us take it that the minimum contrast

in brightness that could be observed in Camichel's observations was about 0 0 . .5 Accordingly, he was able to see the polar zone of Saturn through the A ring when b t = 0.05b

A = 0.028b e

.

Substituting this in Eq.

(14.11, we obtain 7

oA

= 0.7.

In a l l probability, the interval

05 .

< TO < 0.7

w i l l provide a q u i t e c o r r e c t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e v a l u e of t h e o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s of t h e A r i n g , b u t it i s d e s i r a b l e t o make f u r t h e r assessments, p r e c i s e l y corrected f o r halation. Method ( b ) , as h a s been p o i n t e d o u t , i s based on o b s e r v a t i o n s of o c c u l t a t i o n s of stars by t h e r i n g s . v i s u a l ones. To d a t e t h e o n l y types of such o b s e r v a t i o n s are

They have been made mostly by amateurs u s i n g low and medium powered

i n s t r u m e n t s (D

< < 50 c m ) .

H e r e w e w i l l c o n s i d e r t h e case of good i m a g e s ( f o r

d e t a i l s s e e Bobrov, 1962). Let u s suppose t h a t t h e r a d i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e i n t e n s i t y i n t h e i m a g e of a star i s i d e n t i c a l t o t h a t i n a d i f f r a c t i o n p i c t u r e of a p o i n t s o u r c e , b u t t h a t t h e f i r s t minimum o c c u r s a t r

t = r1

+ t,

where r

minimum, and t i s t h e a n g l e of turbulence.

Let b

r

is the f i r s t diffraction 1 be t h e surface b r i g h t n e s s of
r
be t h e minimum b r i g h t n e s s

t h e zone of t h e r i n g o c c u l t i n g t h e star, and l e t eb

of t h e image of t h e star needed i n o r d e r f o r t h e eye t o d i s t i n g u i s h it through the ring.
L e t u s n o t e t h a t t h e r a d i u s of t h e i m a g e of t h e star v i s i b l e through

t h e r i n g i s r,

< rA. I t i s obvious t h a t L . C; b , (C) = bt0 (Go) G2 cxp - (z,/sin

A');

(14.4)

where G

0

i s t h e equipupillary magnification;

b

G i s t h e m a g n i f i c a t i o n r e s o l v i n g t h e i m a g e of t h e star;
( G ) and ;( * G ) a r e t h e mean b r i g h t n e s s of t h e star when not o c c u l t e d o ( G m a g n i f i c a t i o n ) , and d u r i n g o c c u l t a t i o n ( G m a g n i f i c a t i o n ) , r e s p e c t i v e l y .

t

0

On t h e o t h e r hand

Remembering t h a t

r* = pe/2G,
where p

(14.6)

e

i s t h e a n g l e r e s o l v e d by t h e naked eye, s u b s t i t u t i n g Eq. (14.5) i n Eq.

(14.4), and changing from b r i g h t n e s s e s t o t h e i r s t e l l a r magnitudes p e r square
second, w e o b t a i n
TO

sin .4 = 7 [p,, - ?nlO 2.5 Ig 8 4-5 lg G f 2.5 lg f -1,036

(TJL)

- 1O:L12]. '

(14.7)
31

I111111IlI 1I Ill I lI

H e r e t h e function f ( r * / r

t

) s i g n i f i e s t h e p e r c e n t a g e of luminous f l u x from t h e
I n Eq.

p a r t of t h e s t e l l a r i m a g e bounded by r a d i u s r*.

(14.7) w e t o o k it t h a t
(1961);
The minimum

e '

= 120ff, based on t h e experiments made by Maksutov (1946) and Pavlov

that m

to

w a s t h e s t e l l a r magnitude of t h e star ( a t t h e z e n i t h ) .

c o n t r a s t E depends on t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e background. made t h e corresponding l a b o r a t o r y i n v e s t i g a t i o n s .

Sytinskaya

(1949)

The v a l u e of t d u r i n g t h e o b s e r v a t i o n can be e s t i m a t e d by u s i n g t h e DanjonCoude i m a g e q u a l i t y s c a l e , b e a r i n g i n mind t h a t t h e case of good images i s s a t i s f i e d by t h e c o n d i t i o n t h a t ( t / r l ) -? 1 2 /.

I

- -

--

--

I

. _

--

j

and r i n g s on 28 A p r i l

1957

Needless t o s a y , t h e assumptions on which Eq.
rough approximation of o c c u l t a t i o n c o n d i t i o n s .

(14.7) are based are but a

T h i s is why two of i t s s h o r t 4

comings w i l l be found i n a l l of t h e a v a i l a b l e observed d a t a i n which t h e e q u a t i o n

w a s used.

F i r s t of a l l , t h e computed v a l u e of

T

0

t u r n s o u t t o be somewhat The

/35

exaggerated as compared w i t h t h e v a l u e o b t a i n e d through method ( a ) .

d i f f e r e n c e d i s a p p e a r s i f w e change t h e l a s t term i n t h e e q u a t i o n , p u t t i n g i t equal t o -10 -81.

m

T h i s means t h a t o n l y 54 p e r c e n t of t h e luminous f l u x from

t h e star i s c o n c e n t r a t e d i n t h e c e n t r a l c i r c l e of t h e t u r b u l e n t i m a g e of t h e star, r a t h e r than

84 p e r c e n t ( a s i s t h e c a s e i n t h e c l a s s i c a l d i f f r a c t i o n p a t t e r n .
(14.7)).
Moreover, t h i s i s n o t t h e o n l y
T

and as we assumed i n d e r i v i n g Eq. possibility.

0 method ( a ) i s based, i s c o r r e c t o n l y for a p o i n t s o u r c e of l i g h t , whereas

S t r i c t l y speaking, Eq.

(14.1), on which o u r e s t i m a t e of

through

S a t u r n ' s d i s k i s an extended e x a g g e r a t i n g t h e t r u e v a l u e of

source.
T

D i s r e g a r d f o r t h i s f e a t u r e can l e a d t o

0

and i t is p o s s i b l e t h a t h e r e i n l i e s t h e r e a s o n

f o r t h e d i s c r e p a n c i e s discussed. Second, t h e numerical v a l u e s of
T

0

give a g r e a t e r random s c a t t e r .

It is

l i k e l y t h a t t h e above computed c o n c e n t r a t i o n of luminous f l u x i s

54 p e r c e n t

32

o n l y i n t h e middle, and t h e r e could be c a s e s when t h e r e could be a s i g n i f i c a n t d e v i a t i o n from t h i s magnitude.*

A t t h e same t i m e , o b s e r v a t i o n of a s t a r o c c u l t e d by t h e r i n g s undoubtedly

i s a s o l i d and f r u i t f u l method t o use t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s of
t h e r i n g s , t h e i r r a d i a l s t r u c t u r e , and t h e l i k e . The advantages of t h i s method

have n o t y e t a t t r a c t e d t h e a t t e n t i o n of t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l o b s e r v e r s . One of t h e most i n t e r e s t i n g of t h e o c c u l t a t i o n s occurred on 28 A p r i l The p a t h of t h e star (BD

1957.

-

20O4568; 8m.0) can be s e e n i n F i g u r e 12.

The pheno-

menon w a s observed v i s u a l l y be W e s t f a l l (see Heath, 1958) i n a 20 i n c h r e f r a c t o r ( m a g n i f i c a t i o n 320). The o b s e r v e r d i d n o t have a photometer and e s t i m a t e d t h e

change i n t h e magnitude of t h e star d u r i n g t h e o c c u l t a t i o n by eye.

W e have

attempted, i n F i g u r e 13, t o show t h e s e changes g r a p h i c a i l y i n accordance w i t h t h e q u a l i t a t i v e d e s c r i p t i o n given by Westf a l l .
H i s o b s e r v a t i o n s a r e important

/36

i n t h a t t h e y demonstrated f o r t h e f i r s t time t h e p a r t i a l t r a n s p a r e n c y n o t o n l y of t h e A r i n g , b u t of t h e B r i n g as w e l l ( a t l e a s t of i t s o u t e r zone and of a

small p a r t n e a r t h e c e n t e r ) .

F i g u r e 13 also shows t h a t t h e o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s

of t h e A r i n g changes markedly w i t h r , d e c r e a s i n g i n t h e c e n t r a l zone, and, i t

seems p o s s i b l e , having narrow l a n e s n e a r t h e outermost boundary of t h e e n t i r e
r i n g system. V i s i b i l i t y of occulted f t a r
6

Cassini division

Cassini division

II

Seen weakly

F i g u r e 13.

Schematic r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e change i n t h e b r i g h t n e s s of a s t a r d u r i n g i t s o c c u l t a t i o n by S a t u r n ' s r i n g s on 28 A p r i l 1958, observed v i s u a l l y by W e s t f a l l .

by comparing W e s t f a l l ' s r e s u l t s f o r t h e A OB r i n g with t h e r e s u l t s f o r t h e B r i n g . W e s t f a l l observed zones i n both r i n g s t h a t

Let u s attempt t o estimate r

w e r e n o t t r a n s p a r e n t f o r t h e star.
~

These m n e s w e r e wider i n t h e B r i n g .
~

Zones t h a t were p a r t i a l l y t r a n s p a r e n t f o r t h e star were observed i n both r i n g s . ~. ..._ - __ Note t h a t t h e v a l u e s of t h e magnitudes pe and E can change s i g n i f i c a n t l y , depending on o b s e r v a t i o n c o n d i t i o n s .

*

33

They were narrower i n t h e B r i n g .
T~~

W can conclude, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t i n g e n e r a l e

b u t n o t much. If T~~ i s OA we can take t h e average f o r t h e B r i n g as

is higher than

T

'

0.5

to

0.7 [ s e e Eq. (14.3)1,

T

OB-

1.

(14.8)

Some B r i n g zones are even more t r a n s p a r e n t . The methods d e s c r i b e d h e r e cannot be a p p l i e d t o t h e C r i n g because of t h e s p e c i f i c d i f f i c u l t i e s t h a t a r i s e i n connection w i t h i t s l a c k of b r i g h t n e s s . v a l u e s adopted f o r T The

oc

a l l a r e based on t h e o l d o b s e r v a t i o n made by Barnard (1890).

These were e s t i m a t e s of t h e a t t e n u a t i o n of t h e b r i g h t n e s s of I a p e t u s as a funct i o n of t i m e i n t h e shadow o f t h e C r i n g . Cook and F r a n k l i n (1958) made a deT

t a i l e d a n a l y s i s of t h i s o b s e r v a t i o n and concluded t h a t

oc

i n c r e a s e s monotoni-

c a l l y w i t h d i s t a n c e from t h e c e n t e r of S a t u r n from 0.0 f o r 911/3 t o 0.18 f o r

13'1 .2

.

#l5. Radiometric and RadioasAronomical . _ t a Da Kuiper

/3 7
I t w a s supposed t h a t t h e p a r t i c l e s

(1951) e s t i m a t e d t h e e q u i l i b r i u m temperature of a t y p i c a l p a r t i c l e

of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s t o be between

60"

and 70°K.

were covered by h o a r f r o s t and t h a t t h e y were screened p e r i o d i c a l l y from t h e sun by each o t h e r , ar.d by t h e b a l l of Saturn.

A t t h i s low temperature t h e Planckian

maximum of i n t r i n s i c h e a t r a d i a t i o n of the p a r t i c l e w i l l be

41-48 microns,

t h a t i s i n t h e wave band t h a t i s l o n g e r t h a n t h e r e g i o n of t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n window f o r t h e e a r t h ' s atmosphere. Consequently, h e a t r a d i a t i o n from t h e r i n g s

a t i n f r a r e d wavelengths can be observed o n l y by extra-atmospheric o b s e r v a t i o n s ,
and such o b s e r v a t i o n s have not y e t been made. Conversely, r a d i o a s t r o n o m i c a l o b s e r v a t i o n s of S a t u r n make i t p o s s i b l e , i n p r i n c i p l e , t o d e t e c t h e a t r a d i a t i o n from t h e r i n g s without going beyond t h e

l i m i t s of t h e e a r t h ' s atmosphere.

Moreover, r a d i o a s t r o n o m i c a l o b s e r v a t i o n s can

be used t o o b t a i n e s t i m a t e s of t h e o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s of t h e r i n g s a t r a d i o wavel e n g t h s , and t h e s e , i n t u r n , can be used t o make a r e a d y d e t e r m i n a t i o n of t h e t y p i c a l s i z e of a p a r t i c l e (we w i l l r e c a l l t h a t when 2rrp/h

< 1, where p i s t h e

r a d i u s of t h e p a r t i c l e , t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n f o r t h e system i n c r e a s e s s h a r p l y ) . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , p r e s e n t d a t a on r a d i o r a d i a t i o n from S a t u r n i s such t h a t one cannot do t h e s e t a s k s without ambiguity. d a t a i s of i n t e r e s t . S t i l l , d i s c u s s i o n of t h e a v a i l a b l e

34

Radio radiation from Saturn has been measured by Kutuza et al. (1965), at

8 mm, by Welch et al. (1966), at 1.53 cm, by Cook et al. (19601, at 3.45 cm, by Hughes (1966), at 6.0 cm, by Rose et al. (19631, at 9 4 cm, by Drake (19621, .
A
=

at 10.0 cm, by Davies et al. (l964), at 11.3 cm, and by Davies and Williams (1966), at 21.2 cm. The values for the brightness radio-temperature of Saturn, Tb, ob-

tained by these authors are shown in Figure 14 as a function of the wavelength (the open circles; the vertical lines show probable errors in the determinations rises with C h , although the conb siderable scatter in the points does not enable us to fix the law of rise with as cited in the articles).
A s will be seen, T

confidence.

The reason for the rise is the greenhouse effect (the larger A , the

deeper the layers of the atmosphere from which the radiation is being recorded), or the presence of a nonthermal component (radiation from the radiation belts, similar to that observed for Jupiter). If the second possibility is what

occurs, radio radiation from Saturn definitely should be polarized, and this is what has been found by Rose et al. (1963), at 9.4 cm. strong (20 These authors reported

*

8%) polarization with orientation of the electric vector parallel

to the axis of rotation of the planet (in the case of the corresponding radiation from Jupiter the electric vector is perpendicular to the axis of rotation; Zheleznyakov (1964) showed that the difference in orientation can be explained by the effect of the rings on the shape of the radiation belts). However, observaFor

tions made by other radio astronomers have not confirmed Rose's results.

example, Davies et al. (1964), observed no polarization at 11.3 cm, and arrived at the conclusion that its upper limit is less than 6 percent.
So, the question

138

is not completely settled, and further observations are needed in order to resolve it. But whatever the nature of the rise in T with Ch, it can be expected that b when 1 is small enough the radio brightness temperature of Saturn should be close to the infrared brightness temperature. Today we can place the old results ob-

tained by Pettit and Nicholson (19241, and by Menzel, Coblentz, and Lampland 125" to 130°K, as well as more recent observations by (1926), which yielded T b Murray and Wildey (1963), and by Low (1964, 1966), at infrared wavelengths. Murray and Wildey used a germanium photoresistance on a 19-inch reflector and worked in the transmission window between 8 and 13 microns.

-

No traces of infra-

red emission from Saturn were found, so it follows that in this band of

35

wavelengths T < lO5'K. L w measured o b t h e emission from S a t u r n w i t h an inf r a r e d photometer i n t h e C a s s e g r a i n l s focus of an 82-inch r e f l e c t o r i n t h e

P
I
. . 1 ..

I

McDonald Observatory a t h = 10 and 20 microns. found. This t i m e emission w a s

The corresponding T

w e r e 93

* 3OK,

b

values

confirming t h e c o r r e c t -

n e s s of t h e c o n c l u s i o n s reached by Murray and Wildey, and showing t h a t t h e o l d estimates of t h e i n f r a r e d b r i g h t n e s s temperature of Saturn a p p a r e n t l y w e r e exaggerated.
- I
.-L. L.. ...
J

The mean of Low's r e s u l t s is F i g u r e 14. B r i g h t n e s s temperature of S a t u r n a t r a d i o wavelengths. The c i r c l e s a r e f o r temperature normalized f o r t h e f u l l d i s k of S a t u r n ( t h e " c o l d , completely t r a n s p a r e n t " r i n g s hypothesis). The c r o s s e s and tria n g l e s a r e f o r temperature c a l c u l a t e d through JZq. (15.2) when TK = 30" and 65 OK ( t h e llwarm, p a r t i a l l y t r a n s p a r e n t " rings hypothesis). The h o r i z o n t a l arrow is t h e i n f r a r e d b r i g h t n e s s t e m p e r a t u r e a t A = 10 and 20 microns (Low, 1964, 1966) normalized f o r t h e p a r t of S a t u r n ' s d i s k n o t screened by t h e r i n g s . shown by t h e h o r i z o n t a l arrow a t t h e

/39
As
U

axis of o r d i n a t e s i n Figure 14.

w i l l be s e e n from t h e f i g u r e , a l l TL

estimates o b t a i n e d a t r a d i o frequenc i e s are h i g h e r t h a n t h i s v a l u e , b u t

it s t i l l i s hard t o s a y whether t h e
temperature found by Low is t h e asymptote t o which t h e r a d i o temperat u r e t e n d s w i t h r e d u c t i o n i n A. The

data still are too sparse f o r this.

L e t us t u r n now t o t h e q u e s t i o n of t h e thermal emission from t h e r i n g s . Low

(1966) n o t e s t h a t h i s v a l u e f o r t h e b r i g h t n e s s temperature of S a t u r n i s
H e does n o t provide numerical v a l u e s f o r r i n g

c o r r e c t e d f o r a b s o r p t i o n i n t h e r i n g s , which, i n h i s words, proved t o be very much c o l d e r t h a n S a t u r n ' s d i s k . t e m p e r a t u r e s , however.

So f a r as t h e r a d i o wavelengths are concerned, a l l of

t h e radioastronomers proceed from t h e assumption t h a t t h e emission s o u r c e i s t h e t o t a l a r e a of S a t u r n ' s d i s k when t h e y make t h e t r a n s i t i o n from t h e measured flow of t h e emission t o T T h i s , however, i g n o r e s t h e v i s i b l e a r e a of t h e r i n g s , b' n o t o n l y i n t h e e y e s , b u t i n f r o n t of t h e d i s k as w e l l . This is t h e e q u i v a l e n t

36

I
of t h e "cold, completely t r a n s p a r e n t " r i n g s . I n t h e g e n e r a l case, t h a t of t h e

"warm, p a r t i a l l y t r a n s p a r e n t " r i n g s , however, t h e mean r a d i o b r i g h t n e s s temperat u r e of t h e S a t u r n p l u s r i n g s system can be found through t h e e x p r e s s i o n (with an accuracy up t o f i r s t o r d e r s c a t t e r )
-

T=

1 -- [i - exp - (Totsin A')]Tr + [y 4-(I - y) esp - (To/sin A')] {Z XfY

),

(15.1)

where

T and T a r e t h e r a d i o temperatures of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s and d i s k ; r d i s t h e v i s i b l e area of t h e r i n g s ( i n t h e eyes and i n f r o n t of t h e d i s k ) ; x
y
7
0

is t h e area of t h a t p a r t of S a t u r n ' s d i s k n o t screened by t h e r i n g s ; i s t h e o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s of t h e r i n g s f o r a given wavelength; i s t h e a n g l e of e l e v a t i o n of t h e e a r t h above t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s .

A'

The magnitudes x and y are expressed i n percentages of t h e t o t a l a r e a of S a t u r n ' s disk. They have been t a b u l a t e d by Schoenberg (1929) a s a f u n c t i o n of A ' .

T / ( x + y ) , where T i s t h e b r i g h t n e s s b b temperature c i t e d by t h e r a d i o astronomers. Hence, t h e r a d i o temperature of t h e

It is n o t d i f f i c u l t t o see t h a t

7

=.

d i s k is T dTby

[ I - cxp - (zo/sin A')] Tr -. +- (I - i)c s p - @,,/sin A')
2

~

.

W e used

T = 3 0 ° K (W t h 7 r 0 measurements a g r e e with t h e

5.2) t o f i n d T v a l u e s f o r two assumptions, T = 6 5 ° K and d r taken as e q u a l t o 0 . 8 ) , i n o r d e r t o see how e x i s t i n g r a d i o
llwarm,

p a r t i a l l y t r a n s p a r e n t " r i n g s hypothesis.

The

corresponding p o i n t s a r e shown by t h e t r i a n g l e s and c r o s s e s i n F i g u r e 14.
As w i l l be seen from t h e f i g u r e , i n a l l b u t one c a s e t h e computed v a l u e s of

T

d

a r e h i g h e r t h a n t h e i n f r a r e d temperature of Saturn as found by Low; t h a t i s ,

t h e y agree with t h e l l w a r m , p a r t i a l l y t r a n s p a r e n t " r i n g s h y p o t h e s i s when T = 3 0 ° K , r a s w e l l a s when T = 6 5 " ~ . The p o i n t where t h e y a r e n o t i n agreement (1 =

r

3.45 c m ) is t h a t found by Cook e t a l . (1960), t h e first t i m e an o b s e r v a t i o n had
been s u c c e s s f u l i n d e t e c t i n g r a d i o emission from Saturn. Perhaps t h i s i s t h e e x p l a n a t i o n of why Cook's p o i n t i n F i g u r e 14 c l e a r l y "breaks" downward, as compared w i t h a d j a c e n t p o i n t s .

L40

It would appear t h a t t h e measurement provided an

I n f a c t , one should expect T exaggerated v a l u e f o r T b' b S u b s t i t u t i n g t h i s f i g u r e i n EQ. ( l 5 . 2 ) , w e f i n d 75°K and

-

l b ° K a t 1 = 3.45 c m .

1 1 6 " ~ o r Td when f
37

T = 65"~ and 30°K, r e s p e c t i v e l y . It can be t a k e n t h e r e f o r e , t h a t when T = r r 30°K, t h e llwarml' r i n g s h y p o t h e s i s s a t i s f i e s a l l t h e a v a i l a b l e o b s e r v a t i o n a l
d a t a , remembering t h a t t h e r i n g s are no more t r a n s p a r e n t a t t h e r a d i o wavel e n g t h s t h a n t h e y are a t t h e o p t i c a l wavelengths. T

r

=

6 5 " ~ t o o high a is

v a l u e , although t h i s conclusion is based on j u s t one p o i n t i n F i g u r e 14,

Cook's p o i n t .
A t t h e s a m e t i m e i t should be emphasized t h a t t h e

30°K v a l u e obtained h e r e

f o r t h e temperature of t h e r i n g s i s u n j u s t i f i a b l y low, s o t h e f a c t t h a t S a t u r n ' s r i n g s a r e more t r a n s p a r e n t a t r a d i o wavelengths t h a n t h e y are a t o p t i c a l wavel e n g t h s cannot be precluded. e x i s t i n g d a t a is t o reduce 7
0

I n f a c t , a l l t h a t need be done t o s a t i s f y a l l to

0.4 when T = 6 5 " ~ . F u r t h e r o b s e r v a t i o n s are
r
The most effecThe f i r s t would involve o b t a i n i n g long

needed i n o r d e r t o a r r i v e a t a f i n a l answer t o t h i s problem. t i v e o b s e r v a t i o n s .would be of two types.

s e r i e s of measurements of T as a f u n c t i o n of A ' . The second would involve b o b s e r v a t i o n s w i t h high a n g u l a r r e s o l u t i o n , t h e purpose being t o e s t a b l i s h t h e
shape and s i z e of t h e r a d i o e m i t t i n g r e g i o n , and t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of r a d i o b r i g h t n e s s i n it. If it should develop t h a t S a t u r n , l i k e J u p i t e r , has r a d i a -

t i o n b e l t s , t h e q u e s t i o n of t h e temperature of t h e r i n g s w i l l c a l l f o r a new d i s c u s s i o n , d i f f e r e n t from t h a t undertaken i n t h e foregoing.

IV. Model of t h e B Ring. -

-

P r o p e r t i e s of a Typical P a r t i c l e .

ri _ ~ . s #16. Absolute Surface B_g h t n e_s _of t h e B Ring _ The preceding c h a p t e r s have d e a l t w i t h o b s e r v a t i o n a l d a t a . about a n a l y z i n g a l l of t h i s primary information. of o u r a t t e n t i o n w i l l be t h e B r i n g .

L e t u s now set

A s b e f o r e , t h e primary o b j e c t

L e t u s , as o u r f i r s t s t e p , compute t h e

a b s o l u t e s u r f a c e b r i g h t n e s s , b ( O ) , of t h e most i n t e n s e zone of t h e B r i n g when B ~y = 0. Knowledge of b ( 0 ) w i l l make i t p o s s i b l e t o estimate t h e s p h e r i c a l B albedo* of a p a r t i c l e and t o draw some c o n c l u s i o n s a s t o t h e p a r t i c l e ' s n a t u r a l phase function. The term Itabsolute b r i g h t n e s s " w i l l be used i n t h e sense of
0

"brightness i n b

u n i t s , " where b

0

i s t h e b r i g h t n e s s of an a b s o l u t e l y white,

o r t h o t r o p i c a r e a , p o s i t i o n e d normal t o t h e i n c i d e n t s o l a r r a d i a t i o n a t t h e mean d i s t a n c e o f Saturn.** W s h a l l express b e
0

i n a v i s u a l system.

A s w a s noted i n #12, n o t t o o much credence can be placed i n t h e e x t r a p o l a t i o n of t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e r i n g t o cy = 0. The most r e a s o n a b l e t h i n g t o do

i s t o r e p r e s e n t t h e v a l u e as

BB(o) = B c
where p. 2 2 ) ; c i s t h e c e n t e r of S a t u r n ' s d i s k .

m - 0.06,

(16.1)

B i s t h e b r i g h t n e s s , expressed i n s t e l l a r magnitudes ( s e e f o o t n o t e on
Converting t h e magnitudes i n Eq.

(16.1)

i n t o conventional b r i g h t n e s s e s , w e o b t a i n b ( 0 ) = 1.06b B Thus, t h e t a s k i s reduced t o f i n d i n g b t h a t we c o n s i d e r t h e b
C C

.
in b
0

(16.2) units.

C

I t should b e . n o t e d

/42

used i n Eq.

(16.2)

as t h e photometric s t a n d a r d t o be a

magnitude t h a t i s completely s t a b l e w i t h r e s p e c t t o S a t u r n ' s a x i s of r o t a t i o n , and with change i n a n g l e s A and A ' . T h i s s t a b i l i t y i s not a b s o l u t e , of c o u r s e ,

b u t t h e many o b s e r v a t i o n s a l r e a d y made i n d i c a t e t h a t when t h e r i n g s a r e wide open, b
C

i s s t a b l e enough, as a r u l e , t o s e r v e as a good photometric s t a n d a r d .

* S p h e r i c a l albedo i s a dimensionless magnitude equal t o t h e r a t i o of t h e luminous f l u x s c a t t e r e d i n a l l d i r e c t i o n s by t h e body t o t h e luminous f l u x i n c i d e n t on it ( g i v e n t h e c o n d i t i o n t h a t t h e body i s i l l u m i n a t e d by a beam of p a r a l l e l The analogous magnitude f o r a p l a n e a r e a i s c a l l e d t h e p l a n e albedo. rays). I f t h e r a y s a r e i n c i d e n t on t h e a r e a i n a d i r e c t i o n normal t o i t , one can t h e n speak of t h e plane-normal albedo.
** B r i g h t n e s s , expressed i n b0 u n i t s , i s a l s o c a l l e d t h e llluminance f a c t o r , " or I f v i s i b l e albedo , I t i n astrophotometry. 39

Moreover, i n o u r c a l c u l a t i o n s b i n t h e end, e x p r e s s b (0)i n b

C

is o n l y an i n t e r m e d i a t e magnitude.

We w i l l ,

B

0 C

u n i t s , and bo i s i n f a c t s t a b l e .

Absolute measurements of b and p h o t o g r a p h i c a l l y ,

w e r e made by Sharonov (1935, 19391, v i s u a l l y

and by Lebedinets

(1957) p h o t o g r a p h i c a l l y , by comparing

t h f s magnitude w i t h t h e b r i g h t n e s s of a w h i t e s c r e e n i l l u m i n a t e d by v e r y weak solar radiation. B r i g h t n e s s w a s reduced t o a v i s u a l system i n t h e photographic

work done by Sharonov

(1939).

Lebedinets used f o u r f i l t e r s ( r e d , yellow, green,
C

and b l u e ) and o b t a i n e d t h e r e s p e c t i v e f o u r b

values.

From t h e s e one can deduce

a single b

C

v a l u e i n a v i s u a l system, proceeding from t h e s t a n d a r d curve f o r T h i s procedure

v i s u a l a c u i t y , and t h e e f f e c t i v e wavelengths f o r t h e f i l t e r s . r e s u l t s i n t h e d a t a l i s t e d i n Table

4.
TABLE

4

Observer Sharonov ( 1935) Sharonov ( 1939) Lebedinets Photographic Photo graphi c
I
---A-

0.68
0.48
~

(1957)

- _ _

Absolute measurement t e c h n i q u e s a r e complicated, and i n v o l v e many i n t e r mediate o p e r a t i o n s w i t h a l l of t h e s y s t e m a t i c and random e r r o r s i n h e r e n t i n such o p e r a t i o n s , t h e magnitude of which it i s d i f f i c u l t t o estimate. T h i s i s pre-

c i s e l y why t h e divergence i n t h e b /b v a l u e s l i s t e d i n Table 4 i s s o g r e a t . c o But one can r e a d i l y c a l c u l a t e b /b i n d e p e n d e n t l y , and e s t i m a t e t h e probable c o e r r o r i n t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s , by s t a r t i n g with t h e v i s u a l s t e l l a r magnitude of Saturn (without t h e r i n g s )

y,t h e

a r e a of S a t u r n ' s d i s k w ( i n seconds of a r c ) ,

and t h e darkening toward t h e limb of S a t u r n ' s d i s k , and which can be expressed by t h e r a t i o 'i;/bc, W obtain e where

'; i s t h e mean b r i g h t n e s s of S a t u r n ' s d i s k . i

(16.3
where E
(3

i s t h e b r i g h t n e s s of an o r t h o t r o p i c , a b s o l u t e l y w h i t e s u r f a c e placed

/43 -

a t a d i s t a n c e from t h e e a r t h normal t o t h e i n c i d e n t s o l a r r a d i a t i o n ( o u t s i d e t h e
e a r t h ' s atmosphere); F$

i s t h e mean d i s t a n c e of S a t u r n from t h e sun.

40

The v a l u e of E/b

C'

found from o b s e r v a t i o n s of t h e darkening toward t h e

limb of S a t u r n (Schoenberg, 1921; Barabashov and Chekirda, 1952; Lebedinets,

1957; Camichel, 1958), h a s a mean of 0.66f55%;
AU. The addend

"12
u)

= =

+

m 0 .89 f

7%; E(3

=

1.35-10 5
=

l x 5 5% ( b o t h v a l u e s t a k e n from Russel, 1916);
1 lux.

= 270" (Rabe, 1928);

5,

9.54

5.57 i s based on F a b r y ' s formula f o r a s t e l l a r magnitude of The probable e r r o r i s 5 percent.
= 0.62

S u b s t i t u t i n g a l l of t h e s e magnitudes i n Eq. (16.3) w i l l give ( b /b c o 5 22h, and, as a r e s u l t

(16.4) The middle of t h e i n t e r v a l i s v e r y c l o s e t o t h e r e s u l t o b t a i n e d i n Sharonov's second e f f o r t .

#l7. Model o f t h e __ Ring.
- =

.~.

Albedo of a P a r t i c l e .

The s p h e r i c a l albedo* of a t y p i c a l r i n g p a r t i c l e can be obtained by u s i n g t h e v a l u e b,(0)/bo from Eq.

(16.4) i f we know t h e magnitude of t h e phase i n t e Two a l t e r n a t i v e models

g r a l , q ( e x p r e s s i n g t h e a n g u l a r d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e l i g h t s c a t t e r e d by t h e p a r 7

t i c l e ) and i f we have s e l e c t e d some model of t h e r i n g . can e x i s t .

One of t h e models h a s p r o p e r t i e s such t h a t a t any p o i n t on t h e r i n g

normal t o i t s s u r f a c e one w i l l f i n d no more t h a n a s i n g l e p a r t i c l e
z
O

- 2
P

where z

0

i s the r i n g thickness; p is the p a r t i c l e radius.

I t i s n o t shown

as a t r u e e q u a l i t y because t h e p a r t i c l e s can complete s m a l l o s c i l l a t i o n s around
t h e middle p o s i t i o n s . system.f1 The a l t e r n a t e model can be w r i t t e n by t h e e x p r e s s i o n
z
0

W s h a l l c a l l t h i s model a " o n e - p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s e

% p The i n e q u a l i t y of Eq. (17.2)

(17.2) signi-

This i s a % a n y - p a r t i c l e

t h i c k n e s s system."

f i e s t h a t t h e i n c l i n a t i o n s of t h e p a r t i c l e o r b i t s t o t h e plane of t h e r i n g a r e not v e r y s m a l l . That i s ,

i $ L r __ ~~

(17.3

where i i s t h e mean i n c l i n a t i o n ; r i s t h e mean r a d i u s of t h e p a r t i c l e o r b i t . . _ ~ ~. . . . _ -_ * See f o o t n o t e , p. 39.

41

Recognizing t h a t

T

0

-

1, we s e e t h a t t h e Eq.

(17.2)

model can be c h a r a c t e r i z e d

/44 -

by f r e q u e n t c o l l i s i o n s between t h e p a r t i c l e s .

J e f f r e y s (1947b) drew a t t e n t i o n The energy d i s s i p a t i o n

t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e c o l l i s i o n s are i n p a r t i n e l a s t i c .

t h a t takes p l a c e as a r e s u l t of nonideal e l a s t i c i t y of c o l l i s i o n s r e s u l t s i n a s e c u l a r r e d u c t i o n i n i n c l i n a t i o n s and e c c e n t r i c i t i e s i n p a r t i c l e o r b i t s . Calculations led J e f f r e y s t o t h e conclusion t h a t over a period of t i m e t h a t w a s s h o r t as compared w i t h t h e a g e of t h e s o l a r system, S a t u r n ' s r i n g s should have been transformed i n t o a o n e - p a r t i c l e t h i c l m e s s system. But, as w i l l be seen i n

Chapter V , t h e d a t a from o b s e r v a t i o n s q u i c k l y i n d i c a t e i n f a v o r of t h e manyp a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s system. non-concordance Chapter V I w i l l take up t h e p o s s i b l e r e a s o n f o r t h e W will e

between J e f f r e y ' s r e s u l t and t h e r e a l r i n g s t r u c t u r e .

n o t , a t t h i s p o i n t , o p t i n f a v o r of e i t h e r model.

(a)
albedo, a

One-particle t h i c k n e s s system.
~

The upper l i m i t of t h e s p h e r i c a l T h i s i s t h e c a s e f o r microscopic

m a '

i s equal t o one f o r v i s u a l r a y s .

dielectric particles. Saturn's rings.

They w i l l be p a r t i c l e s of i c e (#lo) i n t h e c a s e of

But t h e v e r y concept of r i n g s c o n s i s t i n g o n l y of microscopic One of t h e major d i f f i c u l t i e s

p a r t i c l e s encounters very s e r i o u s d i f f i c u l t i e s .

i s cosmogonic i n n a t u r e .

Microscopic p a r t i c l e s would experience t h e s t r o n g i n -

f l u e n c e of p l a n e t o c e n t r i c r a d i a t i v e b r a k i n g , which i s analogous t o t h e atmospheric b r a k i n g of a r t i f i c i a l e a r t h s a t e l l i t e s and which would f o r c e t h e p a r t i c l e s t o f a l l i n t o t h e c e n t r a l body ( t h e p l a n e t ) . T h i s problem w a s reviewed by Radziyevskiy

(19521, who d e r i v e d t h e formula

t

=

0.95-10 7pR 2 G l n ( r o / r t ) ,

(17.4)

where 9 i s t h e p a r t i c l e r a d i u s (cm); 6 i s t h e p a r t i c l e d e n s i t y ( g / c c ) ;

R i s t h e d i s t a n c e of t h e c e n t r a l body from t h e sun ( A U ) ; t i s t h e t i m e i n t e r v a l
( y e a r s ) d u r i n g which t h e r a d i u s of t h e c i r c u l a r o r b i t of a p a r t i c l e w i l l dec r e a s e from r
0

to r

t-

Applying Eq.

(17.4) t o S a t u r n ' s r i n g s , Radziyevskiy i n t r o -

duced a c o r r e c t i o n f a c t o r t h a t took i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e s h i e l d i n g of t h e p a r t i c l e from d i r e c t S o l a r r a d i a t i o n by t h e b a l l of S a t u r n , and by o t h e r p a r ticles. The t r u e v a l u e of t t u r n s o u t t o be g r e a t e r t h a n t h a t computed through

Eq. (17.4) by a f a c t o r of approximately t h r e e .
Schoenberg and Cook

(1933) w a s of t h e o p i n i o n t h a t p could be 3.6 microns.

