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

e. /

N A S A TT - &701

LOAN CQPY

AFWL KIRTLAND

THE RINGS OF SATURN
i
I

by M a Sa Bobrou
I

I
'
i

Academy of Sciences USSR, Astronomical Council "Nauka" Press, Moscow, 1970

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

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

.

. Ring Dynamics ....... ...................................... Absolute surface brightness of the B ring .......... . The physical condition of the ring material ................... The mechanism responsible for the observed ring phase curve ....... #24.. Optical thickness ................... . .. Introduction I ........... Model of the ring ....................... VI ............ Mechanisms that possibly prevent complete flattening of the rings V 75 81 .......... IV........................................ .......... ........... #16 ................... Albedo of a particle ..... and C rings ....... #19 ................... ....... Ring rotation law .... ................. ....................................... V ........... #3 ........... #25 ...... fl #2 of the Earth Details of the Structure that Differ from Those The zonal structure.............. ..... .... .... .................. # 9 ......... 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 .. Astrophysical and Radioastronomy Data ....... I11................... #26 .................................. #13 ................ 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 .... Infrared spectrometry .................... Introductory remarks ....... #I1 ....... Other photometric data ......................... .......... #17 .............. .... 53 53 54 60 70 72 73 74 72 #28 ................................... Polarization ..... Visible and near ultra-violet spectral reflectivity ............................ #14 ........................ #12 ........................... .. #10 .... Change in surface luminance with phase angle ......................... 3 3 4 ............ .................... #15 .. .... #27 .................... Radiometric and radioastronomical data ........ Differential rotation and Its Consequence . B................ "he A ..... . Properties of a Typical Particle .................. Table of Contents 1 ................................... #18 ........ #7 .... # 8 ........................ ................ Model of the B Ring ..................... ........ Stability .. 6 7 7 8 9 10 10 10 11 19 21 21 27 2 9 34 39 39 41 49 51 and properties of a typical particle .............. More precise detail Ring dimensions .......... . Linear rotational velocities of the rings .......... .............

........ 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 ...VI1 .......... vi .. .............. APPENDIX .......... ........................... 85 85 85 87 99 114 114 118 120 ................ #32 ..... .... #31 #34 #3O ......... ......... Theory of the Effect of Mutual Shading and Its Comparison with Observations ...................... ............. The Seeliger approximation ...... ............... #33 .. The llcone-cylinderll approximation.......................................... ...... ........ REFERENCES ...... Introductory remarks .. #29 .... ..

or of the moon. and we cannot accept it without seeking for an explanation for it. compact system in which the individual satellite loses its individuality." James Clerk Maxwell On the Stability of the Motion of Saturn's . and the comparative shortness of the distance between those bodies. the great many bodies that are contained within it. in essence. We cannot become reconciled to this phenomenon as if it were some simple fact. First of all. Saturn's rings have a dual interest for the researcher. is the only cosmic formation of its type that we know of. and in its own way is as characteristic as the ring of asteroids. it is one of the In elements in the solar system. makes them into a single. * Numbers in the marin indicate pagination in the foreign text."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. dynamics and other features.~ _ _ --_ Rinas ~ L 5* Introduction Saturn's rings are. we cannot describe it simply as the result of observations. as the Galilean satellites of Jupiter. At the same time. our mind can no longer remain at ease. a satellite object. special geometry. it It has its own Furthermore. 1 .

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 . and can b e d e s c r i b e d by s i m i l a r equations. 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 .o t h e r words. 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. 1967). a t t h e same t i m e . 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. I . 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 . 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. and something t h a t cannot b e ignored. 1964. 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 ) . 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. t h e r i n g s are gonic i n t e r e s t . Z l o t n i k . 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. i n many r e s p e c t s . 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 . 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. according t o contemporary hypotheses. 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 . 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. 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 . 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. 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 . 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. If t h i s i s so. f o r example. 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 . It can b e pointed o u t .

- 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 . _ 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 . 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. I. and t h e C r i n g ( t h e i n n 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 ) . 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 . a s t r o p h y s i c s .Zonal S t r u c-~ ture. 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. 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 . These d a t a can be found q u i t e r e a d i l y i n handbooks. 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.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 . The. d a t a . 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 . a s t r o m e t r y . 3 . 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 . meteor astronomy. 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 . 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 . The r i n g s . 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. The A r i n g v i s u a l l y i s 0. 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 . 1921) and Hepburn (1914). t h e B r i n g ( t h e middle).6 weaker (Schoenberg. t h i s i s C t h e approximate estimate made by B e l l (1919)l. and o t h e r s . c e l e s t i a l mechanics. 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 ) . cosmogony. 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. and C Rings. #l. 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 . 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 . and w e have given o u r views concerning them. 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 r t o i n d i c a t e t h e o r d e r s of magnitude. when t h e y open wide enough. o r t h a t w e r e completely e v i d e n t t o us. a s i f devoid o f m a t t e r . r e s u l t s . 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. 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 . W e pre- f e r r e d t o u s e rounded e s t i m a t e s . 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. B. 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.

. #2.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. . 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 .. a S a t u r n w i t h r i n g s opened w i d e (photograph by Camichel. 1964). . 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 ) . Contrast i s somewhat overdrawn.- . More P r e c i s e D e t a i l . observing S a t u r n /9 F i g u r e 1. t a k e n by Barnard (19141.- 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 .539 A U ) . .. . . 1963). 1675. . 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. 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 . 1958).. ~ ... w a s a b l e t o /a see S a t u r n ' s d i s k . . % .411..2'j1'). .000 k i l o m e t e r s .i ! __ _. ring is very transparent. 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 . - 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. 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. 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 . Lyot (19531._ C Jean Dominique C a s s i n i . 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 . . Resolution i s "0. 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 ) . 1953). . 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. The a n g u l a r dimensions of t h e rings 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. 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.. The c r a p e The b a l l o f t h e planet i s readily distinguishable through it when observed v i s u a l l y (it I - -. . .__ . according t o Barnard (1914). - 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.

A c t u a l l y . as w e l l as by many o t h e r o b s e r v e r s . ( S e e l i g e r . 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 . B. 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 .along t h e major axis o f t h e r i n g s ( F i g u r e I C ) . 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. 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 . so t h e p o s s i b i l i t y i s not r u l e d a t t h e same t i m e . o r a r e f i c t i c i o u s . 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 .051' t o 0. 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 . 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. 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 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. 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 . . 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. " 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 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 W e s h a l l d i s c u s s t h i s method i n #14. 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. 1881). 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. and C r i n g s . t h e width o f t h e A r i n g . 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. 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 .10". of t h e "Encke d i v i s i o n . 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 ) .f i f t h A r e g i o n o f darkening t h a t w a s . E a r l i e r o b s e r v e r s . "Encke d i v i s i o n " ) . c o n t a i n i n g v e r y l i t t l e material. 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 . 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. o u t .9 y e a r s . however). and op ti c al thickness of t h e divisions. w a s 0. some weak d i v i s i o n s can change i n t e n s i t y markedly. p o s i t i o n .

i s very c l o s e t o 1/2. 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).42 8. w i t h h e l i o m e t e r s . 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 . ooo 17. 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 . Seconds of A r c K i 1omet e r s . #3.300 60.. t h e s i d e r e a l p e r i o d of one. Consequently.300 122. Table 1 l i s t s t h e r i n g dimensions. 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 . . .68 16.I__. . o r of t h e most massive of them.. TABLE 1 . 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 .72 B ring. o u t e r edge A r i n g . 1922 b ) . . 1/3.900 17. boundary of t h e p l a n e t s b a l l . 6 .. 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. . 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 .- . k i1 omet ers ~__ -~_ _ . . 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 . .91 10..- -- A r i n g . using photographic photometry and l i g h t f i l t e r s . Detail Visible radius (distance 9. (19101. 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 ) .5388 AU) seconds of a r c 20.14 Wj t h Actual r a d i u s .100 5. 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. o u t e r edge C r i n g . v i s i b l e . according t o Rabe (1928). i n n e r edge Equatorial r a d i u s of S a t u r n 89.~ ~. I n view of t h i s .- - . outer edge C r i n g . Ring Dimensions. 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 .300 Barabashov and Semeykin (19331. l 9 2 2 ) . i n n e r edge 139.000 27.300 72.200 17..- . 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 .95 12. Goldsbrough (1921.200 117.

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. 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 = 0.7". i n o t h e r words. 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 . -~__ V i e w from t h e Edge. r e s p e c t i v e i n t e r v a l s a r e 13. .1 1 . olution change c o n s t a n t l y . /11 #4. A s w i l l b e seen from F i g u r e 2 . T h i s i s what t h e ob- 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 .46 y e a r s ) . 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 ' 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. 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. 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 ) . 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. 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 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.- Cycle of Changes i n Ring Openings. t h e t h e plane of t h e e a r t h ' s o r b i t by 28. 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 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. b a s i c a l l y . and t o A s t h e p l a n e t moves i n i t s o r b i t . and t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s . a f i x e d t i m e ( t h a t i s . 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. s e r v e r on e a r t h sees. 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 . t h e r e f o r e . two t i m e s of maximum opening of t h e r i n g s .1". The rounded. 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 .75 and 15. of Saturn i n its o r b i t . 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 a t t o o k p l a c e i n 1966 ( F i g u r e 3 ) . 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. p l a n e o f i t s e q u a t o r . i n t h e f i n a l a n a l y s i s .75 years. 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. A and A ' . depending on t h e p o s i t i o n There are. Changes i n Ring Openings. t o two i n t e r s e c t i o n s ) . 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 . 7 .

If66 fl m y mag M B7 /f67 Figure 3. 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 ) . 5 . The o u t e r condensations c o i n c i d e 8 . Observations o f t h e Dark S i d e of t . . 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 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 .Rings. 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”. -F i g u r e 2 can b e used t o f i n d I A - All 2 3. 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. A and A ’ . above t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s i n 1966. t h e e a r t h can b e over t h e d a r k s i d e 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. 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 . 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 . 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 . h. and t h e b e s t o f them w e r e made by Barnard. 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 . 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. . 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 . #5. e.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. t h a t i s . example. - 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 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 . 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 of t h e r i n g s ( F i g u r e 3 ) . graphy of t h e d a r k s i d e h a s n o t y e t been published.

A ' But it i s ob- # 0. 1. t h e gaps w i l l b e seen (#5). 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. a r e c o n t a i n e d i n Chapter V. "Disappearance" of t h e Rings. 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. 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 . g e n e r a l l y speaking. and t h e r e s u l t s 9 . 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). The case when A = 0 . 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 . #6. Accordingly. F i g u r e 4. 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. t h e inner with t h e crape ring. 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. t h a t i s . F u r t h e r d e t a i l s . so long a s a n g l e A ' i s not t o o s m a l l .908 a ) .with t h e Cassini d i v i s i o n s .

by s a t e l l i t e s . . Astrophysical .. and by t h e d i s k o f t h e p l a n e t . Linear R o t a t i o n a l V o c i t i e s of t h e Rings.. 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 .__I Data I _ /15 #7. by Deslandres (1895) i n P a r i s .1 1 1 .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 . 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 .. Data on t h e A r i n g are v e r y m e a g e r . s i d e r e d a s e p a r a t e . s a t e l l i t e of S a t u r n . 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 . Radioastronop-y . 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 . 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. 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._e l . 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. I n t r o d u c t o r y Remarks.independent. . 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. and by K e e l e r (1895) i n t h e Licks Observatory. Observations w e r e made independently by B e l o p o l ' s k i y (1895) i n Pulkovo. 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. any r i n g p a r t i c l e can be con- 5.. . 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 . 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 . -. . #8. 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. 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 . 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. and.__ 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 . because of i t s b r i g h t n e s s . I n f a c t . Consequently. f o r a l l p r a c t i c a l purposes. 10 The . 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 . 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 . . however.. Ring B. 1958). 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 t h e c r a p e r i n g i s . ~. . A s w i l l b e seen from t h e d a t a i n Table 2 . t e r r a incognita... mutual p e r t u r b a t i o n s .

.d 2 . P o s i t i o n of s l i t .5 ._ .. km/s ( Kepl e r ) A r i n g . . 1 ... .. I . . 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. inner boundary I I 21._. ~~ #9.. ' Figure 5.v i o l e t S p e c t r a l R e . . .. o u t e r boundary Middle of t h e r i n g 15... 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 ._. . .. Deslandres. .4 B r i n g . Detail I . i . 1 t .. . .flectivity.. and K e e l e r ) . . .. V i s i b l e and Near U l t r a . . i . 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 .0 20.. . .. . /. .. .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._ Linear v e l o c i t y .

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. and disappeared n e a r t h e G band.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. t h a t o f t h e d i s k spectrum o n l y t o 4020 a. 1895. 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 . 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. opposite. t a k e n by B e l o p o l ' s k i y i n 1906 and 1909. 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. 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. 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 could b e t r a c e d t o 3970 t h e same. 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 . 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. 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 . r e s p e c t i v e l y . r e d u c t i o n i n t h e wavelength. 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 . Tikhov's work. Tikhov w a s i n c l i n e d t o t h e l a t t e r view. whereas 1 = 4000 1. 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 i n t h e whole. i n t h e April 13. 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 . 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 . 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 . 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 . According t o Tikhov. N e a r 4500 %. it w a s found t h a t t h e b r i g h t n e s s 12 .v i o l e t p a r t s of t h e spectrum). yellow-green. o r selective. Lack o f a t i e w i t h t h e sun. a n d t h e darker i n t h e v i o l e t . v i r t u a l l y without a t t e n u a t i o n . s u b s t a n t i a l i n t h e r e d . t h e green. 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 . B. 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. 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. and t h e b l u e . 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. 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. Thus. t h e red-orange. and based it on t h e following c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . 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 .