Franklin

(1965) a r r i v e d a t 310 microns i n t h e i r "Model II.!! S u b s t i t u t i n g t h e s e

42

values

f o r p i n Eq.

0 4 14.10~ km ( t h e p r e s e n t o u t e r l i m i t of t h e A r i n g ) , and rt = 7-10 km ( t h e pre-

(17.4), and t a k i n g 6 = 0.9 g/cm

3

( i c e ) , R = 9.54 AU, r

=

s e n t i n n e r l i m i t of t h e C r i n g ) , w e o b t a i n tively.

6.105 y e a r s and 5.107 y e a r s , respec-

I n o t h e r words, even i f p = 310 microns, a l l of t h e r i n g material

should have undergone complete renewal o v e r t h e p e r i o d o f time t h a t t h e s o l a r system h a s been i n e x i s t e n c e (-5.10

9

y e a r s ) some 100 t i m e s !

Another p o s s i b i l i t y

( a l s o of s l i g h t p r o b a b i l i t y ) i s t h a t t h e r i n g s are s e v e r a l o r d e r s of magnitude younger t h a n any typical body i n t h e s o l a r system. Thus, w e have e l i m i n a t e d f r o m f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n microscopic p a r t i c l e s , and w i l l now proceed t o look i n t o p a r t i c l e s of macroscopic s i z e ( p

&

5 3

cm).

It

can be expected t h a t t h e a c t i o n of m i c r o m e t e o r i t e s and s o l a r c o r p u s c u l a r r a d i a t i o n would have l e f t t h e s u r f a c e l a y e r of t h i s s o r t of p a r t i c l e v e r y rough, and t h a t i t would resemble t h e moonls s u r f a c e l a y e r (somewhat s i m i l a r t o I f c a s t l e s i n the air," and t h e l i k e ) . Consequently, t h e v a l u e c l o s e t o t h a t can be taken f o r t h e phase i n t e -

of t h e phase i n t e g r a l f o r t h e moon (q) = 0.5851,
g r a l , q, f o r t h e p a r t i c l e .

I t a l s o i s n a t u r a l t o suppose t h a t t h e s u r f a c e
T

l a y e r i s t h i c k enough f o r

0

=

0. 3

Moreover, we know t h a t t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e
M

r i n g i n opposition is [bB(0)/bol

0.65.

L e t u s r e c a l l t h a t w e do have a c a s e
T

i n t h e o n e - p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s system when

= T m 1. The i n d i c a t r i x f o r o OB t h e i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c l e w i t h t h e s u r f a c e l a y e r d e s c r i b e d above i s b a d l y asym-

m e t r i c a l , with t h e s c a t t e r maximum d i r e c t e d backward (toward t h e l i g h t s o u r c e ) . The s p h e r i c a l albedo of t h e p a r t i c l e i n t h i s system need n o t be high i n o r d e r t o Then we can i g n o r e m u l t i p l e s c a t t e r i n g from p a r t i c l e ensure t h a t b ( 0 ) = 0.65b B 0 t o p a r t i c l e , j u s t a s w e can t h e d a r k l a n e s between p a r t i c l e s ( e r r o r s have o p p o s i t e s i g n s and c a n c e l each o t h e r , a p p r o x i m a t e l y ) , and we can i d e n t i f y bg(0) with t h e mean b r i g h t n e s s of t h e d i s k of t h e p a r t i c l e i n t h e f u l l phase

.

(17.5
This approximation r e s u l t s i n a r e a d i l y o b t a i n a b l e m a j o r i z i n g e s t i m a t e of t h e s p h e r i c a l albedo of a p a r t i c l e i n t h e system. l e f t hand s i d e of Eq. particle (17.6) A c t u a l l y , t h e magnitude on t h e

(17.5) i s , by d e f i n i t i o n , t h e geometric albedo of t h e

43

But t h e geometric albedo of any body i s l i n k e d w i t h i t s s p h e r i c a l albedo by t h e relationship

where q i s t h e phase i n t e g r a l .

Consequently, i n o u r case w e can write

(17.8)
where t h e s u b s c r i p t s p and D are magnitudes t h a t e q u a t e t o t h e p a r t i c l e and t o t h e moon.

> a A s a m a t t e r of f a c t , i n t h e Eq. (17.5) approxig P gD. mation a = 0.65, whereas t h e t a b u l a t e d v a l u e i s a = 0.106 ( A l l e n , 1960). 9 P g D S i n c e t h e i n d i c a t r i x f o r t h e p a r t i c l e can be considered t o be c l o s e t o t h e i n d i Nw note t h a t a o c a t r i x f o r t h e moon, t h i s i n e q u a l i t y means t h a t t h e p a r t i c l e ' s r e f l e c t i v i t y i s h i g h e r t h a n t h e moon's. But g e n e r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , as w e l l as l a b o r a t o r y i n v e s -

t i g a t i o n s (Hapke and van Horn,

19631, s u g g e s t t h a t when t h e body h a s a l u n a r
I n such c a s e q /q P D

t y p e s u r f a c e , t h e e l o n g a t i o n of t h e i n d i c a t r i x (toward t h e l i g h t s o u r c e ) de-

creases w i t h i n c r e a s e i n t h e body's r e f l e c t i v i t y .
we can w r i t e t h e f o l l o w i n g i n p l a c e of Eq.

>

l , and

(17.8)

The v a l u e s o f a l l t h e magnitudes on t h e r i g h t hand s i d e a r e known, s o a l l t h a t needs t o be p o i n t e d o u t i s t h a t t h e a

g D

=

0.106 c i t e d above should be c o r r e c t e d
T h i s w i l l give a

f o r t h e e f f e c t of t h e moon's o p p o s i t i o n . when a g P
= 0.65+22h,

g D

=

0.145.

Then,

and a

SP D

=

0.067

a
In

SP P

> 0.30+22%.

(17.10)

#18 it w i l l be shown t h a t t h i s albedo i s t o o high t o be a b l e t o a s c r i b e
Consequently,

t h e t t l o g a r i t h m i c t t shape of t h e phase curve f o r t h e B r i n g t o t h e e f f e c t of shading i n t h e s u r f a c e l a y e r of an i n d i v i d u a l r i n g p a r t i c l e . the E . q system.

(17.10) r e s u l t i n d i c h t e s t h a t t h e B r i n g i s n o t a o n e - p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s

It now becomes of i n t e r e s t t o t u r n t o microscopic p a r t i c l e s w i t h a s p h e r i c a l
albedo c l o s e t o u n i t y . They appear t o be u n s a t i s f a c t o r y from t h e photometric To show t h i s , l e t u s cal'

p o i n t of view, a p a r t from cosmogonic c o n s i d e r a t i o n s .

c u l a t e t h e b r i g h t n e s s o f t h e l a y e r as a p p l i c a b l e t o d i e l e c t r i c p a r t i c l e s s c a t t e r e d

= 1, t h e b r i g h t n e s s SP o f t h i s l a y e r i s much less t h a n t h a t observed f o r S a t u r n ' s r i n g s , 0.65b0.

i n accordance w i t h M i e ' s formulas.

W e see t h a t even when a

I n t h i s c a s e we are n o t j u s t i f i e d i n i g n o r i n g t h e m u l t i p l e s c a t t e r i n g from p a r t i c l e t o p a r t i c l e because t h e albedo i s high. t h e r e f o r e should be w r i t t e n i n t h e form The r e s u l t a n t system b r i g h t n e s s

b = b 1 + Ab,
b r i g h t n e s s of f i r s t and h i g h e r o r d e r s of s c a t t e r i n g .

(17.11)
Since t h e c a l c u l a t i o n is

where t h e f i r s t and second summands d e s i g n a t e t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e r e s u l t a n t

being made f o r a o n e - p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s system and f o r t h e moment o f p r e c i s e

i s t h e geometric albedo of t h e p a r t i c l e . 1 known, t h e c a l c u l a t i o n i s r e a d i l y made through Eq. (17.7).
o p p o s i t i o n , t h e magnitude b

If q i s

The monochromatic phase f u n c t i o n of d i e l e c t r i c microscopic s p h e r e s w i t h i n d i c e s of r e f r a c t i o n m = 1.33 and approximately 130 ( W a l t e r , 1957, parameter H == 2rrp/h,

1-50 y i e l d s q v a l u e s t h a t v a r y from 1.72 t o
e t al.,

1959; Giese

1961), depending on t h e

where h i s t h e wave l e n g t h of t h e i n c i d e n t r a d i a t i o n , and W a l t e r ' s t a b l e s list t h e parameter n w i t h Assuming

p i s t h e r a d i u s of t h e sphere.

v a l u e s from 10 t o 400, and G i e s e ' s t a b l e s l i s t it from 10 t o 159.

1 = 0.555 micron,

w e o b t a i n p l i m i t s 0.9-35.4

microns and 0.9-14.1

microns, r e s p e c t i v e l y .

When w e u s e t h e d a t a i n t h e s e t a b l e s w e should take i n t o

c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e i n c i d e n t r a d i a t i o n is not monochromatic i n o u r c a s e , and t h a t p can have d i s p e r s i o n ( c o n s i d e r a b l e , i n a l l p r o b a b i l i t y ) . should be t a k e n f o r q , t h e r e f o r e , i s a mean v a l u e
a

What

around

7.15.

Assuming

SP

1, w o b t a i n e

bl

= a

g

=

1/7-15 = 0.14.

(17.12)

45

W e can e s t i m a t e t h e t e r m
scattering. systems.

A through formulas from t h e t h e o r y of m u l t i p l e b

U n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h i s t h e o r y h o l d s o n l y w i t h many-particle t h i c k n e s s
0 '

L e t u s take a n exaggerated v a l u e f o r T

s a y 3 , i n o r d e r t o avoid

u n d e r e s t i m a t i n g Ab.

Then t h e i s o t r o p i c phase f u n c t i o n w i l l y i e l d Ab/b

1

=

0.41

f o r a b s o l u t e l y r e f l e c t i n g p a r t i c l e s and wide open r i n g s ( A = A ' = 25O) [ i n o u r

case t h e l i g h t i s s c a t t e r e d forward, p r i m a r i l y , and t h i s r e d u c e s Ab/b
pared w i t h t h e i s o t r o p i c problem; t h e v a l u e of

1

as com-

0.41 used i n Eq. (17.11) t h e r e f o r e
So, t h e

should give some e x a g g e r a t i o n i n t h e e s t i m a t e of system b r i g h t n e s s , b u t , as

w i l l be seen below, t h i s merely served t o s t r e n g t h e n t h e argument].
t o t a l b r i g h t n e s s of t h e l a y e r i s

Comparing t h i s r e s u l t w i t h

cB(0) 0.65 =

( a s w e l l as w i t h t h e o t h e r i n b

0

units)

we s e e t h a t t h e system j u s t reviewed w i l l be less b r i g h t t h a n t h e B r i n g by a t l e a s t a f a c t o r of t h r e e . Thus, t h e o n e - p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s system c o n s i s t i n g of

microscopic d i e l e c t r i c s p h e r e s does n o t s a t i s f y t h e photometric d a t a . One can r a i s e t h e o b j e c t i o n t h a t microscopic p a r t i c l e s expected i n S a t u r n ' s r i n g s should be c r y s t a l s , r a t h e r t h a n t r u e spheres. phase f u n c t i o n c a l c u l a t i o n s f o r c r y s t a l s . Unfortunately, t h e r e a r e no

However, i f c r y s t a l o r i e n t a t i o n i s

c h a o t i c , t h e r e s u l t s should be c l o s e t o t h o s e f o r spheres.

If t h e o r i e n t a t i o n

i s s y s t e m a t i c , m e t e o r o l o g i c a l d a t a can be used ( o p t i c a l phenomena i n i c e c r y s t a l s
i n t h e e a r t h ' s atmosphere; s e e Minneart,

1958, f o r example).

These d a t a f a i l t o

i n d i c a t e back s c a t t e r i n g s t r o n g enough t o e n s u r e a high degree of b r i g h t n e s s for the B ring. Moreover, c r y s t a l s a r e i n c a p a b l e of c r e a t i n g t h e observed

fllogarithmic'l shape of t h e phase curve f o r t h e B r i n g w i t h i t s r a p i d drop i n brightness near
= 0.

The l a t t e r comment i s v a l i d as w e l l for microscopic,

opaque white s p h e r e s r e f l e c t i n g i n accordance w i t h Lambert's l a w ( a l t h o u g h t h e amount of l i g h t s c a t t e r e d backward i n t h i s c a s e i s s u f f i c i e n t ) . (b) Many-particle t h i c k n e s s system. T h i s i s t h e c l a s s i c a l case considered

/48 -

i n t h e t h e o r y of m u l t i p l e s c a t t e r i n g of l i g h t ( a f l a t l a y e r of s c a t t e r i n g medium with o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s
T
0

i n t h e d i r e c t i o n normal t o t h e l a y e r , t h e p a r t i c l e s Formulas and t a b l e s can be found i n Chandrasekhar Table

of which have albedo a ) . Sobolev

(1953),

(19561, Chandrasekhar, E l b e r t , and F r a n k l i n (1952).

5 lists o u r
0.62 as t h e

c a l c u l a t i o n s f o r t h e B r i n g ( a g a i n when A = A ' = 25').

W selected e

46

mean v a l u e of b g ( 0 ) , r a t h e r t h a n the results.

0.65.

T h i s produces no s i g n i f i c a n t change i n

TABLE 5
f o r second 1 md h i g h e r orler s c a t t e r i n g
c

~-

___

70

b, (0)
- . .

a

Ab b

Under study

_ _

1 1 1 1
3

0.62 0.48 0.76 0.62 0.62
0.62 0.62
0.62 0.62 0.62

0 0 0
0 0

1 1 1 1 1

+3 -3
0 0 0

1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 8 . 0 7 . 0.6

3.3
2.7 4.9
4.0 3.7

0.24

03 .1
0.20
0.17 0.31 0.08 0.14 0.12 0.08 0.06

E f f e c t o f bg ( 0 E f f e c t o f -r0 E f f e c t of x Effect of a

4.4 4.1 5.5 6;s 7.9

1

I n Table 5 ,

T

0

i s t h e o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s of t h e l a y e r , b g ( 0 ) i s t h e b r i g h t n e s s

of t h e l a y e r i n o p p o s i t i o n , a i s t h e s p h e r i c a l albedo of a p a r t i c l e i n t h e l a y e r , x(lT) i s t h e v a l u e of t h e phase f u n c t i o n of p a r t i c l e x(y) for time when t h e a n g l e of s c a t t e r i n g y = n, t h a t i s , a l s o i n o p p o s i t i o n and bb/b

i s t h e r a t i o of t h e
The follow-

brightness a t t r i b u t a b l e t o multiple s c a t t e r i n g t o t o t a l brightness.

i n g parameter w a s used t o c a l c u l a t e s c a t t e r i n g of o r d e r s h i g h e r t h a n t h e f i r s t

and i s a measure of t h e e l o n g a t i o n of t h e i n d i c a t r i x .

x1 i s equal t o zero i n

t h e c a s e of i s o t r o p i c s c a t t e r i n g , i s p o s i t i v e f o r an i n d i c a t r i x w i t h forward e l o n g a t i o n , and n e g a t i v e f o r an i n d i c a t r i x with backward e l o n g a t i o n . corresponds t o an i n d i c a t r i x w i t h extremely g r e a t e l o n g a t i o n . x1 = 3 A s w i l l be seen

I 1

/49

from t h e d a t a l i s t e d i n t h e t a b l e , t h e dependence of x ( T ) and Ab/b on x1 i s weak, s o i n f u t u r e c a l c u l a t i o n s it can be t a k e n t h a t m u l t i p l e s c a t t e r i n g i s i s o tropic

.

The phase f u n c t i o n x ( y ) w a s normalized such t h a t i t s mean v a l u e over t h e e n t i r e sphere w a s x ( y ) 4.

-

I n o r d e r t o avoid any c o n f u s i o n , l e t u s p o i n t o u t

t h a t i n astrophotometry t h e n o r m a l i z a t i o n of t h e phase f u n c t i o n i s d i f f e r e n t , t h a t i s , it i s t a k e n t h a t x(T) = 1 f o r any shape of t h e i n d i c a t r i x . In t h i s

47

IllI

case t h e magnitude i n t h e f i f t h column i n Table 5 is x ( n ) E ( y ) = l f i ( y ) = 4/q,
where q is t h e phase i n t e g r a l [and f o r t h e c a l c u l a t i o n of which i t a l s o i s t a k e n t h a t x(n) =

11.

There is y e t a n o t h e r comment t o be made, one based on p r i n c i p l e , i n addit i o n t o t h e p u r e l y formal comment a l r e a d y made. Table The magnitude of a l i s t e d i n

5 i s n o t t h e albedo of an i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c l e i n t h e system, s t r i c t l y

speaking, b u t t h e albedo of an element of t h e volume of t h e system c o n t a i n i n g a s u f f i c i e n t l y l a r g e number of p a r t i c l e s , a c c o r d i n g t o t h e d e r i v a t i o n of t h e formu-

l a s of t h e t h e o r y of m u l t i p l e s c a t t e r i n g .
a w i t h t h e albedo of t h e p a r t i c l e .

W i n t r o d u c e an e r r o r by i d e n t i f y i n g e

But i t i s obvious t h a t t h i s e r r o r w i l l be A t t h e end of #12 we

smaller t h e s m a l l e r t h e magnitude of t h e Ab/b r a t i o .

emphasized t h e fact t h a t t h e observed extreme s h a r p n e s s of t h e B r i n g phase funct i o n m a x i m u m when cy = 0 ( F i g u r e 9b) s u g g e s t s t h e primacy i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n of t h e e f f e c t s of f i r s t o r d e r s c a t t e r i n g ; t h a t i s , on t h e s m a l l n e s s of Ab/b as compared w i t h u n i t y . The r e s u l t s of t h e d i r e c t c a l c u l a t i o n s i n terms of t h e t h e o r y

of m u l t i p l e s c a t t e r i n g , as l i s t e d i n Table ab/b v a l u e i s n o t g r e a t e r t h a n 0.31, put a -

5 , confirm t h i s f a c t , so long as t h e
I t i s more r e a l i s t i c t o
There i s no o b j e c t i o n t o iden-

even when a = 1.

0.6 t o 0.7, and t h e n Ab/b

=

0.06 t o 0.08.

t i f y i n g a w i t h t h e albedo of an i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c l e under s i m i l a r circumstances. A f t e r t h e s e n e c e s s a r y comments, l e t u s proceed t o t h e s u b s t a n t i v e a n a l y s i s of t h e d a t a i n Table

5.
T
0

and b ( 0 ) v a l u e s l i s t e d i n t h e t a b l e as parameters B In known from o b s e r v a t i o n ( t h e accuracy of which i s w i t h i n d e f i n i t e bounds). W w i l l consider t h e e such c a s e t h e d a t a i n t h e t a b l e e n a b l e u s t o e s t a b l i s h what t h e x(n) and Ab/b v a l u e s f o r some a ought t o be s o t h a t , when o b s e r v a t i o n s w i l l be obtained. conclude t h a t : 1. Microscopic, d i e l e c t r i c , d i f f r a c t i n g ( c o n s e q u e n t l y t r a n s p a r e n t ) s p h e r e s 1, x(n)

1, a b ( 0 ) v a l u e s a t i s f y i n g t h e B In turn, t h i s w i l l m a k e it possible f o r us t o
T
0

-

f o r which a -

- 0.56

(Walter, 1957, 1959; Giese e t a l , 1961) do n o t satis-

f y t h e many-particle t h i c k n e s s models, because t h e y cannot provide t h e observed b B ( 0 ) value. 2. A b s o l u t e l y w h i t e s p h e r e s , s c a t t e r i n g i n accordance w i t h Lambert's l a w almost s a t i s f y t h e minimum observed v a l u e bB(0) = 0.51 of E q .

[x(n) = 2.71,

(16.4).

48

A t t h e same t i m e , a = 1 i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e s p h e r e s are microscopic and have a f r e s h i c e surface. R e c a l l i n g t h a t cosmogonic c o n s i d e r a t i o n s l e a d t o a v e r y s h o r t

/50

l i f e span f o r microscopic p a r t i c l e s i n S a t u r n ' s r i n g s , w e should suppose t h a t t h e s o l e s o u r c e of p a r t i c l e s such as t h e s e i s t h e f r a c t i o n a t i o n of macroscopic p a r t i c l e s when t h e y c o l l i d e w i t h each o t h e r . Consequently, t h e per-

centage of microscopic w h i t e p a r t i c l e s i n t h e t o t a l m a s s of t h e r i n g ought t o b e small.

3.

The preceding c o n c l u s i o n can be expressed i n a d i f f e r e n t way.

The

main m a s s of t h e B r i n g i s made up of macroscopic p a r t i c l e s .

It can be a n t i c i -

p a t e d t h a t because of t h e c o n s t a n t a c t i v i t y of m i c r o m e t e o r i t e s and of s o l a r c o r p u s c u l a r r a d i a t i o n on t h e s u r f a c e of t h e p a r t i c l e s , t h e i r phase f u n c t i o n w i l l be extremely c l o s e t o t h e moon's phase f u n c t i o n , f o r which, w i t h t h e e f f e c t of opposition taken i n t o consideration, x(n) =

9.43.

For t h e same r e a s o n s , it can

be a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t t h e s p h e r i c a l albedo of a t y p i c a l macroscopic p a r t i c l e of t h e B r i n g w i l l be s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s t h a n u n i t y . this. Actually, a r i n g with
T
0

The d a t a i n Table

5 confirm
0.6 and

= 1, and c o n s i s t i n g of p a r t i c l e s with a =

x ( n ) = 7.9,

w i l l have a s u r f a c e b r i g h t n e s s b g ( 0 ) = 0.62 when A = A ' = 25".

F i n a l l y , i t can be s t a t e d t h a t a many-particle t h i c k n e s s system having t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e B r i n g , and c o n s i s t i n g p r i m a r i l y of macroscopic p a r t i c l e s with a phase f u n c t i o n s i m i l a r t o t h a t of t h e moon ( r e f l e c t i n g s u r f a c e i n terms of m a s s ) w i l l have an albedo f o r t h e p a r t i c l e s of

- 0.5

- 0.6

(17.15)

or approximately double t h a t of t h e o n e - p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s system.

#18. The Mechanism Responsible- r t h e Observed Ring Phase Curve fo
Three e x p l a n a t i o n s have been advanced f o r t h e shape of t h e phase curve observed f o r S a t u r n ' s r i n g s .
1.

They are, i n h i s t o r i c a l sequence:

mutual shading of t h e p a r t i c l e s ( S e e l i g e r , 1887, 1893; s e e as w e l l a

d e t a i l e d review of t h e s e p a p e r s , w r i t t e n by Schoenberg, 1929);
2.

d i f f r a c t i o n of l i g h t by an i n d i v i d u a l r i n g p a r t i c l e (Schoenberg, 1933); t h e shadow e f f e c t on t h e s u r f a c e l a y e r of an i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c l e

3.

( e h r e l s , 1956, 1957; Gehrels e t a l , 1964; Hapke, 1963; Hapke and van Horn, 1963). W e s h a l l c a l l i t t h e Gehrels-Hapke e f f e c t , f o r purposes of b r e v i t y .

49

The observed phase curve c a n be a t t r i b u t e d t o one of t h e s e e f f e c t s , or t o combinations of them.

L e t u s a t t e m p t t o estimate t h e r e l a t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n of each e f f e c t t o t h e
r e s u l t a n t phase curve. of f a c t , i n The c o n t r i b u t i o n of d i f f r a c t i o n i s small.

/51

As a matter

#17 w e s a w t h a t a r i n g w i t h a r e f l e c t i n g surface a t t r i b u t a b l e mainly
Recalling t h a t

t o d i f f r a c t i n g p a r t i c l e s would be w e a k e r t h a n t h e B r i n g i n b r i g h t n e s s by more t h a n one s t e l l a r magnitude.

$,

- $,

x Om.6

(#1),w e can add

t h a t a r i n g such as t h i s w i l l be much weaker even t h a n t h e A r i n g . The c o n t r i b u t i o n of t h e Gehrels-Hapke e f f e c t too is s m a l l .

A s a m a t t e r of

f a c t , t h i s e f f e c t can give a phase curve resembling i n shape t h e phase curve f o r S a t u r n ' s r i n g s o n l y f o r t h e c o n d i t i o n t h a t t h e albedo of t h e p a r t i c l e i s v e r y low. T h i s can be seen q u i t e w e l l i n t h e example of t h e G a l i l e a n s a t e l l i t e s

of J u p i t e r , I o , Europa, Ganymede, and C a l l i s t o . a reasonable assumption t h a t q = q albedo v a l u e s of

H a r r i s ( 1 9 6 2 ) , proceeding from

D

=

0.585 f o r a l l t h e s e b o d i e s , found s p h e r i c a l
r e s p e c t i v e l y , f o r them.

0.54, 0.49, 0.29,

and 0.15,

The phase c u r v e s f o r t h e s a t e l l i t e s a r e q u i t e r e l i a b l y known from t h e e l e c t r o p h o t o m e t r i c o b s e r v a t i o n s made by S t e b b i n s and Jacobsen (1928). Only i n t h e

case of C a l l i s t o does t h e phase curve resemble t h e phase curve f o r t h e B r i n g
w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e ' t l o g a r i t h m i c t t behavior n e a r o p p o s i t i o n . I n t h e c a s e of t h e

o t h e r G a l i l e a n s a t e l l i t e s , t h e phase c u r v e s a r e p r a c t i c a l l y s t r a i g h t l i n e s , or a r e o n l y s l i g h t l y curved, w i t h a c u r v a t u r e t h a t remains almost unchanged with cy. But t h e main photometric f e a t u r e of C a l l i s t o i s i t s v e r y low albedo (0.15, as compared with 0.29 t o 0.54 f o r t h e o t h e r t h r e e s a t e l l i t e s ) . Another s a t e l l i t e

w i t h a phase curve resembling t h e phase curve f o r S a t u r n ' s r i n g s i s t h e moon (Gehrels e t a l , 1964).

I t s albedo t o o i s v e r y low (0.07).

T h e o r e t i c a l r e s e a r c h (Hapke,

1963) and l a b o r a t o r y experiments (Hapke and
In

van Horn, 1963) a l s o confirm t h a t t h e l l l o g a r i t h m i c f lbehavior of t h e phase curve n e a r o p p o s i t i o n can be observed o n l y i n t h e c a s e of b o d i e s w i t h low albedo.

p a r t i c u l a r , a r t i f i c i a l l a b o r a t o r y s u r f a c e s t r u c t u r e s i n t h i s c a s e should have a normal albedo n o t exceeding 0.15 would have a

( a s p h e r i c a l body w i t h a s u r f a c e such as t h i s

2 0.09).

A t t h e same t i m e , we s a w i n

#17 t h a t even a o n e - p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s system

with t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e B r i n g should have a

-

0.3,

and i n t h e c a s e of t h e

50

,

II I I I . 1 11 . 1 1.1 1 1

I

I111 II I

many-particle

t h i c k n e s s system (matching more c l o s e l y t h e real s t r u c t u r e of t h e approxi-

B r i n g ) t h e v a l u e of t h i s parameter should be i n c r e a s e d t o 0.5 t o 0.6,
mately. These f i g u r e s do n o t concord w i t h t h e s t r o n g Gehrels-Hapke

lllogarithmicfl

e f f e c t near opposition.

On t h e o t h e r hand, mutual shading i s t h e p r i n c i p a l e f f e c t r e s p o n s i b l e f o r
t h e observed shape and amplitude of t h e r i n g ' s phase curve. i n f a v o r of t h i s p o i n t of view are as follows: 1. The arguments r a i s e d

I t i s not mandatory t h a t r i n g p a r t i c l e s be microscopic.
I f t h e r a d i u s of a p a r t i c l e ,

I n t h i s regard,

/52

cosmogonic considerati-ons vanish.

p, h a s an o r d e r

of magnitude of a few c e n t i m e t e r s , or more, t h e l i f e of t h e r i n g s a t i s f i e s cosmogonic requirements.
2.

The s p h e r i c a l albedo of t h e p a r t i c l e can have any v a l u e between 0 and 1. to

S p e c i f i c a l l y , i t can be 0.5 b r i g h t n e s s of t h e B r i n g .

0.6,

t h a t i s , have a v a l u e s a t i s f y i n g t h e observed

3.

T h e o r e t i c a l phase c u r v e s f o r t h e e f f e c t of mutual shading can y i e l d exConcordance

tremely good concordance w i t h a v a i l a b l e o b s e r v a t i o n s of t h e B r i n g .

can be achieved when t h e v a l u e s of t h e t h e o r e t i c a l parameters a r e r e a s o n a b l e ( s e e , i n a d d i t i o n , Chapter V I I ) .

#l9. Conclusiogs--Cpncerning t h e S t- of t h e B Ring and P r o p e r t i e s of a ructure
~~ ~~

-~

Typical P a r t i c l e

So, i t i s more probable t h a t t h e p r i n c i p a l e f f e c t r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e shape
and amplitude of t h e phase curve f o r t h e B r i n g i s mutual shading. This postu-

l a t i o n l e a d s immediately t o c e r t a i n q u i t e s p e c i f i c c o n c l u s i o n s as t o r i n g s t r u c ture. F i r s t , t h e r i n g should be a many-particle t h i c k n e s s system. This is t h e
0 '

consequence of t h e requirement t h a t t h e p h y s i c a l t h i c k n e s s of t h e r i n g , e ought t o s a t i s f y t h e c o n d i t i o n

z

0

cy

1 sin

A,

(19.1)
I n Chapter V I 1 it w i l l be

where 1 i s t h e l e n g t h of t h e d a r k cone of t h e p a r t i c l e , and A i s t h e a n g l e of e l e v a t i o n of t h e sun above t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g . shown t h a t i f Eq.

(19.1) i s n o t s a t i s f i e d , t h e phase curve w i l l be almost a

straight line i n the interval 0

<

< 3'.

I t i s obvious t h a t t h e o n e - p a r t i c l e

t h i c k n e s s system can s a t i s f y t h e c o n d i t i o n of E q .

(19.1) o n l y when v a l u e s of A

1ll11l1 I Ill I I

are v e r y s m a l l .

A t t h e same t i m e , t h e observed phase curve f o r t h e B r i n g i s

extremely n o n l i n e a r i n t h i s i n t e r v a l t o A

-

28”.

Second, t h e mean d i s t a n c e between a d j a c e n t p a r t i c l e s ought t o be s h o r t enough t o provide f o r a comparatively high p r o b a b i l i t y of mutual shading. In

o t h e r words, t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e volume of t h e r i n g occupied by p a r t i c l e s , or t h e s o - c a l l e d v o l u m e t r i c d e n s i t y , D, should not be t o o s m a l l . Calculations

u s i n g t h e formulas from t h e t h e o r y of mutual shading (Chapter V I I ) reduce t o t h e condition

D

5 10-3.

(19.2)

Once t h e B r i n g model i s s e l e c t e d , it becomes p o s s i b l e t o d e s c r i b e t h e p r o p e r t i e s of a t y p i c a l r i n g p a r t i c l e . in S t r i c t l y s p e a k i n g , t h e y were d e s c r i b e d
T
0

#l7, when we reviewed t h e many-particle t h i c k n e s s system with

= 1, and

b r i g h t n e s s a t o p p o s i t i o n equal t o B r i n g b r i g h t n e s s .

With t h i s i n mind, we can

r e p r e s e n t a t y p i c a l B r i n g p a r t i c l e as a macroscopic, opaque, d i f f u s e l y r e f l e c t i n g body with a s u r f a c e l a y e r s i m i l a r t o t h e l u n a r s u r f a c e , and w i t h s p h e r i c a l albedo a

-

0.5 t o 0.6.

Macroscopic p a r t i c l e s w i t h t h e s e p r o p e r t i e s ( l l b l o c k s f f )should comprise t h e overwhelming p e r c e n t a g e of t h e m a s s and r e f l e c t i n g s u r f a c e of t h e r i n g , b u t t h i s does not p r e c l u d e t h e presence of s m a l l e r p a r t i c l e s ( l f d u s t 1 l )i n t h e volume of t h e r i n g . The l i f e of such system ( I t b l o c k s A c t u a l l y , although t h e

+

d u s t 1 ! ) can be q u i t e long, cos-

mogonically speaking.

w i l l be swept o u t of t h e

r i n g volume c o n t i n u o u s l y because of r a d i a t i v e b r a k i n g , t h e c o l l i s i o n s between Ilblocks” w i l l r e s u l t i n t h e fragmentation of t h e i r s u r f a c e l a y e r and t o t h e appearance of new Ildust p a r t i c l e s . ” system i n which 7
0

-

C o l l i s i o n s i n a many-particle t h i c k n e s s

1 should be f r e q u e n t

(#28). The presence of l l d u s t l fi n
(1937) p h o t o m e t r i c a l l y .
The

S a t u r n ’ s r i n g s w a s d e t e c t e d r e l i a b l y by Maggini

presence of t h e l l d u s t l l i s r e a d i l y apparent o n l y when t h e openings a r e extremely

small ( s e e F i g u r e 11).

52

V.

Ana _ -l y s i s of Observations Made During Extremely Small Ring Openings -Remarks

# . ntroductory a I

I t i s obvious t h a t o b s e r v a t i o n s of t h e r i n g s when openings a r e extremely
s m a l l ( i n c l u d i n g t i m e s when A , or A ’ ,
e q u a l s z e r o ) can p r o v i d e important addi-

t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e shape and n a t u r e of t h e r i n g s . F i r s t of a l l , t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s make it p o s s i b l e t o e s t i m a t e t h e p h y s i c a l t h i c k n e s s of t h e r i n g s , z ding t o z
0’ 0

.

[ L e t u s emphasize t h e f a c t t h a t a n g l e q , correspon-

as seen from t h e e a r t h , is uncommonly s m a l l , and cannot be r e s o l v e d
For example, i f z
0

by t h e l a r g e s t t e l e s c o p e s , even when i m a g e s a r e e x c e l l e n t . 1 km,
=

=

-4 1.4010 second of arc.

See #22, Eq.

(22.211.

There a r e two ways i n which t h e problem can be solved. 1. Observe t h e r i n g s when A ’ i s e x a c t l y e q u a l t o zero.
A t t h i s time t h e

r i n g s should be seen edge-on ( p r o v i d i n g t h e plane of t h e r i n g s has no s i g n i f i c a n t deformations of t h e f i g u r e - 8 ,

or o t h e r t y p e s ) , and t h e luminous f l u x from t h e

r i n g s should depend s o l e l y on t h e v a l u e of t h e i r p h y s i c a l t h i c k n e s s . 2. Observe t h e d a r k s i d e of t h e r i n g s ( t h e e y e s ) . The observer s h o u l d , i n

p r i n c i p l e , d e t e c t a b r i g h t , narrow, band c r e a t e d by t h e edge of t h e system, a t t h e limb of t h e s e m i - e l l i p s e of t h e r i n g s c l o s e s t t o t h e e a r t h . S i n c e t h e edge

i s i l l u m i n a t e d by d i r e c t s o l a r l i g h t , i t s t r u e b r i g h t n e s s , be, should be of t h e
o r d e r of b r i g h t n e s s of t h e B r i n g a t l a r g e openings, whereas t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e dark s i d e , b d , should be from 2 t o 2 1/2 o r d e r s of magnitude l e s s ( t h e subs c r i p t s ‘left and “ d f l d e s i g n a t e t h e edge and dark s i d e of t h e r i n g s , r e s p e c t i v e l y ) . r a t i o w i l l be g r e a t l y reduced A s a p r a c t i c a l m a t t e r , t h e magnitude of t h e b /b e d because of t h e apparent expansion of t h e image of t h e edge, b u t d e s p i t e t h i s f a c t , given t h e corresponding v i s i b i l i t y c o n d i t i o n s , t h e presence of a b r i g h t edge w i l l show up i n t h e form of some asymmetry i n t h e photometric s e c t i o n of t h e eyes. F u r t h e r d e t a i l s d e a l i n g w i t h t h e s e two methods of a r r i v i n g a t an observed

e s t i m a t e of z

0

w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n #22.

53

Other tasks of o b s e r v a t i o n s a t extremely small A and A ' a r e e x p l a i n i n g t h e s o u r c e s of i l l u m i n a t i o n of t h e d a r k s i d e , e s t i m a t i n g b /b (where t h e s u b s c r i p t d 1 'l1" d e s i g n a t e s t h e l i g h t e d s i d e of t h e r i n g s ) , s t u d y i n g t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of p a r t i c l e s by s i z e a l o n g t h e z-coordinate,

/55 -

s e a r c h i n g f o r a g a s , o r d u s t , atmosphere,

p o s s i b l y , b l a n k e t i n g t h e r i n g s , e s t i m a t i n g t h e o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s of t h e d i v i s i o n s , and o t h e r s . The m a j o r i t y of t h e s e problems can be s o l v e d because t h e p e r i o d s

when A and A ' have o p p o s i t e s i g n s provide t h e o b s e r v e r w i t h t h e d i s t i n c t p o s s i b i l i t y of s t u d y i n g t h e r i n g s i n d i f f u s e l y t r a n s m i t t e d l i g h t , r a t h e r t h a n i n d i f f u s e l y r e f l e c t e d l i g h t (as i s customary) #2l.

.

I l l u m i n a t i o n o f t h e Dark S i d e o f t h e Rings

(a)

I l l u m i n a t i o n of t h e d a r k s i d e o f t h e _ _ - _ Saturn. ball of -

Russel (1908)

w a s t h e f i r s t t o o b t a i n t h e c o r r e c t o r d e r of magnitude of t h i s e f f e c t .
c u l a t i o n can be expressed by t h e formula (bA/bl)
= 1/2

H i s cal-

[(I?R

2

2 2 sin P)/(Igr

2 sin p)] f

5

((Y

5

)f

P

((Y

P

)

(21.1)

where b ' i s a b r i g h t n e s s component f o r t h e d a r k s i d e a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e i l l u m i d n a t i o n of t h e r i n g s by t h e b a l l of S a t u r n ;

i s t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e l i g h t e d s i d e ( t h e most i n t e n s e zone of t h e B 1 r i n g when cy e- C Y " ) i
b

I

'z

and I

8

a r e t h e i n t e n s i t i e s of t h e l i g h t from S a t u r n and from t h e s u n ,

as observed from t h e e a r t h ;

R and r a r e t h e mean h e l i o c e n t r i c d i s t a n c e s of S a t u r n and t h e e a r t h ;
P and p a r e t h e apparent magnitudes of t h e p o l a r r a d i u s of S a t u r n for t h e
observer a t a given p o i n t on S a t u r n ' s r i n g s and on t h e e a r t h ;

are t h e phase f u n c t i o n s of t h e b a l l of S a t u r n and of a t y p i c a l P p a r t i c l e of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s ;
f and f

5

i s t h e phase angle a t S a t u r n ( i n t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l s e n s e ; t h a t i s , when
t h e sun i s taken as t h e l i g h t s o u r c e ) ;

i s t h e phase angle f o r t h e p a r t i c l e a t a given p o i n t a t t h e r i n g s ( i n a P s p e c i a l s e n s e ; t h e source of l i g h t i s t h e b a l l of S a t u r n ) . F i g u r e 15 i l l u s t r a t e s
(Y

the situation.

54

a

F i g u r e 15. C a l c u l a t i o n o f t h e illuminat i o n o f t h e dark s i d e o f t h e r i n g s by t h e b a l l o f S a t u r n [ s e e Eq. (21.111.
a schematic view o f t h e S a t u r n system with t h e dark side o f t h e r i n g s turned t o t h e e a r t h ; M i s a r i n g part i c l e ( t h e s i z e of the p a r t i c l e i s g r e a t l y exaggerview ated for c l a r i t y ) ; b from a p o i n t above t h e n o r t h p o l e o f Saturn.

-

-

The 1/2 i n Eq.

(21.1)

means t h a t t h e o b s e r v e r of t h e r i n g s sees o n l y h a l f Russell

of S a t u r n ' s d i s k ( " h a l f of t h e moon, h a l f s e t , " as Bond h a s p u t i t ) .

placed h i s " t e s t p a r t i c l e f 1 a t a p o i n t on t h e major axis of t h e e l l i p s e of t h e r i n g s a t a d i s t a n c e measured from t h e c e n t e r of S a t u r n equal t o t h e p o l a r diameter of t h e p l a n e t ( w e s h a l l c a l l i t t h e R u s s e l l point"). T h i s p o i n t i s on t h e B r i n g

a t a d i s t a n c e of some 8,000 km from t h e r i n g ' s o u t e r boundary, i n t h e b r i g h t e s t
zone of t h e e n t i r e r i n g system.
P =

50" a t t h e R u s s e l 1 p o i n t .

Taking p = 9ff.07, me

- m5
cy5

= -2Gm.60
= cyp

- 0m .88

=

-2F.48
= 2/7,

[from whence (I /I ) = 1.02-10-111,

' z e

(R/r)
M

=

9.539,

= 90", f 5 ( 9 0 " )

f (90" ) = 1/3, and p u t t i n g 2/7*1/3 P

1/10, approximately, R u s s e l l o b t a i n e d

(bA/bl) x 1/160. The a u t h o r of t h i s book reviewed t h e work done b y R u s s e l L

(21.2) H took i n t o e (21.11,

/56

c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e p r e s e n t day v a l u e s f o r t h e magnitudes contained i n Eq. and v e r i f i e d t h e c o r r e c t n e s s of t h e b a s i c assumptions.

The i n t e n s i t y of t h e

i l l u m i n a t i o n of t h e d a r k s i d e w a s c a l c u l a t e d f o r a s e r i e s o f p o i n t s along t h e major axis of t h e r i n g s , and along a s e c a n t normal t o t h e major axis and i n t e r secting it at theRussellpoint,

as w e l l as f o r t h e R u s s e l l p o i n t .

The r e s u l t s

of t h e review can be formulated as follows. The cy = 90" v a l u e f o r t h e R u s s e l l p o i n t i s i n a c c u r a t e . I t would be P more c o r r e c t t o measure cy from t h e d i r e c t i o n t o t h e photometric c e n t e r of gra1.

P

v i t y of t h e p l a n e t ' s c r e s c e n t , r a t h e r t h a n from t h e d i r e c t i o n t o t h e c e n t e r of S a t u r n ' s disk. point. (21.2). T h i s w i l l g i v e a c o r r e c t i o n f a c t o r of Acy =

14" f o r t h e R u s s e l l

The corresponding bh/bl

v a l u e w i l l t h e n be 40%g r e a t e r t h a n it i s i n

Analogous c o r r e c t i o n f a c t o r s can be i n t r o d u c e d f o r a l l t h e o t h e r p o i n t s .

55

,

...

. .

..

.. .

-..

.

..

.-

h - e s e n t day v a l u e s of m and p a r e -26 -73 ( A l l e n , 19501, and 811.80 8 (Rabe, 1928). When t h e y a r e s u b s t i t u t e d i n t o Eq. (21.1) i n p l a c e o f t h e v a l u e s 2. accepted by R u s s e l l , t h e r e s u l t i s changed by

m

6% i n a l l (on t h e lower s i d e ) .
is equivalent t o adopting
According t o Lambert's

3. R u s s e l l l s assumption t h a t f ( O o ) * f (90") = 1/10 9 P
Lambert's scatter l a w f o r S a t u r n , and f o r t h e p a r t i c l e .

law

f ( 9 0 ° ) = 0.318, so t h a t f ( 9 O o ) = f ( 9 O 0 )= 0.101.

Contemporary r e s e a r c h ( s e e

H a r r i s , 1963, s e c t i o n 8.5) i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e phase f u n c t i o n s o f l a r g e p l a n e t s
are, i n a l l probability, scattering. i n t e r m e d i a t e between t h e Lambert f u n c t i o n s and Rayleigh

/57 -

The l a t t e r y i e l d s f ( 9 O o ) = 0.24.

f ( 9 0 " ) f o r Venus h a s p r e c i s e l y

t h i s v a l u e (Danjon,

1949; t h e phase f u n c t i o n of Venus observed by him p r a c t i c a l l y

c o i n c i d e s w i t h t h e phase f u n c t i o n of t h e Rayleigh s c a t t e r i n g r i g h t up t o

a

=

looo).

So f a r as t h e phase f u n c t i o n of p a r t i c l e s of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s i s concerned, i t should be n e a r t h e phase f u n c t i o n of t h e moon, and t h e n f ( 9 O o ) = 0,08 ( R o u g i e r ,

1933).

However, t h i s v a l u e i s v a l i d o n l y when t h e a n g u l a r dimensions of t h e I n t h e c a s e uncler c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e h a l f - c r e s c e n t

l i g h t source a r e s m a l l .

v i s i b l e from t h e R u s s e l 1 p o i n t i s 30" i n a l t i t u d e and somewhat i n excess of t h a t i n a:ziimuth. A wide-angle source such as t h i s w i l l g r e a t l y reduce t h e shadow on

t h e s u r f a c e of t h e p a r t i c l e , and t h e r e s u l t a n t f ( 9 0 " ) w i l l be much l a r g e r t h a n P

0.08.
With a l l of t h i s i n mind, we c a l c u l a t e d t h e behavior of t h e d a r k s i d e b r i g h t n e s s i n t h e eyes ( a l o n g t h e major a x i s , and a l o n g t h e normal s e c a n t through t h e Russel p o i n t ) , u s i n g two assumptions

1)
where f

f

'z

(a)

= f P

(a)

= f L ( p ) and 2 )

f

5

(a)

= f

P

(Q) = f

P

(a),

( a ) and f ( a ) a r e t h e phase f u n c t i o n s of t h e Lambert s c a t t e r i n g and of L P Venus, r e s p e c t i v e l y . F i g u r e 16 i s a p l o t of t h e r e s u l t s f o r t h e " R u s s e l 1 secant."
Figure

16.

Theoretical d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e b r i g h t n e s s o f t h e dark s i d e of S a t u r n l s r i n g s along t h e s e c a n t p a s s i n g through t h e R u s s e l l p o i n t normal t o t h e major a x i s o f t h e r i n g s .

The s o l i d curve i s f o r t h e assumption t h a t S a t u r n ' s b a l l and t h e p a r t i c l e ref l e c t i n accordance with Lambert 1 s law. The dashed curve i s f o r t h e assumption t h a t t h e y r e f l e c t i n a manner s i m i l a r t o t h a t f o r Venus.

56

A s w i l l be s e e n , t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e d a r k s i d e d i m i n i s h e s w i t h d i s t a n c e
from t h e Russel p o i n t a l o n g t h e secant. ratio The mean magnitude of t h e b'/b d l f o r t h e Lambert. phase f u n c t i o n , and 3.6-10-3 f o r t h e phase f u n c t i o n

i s 5.4010'~
of Venus.

The bA/bl

r a t i o changes along t h e major axis i n t h e case of t h e Lambert

phase f u n c t i o n from 5 0 1 0 ' ~a t t h e o u t e r boundary of t h e A r i n g , t o 13-10'3 t h e i n n e r boundary of t h e B r i n g . (b) radiation.
-- Component~. -t h-b r i g h t n e s s of e

at

a t t r i b u t a b l e t o d i f f u s e l y transmitted s o l a r --

T h i s component can be e s t i m a t e d through formulas and t a b l e s t h a t are Table

p a r t of t h e t h e o r y of m u l t i p l e s c a t t e r i n g . c a l c u l a t i o n s f o r t h e A and B r i n g s . indicatrix.

6 lists t h e r e s u l t s of our

The c a l c u l a t i o n s w e r e made f o r a s p h e r i c a l

Because t h e i n d i c a t r i x f o r t h e s c a t t e r i n g of t h e r i n g m a t e r i a l i s

i n f a c t v e r y a s p h e r i c a l , and h a s backward e l o n g a t i o n , t h e a c t u a l b r i g h t n e s s e s should be lower t h a n t h o s e c a l c u l a t e d .
TABLE 6

-

-

-

-- O"35'

2"20'

0.M
0.01

0.01

0 35

2 20

0.04

2 20

0 35

0.04

0.01

0 35

2 20

0.01

0.04

I n Table 6 , b1Id i s t h e component o f d a r k s i d e b r i g h t n e s s c r e a t e d by t h e d i f f u s e l y transmitted s o l a r l i g h t . t r u e and apparent b r i g h t n e s s . The s u b s c r i p t s l l t r u e l l and .rlapprld e s i g n a t e

Apparent b r i g h t n e s s i s understood t o mean t h e

b r i g h t n e s s a t t e n u a t e d by atmospheric and i n s t r u m e n t a l wash o u t f o r t h e c a s e of v i s u a l o b s e r v a t i o n s made i n a t e l e s c o p e w i t h an a p e r t u r e of between

0.6 and 1.0

m e t e r when image q u a l i t y i s good.

W used t h e contour of b r i g h t n e s s d i s t r i b u e

t i o n i n t h e image of a star o b t a i n e d by Meinel (1963) f o r t h e r e d u c t i o n , t a k i n g

57

i t t h a t t h e c e n t r a l peak c o n t a i n s 30 p e r c e n t of t h e t o t a l luminous f l u x from
t h e star and t h a t t h e t e l e s c o p e can r e s o l v e a d u a l system w i t h components of equal b r i g h t n e s s d i s t a n t from each o t h e r by Ot1.375. Graphical i n t e g r a t i o n w a s

/58

used t o make t h e t r a n s i t i o n from a p o i n t s o u r c e of l i g h t t o a l i n e , and t o a band.

w a s c a l c u l a t e d f o r e q u a l p u p i l l a r y magnifioaThe magnitude of ( b t t /b d 1 aPP t i o n , and w a s not reduced f o r atmospheric and i n s t r u m e n t a l a b s o r p t i o n .
A s w i l l be seen from Table
smaller than b '

6 , when

ey

-

0.5, t h e b f r d component i s somewhat
T h i s d i f f e r e n c e i s even

and t h i s i s t r u e i n a l l cases, d' g r e a t e r f o r t h e backward e l o n g a t e d i n d i c a t r i x . (c)

S o l a r r a d i a t i o n d i f f u s e l y t r a n s m i t t e d Ahrough t h L C a s s i n i -~diyisiog; -

o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s of t ~ d i v i s ~ - o L e. t u s suppose t h a t t h e s c a t t e r i n g proper~

t i e s of t h e p a r t i c l e s f i l l i n g t h e C a s s i n i d i v i s i o n a r e i d e n t i c a l with t h o s e of
the particles f i l l i n g the B ring. The problem i s t o f i n d t h a t v a l u e of t h e op(T

/59

t i c a l t h i c k n e s s of t h e C a s s i n i d i v i s i o n
observational data:

oC d

) t h a t w i l l s a t i s f y t h e following

(1) v i s i b i l i t y of t h e e x t e r n a l b r i g h t condensation on t h e d a r k s i d e when

A S 1

-

2; '

( 2 ) v i s i b i l i t y ( a t s i t e s of e x t e r n a l b r i g h t c o n d e n s a t i o n s ) of d a r k s p o t s
when t h e r i n g h a s i t s i l l u m i n a t e d s i d e t u r n e d toward t h e e a r t h and A i s o f t h e o r d e r of 2; '

( 3 ) n o n - v i s i b i l i t y of t h e double b r i g h t l i n e of t h e C a s s i n i d i v i s i o n on
t h e d a r k s i d e of t h e r i n g s between t h e e x t e r n a l and i n t e r n a l condensations;

( 4 ) t h e s i g n i f i c a n t e x c e s s of t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e o u t e r condensations
over t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e d a r k s i d e . n a l condensations v i s u a l l y a r e S p e c i f i c a l l y , when A t

-

Oo!tO1, the exter-

6 t o 8 t i m e s b r i g h t e r t h a n t h e d a r k s i d e (Barnard,

1908a) ,
Our c a l c u l a t i o n s r e v e a l e d t h a t w e can o b t a i n s a t i s f a c t o r y concordance w i t h

is exceptionally s m a l l , oC d t h e v a l u e of t h e b r i g h t n e s s can be c a l c u l a t e d w i t h o n l y t h e f i r s t o r d e r s c a t t e r a l l of t h e s e p o i n t s when r o
T

-~

5 . 6 ~ . Because

i n g taken i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n . graphic form.

F i g u r e s 17 and 18 show some of t h e r e s u l t s i n

They confirm Barnard Is assumption t h a t t h e o u t e r condensations

c a n be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e l i g h t d i f f u s e l y t r a n s m i t t e d through t h e C a s s i n i d i v i -

58

sion.

L e t u s add t h a t t h e i n n e r condensations ( c o i n c i d i n g i n terms of p o s i t i o n

w i t h t h e C r i n g ) e v i d e n t l y can be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e l i k e d i f f u s i o n of l i g h t through o t h e r o p t i c a l l y t h i n zones, s p e c i f i c a l l y through t h e d i v i s i o n between t h e B and C r i n g s , and through t h e zone near t h e i n n e r p a r t of t h e C r i n g where
T~~

c a n be q u i t e s m a l l t o o '(Cook and F r a n k l i n , 19-58].

T h i s assumption i s s t r e n g -

thened by t h e f a c t t h a t some o b s e r v e r s with good i m a g e s ( A i t k e n , 1908b) s a w each of t h e i n n e r condensations twice.

1907; Barnard,

Figure

17. a

t h e C a s s i n i d i v i s i o n a s seen from t h e e a r t h when s i n A ' = 0.04; b t h e o r e t i c a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of apparent b r i g h t n e s s ( e x c e s s over d a r k s i d e b r i g h t n e s s ) along t h e major axis of t h e r i n g s ( t e l e s c o p e with 0.6 t o 1.0 meter, r e s o l u t i o n O'I.375; c e n t r a l peak of aperture s t a r image c o n t a i n s 30 p e r c e n t of t o t a l luminous f l u x ) .

-

--

-.
3
' \

Figure 18.

T h e o r e t i c a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e a p p a r e n t b r i g h t n e s s i n t h e image o f t h e dark s i d e o f t h e r i n g s along a s e c a n t normal t o t h e major a x i s a t a d i s t a n c e of 121l.9 from t h e c e n t e r o f S a t u r n ( o b s e r v a t i o n cond i t i o n s t h e same a s t h o s e i n t h e preceding f i g u r e ) .

1 component of b r i g h t n e s s from d i f f u s i o n o f l i g h t through t h e n o r t h and south branches of t h e C a s s i n i d i v i s i o n ; 2 summed b r i g h t n e s s from both branches; 3 component o f b r i g h t n e s s from dark s i d e o f A and B r i n g s when t h e C a s s i n i d i v i s i o n w a s missing

-

-

-

.

59

.... .

#22.

A n a l y s i s of Observations f o r E s t i m a t i n g t h e P h y s i c a l Thickngss of t h e Rings ~

(a)

Observations of d a r k s i d e .

The p r e s e n c e of a f u l l y i l l u m i n a t e d edge

of t h e r i n g s a t t h e boundary of t h e e l l i p s e c l o s e s t t o t h e e a r t h e v i d e n t l y should r e s u l t i n asymmetry i n t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of b r i g h t n e s s a l o n g t h e s e c a n t s o f t h e eyes normal t o t h e major axis, s o u r c e s of l i g h t i s Once a g a i n , assuming t h a t t h e r e s o l u t i o n of p o i n t

0l1.375, and t h a t t h e c e n t r a l hump of t h e s t a r image i n c l u d e s
l 9 a f o r a s e c a n t 1!tf1.O
Q

30 p e r c e n t of t h e t o t a l linninous f l u x from t h e star, w e o b t a i n t h e b r i g h t n e s s
d i s t r i b u t i o n shown i n F i g u r e when z
0

from t h e c e n t e r of S a t u r n

= 20 and 10 km.

When z

= 10 km, t h e b r i g h t n e s s o f t h e r i g h t maximum on

t h e r e s u l t a n t curve is

9 p e r c e n t h i g h e r t h a n t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e l e f t .

It i s

probable t h a t t h i s i s c l o s e t o t h e lower l i m i t of d e t e c t i o n by v i s u a l methods. F u r t h e r , i f it i s assumed t h a t t h e r e s o l u t i o n i s double t h e above (011.187), t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h i s same s e c a n t w i l l b e t h a t shown i n F i g u r e l 9 b (zo = 10 km). The peaks c r e a t e d by t h e C a s s i n i d i v i s i o n have much greater The r e s u l t is t h a t t h e

i n t e n s i t y i n t h i s c a s e t h a n t h e y do i n t h e p r e v i o u s one.

c o n t r a s t between t h e r i g h t and t h e l e f t m a x i m a remains almost t h e same (10 per;, cent)

.

a

Figure 19.

I n f l u e n c e o f z on t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f a p p a r e n t b r i g h t n e s s in t h e 0 dark s i d e i m a g e ( a l o n g a s e c a n t normal t o t h e major axis a t a d i s t a n c e o f 1 4 l l . O from t h e c e n t e r o f S a t u r n ) .

a

r e s o l u t i o n OIl.375. The bold f a c e and dashed c u r v e s are t h e t h e o r e t i c a l contours f o r e 20 and 10 km; b r e s o l u t i o n 011.187, z 10 km.

-

-

0 %

0 %

60

a

b

Figure 20.

Same as i n Figure 19, but f o r a s e c a n t p a s s i n g through t h e A r i n g z 10 km. ( d i s t a n c e from t h e c e n t e r o f S a t u r n l 9 I l . l ) ; a

-

r e s o l u t i o n 011.375;

b

-

o w

r e s o l u t i o n 011.187.

Conditions a r e more f a v o r a b l e along t h e s e c a n t p a s s i n g through t h e A r i n g eye, t h a t i s , outside t h e Cassini division. brightness distribution. F i g u r e 20 shows t h e corresponding

/62

E v i d e n t l y , asymmetry i n t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of b r i g h t n e s s
0

can be d e t e c t e d v i s u a l l y i n t h i s c a s e , even when z

=

5 km.

However, t h i s

e f f e c t w a s not noted a t t h e t i m e t h e o l d o b s e r v a t i o n s w e r e made (1907-1908, lg20-1921), nor w a s it noted d u r i n g t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l p a t r o l o b s e r v a t i o n s made

of S a t u r n i n (b)

1966.
The r i n g s t r a n s m i t a luminous f l u x t o t h e e a r t h I f t h e r e c e i v e r is sensi-

Observations of edge.

from t h e edge o n l y when A ' i s p r e c i s e l y equal t o zero.

t i v e enough t o d e t e c t t h e l i n e of t h e r i n g s beyond t h e b a l l of S a t u r n , w obe t a i n d a t a on which t o b a s e an e s t i m a t e of t h e low l i m i t of z t h e r e had been no s u c c e s s i n o b t a i n i n g a p o s i t i v e e f f e c t . T h i s a u t h o r found t h a t when A ' = 0 , t h e expected b r i g h t n e s s of t h e r i n g
0

.

Up t o

1966,

i m a g e (beyond S a t u r n ' s b a l l ) w a s so low t h a t S a t u r n ' s atmospheric a u r e o l e can
prevent detection. High mountain o b s e r v a t o r i e s t h e r e f o r e o f f e r t h e b e s t r e s u l t s .

R e f l e c t o r s ( s i n c e t h e y do not have chromatic a b b e r a t i o n ) are p r e f e r a b l e t o refractors. The

1966 o b s e r v a t i o n s showed t h a t i n g e n e r a l our c a l c u l a t i o n s w e r e c o r r e c t .

T h i s can be s e e n from F i g u r e 21a, which shows a p o s i t i v e p r i n t from one of t h e

61

p l a t e s o b t a i n e d by D o l l f u s on P i c du Midi, and which l e d him t o t h e d i s c o v e r y of S a t u r n ' s t e n t h s a t e l l i t e . The b r i g h t n e s s of t h e p l a n e t ' s d i s k w a s a t t e n u a t e d

a r t i f i c i a l l y by approximately two o r d e r s o f magnitude by a band of absorbing

material.

The i n t e n s e a u r e o l e of S a t u r n , t h e b r i g h t n e s s of which d i m i n i s h e s The r i n g s ( d a r k

w i t h d i s t a n c e from t h e limb, w i l l be seen o u t s i d e t h e band.

s i d e t u r n e d toward t h e e a r t h and v i s i b l e almost from t h e edge) c a n be d i s t i n g u i s h e d a g a i n s t t h e background of t h e a u r e o l e w i t h d i f f i c u l t y . But i t must be remembered

t h a t t h e s i t u a t i o n i s somewhat more f a v o r a b l e f o r v i s u a l or p h o t o e l e c t r i c o b s e r v a t i o n s because t h e widening of t h e l i n e of t h e r i n g i s less i n cases such as these. Let u s assume we observe t h e passage of t h e e a r t h through t h e p l a n e of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s under i d e a l c o n d i t i o n s , when o n l y t h e d i f f r a c t i o n a u r e o l e p l a y s any s i g n i f i c a n t r o l e . The c a l c u l a t i o n s made t o determine t h e i n t e n s i t y of t h i s

component of t h e a u r e o l e y i e l d b r i g h t n e s s e s of

7.4, 1.8, and 1.2010
b

-4

bc, r e s p e c and 1911.6

t i v e l y , f o r d i s t a n c e s from t h e c e n t e r o f S a t u r n of r = 14If.4, ( t e l e s c o p e a p e r a t u r e D = 60 c and m a g n i f i c a t i o n G = 220). m of t h e c e n t e r of S a t u r n ' s d i s k .
C

1 1 . , 8 10

is the brightness

Moreover, i t can be shown t h a t f o r our " s t a n c o n c e n t r a t i o n 3 0 p e r c e n t of t o t a l

dard" i m a g e q u a l i t y ( r e s o l u t i o n OIl.375,

luminous f l u x a t t h e c e n t r a l hump or t h e star i m a g e ) b r i g h t n e s s b

a

along t h e

axis of an extremely narrow b r i g h t band i s
ba = (cp/Ot'-37)btrue, (22.1)

where cp i s t h e a n g u l a r width of t h e band ( i n seconds of arc) and b t r u e i s t h e t r u e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e band. F i n a l l y , t h e l i n e a r w i d t h , h , of t h e band a t t h e mean d i s t a n c e o f S a t u r n i s
=

/63 -

6.91.10

cp s e c arc

(22.2)

Then, t a k i n g btrue aureole is
8

-

= bc, and ba = 5 . 1 0 - ~ b ~( c o n t r a s t w i t h t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e

25%), we o b t a i n h

- 0.26

km

(22.3 )

The o r d e r of z

0

should be such t h a t i t can s t i l l be d e t e c t e d by a highConsequently, t h e s e n s i t i v i t y of t h i s method i s a t l e a s t

mountain observatory.

an o r d e r of magnitude g r e a t e r t h a n t h e s e n s i t i v i t y of t h e method d e s c r i b e d i n section (a).

62

The procedure f o r e s t i m a t i n g z l e a s t a t first glance. v a t o r y where, a t t i m e A '

0

from o b s e r v a t i o n s when A '

= 0 i s simple, a t obser-

A l l t h a t need be done is t o select a high-mountain

= 0 , computed i n advance, it w i l l be astronomical n i g h t

and S a t u r n w i l l be .high enough above t h e horizon t o observe ( v i s u a l l y or photoe l e c t r i c a l l y ) whether or not t h e l i n e s of t h e r i n g s d i s a p p e a r , a f t e r which Eq. (22.1), or one s i m i l a r t o i t ,

i s used f o r t h e c a l c u l a t i o n .

Unfortunately, t h e

p o s i t i o n of t h e p l a n e of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s w a s not known a c c u r a t e l y enough u n t i l recently. Accoraing t o S l i p h e r ( l 9 2 2 ) , t h e a c t u a l t i m e A ' = 0 can d i f f e r from

t h e computed time by as much as 51 day.*

Consequently, s u c c e s s f u l o b s e r v a t i o n s

r e q u i r e d t h e conduct of an i n t e r n a t i o n a l p a t r o l of S a t u r n by personnel i n many o b s e r v a t o r i e s c o v e r i n g a s u f f i c i e n t l y wide range of l o n g i t u d e s . Let u s emphasize

t h e f a c t t h a t t h e o b s e r v e r ' s t a s k should i n c l u d e not o n l y e s t a b l i s h m e n t of t h e f a c t of v i s i b i l i t y , or n o n - v i s i b i l i t y of t h e r i n g s on t h e c r i t i c a l n i g h t , b u t a l s o t h e o b t a i n i n g of evidence of t h e f a c t t h a t h i s eyes observed t r a n s i t of t h e e a r t h through t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s . The a u t h o r , t o g e t h e r with D o l l f u s , made t h e f i r s t attempt t o o r g a n i z e a p a t r o l such as t h i s i n 1966 ( w i t h i n t h e framework of t h e Commission on P h y s i c s of P l a n e t s of t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l Astronomical Union).

I t w a s p o s s i b l e t o observe

two t r a n s i t s of t h e e a r t h , and one t r a n s i t of t h e sun through t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s , as w e l l as two q u i t e long p e r i o d s of v i s i b i l i t y of t h e d a r k s i d e of t h e r i n g s (see F i g u r e 3 ) . More t h a n t e n f i r s t - c l a s s o b s e r v a t o r i e s i n t h e e a s t e r n and western hemispheres p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h i s cooperative venture. The program d i s t r i b u t e d t o t h e o b s e r v e r s

(Bobrov, 1966) envisaged not o n l y o b s e r v a t i o n s designed t o s o l v e t h e main problem, t h a t of e s t i m a t i n g t h e t h i c k n e s s of t h e r i n g s , but doing o t h e r work as w e l l , t h e /64 d e s i r a b i l i t y of t h e i m p o s i t i o n of which w a s determined by t h e s p e c i a l l o c a t i o n of t h e r i n g s r e l a t i v e t o t h e e a r t h i n 1966. Recommendations included making

-

photometric, s p e c t r o s c o p i c , and s p e c t r o p h o t o m e t r i c o b s e r v a t i o n s of t h e l i g h t and d a r k s i d e s of t h e r i n g s , t o attempt t o o b t a i n t h e dependence of b r i g h t n e s s of ~-~ . -- --~~

The r e s u l t s of t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o o p e r a t i v e o b s e r v a t i o n s of S a t u r n i n 1966 showed t h a t i n f a c t t h e c o r r e c t i o n f a c t o r f o r t h e ephemeris time A I = 0 i s some 5 hours ( D o l l f u s and Focas, 1968; Kiladze, 1968). The s i g n of t h e c o r r e c t i o n f a c t o r i s p o s i t i v e f o r passage o f t h e e a r t h on t h e south s i d e of t h e p l a n e o f t h e r i n g s and n e g a t i v e . f o r passage on t h e n o r t h s i d e . The e r r o r of t h e c o r r e c t i o n f a c t o r f o r t h e o b s e r v e r i s e s t i m a t e d a t .&2 hours.

*

63

t h e r i n g s on t h e phase a n g l e and on t h e a n g l e of e l e v a t i o n of t h e sun above t h e i r p l a n e , t o d e t e c t t h e p r e s e n c e o f a f e e b l y luminous flatmospherell ( d u s t or g a s ) t h a t , according t o Maggini

(1937), i s e n t r a i n e d i n t h e p l a n e o f t h e r i n g s , t o check

t h e e x i s t e n c e of t h e s o - c a l l e d D r i n g , more d i s t a n t from S a t u r n t h a n t h e A r i n g , and o t h e r s . F u r t h e r , it w a s emphasized t h a t t h e p r a c t i c a l absence of t h e d i s -

t u r b i n g i n f l u e n c e of l i g h t s c a t t e r e d by t h e r i n g s ( p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e p e r i o d of t h e i r d a r k s i d e v i s i b i l i t y ) made many types of o b s e r v a t i o n s of S a t u r n ' s d i s k and s a t e l l i t e s f a v o r a b l e , i n c l u d i n g d e t e r m i n a t i o n of t h e i n t e g r a l s t e l l a r magnit u d e of t h e d i s k , and i t s dependence on t h e phase a n g l e , photometry, spectro-

photometry, spectroscopy of t h e d i s k and of d e t a i l s of t h e d i s k , and of observat i o n s of t h e covering of t h e s a t e l l i t e s by t h e atmosphere and by t h e edge of S a t u r n ' s d i s k , as w e l l as o b s e r v a t i o n s of t h e e c l i p s e of t h e s a t e l l i t e s . The m a j o r i t y of t h e o b s e r v a t o r i e s t h a t took p a r t i n t h e

1966 p a t r o l observa-

t i o n s obtained a wealth of m a t e r i a l , much of it unique i n many ways, t h a t h e l p s e x p l a i n many of t h e q u e s t i o n s concerned w i t h t h e p h y s i c s of t h e S a t u r n system, particularly its rings. The primary p r o c e s s i n g i s completed and r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d

by t h e P i c du Midi, Meudon ( D o l l f u s and Focas, published.

1967) o b s e r v a t o r i e s have been

I n p r o c e s s i n g a r e a number of t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s obtained by t h e Univer-

s i t y of N w Mexico o b s e r v a t o r y (140 p l a t e s , covering e

64 n i g h t s ) , and a s i m i l a r

s e r i e s o b t a i n e d i n t h e Kuiper Lunar-Planetary Laboratory. F r a n t z and Johnson

(1967) attempted p h o t o e l e c t r i c scanning of t h e l i n e of

r i n g s i n t h e Lowell Observatory f o r

14 n i g h t s .

U n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e equipment

w a s not good enough t o o b t a i n any d e f i n i t i v e r e s u l t s ( H a l l , 1968).
Texereau

(1967) published a s h o r t r e p o r t on h i s photographic photometry of 1966.
If h i s d a t a a r e t o be t r u s t e d , t h e i n t e n s i t y of t h e r i n g s

S a t u r n ' s d i s k and r i n g s , made w i t h a 2 meter t e l e s c o p e i n t h e McDonald Observat o r y , November

continued t o diminish w i t h i n two or t h r e e days a f t e r t h e t r a n s i t of t h e e a r t h through t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s . This i s c l e a r l y i n e r r o r . Texereau himself

n o t e s t h a t t h e measured i n t e n s i t i e s were g r e a t l y d i s t o r t e d by d i f f u s e d l i g h t from S a t u r n ' s d i s k ( t h e b r i g h t n e s s of which Texereau f a i l e d t o a t t e n u a t e ) , and t h a t t h e image q u a l i t y changed g r e a t l y from n i g h t t o n i g h t . These i s o l a t e d f a i l u r e s a r e recognized as being i n e v i t a b l e , t o some e x t e n t , because t h e measurements r e q u i r e d were v e r y d e l i c a t e , and involved many d i f f i c u l ties.

/65

64

F i g u r e s 21a through e i l l u s t r a t e t h e most important r e s u l t s of t h e p a t r o l o b s e r v a t i o n s of S a t u r n ( o t h e r t h a n t h e work done by Kozyrev, more about which i n #23 F i g u r e 21a reproduces t h e photography on which, f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e , t h e r e

w a s d e t e c t e d t h e p r e v i o u s l y unknown t e n t h s a t e l l i t e of S a t u r n ( D o l l f u s , 1967).
T h i s s a t e l l i t e , c a l l e d Janus, r o t a t e s around t h e p l a n e t a t a d i s t a n c e of three e a r t h r a d i i from t h e o u t e r l i m i t of t h e A r i n g , and has a s t e l l a r b r i g h t n e s s of

14.

The n e a r n e s s t o t h e r i n g s , and t h e weakness of t h e s a t e l l i t e , i n t e r m s of

b r i g h t n e s s , r e s u l t i n i t s being seen o n l y a t t i m e s when t h e r i n g s have t h e i r dark s i d e turned t o t h e earth. Beyond t h i s , a t t h e t i m e of o b s e r v a t i o n , Janus A l l of t h i s

should be n e a r t h e p o s i t i o n of m a x i m u m e l o n g a t i o n ( e a s t , o r w e s t ) . makes Janus an extremely d i f f i c u l t o b j e c t t o d e t e c t .

D o l l f u s discovered it by

basing h i s e f f o r t s on h i s own i d e a t h a t t h e C a s s i n i d i v i s i o n by i t s v e r y e x i s t e n c e w a s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e resonance p e r t u r b a t i o n s , n o t of Mimos, b u t of a body c l o s e r t o S a t u r n , a conclusion a r r i v e d a t a s a r e s u l t of new, more p r e c i s e micrometric measurements made o f S a t u r n ' s r i n g s i n t h e P i c du Midi Observatory (Figure IC). F i g u r e s 21b and c a r e t h e c u r v e s f o r t h e i n t e n s i t y of t h e l i n e of t h e r i n g s ( i n terms of t i m e ) d u r i n g t h e October and December t r a n s i t s of t h e e a r t h through t h e i r plane. These c u r v e s , obtained by t h e photographic photometry method by

Kiladze, and D o l l f u s and Focas, r e s p e c t i v e l y , are an important s t e p forward i n t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s . They made i t p o s s i b l e for t h e f i r s t time W w i l l discuss e

t o f i n d t h e o r d e r s of t h e p h y s i c a l t h i c k n e s s e s of t h e r i n g s . t h e s e curves i n d e t a i l a t t h e end of t h i s s e c t i o n .