The new approach. 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. 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 . 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 t photo graphs. 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. 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 . 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 ) . 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 .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 . Consequently. 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. 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 . "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 . 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 . 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 . 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. on t h e o t h e r hand. 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 ) . 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 . 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 . a t t h e very l e a s t . v i 01 . the ultraviolet. t h a t i 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. Wright l s photographs. and t h i s w a s t h e case f o r a l l rays. However. it would b e necessary. 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). never been confirmed. scales. 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 .

and o t h e r s ) .l i k e . as w a s t h e r e a l Saturn. 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 . 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 . 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. 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 . Barabashov and Saturn Semeykin (1933) d i d j u s t t h i s i n t h e i r work. r a t h e r t h a n s t e p . i f p o s s i b l e . a l r e a d y mentioned i n #3. 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. 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. i n p a r t i c u l a r . 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. yellow. and w i t h t h e same exposures. t o p r i n t photometric scales. and by t h e r a t i o of th. 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. An “ a r t i f i c i a l S a t u r n . and i n c r e a s e s w i t h de- crease i n t h e wavelength. 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 .. w a s photographed t h r o u g h r e d .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. ” 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 /19 - 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 . chromatic a b b e r a t i o n . w a s c u t from t h i c k w h i t e paper. and. scatt e r i n g i n t h e photographic l a y e r .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. 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 . 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 . 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.e A and B r i n g b r i g h t n e s s e s . e r r o r s i n t h e microphotometer. whereas t h e v i s u a l s u r f a c e photo- m 14 . 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 . system.06 below t h e b r i g h t n e s s of t h e B r i n g . and t o t h e i n s t r u m e n t . 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 . corresponding t o t h e C a s s i n i d i v i s i o n . r e a c h i n g 0. t o t h e microphotometer. 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. 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.

00 respec- m Thus. r e s p e c t i v e l y . 0. 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 . and 3 were c o n s t r u c t e d f o r photographs i n which r e d .585. 0. and 0. 1933). and 0.221. I n o t h e r words. 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 . and b l u e . 2. 15 . Curves 1.129 t o 0. were 0. 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.59. yellow.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 0.150 and 0. m 0. yellow.862 f o r t h e most i n t e n s e B r i n g zone.179. had been used. 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. tively]. 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 .194.47. 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. provide magnitudes of 0.775. t h e photographic photometry provided by Camichel (1958) using a yellow f i l t e r .metry provided by Schoenberg (19211. m and 1. and t h e photographic photometry of F r a n k l i n and Cook (1965). and b l u e f i l t e r s .

as a r e s u l t . 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 . 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 . ~ . brightnesses. 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 . of t h e Sun. 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 . and t o c l a s s G s t a r s . 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. t h e Sun.398 and 0. and. comprising almost 0. 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 d i c a t i v e of t h e presence i n t h i s space of evacuated.i n t o t h e sun. 7 . S p e c t r a of S a t u r n ( d i s k and r i n g s ) . particles. w e r e obtained.403. = O " . s e l e c t i v e l y d i f f u s i n g matter. q u e s t i o n . F i n a l l y .003.equated t o t h e c e n t e r o f t h e d i s k .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 ) .5. 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. 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. 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 . and 2'38l. a n d 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 m e f f e c t of t h e phase of t h e B r i n g . and of two c l a s s G dwarf stars. of 9 C e t i (using spectrograms with low d i s p e r s i o n ) . 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. 9 C e t i and 51 P e g a s i .O " 3 7 I . it would appear. 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 . 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. and t h a t t h i s w a s 1) 16 . t h a t is. 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 . Y ( 2 ) comparison of t h e s p e c t r a of Saturn. b r i g h t e r . Comparison w i t h t h e d i s k showed t h e marked 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 . t h e Moon. (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 . w i t h a probable e r r o r o f 0. 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. F J ~ .

. and t h e v i s u a l . 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 e b l u e . 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 and 51 P e g a s i f r e e o f s y s t e m a t i c e r r o r s . - and m m . f o r S a t u r n rings. F o r t h e sun B m m +0. The c o n t r o l comparison o f t h e 9 C e t 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. The t i e . Without going i n t o d e t a i l .64 ( S t e b b i n s and Kron. Consequently.so w i t h t h e accuracy o f w i t h i n 0. - - 17 .98. 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. f o r b o t h m V = +0. 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. - 4600 1.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 . Moon. 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 . 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 . 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. 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 . B V = +0.m does not R + .6500 1) 0 t h e magnitude mg change i n t h e magnitude o f m - mB i s 0. 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 . according t o F r a n k l i n and Cook (19651. ending n e a r 5700 t h a n t h e sun. w i t h A.5.c a l l e d UBV* system.86. whereas t h e 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 . 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 . ring. m - mh changes 1.5.01. t h e u l t r a v i o l e t . m . i n t u r n . 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 . t h e moon h a s been added a s a -. and 9 C e t i .04. which i s much more yellow t h a n t h e sun. 1956). A s w i l l b e seen. and +1._ _ _ _ *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. and f o r l a r g e 1 t h e r e i s a s l i g h t @ B 1 . i s much more yellow than t h e B I n f a c t . according t o H a r r i s - - /22 (1963). From a l l of t h i s . 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.mB' 8 depend on A i n t h e i n t e r v a l 4000 r i s e ._ -_ . t h a n t h e l e n g t h o f t h e l i g h t wave. as w i l l b e seen from F i g u r e 7. duced t o a s i n g l e & v a l u e and averaged. and w e r e t a k e n w i t h a weight of 2 i n t h e averaging.

' 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. Also p o s s i b l e i s .00 0..-la t ! - O?b. i s n o t b l u e because . - : 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 . I"o0 f - . but h i s chief conclusion 0 . 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 . 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.5"). 0 0 0 v e r y good concordance w i t h Shayn's s p e c t r o 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 . 1 noted i n t h e s e p a p e r s i s n o t . (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 .t y p i c a l body i n t h e s o l a r system devoid of atmosphere)./. i n any e v e n t .29 of00 0. 0 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) . i n any e v e n t .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 . 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 .- ~ +Of34 +0. t h e B r i n g . 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 .n3U 4'TU - OY77 and . 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 . TABLE 3 __ Saturn's disk A and B r i n g s Moon Reference . 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). 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. 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 . /23 - 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 1.22 +0.

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. i n s i z e . 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 . i n c l u d i n g t h e d i s k . and a r e of t h e o r d e r o f 0.5 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. and n o t t o i t s d i s k . 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 . 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 . 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. 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. ( t = -78OC).5 microns.1.63 t o 1. who used a spectrometer 19 . 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. The t r a c e s showed i n t e n s i t y maxima a t 1. t e n s i t y a t 1. In f r a r e d Spectrometry Kuiper (1951) found t h a t a t 1 .80 and 2. c r y s t a l s .9 t o 2.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. 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).0 t o 2. and 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 . o b t a i n e d using t h e same i n strument. 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 .5 microns. O n t h e o t h e r hand.5 micron range. Grechushnikov. 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 . o r w e r e covered by i c e . 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 . i n t h e 0. Grechushnikov. Mertz and Coleman (1966).1 mm. particles. 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 Moroz (1964). on t h e s u r f a c e of t h e 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. o r of snow. 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.5 microns. and t h e widely opened r i n g s . Shnyrev. 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. 1. #lo. 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 . 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 . o r s m a l l e r .

I .6'1. 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 . 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. 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. 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 inf r a r e d s p e c t r a of r i n g s and d i s k . 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). 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. . e t a l .I F i g u r e 8. t h e spectrum o f t h e r i n g s o b t a i n e d by Shnyrev.paraformaldehyde (powder). I I. 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 ) . Figure 8d). ..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). 1965) coupled t o a 61 inch t e l e s c o p e . 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. .66 microns ( F i g u r e 8 b ) . . A' = 5. A = 3. according t o Mertz and Coleman (1966). Second. - - - w i t h a F o u r i e r t r a n s f o r m (Mertz.. . one e a s i l y o b t a i n s t h e 1.66 microns. 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 . F i r s t of a l l . (1964). 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. . 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 spectrum a t A = 1. 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 . 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. a c c o r d i n g t o Shnyrev. A s a m a t t e r of f a c t .. and t h a t t h e r e is no b a s i s /25 We 20 .6'. ..

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. #11. ~ 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 . 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. normal t o t h a t i n d i c a t e d above. #12. /26 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 . -~ Polarization. g r e a t l y with phase. 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.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.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. 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 .5". 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 . b u t t h e A r i n g polarization properties. 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. 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 . 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. Luminance w i t h Phase Angle. Change i n -S u r f a c e ~~ Although the. 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 . astronomy. 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. 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). 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 . 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 ) . 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. 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 . 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.

S p e c i f i c a l l y . 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 .see Schoenberg.t h e l i g h t curves f o r e c l i p s i n g double stars. f r e q u e n t l y r e q u i r e d i n astrophotometry. 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. i f b is expressed i n a p o s t i l b s ("white luxest').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 . 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 ) . 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 ) . yellow. t h e n C = 13-92 22 * I . 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). a f t e r it has been d e c i p h e r e d . 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.5i0g b + c. b e s t t o date. 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. r i n g s i n d i v i d u a l l y . 1917). d i f f e r e d from t h e . 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 . (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 . b . g r e e n . 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 . 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. The second series (1) f o u r f i l t e r s ( r e d . using t h e same photometer. 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. 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.1) where $ . 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. 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 . by t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p $ = -2. ( 2 ) many more p o i n t s n e a r CY = 0. 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. 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 . 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. 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).

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 . 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 . 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 ) . 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 . Four f i l t e r s . 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 . 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. nances t h e n were expressed i n B and V u n i t s on t h e UBV scale. 23 . 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.s c a l e . were used.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 e should p o i n t o u t t h a t E q . 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.167. yellow. L 2 7 (12. b l u e . u l t r a v i o l e t .II I 111 I II I1 I 111 1111111 I I1 magnitude/ square second of a r c ) .01. 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.* Lumi- * See t h e f o o t n o t e on page 17.1) 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. The r e s u l t s are q u i t e depend- a b l e . 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.6 and 60. Without going i n t o f u r t h e r d e t a i l . (12. 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). t h e observers simultaneously obtained a s e r i e s of l a r g e . (Y is t h e phase a n g l e a t S a t u r n (minutes of a r c ) . 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 . BB( 0 ) = ' is t h e s t e l l a r magniEq. 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. r i n g phase curve. 2 6O30'). and r e d . and d i d so p h o t o e l e c t r i c a l l y . and f o r t h e widely opened r i n g s .

so it can L 2 8 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. 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 . 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. 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 . p o i n t s extremely c l o s e t o 'center Om. The B r i n g phase c u r v e s obtained by Lebedinets. 06. 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 . w e encounter t h 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 . 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. l i k e t h o s e of F r a n k l i n and Cook. u n f o r t u n a t e l y . Turning once a g a i n t o t h e observed B r i n g phase c u r v e . L e 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 x i s t e n c e . of t h e B r i n g when Schoenberg = 0. but i n e a r l i e r work he took b ( 0 ) as 1. 24 . I n our view.A n 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 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 . 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 a u t h o r s d i d not do t h i s . 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 . 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 . show t h a t e v i d e n t 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 . 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 . 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. i n c l u d i n g a c e r t a i n number of = 0 .(O) (1933) took it t h a t b B ( 0 ) = bcenter. b B ( 0 ) . max t h a t no one has observed t h e r i n g when Cy Q )I. 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 . A t t h e s a m e t i m e .10b B center' where b The d a t a provided by F r a n k l i n and Cook. 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. 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. a r e i n good concordance w i t h Schoenberg's curve (1933).

somewhat c o n v e n t i o n a l l y . i n which c a s e .(CY) (12. almost l i n e a r rise i n t h e s t e l l a r magnitude with a.3'). once a g a i n is almost a s t r a i g h t l i n e .2). t h e y have $. The s h a r p e r t h e maximum.$.(O) = @ center E q . namely. t h a t f o r a s i n g l e . and basing t h e - Today t h e r e is a more b a s i c center' m 0 . t h e f i r m e r t h e 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 As will 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 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 .06. one by 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 . 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.2) where CY. 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. 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 s a y J a . 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 = 0.270 m log Cy - 0?153 N o w l e t u s change t h e (12. down. 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 . part i n the particular direction. (12. t h i s mechanism is t h e mutual shading of t h e p a r t i c l e s . r a t h e r than . ( 2 ) t h e t r a n s i t i o n s e c t i o n (0'25' < . (12.) 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 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. w i t h t h o s e of Eq. 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). d e f i n i t e v a l u e of CY. be p o i n t e d o u t i n #18. as b e f o r e . 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 . 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 .(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. Cy and ( 3 ) t h e s a t u r a t i o n s e c t i o n .(O) = 0. be s e e n q u i t e r e a d i l y . which.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 22.11. 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. A c t u a l l y . t h a t @. comparison on t h e assumption t h a t @ B ( 0 ) = assumption. 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 . w e come t o t h e e x p r e s s i o n $.e . is expressed i n minutes of a r c .1). 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 .

Luminance of B r i n g ( i n polar c o o r d i n a t e s ) .a Figure 9. mean weighted v a l u e s f o r f o u r f i l t e r s ) . 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. (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 2= 0 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 . 2 - Lebedinets (1957). 3 and 4 - F r a n k l i n and Cook (1965. r e s p e c t i v e l y ) ] . blue and v i s u a l s t e l l a r magnitudes. 26 .

and t h i s is t h e same t h i n g .039. t o Om. 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 . 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. 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. 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 . 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. between 26 t o 27Q. Cy o r . and by Maggini (19371. who used t h e photographic method. This e f f e c t w a s confirmed by Fesenkov (1926. 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. 1927. who used t h e p h o t o e l e c t r i c method. 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. 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. 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). e s t i m a t e d by photographing double stars. F i g u r e 10 shows t h e 27 .4. 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 . 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.i n nature. 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 . 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 .06 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. 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 . m i n luminances w a s o . 19281. The d i r e c t cause of t h e e f f e c t is unknown. w a s 01t. 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 . A and A ' . #13. of reducing t h e s h a r p n e s s of t h e peak when = 0.20. 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. 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 .

c o o r d i n a t e . 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 . 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 . A ' . Dependence of luminance on t h e angle of e l e v a t i o n This f a c t . 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. 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 . (12. 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 . 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. 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). 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 . 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 . 1958). 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). as c o r r e c t e d by u s f o r t h e phase dependence by using Eq. 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 . and p l o t t e d as a f u n c t i o n of A. 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 . 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 . 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'. w a s n o t observed. ( 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 1 as a f u n c t i o n of A.11. The o t h e r r i n g shows no marked F i g u r e 10. no d e f i n i t e dependence of J on A ' w a s observed. effect . is r e a d i l y s e e n . 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 . 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 . A t t h e s a m e t i m e . 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.luminance of t h e A and B r i n g s . I n t h i s r e g a r d .