F i g u r e 21 d h a s been t a k e n from Feibelman (19671, and demonstrates t h e s u c c e s s f u l e f f o r t t o confirm t h e e x i s t e n c e of t h e s o - c a l l e d D r i n g (of t h e extens i o n of t h e r i n g system beyond t h e l i m i t s of t h e A r i n g ) .

I t w a s s o dim t h a t

i t could be seen o n l y n e a r t h e p o s i t i o n on t h e edge, and t h e n o n l y when condit i o n s w e r e such t h a t t h e e n t i r e r i n g system had i t s d a r k s i d e t u r n e d t o t h e earth. A s w i l l be seen from t h e f i g u r e , t h e D r i n g l i n e e x t e n d s f o r a d i s t a n c e

exceeding t h e apparent diameter of t h e r i n g system by a f a c t o r g r e a t e r than two

(so t h a t Janus i s r e v o l v i n g around S a t u r n , i n s i d e t h i s r i n g l ) .
Feibelman's e s t i m a t e of D r i n g b r i g h t n e s s i s 15 s t e l l a r magnitudes/square of arc, o r l e s s . second

65

II

I

F i g m e 21e shows one more result of Dollfus and Focas' photometry, measurements of the luminance of the dark side of the rings as a function of the elevation of the sun above their lighted side. These are the first, and as yet the Prior to 1966, estimates

only, quantitative measurements of dark side luminance.

of dark side brightness were based on old, vjsual.observations made by Barnard, Slipher, and G a f f , as well as by an approximate calculation of the illumination of the night side by light reflected by the ball of Saturn, and by light diffi-lsely transmitted through the thickness of the rings from the day side ( 2 ) #1. The

observations made by Dollfus and Focas now make it possible to check these caiculations. Agreement seems to be completely satisfactory.
0

d

b

1

4f 3l

4L.f

. . *4u

L

44JJZl

C

Figure 21. Materials illustrating the results of the international cooperative observation s made of the Saturn system in 1966.

1

4O.4

66

December 1966

a P r i n t from a p l a t e o b t a i n e d by D o l l f u s on P i c du Midi on 15 December 1966. The luminance of S a t u r n ' s d i s k w a s a r t i f i c i a l l y a t t e n u a t e d by a f a c t o r of 140 The r i n g s have t h e i r d a r k s i d e t u r n e d t o t h e e a r t h and by an absorbing band. The i n s i d e p a r t s of t h e image of t h e r i n g s a r e almost edge-on ( A ' = OO29.5). s i n k i n t o t h e i n t e n s i v e a u r e o l e of S a t u r n ' s d i s k . The arrow p o i n t s t o t h e new, Change i n t h e i n t e n s i t y of t e n t h s a t e l l i t e of S a t u r n , discovered by D o l l f u s ; b t h e r i n g s d u r i n g t h e t r a n s i t of t h e e a r t h through t h e i r p l a n e i n October 1966, i n t h e d i r e c t i o n from t h e l i g h t e d s i d e t o t h e d a r k (photometric measurements made t o e s t i m a t e r i n g t h i c k n e s s e s ; Kiladze, 1968); c S i m i l a r measurement of i n t e n s i t y of r i n g s i n December 1966, when t h e e a r t h i n t e r s e c t e d t h e p l a n e of Bottom View t h e r i n g s i n t h e o p p o s i t e d i r e c t i o n ( D o l l f u s , Focas, 1968); d of S a t u r n on 14 November 1966; Top M i c r o d e n s i t o g r m along t h e l i n e X-X. The decay i n t h e c e n t e r corresponds t o t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e v i s i b l e t h i n l i n e of t h e D r i n g (Feibelman, 1967); e Luminance of t h e d a r k s i d e of t h e r i n g s as a f u n c t i o n of t h e a n g l e of e l e v a t i o n of t h e sun o v e r t h e i r l i g h t e d s i d e ( D o l l f u s , Focas , 1968).

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Let u s add t h a t t h e D o l l f u s and Focas photometry a l s o c o n t a i n s d a t a on t h e luminance of t h e l i g h t e d s i d e of t h e r i n g s i n terms of t h e phase a n g l e when t h e r i n g openings a r e extremely s m a l l . m a t e r i a l as well. T h i s i s t h e f i r s t time f o r such o b s e r v a t i o n a l

L a t e r on i t s a n a l y s i s can be used t o check e x i s t i n g t h e o r i e s

of r i n g s t r u c t u r e (#34). Let u s now t u r n t o t h e curve f o r t h e i n t e n s i t y of t h e l i n e of t h e r i n g s as

a f u n c t i o n of A ' n e a r t h e time of t r a n s i t of t h e e a r t h through t h e p l a n e of t h e
r i n g s ( F i g u r e 21b and c ) . The December curve ( D o l l f u s and Focas) i s v e r y s i m i l a r

t o t h e October one ( K i l a d z e ) , d i f f e r i n g from it o n l y by t h e o r d e r of movement i n terms of time of t h e s t e e p and f l a t branches (corresponding t o t h e b r i g h t and dark s i d e s of t h e r i n g s ) . near A ' The i n t e n s i t y w i t h i n t h e l i m i t s of each branch Significant

= 0 changes monotonically, and i s p r a c t i c a l l y l i n e a r .

i n a d e q u a c i e s i n both s e r i e s a r e l a c k of measurements a t t h e i n t e n s i t y minimum, and i n d i r e c t proximity t o it. T h i s r e s u l t s i n t h e shape of t h e c u r v e s over

t h e s e c t i o n of t h e t r a n s i t from t h e s t e e p branch t o t h e f l a t one remaining unhown.
A t t h e same t i m e , it i s a p p a r e n t t h a t t h e shape of t h e t r a n s i t i o n s e c t i o n

should have a s i g n i f i c a n t dependence on t h e shape of t h e r i n g c r o s s - s e c t i o n . For example, p l a n e - p a r a l l e l r i n g s should y i e l d a l i n e a r i n t e n s i t y c u r v e , w i t h a

m i n i m u m c o i n c i d i n g w i t h t h e p o i n t of i n t e r s e c t i o n of t h e branches.
s e c t i o n g i v e s a rounded minimum.

A ellipticalm n

If t h e t h i c k n e s s i n c r e a s e s toward t h e o u t e r
The presence of an absorbing

edge of t h e r i n g system, t h e minimum w i l l be f l a t .

67

r i n g o u t s i d e t h e v i s i b l e r i n g system w i l l cause a n o n l i n e a r decay i n i n t e n s i t y t o t h e minimum, and so f o r t h . (Moreover, t h e i n t e n s i t y of t h e l i n e of t h e r i n g s

w i l l depend on t h e phase a n g l e , cy, and on t h e a n g l e of e l e v a t i o n of t h e sun over
t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s , A , b u t a n a l y s i s of e x i s t i n g o b s e r v a t i o n a l d a t a shows t h a t n e a r A ' = 0 , t h e i n f l u e n c e o f cy and A i s s l i g h t compared w i t h t h e i n f l u e n c e of A ' ) . K i l a d z e , as w e l l as D o l l f u s and Focas, assumed t h a t t h e r i n g i n t e n s i t y

m i n i m u m o c c u r s a t t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n of t h e two branches.
a p p l i e s with equal f o r c e t o t h e plane-parallel

W have seen t h a t t h i s e Based on t h i s

r i n g s hypothesis.

assumption, t h e October s e r i e s of measurements ( K i l a d z e , i n b l u e l i g h t ) p r o v i d e s
z
0

=

1.6 km, and t h e December ones ( D o l l f u s and Focas, i n yellow l i g h t ) z0
e r r o r of t h e o r d e r o f 25 t o 50 p e r c e n t .

= 2.8

km, w i t h a root-mean-square

A t the

same time, as i n t h e c a s e of t h e #21 c a l c u l a t i o n s , i t i s assumed t h a t t h e s u r f a c e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e edge i s equal t o t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e most i n t e n s e zone of t h e B r i n g a t l a r g e openings. S i n c e t h e t r u e behavior of t h e i n t e n s i t y i n t h e t r a n s i t s e c t i o n i s unknown, s t r i c t l y speaking we have no r i g h t t o assume i n t h e c a s e of t h e r i n g t h i c k n e s s c a l c u l a t i o n s , t h a t t h e y are p l a n e - p a r a l l e l . I n t h a t c a s e , though, e s t i m a t e s of by t a k i n g an

r i n g t h i c k n e s s can be p u r e l y formal i n n a t u r e .

So we must f i n d

2;

0

approach t h a t w i l l be as f r e e as p o s s i b l e from a r b i t r a r y hypotheses. This c a l c u l a t i o n can be made i f w u s e t h e r e s u l t s of t h e measurements e D o l l f u s and Focas made of t h e i n t e n s i t y of t h e d a r k s i d e image v e r y c l o s e t o A ' = 0 ( F i g u r e 21c) on 17 December 1966. night. Three images were o b t a i n e d on t h a t

The midpoint of t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s o c c u r r e d a t t =

1966 December 17d19h.2

UT, when A ' = 0 i n t h e l l p l a n e - p a r a l l e l ' l approximation w a s t = 1966 December 0 d h h 18 03 .O, from whence to t = 7 .8 ( a t t h e end of t h e c a l c u l a t i o n we can c o n s i -

-

d e r t h e e f f e c t an e r r o r i n

t

0 '

random or s y s t e m a t i c , o c c u r r i n g as a r e s u l t of h a s on t h e z

t h e divergence of t h e f i g u r e of t h e r i n g s from p l a n e - p a r a l l e l , estimate). ( i n cbr/bc The mean of i n t e n s i t i e s measured on 17 December i s u n i t s , where

I(t) 0.39010 -3 =

0

5

i s t h e width of t h e eye of t h e r i n g s on t h e microi s t h e r a t i o of s u r f a c e

photometer scanning l i n e i n seconds of a r c , and br/bc

b r i g h t n e s s of t h e r i n g s t o s u r f a c e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e c e n t e r of S a t u r n ' s d i s k ) . Let u s compare

y ( t ) with

t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n made t o t o t a l i n t e n s i t y of t h e Let u s d e s i g n a t e t h i s magni-

/69

l i n e of t h e r i n g s by t h e d a r k s i d e luminous f l u x .

68

( t ) = 5bd/bc, where b i s t h e d a r k s i d e d d brightness. The magnitude of t h e b /b r a t i o can be found from t h e g r a p h i c i n d c F i g u r e 21e, remembering t h a t C corresponds t o A = 2O.750. T h i s y i e l d s bd/bc = h 15.3-10-~, With r e s p e c t t o 5, to t = 7 .% corresponds t o 5 = 3 4 x .
t u d e by I d / ( t ) . I t i s obvious t h a t I

-

The d a r k s i d e c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t o t a l i n t e n s i t y t h e n i s I ( t ) = d 3.4-10'3.15.3*10'3 = 0.052-10-3, t h a t i s , 0.13 t h e measured i n t e n s i t y T(t). second of arc. T h i s important r e s u l t i n d i c a t e s t h a t a t time t t h e luminous f l u x from t h e d a r k s i d e w a s low compared w i t h t h e t o t a l luminous f l u x , The 0.87 remainder of i n -

t e n s i t y e v i d e n t l y w a s c o n t r i b u t e d by t h e luminous f l u x from t h e edge of t h e r i n g s , and t h i s makes i t p o s s i b l e t o f i n d t h e v a l u e of r i n g t h i c k n e s s without r e s o r t t o t h e e s t i m a t e s made by Ki1adz.e and D o l l f u s and Focas, Putting ring

edge b r i g h t n e s s , b e , equal t o t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e l i g h t e d s i d e of t h e r i n g s d u r i n g l a r g e openings, as above, we w i l l have

The random e r r o r i n t on t h i s r e s u l t .

h ( e s t i m a t e d by t h e o b s e r v e r s as +2 ) has almost no e f f e c t
0

I n f a c t , i f we t a k e t h e extreme v a l u e s of Sh.8 and 9h.8 f o r

to

-

t , we o b t a i n z 0 equal t o 3.2 and 3.5 km, r e s p e c t i v e l y .

Nor

For example, i f w t a k e e does t h e v a l u e used f o r b /b have much e f f e c t on z d c 0 12.0*10-3 f o r bd/bc, r a t h e r t h a n 15.3-10-3, as we d i d above, ( t h e f i g u r e i s from D o l l f u s ' o b s e r v a t i o n s on t h e n i g h t preceding t h e December t r a n s i t of t h e e a r t h h t = 7 .8. through t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s ) , we w i l l have z = 3.7 lan when t
0
0

.

-

Hence, w can t a k e t h e Eq. e

(22.4)

e s t i m a t e as q u i t e r e l i a b l e .

This method p r o v i d e s a mean of zo =

3 4 km, which i s 22 p e r c e n t h i g h e r t h a n .
The d i s c r e -

t h e v a l u e o b t a i n e d by D o l l f u s and Focas, and double t h a t o f Kiladze.

pancy can be explained simply by t h e s y s t e m a t i c e r r o r s i n t h e photometry, b u t a t t h e same time t h e f a c t t h a t what i s suggested h e r e i s some d e v i a t i o n of t h e f i g u r e of t h e r i n g s from p l a n e - p a r a l l e l cannot be precluded. q u e s t i o n of whether or not t h e t
0

This r a i s e s t h e

we found by assuming t h e r i n g s t o be plane-

p a r a l l e l ought t o be c o r r e c t e d f o r t h e corresponding s y s t e m a t i c e r r o r . The r e p l y must be i n t h e negative. A s a m a t t e r of f a c t , t h e approximately

l i n e a r behavior of t h e branches, of t h e decay and t h e r i s e i n t h e i n t e n s i t y , as shown i n F i g u r e s 21b and c , r e v e a l s t h a t p h o t o m e t r i c a l l y t h e r i n g s conduct them-

69

s e l v e s as a p l a n e - p a r a l l e l

system when t h e y a r e n o t v e r y c l o s e t o t

0 '

so t h a t

t h e i r i n t e r s e c t i o n w i t h t h e mid-plane

of t h e e a r t h ought t o take p l a c e v e r y Something else a g a i n i s t h e

c l o s e t o t h e t i m e of i n t e r s e c t i o n of t h e branches.

fact t h a t t

0

found i n t h e p l a n e - p a r a l l e l

approximation w i l l n o t , g e n e r a l l y

speaking, be t h e t i m e of t h e i n t e n s i t y minimum f o r t h e l i n e o f t h e r i n g s , b u t

/70

t h i s i s a q u e s t i o n t h a t more p r o p e r l y belongs t o refinement of t h e r i n g t h i c k n e s s c o n c e p t , r a t h e r t h a n t o t h e first p l a u s i b l e e s t i m a t e of t h e o r d e r of t h e t h i c k ness. W should p o i n t o u t t h a t d u r i n g a more p r e c i s e c o n s i d e r a t i o n i t w i l l be e

n e c e s s a r y t o remember t h e poor d e f i n i t i o n of t h e boundaries of t h e f i g u r e of t h e r i n g s , t h a t i s , t h e gradualness of t h e r e d u c t i o n i n t h e v o l u m e t r i c d e n s i t y of t h e r i n g m a t e r i a l w i t h approach t o t h e b o u n d a r i e s , as w e l l as t h e gas-dust flatmosphereffof t h e r i n g s (#23). d a t a i n t h e d i r e c t proximity of t But t h i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n w i l l r e q u i r e photometric
0 '

and s i n c e t h e r e are no such d a t a as y e t , a l l

p o s s i b l e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n t h i s r e g a r d can be n o t h i n g more t h a n s p e c u l a t i v e . Summing up, i t can be s a i d t h a t one of t h e main g o a l s of t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l p a t r o l o b s e r v a t i o n s of S a t u r n i n

1966, h a s been achieved.

The t h i c k n e s s of t h e

r i n g s , a parameter t h a t f o r many y e a r s had escaped o b s e r v a t i o n a l e s t i m a t i o n , has been e s t a b l i s h e d . #23.

I t i s of t h e o r d e r of 3 t o

4

kilometers.

lfAtmospherelf o f - - t h e Rings. The f i r s t evidence of t h e e x i s t e n c e of evacuated m a t e r i a l enveloping t h e

r i n g s w a s t h e e f f e c t of some r e s i d u a l b r i g h t n e s s i n t h e space between t h e i n n e r boundary of t h e C r i n g and t h e b a l l of S a t u r n , discovered i n b l u e l i g h t by Barabashov and Semeykin (1933; s e e #3 of t h i s book). F i g u r e 11) discovered two o t h e r e f f e c t s :

Maggini

(1937; s e e #l3,

(1) a gradual darkening of t h e r i n g s

w i t h r e d u c t i o n i n t h e a n g l e of e l e v a t i o n of t h e s u n , A , above t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s , wherein r e d u c t i o n i n A from 2O.06 b r i g h t n e s s of 1 .2 f o r h = to
1 O . 0 1

r e s u l t e d i n a decay i n t h e
0

m

0

5300 A , and of 1 .6 f o r h = 4200 A ; ( 2 ) a simultaneous
These r e s u l t s c e r t a i n l y p o i n t t o t h e

m

increase i n t h e r i n g color equivalent.

presence of some evacuated m a t e r i a l above t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s (Maggini even r e p o r t s t h a t he w a s a b l e t o observe it v i s u a l l y , and t h a t it blanketed t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s on both s i d e s . however). In T h i s has n o t been confirmed by o t h e r o b s e r v e r s ,

1966, Kozyrev, u s i n g t h e 122-cm r e f l e c t o r i n t h e Crimean Astro-

p h y s i c a l Observatory of t h e Academy of S c i e n c e s of t h e USSR, made s p e c t r o g r a p h i c

70

o b s e r v a t i o n s of t h e shadow of t h e r i n g s on t h e b a l l of S a t u r n ( s e e Kozyrev,

1968).

The d i r e c t i o n of t h e s o l a r r a y s w a s almost p a r a l l e l t o t h e plane of t h e r i n g s ,

s o t h e p a t h o f t h e s o l a r r a d i a t i o n i n s i d e t h e suspected l!atmosphere!l of t h e
r i n g s w a s long enough for it t o be observed. The o b s e r v e r found t h e NH

3

band t o

be s t r o n g e r i n t h e shadow of t h e r i n g s , and t h e CH

4 weaker, t h a n o u t s i d e it ( i n -

d i c a t i o n s of t h e hothouse e f f e c t c r e a t e d by t h e ‘‘atmosphere!! of t h e r i n g s )

.

He a l s o noted t h e p r e s e n c e of H20 v a p o r s , and e s t i m a t e d t h e t h i c k n e s s o f t h e s h e l l t o be between 5,000 and 10,000 lan. There i s r e a s o n t o t h i n k t h a t t h e

p r o c e s s i n g of m a t e r i a l s o b t a i n e d by o t h e r o b s e r v a t o r i e s i n 1966, w i l l even f u r t h e r e n r i c h our i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e s h e l l of t h e r i n g s .

#24. Ring R o t a t i o n Law
One of t h e most i m p o r t a n t dynamic f e a t u r e s of S a t u r n ’ s r i n g s i s t h a t t h e i r

mass

(a ) r

i s extremely small compared w i t h t h e m a s s of S a t u r n

shown by t h e observed f a c t

(a) a t th

(%I. h

This i s

t h e speed of r o t a t i o n f o r any r i n g zone i s T h i s would be t h e

almost p r e c i s e l y equal t o t h e Keplerian c i r c u l a r v e l o c i t y .

r i n g r o t a t i o n l a w f o r t h e c o n d i t i o n t h a t t h e r e i s l i t t l e disapperance of

r

as

The c o n t r a r y , extreme c a s e i s a homogeneous d i s k without compared w i t h ! % h’ c e n t r a l condensation. I t would r o t a t e as would a s o l i d body. If the ratio were n o t v e r y s m a l l , t h e r i n g r o t a t i o n l a w would be somewhere between t h e s e two extreme cases. But t h e s p e c t r o s c o p i c d a t a on r i n g v e l o c i t y as a f u n c t i o n of r

(#8, Table 2 ) f a i l t o show s y s t e m a t i c d e v i a t i o n s of t h e r o t a t i o n l a w from t h e
Keplerian l a w .
H.

S t r u v e (1898) attempted t o e s t i m a t e

(zr/j”k) from

t h e observed movements But t h e s e

of t h e p e r i c e n t e r s and nodes of t h e i n t e r n a l s a t e l l i t e s of Saturn.

movements a r e mandatory not o n l y f o r t h e r i n g s , b u t f o r t h e f l a t t e n i n g of S a t u r n

as w e l l .

It i s v e r y d i f f i c u l t t o s e p a r a t e t h e e f f e c t s .

I n f a c t , a more or l e s s

v a l i d s o l u t i o n t o t h e problem r e q u i r e s a knowledge of t h e d e n s i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n

l a w i n t h e b a l l of t h e p l a n e t , as w e l l as t h e p r e c i s e v a l u e f o r t h e f l a t t e n i n g
of Saturn. A c t u a l l y , knowledge of both t h e s e magnitudes (and p a r t i c u l a r l y of Consequently, S t r u v e ’ s e s t i m a t e of 3 /.rL. = r h c i t e d i n a l l t h e handbooks, i s viewed as without foundation by Brower

of t h e first) i s o n l y approximate. 1/27000,

and Clemence

(1963), as w e l l as by Yabushita (1966).

Yabushita adds t h a t i t i s be a r r i v e d a t o t h e r t h a n by

h i s view t h a t t h e observed e s t i m a t e of o p t i c a l observations.

ar/’”ncannot h

The a u t h o r (Bobrov, 1956b,

1961) made s e v e r a l a t t e m p t s of

t h i s t y p e , based on t h e t h e o r y of t h e e f f e c t of mutual s h a d i n g , as d i d F r a n k l i n and Cook

(1965) l a t e r on.

W s h a l l d i s c u s s t h i s q u e s t i o n i n Chapter V I I . e

A t t h e same t i m e , i t seems t h a t a comparison of t h e Keplerian r o t a t i o n l a w /72
w i t h t h e a c t u a l r i n g r o t a t i o n l a w ( o b t a i n e d from extremely a c c u r a t e s p e c t r o g r a p h i c o b s e r v a t i o n s which should be made e s p e c i a l l y f o r t h i s purpose) would, i n p r i n c i p l e , make i t p o s s i b l e t o e s t i m a t e t h e upper l i m i t of 2 considerations 72

-

.

r

/k from s

dynamic

#25.

D i f f e r e n ~.a l R o t a t i o n __ Its Consequence ti and C o r r e c t n e s s of a K e p l e r i a n r o t a t i o n l a w f o r S a t u r n ' s r i n g s i m p l i e s d i f f e r e n -

t i a l rotation.

T h i s e f f e c t i s v e r y g r e a t and i s c a p a b l e of d e s t r o y i n g any con-

d e n s a t i o n ( o r e v a c u a t i o n ) t h a t could occur i n t h e r i n g m a t e r i a l i n a v e r y s h o r t p e r i o d of time. I n f a c t , t h e Keplerian c i r c u l a r v e l o c i t y f o r a narrow zone of t h e r i n g s a t d i s t a n c e r from t h e c e n t e r of S a t u r n i s

whence

v where A r i s t h e width of t h e zone; A i s t h e corresponding d i f f e r e n c e i n v e l o c i -

ties.

W a l s o can w r i t e As(+,) e

=

tAv

I

= 1/2&Ar.

where

u)

i s t h e angular v e l o c i t y

of t h e i n s i d e edge of t h e zone; A s i s t h e r e l a t i v e displacement i n t h e two p o i n t s , which, a t time t = 0 , have i d e n t i c a l azimuths and a r e l o c a t e d a t d i s t a n c e A r from each o t h e r .
L e t u s u s e T and n t o d e s i g n a t e t h e p e r i o d of r o t a t i o n and t h e num-

b e r of r e v o l u t i o n s of a p o i n t on t h e i n s i d e edge of t h e zone. As(nT) = rrnAr. I f , f o r example, A r = 1000 km, and n = 1 (25.3)

AS

=

3140

lane

(25.4)

Such i s t h e displacement of p o i n t s of t h e i n n e r boundary of a zone 1000 lun wide w i t h r e s p e c t t o p o i n t s on i t s o u t e r boundary d u r i n g one r e v o l u t i o n ( r e g a r d l e s s of r ) . Here a few words need be s a i d about t h e s o - c a l l e d Roche l i m i t and i t s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o r i n g dynamics. According t o Roche, (18501, t h e homogeneous, u n f l a t -

t e n e d , l i q u i d s a t e l l i t e would be t o r n by t i d a l f o r c e s i f it approached t h e cen-

t r a l body a t d i s t a n c e r S = 2.45
where r

3

4 6 x rp,
/73

6P o n l y t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f o r c e s ( t h e molecular cohesion i s i g n o r e d ) a r e considered in E. q (25.5).

i s t h e r a d i u s of t h e c e n t r a l body ( t h e p l a n e t , i n t h i s c a s e ) ; S S and P a r e t h e d e n s i t i e s of s a t e l l i t e and c e n t r a l body, r e s p e c t i v e l y . Note t h a t

73

I

Some a u t h o r s raise t h e q u e s t i o n of whether S a t u r n ' s r i n g s l i e i n s i d e t h e Roche l i m i t , or whether t h e y are, i n p a r t , beyond t h a t l i m i t , and t h e n t h e y proceed t o d i s c u s s t h e p h y s i c a l and cosmogonic consequences of t h i s f a c t . be seen from Eq. of 6s. (25.51,

As w i l l

t h e r e p l y t o t h e first q u e s t i o n depends on t h e v a l u e

S p e c i f i c a l l y , i f it is t a k e n t h a t 6 s = 3 ( s t o n y p a r t i c l e s ) , i t w i l l

s e e m t h a t S a t u r n ' s r i n g s l i e i n s i d e t h e Roche l i m i t , b u t o n l y i n p a r t .

it i s taken t h a t hS
side the l i m i t .

-

But i f

1 ( i c e p a r t i c l e s ) , t h e r i n g s w i l l l i e almost e n t i r e l y i n -

T h i s sometimes l e a d s t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t ( I ) Roche's formula

i n d i c a t e s a p r e f e r e n c e f o r i c e p a r t i c l e s , and (11) t h a t i n s i d e t h e Roche l i m i t t h e t i d a l f o r c e s hamper t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l condensation of t h e p a r t i c l e s .

So f a r as c o n c l u s i o n ( I ) i s concerned, i t should be p o i n t e d o u t t h a t
according t o J e f f r e y s

(1947a), who considered not o n l y t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f o r c e s ,
Y e t obser-

b u t molecular cohesion as w e l l , t h e i c e b a l l , which i s i n s i d e Roche's l i m i t , w i l l be t o r n by t i d a l f o r c e s o n l y i f i t s diameter i s i n e x c e s s o f 2 0 km. 0 v a t i o n s show t h a t r i n g t h i c k n e s s is between 3 and

4 km.

Thus, t h e q u e s t i o n of

t h e n a t u r e of t h e p a r t i c l e s h a s no r e l a t i o n t o Roche's l i m i t ( p r o v i d i n g it i s n o t assumed t h a t t h e r i n g s were formed as a r e s u l t of t h e explosion of a comp a r a t i v e l y l a r g e s a t e l l i t e t h a t approached t h e p l a n e t t o a d i s t a n c e l e s s t h a n Roche ' s l i m i t , a h y p o t h e s i s t h a t has no c o n f i r m a t i o n i n contemporary cosmogony). Conclusion I1 l a c k s p e r s u a s i o n as w e l l because Eq.

( 2 5 . 3 ) and (25.4) show

t h a t i n t h e c a s e of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s , any condensation of t h e p a r t i c l e s w i l l be d i s r u p t e d i n a v e r y s h o r t p e r i o d of time simply because of d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n . #26. The P h y s i c a l Condition of t h e R i n g M a t e r i a l
~~

I t i s completely e v i d e n t t o modern astronomy t h a t S a t u r n ' s r i n g s c o n s i s t of
a m u l t i p l i c i t y of i n d i v i d u a l s o l i d p a r t i c l e s , b u t i t s t i l l i s u s e f u l t o review

h e r e t h e arguments advanced t o p r e c l u d e any o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t i e s . The Keplerian r o t a t i o n l a w e v i d e n t l y p r e c l u d e s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e A ,

B , and C r i n g s can be m o n o l i t h i c , s o l i d bodies.

Liquid r i n g s would r e f l e c t The r i n g s would have low

S a t u r n ' s b a l l , an e f f e c t t h a t never has been observed.

r e f l e c t i v i t y , and t h e A and B r i n g s would be s u b s t a n t i a l l y l e s s b r i g h t t h a n t h e y i n f a c t are. They could be made up of j u s t hydrogen and helium. Other s u b s t a n c e s Yet r i n g spec-

cannot remain l i q u i d a t T -

6 5 ° K (#15) and a t v e r y low p r e s s u r e .

/74

74

trometry

(#lo)

h a s d e t e c t e d t h e presence of s o l i d H 2 0 ,

and n o t l i q u i d hydrogen,

or helium.

Also completely e v i d e n t i s t h e f a c t t h a t t h e r i n g s are n o t gaseous. However,

So t h e r i n g s can be made up of nothing o t h e r t h a n s o l i d m a t e r i a l .

because t h e r i n g s have d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n , t h e y can be a system of many narrow, c o n c e n t r i c , r i n g - l i k e zones, or a f l a t cloud made up of many t i n y s a t e l -

lites.

Laplace (1802) e l i m i n a t e d t h e f i r s t p o s s i b i l i t y .

H e proved t h a t a

narrow, homogeneous r i n g , r o t a t i n g w i t h c o n s t a n t a n g u l a r v e l o c i t y around a g r a v i t a t i n g c e n t e r , w i l l be u n s t a b l e . Kowalewsky (1885) r e f i n e d t h e shape of t h e

c r o s s - s e c t i o n of a r i n g such as t h i s , and Maxwell (1859) showed t h a t t h e s t a b i l i t y of a r i n g such as t h i s can be achieved o n l y by t h e a d d i t i o n t o i t a t one p o i n t of a s a t e l l i t e w i t h m a s s corresponding t o 4 1 / 2 m .

r

The o b s e r v a t i o n s a r e n o t i n

f a v o r of t h i s model. dent, solid particles. #27. Stability

Consequently,

S a t u r n ' s r i n g s should b e c l o u d s of indepen-

The r e s e a r c h t h a t has been done on t h e problem of t h e s t a b i l i t y of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s i s extensive. O t h a t r e s e a r c h , t h a t of Duboshin (1940) c o n t a i n s i n addif Hagihara

t i o n an extremely complete c r i t i c a l review of t h e preceding r e s u l t s .

(1963) i n c l u d e s a l i s t of l a t e r e f f o r t s .

This s e c t i o n reviewed t h e problem of P a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n i s devoted and t o q u e s t i o n s

r i n g s t a b i l i t y p r i m a r i l y from t h e p h y s i c a l s i d e .

t o an a n a l y s i s of t h e r o l e of t h e c o l l i s i o n s between p a r t i c l e s , concerned with an o b s e r v a t i o n a l v e r i f i c a t i o n of t h e theory.

Hence, we c e r t a i n l y

w i l l not be a b l e h e r e t o d i s c u s s a l l of t h e a v a i l a b l e p a p e r s on t h e s u b j e c t .

(a)

M a x w e l l ' s s t a b g i t y c r i t e r i a f o r a r i n g of c o l l i s i o n l e s s p a r t i c l e s . Maxwell (1859) analyzed t h e c a s e of t h e narrow, m o n o l i t h i c r i n g , as

w e l l a s t h a t of a r i n g c o n s i s t i n g of independent p a r t i c l e s .

The f i r s t model The mean

Maxwell considered w a s an elementary r i n g of p equal p a r t i c u l a t e s .

p o s i t i o n s of t h e p a r t i c l e s w i l l move around S a t u r n a t equal d i s t a n c e s i n t h e same c i r c u l a r o r b i t , and a t t h e same Keplerian v e l o c i t y . Mutual g r a v i t a t i o n a l

p e r t u r b a t i o n s of t h e p a r t i c l e s w i l l f o r c e them t o o s c i l l a t e n e a r t h e s e mean positions. The o s c i l l a t i o n s w i l l produce crowding and t h i n n i n g i n t h e elementary Maxwell n o t e s t h a t t h e

r i n g , propagating t a n g e n t i a l l y as waves of some kind.

wave, a t a f i x e d moment i n t i m e , has what i s , g e n e r a l l y speaking, an a r b i t r a r y shape, b u t t h a t i t can be r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e sum of t h e elementary waves through

a Fourier series.

Maxwell deduces t h e f o l l o w i n g c o n d i t i o n f o r which t h e amplitude

of t h e waves w i l l remain f i n i t e

/75
75

I1l1111I I l

(27.1)

T h i s is t h e s t a b i l i t y c r i t e r i o n f o r an elementary r i n g of equal p a r t i c l e s . Eq. (27.1) shows t h a t t h e r i n g is s t a b l e i f i t s m a s s i s s m a l l compared w i t h

S a t u r n ' s m a s s ( t h e l a r g e r t h e number of s a t e l l i t e s , be).

w,

t h e smaller

/u rcZ should

Of t h e o t h e r models considered by Maxwell, t h e one of g r e a t e s t , s i g n i f i c a n t

i n t e r e s t is t h e ring-shaped cloud of independent p a r t i c l e s r o t a t i n g around S a t u r n as a whole, t h a t i s , a t a s i n g l e a n g u l a r v e l o c i t y . Using t h e same method

h e r e as he d i d f o r t h e elementary r i n g , M a x w e l l concluded t h a t t h e r i n g would be s t a b l e i f t h e c o n d i t i o n

6 r < 1/300 h 5 ,
were s a t i s f i e d . Here 6

(27.2) If

r

and 6

5

a r e r i n g and S a t u r n d e n s i t i e s , r e s p e c t i v e l y .

t h e c o n d i t i o n s of Eq.

(27.2) were not s a t i s f i e d , t h e r i n g would be d e s t r o y e d by

t a n g e n t i a l waves because t h e i r amplitudes would r i s e t o i n f i n i t y .

It should be emphasized t h a t Eq.

(27.2) ignored d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n .

But

s i n c e t h e l a t t e r p l a y s s o important a r o l e i n t h e c a s e of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s ( # 2 5 ) ,

i t can be assumed t h a t some system of crowding, or of waves, capable of d e s t r o y i n g
t h e r i n g s , w i l l i n f a c t i t s e l f destroy the d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n before perturb a t i o n r e a c h e s a dangerous magnitude. p e r m i s s i b l e r i n g d e n s i t y , Eq. I f t h i s i s s o , Maxwell's upper l i m i t of

( 2 7 . 2 ) , i s g r e a t l y underestimated.

This c o n t r a d i c t i o n passed unnoticed u n t i l v e r y r e c e n t l y , when Cook and F r a n k l i n (1964,

1966) reviewed Maxwell's i n v e s t i g a t i o n s .

They found t h a t t h e

c r i t i c a l d e n s i t y i n f a c t i s c o n s i d e r a b l y i n e x c e s s of 1/300 t u r n t o t h i s q u e s t i o n a l i t t l e l a t e r on. (b) The e f f e c t of c o l l i s i g n s between r i n g p a r t i c l e s .

6 5'

W shall ree

Maxwell d i s c u s s e s

t h i s a t t h e end of h i s paper.

He reviews a model one p a r t i c l e t h i c k ( a series

of c o n c e n t r i c elementary r i n g s ) and concludes t h a t t h e resonance phenomena
o c c u r r i n g i n t h i s system w i l l cause t h e p e r t u r b a t i o n s t o i n c r e a s e e x p o n e n t i a l l y and as a r e s u l t t h e p a r t i c l e s should begin t o c o l l i d e w i t h each o t h e r . The

c o l l i s i o n s ( n o t e n t i r e l y e l a s t i c ) w i l l l e a d t o t h e r a d i a l expansion of t h e r i n g ,

76

o r t o t h e r a d i a l r e d i s t r i b u t i o n of i t s s u r f a c e d e n s i t y . t h e tendency of t h e system t o form s h o r t - l i v e d , s u r f a c e d e n s i t y between them.

M a x w e l l also points t o

narrow zones w i t h a reduced

I t must be p o i n t e d o u t , however, t h a t resonance phenomena can o n l y occur
when t h e r e i s no d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n . S i n c e t h e l a t t e r cannot be i g n o r e d , what Goldsbrough (1951)

/76

must be expected is n o t resonance, b u t long-period b e a t s .

made a q u a n t i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s of this c a s e ( f o r two elementary r i n g s ) and found t h a t t h e system can be maintained s t a b l e , p r o v i d i n g i t s m a s s i s s m a l l enough as compared with S a t u r n ' s m a s s . J e f f r e y s (194713) took t h e next s t e p i n t h e d i s c u s s i o n of t h e e f f e c t s of c o l l i s i o n s on S a t u r n ' s r i n g s .
H e c o n c e n t r a t e d on t h e d i s s i p a t i o n of energy

a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e p a r t i a l l y i n e l a s t i c n a t u r e of t h e c o l l i s i o n s , and concluded t h a t t h e d i s s i p a t i o n g r a d u a l l y should s u p p r e s s t h e o s c i l l a t i o n s of t h e p a r t i c l e s n e a r t h e mean p o s i t i o n s , and t h a t , f i n a l l y , t h e r i n g should be converted i n t o a c o l l i s i o n l e s s system one p a r t i c l e t h i c k . J e f f r e y s estimated t h a t t h i s process

should t a k e p l a c e over a v e r y s h o r t p e r i o d of t i m e , cosmogonically speaking. J e f f r e y s assumed t h a t t h e f i n i t e c o n d i t i o n of t h e r i n g system he found d i d not c o n t r a d i c t o b s e r v a t i o n a l d a t a , i n c l u d i n g t h e photometric d a t a . This i s not

so, i n fact.

A o n e - p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s system w i t h t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e B r i n g

cannot y i e l d t h e observed f l l o g a r i t h m i c l ' shape of t h e phase curve n e a r o p p o s i t i o n ( s e e Chapter I V ) . I n o t h e r words, o b s e r v a t i o n s show t h a t f a c t o r s e x i s t t h a t

prevent t h e r i n g s from r e a c h i n g a s t a t e of complete f l a t t e n i n g . But t h e n t h e system i s not c o l l i s i o n l e s s , t h e energy of t h e o s c i l l a t i o n s of t h e p a r t i c l e s g r a d u a l l y i s d i s s i p a t e d , and t h e o n l y p o s s i b i l i t y of p r e v e n t i n g complete f l a t t e n i n g l i e s i n a continuous replenishment of t h i s energy by some source w i t h adequate c a p a c i t y . w i l l be t a k e n up i n #28. (c) Latest research. A s w e a l r e a d y have p o i n t e d o u t , M a x w e l l ' s work r e T h i s w a s wide-ranging The p o s s i b l e mechanisms of such replenishment

c e n t l y w a s reviewed by Cook and F r a n k l i n (1964, 1966).

t h e o r e t i c a l r e s e a r c h i n which t h e a u t h o r s analyzed seven models of r i n g systems. They used M a x w e l l ' s method; t h a t i s , t h e y reviewed t h e compression and expansion waves propagating i n t h e r i n g s , and assumed t h a t i f t h e amplitudes of t h e waves

77

I

r o s e without l i m i t , i n s t a b i l i t y would r e s u l t .

st a b i li t y

.

The o p p o s i t e c a s e would mean

The a u t h o r s p o i n t e d o u t , and e l i m i n a t e d , three of M a x w e l l ' s e r r o r s a t t h e same t i m e . The most important e r r o r ( t h e one t h a t l e d M a x w e l l t o h i s g r e a t

u n d e r e s t i m a t i o n o f t h e upper l i m i t of p e r m i s s i b l e d e n s i t y ) w a s c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e f a c t t h a t Maxwell ignored t h e e f f e c t of d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n .

H e con-

s i d e r e d two t y p e s of waves, one of which i s t h e r e s u l t of t h e t a n g e n t i a l component of t h e o s c i l l a t i o n s of t h e p a r t i c l e s i n t h e azimuthal d i r e c t i o n , t h e o t h e r t h e r e s u l t of t h e r a d i a l component, and propagated r a d i a l l y . Retaining t h e

terminology used by C o o k and F r a n k l i n , we w i l l c a l l t h e s e two t y p e s t h e t a n g e n t i a l and r a d i a l waves. Maxwell n o t e d , and C o o k and F r a n k l i n confirmed, t h e f a c t t h a t This w a s

/77

t h e t a n g e n t i a l waves become u n s t a b l e sooner t h a n do t h e r a d i a l waves.

t h e f a c t upon which Maxwell based h i s c o n c l u s i o n t h a t r i n g s t a b i l i t y depended s o l e l y on t h e t a n g e n t i a l waves, and t h u s a r r i v e d a t h i s d e n s i t y c r i t e r i o n i n

Eq. (27.2).

I n f a c t , t h e presence of d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n can v e r y q u i c k l y con-

v e r t a t a n g e n t i a l wave i n t o a r a d i a l wave ( s e e our example i n #25), and t h i s l e d
C o o k and F r a n k l i n t o conclude t h a t i t i s not t h e t a n g e n t i a l , b u t t h e r a d i a l waves

that control ring s t a b i l i t y .

T h i s o p i n i o n (whether i t i s , or i s n o t , c o r r e c t They used t h e i r

w i l l be d i s c u s s e d l a t e r ) i s t h e a u t h o r s ' p o i n t of depai-ture.

mode p r i m a r i l y t o estimate t h e c r i t i c a l d e n s i t y of t h e r i n g s s a t i s f y i n g t h e cond i t i o n of s t a b i l i t y f o r r a d i a l waves. Recognizing t h a t t h e width t o t h i c k n e s s

r a t i o f o r S a t u r n ' s r i n g s i s v e r y g r e a t , t h e a u t h o r s ignored r i n g c u r v a t u r e and limb e f f e c t s i n a l l t h e i r models. Their f i n a l c o n c l u s i o n w a s t h a t t h e r i n g sys-

tem i s g r a v i t a t i o n a l l y s t a b l e i f t h e s y s t e m ' s mean d e n s i t y i s l e s s t h a n 0.18

g/cm

3

,

and t h a t it i s u n s t a b l e i f t h e mean d e n s i t y i s g r e a t e r t h a n

1.04 g/cm

3

.

W should emphasize t h e f a c t t h a t even t h e s m a l l e s t of t h e s e v a l u e s i s l a r g e r e t h a n t h e Maxwellian upper d e n s i t y l i m i t by a f a c t o r of approximately 80. The

l i m i t s of t h e r e g i o n i n which t h e c r i t i c a l v a l u e of t h e 2 3
can be o b t a i n e d a t once from t h e s e e s t i m a t e s . Actually

r4r a t i o

i s contained

(Lh/s:$)
where r

=

n(r2

2

-

2 r l ) zo'r

(27.3

and r a r e t h e i n t e r n a l and e x t e r n a l r a d i i of t h e r i n g system; Sr i s 1 2 10 t h e mean d e n s i t y of t h e r i n g s . S u b s t i t u t i n g r = 0.89-1010 c m , r = 1.39.10 cm, 1 2 5 cm, and u s i n g t h e 6 e s t i m a t e c i t e d above, we o b t a i n z = 10
0

r

78

I

Yabushita

(1966) i s a n o t h e r who made a r e c e n t estimate of (3irb$)ma.

He

t o o i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e s t a b i l i t y of t h e r i n g s i n t e r m s of axisymmetrical p e r t u r b a t i o n s , b u t he took r i n g curvature, limb e f f e c t s , and (somewhat a r b i t r a r i l y ) t h e r a d i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e d e n s i t y , i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n . even more from t h o s e of M a x w e l l
i <26 -

H i s results differ

-< ( % d a $ m a x 4su
(d)
~

i

(27.5) W shall not, e (27.4)

Objgct_ions to- t.. e ~.~ h conception of wave-like p e r t u r b a t i o n s . . ___

h e r e , seek t h e r e a s o n s f o r t h e s t r i k i n g l a c k of agreement between Eqs. and (27.51,

b u t w i l l p o i n t o u t t h e following weak p o i n t s i n both i n v e s t i g a t i o n s .

/78

The a u t h o r s proceeded on t h e assumption t h a t azimuthal waves with a wave f r o n t extending over t h e e n t i r e width of t h e r i n g , and r a d i a l waves with a wave f r o n t extending over t h e e n t i r e circumference of t h e r i n g , could e x i s t . assumption has a p h y s i c a l b a s i s . Neither

I n f a c t , t h e r e i s no p h y s i c a l r e a s o n f o r t h e

c r e a t i o n i n a r i n g with d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n of compression ( e x p a n s i o n ) of t h e o r d e r of 10,000 k m i n l e n g t h extending i n t h e r a d i a l d i r e c t i o n , or of t h e format i o n of a r a d i a l l y propagating r i n g - l i k e p e r t u r b a t i o n i n which a l l p a r t i c l e s would o s c i l l a t e i n i d e n t i c a l phase over 360". T h i s i s so because t h e c r i t e r i a

of s t a b i l i t y , based on s i m i l a r assumptions, cannot be t r u s t e d . Here t h e q u e s t i o n of t h e shape of t h e d e n s i t y p e r t u r b a t i o n t h a t o c c u r s when t h e r i n g approaches a s t a t e of g r a v i t a t i o n a l i n s t a b i l i t y i s of much i n t e r e s t . The answer i s a s follows. The most probable answer i s t h a t i n c r e a s e i n

w i l l c r e a t e random f l u c t u a t i o n s i n d e n s i t y , r a t h e r t h a n waves.

The o n l y shape

(mr

4)

f o r p e r t u r b a t i o n s such a s t h i s i s an e l l i p s o i d w i t h a d e n s i t y somewhat g r e a t e r t h a n i t s surrounding r e g i o n .

I t should be g r e a t l y f l a t t e n e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e

z c o o r d i n a t e because ( r r l ) 9 zO. The dimensions, and t h e l i f e span, of t h e 2 e l l i p s o i d w i l l depend on t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n v e l o c i t y , or i n o t h e r words, on t h e v a l u e of

-

(mr4). We

may r e c a l l t h a t t h i s p r e s e n t a t i o n was analyzed i n

d e t a i l by Gurevich and Lebedinskiy ( i 9 5 0 ) f o r a p r o t o p l a n e t a r y cloud. Let u s p o i n t o u t as w e l l t h a t i f

(mr/lnlz)

were s o l a r g e t h a t t h e e f f e c t of

d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n t u r n e d o u t t o be s m a l l , t h e o b j e c t i o n t o wave-like p e r t u r b a t i o n s would vanish. T h i s i s not s o i n t h e c a s e o f S a t u r n ' s r i n g s , however,

because spectroscopy of t h e r i n g s has d e t e c t e d s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n .

79

(e)

O b s e r v a t i o n a l i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t t h e r i n g ? =e

f a r from u n s t a b l e .

There

is y e t a n o t h e r shortcoming common t o t h e work done by Cook and F r a n k l i n , and by
Yabushita. T h i s i s t h a t t h e problem of t h e s t a b i l i t y of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s w a s

analyzed as i f t h e r i n g s were an o b j e c t n o t s u s c e p t i b l e t o d i r e c t o b s e r v a t i o n s . I n p o i n t of f a c t , d u r i n g t h i s c e n t u r y t h e r i n g s have been thoroughly s t u d i e d by Lowell, Barnard, Lyot, D o l l f u s , Camichel, Kuiper, and o t h e r v e r y experienced o b s e r v e r s under c o n d i t i o n s p r o v i d i n g good, and even e x c e l l e n t , images and h i g h resolution. Not a t r a c e of moving, heterogeneous r i n g material h a s been observed

( i n t h e form of r a d i a l or t a n g e n t i a l waves, or i n t h e form of e l l i p s o i d s ) . A l l observers r e p o r t s t a b l e , ring-like d i v i s i o n s (Kirkwood's s l i t s ) , a t t r i b u t a b l e

and minor azimuthal t o resonancy w i t h t h e i n t e r n a l s a t e l l i t e s of S a t u r n ( # l ) , d i f f e r e n c e s i n b r i g h t n e s s , such as t h e nonuniform b r i g h t n e s s of t h e e y e s , and t h e l i k e (#13). The c a u s e s of t h e azimuthal e f f e c t s a r e unknown, but t h e i r d e f i -

n i t e o r i e n t a t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e sun i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e y can be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e i n f l u e n c e of s o l a r r a d i a t i o n . I n any c a s e , i t would be extremely u n j u s t i -

f i e d t o s a y t h a t t h e y a r e connected with dynamic i n s t a b i l i t y . So f a r as t h e minimum nonuniformity t h a t can be observed i n t h e dimensions of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s from a high mountain o b s e r v a t o r y ( P i c du Midi, or Lowell, f o r example) i s concerned, i t s magnitude i s of t h e o r d e r of O t ' . l l i k e n o n u n i f o r m i t i e s , and of t h e o r d e r of 0".2 t o O't.4 t o 0".2 for ring-

f o r b r i g h t or d a r k s p o t s

( h e r e we a r e assuming t h a t t h e n o n u n i f o r m i t i e s have adequate b r i g h t n e s s c o n t r a s t with t h e i r s u r r o u n d i n g s ) . respectively.

I t i s between 700 and 1400 and 1400 and 2800 km.

Comparing t h e s e numbers w i t h Eq.

(25.41, one can be persuaded
A s m a l l nonunifor-

t h a t a s p o t from 1400 t o 2800 km i n diameter would be destroyed by d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n w i t h i n one, or two, r e v o l u t i o n s (one day, or l e s s ) . mity with a diameter of

4 Jan would have a l i f e span of t h e o r d e r of one year.

I n o t h e r words, long-term e x i s t e n c e , even of such s m a l l condensation d e n s i t i e s

as 4 km, i s n o t compatible w i t h t h e observed magnitude of t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n of t h e r i n g s .

So, d i r e c t o b s e r v a t i o n s show t h a t t h e r i n g s a r e f a r from u n s t a b l e .

The m a s s

of S a t u r n i s many o r d e r s of magnitude i n e x c e s s of t h e mass of t h e r i n g s , and damps even s m a l l f l u c t u a t i o n s i n d e n s i t y i n s h o r t o r d e r .

80

#28.

Mechanisms _That _ P o s s i b l. P- e v e n t Complete F l a t t e n i n g of t h e Rings . -_ y r . ~Let u s t u r n t o t h e problem touched upon i n #27, t h a t of t h e former J e f f r e y s

Conception, i n accordance with which t h e r i n g s are a o n e - p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s system, b u t which h a s been c o n t r a d i c t e d by o b s e r v a t i o n s . I f t h i s i s so, c o l l i -

s i o n s should occur between t h e p a r t i c l e s , and t h e r e should be continuous d i s s i p a t i o n of t h e p a r t i c l e o s c i l l a t i o n energy. J u s t what mechanisms are t h e r e t h a t

can be involved i n r e p l e n i s h i n g t h e energy c a p a b l e of p r e v e n t i n g t h e complete f l a t t e n i n g of t h e r i n g s d u r i n g t h e l i f e span of t h e s o l a r system? One obvious mechanism i s t h a t of g r a v i t a t i o n a l p e r t u r b a t i o n s of t h e p a r t i c l e s by S a t u r n ' s s a t e l l i t e s . The p e r t u r b a t i o n s could be of s e v e r a l types: short-

p e r i o d , long-period, resonance, and t h e l i k e .

Resonance p e r t u r b a t i o n s a r e e f f e c -

t i v e o n l y f o r narrow zones, w i t h i n t h e l i m i t s of which t h e r e i s commensurability of t h e p e r i o d s of r o t a t i o n of p a r t i c l e s and s a t e l l i t e s ( t h a t i s , f o r t h e d i v i sions). They c a n n o t , t h e r e f o r e , prevent t h e complete f l a t t e n i n g of t h e r i n g Short-period p e r t u r b a t i o n s a r e of g r e a t e s t i n t e r e s t i n t h e

system as a whole.

c a s e of f r e q u e n t c o l l i s i o n s ( y e t o n l y t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t s a r e i m p o r t a n t ) . There a r e no e s t i m a t e s of t h e i r e f f e c t i v e n e s s as y e t . a r e important i n t h e c a s e of rare c o l l i s i o n s . Long-period perturbations

C a l c u l a t i o n s made a t our r e q u e s t

by t h e Shternberg S t a t e Astronomical I n s t i t u t e provided t h e f o l l o w i n g r e s u l t s . P e r t u r b a t i o n s from t h e accumulation of t h e o r b i t s of p a r t i c l e s of M i m a s , Tethys, and T i t a n c r e a t e amplitudes of o s c i l l a t i o n of p a r t i c l e s along t h e z c o o r d i n a t e of 16, tem.

/80

47, and 106 m e t e r s , r e s p e c t i v e l y , a t t h e o u t e r boundary of t h e r i n g sysThe p e r i o d of t h e p e r t u r b a t i o n s i s of t h e o r d e r of 400 r e v o l u t i o n s of a Long-period p e r t u r b a t i o n s , t h e r e f o r e , can be e f f e c t i v e o n l y i n v e r y

particle.

t r a n s p a r e n t zones of t h e r i n g s ( i n t h e i n t e r n a l zones of t h e C r i n g , for example), where c o l l i s i o n s a r e extremely r a r e . C o l l i s i o n s should be f r e q u e n t i n t h e A and B r i n g r e g i o n s . show t h i s , l e t u s compute t h e 1/z
0

In order t o

r a t i o , which i s t h e r a t i o of t h e mean l e n g t h Let u s assume t h a t t h e

of t h e f r e e p a t h of a p a r t i c l e t o t h e r i n g t h i c k n e s s .

p a r t i c l e s have t h e same r a d i u s , p , and t h a t t h e y are d i s t r i b u t e d a t random i n a plane-parallel l a y e r with thickness z
T
0

and o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s (28.1)

O

= T 2Nao/R, I

P

81

where N i s t h e number of p a r t i c l e s i n t h e r i n g ;

R i s t h e volume of t h e r i n g .

The m e a n l e n g t h of t h e f r e e p a t h f o r t h e p a r t i c l e i s

I = 1:j.i - ! / ~ ~ , o 2 ~ ~ ~ ,
Comparing these expressions, we obtain
IJZo

(28.2)

3 14 ]~Z.G,.
= 1, t h e v a l u e s

(28.3)

0 f o r t/z

When r

= T = OA
0

0.6 and r

, respectively.

0

= T

OB

0.18 and 0.30 are obtained

Thus, c o l l i s i o n s i n t h e A and B r i n g s a r e f r e q u e n t .

In t h i s c a s e t h e s o u r c e of energy compensating f o r d i s s i p a t i o n during c o l l i s i o n s can be t h e energy of d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n of t h e r i n g . Actually,

d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n c r e a t e s transfer o f t h e p u l s e moment i n t h e d i r e c t i o n of i n c r e a s e i n t h e r a d i u s of t h e r i n g , r. S i n c e t h e c o l l i s i o n s a r e not c e n t r a l

c o l l i s i o n s , g e n e r a l l y speaking ( t h e p r o b a b i l i t y of what would be c e n t r a l c o l l i s i o n , s t r i c t l y speaking, i s z e r o ) , t h e t r a n s f e r of p u l s e moment i s accompanied by f r e q u e n t conversions of d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n energy i n t o random p a r t i c l e motion energy n e a r t h e i r mean p o s i t i o n s ; i n t o "heat.
It

Dissi-

p a t i o n of energy can be considered a s l l c o o l i n g " t h e r i n g , because of t h e l e s s t h a n complete e l a s t i c i t y of t h e p a r t i c l e s . other i n t h e stationary state.
z
0

The two p r o c e s s e s c a n c e l each

remains c o n s t a n t , but t h e t o t a l mechanical The r e s u l t i s t h a t a l l p a r t i c l e s slowly

energy of t h e r i n g d e c r e a s e s s t e a d i l y . approach Saturn. L e t u s i n t r o d u c e a formula f o r z random motion,

u.

0

as a f u n c t i o n of t h e mean v e l o c i t y of

W e w i l l assume t h a t t h e r e d u c t i o n i n energy a t t r i b u t a b l e

t o t h e l e s s t h a n t o t a l e l a s t i c i t y during each c o l l i s i o n i s completely balanced by t h e above-indicated "heating." I n f a c t , t h e r e i s only a mean compensation,

but i f t h e c o l l i s i o n s a r e f r e q u e n t , t h e behavior of t h e system w i l l be c l o s e t o t h e c a s e of completely e l a s t i c c o l l i s i o n s . b u t i o n w i l l b e c l o s e t o Maxwellian. Since t h e system i s unusually f l a t , and s i n c e Specifically, velocity d i s t r i -

D

A i s extremely s m a l l ,

t h e random motion of a p a r t i c l e along t h e z c o o r d i n a t e ( t h a t i s , normal t o t h e plane of t h e r i n g ) can be considered a harmonic o s c i l l a t i o n i n S a t u r n ' s gravitational f i e l d .

I t s amplitude t h e n i s
(28.4)

82

where u

2

i s t h e component of t h e random v e l o c i t y i n t e r m s of t h e z c o o r d i n a t e

when z = 0 ' ; w i s t h e angular v e l o c i t y of t h e c i r c u l a r Keplerian motion of t h e particle. I n t u r n , t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e p a r t i c l e c o n c e n t r a t i o n i n terms

of t h e z c o o r d i n a t e w i l l be d e s c r i b e d by t h e Boltzmann e q u a t i o n n ( z ) = n ( 0 ) exp (-E /kT). P (28.5)

2 2 -2 S u b s t i t u t i n g E = 1/2 m w z and kT = 1/3 m c 2 = 1/8 m u (where c and P are t h e mean-square and t h e mean v e l o c i t i e s , r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , w e o b t a i n 2 2 2 n ( z ) = n ( 0 ) exp (-4cu a /nu

1.
2 ;

(28.6)

L e t us i n t r o d u c e t h e e f f e c t i v e p h y s i c a l t h i c k n e s s

o eff'

satisfying the

condition (28.7)
A comparison of Eq.

(28.6) w i t h Eq. (28.7) w i l l y i e l d

-

u = ut3

o eff

/ 6

(28.8)

I t can be shown t h a t about

84 p e r c e n t of a l l t h e p a r t i c l e s can b e contained
eff planes.
0

between t h e +zo e f f and

-Z

N w l e t us estimate t h e z o

v a l u e t h a t can be maintained c o n s t a n t f o r t i m e

t of t h e l i f e of t h e s o l a r system a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e expenditure of mechanical
energy by t h e p a r t i c l e , i f t h e r a d i u s o f t h e p a r t i c l e ' s o r b i t changes from r to r
0

t

in that t i m e . According t o t h e hydrodynamics of a v i s c o u s , incompressible m e d i u m , t h e

amount of energy converted i n t o h e a t ( i n a u n i t of volume i n a u n i t of t i m e ) during t h e t r a n s f e r of p u l s e moment i s -(dE/dt)
=

Tr2

2 (du)/dr)

,

(28.9)

*ere

7

=

1/3 Tl6, and i s t h e c o e f f i c i e n t of i n t e r n a l f r i c t i o n ; ( 6 i s d e n s i t y
Mindful of t h e f a c t t h a t t h e mechanical energy of t h e p a r t i c l e

of t h e medium).
is

E = y 5/2r, m P P

(28.10)

where y i s t h e c o n s t a n t of g r a v i t a t i o n , and t h a t r2(dcU/drl2 = 9/4

(%/r 3 1,

( 28.11 )

83

and r e s o r t i n g as w e l l t o t h e use of Eqs. (28.91,

(28.3)

and (28.81,

i n p l a c e of Eq.

we obtain

-r 5/2dr
implying

= (3

zt eff/8 G o ) d t ,

( 28.12)

l e t u s assume f o r o eff' example t h a t a p a r t i c l e t h a t now i s l o c a t e d c l o s e t o t h e c e n t e r of t h e B r i n g
I n o r d e r t o use t h i s e q u a t i o n t o estimate z

/82

(r

=

r

t

= l.OO-lO1o

cm) w a s ,
0

a t t h e beginning of t h e e x i s t e n c e of t h e r i n g

system, a t d i s t a n c e r = r t h e system). w find e

1.37*1010 c ( t h e p r e s e n t day o u t e r boundary of m 9 y e a r s = 1.58-1017 seconds, Then, s e t t i n g 7 = 1, and t = 5.10
=

0

z

o eff

=

35 m

( 28.14

i s c o n s i d e r a b l y more aPP' t h a n t h i s when t h e r i n g s a r e viewed p r e c i s e l y edge-on. The j u d i c i o u s t h i n g t o
The apparent p h y s i c a l t h i c k n e s s of t h e r i n g s , z
0

do i s t o d e f i n e z

a s t h e t h i c k n e s s of a l a y e r having an o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s aPP along t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s a t t h e boundaries equal t o u n i t y . I n such c a s e
0

app/zo eff M sustaining
Z

3.5.

The j u s t considered mechanism t h e r e f o r e i s capable of

z
0

aPP

M

120 m

(28.15)

f o r 5-10

9 years.

Since w have assumed t h a t a l l t h e p a r t i c l e s a r e of a s i z e , e

t h i s e s t i m a t e i s t h e low l i m i t for z
0

**
aPP' (28.8) and (28,141, t h e mean The

Let u s add t h a t i n accordance w i t h Eqs.

v e l o c i t y of t h e random movement of t h e p a r t i c l e s i s about 0.4 cm/s.

impact f o r c e d u r i n g c o l l i s i o n s should n o t be g r e a t , t h e r e f o r e , and t h e Newtonian c o e f f i c i e n t of r e s t i t u t i o n should be c l o s e t o u n i t y ( s e e Goldsmith, 1965).

The observed t h i c k n e s s of t h e r i n g s ( e s t a b l i s h e d f o r t h e f i r s t time i n 1966, and f o r which s e e #22) i s of t h e o r d e r of 3 t o 4 km.

*

*

-.

.

~

. _

__

*

Equation i s i l l e g i b l e i n o r i g i n a l t e x t

-

Translation editor.

84

VII.

Theory of t h_ _ f f e c t o f Mutual Shading and-I>s e E vations * -

Comparison with Obser-

i83

#29.

I n t r o d u c t o r y Remarks
A s soon a s w e have e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t t h e mutual shading of t h e p a r t i c l e s

i s t h e p r i n c i p a l e f f e c t r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e observed shape of t h e phase c u r v e s
e f o r t h e r i n g s (#18) w can e s t i m a t e t h e volumetric d e n s i t y of t h e r i n g s , D , from t h e t h e o r y of t h i s e f f e c t . Then a knowledge of t h e o r d e r of t h i c k n e s s &P j u s t as knowledge of z

of t h e r i n g s , z

0

(#22) and of t h e p a r t i c l e d e n s i t y ,

t h e t o t a l mass of t h e r i n g s , thickness,
T

mr,

,

enables us t o estimate and of t h e o p t i c a l of a p a r t i c l e

0’

0

( # I & ) e n a b l e s u s t o e s t i m a t e t h e mean r a d i u s , p, ,

of the ring. The mechanism involved i n t h e mutual shading e f f e c t i s v e r y simple, q u a l i t a t i v e l y speaking. Let u s suppose t h a t w have a p l a n e - p a r a l l e l e layer

of p a r t i c l e s i l l u m i n a t e d by t h e sun and observed from t h e e a r t h ( t h e a n g l e s of e l e v a t i o n A and A ‘ , r e s p e c t i v e l y ) . l a y e r i s m a n y t i m e s t h a t of p, system. Let u s t a k e it t h a t t h e t h i c k n e s s of t h e

t h a t i s , t h a t w have a many-particle t h i c k n e s s e

P a r t i c l e s l o c a t e d c l o s e r t o t h e sun c a s t t h e i r shadow on p a r t i c l e s But t h e s e shadows cannot be seen from t h e e a r t h a t

f a r t h e r from it.

t h e time of exact o p p o s i t i o n (a, = 0 ) , because every p a r t i c l e s h i e l d s i t s own shadow. With i n c r e a s e i n cy, t h e shadows g r a d u a l l y emerge from t h e d i s k s of t h e and t h e mean b r i g h t n e s s of t h e system diminishes. H also w a s the f i r s t t o e

particles,

W a r e indebted t o S e e l i g e r f o r t h i s concept. e

develop t h e q u a n t i t a t i v e t h e o r y of t h i s e f f e c t ( S e e l i g e r , 1887, 1893).

The r e a d e r should keep i n mind t h a t t h e t h e o r e t i c a l r e s e a r c h done by S e e l i g e r on t h e phase f u n c t i o n of S a t u r n ’ s r i n g s , and i t s a s s o c i a t i o n with t h e s t r u c t u r e of t h i s o b j e c t , was c a r r i e d out almost 80 y e a r s ago, b e f o r e spect r o g r a p h i c o b s e r v a t i o n s were made of r i n g r o t a t i o n ( B e l o p o l ’ s k i y , Deslandres,

/84

Keeler, #%), long b e f o r e d i r e c t measurements were made of t h e s u r f a c e b r i g h t n e s s
___ _ _ _ _ __
. _ _ .

See t h e Appendix (pp. t h i s chapter.

*

118-119 f o r t h e n o t a t i o n s used i n t h e formulas i n

85

of t h e r i n g s (Schoenberg, Hertzsprung, #12), and much e a r l i e r t h a n t h e

formu-

l a t i o n of t h e t h e o r y of t h e m u l t i p l e s c a t t e r i n g of l i g h t (Ambartsumyan, Sobolev, Chandrasekhar).

Nor had M i e ' s d i f f r a c t i o n t h e o r y been formulated.

The proximate c a u s e of S e e l i g e r ' s r e s e a r c h e v i d e n t l y w a s t h e r e s u l t s of

Miiller's measurements (1893) of t h e i n t e g r a l b r i g h t n e s s of t h e S a t u r n system
as a f u n c t i o n of A ' and cy.

M u l l e r found a v a l u e of 0.044 s t e l l a r magnitude/

degree of phase f o r S a t u r n ' s phase c o e f f i c i e n t , a v a l u e f a r i n e x c e s s of J u p i t e r ' s phase c o e f f i c i e n t (0.015) and of t h e phase c o e f f i c i e n t s of o t h e r planets. S e e l i g e r showed t h a t he w a s extremely p e r s p i c a c i o u s by p o s t u l a t i n g

t h a t t h i s f a c t could be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e " m e t e o r i t i c " s t r u c t u r e of S a t u r n ' s rings. The i d e a of t h e " m e t e o r i t i c " s t r u c t u r e was borrowed from M a x w e l l (1859).

S e e l i g e r , i n h i s t h e o r y , considered o n l y f i r s t o r d e r s c a t t e r i n g , d i c t a t e d by t h e l e v e l of knowledge of t h e time. I n h i s f i r s t paper he wrote of a r i n g

made up of p a r t i c l e s of i d e n t i c a l s i z e , but h i s second paper included g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of a t h e o r y d e a l i n g with t h e case of p a r t i c l e s n o t a l l of t h e same s i z e . The sun w a s r e p l a c e d by a p o i n t source of l i g h t a t i n f i n i t y , and

it w a s t a k e n t h a t t h e p a r t i c l e s w e r e macroscopic, d i f f u s e l y r e f l e c t i n g spheres.
The n a t u r a l phase f u n c t i o n of t h e p a r t i c l e was t a k e n i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n by i n t r o d u c i n g a f a c t o r t h a t was dependent on cy. S e e l i g e r , i n t h i s approximation,

obtained formulas f o r c a l c u l a t i n g t h e phase f u n c t i o n . Figure 22. Discrepancy between S e e l i g e r f s phase curves and t h e observat i o n a l curves.

1, 2 , 3 - t h e o r e t i c a l phase c u r v e s (Seel i g e r , 1887) f o r D = = 3.75-10-3 6.25. 10-3and 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 - ~ , c o r r e c t e d f o r t h e n a t u r a l e f f e c t of p a r t i c l e phase and f o r h i g h e r o r d e r s c a t t e r i n g ; c i r c l e s are t h e means from Schoenberg Is o b s e r v a t i o n s (1933) ; 4 - observed phase curve f o r B r i n g , cons t r u c t e d using t h e s e p o i n t s [ E q . (12.111.

,

D i r e c t measurements of t h e s u r f a c e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e A and B r i n g s a s a f u n c t i o n of cy (Hertzsprung, 1919; Schoenberg, 1921, 1933) d e t e c t e d a g r e a t d i s crepancy between S e e l i g e r ' s t h e o r e t i c a l phase curve and t h e o b s e r v a t i o n a l d a t a

86

( F i g u r e 22).

T h i s a u t h o r (see Bobrov, 1940, 1959, 1967) demonstrated t h a t

t h e s e d i s c r e p a n c i e s a r o s e because S e e l i g e r ' s approximation d i d n o t reproduce t h e c o n d i t i o n of S a t u r n ' s r i n g s a c c u r a t e l y enough, t h e angular dimensions of t h e s o l a r d i s k ( - 3 ' . 5 ) , i n t h a t (1) he d i s r e g a r d e d ( 2 ) he d i d n o t c o n s i d e r

/85 -

m u l t i p l e s c a t t e r i n g , and ( 3 ) he assumed t h a t a l l s i z e s of p a r t i c l e s w e r e e q u a l l y probable.
W e p o s t u l a t e d t h a t an approximation f r e e of t h e s e l i m i t a t i o n would s a t i s f y

t h e c o n d i t i o n s f o r S a t u r n ' s r i n g s incomparably b e t t e r t h a n would S e e l i g e r ' s approximation. T h i s approximation of t h e t h e o r y w a s c o n s t r u c t e d and w a s i n

extremely good concordance w i t h o b s e r v a t i o n s . s e c t i o n s t h a t follow.

It w i l l be reviewed i n t h e

#3l. The "Cone-Cylinder" Approximation, Without_ _ __ - - Variance
I
~ ~

i n t h e S i z e s of

P a r t i c l e s Taken i n t o Consideration The shadow of a p a r t i c l e i n S e e l i g e r ' s approximation i s an i n f i n i t e l y long c y l i n d e r , because of h i s l i m i t a t i o n ( 1 ) . The volume behind t h e p a r t i c l e , i n which t h e r i n g m a t e r i a l i s s h i e l d e d from t h e observer by t h e d i s k of t h e p a r t i c l e , t o o i s an i n f i n i t e l y long c y l i n d e r . "cy1 inder-cy1 i n d e r " approximation.
W e can c a l l t h i s scheme t h e

-

- -

...

/---.-.

-_

F i g u r e 23.

Schematic View o f t h e eye o f S a t u r n ' s r i n g s .

The element de belongs t o a p a r t i c l e a r b i t r a r i l y s e l e c t e d a t depth z , measured from p l a n e fl ( c l o s e s t t o t h e s u n ) . The s t r a i g h t l i n e s M S and M are d i r e c t e d E toward t h e sun, and toward t h e e a r t h , r e s p e c t i v e l y . C i s t h e cylinder of s h i e l d i n g ; U i s t h e cone of shading; p i s t h e p a r t i c l e r a d i u s ; cy i s t h e phase a n g l e ; A and A ' are t h e a n g l e s of e l e v a t i o n of t h e sun and e a r t h over t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s .

87

1111 l111ll1l I 1l1111I I I Il 1 I I1 l

L e t u s remove l i m i t a t i o n

(11,

and l e t u s say t h a t a t t h e mean d i s t a n c e

of S a t u r n from t h e sun, t h e d i s k of t h e l a t t e r h a s an a n g u l a r r a d i u s of

cp

= 11.676;

l/cp w 2.0'10 3

.

(31.1)

The shadows of t h e p a r t i c l e s t h e n w i l l be cones w i t h a f i n i t e l e n g t h of p / ~ , where p

/86 -

is the p a r t i c l e radius.

But a t t h e same t i m e , t h e s h i e l d e d volumes W o b t a i n t h e "cone-cylinder" approximation. e when penumbra i s __ Some p a r t i c l e , striking

remain i n f i n i t e l y long c y l i n d e r s .

(a)

Amplitude of chang disregarded. L e t u s look a t F i g u r e 23.

__IiL___;

t h e c e n t e r of volume sun, r e s p e c t i v e l y .

c , or U, s h i e l d s element de from t h e e a r t h , o r from t h e
I n t h e c a s e of t h e former t h e element de w i l l be s h i e l d e d I n t h e c a s e of t h e l a t t e r t h e p a r t i c l e

by t h e d i s k of t h e p a r t i c l e considered.

w i l l c a s t i t s shadow on de.

The shadow of t h e p a r t i c l e should be considered

as b l a c k w t h an accuracy of w i t h i n f i r s t o r d e r s c a t t e r i n g , s o t h a t t h e
element de w i l l be seen from t h e e a r t h only f o r t h e p e r i o d of time when t h e c e n t e r s of a l l t h e other N-1 p a r t i c l e s of t h e r i n g s ( N i s t h e number of a l l

p a r t i c l e s ) w i l l be o u t s i d e t h e s o - c a l l e d volume of p r o b a b i l i t y

v=c+u-w,
where W i s p a r t of V, t h e t o t a l of C and U. The p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t de w i l l be seen i s
11 : z

(31- 2 )

[ ( R - V)/f?]"-' zz

C S ~ (-

TJN/R),

(31- 3 )
For

where R is t h e volume of t h e r i n g .