#14. and weaker i n t h e c a s e of t h e western. I n o t h e r words. Optical 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.lt a g a s component is n o t precluded.from t h e mean p l a n e of 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 . 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 . 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 . 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 . 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 . Payer. 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. 4200 . 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 . ( P / I o ) - 29 .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 = . I n o t h e r words. 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 . h fJUU F i g u r e 11. 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.l n ( I / I o ) . 1937).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 . 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.

A polar zone can be seen through it.Oe5' . A and A' are the angles of elevation of sun and earth above the pane of the rings.2) will yield a correct order of magnitude. he was able to see the polar zone of Saturn through the A ring when b t = 0. To is the optical thickness of the ring in a direction normal to its plane . 4 2 9 and 0 .08) A 0. Accordingly. This creates additional brightness come- = 2. the optical thickness of the A ring.08b e e' From whence.11..30 (Ig 0. where b This observer found a mean of b and b are the surface brightness of the A ring and of Saturn's equae torial zone. (14.7. and Saturn's A = 0.87b when not occulted. The A ring is partially transparent.429 + 0. .-- (14. 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. we obtain 7 oA = 0. Evaluation of E q . and for which Camichel's Let us take it that the minimum contrast tain some degree of error attributable to data were not corrected (see #l3). Polar zone brightness i s equal to 0.1) . respectively.18 0.0. Substituting this in Eq. sponding to 0. (14.028b e .. but can conhalation.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.426 .l111111llI I b'=bexp-( where sin A + sin : A sin A sin A ' ' 0 (14.426 _.57be.2) where 0 . and in accordance with Q. A0 at the (14. 237 0 420. Camichel's data (1958) permit the use of this formula to evaluate TOA. in brightness that could be observed in Camichel's observations was about 0 .05b A = 0. 4 2 6 are the mean values of the sines of angles A and timeof the observations used here. 0 5 .

/sin A').5 lg f 1.?nlO -. v i s u a l ones.. 1962). (14. 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. * ( 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 ) . 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 . C. b . Method ( b ) . < rA.(z.1O:L '1 2 ] . 5 < TO < 0. s u b s t i t u t i n g Eq.5) i n Eq.In a l l probability.4 =7 [p. p r e c i s e l y corrected f o r halation. ( G ) and . (14. the interval 0 .4).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 .5 Ig 8 4-5 lg G f 2. 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. w e o b t a i n TO 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.036 (TJL) . and t i s t h e a n g l e of turbulence. I t i s obvious t h a t L . 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.7) 31 . 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. r e s p e c t i v e l y . 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. sin . 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 . 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 ) .2. t 0 On t h e o t h e r hand Remembering t h a t r* = pe/2G.6) (14.4) where G 0 i s t h e equipupillary magnification. (C) = bt0 (Go) G2 cxp . (14. where r minimum. as h a s been p o i n t e d o u t . 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. 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. where p (14. i n s t r u m e n t s (D 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 < < 50 c m ) . . 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.

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 ) . (14. 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 . I . p u t t i n g i t equal t o -10 -81. (14. 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 . F i r s t of a l l .I1 lI11111IlI 1I Ill I H e r e t h e function f ( r * / r 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*. Eq. (14. 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 . 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. 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 . possibility.1).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. _ -- j and r i n g s on 28 A p r i l 1957 Needless t o s a y . 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 ) . 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. Second. 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. 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 . 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. 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 . rough approximation of o c c u l t a t i o n c o n d i t i o n s .7) w e t o o k it t h a t (1961). t h e assumptions on which Eq. 0 method ( a ) i s based. 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. 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. (14. Moreover.- -- -- I . 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 . whereas S t r i c t l y speaking.7)). 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 .

1958) i n a 20 i n c h r e f r a c t o r 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 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. depending on o b s e r v a t i o n c o n d i t i o n s . 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 . * ~ 33 . 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 . ~. 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.__ 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 .* A t t h e same t i m e . i n F i g u r e 13. 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 .. - 1957. 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 . t h e i r r a d i a l s t r u c t u r e . i t seems p o s s i b l e . 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 . 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. and.o n l y i n t h e middle. V i s i b i l i t y of occulted f t a r 6 Cassini division II Cassini division Seen weakly F i g u r e 13.._ . 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 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 small p a r t n e a r t h e c e n t e r ) . 20O4568. d e c r e a s i n g i n t h e c e n t r a l zone. ~ 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 . . observed v i s u a l l y by W e s t f a l l . 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. 8m. 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 ( m a g n i f i c a t i o n 320). and t h e l i k e . W e have attempted.0) can be s e e n i n F i g u r e 12. of t h e A r i n g changes markedly w i t h r . These m n e s w e r e wider i n t h e B r i n g . 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.

d i s c u s s i o n of t h e a v a i l a b l e 34 . 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 .18 f o r oc i n c r e a s e s monotoni- 13'1 . (14. 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 . 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 . Moreover. D_ a -t a 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. 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. T~~ W e can conclude.5 to 0. 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 . 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 . ar. i n p r i n c i p l e . Conversely. Consequently. 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 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. d a t a i s of i n t e r e s t .d by t h e b a l l of Saturn. S t i l l .2 . 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. Cook and F r a n k l i n (1958) made a deT 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). 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. Radiometric and RadioasAronomical . #l5. (14. 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. U n f o r t u n a t e l y .3)1.0 f o r 911/3 t o 0. and t h e s e . v a l u e s adopted f o r T The 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 .8) T OB- 1. and such o b s e r v a t i o n s have not y e t been made. 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. i n t u r n . 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 ) . Some B r i n g zones are even more t r a n s p a r e n t . 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 . t h a t i n g e n e r a l b u t n o t much. 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.7 [ s e e Eq.They were narrower i n t h e B r i n g . t h e r e f o r e .

obtained by these authors are shown in Figure 14 as a function of the wavelength (the open circles. at 6. But whatever the nature of the rise in T with Ch. so it follows that in this band of 35 . at 11. strong (20 * 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. (1965).0 cm. and this is what has been found by Rose et al. by Drake (19621. However. the vertical lines show probable errors in the determinations rises with C h . A = at 10. which yielded T b Murray and Wildey (1963). T confidence.4 cm. observed no polarization at 11. at the conclusion that its upper limit is less than 6 percent. Murray and Wildey used a germanium photoresistance on a 19-inch reflector and worked in the transmission window between 8 and 13 microns. and further observations are needed in order to re- - No traces of infra- red emission from Saturn were found. (1964). although the conb siderable scatter in the points does not enable us to fix the law of rise with as cited in the articles). (19601. (19631. at 1.3 cm. A s will be seen. at 9. (l964).3 cm. and Lampland 125" to 130°K. solve it. and arrived So. as well as more recent observations by (1926). example. at infrared wavelengths. 1966). at 21.2 cm. 4 cm. and by Low (1964. radio radiation from Saturn definitely should be polarized. Zheleznyakov (1964) showed that the difference in orientation can be explained by the effect of the rings on the shape of the radiation belts). by Cook et al. the deeper the layers of the atmosphere from which the radiation is being recorded). Today we can place the old results obtained by Pettit and Nicholson (19241. by Davies et al. If the second possibility is what These authors reported occurs. observaFor tions made by other radio astronomers have not confirmed Rose's results. by Rose et al. at 3. (1963). by Welch et al.53 cm. at 8 mm. the question 138 is not completely settled.0 cm. similar to that observed for Jupiter). The reason for the rise is the greenhouse effect (the larger A . and by Menzel.Radio radiation from Saturn has been measured by Kutuza et al. 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.45 cm. (1966). Tb. or the presence of a nonthermal component (radiation from the radiation belts. at 9 . Davies et al. Coblentz. and by Davies and Williams (1966). The values for the brightness radio-temperature of Saturn. by Hughes (1966).

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 . 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. found.2) when TK = 30" and 65 OK ( t h e llwarm. i n h i s words. I focus of an 82-inch r e f l e c t o r i n t h e McDonald Observatory a t h = 10 and 20 microns. .I . completely t r a n s p a r e n t " r i n g s hypothesis). t e m p e r a t u r e s . p a r t i a l l y t r a n s p a r e n t " rings hypothesis). b' n o t o n l y i n t h e e y e s ..-L. however. 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 . This is t h e e q u i v a l e n t 36 . . w i l l be s e e n from t h e f i g u r e . L o w measured 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 P I . 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. which. This t i m e emission w a s The corresponding T w e r e 93 * 3OK. 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 . 1 . 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. 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 . . The data still are too sparse f o r this. So f a r as t h e r a d i o wavelengths are concerned. 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. (15. 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. 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. 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 . 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 .wavelengths T < lO5'K. . 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 . J The mean of Low's r e s u l t s is F i g u r e 14. 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. 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 . L . a p p a r e n t l y w e r e exaggerated. b u t i n f r o n t of t h e d i s k as w e l l . . 1964.

T = 3 0 ° K (W t h 7 r 0 measurements a g r e e with t h e 5.i)c s p . one should expect 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. 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 .I of t h e "cold. 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 .(To/sin A')] XfY ). 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 . 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.. 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. T = 6 5 ° K and d r taken as e q u a l t o 0 . 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 ) . however.y) esp .2) t o f i n d T v a l u e s f o r two assumptions. 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 =. 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. as compared w i t h a d j a c e n t p o i n t s .45 c m ) is t h a t found by Cook e t a l . 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. A') +. 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 ' . As w i l l be seen from t h e f i g u r e . t h a t i s . 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. I n t h e g e n e r a l case. T / ( x + y ) .@. d i s k is T dW e used Tby [ I . 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 -{Z [i .(zo/sin A')] Tr .45 c m . 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. r a s w e l l a s when T = 6 5 " ~ . w e f i n d 75°K and - l b ° K a t 1 = 3..exp . r L40 It would appear t h a t t h e measurement provided an exaggerated v a l u e f o r T I n f a c t . 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 . completely t r a n s p a r e n t " r i n g s . 2 ) . 116"~ f o r T when d 37 . The p o i n t where t h e y a r e n o t i n agreement (1 = 3. (1960). 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 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.(Totsin A')] Tr + [y 4-(I . t h a t of t h e "warm.cxp .(I . 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.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 . 8 ) . (15./sin 2 ~ . ( l 5 . t h e y agree with t h e l l w a r m .

has r a d i a - t i o n b e l t s . e x i s t i n g d a t a is t o reduce 7 0 I n f a c t . 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. 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. 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 . s e r i e s of measurements of T as a f u n c t i o n of A ' . r = 65"~ is t o o h i g h a Cook's p o i n t . 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. 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. a l l t h a t need be done t o s a t i s f y a l l to 0. 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. 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 = 65"~ and 30°K. t i v e o b s e r v a t i o n s . 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 . . 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 h a t when T = r r 30°K. d i f f e r e n t from t h a t undertaken i n t h e foregoing. T v a l u e . 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 . It can be t a k e n t h e r e f o r e .4 when T = 6 5 " ~ . 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 . r e s p e c t i v e l y .would be of two types.

** W e s h a l l express b 0 i n a v i s u a l system. about a n a l y z i n g a l l of t h i s primary information.06b B Thus. (16. c i s t h e c e n t e r of S a t u r n ' s d i s k .IV. * 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. I t i n astrophotometry. in b 0 (16. 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 . 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. " or I f v i s i b l e albedo . L e t u s now set A s b e f o r e . 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. n o t e d /42 used i n Eq. w e o b t a i n b ( 0 ) = 1. o r t h o t r o p i c a r e a . 2 2 ) . A s w a s noted i n #12. ** B r i g h t n e s s .1) i n t o conventional b r i g h t n e s s e s . - - P r o p e r t i e s of a Typical P a r t i c l e . one can t h e n speak of t h e plane-normal albedo. " 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. B righ t n e_ s s_ of t h e B Ring #16. b C i s s t a b l e enough.06. 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. m . t o s e r v e as a good photometric s t a n d a r d . (16. 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. 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. 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.0. i s a l s o c a l l e d t h e llluminance f a c t o r .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 . 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 . as a r u l e . 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 . b ( O ) . 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 . T h i s s t a b i l i t y i s not a b s o l u t e .2) units. 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. 39 . and with change i n a n g l e s A and A ' . 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 . of c o u r s e . Model of t h e B Ring.1) B i s t h e b r i g h t n e s s . t h e primary o b j e c t L e t u s . (16. as o u r f i r s t s t e p . C I t should b e . rays). Absolute Surface _ _ _ ~ . 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 . expressed i n b0 u n i t s .

(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 . 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. and t h e darkening toward t h e limb of S a t u r n ' s d i s k . We w i l l . 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 .68 0. F$ 40 . yellow. Lebedinets used f o u r f i l t e r s ( r e d . 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 . 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). 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. 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. 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. 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. i n o u r c a l c u l a t i o n s b i n t h e end. w e r e made by Sharonov (1935. green. W e obtain where ' i . T h i s i s prec 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 .Moreover.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 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. and bo i s i n f a c t s t a b l e . 19391. and which can be expressed by t h e r a t i o 'i. 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 . Absolute measurements of b and p h o t o g r a p h i c a l l y ._ _ Absolute measurement t e c h n i q u e s a r e complicated./bc. 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 . TABLE 4 Observer Sharonov ( 1935) Sharonov ( 1939) Lebedinets Photographic Photo graphi c I ---A- 0.48 ~ (1957) . 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 . 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 0 C u n i t s . /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). a b s o l u t e l y w h i t e s u r f a c e placed 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. 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 .

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. #l7. .66f55%. p is the p a r t i c l e radius. system. 1916).~. 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 . 1921. h a s a mean of 0. 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 .3 41 . Model o f t h e __ Ring. ~~ i $ L r (17. AU. 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.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 . can e x i s t .3) w i l l give ( b /b c o 5 22h.(0)/bo from Eq. 1928).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.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. Barabashov and Chekirda. (16. (17.= . Camichel.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 . 9.2 P where z 0 i s the r i n g thickness. = 270" (Rabe. 1957.89 f 7%. t h i c k n e s s system. 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 . 1958).2) (17. _ ~ ~.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 e s h a l l c a l l t h i s model a " o n e . (16.35-10 5 = l x 5 5% ( b o t h v a l u e s t a k e n from Russel.54 5. 39. . as a r e s u l t (16. 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 ." 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 . _ _ - where i i s t h e mean i n c l i n a t i o n . p.p a r t i c l e That i s .p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s % p The i n e q u a l i t y of Eq. = 0. . Lebedinets. 1 lux. . .2) signi- This i s a % a n y . 5. and. The addend "12 u) = = + m 0 . 1952. E(3 = 1. Albedo of a P a r t i c l e . _ -_ * See f o o t n o t e .

we s e e t h a t t h e Eq. 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 . 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 3.4) by a f a c t o r of approximately t h r e e . But. n o t .6 microns. 6 i s t h e p a r t i c l e d e n s i t y ( g / c c ) . (17. 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 .95-10 7pR 2 G l n ( r o / r t ) .4) where 9 i s t h e p a r t i c l e r a d i u s (cm). 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. who d e r i v e d t h e formula t = 0. dielectric particles. o p t i n f a v o r of e i t h e r model. 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. Saturn's rings. T h i s problem w a s reviewed by Radziyevskiy (19521. Franklin (1965) a r r i v e d a t 310 microns i n t h e i r "Model II. 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 ) . (a) albedo. 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 e will 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 . 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 . a One-particle t h i c k n e s s system.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 .!! S u b s t i t u t i n g t h e s e 42 . ~ 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 .Recognizing t h a t T 0 - 1. (17. 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. and by o t h e r p a r ticles.p a r t i c l e t h i c l m e s s system. i s cosmogonic i n n a t u r e . as w i l l be seen i n Chapter V . a t t h i s p o i n t .4) t o S a t u r n ' s r i n g s . (17. S a t u r n ' s r i n g s should have been transformed i n t o a o n e . 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. 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 . 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 . (17.

54 AU. Thus.p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s system when = T m 1. 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) = 0.4). 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. t h e geometric albedo of t h e 43 . 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). 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. (17. particle (17. 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 ) .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 ) .5851.105 y e a r s and 5.5 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. w e o b t a i n tively. l e f t hand s i d e of Eq. R = 9.values 0 4 14. 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 . f o r t h e p a r t i c l e . 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 ." and t h e l i k e ) .65b B 0 t o p a r t i c l e .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. 6.107 y e a r s .6) A c t u a l l y . 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 ) . t h e magnitude on t h e (17. 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.65. 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 rt = 7-10 km ( t h e pre- f o r p i n Eq. and t a k i n g 6 = 0. respec- I n o t h e r words.9 g/cm 3 ( i c e ) . 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 . 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. 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 . r = s e n t i n n e r l i m i t of t h e C r i n g ) . 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. even i f p = 310 microns. g r a l .5) i s . Moreover. Consequently. q. (17. by d e f i n i t i o n .

30+22%. 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. Consequently.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 . 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 N o w note t h a t a c a t r i x f o r t h e moon.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. a In SP P > 0. the E q . a p a r t from cosmogonic c o n s i d e r a t i o n s .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. g D = 0.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 . (17. 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 . l e t u s cal' p o i n t of view. 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 . > l .067 g D = 0. (17.106 ( A l l e n .5) approxig P gD. and (17. Then.65. whereas t h e t a b u l a t e d v a l u e i s a = 0. system. But g e n e r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . 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. 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. mation a = 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 and a SP D = 0. 19631.8) 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. i n t h e Eq. > a A s a m a t t e r of f a c t . 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 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 .145.65+22h. 1960). 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 .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 . when a g P = 0. 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 . (17. i n o u r case w e can write (17.

0.4 microns.555 micron. (17. 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 . (17.1 p i s t h e r a d i u s of t h e sphere. should be t a k e n f o r q . and G i e s e ' s t a b l e s l i s t it from 10 t o 159. 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. 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 . 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 = 1.9-14. 1 = 0. r e s p e c t i v e l y . v a l u e s from 10 t o 400.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 . 1-50 y i e l d s q v a l u e s t h a t v a r y from 1.11) 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 . (17.= 1. 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 microns and 0.9-35. o p p o s i t i o n . 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. parameter H == 2rrp/h. 1 known. i n accordance w i t h M i e ' s formulas.72 t o e t al. i s a mean v a l u e a What around 7. w e obtain bl = a g = 1/7-15 = 0. t h e r e f o r e . 1957. w e o b t a i n p l i m i t s 0. 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 . 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.15.12) 45 . i n a l l p r o b a b i l i t y ) . 1959. Assuming SP 1.7). 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 .. Giese 1961). 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 .65b0.33 and approximately 130 ( W a l t e r .14.

Unfortunately. 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 ) . 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. b u t . 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 . and F r a n k l i n (1952).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.W e can e s t i m a t e t h e t e r m scattering. t h e r e a r e no However. 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 ) . Chandrasekhar. t h i s merely served t o s t r e n g t h e n t h e argument]. t h e o n e . 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.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 .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 . 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. 1958. f o r example). The l a t t e r comment i s v a l i d as w e l l for microscopic. 5 lists o u r 0. 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 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.41 used i n Eq. (b) Many-particle t h i c k n e s s system. 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. (17. W e selected 46 .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'). i n o r d e r t o avoid U n f o r t u n a t e l y . A b through formulas from t h e t h e o r y of m u l t i p l e s a y 3 . 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. systems. r a t h e r t h a n t r u e spheres. E l b e r t . (19561. Thus. 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 . t h e v a l u e of 1 as com- 0. as w i l l be seen below. 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 u n d e r e s t i m a t i n g Ab. 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 . 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. p r i m a r i l y . 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 . s e e Minneart. Sobolev (1953).11) t h e r e f o r e So.

62 0. 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 . 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 . 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 . In t h i s 47 . 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 . .20 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 1 0. 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 a ~- ___ 70 b.06 4.7 0.9 4. 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 .7 4. 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 . - I n o r d e r t o avoid any c o n f u s i o n . 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 sca ttering t o t o t a l brightness.08 0.3 2. 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. 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 .24 0 . 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 . 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.62 0.62 0. 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 .65. 0. r a t h e r t h a n the results.mean v a l u e of b g ( 0 ) .62 0. 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 .6 3.4 4.48 0. 0.0 3.17 0. 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 . (0) -. 0 7 . 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 . t h a t i s .s 7. 3 1 0. t h e dependence of x ( T ) and Ab/b on x1 i s weak.5 6.14 0.08 0.12 0.62 0.62 0.76 0.1 5.31 0. Ab b Under study _ _ 1 1 1 1 3 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 .9 I n Table 5 . t h a t i s .62 0.

7. 1957. 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. 0. [x(n) = 2. t h a t i s .08. 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).0. (16.51 of E q . 1961) do n o t satis- f y t h e many-particle t h i c k n e s s models.31. confirm t h i s f a c t . a b ( 0 ) v a l u e s a t i s f y i n g t h e B In turn. 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. A f t e r t h e s e n e c e s s a r y comments. 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 . 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 .56 (Walter.4).6 t o 0. 1959. because t h e y cannot provide t h e observed b B ( 0 ) value. put a - 5 . one based on p r i n c i p l e . when o b s e r v a t i o n s w i l l be obtained. 48 . 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. The magnitude of a l i s t e d i n There is y e t a n o t h e r comment t o be made. 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 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. 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. W e 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 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 . 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. A b s o l u t e l y w h i t e s p h e r e s . W e w i l l consider t h 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 . 2. 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. 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. a w i t h t h e albedo of t h e p a r t i c l e . conclude t h a t : 1.06 t o 0. 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 . d i e l e c t r i c . s t r i c t l y speaking. 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 . Microscopic. 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 - .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. x(n) 1.71. and t h e n Ab/b = 0. 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 . Giese e t a l .

2. s e e as w e l l a 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. 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 . it can The d a t a i n Table 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 . x(n) = 9. w r i t t e n by Schoenberg. 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. Consequently.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. Hapke. 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.5 . 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 . a r i n g with T 5 confirm 0.9. 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. 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 . Hapke and van Horn. For t h e same r e a s o n s . 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 . 3. 1893.43. 1963. 1887. 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 .0. 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. this. #18. 1957. and c o n s i s t i n g of p a r t i c l e s with a = 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. 3. 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 . 1956. W e s h a l l c a l l i t t h e Gehrels-Hapke e f f e c t . 1933).6 (17. 1964. 0 = 1. 1963). They are.62 when A = A ' = 25".A t t h e same t i m e .6 and x ( n ) = 7. 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 d e t a i l e d review of t h e s e p a p e r s . 1. Actually. F i n a l l y . The Mechanism Responsiblef o r t h e Observed Ring Phase Curve 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 . Gehrels e t a l . f o r purposes of b r e v i t y . 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 . 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 .0. 1929). 49 . ( e h r e l s .

A t t h e same t i m e .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 . Europa. normal albedo n o t exceeding 0. or t o combinations of them. 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 ) . f o r them. Ganymede. 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 ( 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. x Om. 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 . 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 . T h e o r e t i c a l r e s e a r c h (Hapke.3.15 would have a p a r t i c u l a r . 0.29.07). 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 .54. /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. 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. we s a w i n #17 t h a t even a o n e . A s a m a t t e r of f a c t . and C a l l i s t o .15.09). 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. as compared with 0.15.49.585 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 .29 t o 0. 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.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. or a r e o n l y s l i g h t l y curved. 1963) and l a b o r a t o r y experiments (Hapke and In van Horn. proceeding from 0. $. I t s albedo t o o i s v e r y low (0. 0.6 (#1). . The c o n t r i b u t i o n of t h e Gehrels-Hapke e f f e c t too is s m a l l . The phase c u r v e s f o r t h e s a t e l l i t e s a r e q u i t e r e l i a b l y known from t h e e l e c t r o p h o t o m e t r i c o b s e r v a t i o n s made by S t e b b i n s and Jacobsen (1928). 1964). I o . 1963) a l s o confirm t h a t t h e l l l o g a r i t h m i c f lbehavior of t h e phase curve n e a r o p p o s i t i o n can be observed o n l y i n t h e c a s e of b o d i e s w i t h low albedo. I n t h e c a s e of t h e o t h e r G a l i l e a n s a t e l l i t e s . of f a c t .54 f o r t h e o t h e r t h r e e s a t e l l i t e s ) . Another s a t e l l i t e w i t h a phase curve resembling t h e phase curve f o r S a t u r n ' s r i n g s i s t h e moon (Gehrels e t a l . and 0. w i t h a c u r v a t u r e t h a t remains almost unchanged with cy. and i n t h e c a s e of t h e 50 .w e can add t h a t a r i n g such as t h i s w i l l be much weaker even t h a n t h e A r i n g . D = 0.$. 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.

,

II I I I 1 . 1 1 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 re a l 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 e f f e c t near opposition.

lllogarithmicfl

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 tr u c t u r e of t h e B Ring and P r o p e r t i e s of a
~~ ~~

-~

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 postul 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
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

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 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.

A na l y s i s of Observations Made During Extremely Small Ring Openings _ -Remarks

# a . Introductory

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 addit 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

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 . 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 ) . b l a n k e t i n g t h e r i n g s . when t h e sun i s taken as t h e l i g h t s o u r c e ) . atmosphere. 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. 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 . F i g u r e 15 i l l u s t r a t e s (Y the situation.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 . 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. 54 . o r d u s t . 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. 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 . 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 _ ball _ of _ Saturn. - 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 . 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 . and o t h e r s .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 . 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. 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 ) . as observed from t h e e a r t h . /55 - s e a r c h i n g f o r a g a s . 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 . 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 . t h a t i s . 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 . . 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 . p o s s i b l y .

. f (90" ) = 1/3. 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 H e took i n t o (21.2) = -2F.a F i g u r e 15.. . R u s s e l l o b t a i n e d (bA/bl) x 1/160.. b from a p o i n t above t h e n o r t h p o l e o f Saturn. (21. 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 .60 = cyp . 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 = P 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 . f 5 ( 9 0 " ) 1/10. 55 . 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 . (21. h a l f s e t . as w e l l as f o r t h e R u s s e l l p o i n t .m5 cy5 = -2Gm. 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. . M i s a r i n g part i c l e ( t h e size 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 ) . .. 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.111..07.. 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. = 90". " as Bond h a s p u t i t ) .- . . .02-10-111. 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. [from whence (I /I ) = 1. and p u t t i n g 2/7*1/3 P ' z e (R/r) M = 9.11. -. - - The 1/2 i n Eq. 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 8.48 = 2/7. Taking p = 9ff. (21..88 (21. 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").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.2). 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.0m . point. P = 50" a t t h e R u s s e l 1 p o i n t . approximately. me . The r e s u l t s of t h e review can be formulated as follows. /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. v i t y of t h e p l a n e t ' s c r e s c e n t . .000 km from t h e r i n g ' s o u t e r boundary. . 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.539. . 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 .