The mean luminous f l u x t r a n s m i t t e d t o t h e

e a r t h by element de when t h e l a t t e r i s not s h i e l d e d , and i s not shaded. t h e many-particle t h i c k n e s s system, a l l l a y e r s n o t t o o c l o s e t o p l a n e s a t i s f y t h e condition

n
(31.4)

p -4 z .
Further, i f t h e volumetric density is
4

D

3- z[? (IV/R)

(31.5)
T h i s means t h a t f o r a l l elements

which i s s m a l l compared w i t h u n i t y , JZq.

(31.4) can be s a t i s f i e d by p r a c t i c a l l y

a l l p a r t i c l e s t h a t can be s h i e l d e d , o r shaded. d e , t h e p r o b a b i l i t y of no s h i e l d i n g p r a c t i c a l l y t h e same. Consequently F==pPo-

o r shading, by t h e same p a r t i c l e i s t h e l i g h t f l u x from t h i s p a r t i c l e w i l l be

(31.6)

88

where

r

i s t h e v a l u e of F

0

when cy = 0 and f ( d i s t h e p a r t i c l e ' s n a t u r a l

phase f u n c t i o n .
W e can, t h e r e f o r e , w r i t e t h e following e x p r e s s i o n f o r t h e amplitude of

t h e change i n r i n g b r i g h t n e s s when

a changes from

0 t o cym a x x 6 O . 5 :

Since, when a = a

max

w<c+u,

(31.8)

( s e e Bobrov, 1960, p. 3141, w can set e

(31.9)
while

v(0)

=

c.

(31.10)
and t h e volume of U i s a f u n c t i o n

The volume of C i s a f u n c t i o n of A ' , of A .

But i f t h e r i n g opening i s not v e r y small A and A ' w i l l be c l o s e i n

v a l u e , and we can t a k e it t h a t
A'
= A.

(31.11)

It i s convenient t o i n t r o d u c e a new v a r i a b l e

Then

(31.13)
and

(31.14)
In p l a c e of Eq.

(31.71, we o b t a i n

and t h e i n t e g r a l i n t h i s e q u a t i o n i s r e a d i l y e v a l u a t e d by numerical i n t e g r a t i o n . In Eqs. (31.13) through l3q.

-

(31.151, 'r
and

0

i s t h e o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s , p r e v i o u s l y determined

(28.11,

x 0 r: (cps,/p sin A ) = -. 4

- - -: ; 'Cllcp 3 Ds1n '4 .

(31.16)
89

is the brightness created by first order scattering. A s already has 1 been indicated by Eq. (17.11), the total brightness, with higher order scatterwhere b ing taken into consideration, is b = b1
i

Ab.

(31-17)

Since the interval of change in a for Saturn is very small, it can be taken that (31.18) Then we can use the following equation to make the transition from b ( a 1 max )/

where Ab(0) can be computed through formulas and tables for the theory of multiple scattering of light. The results of the calculations of the Ab(O)/b(O)

L88

ratio for Saturn's rings have already been presented in #17 (see Table 5 . ) Ab(O)/b(O) is of the order of 10 percent, or less, for particles with a

- 0.6,

and the phase function is similar to that of the moon, and this is extremely close to actual conditions. The factor f(amax)/f(0) can be computed as follows. Since the spherical

albedo of a typical ring particle is now low, the natural effect of opposition of the particles (the Gehrels-Hapke effect) is slight.
0 ral phase curve for a particle in limits ( < a

Consequently, the natu-

6O.5) should be practically

linear, so that .1-pmx Cf (amax)/f(0) 1 = 2 5 2 ' a a , where p is the particle phase coefficient. P
Eqs. ( 31 2 0

(31.15),

(31.191, and (31.20) solve this problem.

They make it

possible to compute the amplitude of the effect of mutual shading when the penumbra is ignored. The results of the calculations converted to stellar magnitudes are shown in Figure 24 (the solid curve). The dashed curve shows similar results ob-

tained when the penumbra was taken into consideration (see the next section). We used
7

0

= 1, A = A ' =

25" (wide open rings), (Ab/b)

= 0.10, and p

P

= 0.024.

The only free parameter now is D.

AS will be seen from Figure

24, the amplitude

is heavily dependent on D, a fact not included in the Seeliger approximation.

90

The p h y s i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n is q u i t e clear. Since t h e cones of t h e shadows cast by t h e p a r t i c l e s have a f i n i t e l e n g t h , t h e p r o b a b i l i t y of mutual shading dimin i s h e s w i t h i n c r e a s e i n t h e mean d i s t a n c e between a d j a c e n t p a r t i c l e s . But t h e

mean d i s t a n c e can o n l y i n c r e a s e when t h e r e is a r e d u c t i o n i n D. F i g u r e 24. T h e o r e t i c a l amplitude, Ammax, of t h e e f f e c t of mutual shading i n s t e l l a r magnitudes a s a f u n c t i o n of log D. The s o l i d curve w a s computed w i t h t h e penumbra ignored; t h e dashed curve w i t h t h e penumbra t a k e n int o consideration. The amplitude i s g r e a t l y dependent on D. The i n f l u e n c e of t h e penumbra is slight. A s opposed

t o t h i s , t h e shadows i n S e e l i g e r ' s approximation a r e i n f i n i t e l y long c y l i n d e r s , and, as a r e s u l t , t h e p r o b a b i l i t y of t h e mutual shading does n o t depend on t h e mean d i s t a n c e between p a r t cles. Let u s p o i n t o u t t h a t Eq.
N

(si.16 1
0

demonstrates t h e dependence of x

on D.

It is n e c e s s a r y t h a t D

>

according

t o Figure 24, i n o r d e r t o o b t a i n a s i g n i f i c a n t amplitude from t h e e f f e c t of mutual shading. Setting
0

(31.16), w e f i n d t h a t x

= 7 - 1 , and s i n A = s i n 25" = 0.4225, i n Eq. 0 OB = 1 corresponds t o D = 1.58 The observed
7

PB(zmax) p B ( 0 ) is of t h e o r d e r of 0. 5 (#12), a v a l u e corresponding t o
x
0

-

m

l / 3 and D

%

5

lom3.

Thus, t h e s t r o n g e f f e c t of mutual shading can only
0

be achieved when t h e c o n d i t i o n is x

1.

Turning now t o Eq.

(31.15), w e can

see t h a t t h i s l a t t e r c o n d i t i o n means t h a t only t h e f i r s t t e r m i n t h e numerator

is present.

This t e r m d e s c r i b e s t h e photometric p r o p e r t i e s of t h o s e l a y e r s of
L e t u s c a l l them t h e " s u r f a c e

t h e r i n g where a l l shadow cones a r e t r u n c a t e d . layers."

The second and t h i r d terms i n t h e numerator of Eq. (31.15) a r e t h e

"deep l a y e r s , " where, a s b e f o r e , some of t h e shadow cones a r e truncated', b u t some a l r e a d y have reached completion. The presence of completed cones reduces

t h e p r o b a b i l i t y of mutual shading; t h a t i s , t h e i n t e n s i t y of t h e e f f e c t i s s t r o n g e r t h e t h i c k e r t h e deep l a y e r s a s compared w i t h t h e t h i c k n e s s of t h e s u r face layers. Accordingly, t h e c o n d i t i o n f o r i n t e n s i v e e f f e c t of mutual shading

i s absence of deep l a y e r s .

1l 1 1l1l1 1l1l1 1 l I I1 I

E
\

-. -~

.- . --

.

__

/ -

t ------

F i g u r e 25.

Shape of t h e volume of p r o b a b i l i t y , V, i n t h e c a s e when t h e penumbra i s taken i n t o consideration. Designations are t h e same as t h o s e used i n F i g u r e 23.
. I n f l u e n c e of t h e penumbra.

(b)

H e r e t h e geometry of t h e volume o f proba-

b i l i t y , V , must be changed somewhat, and t h i s i s shown i n F i g u r e 25. S p e c i f i c a l l y , i n a d d i t i o n t o cone U , t a p e r i n g i n t h e d i r e c t i o n toward t h e sun,

w e must i n t r o d u c e a second cone ( c o a x i a l w i t h U ) expanding i n t h e d i r e c t i o n
toward t h e sun. The a n g l e between t h e axis and t h e g e n e r a t r i x of t h i s new

cone once again i s equal t o cp. Then

v =c + u

+ P -

w,
(31.2).

(31.21)

where P i s t h e volume c o n t a i n e d between t h e expanding and t a p e r i n g cones. The o t h e r d e s i g n a t i o n s are t h e same a s t h o s e used i n Eq.

If t h e c e n t e r of some p a r t i c l e e n t e r s P , t h e p a r t i c l e w i l l c a s t a penumbra
on t h e element d e , and t h e i n t e n s i t y of t h a t penumbra w i l l depend on t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e c e n t e r of t h e p a r t i c l e with r e s p e c t t o de.

/9_0

92

where po, pl,

p2

volume V ; K 0 ' d6 corresponding t o t h e s e events.

,... a r e t h e p r o b a b i l i t i e s of 0, 1, e t c . , K1, K2, ... are t h e m e a n r e l a t i v e i l l u m i n a t i o n s
2,

particles hitting of t h e element

K

0

=

1.

Ignoring a l l t e r m s i n Q. (31.22) w i t h s u b s c r i p t s l a r g e r t h a n one, we obtain

which g i v e s t h e approximation f o r t h e e f f e c t of mutual shading w i t h excess. By Actually, t h e c o e f f i c i e n t s K and t h e p r o b a b i l i t i e s p are p o s i t i v e . n n ignoring t h e terms with s u b s c r i p t s l a r g e r t h a n one w e u n d e r e s t i m a t e t h e mean luminousflux, F; t h a t is, w e o v e r e s t i m a t e t h e e f f e c t of mutual shading.
On t h e o t h e r hand, d i s r e g a r d f o r t h e penumbra ( s e e "a" t h i s s e c t i o n ) under-

e s t i m a t e s t h e e f f e c t of mutual shading.

Thus, t h e t r u e amplitude of t h e e f f e c t

w i l l f a l l between t h e s e two extremes.
The p r o b a b i l i t i e s pn can be c a l c u l a t e d by using t h e formula f o r t h e prob-

l e m involving f l u c t u a t i o n s (see Timiryazev, 1956, f o r example)
n '
-

[ v n exp(-v)/n:l,

(31.24)

where v i s t h e mean number of p a r t i c l e s i n volume providing v and n are small compared with N .

v.

E q . (31.24)

is valid

This c.r.ndition i s s a t i s f i e d i n (31.23) by

o u r c a s e because V

<

R.

Since

V

=(N/R)V,

we can r e p l a c e Eq.

L e t us t a k e i t t h a t , a s i n t h e c a s e when t h e penumbra was ignored, W = 0 when
CY =

amax.
Then

and

from whence (31.28) and

Il l l I

The general e x p r e s s i o n f o r t h e c o e f f i c i e n t K h a s t h e form 1
XI == (I/!')
I'

(I - 3;-) tlV,

(31.30)

where S

Q

and CT are s o l i d a n g l e s at which t h e s o l a r d i s k , and t h a t p a r t of it

s h i e l d e d by t h e p a r t i c l e , can be seen from p o i n t M. The n a t u r e of t h e s o l a r e c l i p s e a t p o i n t M a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e p a r t i c l e w i t h i t s c e n t e r i n volume P w i l l depend on t h e p o s i t i o n of t h i s c e n t e r i n

t e r m s of M.

The e c l i p s e can b e p a r t i a l , a n n u l a r , o r " p a r t i a l annular."
9 / 9 1

A l l l a y e r s of t h e r i n g can b e broken down i n t o s u r f a c e ( s u b s c r i p t llSII)

middle ( " M I 1 ) , Then

and deep ( I ' D " ) ,

depending on t h e n a t u r e of t h e e c l i p s e .

where, f o r b r e v i t y , t h e v a l u e s of K by t h e s u b s c r i p t s "max" and " . 0" have t h e forms

and V when cy = Q and cy = 0, are shown 1 max The approximate formulas f o r t h e c o e f f i c i e n t s

94

... . .

..

Eqs. (31.311,

(31.32),

and (31.19) s o l v e t h e problem.

The r e s u l t s are

shown by t h s dashed curve i n F i g u r e 24.

A w e see, it p a s s e s v e r y c l o s e t o s
T h i s r e f l e c t s t h e r a p i d de-

t h e curve o b t a i n e d when t h e penumbra w a s ignored.

cay i n t h e i n t e n s i t y of t h e penumbra w i t h i n c r e a s e i n t h e d i s t a n c e between t h e c e n t e r of t h e p a r t i c l e and t h e f u l l shadow cone. The e r r o r introduced by i g -

m n o r i n g t h e penumbra i s l e s s t h a n 0 .l.

N w we can i g n o r e t h e i n f l u e n c e of t h e o

penumbra i n a l l f u t u r e formulas i n t h e t h e o r y of t h e e f f e c t of mutual shading. (c) from Eq. The o r i g i n a l formula f o r b ( a ) / b l ( 0 ) i s obtained 1 (31.7) by r e p l a c i n g amax a W is not considered s m a l l as compared by . Phase f u n c t i o n .

with C + U.

A s w have noted i n t h e f o r e g o i n g , t h e c a s e t h a t i s o f p r a c t i c a l importance e

i s t h e one i n which t h e r e a r e no deep l a y e r s ( x

0

<

1, o r z

0

< (p/cp)).

For

t h i s c a s e , s e t t i n g A ' = A , changing from t h e v a r i a b l e z t o x , and t a k i n g cognizance of Eq.

(31.201,

i n p l a c e of Eq.

(31.33) we o b t a i n (31.34)

95

where

and
=

a/q.

L e t u s remember t h a t W d e s i g n a t e s t h e common p a r t of t h e volumes C and U
[ s e e Eq. (31.211. The phase a n g l e , cy, a l s o i s t h e a n g l e between t h e axes of When cy i n c r e a s e s , C and U move with r e s p e c t

t h e volumes C and U ( F i g u r e 2 3 ) .

t o each o t h e r , i n much t h e same f a s h i o n as t h e h a l v e s of a s c i s s o r s , and W decreases quickly. Consequently,

w i s g r e a t l y dependent on a, s i n c e it i s ,

i n t h e f i n a l a n a l y s i s , t h e reason f o r t h e lllogarithmiclf shape of t h e t h e o r e t i c a l phase curve. The p r e c i s e e x p r e s s i o n f o r w(cy) i s v e r y cumbersome. The r e a d e r can f i n d

it i n our a r t i c l e (Bobrov, 19601, which c o n t a i n s simple, approximate, e x p r e s s i o n s
as w e l l .
The n a t u r a l phase f u n c t i o n of t h e p a r t i c l e ( t a k e n as l i n e a r on t h e s t e l ar /93 magnitude s c a l e ) i s r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e f a c t o r 2.512-ppa. The r e d u c t i o n f o r

-

s c a t t e r i n g of h i g h e r o r d e r s i s accomplished as f o r amplitude [ s e e Eq. and t h e e x p l a n a t o r y t e x t accompanying t h i s e x p r e s s i o n ] .

(31.19

Overall, b ( a ) / b ( O ) depends on t h e v a r i a b l e s cy, A , A ‘ , and on t h e param e t e r s D, r
0’

Ab(O)/b(O),

pp.

The dependence of A and A ’ is s l i g h t .

Beyond

t h i s , A ’ M A f o r widely, or even moderately opened r i n g s .

The parameter r

i s known from o b s e r v a t i o n s (#I&) and i t s accuracy i s s a t i s f a c t o r y .
of t h e parameters Ab/b of 0.10. in a l r e a d y has been c a l c u l a t e d

/94 0 The v a l u e

-

( # l 7 ) , and i s not i n e x c e s s

#17,

The a n t i c i p a t e d v a l u e of p according t o t h e conclusion w reached e P’ should be c l o s e t o t h a t f o r t h e moon (pr, w 0.027 s t e l l a r magnitude/de-

g r e e of p h a s e ) .

W e can c o n s i d e r t h i s parameter t o b e known from o b s e r v a t i o n s .

The o n l y f r e e parameter i s D , and t h e o n l y v a r i a b l e ( f o r f i x e d A ) i s cy.

96

'f

/

F i g u r e 26.

Shapes of t h e o r e t i c a l phase c u r v e s i n terms of parameters D, I 0' p and Ab/b ( d i s p e r s i o n s i n s i z e s of p a r t i c l e s i g n o r e d ) . The & g l e s of e l e v a t i o n have t h e f i x e d v a l u e A = A ' = 25O i n a l l c a s e s The v a l u e s (widely opened r i n g s ) , z i s t a k e n as equal t o 1 lan. 0 of t h e o t h e r parameters a r e shown n e a r t h e curves.

,

Figure 26 shows t h e shapes of t h e t h e o r e t i c a l phase c u r v e s i n terms of D,
To'

Pp'

and Ab/b f o r f i x e d A , A I , and z 0

.

F i g u r e 27 i s a comparison between t h e t h e o r e t i c a l phase c u r v e s and d a t a

/95 -

from o b s e r v a t i o n s made by Hertzsprung (19191, Schoenberg (19331, and Lebedinets

(1957).

The F r a n k l i n and Cook d a t a (1965) are v e r y c l o s e t o Schoenberg's ( b u t

are n o t p l o t t e d i n F i g u r e 27 i n o r d e r t o avoid c l u t t e r ) .
d a t a with t h e t h e o r e t i c a l d a t a a l i t t l e later.

W e s h a l l compare t h e s e

97

I

i a/u
F i g u r e 27. Comparison of t h e o r e t i c a l phase c u r v e s ( s o l i d l i n e s ) w i t h t h e obs e r v a t i o n s made by Hertzsprung (open c i r c l e s ) , Schoenberg ( f i l l e d c i r c l e s ; mean weighted v a l u e s f o r a l l of h i s f i l t e r s ) , and Lebedinets ( c r o s s e s ) . The lower, middle, and upper c u r v e s were The corresponcomputed f o r D = 1.6.10-3, 3.2-10-3, and 4.7.10-3. ding v a l u e s f o r B ( 0 ) B C are 0m .053, Om.128, and Om.145. In a l l c a s e s A = A I = 258 9 To = Z = 0.024 = 1, Ab/bl = 0.07, and p s t e l l a r magnitude/degree phase. The dashed c u r v e sPwere cons t r u c t e d through t h e e m p i r i c a l e q u a t i o n , Eq. (12.11, from Schoenberg's mean v a l u e s , with t h e same changes i n @ ( 0 ) as above. B C

-

09

A s w i l l be seen from F i g u r e 27, t h e concordance between t h e o r y and observ a t i o n s i s extremely good f o r t h e middle and upper curves. t h e more p r e f e r a b l e , b u t t h e corresponding v a l u e f o r
D =

4.7-10-~ is

BB ( 0 )

-

BC

,

-0

m

-145,

s e e m s e x c e s s i v e ( s e e n o t e accompanying t h e f i g u r e ) .
some s m a l l ,

Also t o be suspected i s

a l b e i t s y s t e m a t i c , d i s c r e p a n c y between t h e upper curve and t h e

o b s e r v a t i o n s i n t h e r e g i o n of extremely s m a l l CY ( t h e dashed curve p l o t s above t h e s o l i d one). Then t o o , w e see t h a t t h e F r a n k l i n and Cook o b s e r v a t i o n s con-

f i r m t h i s assumption and t h a t t h e d i s c r e p a n c y noted, j u s t as i s t h e c a s e f o r
too l a r g e

B,(o)

- Bc,

can r e a d i l y be e l i m i n a t e d i f t h e v a r i a n c e

i n the sizes

of t h e p a r t i c l e s i s t a k e n i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n .

98

The v a l u e s of t h e o t h e r parameters and v a r i a b l e s used t o compute t h e t h e o r e t i c a l phase curves (see t h e n o t e accompanying F i g u r e 27) w e r e t a k e n from o b s e r v a t i o n s , f o r t h e most p a r t , and evoke no real o b j e c t i o n s . Thus, even a

simple model t h a t i g n o r e s d i s p e r s i o n s i n p a r t i c l e s i z e s e v i d e n t l y q u i t e satisf a c t o r i l y reflects t h e Saturn r i n g s t r u c t u r e .

#32. The. -%one-Cylinder" - . _ I _ . Approximation- with . Varianaes- i n P a r t i c l e S i z e . . . . ~.. .~-. . . - . .. . _ . . . . .
I . .

Taken i n t o Consideration
(a)

General e x p r e s s i o n f o r amplitude.

The formulas s e t f o r t h i n t h e

preceding s e c t i o n can q u i t e e a s i l y be g e n e r a l i z e d f o r t h e case when t h e r a d i i of t h e p a r t i c l e s have variance i n t h e i n t e r v a l ( p 1, p 2 ) . variance The most i n t e r e s t If it i s narrow,

ing c a s e i s t h a t when t h e i n t e r v a l of

i s broad.

t h e r e s u l t s w i l l be c l o s e t o t h o s e a l r e a d y obtained above, when v a r i a n c e s
a r e ignored.

Unfortunately, t h e r e are no o b s e r v a t i o n a l d a t a on t h e t y p e of p a r t i c l e size
will,

variance

law a p p l i c a b l e t o S a t u r n ' s r i n g s .

I n t h e next deduction we

f o r t h i s law, take t h e e x p r e s s i o n o r d i n a r i l y used i n meteor astronomy d = Kp-S dP, N (32.1)

where p i s t h e p a r t i c l e r a d i u s ; K i s a c o n s t a n t ; s is a d i s t r i b u t i o n parameter.
L e t u s take it t h a t when p is s u f f i c i e n t l y small, p e n e t r a t i o n of l i g h t

i n t o t h e r e g i o n of t h e geometric shadow of t h e p a r t i c l e w i l l occur because of diffraction. Arkad'yev's experiments (1912) l e a d t o t h e conclusion t h a t t h e r e

i s a s i g n i g i c a n t s h o r t e n i n g of t h e geometric shadow cone when t h e number of
F r e s n e l zones, n , covered by t h e d i s k of a p a r t i c l e (reckoned from t h e apex of /96 t h e shadow cone) i s 0.1 t o 0.5.
On t h e o t h e r hand, when n = 3.5,

-

there is

p r a c t i c a l l y no washing away of t h e shadow cone. compromise. Then, when

The v a l u e n = 2 i s a j u d i c i o u s a t which t h e

(l/cp)

= 2000, t h e boundary v a l u e f o r p ,

shadow cone s t i l l i s n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y shortened, i s ( f o r v i s u a l r a y s )

p * = 2-10

-1

cm;

(32.2)

and i n accordance with which w e can take it t h a t a l l p a r t i c l e s w i t h p 2 p* cast

< p * c a s t no shadows. I n t h i s approximation, t h e p a r t i c i p a t i o n of p a r t i c l e s with p < p * simply reduces
a shadow with l e n g t h p/Cp,

and t h a t p a r t i c l e s with p

t o one of t h e i r f a l l i n g w i t h i n t h e shadows of l a r g e r p a r t i c l e s , s o f a r as t h e mutual shading e f f e c t i s concerned.

99

L e t u s f i n d t h e luminous f l u x t r a n s m i t t e d t o t h e e a r t h by p a r t i c l e s i n
t h e i n t e r v a l (p,

p + dp) when t h e y are s h i e l d e d and shaded by p a r t i c l e s i n
W e s h a l l ignore t h e effect of t h e penumbra of t h e

t h e interval (r, r + d r ) .

p a r t i c l e s , i n accordance w i t h t h e proof i n & l b . The geometry of t h e volume of p r o b a b i l i t y , problem without variance ( F i g u r e 23).
V , remains as it w a s i n t h e

Only t h e r a d i u s of t h e c y l i n d e r ,

and

t h e m a x i m u m r a d i u s of t h e cone, now should be set equal t o r. of t h e volume of p r o b a b i l i t y now w i l l be a f u n c t i o n of r

The magnitude

(32.3) The p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t t h e element de (see F i g u r e 23) w i l l n o t he s h i e l d e d ,

or shaded, by p a r t i c l e s i n t h e i n t e r v a l ( r , r + d r ) i s p
where d N

r

=

exp(-

V 2

dNr),
Let

r

i s t h e t o t a l number of p a r t i c l e s i n t h e i n t e r v a l ( r , r + d r ) .

u s suppose, a s we d i d i n #31, t h a t t h e volumetric d e n s i t y i s s o low t h a t t h e inequality p r a d i u s p.

<

z s a t i s f i e s t h e s h i e l d i n g , o r shading, of any p a r t i c l e with

Then, f o r a l l p r a c t i c a l purposes, t h e v a l u e s of p

r

f o r various

elements, d e , of t h e same p a r t i c l e s c o i n c i d e , and f u r t h e r arguments can be advanced f o r a l l p a r t i c l e s , as a whole.

2 L e t a luminous f l u x rf(cr)p

, in

which

r

is a c o n s t a n t and f ( a ) i s t h e

p a r t i c l e ' s phase f u n c t i o n , be t r a n s m i t t e d t o t h e e a r t h by a p a r t i c l e i n t h e i n t e r v a l (p, p + d p ) , o u t s i d e t h e shading, o r s h i e l d i n g . This p a r t i c l e ,

p e r i o d i c a l l y shaded and s h i e l d e d by p a r t i c l e s i n t h e i n t e r v a l ( r , r + d r ) ,

w i l l , a f t e r a s u f f i c i e n t l y long p e r i o d of t i m e , t r a n s m i t a mean luminous f l u x
t o t h e e a r t h of

The f l a t l a y e r of p a r t i c l e s i n t h e i n t e r v a l (p,

p + d p ) , with thickness dz,

and a t d e p t h z , w i l l t r a n s m i t a luminous f l u x t o t h e e a r t h of

where dN

P

is t h e t o t a l number of p a r t i c l e s i n t h e i n t e r v a l ( p ,

p + dp).

Replacing t h e magnitudes d N from Eq. (32.11,

P

and d N

r

i n t h i s l a s t e x p r e s s i o n by t h e i r v a l u e s

we obtain

100

I n o r d e r t o take i n t o account t h e e f f e c t of shading and s h i e l d i n g of t h e /97 particles in the (p, p + dp) i n t e r v a l by p a r t i c l e s of a l l s i z e s from p* t o p2,

-

w e must f i n d t h e p r o b a b i l i t y of a p a r t i c l e of r a d i u s p n o t being s h i e l d e d o r shaded by one of t h e p a r t i c l e s i n t h e ( p * , small D , p2) interval. For s u f f i c i e n t l y

it can b e taken t h a t t h e unknown p r o b a b i l i t y i s equal t o t h e product
From whence, t h e luminous f l u x

of t h e p r o b a b i l i t i e s , equated t o f i x e d r.

t r a n s m i t t e d t o t h e e a r t h by p a r t i c l e s i n t h e i n t e r v a l (p,

p + dp) when t h e y

a r e s h i e l d e d and shaded by p a r t i c l e s of a l l s i z e s from p * t o p2 can be found
through t h e e x p r e s s i o n

I n t e g r a t i n g i n t e r m s of p from p1

t o p,,

and i n t e r m s of z from 0 t o z 0 we '
cy

o b t a i n t h e t o t a l luminous f l u x t r a n s m i t t e d t o t h e e a r t h f o r phase angle

by

a l l r i n g p a r t i c l e s , w i t h t h e shadow e f f e c t of p a r t i c l e s , t h e r a d i i of which
are i n t h e i n t e r v a l ( p * ,

p2),

taken i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n (32.8)

I t now i s easy t o f i n d t h e amplitude of t h e shadow e f f e c t of a model w i t h
varianceof p i n t h e same manner as t h a t used i n #31, t h a t i s , t h a t when cy = 0 ,
V

r

= C

r'

and when

cy

max

vr

=

cr +

Ur'

W e obtain
K

(32.9)

bl ( Z , n a x ) bi

('J)

- f(0)
0
P.

-- f

(2"ItlX

>'-

The i n t e g r a t i o n of t h e numerator of t h i s e x p r e s s i o n h a s p r a c t i c a l complic a t i o n s stemming from t h e f a c t t h a t i n t h e i n t e r v a l 0 5 z g (p/cp)sin A , t h e volume U i s a t r u n c a t e d cone ( f o r any r from p * t o p 2 ) , and i s a complete cone r p i n t h e i n t e r v a l p/cp) s i n , f o r a l l r s a t i s f y i n g t h e i n e q u a l i t y Vz/sin A S r

cp

Iz 5 z

0

.

With t h i s i n mind, w e should w r i t e t h e f o l l o w i n g i n p l a c e of

32.10)

101

where Ur d e s i g n a t e s complete cones ( t h e I1deep1ll a y e r s of t h e r i n g s ) ; US d e s i g n a t e s t r u n c a t e d cones (the llsurfacell a y e r s ) ; t h e s u b s c r i p t r i s omitted from l

a l l volumes.
J3q. (32.10)

i s a g e n e r a l e q u a t i o n ( t h a t i s , it is v a l i d f o r any s ) f o r
variance

/98

t h e amplitude of t h e shadow effect w i t h

p taken i n t o consideration
The g e n e r a l

( i n t h e approximation of t h e shadow e f f e c t w i t h a shortcoming). formulas must be added. These are

(32.11)

f o r t h e o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s of t h e r i n g , and (32.12)

f o r t h e volumetric d e n s i t y .

Eq.

(32.10) c o n s i d e r s only first o r d e r s c a t t e r i n g .

Eq. (31.19)

i s used

t o make t h e r e d u c t i o n f o r h i g h e r o r d e r s c a t t e r i n g . L e t us n o t e i n a d d i t i o n t h a t t h e n a t u r a l phase c o e f f i c i e n t f o r t h e p a r t i c l e , p dent on p. (b)
. t . r v a l -_ Comnents r e l a t i v e t o t h e -i n . e .- _- and p a r a m e t ?

P

,

i s assumed not depen-

OS variance.

As will

be p o i n t e d o u t at t h e end of t h e s e c t i o n , t h e parameter s for t h e B r i n g should s a t i s f y t h e condition

s
i n t h e Q. (32.1) v a r i a n c e law.

< 3.

(32.13)

So l e t u s c o n s i d e r t h e connection between

, t h e magnitudes p 1, ,P

T ~ ,D

when s changes i n t h e i n t e r v a l 2.5 5 s 5 3.5.

F i r s t l e t u s p o i n t o u t t h a t we can t a k e

and

as t h e minimum v a l u e s f o r p,

and .p ,

Q. (32.14)

f o l l o w s because t h e B r i n g

s c a t t e r s s o l a r l i g h t almost n o n - s e l e c t i v e l y

( # 9 ) , and Eq. (32.15) f o l l o w s

from t h e c o n d i t i o n of t h e c o s m o g m i c a l l y a c c e p t a b l e age of t h e r i n g

[#l7, E q .

(17.4) I.

102

Eqs. (32.11)
formulas f o r T
0

and (32.12)

m a k e it e a s y t o o b t a i n t h e f o l l o w i n g s p e c i a l

and D i n t h e i n t e r v a l of i n t e r e s t t o u s

s = 2.5

R 8 d C 11 -(PI/PL)''~I D=R 9 s = 3.0

K T o = . 2 X. Z O [ I -

-

(Pl/P3)"zl

p'/a;

(32.16) (32.17) (32.18) (32.19)

p'z/'.

s = 3.5
(32.2Q)

(32.21)

A s w i l l be seen from Eq.

(32.16)

-

(32.21),

when s

< 3.0, t h e o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s

(and t h e r e f o r e r i n g r e f l e c t i n g s u r f a c e ) i s determined p r i m a r i l y by l a r g e part i c l e s , and when s

> 3.0, by small ones.

The volumetric d e n s i t y (and t h e

m a s s of t h e r i n g ) over t h e e n t i r e i n t e r v a l of s v a l u e s of i n t e r e s t t o u s i s
determined by l a r g e p a r t i c l e s . This obvious r e l a t i o n s h i p must be added t o t h e s e formulas
0

2P2

(32.22) t h i c k n e s s system r e q u i r e s

S t r i c t l y speaking, t h e model of t h e many-particle t h e o b s e r v a t i o n of t h e more r i g i d c o n d i t i o n t h a t

=0
b u t t h e Eq. That EQ.

P2

(32.23)

(32.22) c o n d i t i o n is adequate f o r majorizing t h e amplitude e s t i m a t e .

(32.22) does j u s t t h a t , t h a t i s , t h a t it e x a g g e r a t e s t h e amplitude
As

of t h e mutual shading e f f e c t , is c l e a r from t h e f o l l o w i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n .

W i l l be seen from F i g u r e 26, t h e s e c t i o n of expressed n o n l i n e a r i t y of t h e phase

curve f o r t h e l a y e r of p a r t i c l e s w i t h f i x e d p and z t h e l a r g e r D may be, t h a t i s , t h e l a r g e r t h e p / z
0

0

c o v e r s a l o n g e r cy i n t e r v a l
If t h i s r a t i o i s

ratio.

l a r g e enough, t h e n o n l i n e a r s e c t i o n g e n e r a l l y can prove t o b e o u t s i d e t h e

l i m i t s of t h e observed i n t e r v a l of phase a n g l e s , and t h e a c t u a l amplitude of
t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e l a y e r w i t h change i n CY from 0 t o 60.5 w i l l be s i g n i f i c a n t l y below t h a t computed through Eq. (32.101, i n which it i s assumed t h a t W = 0 ,

103

t h a t i s , t h a t when cy = 6 O . 5 , from p

t h e n o n l i n e a r s e c t i o n of t h e curve h a s passed

1

t o p2 f o r a l l p a r t i c l e s . (32.22) c o n d i t i o n t o t h e r i n g model l i m i t s I n f a c t , s u b s t i t u t i n g Eq. (32.22)

The a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e Eq.

t h e r a n g e of p o s s i b l e D v a l u e s from above. i n Eqs. (32.16)

-

(32.21),
7

and e x p r e s s i n g D i n t e r m s of 7
= 1? o =

q u i t e e a s i l y t h a t when

0

-4 c m , and z 1.10

0

=

9' 10 c m .

it w i l l be found
D is 0.21, max The l a t t e r of

3.3-10-2,

and 3 . 0 - 1 0 - ~ f o r s = 2.5,

3.0 and 3.5, r e s p e c t i v e l y .

t h e s e v a l u e s i s so s m a l l t h a t t h e r e is no assurance t h a t t h e amplitude of t h e change i n b r i g h t n e s s of t h e B r i n g can be observed, even when t h e r e i s no persion, p ( s e e F i g u r e 24). dis-

But from what f o l l o w s , we s h a l l see t h a t achieve-

ment of t h a t amplitude r e q u i r e s a model with h i g h e r D v a l u e s when t h e r e i s vari a n c e of p, t h a n when a model without t h e i n t e r v a l of v a r i a n c e variance

is used.
=

Consequently, when

i s a broad one, t h e v a l u e s

3.5 i s extremely high.

There i s y e t another d i s t i n c t i v e f e a t u r e of t h e model under c o n s i d e r a t i o n , and t h a t is t h a t s i n c e it i n c l u d e s a component i n which p

<

3 cm, the effect
Specifically,

of t h e l i g h t p r e s s u r e no longer can be taken as n e g l i g i b l y small. r a d i a t i v e braking w i l l p l a y a s i g n i f i c a n t r o l e .

It w i l l sweep out t h e s l i g h t l y -

d i s p e r s e d component of t h e r i n g material w i t h i n t h e volume of t h e r i n g s over
a p e r i o d of t i m e t h a t i s s h o r t compared with

5 . 1 0 ~y e a r s .

I t i s t r u e enough

t h a t l a r g e p a r t i c l e s approaching S a t u r n v e r y much more slowly w i l l s h i e l d t h e p l a n e t from t h e s m a l l p a r t i c l e s , and, a t t h e same t i m e , w i l l i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e sweeping out process.
As w i l l be seen from Eqs.

/lo0 . -

(32.16)

-

(32.21), t h e

s h i e l d i n g is p a r t i c u l a r l y strong- when s

< 3 , when t h e o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s of t h e
A ray penetrating t h e r i n g r a d i a l l y
T

r i n g i s f i x e d p r i m a r i l y by l a r g e p a r t i c l e s .

c a u s e s an o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s of t e n s of thousands because

1. From t h i s OB it f o l l o w s t h a t t h e e f f e c t of r a d i a t i v e braking on p a r t i c l e s w i t h p 3 c m

-

<

should l e a d t o t h e i r s e t t l i n g on t h e s u r f a c e s of l a r g e p a r t i c l e s .

The subse-

quent f a t e of a s m a l l p a r t i c l e i s a s t r o n g bond between it and t h e s u r f a c e of
a l a r g e p a r t i c l e (by f r e e z i n g t o i t , f o r example), o r of i t s being t o r n away

from t h i s s u r f a c e when two l a r g e p a r t i c l e s c o l l i d e . If t h e former i s t h e c a s e , t h e number of s m a l l , f r e e p a r t i c l e s i n t h e r i n g volume w i l l d e c r e a s e r a p i d l y w i t h t i m e . N w l e t us r e a l i z e t h e l a t t e r o

case.