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 ) . and f o r t h e p a r t i c l e . 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. However.24. With a l l of t h i s i n mind. 1933).80 8 (Rabe. s e c t i o n 8. 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. accepted by R u s s e l l . 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. 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.1) i n p l a c e o f t h e v a l u e s 2. 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.h . 1928). law Contemporary r e s e a r c h ( s e e H a r r i s . 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 .101. When t h e y a r e s u b s t i t u t e d i n t o Eq. 56 . Theoretical distribution 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 . 3. so t h a t f ( 9 O o ) = f ( 9 O 0 )= 0." Figure P (a).318.08 ( R o u g i e r . i n a l l probability.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. 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 ( 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.c r e s c e n t l i g h t source a r e s m a l l . 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 .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 . R u s s e l l l s assumption t h a t f ( O o ) * f (90") = 1/10 9 P f ( 9 0 ° ) = 0. is equivalent t o adopting According t o Lambert's Lambert's scatter l a w f o r S a t u r n . 1949. r e s p e c t i v e l y . 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. 19501. 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 811. and t h e n f ( 9 O o ) = 0. scattering. 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. 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. 16. 1963. (21. 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 .08. 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 ) .

04 I n Table 6 .0 m e t e r when image q u a l i t y i s good. indicatrix. 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 . and 3. 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 . phase f u n c t i o n .01 2 20 0. of -t hebrightness at attributab -l e t o d i f f u s e l y transmitted s o l a r Table 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 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 . W e used t h e contour of b r i g h t n e s s d i s t r i b u - 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 .01 0. TABLE 6 - - - -. The s u b s c r i p t s l l t r u e l l and . (b) radiation.6 and 1. 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 .04 0 35 2 20 2 20 0 35 0 35 0.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.M 0. i s 5.6-10-3 f o r t h e phase f u n c t i o n 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 . 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 .01 0.O"35' 2"20' 0.04 0. 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. t a k i n g 57 .4010'~ of Venus.A s w i l l be s e e n . -Component ~.01 0. ratio The mean magnitude of t h e b'/b d l f o r t h e Lambert.

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 ' . 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 . 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 . 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 . and t o a band.375. graphic form. when ey - 0. 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 . (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 -~ diyisio g. 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. 6 ~ Because .o L ~ e. 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 . 1908a) . 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 .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. 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. when A t - Oo!tO1. A s w i l l be seen from Table smaller than b ' 6 . ( 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 .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. 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 . 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. ( 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 ' . 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 . i n g taken i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n .5. ( 3 ) n o n . o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s of t ~ d i v i s ~ .

. 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 ) . - 59 . 19-58]. 3 ' \ Figure 18. 1908b) s a w each of t h e i n n e r condensations twice. - . 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 .6 t o 1.sion. Barnard. 2 summed b r i g h t n e s s from both branches. 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. 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 . 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 . 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 .04. 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..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 ) . 1907. . 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. - -- -.375.. . 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 - 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.0 meter. Figure 17. r e s o l u t i o n O'I.

187. When z = 10 km. 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 . 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 . 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. 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. 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. F u r t h e r .375. 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. b r e s o l u t i o n 011. cent) . a r e s o l u t i o n OIl. 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.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. a Figure 19. 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. O from t h e c e n t e r o f S a t u r 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. 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. - 0 % 0 % 60 ..187). s o u r c e s of l i g h t i s Once a g a i n . 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). - 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 . 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. z 10 km.375.#22.

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. 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. = 5 km. T h i s a u t h o r found t h a t when A ' = 0 .a b Figure 20. 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 . T h i s can be s e e n from F i g u r e 21a. even when z lg20-1921). 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 . Same as i n Figure 19. F i g u r e 20 shows t h e corresponding /62 E v i d e n t l y . 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. w e obt 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 . brightness distribution. 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 .375. 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. However. 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.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. which shows a p o s i t i v e p r i n t from one of t h e 61 . 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. ( 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 . 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. t h a t i s . outside t h e Cassini division. 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. l ) . a - r e s o l u t i o n 011. b - o w r e s o l u t i o n 011. 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 .

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 - 6.4. 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 . 62 .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.375.~ 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%). 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. 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 . 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. The i n t e n s e a u r e o l e of S a t u r n . 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).91.1) 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.4.26 km (22. 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 7.8. C 1 8 1 1 . t h e l i n e a r w i d t h . 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 . we o b t a i n h . r e s p e c and 1911. F i n a l l y .2) Then.6 t i v e l y . 1 0 . dard" i m a g e q u a l i t y ( r e s o l u t i o n OIl. and ba = 5 . 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. t a k i n g btrue aureole is 8 - = bc. ( t e l e s c o p e a p e r a t u r e D = 60 c m and m a g n i f i c a t i o n G = 220). 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 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. is the brightness Moreover. 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. 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.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. of t h e c e n t e r of S a t u r n ' s d i s k .10 cp s e c arc (22. w i l l be seen o u t s i d e t h e band. 0 . h . 1. 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 .2010 b -4 bc.0. and 1. (22.

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. s p e c t r o s c o p i c .&2 hours. or one s i m i l a r t o i t . 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. Unfortunately.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 . (22. 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. 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 . 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). More t h a n t e n f i r s t . 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 Accoraing t o S l i p h e r ( l 9 2 2 ) . f o r passage on t h e n o r t h s i d e . 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 ) . it w i l l be astronomical n i g h t and S a t u r n w i l l be . The a u t h o r . 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. 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 . i s used f o r t h e c a l c u l a t i o n . 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 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. * 63 . but doing o t h e r work as w e l l . computed i n advance. 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 .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. 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 . a t obser- A l l t h a t need be done is t o select a high-mountain = 0 . 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. 1968.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 . 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 . Recommendations included making - photometric. 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 . -. 1968). a f t e r which Eq. 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 . 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 ~-~ . t o g e t h e r with D o l l f u s . v a t o r y where.* Consequently.--~~ 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. Kiladze. 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 . recently.1). or n o n .

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 i t s dependence on t h e phase a n g l e . photometry. 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. 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.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 . 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 . U n f o r t u n a t e l y . 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 . 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. 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 . 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 ) . 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 . covering 64 n i g h t s ) . If h i s d a t a a r e t o be t r u s t e d . according t o Maggini (1937). and o t h e r s . 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 . This i s c l e a r l y i n e r r o r . Texereau (1967) published a s h o r t r e p o r t on h i s photographic photometry of 1966. particularly its rings. spectro- photometry. 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 . 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 . 1968). 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 . 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 . 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 .c a l l e d D r i n g . much of it unique i n many ways. F u r t h e r . /65 64 . 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 . 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 e w Mexico o b s e r v a t o r y (140 p l a t e s . 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 . and involved many d i f f i c u l ties. 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 . 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 . t o some e x t e n t . 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 . Meudon ( D o l l f u s and Focas. published. t o check t h e e x i s t e n c e of t h e s o . 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 .

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 . 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 . 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 . f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e . These c u r v e s . 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 . Janus A l l of t h i s D o l l f u s discovered it by 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 . 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. second 65 II I . o r w e s t ) . T h i s s a t e l l i t e .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. 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. and D o l l f u s and Focas. 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. F i g u r e 21 d h a s been t a k e n from Feibelman (19671. Beyond t h i s . 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. o r l e s s . n o t of Mimos. a t t h e t i m e of o b s e r v a t i o n . 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. The n e a r n e s s t o t h e r i n g s . c a l l e d Janus. 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 . i n t e r m s of b r i g h t n e s s . and has a s t e l l a r b r i g h t n e s s of 14.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 ) . 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). 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 . and t h e weakness of t h e s a t e l l i t e . 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 . more about which i n #23 F i g u r e 21a reproduces t h e photography on which. 1967). a conclusion a r r i v e d a t a s a r e s u l t of new. 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 . b u t of a body c l o s e r t o S a t u r n . A s w i l l be seen from t h e f i g u r e . i n s i d e t h i s r i n g l ) . 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 . obtained by t h e photographic photometry method by They made i t p o s s i b l e for t h e f i r s t time W e w i l l discuss Kiladze.

of dark side brightness were based on old. culations. *4u L 44JJZl C Figure 21. . and by light diffi-lsely transmitted through the thickness of the rings from the day side ( # 2 1 ) .4 66 December 1966 . These are the first. Materials illustrating the results of the international cooperative observation s made of the Saturn system in 1966.F i g m e 21e shows one more result of Dollfus and Focas' photometry. and as yet the Prior to 1966. Agreement seems to be completely satisfactory. and G a f f . estimates only. measurements of the luminance of the dark side of the rings as a function of the elevation of the sun above their lighted side.observations made by Barnard. 1 4O. quantitative measurements of dark side luminance. vjsual.f . as well as by an approximate calculation of the illumination of the night side by light reflected by the ball of Saturn. 0 The observations made by Dollfus and Focas now make it possible to check these cai- d b 1 4 3 f l 4L. Slipher.

m a t e r i a l as well. 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. 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 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 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 ) . A t t h e same t i m e . Focas . 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. of r i n g s t r u c t u r e (#34). 1968). 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. discovered by D o l l f u s . edge of t h e r i n g system.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 . For example. 1967). 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. 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. The arrow p o i n t s t o t h e new. 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 ) . 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 . A n ellipticalm 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 67 . Focas. 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 . 1968). 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.s e c t i o n . 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. 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. p l a n e . 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 . 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 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. s e c t i o n g i v e s a rounded minimum. d of S a t u r n on 14 November 1966. 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 . and i s p r a c t i c a l l y l i n e a r . 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 .5). t h e minimum w i l l be f l a t . - - - - - - - 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 . 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 ) . Kiladze. and i n d i r e c t proximity t o it. 1968). 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 .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.

i n b l u e l i g h t ) p r o v i d e s z 0 = 1. from whence to t = 7 . So we must f i n d 2. a p p l i e s with equal f o r c e t o t h e plane-parallel W e have seen t h a t t h i s Based on t h i s r i n g s hypothesis.p a r a l l e l .O. I n t h a t c a s e . night. 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 . 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 ) . t h e October s e r i e s of measurements ( K i l a d z e . assumption.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 . 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 ' ) . 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 .39010 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 .p a r a l l e l ' l approximation w a s t = 1966 December 0 d h h 18 03 . t h a t t h e y are p l a n e .6 km. though. 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 . w i t h a root-mean-square A t the same time. 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. This c a l c u l a t i o n can be made i f w e u s e t h e r e s u l t s of t h e measurements 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. and so f o r t h . 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 . 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. 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 . 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.p a r a l l e l . 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.2 UT.8 km.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. 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 . 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 . ( 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 . 68 . as w e l l as D o l l f u s and Focas. cy. (Moreover. 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 . A . 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 . estimate). K i l a d z e . where -3 I(t) = 0. when A ' = 0 i n t h e l l p l a n e . = 2. and t h e December ones ( D o l l f u s and Focas. 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.

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. 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. as shown i n F i g u r e s 21b and c .( t ) = 5bd/bc. T h i s y i e l d s bd/bc = h 15. Putting ring edge b r i g h t n e s s .3*10'3 = 0.p a r a l l e l cannot be precluded.2 and 3.7 lan when t 0 0 .0*10-3 f o r bd/bc. w e can t a k e t h e Eq. we o b t a i n z 0 equal t o 3. A s a m a t t e r of f a c t .13 t h e measured i n t e n s i t y T( t ) .e and D o l l f u s and Focas. 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. remembering t h a t C corresponds t o A = 2O. second of arc.750.4-10'3. 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 . 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.3-10-3. i f w e take 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. 4 x t u d e by I d / ( t ) . The r e p l y must be i n t h e negative.8 f o r 0 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 to - t . to t = 7 .5 km. 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 we d i d above. This method p r o v i d e s a mean of zo = 3 . 0. 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 . and double t h a t o f Kiladze. For example. 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. we w i l l have z = 3. r a t h e r t h a n 15. t h e approximately l i n e a r behavior of t h e branches.8. where b i s t h e d a r k s i d e d d brightness. The 0.3-10-~.15.8 and 9h. With r e s p e c t t o 5.% corresponds t o 5 = 3 . (22. 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 .4) e s t i m a t e as q u i t e r e l i a b l e . t h a t i s . Nor - Hence. i f we t a k e t h e extreme v a l u e s of Sh. 4 km. I n f a c t . 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 . 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 . 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 .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 .052-10-3. as above. b e . ( 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 . r e s p e c t i v e l y . through t h e p l a n e of t h e r i n g s ) .

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 e 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

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

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

0

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 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 -

3

band t o

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 ) s h e l l t o be between 5,000 and 10,000 lan.

.

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 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) that

(%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 of t h e first) i s o n l y approximate. 1/27000, 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

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 e 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 .

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

/ s k from

dynamic

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.45 where r 3 4 6 x rp.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 ) . 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 . 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 . a t time t = 0 . 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 . A ties.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. Note t h a t 73 .) = tAv I = 1/2&Ar. A r = 1000 km. which. 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. t i a l R o t a t i o n __ and Its Consequence 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. /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 .3) AS = 3140 lane (25. As(nT) = rrnAr. 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 i s t h e corresponding d i f f e r e n c e i n v e l o c i where A r i s t h e width of t h e zone. and n = 1 (25. Here a few words need be s a i d about t h e s o . (25. I n f a c t .5). 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. W e a l s o can w r i t e As(+. 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. t h e homogeneous. u n f l a t t e n e d . 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. Di f f e r e n ~. I f . According t o Roche.#25. r e s p e c t i v e l y . f o r example. (18501.

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. /74 74 . #26. r e f l e c t i v i t y . 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 . Conclusion I1 l a c k s p e r s u a s i o n as w e l l because Eq. 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 . So f a r as c o n c l u s i o n ( I ) i s concerned. 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).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 . be seen from Eq. 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). (25. 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. Thus. s o l i d bodies. B .51. - But i f 1 ( i c e p a r t i c l e s ) . 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 0 km. 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 . 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 . 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 . i n p a r t . 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 . and C r i n g s can be m o n o l i t h i c . 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 . 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 . 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 . 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 . an e f f e c t t h a t never has been observed. t h e i c e b a l l . Y e t obser- b u t molecular cohesion as w e l l . of 6s. which i s i n s i d e Roche's l i m i t . it i s taken t h a t hS side the l i m i t . 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 ) . 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 . beyond t h a t l i m i t . 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 . ( 2 5 . 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 . b u t o n l y i n p a r t . 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 . or whether t h e y are. They could be made up of j u s t hydrogen and helium.

has what i s . Kowalewsky (1885) r e f i n e d t h e shape of t h e c r o s s . propagating t a n g e n t i a l l y as waves of some kind.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 . The o b s e r v a t i o n s a r e n o t i n r f a v o r of t h i s model. r i n g . However. and n o t l i q u i d hydrogen. solid particles.s e c t i o n of a r i n g such as t h i s . 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. wave. or a f l a t cloud made up of many t i n y s a t e l - lites. a t a f i x e d moment i n t i m e . O f t h a t r e s e a r c h . dent. 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 . 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 . 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 . 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 . 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 . H e proved t h a t a narrow. 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 . Stability Consequently. Maxwell (1859) analyzed t h e c a s e of t h e narrow. t h e y can be a system of many narrow. 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 . t h a t of Duboshin (1940) c o n t a i n s i n addiHagihara 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 . m o n o l i t h i c r i n g . Hence. 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. 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. g e n e r a l l y speaking. w i l l be u n s t a b l e . 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 .l i k e zones. #27. 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 . (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 . 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 . c o n c e n t r i c . 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 . 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. 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. or helium. 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 . 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 . an a r b i t r a r y shape. homogeneous r i n g . (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 .

(27. 2 ) . t h e one of g r e a t e s t . t h a t i s . Eq. 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. or of waves. 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 . 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 . capable of d e s t r o y i n g the rings. 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 .2) were not s a t i s f i e d . be). Maxwell's upper l i m i t of ( 2 7 . 6 5' W e shall re- 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. i t can be assumed t h a t some system of crowding. 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 . w. 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 ) .2) ignored d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n . (27. t h e smaller /u should rcZ Of t h e o t h e r models considered by Maxwell. t h e c o n d i t i o n s of Eq. 76 .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 . were s a t i s f i e d . 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. when Cook and F r a n k l i n (1964. r e s p e c t i v e l y . (27.I1 l1 l111I I (27. a t a s i n g l e a n g u l a r v e l o c i t y . 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 . i s g r e a t l y underestimated. I f t h i s i s s o . (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 .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. It should be emphasized t h a t Eq. p e r m i s s i b l e r i n g d e n s i t y . 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 . 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.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 . Here 6 (27. 1966) reviewed Maxwell's i n v e s t i g a t i o n s .

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 . w i l l be t a k e n up i n #28. and t h a t . t h e y reviewed t h e compression and expansion waves propagating i n t h e r i n g s . 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 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. 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 u r f a c e d e n s i t y between them. 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 . i n c l u d i n g t h e photometric d a t a . 1966).l i v e d . 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 . (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. what Goldsbrough (1951) must be expected is n o t resonance.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 . /76 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 . however. 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 . t h e tendency of t h e system t o form s h o r t . 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 . They used M a x w e l l ' s method. b u t long-period b e a t s . This i s not so. 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 .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 ) . S i n c e t h e l a t t e r cannot be i g n o r e d . 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 . cosmogonically speaking. 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 . I n o t h e r words. A o n e . 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 . and assumed t h a t i f t h e amplitudes of t h e waves 77 I . t h a t i 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 . i n fact. f i n a l l y .

04 g/cm 3 . W e 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 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. 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.18 g/cm 3 . and propagated r a d i a l l y . 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 .39. Actually r4r a t i o The i s contained (Lh/s:$) where r = n(r2 2 - 2 r l ) zo'r (27.r o s e without l i m i t . 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 u s i n g t h e 6 e s t i m a t e c i t e d above. 1 2 5 z = 10 cm. Retaining t h e terminology used by C o o k and F r a n k l i n .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. 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). i n s t a b i l i t y would r e s u l t . 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 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 . Maxwell n o 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 .89-1010 c m .2). T h i s o p i n i o n (whether i t i s . H e con- s i d e r e d two t y p e s of waves. r = 1. 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. I n f a c t . 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. 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. 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 . or i s n o t . st a b i li t y . (27. 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 . 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. 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. and e l i m i n a t e d . we o b t a i n 0 r 78 I . 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.10 cm. 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. 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 . S u b s t i t u t i n g r = 0. 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 . 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 . 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. and C o o k and F r a n k l i n confirmed.

cannot be t r u s t e d . 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 . 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 . 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 . 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 . limb e f f e c t s . 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 . even more from t h o s e of M a x w e l l H i s results differ 4su < ( % d a $ m a x i i <26 - (27. /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 . 79 .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".5) W e shall not. The dimensions. ___ ~ h e r e . 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 . of wave-like p e r t u r b a t i o n s .51. 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. Neither I n f a c t . 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 .t.~ conception . 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 answer i s a s follows. 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. however. 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. or i n o t h e r words. (27. r a t h e r t h a n waves. or of t h e format i o n of a r a d i a l l y propagating r i n g .. 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 . b u t he took r i n g curvature. based on s i m i l a r assumptions. and (27. 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 . i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n . h e ~. could e x i s t . on t h e v a l u e of - (mr4).4) (d) Objgct_ions to. 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 . assumption has a p h y s i c a l b a s i s .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 . 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 . 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 t h e l i f e span. 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 .Yabushita (1966) i s a n o t h e r who made a r e c e n t estimate of (3irb$)ma.

I t i s between 700 and 1400 and 1400 and 2800 km. Camichel. 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. or l e s s ) . or i n t h e form of e l l i p s o i d s ) . 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 Lowell. or two. 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. and by Yabushita. D o l l f u s . 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 .2 t o O't. 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 . and t h e l i k e (#13). Comparing t h e s e numbers w i t h Eq.(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 . A l l observers r e p o r t s t a b l e . I n p o i n t of f a c t . and even e x c e l l e n t . r e v o l u t i o n s (one day. such as t h e nonuniform b r i g h t n e s s of t h e e y e s . i t s magnitude i s of t h e o r d e r of O t ' . images and h i g h resolution. I n any c a s e . 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. even of such s m a l l condensation d e n s i t i e s as 4 km. 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. 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 . Barnard. 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 . Not a t r a c e of moving. 80 . 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. (25. 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 .4 t o 0". f o r example) i s concerned. Kuiper.41. 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 . ring-like d i v i s i o n s (Kirkwood's s l i t s ) . d i f f e r e n c e s i n b r i g h t n e s s . and of t h e o r d e r of 0". The c a u s e s of t h e azimuthal e f f e c t s a r e unknown. long-term e x i s t e n c e . respectively. l l i k e n o n u n i f o r m i t i e 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 . I n o t h e r words.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 ) . So. 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 ) . 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 . Lyot.

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 0 and o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s (28. r e s p e c t i v e l y .p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s system. y . t h e r e f o r e . for example).#28. P 81 . 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 . t h e r e f o r e . 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 . Pr e v e n t Complete ~F l a t t e n i n g of t h e Rings Let u s t u r n t o t h e problem touched upon i n #27. 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 . -_That _ _ P o s s i b l. 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 . 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 . 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 . can be e f f e c t i v e o n l y i n v e r y particle. They c a n n o t . /80 47. 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 . t h a t of t h e former J e f f r e y s Conception. resonance. where c o l l i s i o n s a r e extremely r a r e . p . long-period. 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. Mechanisms .1) O = T I 2Nao/R. 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. f o r t h e d i v i sions). 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. 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 . 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. 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 . tem. 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 . i n accordance with which t h e r i n g s are a o n e . show t h i s . 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 ) . l e t u s compute t h e 1/z 0 In order t o r a t i o . 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 . 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 . and t h e l i k e . 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 . and 106 m e t e r s . l a y e r with thickness z T p a r t i c l e s have t h e same r a d i u s . I f t h i s i s so. Tethys.

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 .3) 0 f o r t/z When r = T = OA 0 0. 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 . approach Saturn. we obtain IJZo (28. 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. 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 . 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 . 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 . L e t u s i n t r o d u c e a formula f o r z random motion. respectively. Comparing these expressions. I t s amplitude t h e n i s (28. b u t i o n w i l l b e c l o s e t o Maxwellian. velocity d i s t r i - D A i s extremely s m a l l . 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 . s t r i c t l y speaking. R i s t h e volume of t h e r i n g .4) 82 . 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 .! / ~ ~ .18 and 0. 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.. 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 . 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 .G. 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 . Since t h e system i s unusually f l a t . t h e r e i s only a mean compensation. 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 .30 are obtained Thus.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 ." I n f a c t . i n t o "heat. other i n t h e stationary state.2) 3 14 ]~Z. = 1. r. 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 .6 and r . Actually.i . i s z e r o ) . u. 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 . 0 = T OB 0. t h e v a l u e s (28. and s i n c e Specifically. o 2 ~ ~ ~ . 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 .

r e s p e c t i v e l y ) .6) w i t h Eq.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. P P (28. 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 .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.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 I n t u r n . incompressible m e d i u m .7) w i l l y i e l d - u = ut3 o eff / 6 (28.7) A comparison of Eq. 0 between t h e +zo e f f and -Z N o w l e t us estimate t h e z 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 . (28. w e o b t a i n 2 2 2 n ( z ) = n ( 0 ) exp (-4cu a /nu 1. (28. 2 . is E = y m 5/2r.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 . (28.11 ) 83 . 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 . 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) . 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. According t o t h e hydrodynamics of a v i s c o u s .9) *ere 7 = 1/3 Tl6. ( 28. 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 when z = 0 ' . ( 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). (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 . 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. and t h a t r2(dcU/drl2 = 9/4 (%/r 3 1.

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. (28. a t d i s t a n c e r = r t h e system). 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 . 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 1966.10 = 0 z o eff = 35 m 0 ( 28. 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. z 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 3.141.and r e s o r t i n g as w e l l t o t h e use of Eqs. w e find 1.81. * * -. .4 cm/s. (28. Then. 84 . ( 28.OO-lO1o cm) w a s . i n p l a c e of Eq.58-1017 seconds. 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 .5. The j u s t considered mechanism t h e r e f o r e i s capable of z f o r 5-10 9 years. and t = 5. 1965).15) Since w e 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 .37*1010 c m ( t h e p r e s e n t day o u t e r boundary of 9 y e a r s = 1.8) and (28. we obtain -r 5/2dr implying = (3 zt eff/8 G o ) d t .3) and (28. 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.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. s e t t i n g 7 = 1. t h e mean The 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. (28. 0 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 aPP' ** Let u s add t h a t i n accordance w i t h Eqs. _ __ * 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.91. 0 aPP M 120 m (28. 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. ~ .

The mechanism involved i n t h e mutual shading e f f e c t i s v e r y simple. #%). of the ring. t h e t o t a l mass of t h e r i n g s . Keeler. With i n c r e a s e i n cy. f o r t h e r i n g s (#18) w from t h e t h e o r y of t h i s e f f e c t . z thickness. r e s p e c t i v e l y ) . 1893).VII. H e also w a s the f i r s t t o particles. T mr. 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 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 . . t h i s chapter. W e a r e indebted t o S e e l i g e r f o r t h i s concept. because every p a r t i c l e s h i e l d s i t s own shadow.p a r a l l e l 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 ‘ .of t h_ vations * - Comparison with Obser- i83 #29. Deslandres. f a r t h e r from it. Let u s suppose t h a t w e have a p l a n e . system. D . 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. = 0 ) . that w e have a many-particle t h i c k n e s s 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 t h e time of exact o p p o s i t i o n (a. 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 that is. 1887. 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 . 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. 0’ 0 ( # I & )e . Theory e _ E f f e c t o f Mutual Shading and-I>s . /84 * ___ _ _ _ _ __ - . q u a l i t a t i v e l y speaking. 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 . was c a r r i e d out almost 80 y e a r s ago. 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 . _ _ . p. l a y e r i s m a n y t i m e s t h a t of p. 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 . 0 (#22) and of t h e p a r t i c l e d e n s i t y . 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 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 of t h e r i n g s . 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 . 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 .

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. Hertzsprung.~ . 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 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). Chandrasekhar). 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. 2 5 0 1 0 . 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. 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 . 4 .t h e o r e t i c a l phase c u r v e s (Seel i g e r . i n t h i s approximation. 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 . cons t r u c t e d using t h e s e p o i n t s [ E q . 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.observed phase curve f o r B r i n g . 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 . 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. 1919. Figure 22. #12).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 . d i f f u s e l y r e f l e c t i n g spheres. 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. M u l l e r found a v a l u e of 0.75-10-3 6. 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 . 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. (12. 1. S e e l i g e r .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. 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 . 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 . 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. S e e l i g e r . 1887) f o r D = = 3. 2 . .of t h e r i n g s (Schoenberg. i n h i s t h e o r y . 3 . Sobolev. Schoenberg. 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. 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) . 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. 10-3and 1 .25.111. 1921.

- . U i s t h e cone of shading. -_ F i g u r e 23. 5 ) . t h e angular dimensions of t h e s o l a r d i s k ( . "cy1 inder-cy1 i n d e r " approximation. 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 .3 ' . measured from p l a n e fl ( c l o s e s t t o t h e s u n ) . s e c t i o n s t h a t follow. The volume behind t h e p a r t i c l e . because of h i s l i m i t a t i o n ( 1 ) . Schematic View o f t h e eye o f S a t u r n ' s r i n g s . 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 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. The s t r a i g h t l i n e s M S and M E are d i r e c t e d toward t h e sun. It w i l l be reviewed i n t h e #3l. 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 . 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 . r e s p e c t i v e l y .( F i g u r e 22). W e can c a l l t h i s scheme t h e /---. cy i s t h e phase a n g l e . 87 . p i s t h e p a r t i c l e r a d i u s . 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... 1959. 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 . Without .__ Variance I ~ ~ i n t h e S i z e s of Pa 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 . C i s t h e cylinder of s h i e l d i n g . 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 . 1940. 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 toward t h e e a r t h . e q u a l l y probable. - .. T h i s a u t h o r (see Bobrov.-. The "Cone-Cylinder" __ Approximation.