H e r e w e no l o n g e r can speak of t h e t i m e of t h e f r e e p a t h of a s m a l l

p a r t i c l e , b u t of t h e t i m e it takes t o wash it out of t h e r i n g volume completely.

104

Generally speaking, t h i s t i m e i n c r e a s e s w i t h c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e p e r i o d s of t h e l i n k i n g of small p a r t i c l e s t o l a r g e ones. But i f c o l l i s i o n s between

p a r t i c l e s are n o t t o o rare ( a s obviously i s t h e c a s e ; see #28) t h e t i m e req u i r e d t o wash t h e p a r t i c l e s o u t does n o t i n c r e a s e s i g n i f i c a n t l y .

So, even

i n t h i s l a t t e r case t h e r e w i l l be q u i t e a r a p i d r e d u c t i o n i n t h e number of

s m a l l f r e e p a r t i c l e s i n t h e r i n g volume.
Accordingly, c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e q u e s t i o n of e x t e n s i v e v a r i a n c e i n c l u d i n g p a r t i c l e s with p of p,

<

3 cm, l e a d s u s t o t h e problem of t h e continuous
Without engaging i n a d e t a i l e d

f i l l i n g of t h e r i n g volume w i t h such p a r t i c l e s .

d i s c u s s i o n , we s h a l l simply n o t e t h a t t h e most probable source of r e p l e n i s h ment can be t h e f r a c t i o n a t i o n and t h e breaking away from t h e surface l a y e r of l a r g e p a r t i c l e s a s a r e s u l t of t h e a c t i o n on t h e s u r f a c e l a y e r of s o l a r corp u s c u l a r r a d i a t i o n and of m i c r o m e t e o r i t e s , a s w e l l a s because of c o l l i s i o n s between l a r g e p a r t i c l e s .
L e t u s take t h i s assumption as a working hypothesis. I t imposes t h e

following l i m i t a t i o n on t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f p a r t i c l e s i n terms of p : t o t a l m a s s of r i n g p a r t i c l e s f o r which p

the

5

3 c m should b e of t h e o r d e r o f , o r

g r e a t e r , t h a n t h e m a s s of a l l t h o s e small p a r t i c l e s which, during t h e e x i s t e n c e

of t h e r i n g , w e r e washed out of i t s volume by r a d i a t i v e braking
PB

s;
-

- rrp'd .fl'V

:z

s i
PI

-- .-r>-/iE

.d.V,

( 32-24]

P,

where p

0

i s t h e r a d i u s of a p a r t i c l e , t h e t i m e of e x i s t e n c e of which i n t h e

volume of t h e r i n g i s equal t o t h e a g e of t h e r i n g ; 6 i s t h e d e n s i t y of t h e p a r t i c l e m a t e r i a l ; n i s t h e r a t i o of t i m e of e x i s t e n c e i n t h e volume of t h e r i n g of a p a r t i c l e w i t h r a d i u s p I n accordance w i t h Eq.
0'

(17.41, t h e t i m e of e x i s t e n c e of a p a r t i c l e i n t h e /lo1
Therefore (32.25) (32.24)

volume of t h e r i n g i s d i r e c t l y p r o p o r t i o n a l t o i t s r a d i u s . n = Po/P.

-

Assuming t h a t 6 i s not dependent on p , and r e p l a c i n g n and dN i n Eq. by t h e i r v a l u e s as c a l c u l a t e d through Eqs.
P?

(32.25)
p2-s tlp.

Po

s

and (32.11,

we obtain

$--s

dp

:po

1
PI

(32.26)

From whence w e f i n d t h e f o l l o w i n g e x p r e s s i o n s f o r t h e upper l i m i t of p f o r t h r e e p a r t i c u l a r v a l u e s of s

a)

s

Y

2.5,

p . ==

(.50'/:

'0

- 3p'/2)%;

(32.27)

(32.28 )
C)

s 3 3.5,
=

p2

I

p;/p1.

(32.29)

Substituting p

0

=

3 c m , and p1

10
2

-4

c m h e r e , we o b t a i n the values of 7.6,

102,

and 9 . 1 0 ~ c m , r e s p e c t i v e l y ,

for p

when s = 2.5,

3.0 and 3.5.

These numbers

show t h a t t h e v e r y f a c t of a comparatively s m a l l r i n g t h i c k n e s s (of t h e o r d e r of 3 t o 4 km) imposes a s i g n i f i c a n t l i m i t a t i o n on v a l u e t h a t should b e t a k e n f o r s i s 3.5,
S.

The maximum p e r m i s s i b l e

o r even a somewhat s m a l l e r value.

P l a n e t o c e n t r i c r a d i a t i v e b r a k i n g , t h e e f f e c t of which we have j u s t reviewed,

i s n o t t h e only e f f e c t l i g h t p r e s s u r e h a s on t h e r i n g m a t e r i a l .

The component

of t h e l i g h t p r e s s u r e normal t o t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s f o r example, c a u s e s a d e p r e s s i o n i n t h e p l a n e of t h e o r b i t of t h e p a r t i c l e s ; t h a t i s , it f o r c e s t h e p a r t i c l e s t o move i n p l a n e s t h a t do not p a s s through t h e c e n t e r of t h e m a s s of Saturn. The s m a l l e r p, t h e deeper t h e d e p r e s s i o n , and it i s of i n t e r e s t

t o e s t i m a t e i t s magnitude f o r p = 10

-4

cm.

The p r e s s u r e of d i r e c t s o l a r r a d i a t i o n on an a b s o l u t e l y absorbing p a r t i c l e 2 dyne/cm a t a d i s t a n c e of 1 AU from t h e sun i s of t h e o r d e r of 5 - 1 0 - ~ Con-

.

s i d e r i n g t h e mean d i s t a n c e o f S a t u r n from t h e sun (9.54 i n c i d e n c e of l i g h t on t h e r i n g ( A 26".7),

AU),

t h e inclined

and t h e f a c t t h a t almost o n e - t h i r d

of t h e r i n g i s i n t h e shadow of S a t u r n , w e o b t a i n t h e following v a l u e f o r t h e component of t h e l i g h t p r e s s u r e normal t o t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g Pn 2 1 . 5 - 1 0 - ~ dyne/cm
2

.

(32.30)

Actually, t h e p a r t i c l e s are n o t a b s o l u t e l y b l a c k , but are l i g h t gray ( t h e albedo i s of t h e o r d e r of 0.5 therefore n ' But when it i s remembered t h a t s o l a r r a d i a t i o n i s t o 0.61, diffusively scattering.

i s somewhat i n c r e a s e d .

a t t e n u a t e d s u b s t a n t i a l l y upon passage through t h e t h i c k n e s s of t h e r i n g ,

n v a l u e o b t a i n e d through E q . (32.20) w i l l 1102 b e overestimated much more q u i c k l y t h a n it w i l l be underestimated.
W e f i n d t h e magnitude of t h e d e p r e s s i o n , H , by equating t h e normal component of t h e f o r c e of t h e l i g h t p r e s s u r e t o t h e corresponding component of t h e

because of t h e l a r g e p a r t i c l e s , t h e p

-

att r a c t i v e force

106

I

I

. ? 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 I11111 I .111

111 I 1

I

I1 I 1 1111II 1111.1.11-

1111.111111

I I1 11----IIIII.I1I.II11111111111l1l1

11111 1 1 1 I I1 I I1 11

I

I1 I = I -

where r i s t h e r a d i u s of t h e o r b i t of t h e p a r t i c l e ; y i s t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o n s t a n t ; M i s t h e m a s s of S a t u r n ; p and 6 are t h e p a r t i c l e r a d i u s and d e n s i t y .

cm, M = 5 . 7 0 1 0 " ~grams; and 6 = 1 ( t h e p a r t i c l e s c o n s i s t o f i c e f o r t h e most p a r t ) , 2 w e f i n d t h a t when p = l.5*10'7 dyne/cm n H

Setting r =

lolo

c m ( t h e mean r a d i u s of t h e B r i n g ) , p 2 p,

=

10

-4

2 300

M.

(32.32)

If eo i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y l a r g e r t h a n t h i s number, t h e d e p r e s s i o n is n o t deep
enough f o r s p a t i a l s e p a r a t i o n of s m a l l p a r t i c l e s from l a r g e ones, even when

p = 10

-4

cm.

A n e s t i m a t e of t h e o r d e r of z

0'

based on 1966 o b s e r v a t i o n s (#22)

shows t h a t t h i s i s so. The p r e s s u r e of s c a t t e r e d s o l a r r a d i a t i o n , and of i n f r a r e d r a d i a t i o n from S a t u r n , a l s o have an e f f e c t on s m a l l p a r t i c l e s . The f i r s t of t h e s e f a c t o r s

i s weaker t h a n t h e d i r e c t r a d i a t i o n from t h e sun by approximately two o r d e r s

of magnitude (#21), and t h e second i s weaker by even many more o r d e r s of magnitude. The e f f e c t s t h e y c r e a t e are s l i g h t , and w e w i l l no% c o n s i d e r them.

Without variance
s =2 . 5 s =3 0 .

2.4.102 1.of 10-4 1 .o. 10-4 1.0.10-4 1.0.10-4 2.7, I O ' 1.0.10-4 1 7 1 1 .II O 2 *

2,4.102 2.0.10 2.0.10 2,0.10-' 2,0.10-' 2,7.101 20 .
IO-' 11 . 11 * I O 2 .
*

2,4*102

-' 7 .O

.I 0 ' 7.1.1OS

39 33
41

3,16.10-' 3,16.10-* 34 6. IO-' . 3 16 1 0 3.16 *IO-' 3.1 6.10-2

4,2*103 4.7.104 1,5.10' 5.0.1 04 5,0.104 5,0.104

14
e21

-'

<39
< I <9 <39

s = 3.5

2.97 .IO-" 3,16*10-8 3.16. IO-'

(c)

R e s u l t s of t h e amplitude. .c.a l c u l a t i o n s f o r 2.5 5 s 5 3.5. - .
+ - e - - .
_ I _ -

The sub-

/I --O 3

s t i t u t i o n of p a r t i c u l a r v a l u e s s = 2.5,

3.0 and 3.5 i n Eq.

(32.10) r e a d i l y

s u p p l i e s working formulas f o r amplitude c a l c u l a t i o n (see Bobrov, 1961). Setting z
0
= l.Oo10

5 cm,

T

0

=

1, A = A ' = 25", we f i n d t h e amplitude v a l u e s

III I1 1IIII I I I

l i s t e d i n Table

7.

The r'less t h a n " s i g n i s used when only t h e ma.jorizing Model d a t a without v a r i a n c e are

estimate of t h e amplitude can be obtained.
l i s t e d f o r purposes of comparison.

The parameters of t h i s model w e r e s e l e c t e d

i n o r d e r t o o b t a i n concordance between t h e v a l u e s of t h e magnitude C (a, b 1 maX The observed v a l u e is 39 p e r c e n t . b (0)]/bl(O) and t h e B r i n g o b s e r v a t i o n s . 1 There i s no need t o reduce t h e d a t a f o r m u l t i p l e s c a t t e r i n g , because p

-

i s equal t o t h e amplitude v a l u e only when firs t o r d e r s c a t t e r i n g i s t a k e n i n t o
c o n s i d e r a t i o n , and t h i s i s s o f o r models w i t h and without variance. The following c o n c l u s i o n s as t o t h e n a t u r e of t h e variance in the sizes

of B r i n g p a r t i c l e s d e r i v e from c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e d a t a l i s t e d i n Table 1.

7.

If t h e

variance

i n t e r v a l i s a broad one, t h a t i s , i f it i n c l u d e s

macroscopic p a r t i c l e s as w e l l a s f i n e d u s t w i t h p t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s can be reached only when s
2.

--

10

-4

c m , concordance with

< 3.

The e s t i m a t e of t h e volumetric d e n s i t y of t h e B r i n g , obtained w i t h ignored, should be reviewed. The new D v a l u e w i l l be higher. a s w e l l as observed f a c t s ,

variance

Let u s p o i n t out t h a t general c o n s i d e r a t i o n s ,

impel t h e r e j e c t i o n of t h e p r e f e r e n c e f o r models w i t h a broad v a r i a n c e i n t e r v a l ; t h a t i s , models with s

< 3.

A s a m a t t e r of f a c t , t h e e f f e c t on r i n g

m a t e r i a l of micrometeorites and of s o l a r c o r p u s c u l a r r a d i a t i o n should r e s u l t i n a continuous formation of a f i x e d q u a n t i t y of f i n e d u s t i n t h e r i n g volume. Maggini (19371, observing a s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e i n t h e B r i n g c o l o r e q u i v a l e n t

a t small A a n g l e v a l u e s (#13), confirms t h e f a c t t h a t d u s t such as t h i s a c t u a l l y
does e x i s t i n t h e B r i n g volume.

A t t h e same t i m e , i t i s of i n t e r e s t t o n o t e

t h a t t h e r e l a t i v e d u s t c o n t e n t c l e a r l y i s low, because it cannot be d e t e c t e d by o b s e r v a t i o n when t h e r i n g s are open h a l f way, o r wide open. a n o t h e r i n d i c a t i o n i n f a v o r of t h e models w i t h s T h i s is y e t

< 3 , i n which t h e d u s t c o n t e n t

i s low [see Eqs. (32.161,
(d) Phase f u n c t i o n . _ . (32.9)

(32.18)

and (32.20)l.
( 0 ) is readily 1 + U with C + u

The general e x p r e s s i o n f o r bl(a,)/b by r e p l a c i n g

obtained from Eq.

max

w i t h a, and C

r

r

r

r

- wr.

A s i n t h e c a s e of f i n d i n g t h e phase f u n c t i o n of models without v a r i a n c e

i n t h e r a d i i of t h e p a r t i c l e s , p , w e must d i s t i n g u i s h between s u r f a c e , shallow, middle, and deep l a y e r s of t h e r i n g ( s u b s c r i p t s S , Sh, M, and D,

see #31),

108

s o t h e i n t e r v a l s of i n t e g r a t i o n with r e s p e c t t o r and w i t h r e s p e c t t o Z can
be broken dowi i n t o p a r t s , and t h e r e w i l l be seven summands i n t h e numerator

of t h e expression f o r bl(@)/bl(0)

where

q = zfsin A ,
v =a &

(32.34) (32.35)

and d e s i g n a t i o n s of t h e t y p e

(32.36)
P .

and t h e l i k e are introduced.

I t is accepted t h a t A ' = A , and t h a t t h e i n f l u e n c e The s u p e r s c r i p t r h a s been o m i t t e d from

of t h e penumbra i s n e g l i g i b l y s m a l l .
a l l volumes.

E<1. ( 3 2 . 3 3 )
ation.

i s a g e n e r a l formula f o r t h e phase f u n c t i o n of t h e e f f e c t of
variance i n t h e p a r t i c l e r a d i i , p, t a k e n i n t o c o n s i d e r -

mutual shading, w i t h

The working formulas f o r c e r t a i n s p e c i a l v a l u e s of s can be o b t a i n e d

by s u b s t i t u t i n g t h e s e s p e c i a l v a l u e s i n Fq.

(32.33).

W e used Eq.

(32.33) t o
109

c a l c u l a t e t h e o r e t i c a l phase c u r v e s for t h e f o l l o w i n g two models

S=3,

To= ZOB 1, =

p1= p. ='ti3 c m , pz = 2.8.10' cm, ~ ~ = 1 . 1 cm. 0~

A = A' = 25O, D = 4.3 IO1,

-

The parameters of t h e Eq.

(32.28)

model w e r e s e l e c t e d such t h a t t h e y

s a t i s f y o b s e r v a t i o n a l d a t a , and, a t t h e same t i m e , provide f o r p o s s i b l y o b t a i n i n g a broader range of v a r i a n c e , p a r t i c l e s , but f i n e d u s t as w e l l . one i n c l u d i n g n o t only macroscopic

T h i s s e l e c t i o n l e a d s one t o expect f i r s t ,

good concordance between t h e t h e o r e t i c a l and t h e observed phase curve, and, second, a q u i t e c l e a r l y expressed d i f f e r e n c e between t h e Eq. phase c u r v e , and t h e c u r v e s f o r models without variance. The s e l e c t i o n of v a l u e s f o r t h e parameters
7

(32.37)

model

0'

z

0'

and t h e volumetric This is

d e n s i t y , D , p r o v i d e s t h e c o n c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e d a t a from o b s e r v a t i o n s .

done by t a k i n g a v a l u e f o r t h e l a t t e r which, i n accordance with t h e d a t a l i s t e d i n Table 7, should r e s u l t i n an amplitude c l o s e t o t h a t observed. variance i n t e r v a l (almost seven o r d e r s of magnitude)

The l a t i t u d e i n t h e

f o r a comparatively l a r g e amplitude, i s provided f o r by an extremely moderate v a l u e , s = 2.
A t t h e same t i m e ,

p2 w a s s e l e c t e d such t h a t t h e Eq.

(32.23)

con-

d i t i o n is s a t i s f i e d . i n t e r v a l , including p

T h i s means t h a t f o r a l l p a r t i c l e s i n t h e v a r i a n c e
2'

t h e n o n l i n e a r s e c t i o n of t h e phase curve i s w i t h i n

t h e l i m i t s of t h e observed i n t e r v a l of phase angles. Another model, Eq. (32.381, was taken f o r purposes of comparison. Here,

on t h e o t h e r hand, a m a x i m u m s = 3, w a s t a k e n , something t h a t r e s u l t e d i n a substantial increase i n p small.

p*, 1' Because of t h e l a r g e p

and p

2'

2 t h e Eq.

, otherwise
(32.23)

t h e amplitude would be very

condition is not s a t i s f i e d .

A s h a s a l r e a d y been mentioned above, t h i s r e s u l t s i n a r e d u c t i o n i n t h e a c t u a l
amplitude a s compared w i t h t h a t c a l c u l a t e d using Eq. (32.10).

/lo6 -

110

F i g u r e 28.

1 f 3 4 3 6 7 " a E f f e c t o f v a r i a n c e o f p a r t i c l e r a d i u s , p, on t h e shape o f t h e phase curve.

U

1, 2 c u r v e s f o r t h e Fqs. (32.37) and (32.38) models w i t h v a r i a n c e o f p , resp e c t i v e l y ; 3, 4 t h e i r analogs, o b t a i n e d f o r models without v a r i a n c e e p , f o r and z D values are shown n e a r t h e t h e same v a l u e s of t h e p a r a m e t e r s A , T 0 ' 0curves.

-

-

C a l c u l a t i o n s have r e s u l t e d i n t h e phase c u r v e s shown i n F i g u r e 28 ( c u r v e s
1 and 2 ) .

For purposes of demonstrating how t h e v a r i a n c e o f p a f f e c t s t h e

shape of t h e phase curve, t h e f i g u r e a l s o shows two phase c u r v e s f o r a model without v a r i a n c e o f p , one of which, curve 3 , is t h e analog of c u r v e 1; t h e o t h e r , c u r v e 4, i s t h e analog o f curve 2. and z
0

The v a l u e s o f t h e p a r a m e t e r s A , respectively,

T

0'

are equal f o r t h e p a i r s of c u r v e s , 1-2, and 2-4,

and s o

are t h e v a l u e s of t h e most important parameter, D ( p r e c i s e l y o r a p p r o x i m a t e l y ) ,
s o t h a t t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e shape of t h e compared c u r v e s must be equated

s o l e l y t o t h e e f f e c t o f v a r i a n c e of P.
A s w i l l be seen from t h e f i g u r e , when s
7

3 t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s are much

g r e a t e r t h a n when s = 2.

T h i s can b e explained by t h e f a c t t h a t w i t h i n c r e a s e

i n s t h e r e i s an i n c r e a s e i n t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n made by t h e s m a l l p a r t i c l e s t o t h e t o t a l luminous f l u x from t h e r i n g , and, consequently, i n t h e i n f l u e n c e of t h e s m a l l p a r t i c l e s on t h e r e s u l t a n t phase curve. G e n e r a l l y speaking, every

p v a l u e h a s i t s " p a r t i a l " phase c u r v e , with t h e i n i t i a l ( l i n e a r ) and t r a n s i t i o n a l ( n o n - l i n e a r ) s e c t i o n s s h o r t e r and s t e e p e r t h e smaller p as compared with z The r e s u l t a n t phase c u r v e f o r t h e model as a whole i s t h e mean weighted 0 ' That is why, i n p a r t i c u l a r , curve, as it w e r e , of a l l t h e p a r t i a l curves.

c u r v e 4 (models of s i n g l e , extremely l a r g e , p a r t i c l e s ) is an extremely f l a t

curve, whereas curve 2 (models o f p a r t i c l e s w i t h a v a r i e t y of s i z e s ) r i s e s
q u i t e s h a r p l y from
(Y

=

0 , and approaches s a t u r a t i o n much more r a p i d l y .
1 1 1

/lo7 ---

F i g u r e 29. Comparison between o b s e r v a t i o n s and t h e o r e t i c a l phase curves f o r Eqs. (32.37) and (32.28) models, with v a r i a n c e i n s i z e s o f p a r t i c l e s considered. S o l i d curves are t h e t h e o r e t i c a l phase curves. The c i r c l e s and c r o s s e s are t h e b l u e and v i s u a l s t e l l a r magnitudes of r i n g b r i g h t n e s s according t o F r a n k l i n The luminous fluxes from t h e A and B r i n g s have and Cook (1965), r e s p e c t i v e l y . m h a s been t a k e n equal t o -0 -1-15. n o t been s e p a r a t e d ; @ ( 0 ) B C

F i g u r e 29 compares t h e t h e o r e t i c a l phase c u r v e s w i t h t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s .
W e used F r a n k l i n and Cook's o b s e r v a t i o n a l d a t a (1965). W e see t h a t t h e concor-

dance of t h e s = 2 model with t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s i s q u i t e s a t i s f a c t o r y , p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r b l u e s t e l l a r magnitudes. The v i s u a l s t e l l a r magnitudes develop a

small,

s y s t e m a t i c , discrepancy w i t h t h e o r y when cy

<

0'30'.

The a u t h o r s

b e l i e v e t h a t t h i s discrepancy i s a real one and t h a t it i s t h e r e s u l t of d i f f r a c t i o n i n t h e microscopic, t r a n s p a r e n t , f r o z e n d r o p l e t s forming t h e surf a c e of t h e p a r t i c l e s ( t h e l a t t e r a r e assumed t o b e macroscopic). I t probably

i s t o o soon t o take t h e s e c o n c l u s i o n s as f i n a l .

A s a m a t t e r of f a c t , i n t h e

p h o t o e l e c t r i c photometry provided by F r a n k l i n and Cook t h e luminous f l u x e s from t h e A and B r i n g s w e r e n o t d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e from each o t h e r (#12). The

a u t h o r s assert (on t h e b a s i s of t h e i r simultaneous photographic photometry) t h a t t h e observed phase c u r v e s f o r t h e A and B r i n g s are a b s o l u t e l y i d e n t i c a l . T h i s a s s e r t i o n cannot b e v e r i f i e d , u n f o r t u n a t e l y , because t h e a u t h o r s have

n o t published t h e i r photographic phase c u r v e s f o r t h e A and B r i n g s .

It i s

p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e r e i s a l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e A and B r i n g curves, but t h i s cannot b e d e t e c t e d w i t h i n t h e l i m i t s of e r r o r f o r photographic photometry. 112

But t h e r e are s e r i o u s o b s e r v a t i o n a l f a c t s p o i n t i n g t o an A r i n g l i g h t s c a t t e r i n g with i t s own f e a t u r e s : (1) t h e p o l a r i z a t i o n of t h e l i g h t r e f l e c t e d by t h e A when A '

r i n g i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from t h a t f o r t h e B r i n g ( # l l ) ; ( 2 )

i s extremely s m a l l t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e A r i n g can exceed t h e b r i g h t n e s s of
t h e B r i n g (Barnard, 19091, whereas when t h e openings are of medium, or l a r g e s i z e , t h e r e v e r s e is t r u e ;

/108,

(3)

as c a l c u l a t i o n shows (Bobrov, 1956b, p.

9071,

t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e A and B r i n g b r i g h t n e s s e s cannot be explained by t h e simple d i f f e r e n c e i n
T

0.

E v i d e n t l y , t h e s c a t t e r i n g p r o p e r t i e s of t h e r i n g s Consequently, t h e nonconcordance with t h e o r y menThe only way t o r e s o l v e

a r e not e n t i r e l y i d e n t i c a l . t i o n e d when

c x

C 0'30'

may be due s o l e l y t o t h e A r i n g .

t h i s i s t o m a k e d i r e c t p h o t o e l e c t r i c photometry of t h e s u r f a c e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e A and B r i n g s i n d i v i d u a l l y .
A s w i l l be seen from F i g u r e 29,

t h e behavior of t h e observed b r i g h t n e s s

values near

(y

= 0 possibly i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e value

(-0.1151 taken from B B ( 0 ) -

Bc

i s somewhat ( a b s o l u t e l y ) i n f l a t e d .

There i s reason t o t h i n k , t h e r e f o r e , a s i n Figure 2 9 , b u t i s between 2 and 3 . W should p o i n t e

t h a t i n f a c t t h e s value i s n o t 2.0,

F i g u r e 30 shows our attempt t o i l l u s t r a t e t h i s g r a p h i c a l l y .

out t h a t t h e mean v a l u e s of s f o r m e t e o r i t e s observed i n t h e v i c i n i t y of t h e e a r t h , a s well as f o r t h e m a t e r i a l r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e Fraunhofer component of t h e s o l a r corona have t h i s same o r d e r of magnitude.

F i g u r e 30.The

Same as

F i g u r e 29, but t h e assumption i s t h a t

B

B

(0)

-

8,

= -0m -060.

In F i g u r e 30, pB(0)
i s more r e a s o n a b l e t h a n

- 8,

i s taken as equal t o ( - O m . 0 6 0 ) ,

a magnitude which

(-Om.115).

113

#33. Other S o l u t i o n s
F r a n k l i n and Cook r e c e n t l y published

(1965) formulas f o r c a l c u l a t i n g t h e
They considered two c a s e s : (1)

phase f u n c t i o n of t h e mutual shading e f f e c t .

t h e cone-cylinder approximation, which c o n s i d e r s p a r t i c l e s l a r g e enough so t h e e f f e c t of d i f f r a c t i o n along t h e l e n g t h of t h e shadow can be ignored; and ( 2 ) t h e cone-cone approximation f o r microscopic p a r t i c l e s , when t h e volume of t h e s h i e l d i n g i s not a c y l i n d e r , or a cone. o r i g i n a l paper.
C a s e 1 is t h e complete e q u i v a l e n t of t h e c a s e which we had considered a t

The d e t a i l s can be found i n t h e

t h e time, and which i s dcscx-ibed i n t h i s c h a p t e r .

Analysis of c a s e 2 l e d

F r a n k l i n and Cook t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e r i n g s p o s s i b l y c o n s i s t of part i c l e s with p

3 10 cm. Discussing t h e s e valiies, t h e a u t h o r s a r e s i l e n t thickness, z 0 with r e s p e c t t o t h e more s e r i o u s argument a g a i n s t c a s e 2 , t h a t of t h e v e r y
s h o r t l i f e of a formation such as t h i s .
7

-

300 microns, and they should have e x c e p t i o n a l l y s m a l l p h y s i c a l

-

W discussed t h i s question i n e

and found t h a t t h e l i f e of r i n g s c o n s i s t i n g of p a r t i c l e s of p

- 300

#l7,

microns

i s about 5-13' y e a r s , or

t h e l i f e o f t h e s o l s r system.

Consequently,

t h e assumption must be t h a t t h e r i n g material. has been renewed some 100 t i m e s during t h e l i f e of t h e s o l a r system, o r t h a t t h e r i n g s a r e v e r y young, and t h a t w now s e e them only because of an o c c a s i o n a l , f o r t u i t o u s coincidence. e p o s s i b i l i t i e s have a v e r y low o r d e r of p r o b a b i l i t y . Both

/la9

The a u t h o r s themselves t e n d

more t o t h e view t h a t t h e a c t u a l s t r u c t u r e of t h e r i n g s corresponds more t o c a s e

1 t h a n t o c a s e 2.

To be added is t h e f a c t t h a t t h a n k s t o t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l ob-

s e r v a t i o n s made of S a t u r n i n 1966, i t becaTe p o s s i b l e t o reduce t h e f i r s t e s t i mates o f t h e o r d e r o f t h e t h i c k n e s s of t h e r i n g s t o z
0

-3

t o 4 km.

#34. Discussion of t h e R e s u l t s .
the Riags.

Values of t h e P r i n c i p a l P h y s i c a l Parameters of --

-- - _---

B t h e end of Chapter IV (#19), we were a b l e t o o b t a i n some i d e a of t h e y s t r u c t u r e of t h e B r i n g , and of t h e p r o p e r t i e s of i t s t y p i c a l p a r t i c l e , based

on a n a l y s i s of o b s e r v a t i o n a l d a t a .

It w a s found t h a t t h e B r i n g i s a many-

p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s system, and t h a t t h e p a r t i c l e s themselves a r e macroscopic, v e r y s c a r r e d b o d i e s with a s p h e r i c a l albedo of a tem, when
T

0

-

cy

-

0.5 t o 0.6.

In t h i s sys-

1, t h e phase behavior of t h e b r i l l i a n c e i n t h e r e g i o n of s m a l l cy

w i l l be determined f o r t h e most p a r t by t h e e f f e c t of t h e mutual shading of t h e

114

p a r t i c l e s by each o t h e r , s o t h e n e x t s t e p should be t o apply t h e t h e o r y of mutual shading t o t h e €3 r i n g i n o r d e r t o check and r e f i n e p r e v i o u s l y d e r i v e d c o n c l u s i o n s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e s t r u c t u r e of t h e r i n g , and t o o b t a i n a q u a n t i t a t i v e e s t i m a t e o f i t s p r i n c i p a l p h y s i c a l parameters. t h e t h e o r y of mutual shading i s explained, I n t h i s s e c t i o n , once

and i t s p r e d i c t i o n s are compared

w i t h o b s e r v a t i o n s , w e can d i s c u s s t h e r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d and compile a summary of t h e v a l u e s of t h e r i n g parameters r e p r e s e n t i n g Chose t h a t appear t o be most probable a t t h i s s t a g e of t h e r e s e a r c h .

L e t u s p o i n t o u t , f i r s t of a l l , t h a t t h e t h e o r y of mutual shading i s what
makes it p o s s i b l e t o u s e o b s e r v a t i o n s t o e s t a b l i s h whether t h e r i n g s a r e a onep a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s system, o r a many-particle t h i c k n e s s system.
L e t u s p o s t u l a t e t h e e x i s t e n c e of t h e f i r s t p o s s i b i l i t y .

In t h a t case,

t h e observed shape of t h e phase curve f o r t h e r i n g s w i l l , t o t h e Gehrels-Hapke o p p o s i t i o n e f f e c t

i n t h e main, be due

(#l7).

The e f f e c t of mutual shading w i l l

b e s l i g h t when A i s not t o o s m a l l , because t h e cone of t h e shadow of t h e e c l i p s i n g p a r t i c l e w i l l l i e almost e n t i r e l y o u t s i d e t h e l a y e r i n which t h e p a r t i c l e s a r e located. When A

- 3",

But w i t h r e d u c t i o n i n A t o a f e w degrees, t h e s i t u a t i o n changes. t h e l e n g t h of t h e s e c t i o n of t h e shadow of t h e p a r t i c l e w i t h i n t h e The p r o b a b i l i t y of mutual for

l i m i t s of t h e l a y e r r e a c h e s a v a l u e of s e v e r a l t e n s p .

shading i n c r e a s e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y , and t h e phase e f f e c t w i l l be s t r o n g e r
l a r g e and medium A.

The s i t u a t i o n is d i f f e r e n t i n t h e c a s e of t h e many-particle t h i c k n e s s layer. For t h e m a j o r i t y of t h e p a r t i c l e s t h e shadow f a l l s e n t i r e l y w i t h i n t h e
so t h e p r o b a b i l i t y of mutual shading always i s g r e a t

l a y e r , r e g a r d l e s s of A ,

(providing D i s not t o o small).

The t r a n s i t i o n from l a r g e A t o small i s r e f l e c - /110
7

-

t e d only i n t h e i n c r e a s e i n t h e magnitude t h i c k n e s s along t h e i n c i d e n t r a y . magnitude of t h e phase e f f e c t When
T

.
f o r s m a l l A,

0

0

/sin

A; t h a t i s , i n t h e o p t i c a l

1, t h i s h a s l i t t l e e f f e c t on t h e

Accordingly, i n t h e c a s e of t h e r i n g with a o n e - p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s , t h e phase curve w i l l show a s u b s t a n t i a l i n c r e a s e i n t h e phase f a c t o r a t any p o i n t i n t h e observed i n t e r v a l ,
cy,

and, consequently, a s i g n i f i c a n t inThe phase curve

c r e a s e i n t h e t o t a l amplitude of t h e change i n b r i g h t n e s s .

w i l l be r e l a t i v e l y i n s e n s i t i v e t o change i n A i n t h e c a s e of t h e r i n g w i t h a
many-particle thickness.

I

The program of i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o o p e r a t i o n i n observing S a t u r n ' s r i n g s i n

1966, included among i t s many f a c e t s t h e o b t a i n i n g of phase c u r v e s f o r t h e r i n g s
f o r s m a l l A. Although t h e a n a l y s i s of t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s i s n o t complete as of t h i s t i m e , t h e p r e l i m i n a r y d a t a i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e phase c u r v e f o r t h e B r i n g obtained i n 1966, e v i d e n t l y i s i d e n t i c a l with t h e c u r v e o b t a i n e d f o r l a r g e and medium A ; t h a t i s , t h i s r i n g i s a many-particle t h i c k n e s s system. L e t u s p o i n t out as w e l l t h a t t h e comparison of t h e phase c u r v e s c a l c u l a t e d i n t e r m s of t h e t h e o r y of mutual shading, w i t h t h e observed phase c u r v e s f o r t h e B r i n g , confirms t h e assumption of e x t e n s i v e s c a r r i n g of t h e s u r f a c e of ring particles. T h i s can be seen from t h e f a c t t h a t i n o r d e r t o o b t a i n concor-

dance between t h e o r y and o b s e r v a t i o n s ,

it i s n e c e s s a r y t o add t o t h e n o n l i n e a r

phase curve f o r t h e mutual shading e f f e c t a l i n e a r component w i t h a phase f a c t o r of t h e o r d e r of Om.024 p e r degree of phase ( o r somewhat h i g h e r , i f one r e c a l l s t h e phase f a c t o r f o r t h e c e n t e r of S a t u r n ' s d i s k ) . Obviously, t h i s component The magnitude of t h e

i s none o t h e r t h a n t h e i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c l e phase curve.

phase f a c t o r found i s q u i t e l a r g e , and extremely c l o s e t o t h a t f o r t h e moon, t h e e x t e n s i v e s u r f a c e s c a r r i n g of which is c e r t a i n l y n o t i n doubt.
So, t h e t h e o r y of mutual shading f i r s t of a l l confirms t h e c o r r e c t n e s s of

t h e p r e l i m i n a r y c o n c l u s i o n s a r r i v e d a t i n #l9 concerning t h e B r i n g s t r u c t u r e , and t h e p r o p e r t i e s of i t s p a r t i c l e s . Beyond t h a t , t h e t h e o r y m a k e s it p o s s i b l e

t o a r r i v e a t c e r t a i n new c o n c l u s i o n s with r e s p e c t t o t h e s t r u c t u r e of t h e r i n g ,

as w e l l as t o m a k e a q u a n t i t a t i v e estimate of i t s p r i n c i p a l p h y s i c a l parameters.
I n f a c t , w e e s t a b l i s h e d t h e following i n #3l and 1. marked

#32.

The shape of t h e phase curve f o r t h e r i n g i n d i c a t e s t h e presence of a variance i n t h e s i z e s of t h e p a r t i c l e s forming t h e r i n g . variance l a w i s c l o s e t o 2.5, The exponent

s i n t h e Eq.

(32.1)

a value t h a t is, i n general,

t y p i c a l of meteor material i n t h e s o l a r system. 2. -2 10 The volumetric d e n s i t y , D, of t h e r i n g m a t e r i a l i s of t h e o r d e r of

.
3.
z must be known i n o r d e r t o e s t i m a t e r i n g p a r t i c l e 0 ' The edge-on I n our models, Eqs. (32.37) and (32.381, w e used zo = 1 k m .
Ring t h i c k n e s s ,

sizes.

o b s e r v a t i o n s of t h e r i n g s made i n 1966, confirm t h i s v a l u e by o r d e r of magnitude. When z
0
=

1, and s = 2.5,

w e f i n d t h a t 90 p e r c e n t o f t h e r e f l e c t i n g s u r f a c e be-

1 6 1

longs t o p a r t i c l e s i n t h e i n t e r v a l 2 c m 2 p 5 2 0 1 0 ~ cm, where p radius.

is particle

/ 1 1 1

4.
DA = DB,
z

Knowing D , and t h e geometric dimensions of t h e r i n g s , and approximating and t h a t DC = 0 , we can e s t i m a t e t h e t o t a l m a s s of t h e r i n g s =

r

.