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 . where W i s p a r t of V. s h i e l d s element de from t h e e a r t h .2 ) [ ( R . 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 .c a l l e d volume of p r o b a b i l i t y v=c+u-w. striking (a) Amplitude of chang disregarded. t h e c e n t e r of volume sun. 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. when _ _ . 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. 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. or U.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 . and i s not shaded. t h e t o t a l of C and U.676.4) p -4 z .0'10 3 .3 ) For where R is t h e volume of t h e r i n g . 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 (31.1111 l111ll1l I 1l1 l111I I I Il 1 I I1 L e t u s remove l i m i t a t i o n (11. i f t h e volumetric density is D 3. t h e s h i e l d e d volumes /86 - remain i n f i n i t e l y long c y l i n d e r s . JZq. t h e many-particle t h i c k n e s s system. l/cp w 2. But a t t h e same t i m e . 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. c . 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 .V)/f?]"-' zz C S ~ (- TJN/R).penumbra i s Some p a r t i c l e . o r shaded. L e t u s look a t F i g u r e 23. 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.6) 88 . 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 . r e s p e c t i v e l y . (31. __IiL___. (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 is the p a r t i c l e radius. 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. W e o b t a i n t h e "cone-cylinder" approximation. d e . w i l l c a s t i t s shadow on de.z[? (IV/R) 4 (31. Further. (31.

t h e r e f o r e . x0 r . v a l u e . - (31.16) 89 .151.13) and (31. (31. w e can set (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 (31.9) while v(0) of A .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 ' . 'r and 0 i s t h e o p t i c a l t h i c k n e s s . (31.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 . 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 (31.8) ( s e e Bobrov. when a = a max w<c+u. and we can t a k e it t h a t A' = A. 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 . (31. 1960. In Eqs.71. : (cps. 3141.13) through l3q. W e can. 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 . p. 5 : Since.11.14) In p l a c e of Eq./p sin A ) = -4 -'Cllcp : -. = c. (31. (31. 3 Ds1n '4 . p r e v i o u s l y determined (28.

is of the order of 10 percent. the natu- 6O. P Eqs.20) solve this problem. 90 . the total brightness. 5 1 2 ' p a m a x . 7 The only free parameter now is D. or less. (17. (Ab/b) AS will be seen from Figure 24. (31. They make it possible to compute the amplitude of the effect of mutual shading when the penumbra is ignored. Cf (amax)/f(0) 1 = 2 where p is the particle phase coefficient. We used = 1. for particles with a L88 . a fact not included in the Seeliger approximation.024.0. (31. and the phase function is similar to that of the moon.6.11).191. A s already has 1 been indicated by Eq.15). 0< a ral phase curve for a particle in limits ( Consequently. with higher order scatterwhere b ing taken into consideration. and this is extremely close to actual conditions. tained when the penumbra was taken into consideration (see the next section). The factor f(amax)/f(0) can be computed as follows.is the brightness created by first order scattering. the natural effect of opposition of the particles (the Gehrels-Hapke effect) is slight.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 amplitude P is heavily dependent on D. Since the spherical albedo of a typical ring particle is now low. it can be taken that (31. A = A ' = The dashed curve shows similar results ob= 0. and (31. is b = b1 i Ab. The results of the calculations converted to stellar magnitudes are shown in Figure 24 (the solid curve). (31-17) Since the interval of change in a for Saturn is very small.10. so that .5) should be practically ( 31 2 0 linear. and p = 0. 0 25" (wide open rings). Ab(O)/b(O) The results of the calculations of the Ab(O)/b(O) ratio for Saturn's rings have already been presented in #17 (see Table 5 ) .

a s b e f o r e . (31. 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 . .15). 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 F i g u r e 24. Setting 0 (31. and s i n A = s i n 25" = 0. 5 (#12). " where. T h e o r e t i c a l amplitude. 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 . The i n f l u e n c e of t h e penumbra is slight. 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. 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. t h e r e is a r e d u c t i o n i n D. 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. b u t some a l r e a d y have reached completion. Thus. 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. 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.58 The observed 7 m l / 3 and D % 5 lom3. t h e dashed curve w i t h t h e penumbra t a k e n int o consideration. Let u s p o i n t o u t t h a t Eq. The amplitude i s g r e a t l y dependent on D. Accordingly. 0 OB = 1 corresponds t o D = 1. and. 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 . 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 1.15) a r e t h e "deep l a y e r s ." The second and t h i r d terms i n t h e numerator of Eq. t h a t i s .16 1 0 demonstrates t h e dependence of x on D. Ammax.4225. i n Eq. The s o l i d curve w a s computed w i t h t h e penumbra ignored. The presence of completed cones reduces t h e p r o b a b i l i t y of mutual shading.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. Turning now t o Eq. w e f i n d t h a t x PB(zmax) p B ( 0 ) is of t h e o r d e r of 0.16). N (si. a v a l u e corresponding t o x 0 - = 7 . some of t h e shadow cones a r e truncated'. (31. A s opposed t o t h i s .1 . It is n e c e s s a r y t h a t D > according t o Figure 24. 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 . as a r e s u l t . 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 . layers.

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. and t h i s i s shown i n F i g u r e 25. i n t h e c a s e when t h e penumbra i s taken i n t o consideration. i n a d d i t i o n t o cone U . 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 . V. S p e c i f i c a l l y . Designations are t h e same as t h o s e used i n F i g u r e 23. Then v =c + u + P - w. Shape of t h e volume of p r o b a b i l i t y . (b) H e r e t h e geometry of t h e volume o f proba- b i l i t y . 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 . (31. (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. 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. -- __ / - t ------ F i g u r e 25. must be changed somewhat. I n f l u e n c e of t h e penumbra.. -- .1l 1 1l1l1 1l1l1 1 l I I1 I E \ ~ . /9_0 92 . .. 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. V . 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. -. 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.2).

a r e t h e p r o b a b i l i t i e s of 0. 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 .where po.ndition i s s a t i s f i e d i n (31. (31.28) and . particles hitting of t h e element K 0 = 1. 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. (31. t h a t is. p2 volume V . e t c . . L e t us t a k e i t t h a t . Then and from whence (31.. . 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.. .r. On t h e o t h e r hand. E q .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. 1956.24) 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 . K2.. Since V =(N/R)V. 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. K 0 ' d6 corresponding t o t h e s e events. K1. Ignoring a l l t e r m s i n Q. we can r e p l a c e Eq. 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. pl. (31.23) by o u r c a s e because V < R. Thus. F.. 1. v. W = 0 when CY = amax. f o r example) n ' - [ v n exp(-v)/n:l..24) is valid This c. a s i n t h e c a s e when t h e penumbra was ignored. 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. By Actually. 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. 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.

" have t h e forms and V when cy = Q and cy = 0.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 . a n n u l a r . can be seen from p o i n t M.3. depending on t h e n a t u r e of t h e e c l i p s e . The e c l i p s e can b e p a r t i a l . 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 . (31. Then and deep ( I ' D " ) .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 .-) tlV. where. 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 ." 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 ) . 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. 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 . o r " p a r t i a l annular.

(31. i n p l a c e of Eq...201. Eqs.33) we o b t a i n (31. . o r z 0 < (p/cp)). (c) from Eq.32). (31. . For t h i s c a s e .7) by r e p l a c i n g amax by a ... (31.19) s o l v e t h e problem. and (31. As w e have noted i n t h e f o r e g o i n g . 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. 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 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. . 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. and t a k i n g cognizance of Eq. (31. with C + U. W is not considered s m a l l as compared Phase f u n c t i o n .311. changing from t h e v a r i a b l e z t o x . A s w e see. N o 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 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. 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 o r i g i n a l formula f o r b ( a ) / b l ( 0 ) i s obtained 1 (31. it p a s s e s v e r y c l o s e t o 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.34) 95 . s e t t i n g A ' = A .

pp. r 0’ Ab(O)/b(O). w i s g r e a t l y dependent on a.where and = a/q. A ’ M A f o r widely.19 Overall. b ( a ) / b ( O ) depends on t h e v a r i a b l e s cy. 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 ] . t o each o t h e r . and on t h e param e t e r s D. The r e a d e r can f i n d it i n our a r t i c l e (Bobrov. The o n l y f r e e parameter i s D . 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.10. i n t h e f i n a l a n a l y s i s . 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. which c o n t a i n s simple. A ‘ . Beyond t h i s . or even moderately opened r i n g s .027 s t e l l a r magnitude/de- g r e e of p h a s e ) . cy. 19601. The dependence of A and A ’ is s l i g h t . 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. 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. 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. Consequently. 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 . 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 . w 0. 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 . 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 . s i n c e it i s .211. e x p r e s s i o n s as w e l l . and W decreases quickly. (31. 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.512-ppa. approximate. 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 ) . 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 ) . A . 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 e reached P’ should be c l o s e t o t h a t f o r t h e moon (pr. and i s not i n e x c e s s #17. of t h e parameters Ab/b of 0. - (31. 96 . The phase a n g l e .

0 of t h e o t h e r parameters a r e shown n e a r t h e curves. and z 0 . and Lebedinets /95 - (1957). 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 ) . To' Pp' and Ab/b f o r f i x e d A . 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. 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 ) .'f / F i g u r e 26. z i s t a k e n as equal t o 1 lan. W e s h a l l compare t h e s e 97 I . Schoenberg (19331. 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 ) . A I . 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. 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. 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 from o b s e r v a t i o n s made by Hertzsprung (19191. .

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 ) . The lower. 98 . Then t o o .07. 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). Schoenberg ( f i l l e d c i r c l e s . Eq.7.10-3. In a l l c a s e s A = A I = 258 9 To = Z = 0. 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 . from Schoenberg's mean v a l u e s .i a/u F i g u r e 27. and Om.(o) . B C - 09 A s w i l l be seen from F i g u r e 27.7-10-~ is BB ( 0 ) - BC 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 ) .6.145. some s m a l l . middle. Ab/bl = 0. j u s t as i s t h e c a s e f o r too l a r g e B. Also t o be suspected i s . Om.2-10-3. 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 ) . with t h e same changes i n @ ( 0 ) as above. t h e more p r e f e r a b l e .128.053. -0 m -145.Bc.11. 3. b u t t h e corresponding v a l u e f o r D = 4. and upper c u r v e s were The corresponcomputed f o r D = 1.10-3. a l b e i t s y s t e m a t i c . 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. (12. and p s t e l l a r magnitude/degree phase. ding v a l u e s f o r B ( 0 ) B C are 0m . and 4.024 = 1. and Lebedinets ( c r o s s e s ) . 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. 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 .

. . . . when n = 3. when v a r i a n c e s a r e ignored. . I n t h i s approximation.with . I n t h e next deduction we f o r t h i s law. . n . . . 99 . 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. . On t h e o t h e r hand. f o r t h e most p a r t . i s ( f o r v i s u a l r a y s ) p * = 2-10 a shadow with l e n g t h p/Cp.. -%one-Cylinder" Approximation .1 t o 0. 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. . s o f a r as t h e mutual shading e f f e c t i s concerned. ~. 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. #32. 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. 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 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 . .1) where p i s t h e p a r t i c l e r a d i u s . s is a d i s t r i b u t i o n parameter. variance The most i n t e r e s t If it i s narrow. -1 cm.. compromise. 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 t h e shadow cone) i s 0. 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 . Varianaes . The.. . (32.~-. . t h e boundary v a l u e f o r p . Thus. . 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 N = Kp-S dP. 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 sa t i sf 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 . F r e s n e l zones.i n Particle Size I . 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. Then. (32. and evoke no real o b j e c t i o n s .5. Unfortunately.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 . _ I _ . _ .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. Taken i n t o Consideration (a) General e x p r e s s i o n f o r amplitude. K i s a c o n s t a n t . 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. p 2 ) .5. . 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. 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 there is - p r a c t i c a l l y no washing away of t h e shadow cone. 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..

i n accordance w i t h t h e proof i n & l b . r + d r ) . in which r is a c o n s t a n t and f ( a ) i s t h e 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 . of t h e same p a r t i c l e s c o i n c i d e . or shaded. a s we d i d i n #31. 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. 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 . p + dp). 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. 2 L e t a luminous f l u x rf(cr)p i n t e r v a l (p. p a r t i c l e ' s phase f u n c t i o n . 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 . w i l l . o u t s i d e t h e shading.11. V . and t h e m a x i m u m r a d i u s of t h e cone. . 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 . 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 . p + d p ) . The geometry of t h e volume of p r o b a b i l i t y . 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. (32. of any p a r t i c l e with Then. 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 Replacing t h e magnitudes d N from Eq.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 . r + d r ) . and a t d e p t h z . with thickness dz. u s suppose. r + d r ) . 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. o r shading.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. o r s h i e l d i n g . 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 . now should be set equal t o r. t h e v a l u e s of p r f o r various elements. 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 a r t i c l e s . d e . < z s a t i s f i e s t h e s h i e l d i n g . 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 p + d p ) . r + d r ) i s p where d N r = exp(- V 2 dNr). as a whole. by p a r t i c l e s i n t h e i n t e r v a l ( r . problem without variance ( F i g u r e 23). f o r a l l p r a c t i c a l purposes.

p2). 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 . 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 .f (2"ItlX >'- (32.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. With t h i s i n mind. 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. t h a t i s .f(0) 0 P. p2) interval. 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.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. -. w i t h t h e shadow e f f e c t of p a r t i c l e s . n a x ) bi ('J) . 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 s a complete cone r p . equated t o f i x e d r. taken i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n (32.10) 101 . 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 ) . t h a t when cy = 0 . small D . For s u f f i c i e n t l y - 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 * .9) 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 r a d i i of which are i n t h e i n t e r v a l ( p * . 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. V r = C r' and when cy max vr = cr + Ur' W e obtain K bl ( Z .. 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. we and i n t e r m s of z from 0 t o z 0 ' 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 .

formulas must be added. te . 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 .. E q . (32. 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. t h e s u b s c r i p t r i s omitted from a l l volumes.P T ~ .5 5 s 5 3.14) 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 .13) So l e t u s c o n s i d e r t h e connection between . 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 . i s assumed not depen- OS variance. (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. t h e magnitudes p 1. (17. (32. (b) .D when s changes i n t h e i n t e r v a l 2. 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. US d e s i g n a t e s t r u n c a t e d cones (the llsurfacell l a y e r s ) .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 .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 .p . (32.5. and . and Eq..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 . (31. p dent on p. < 3. (32. Eq. and (32. (32. Eq.1) v a r i a n c e law.4) I. These are (32.12) f o r t h e volumetric d e n s i t y .s e l e c t i v e l y ( # 9 ) . J3q.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). rv_a l -_ and p a r a m e t ? Comnents r e l a t i v e t o t h e -i n P . Q. . 102 .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 ) .

(32. (32.2Q) (32. 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. 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 .18) (32. 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 . when s < 3. 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 .19) p'z/'.0 KZO [I T o = . That EQ.21). t h a t i s . s = 3.12) 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. t h a t i s . 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.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. 103 . 2 X. 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.16) - (32.0.101. and when s > 3. 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 . t h e l a r g e r t h e p / z 0 W i l l be seen from F i g u r e 26.11) formulas f o r T 0 and (32.21) A s w i l l be seen from Eq. l a r g e enough.17) (32. i n which it i s assumed t h a t W = 0 . 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. 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 .22) does j u s t t h a t .23) (32. P2 (32. .0.- - (Pl/P3)"zl p'/a.16) (32.5 R 8 d C 11 -(PI/PL)''~I D=R 9 s = 3. by small ones.Eqs.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 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 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.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.5 (32. (32. (32.

0 -4 c m . 0 .t h a t i 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 . 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 . 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 . /lo0 .5. even when t h e r e i s no persion. 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. 0 = 9' 10 c m . max The l a t t e r of 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. when i s a broad one. N o w l e t us r e a l i z e t h e l a t t e r case. 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. 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 . 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 . t h e number of s m a l l . 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. 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 .16) - (32. 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. 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 .21). i n Eqs. 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 ring 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 . w i l l i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e sweeping out process. 3. (32. 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 . (32.1 0 . (32. dis- But from what f o l l o w s .0 and 3. and. it w i l l be found D is 0. 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. 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.~ f o r s = 2. As w i l l be seen from Eqs. 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 . If t h e former i s t h e c a s e . 5 .16) - (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 .5. the effect Specifically.3-10-2.21. t h a t when cy = 6 O . (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 3. t h e v a l u e s 3. = Consequently.22) The a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e Eq. 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. 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. 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 . f o r example). 1 0 ~y e a r s . s u b s t i t u t i n g Eq.when s < 3 . p ( s e e F i g u r e 24). and z 1.5 i s extremely high.10 and 3 . a t t h e same t i m e . r e s p e c t i v e l y . 104 .

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.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 . 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.rrp'd .V. during t h e e x i s t e n c e of t h e r i n g . 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 . 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 .d. 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. 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. 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 . So. 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. w e r e washed out of i t s volume by r a d i a t i v e braking PB P. ( 32-24] where p 0 i s t h e r a d i u s of a p a r t i c l e . - 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. 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 .25) and (32. L e t u s take t h i s assumption as a working hypothesis. P? Po s $--s dp :po 1 PI (32. 0' (17. 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 .41. (32.25) (32. < 3 cm. Accordingly.. - . d i s c u s s i o n .-r>-/iE . 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 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 . 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 . n = Po/P.26) . 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. we obtain p2-s tlp. 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.fl'V :z s i PI -.11.Generally speaking.

i s somewhat i n c r e a s e d .0 and 3. diffusively scattering. t h e e f f e c t of which we have j u s t reviewed. t h e p - att r a c t i v e force 106 I . 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 . r e s p e c t i v e l y .~ dyne/cm 2 .28 ) C) s 3 3.1 0 . and p1 10 2 -4 c m h e r e .27) (32. t h e deeper t h e d e p r e s s i o n . == (. W e f i n d t h e magnitude of t h e d e p r e s s i o n . n v a l u e o b t a i n e d through E q .5. S.5.61. 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 . (32.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. 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 (9.1 0 . 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./p1. 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. 0 = 3 c m .6. (32. for p when s = 2. p . 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. 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 .29) Substituting p and 9 . 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. t h a t i s . 102. 5 . H . (32. AU).5. 3.3p'/2)%. = p2 I p.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 0.50'/: '0 . 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 . (32. 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. The s m a l l e r p.5. 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 . 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. 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 . 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 .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. 1 0 ~ c m . we o b t a i n the values of 7.~ Con- .30) Actually.7).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". 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 . 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 .

10-' 2. + e . = 10 -4 2 300 M. 10-4 1.0. 1 1 . Without variance s =2 . 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 . IO-' (c) Re l t s of t h e amplitude.I *IO2 2.0. I ? I111111111 1 . 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 .16.101 2 . cm.5 2.0.16.16*10-8 3.o. 5 s =3 0 . 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 .10-4 1. 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. 4 6. M i s t h e m a s s of S a t u r n . I O ' 1. 3.0.32) 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.su .IO-" 3. 2.1 6.102 2.104 14 <39 < I <9 <39 3 16 1 0 3.10-2 -' s = 3. we f i n d t h e amplitude v a l u e s . 2 w e f i n d t h a t when p = l.II11111111111l1l1 11111 1 1 1 1 1 I I1 I I1 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 .7.111111 I I1 11----IIIII. 1961). and w e w i l l no% c o n s i d e r them.11- 1111. 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.104 5.10-' 2.2*103 4.of 10-4 1 .0. and t h e second i s weaker by even many more o r d e r s of magnitude.7.10) 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.1 04 5. 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). _ I _ - The sub- 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. 1 * IO2 * 2. Setting z 0 = l.0. T 0 = 1.4*102 -' 7 . even when p = 10 -4 cm.I .Oo10 5 cm.I1I. 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 I 1 I I1 I 1 1111II 1111.5 5 s 5 3.0 and 3. A = A ' = 25".16. (32.104 1.10-* 3 . .10 2.10-4 2. IO-' 4.1.4.4.97 .1OS 39 33 41 e21 3.c.10-' 3. 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 ) .10 2. /IO3 -- (32. . 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 .1. 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 .7.5.0.I 0 ' 7.5.0. 7 0 1 0 " ~grams.16 *IO-' 3.a l c u l a t i o n s f o r 2. 0 IO-' 1 .10' 5. p 2 p.5 i n Eq. M = 5 .10-4 1 7 1 1 .0.O . 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 .102 1.5*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 ) .5.0.

If t h e variance i n t e r v a l i s a broad one. (32. A t t h e same t i m e . see #31). and D. (32. A s a m a t t e r of f a c t .161. max w i t h a. 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. The r'less t h a n " s i g n i s used when only t h e ma. t h a t i s . 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). and C r r r r . -- 10 -4 c m . 108 . l i s t e d f o r purposes of comparison. 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 . 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. 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 . _ . 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 . Sh. 7. 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. p . 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 .20)l. i n which t h e d u s t c o n t e n t i s low [see Eqs. middle. 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.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. o r wide open. (d) Phase f u n c t io n .wr.)/b by r e p l a c i n g obtained from Eq. Maggini (19371. a s w e l l as observed f a c t s . 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 . The new D v a l u e w i l l be higher. and t h i s i s s o f o r models w i t h and without variance.III I1 1 I IIII I I l i s t e d i n Table 7. 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 . 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 . 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 . concordance with < 3. 1 maX The observed v a l u e is 39 p e r c e n t . 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 . 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. 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. obtained w i t h ignored. ( 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. should be reviewed. w e must d i s t i n g u i s h between s u r f a c e .18) and (32. M. 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 b (a.9) (32. t h a t i s . shallow. models with s < 3.

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 . and t h e l i k e are introduced. p. (32. ( 3 2 . 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 . 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 .36) P . v =a & (32. (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. a l l volumes.33). 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. W e used Eq.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 . 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 . 3 3 ) ation. t a k e n i n t o c o n s i d e r - mutual shading. E<1.

Eq. - The parameters of t h e Eq. Another model.37) model 0' z 0' and t h e volumetric This is d e n s i t y . a t t h e same t i m e . something t h a t r e s u l t e d i n a p*.381. ='ti3 c m . 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 . w a s t a k e n . 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. a m a x i m u m s = 3. 1' Because of t h e l a r g e p and p 2' 2 t h e Eq. p1= p. (32.S=3. substantial increase i n p small. otherwise (32. 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. good concordance between t h e t h e o r e t i c a l and t h e observed phase curve. ~ ~ = 1 . on t h e o t h e r hand. A t t h e same t i m e . (32. (32. 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. pz = 2. but f i n e d u s t as w e l l . p a r t i c l e s . p2 w a s s e l e c t e d such t h a t t h e Eq. 0~ A = A' = 25O. l i s t e d i n Table 7.28) 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 t h e c u r v e s f o r models without variance.8. (32. was taken f o r purposes of comparison.23) con- d i t i o n is s a t i s f i e d . D = 4. and. i n t e r v a l .10). D . s = 2. phase c u r v e . 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. i s provided f o r by an extremely moderate v a l u e .3 IO1. 1 cm. i n accordance with t h e d a t a should r e s u l t i n an amplitude c l o s e t o t h a t observed. . second. To= ZOB = 1. 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 . /lo6 - 110 . Here. 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.10' cm. and. 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.23) t h e amplitude would be very condition is not s a t i s f i e 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 .

37) and (32. 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. 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. on t h e shape o f t h e phase 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 . 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. p. resp e c t i v e l y . consequently. T 0 ' 0curves. c u r v e 4. i n p a r t i c u l a r . 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 . T 0' are equal f o r t h e p a i r s of c u r v e s . and. 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 . 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 . 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 . 1 1 1 . 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 . p a r t i c l e s ) is an extremely f l a t curve. o b t a i n e d f o r models without v a r i a n c e e p . 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 . 2 c u r v e s f o r t h e Fqs. 4 t h e i r analogs. - - 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 ) . of a l l t h e p a r t i a l curves. curve. 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 ) . t h e o t h e r . U 1. is t h e analog of c u r v e 1. 3.F i g u r e 28.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. and s o are t h e v a l u e s of t h e most important parameter. i s t h e analog o f curve 2. (32. c u r v e 4 (models of s i n g l e . 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 . and 2-4. 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.38) models w i t h v a r i a n c e o f p . curve 3 . 1-2. one of which. respectively. extremely l a r g e . as it w e r e . A s w i l l be seen from t h e f i g u r e .

A s a m a t t e r of f a c t . 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. @ ( 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 . 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. discrepancy w i t h t h e o r y when cy < 0'30'. T h i s a s s e r t i o n cannot b e v e r i f i e d . 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 . 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 . 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. u n f o r t u n a t e l y . 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 ./lo7 --- F i g u r e 29. The v i s u a l s t e l l a r magnitudes develop a small. 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). (32.37) and (32. t r a n s p a r e n t . S o l i d curves are t h e t h e o r e t i c a l phase curves. 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). 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 . 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 . 112 . m h a s been t a k e n equal t o -0 -1-15. 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.28) models. n o t been s e p a r a t e d . 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 y s t e m a t i c . 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).

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 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 . ( 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. but t h e assumption i s t h a t B In F i g u r e 30. B (0) - 8. 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 T 0. whereas when t h e openings are of medium. 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. a s i n Figure 2 9 . There i s reason t o t h i n k . a magnitude which (-Om. 1956b. E v i d e n t l y .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 ) .115). F i g u r e 30.The Same as F i g u r e 29. 113 . 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 . i s taken as equal t o ( . p. t h e r e v e r s e is t r u e . 0 6 0 ) . 19091. t h e r e f o r e . or l a r g e s i z e . 9071.8.O m .0.1151 taken from B B ( 0 ) - i s somewhat ( a b s o l u t e l y ) i n f l a t e d . 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 . pB(0) i s more r e a s o n a b l e t h a n . 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 . (3) as c a l c u l a t i o n shows (Bobrov. b u t i s between 2 and 3 . simple d i f f e r e n c e i n /108. W e should p o i n t t h a t i n f a c t t h e s value i s n o t 2. 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 Bc (-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 . = -0m -060. A s w i l l be seen from F i g u r e 29.

Consequently. 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 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 . 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 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 . 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. 7 - 300 microns. #34. Discussion of t h e R e s u l t s .300 #l7. 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. and which i s dcscx-ibed i n t h i s c h a p t e r . or t h e l i f e o f t h e s o l s r system. Values of t h e of . 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 e discussed t h i s question i n 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 . 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 . 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 . and t h a t t h e p a r t i c l e s themselves a r e macroscopic._--- B y t h e end of Chapter IV (#19). when T 0 - cy - 0. and t h a t w e now s e e them only because of an o c c a s i o n a l .Principa -l P h y s i c a l Parameters -- -. 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. and ( 2 ) t h e cone-cone approximation f o r microscopic p a r t i c l e s .5 t o 0. the Riags. 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. o r t h a t t h e r i n g s a r e v e r y young. t h e a u t h o r s a r e s i l e n t thickness. Discussing t h e s e valiies. t h e cone-cylinder approximation. 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. f o r t u i t o u s coincidence. microns i s about 5-13' y e a r s . or a cone. 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 . 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.. 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 . o r i g i n a l paper. t h e assumption must be t h a t t h e r i n g material. In t h i s sys- 1.6. 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. we were a b l e t o o b t a i n some i d e a of t h e s t r u c t u r e of t h e B r i n g . 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.#33.

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 . When A . cy. t h a t i s . 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 . magnitude of t h e phase e f f e c t .p a r t i c l e t h i c k n e s s . In t h a t case. 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 . 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 . L e t u s p o i n t o u t . 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 . When T 0 0 /sin A./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 .p a r t i c l e s by each o t h e r . 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 n t h e c a s e of t h e r i n g with