If

=

3 km, and t h e p a r t i c l e d e n s i t y is of t h e o r d e r of 1 gram/cm3 ( i c e ) ,

ar =

l * 1 0 2 4 ; t h a t i s , about 1/70th t h e m a s s of t h e moon. I n c o n c l u s i o n , w e should l i k e t o emphasize t h e f a c t t h a t even i n i t s p r e s e n t form t h e t h e o r y of mutual shading s t i l l does n o t t a k e i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n a l l t h e main f e a t u r e s of S a t u r n ’ s r i n g s t r u c t u r e . S p e c i f i c a l l y , it f a i l s t o c o n s i -

d e r t h a t D i s a f u n c t i o n of z , and t h a t with i n c r e a s e i n z t h e r e l a t i v e number of small p a r t i c l e s should i n c r e a s e . The e s t i m a t e s of p h y s i c a l parameters of t h e

r i n g s p r e s e n t e d h e r e t h e r e f o r e should be considered simply a s preliminary.

117

APPENDIX N o t a t i o n s i n t h e Formulas Used i n t h e Theory of t h e E f f e c t of Mutual Shading (Chapter V I I , #29-34)

a

-

albedo of p a r t i c l e a n g l e s of e l e v a t i o n of t h e sun and e a r t h above t h e p l a n e of S a t u r n ' s rings component of r i n g b r i g h t n e s s a t t r i b u t a b l e t o f i r s t o r d e r s c a t t e r i n g component of r i n g b r i g h t n e s s a t t r i b u t a b l e t o m u l t i p l e s c a t t e r i n g

A, AI-

bl A b b = b

1

+ Ab - t o t a l r i n g b r i g h t n e s s

b (a) - b r i g h t n e s s of t h e B r i n g f o r phase a n g l e equal t o a B bB(0)
C D
=

-

same, when cy = 0 ( a t t i m e of p r e c i s e o p p o s i t i o n of S a t u r n )
c y l i n d e r of s h i e l d i n g ( s e e F i g u r e s 23 and 25)

-

4/3 (rrp3N)/R - volumetric d e n s i t y ( p a r t of r i n g volume occupied by p a r t i c l e s )

F(a)

-

n a t u r a l phase f u n c t i o n of r i n g p a r t i c l e c o n s t a n t i n t h e p a r t i c l e s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n l a w i n Eq. (32.1)

K M
N
P

-

p o i n t on element of s u r f a c e de of e c l i p s e d p a r t i c l e ( F i g u r e s 23 and 25) number of p a r t i c l e s i n r i n g volume volume c o n t a i n e d between expanding and compressing cones of t h e volume of p r o b a b i l i t y , V ( F i g u r e 25) p r o b a b i l i t y of p a r t i c l e f a l l i n g i n t o -volume V n a t u r a l phase c o e f f i c i e n t f o r t h e p a r t i c l e ( t h e change i n i t s s t e l l a r magnitude f o r change i n phase angle of l o ) r i n g volume exponent i n t h e p a r t i c l e s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n l a w cone of shading ( F i g u r e s 23 and 25) "volume of p r o b a b i l i t y . " The element dc w i l l be s h i e l d e d from t h e e a r t h (completely) o r from t h e sun (completely o r p a r t i a l l y ) when spart i d e f a l l s i n t o t h i s volume. V = C + U W when t h e penumbra i s i g n o r e d ; V = C + U + P W when t h e penumbra i s taken i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n

P pP
R
S

-

U V

-

-

118

W

-

p a r t of V, t o t a l of C and U; w = (cp/np

3 )W

x .= vz/(psinA) x
Z

-

a u x i l i a r y v a r i a b l e replacing t h e v a r i a b l e z

0

= cpzo/(psinA)

-

d e p t h of element de of e c l i p s e d p a r t i c l e ( F i g u r e s 23 and 25) measured from t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s , n, c l o s e s t t o t h e sun r i n g thickness phase angle a t S a t u r n ( t h e a n g l e sun-Saturn-earth) b c C t h e s t e l l a r magnitude of b r i g h t n e s s . If it i s measured i n s t e l l a r magnitudes f o r a square second of a r c , and t h e b r i g h t n e s s b i s i n a p o s t i l b s , C = 13.92 density a u x i l i a r y v a r i a b l e replacing t h e v a r i a b l e a

Z

0

cy

B

= -2.5log

-

6
v = p

-

d~-

particle radius

p,,
d

p2 - minimum and maximum p a r t i c l e r a d i u s v a l u e s
- mean p a r t i c l e r a d i u s

P P*

-

minimum r a d i u s of p a r t i c l e s t h e e c l i p s i n g e f f e c t of which i s n o t y e t taken i n t o consideration

'p

1l.676 - t h e angular r a d i u s of t h e sun f o r an o b s e r v e r a t t h e mean d i s t a n c e
of S a t u r n

S u b s c r i p t s S , Sh, M,

and D d e s i g n a t e t h e s u r f a c e , shallow, middle and

deep l a y e r s of t h e r i n g s ( f o r e x p l a n a t i o n s s e e t h e corresponding s e c t i o n s of the text). disk. The s u b s c r i p t c i s t h e d e s i g n a t i o n f o r t h e c e n t e r o f S a t u r n ' s

REFERENCES 1. Allen, C.W., A s t r o f i z i c h e s k i y e v e l i c h i n y [ A s t r o p h y s i c a l Magnitudes],

IL,

/114

1960.
2. Arkad'yev, Vol.44,

V.K., N .4, o

'"Fresnel D i f f r a c t i o n , 1912, p. 145.

ZhRFKhO, P h y s i c s Department,

3.

Barabashov, N . . P , Semeykin, B.Ye., "Monochromatic Photometry of S a t u r n and Its Rings," Astron. zh., V 0 1 . 3 , 1933, p.381. Barabashov, N.P., Chekirda, A.T., " 0 r a s p r e d e l e n i i y a r k o s t i na d i s k e S a t u r n a i o y a r k o s t i yego k o l e t s , " Trudy Khar'k. a s t r o n . obs. [On t h e D i s t r i b u t i o n of B r i g h t n e s s on t h e Disk o f S a t u r n and on t h e B r i g h t n e s s o f I t s Rings, Proceedings o f t h e Khar'kov Astronomical Observatory], Vo1.2 (101, p.9. "Observations of t h e E c l i p s e o f I a p e t u s i n t h e Shadows of Barnard, E.E., t h e Globe, Crape Ring, and Bright Ring of S a t u r n , 1889 Nov.1," Monthly Not., V 0 1 . 5 0 , 1890, p.107. Barnard, E.E., "Observations of S a t u r n ' s Ring a t t h e T i m e of I t s D i s appearance i n 1907," Monthly Not., Vo1.68, 1908, p.346 ( a ) . Barnard, E.E., llAdditional Observations of t h e Disappearances and Reappearances of t h e Rings of S a t u r n i n 1907/08," Monthly Not., V 0 1 . 6 8 , 1908, p.360 ( b ) . Barnard, E.E., "Recent Observations of t h e Rings o f S a t u r n , V01.69, 1909, p.621. Barnard, E.E., J., Vo1.40, Monthly Not.,

4.

5.

6.
7.

8. 9.
10.

-

"Photographic Measures o f S a t u r n and I t s Rings,

Astrophys.

1914, p.259.
11.
S a t u r n ' s Rings,
'I

B e l l , L., "The P h y s i c a l I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of Albedo. Astrophys. J., V 0 1 . 5 0 , No.1, 1919.

11.

Belopol 1 s k i y , A.A., t l I s s l e d o v a n i y e smeshcheniy l i n i y v s p e k t r e S a t u r n a i yego k o l f t s a , I 1 Izv. SPb. Akad. n-ayk. [An I n v e s t i g a t i o n of Displaced Lines i n t h e Spectrum of S a t u r n and I t s Ring, N e w s of t h e S a i n t P e t e r s burg Academy of S c i e n c e s ] , Vol.3, No.4, 1895, p.379. Relopol 1 s k i v , A.A., Astron. Nachr., "A S p e c t r o g r a p h i c Examination o f Satiirn' s Rings, Vo1.139, No.3313, 1896.
11

12.

13

Berry, A., Kratkaya i s t o r i y a a s t r o n o m i i [ A S h o r t H i s t o r y o f Astronomy], GITTL, 1946. Bobrov, M.S., "On t h e P h y s i c a l I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e Phase Curve of S a t u r n ' s Rings, Astron. zh., Vo1.17, No.6, 1940, p.1. Bobrov, M.S., "Toward t h e Question of t h e Thickness of S a t u r n ' s Rings,

14.

1s.
120

Astron.

zh.,

Vo1.33,

1956, p.161

(a).

16.

Bobrov, M.S., "On t h e S t r u c t u r e o f S a t u r n ' s Rings. 111. An E v a l u a t i o n of t h e Dimensions of P a r t i c l e s and t h e M a s s o f t h e Rings,lt Astron. zh., Vo1.33, 1956, p.904 ( b ) . Bobrov, M.S., D e r i v a t i o n o f t h e T h e o r e t i c a l Phase Function of B r i g h t n e s s of S a t u r n ' s Rings and a Comparison o f It w i t h O b s e r v a t i o n s , " Astron. zh., Vo1.37, 1960, p.306. Bobrov, M.S., Rings. I . p.306. ItTheoretical Phase Curves of t h e Shadow E f f e o t on S a t u r n ' s D e r i v a t i o n of Formulas," Astron. zh., Vo1.37, 1960,

17.

18.

19-

Bobrov, M.S., " A Summation o f t h e Theory o f t h e Shadow E f f e c t on S a t u r n ' s R i n g s on t h e Occurrence of P a r t i c l e s of Non-Identical Dimensions," Astron. zh., Vol.38, 1961, p.669. Bobrov, M.S., "On an Observation of O c c u l t a t i o n s of S t a r s by S a t u r n ' s Rings," Astron. zh., Vo1.39, 1962, p.669. Bobrov, MS , "Sovremennoye s o s t o y a n i y e voprosa o s t r u k t u r e i poryadke . o i i t o l s h c h i n y k o l e t s S a t u r n a , " T r . A s t r_ f_z .- n - t a AN KazSSR [The Modern S t a t u s o f t h e Question on t h e S t r u c t u r e and Order of Thickness of S a t u r n ' s Rings, Proceedings of t h e A s t r o p h y s i c a l I n s t i t u t e o f t h e Academy of S c i e n c e s o f t h e Kazakh SSR], vo1.9, N 0 . 8 3 , 1967. Brower, D., Clemence, J . M . , !'Orbits a n d Masses of P l a n e t s and S a t e l l i t e s , " I N : P l_ e t y i s p u t n i k i [ P l a n e t s and S a t e l l i t e s ] , e d i t e d by Kuiper and an ~ Middlehurst, I L , 1963, ch.3.
Walter, H., " S c a t t e r e d Light I n t e n s i t y of L a r g e S p h e r i c a l P a r t i c l e s , 'I Optik, Vo1.14, 1957, p.130. Walter, H., " S c a t t e r e d Light I n t e n s i t y of L a r g e S p h e r i c a l P a r t i c l e s . 11, Optik, Vol.16, 1959, p.401.

20.

21.

.

22.

23.

24.

/I15

25

Wood, R.W., "Monochromatic Photography of J u p i t e r and S a t u r n , 2, Vo1.43, 1916, p.310. J

Astrophys.

26.

H a r r i s , D.L. ,. " I n t e g r a l Photometry and Colorimetry of P l a n e t s and S a t e l l i t e s , " I N : P l a n e t y i s p u t n i k i [ P l a n e t s and S a t e l l i t e s ] , e d i t e d by Kuiper and M i d d v , ch.8.

27

Gehrels, T., "The Light-Curve and Phase Function of 20 M a s s a l i a , Astrophys. J., Vo1.123, 1956, p.331.
VI. Gehrels, T., "Photometric S t u d i e s o f Asteroids. Magnitudes," Astrophys. J., Vol.125, 1957, p.550.
~~ ~

I'

28.

Photographic

29

Gehrels, T., ization.

Coffeen, T., Owings, D., "Wavelength Dependence of P o l a r 111. The Lunar S u r f a c e , " Astron. J , v01.69, 1964, p.826. . 121

30

Hertzsprung, E., "Comparison Between t h e S u r f a c e B r i g h t n e s s of t h e Rings and C e n t r a l Body o f S a t u r n , " Astron. Nachr., V01.208, 1919, p.81. G i e s e , R.N., Bary, E., B u l l r i c h , K., Vinnemann, C.D., "Tables o f t h e D i f f u s i o n F u n c t i o n s and t h e S c a t t e r i n g Cross S e c t i o n of Homogeneous S p h e r u l e s Based on t h e M i e Theory, R e f r a c t i v e Index 1.50," Abhandl. Dtsch. Akad. W i s s . B e r l i n . .~- K1. Math., Phys.unA Techno, No.6, 1961, _ _ p.1. Goldsbrough, G.R., S a t u r n ' s Ring, "The I n f l u e n c e of S a t e l l i t e s Upon t h e Form o f Philop. Trans. A, Vo1.222, 1921, p.101.
l1

31

32.

l1

33

Goldsbrough, G.R., "Cause of Encke's D i v i s i o n i n S a t u r n ' s Rings, Roy. SOC. London A , Vol.101, 1922, p.280. Goldsbrough, G.R., "The S t a b i l i t y of S a t u r n s Rings, Vo1.244, 1951, p.1. Goldsmith, W., Udar [ C o l l i s i o n ] ,

Proc.

34. 35.
3637.

P h i l o s . Trans.

A,

C o n s t r u c t i o n L i t e r a t u r e P r e s s , 1965.

Greaves, W.M.H., "On t h e Behavior o f a Small Body Within t h e Cassini D i v i s i o n of S a t u r n ' s Ring," Monthly Not., V 0 1 . 8 3 , 1922, p.71 ( b ) . Gurevich, L.E., Lebedinskiy, A . I . , "Ob o b r a z o v a n i i p l a n e t . I. G r a v i t a t s i onnaya k o n d e n s a t s i y a , " Izv. AN SSSR, s e r i y a f i z . [On t h e Formation I. G r a v i t a t i o n a l Condensation," N e w s of t h e of t h e P l a n e t s . Academy of S c i e n c e s of t h e USSR, p h y s i c s s e r i e s ] , Vo1.14, 1950, p.765. Danjon, A., "Photometry and Colorimetry of t h e P l a n e t s Mercury and Venus," Bull. a s t r o n . , Vo1.14, 1949, p.315. Deslandres, H., "A Search f o r S p e c t r a l s on t h e Rings of S a t u r n , " C. Acad. s c i . , Vo1.120, 1895, p.11.55.

38
39.

r.

40.

D o l l f u s , A., " I n v e s t i g a t i o n s o f t h e P o l a r i z a t i o n of P l a n e t s , l 1 I N : P l a n e t y i s p u t n i k i [ P l a n e t s and S a t e l l i t e s ] , e d i t e d by Kuiper and Middlehurst, I L , 1963, ch.9 ( a ) . D o l l f u s , A., "Visual and Photographic O b s e r v a t i o n s o f P l a n e t s a t P i c du M i d i , " I N : P l a n e t y i s p u t n i k i [ P l a n e t s and S a t e l l i t e s ] , e d i t e d by Kuiper and Middlehurst, I L , 1963, ch.15 ( b ) . Dollfus, A., p.822. "A N e w S a t e l l i t e of S a t u r n , " C.

41.

42.

r. Acad. s c i . ,

V01.264,

1967,

43

D o l l f u s , A., "The Discovery of Janus, S a t u r n ' s Tenth S a t e l l i t e , I t Sky and Telescope, Vo1.34, No.3, 1967. D o l l f u s , A., Focas, J . H . , "Photometry of S a t u r n ' s Rings A s Seen Through t h e 1966 S l i t , " p r e p r i n t of t h e Meudon Observatory, 1968, Astron. and Astrophysics, Vo1.2, No.3, 1969.

44.

122

45.
46. 47. 48.
49.

J e f f r e y s , H., "The R e l a t i o n of Cohesion t o Roche's L i m i t , Vo1.107, 1947, p.260 ( a ) .

Monthly Not.,

J e f f r e y s , H., "The E f f e c t s of C o l l i s i o n s on S a t u r n ' s Rings," Monthly ' . Not Vo1.107, 1947, p.263. Drake, F.D., "Microwave Spectrum of S a t u r n , Nature, Vo1.195, 1962, p.893.

Duboshin, G.N., "Ob u s t o y c h i v o s t i k o l e t s S a t u r n a , " Trudy GAISh [On t h e S t a b i l i t y of S a t u r n ' s Rings, Proceedings o f GAISh], Vo1.14, 1940, p.172. Davies, R.D., Beard, M., Cooper, B.F.C., "Observation o f S a t u r n a t 11.3 Centimeters, Phys. -~ L e t t e r s , Vo1.13, 1964, p.325. Rev. Davies, R.D., W i l l i a m s , D., "Observations of t h e Continuum Emission From Venus, M a r s , J u p i t e r , and S a t u r n a t 21.2 c Wavelength," P l a n e t . m and Space Science, Vo1.14, 1966, p.15. Zheleznyakov, V.V., "On t h e C o n f i g u r a t i o n of t h e Magnetic F i e l d of S a t u r n , " Astron. zh., Vo1.41, 1964, p.955. S e e l i g e r , H.H.,
V01.100,

/116

50.

51.
52.

"Frequency of O c c u l t a t i o n s by S a t u r n , " Astron. -

Nachr.,

1881, p.177.

53.

S e e l i g e r , H.H., "Toward a Theory of t h e I l l u m i n a t i o n of t h e Large P l a n e t s , and P a r t i c u l a r l y of S a t u r n , " Abhandl. B a y e r ._ - Akad. W i s s . , -2 K l . , v01.16, 1887, p.467.
~

54.

S e e l i g e r , H.H., Akad. W i s s . ,

"On t h e I l l u m i n a t i o n of Dusty Masses," Abhandl. Bayer. ~- - 2 K l . , Vo1.18, 1893, p.l.

55.
56.

Z l o t n i k , Ye.Ya., "On t h e I n f l u e n c e of t h e Rings on t h e Exosphere and Magnetic F i e l d of S a t u r n , " Astron. zh., Vo1.44, 1967, p.581. Yabushita, S., " S t a b i l i t y Analysis of S a t u r n ' s Rings With D i f f e r e n t i a l R o t a t i o n , " Monthly Not., Vo1.133, 1966, p.247. Carmichel, H., astrophys., "Photometric Measures of S a t u r n and of I t s Ring," Vo1.21, 1958, p.231.

57.
58.

Ann.

Kiladze, R . I . , "Nablyudeniye k o l e t s S a t u r n a v period prokhozhdeniya Zemli cherez p l o s k o s t ' k o l e t s v 1966 godu," Doklad na Simpoziume PO f i z i k e Limy i p l a n e t [Observation of S a t u r n ' s Rings i n t h e P e r i o d o f E a r t h ' s Passage Through t h e P l a n e of t h e Rings i n 1966, Report a t a Symposium on t h e P h y s i c s of t h e Moon and t h e P l a n e t s ] , Kiev, October, 1968. Keeler, J .E., "Spectroscopic Proof of t h e Meteoric C o n s t i t u t i o n of S a t u r n ' s Rings," Astrophys. J., v01.1, 1895, p.416. Kirkwood, D., "The Zone of A s t e r o i d s and t h e Ring of S a t u r n , " Proc. P h i l o s . SOC., Vo1.21, 1884, p.263.
~~

59.
60. 61.

Amer.

Kowalewsky, S.V.,

lIAdditions and Comments t o L a p l a c e ' s Examination of 123

Il l 1 I I I

t h e Shape o f S a t u r n ' s Ring," Astron. 62.

Nachr.,

Vol.111,

1885, p.38.

Kozyrev, N.A., "Vodyanoy p a r v k o l ' t s e S a t u r n a i yego t e p l i c h n y y e f f e k t na poverkhnosti p l a n e t y , " Izv. GAO AN SSSR v Pulkove [Water Vapor i n S a t u r n ' s Ring and Its Greenhouse E f f e c t on t h e P l a n e t ' s S u r f a c e , N e w s o f t h e GAO o f t h e Academy o f S c i e n c e s of t h e USSR i n Pulkova], No.184,

1968, P-9963 64.
Kuiper, G.P., Atmosfery Z e m l i i p l a n e t [Atmospheres of t h e E a r t h and P l a n e t s ] , IL, 1951, pp.378-379. Kuiper, G.P., Trans. Internat. Astron. Union, v01-9, 1957, Pa254 ( a ) . Astron.

65.
66.
67.

Kuiper, G .P., " I n f r a r e d Observations of P l a n e t s and S a t e l l i t e s , V01.62, 1957, p.245 ( b ) .

J.,

B a i r , M.E., Arnold, C.B., "Radio D e t e c t i o n o f Cook, J.J., Cross, L.G., t h e Planet Saturn, Nature, v01.188, 1960, p.393. Cook, A.F., F r a n k l i n , F.A., "Optical P r o p e r t i e s of S a t u r n ' s Rings. Transmission, Smiths. Contribs. Astrophys., V01.2, 1958, p.377.

I.

68.
69

Cook, A.F., F r a n k l i n , F.A., I1Rediscussion o f Maxwell's Adams P r i z e Essay on t h e S t a b i l i t y o f S a t u r n ' s Rings. I , " Astron. J., Vo1.69, 1966, p.179. Cook, A.F., F r a n k l i n , F.A., I1Rediscussion of M a x w e l l ' s Adams P r i z e Essay 11," Astron. J., Vo1.71, 1966, p.10. on t h e S t a b i l i t y of S a t u r n ' s Rings. Kutuza, B.G Losovskiy, B.Ya., Salomonovich, A.Ye., "Radioizlucheniye = 8 m m , " Dokl. AN SSSR [Radio Emission o f S a t u r n a t ) = 8 m m , " , S a t u r n a na Reports o f t h e AN SSSR], V01.161, 1965, p.1301. Laplace, P.S., MGcanique cgle-ste, vo1.3,

70

.,

71
72

sect. 46, 1802.

Lebedinets, V.N., "Absolyutnaya f o t o g r a f i c h e s k a y a f o t o m e t r i y a Y u p i t e r a i S a t u r n a so s v e t o f i l f t r a m i , " Trudy Khar'k. a s t r o n . obs. [Absolute Photographic Photometry o f J u p i t e r and SaTurT W i t h F i l t e r s , Proceedings of t h e Khar'kov Astronomical Observatory], Vo1.12, 1957, p.167. Lyot, B., "Research on t h e P o l a r i z a t i o n o f Light of t h e P l a n e t and of C e r t a i n T e r r e s t r i a l Substances, Ann. Obs. Meudon, V 0 1 . 8 , 1929, pp. 56-62, 147-150. Lyot, B., "Aspect o f t h e P l a n e t a t P i c du Midi Through a 60 c m Lens,ll Astronomie, V01.67, 1953, p.3. Low, F.J., " I n f r a r e d B r i g h t n e s s Temperature of S a t u r n , Astron.
J.,

73.

74.

75.
76

Vo1.69,

1964, p.143.

.

Low, F.J., Astron.

"Observations of Venus, J u p i t e r , J., Vo1.71, 1966, p.391.

and S a t u r n a t

A

20 p , I I

124

77.
78.

L o w e l l , P.

" S a t u r n ' s Rings, Astron.

Nachr.,

Vo1.184,

1910, p.177.
Ricerca

Maggini, M., "The Recent Disappearance of S a t u r n ' s Ring, s c i e n t . , ser.2, Vol.1, No.5-6, y e a r 8 , 1937.

79.

Maxwell, J.C., "On t h e S t a b i l i t y of t h e Motion o f S a t u r n ' s Rings," Cambridge, 1859 ( r e p r i n t e d i n S c i e n t i f i c - P a p e r s-of J . C . Maxwell, Vol . l , Cambridge Univ. P r e s s , 1890),-Maksumov, D.D., Astronomicheskaya o p t i k a [Astronomical Optics], ~~__G T T I , 1946.

80.
81.

Meinel, A., "Quality of t h e Astronomical I m a g e and S e l e c t i o n o f a S i t e an Observatory, I N : Teleskopy [Telescopes], e d i t e d by Kuiper and Middlehurst, I L , r963, p.196. Coblentz, W.W., Lampland, C.O., "Planetary Temperatures Menzel, D.H., Astrophys. J., V 0 1 . 6 3 , 1926, Derived From W a t e r - C e l l Transmission,

82.

P-177.
83. 84.
85.
Mertz, L., "Astronomical I n f r a r e d Spectrometer, Astron. J . , v01.70,

1965, ~ - 5 4 8 Mertz, L., Vo1.71, Coleman, I., 1966, p.747" I n f r a r e d Spectrum o f S a t u r n ' s Ring," Astron.
J, .

Minnaert, M., =et i t~svetv p r i r o d e [ L i g h t and Color i n Nature], Fizmatgiz, 1958. Moroz, V . I . , "On t h e I n f r a r e d S p e c t r a of J u p i t e r and S a t u r n (0.9-2.5 Astron. zh., V 0 1 . 3 8 , 1961, p.1080.
b),"

86.
87.
88.

M u l l e r , G., "Determinations of t h e B r i g h t n e s s o f t h e Large P l a n e t s and S e v e r a l A s t e r o i d s , " Potsdam Publ., V 0 1 . 8 , 1893, p.193. ~.

Murray, B.C., Microns, Pavlov, A.V.,

Wildey, R.L., Astrophys. J.,

v01.137,

" S t e l l a r and P l a n e t a r y Observations a t 10 1963, p.692.

89.
90. 91.
92.

"On t h e Resolving Power of t h e Eye," Byull. VAGO, No.29

(36),

1961, P-39.
P e t t i t , E., Nicholson, S.B., Popul. Astron., __
~

Vol.32,

No.601,

1924, p.614.

Rabe, W., " I n v e s t i g a t i o n s of t h e D i a m e t e r s of t h e L a r g e P l a n e t s , " Astron. . Nachr., Vol.234, 1928, p.153. Radziyevskiy, V.V., "Radiation D e c e l e r a t i o n i n t h e S o l a r System and t h e Growth of S a t u r n ' s Rings," Astron. zh., Vo1.29, 1952, p.306. Wright, W.H., I'Photographs of S a t u r n Made by Light of D i f f e r e n t Colours, Pubis.. Astrpn. SOC. P a c i f i c , Vol.39, 1927, p.231. R u s s e l l , H.N.,
!!On t h e I l l u m i n a t i o n of t h e Dark S i d e o f S a t u r n ' s Rings,"

93. 94.

125

Astrophys.

J, .

V01.27,

1908, ~ - 2 3 0 .

95 96

. .

R u s s e l l , H.N., Astrophys.

J, .

"The S t e l l a r Magnitudes o f t h e Sun, Moon, and P l a n e t s , Vol.43, 1916, p.103

-

It

Rose, W.K., Bologna, G.M., Sloanaker, R.M., "Linear P o l a r i z a t i o n o f t h e 1963, 3200 Mc/sec R a d i a t i o n From S a t u r n , " Phys. Rev. L e t t e r s , V01.10,
p.123.

97

Roche, E.A., "The F i g u r e o f a F l u i d Mass S u b j e c t e d t o t h e A t t r a c t i o n o f a Distant Point, Acad. d e M o n t p e l l i e r ( S c i e n c e s , Vol.1, 1850).
~

98.
99.
100.

Rougier, G., " P h o t o e l e c t r i c Photometry of t h e Moon," Ann. Obs. S t r a s b o u r g , 1933, P.205. V01.2, NO.3, S l i p h e r , E.C., "Phenomena i n Connection With t h e E a r t h T r a n s i t .of t h e P l a n e of S a t u r n ' s Rings i n 1920-21," Popul. Astron., Vo1.30, 1922, p.8. Perenos l u c h i s t o y e n e r g i i v atmosferakh zvezd i-planet Sobolev, V.V., [ T r a n s f e r o f Radiant Energy i n t h e Atmospheres of S t a r s and P l a n e t s ] , G W I , 1956. S t e b b i n s , J., Kron, G.E., ~ 0 1 . 1 2 3 , 1956, p.440. 9 i x - C o l o u r Photometry of S t a r s , Astrophys. J.,

101.

102.

Stebbins, Jacobsen, T.S "Further Photometric Measures of J u p i t e r S a t e l l i t e s and Uranus, With T e s t s of t h e S o l a r C o n s t a n t , " Lick Obs. Bull., Vo1.13, 1928, p.180. "Observations of S a t u r n ' s S a t e l l i t e s a t t h e 30-inch Pulkova S t r u v e , H., Refractor, Publ. Obs. Poulkova, ser.2, Vol.11, 1898, p.232. " I n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e Threshhold of C o n t r a s t S e n s i t i v i t y S y t i n s k a y a , N.N., of Vision a t Low Values o f B r i g h t n e s s , " Uch. zap. LGU, s e r i y a m a t e m . nauk, No.18, 1949, p.158. Texereau, J . , "Observing S a t u r n ' s Edgewise Rings, and Telescope, vo1.33, No.4, 1966, p.226. October, 1968, I t Sky

J.,

.,

103.

104.

105.

-

/118

106.

Timiryazev, A.K., Kineticheskaya t e o r i y a m a t e r i i [The K i n e t i c Theory of Matter], 3 r d e d i t i o n , Moscow, Uchpedgiz, 1956, ch.4. Tikhov, G.A.,"Dvukhtsvetnyye f o t o g r a f i i Marsa i S a t u r n a , poluchennyye p r i pomoshchi pulkovskogo 30-dyuymovogo r e f r a k t o r a sposobom s v e t o f i l ' t r o v , If Izv. Russk. a s t r o n . ob-sa [Dichromatic Photographs o f Mars and S a t u r n , Obtained Using t h e Pulkova 30-inch R e f r a c t o r by Means of F i l t e r s , N e w s o f t h e Russian Astronomical Observatory], Vo1.17, No.5, 1911. Welch, W . J . , Thornton, D.D., Lohman, R., and Mercury a t 1.53 c m , f f Astrophys. Feibelman, W.A., P.793. "Concerning t h e
ID'

107.

108. 109.

J.,

"Observations of J u p i t e r , S a t u r n , Vo1.146, 1966, p.799.
If

Ring of S a t u r n ,

Nature, Vo1.214,

1967,

126

110.

Fesenkov, V.G., IlPhotometric Observations o f t h e P l a n e t S a t u r n , Astron. Vol.229, 1927, p.227; Nachr., Vol.226, 1926, p.127; Astron. Nachr. Astron. Nachr., Vo1.231, 1928, p.9. -

,

111.

F r a n k l i n , F.A., Cook, A.F.., llOptical P r o p e r t i e s of S a t u r n ' s Rings. 11. Two-colour Phase Curves o f t h e Two B r i g h t Rings," Astron. J., Vo1.70,

1965, ~ - 7 0 4 .
112. Hagihara, Y., " S t a b i l i t y of t h e S o l a r System," I N : P l a n e t y i s p u t n i k i [ P l a n e t s and S a t e l l i t e s ] , e d i t e d by Kuiper and Middlehurst, I L , 1963, ch.4. Hapke, B., "A T h e o r e t i c a l Photometric Function f o r t h e Lunar S u r f a c e , 'I J. _ Geophys. R e s . , Vo1.68, 1963, p.4571. Hapke, V., van Horn, H., "Photometric S t u d i e s of Complex S u r f a c e s , W i t h A p p l i c a t i o n s t o t h e Moon," J. Geophys. R e s . , V 0 1 . 6 8 , 1963, p.4545. Heath, M.B.B., P.57. "Saturn i n 1957," J. B r i t . Astron. Assoc.,

113.

114.
115.
116.

V01.68,

1958,

Hepburn, P.H., (1) "Dimensions of S a t u r n and H i s Rings as Measured on (2) llObservations o f t h e Prof. B a r n a r d ' s Photograph on 1911 Nov.19"; Transparency of Ring A , and Other D e t a i l s Appearing on t h e Photograph," Monthly Not., Vo1.24, 1914, p.721. Hughes, M.P., " P l a n e t a r y Observations a t a Wavelength of 6 cm,ll P l a n e t . and Space S c i . , Vo1.14, 1966, p.1017. ~Chandrasekhar, S., I L , 1953. Perenos l u c h i s t o y e n e r g i i [ T r a n s f e r o f Radiant Energy], -

117.
118.

119.
120.

Chandrasekhar, S., E l b e r t , D., F r a n k l i n , A., Isotropic Scattering. I , ~Astrophys. J.,

"The X and y Functions f o r Vo1.115, 1952, P-244.

Shayn, G.A., "On t h e I n t e n s i t y D i s t r i b u t i o n i n t h e Spectrum of S a t u r n and H i s Ring," T s i r k . Pulk. obs., Vo1.13, 1935, p.9. Sharonov, V.V., "An Experiment on t h e Absolute Determination of t h e Yerevanskoy B r i g h t n e s s C o e f f i c i e n t of S a t u r n ' s S u r f a c e , Byull. a s t r o n . obs., 1935. Sharonov, V.V., "Absolute Photographic Photometry of S a t u r n ' s Disk, T s i r k . GAO AN SSSR, No.26-27, 1939, p.37. Sharonov, V.V., P r i - a p l a n e t [Nature of t k e P l a ~ e t s l ,Fizmatgiz, 1958. rod

121.

122.

123. 124.

Shoenberg, E., "On t h e I l l u m i n a t i o n of t h e P l a n e t s , " Publ. Obs. Dorpat, V01.24, 1917. Shoenberg, E., "Photometric Examinations o f J u p i t e r and t h e System o f S a t u r n , Ann. Acad. S c i . Fennicae, s e r . A , Vo1.16, No.5, 1921. 127

125.

126.

Schoenberg, E., Theoretische Photometrie. -Hancbuch der Astrophysik [Theoretical Photometry. Handbook of Astrophysics3 , Vol. 2, Part 1, Berlin, 1929, p. 1 . Schoenberg, E , "hew Investigations of Saturn's Ring , I t Vierteljahresschr. . Astron. Ges., Vol. 68, 1933, p- 387. Shifrin, K.S., Rasseyaniye sveta mutnoy srgde [Light Scattering in a ~Scattering Medium], GTTI, 1951.
~~

127.

128.

129.

Shnyrev, G.D., Grechushnikov, B N , Moroz, V.I., "An Investigation of .. the Infrared Spectrum of Saturn by the Fourier Transform Method," Astron. tsirk., No. 302, 1964, p 1. . Aitken, R.G., "Observations of Saturn's Rings in 1907." Lick Obs. Bull., Vol. 4, 1907, p. 181.

130.

F-701
128

-30

N A T I O N A L A E R O N A U T I C S A N D SPACE A D M I S T R A T I O N W A S H I N G T O N , D.C.
-~

20546
POSTAGE A N D FEES P A I D

O F F I C I A L BUSINESS
P E N A L T Y F O R P R I V A T E U S E S300

FIRST CLASS MAIL

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS A N D SPACE A D M I N I S T R A T I O N

(2
USMAIL

POSTMASTER :

If Undeliverable ( Section 1 I Postal Manual) Do Not Ret-

I

“The aeronadcal and space activities of the United States shall be conducted so as to contribute . . . t o the expansion of human knowledge of phenoiliena in the atmosphere and space. The Administration shall provide for the widest practicable and afipropriate dissemination of inforiliation concerning its actiidies and the res& thereof.”

-NATIONAL AERONAUTICSN D SPACE ACT OF 1958 A

NASA SCIENTIFIC A N D TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS
TECHNICAL REPORTS: Scientific and technical information considered important, complete, and a lasting contribution to existing knowledge. TECHNICAL NOTES: 1nformation.less broad in scope but nevertheless of importance as a contribution to existing knowledge. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUMS: Information receiving limited distribution because of preliminary data, security classification, or other reasons. CONTRACTOR REPORTS: Scientific and technical information generated under a NASA contract or grant and considered an important contribution to existing knowledge. TECHNICAL TRANSLATIONS: Information published in a foreign language considered to merit NASA distribution in English. SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS: Information derived from or of value to NASA activities. Publications include conference proceedings, monographs, data compilations, handbooks, sourcebooks, and special bibliographies. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION PUBLICATIONS: Information on technology used by NASA that may be of particular interest in commercial and other non-aerospace applications. Publications include Tech Briefs, Technology Utilization Reports and Technology Surveys.

Details on the availability of these publications may be obtained from:

SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION OFFICE

NATIONAL AERO N AUT1C S AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Washington, D.C. PO546

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful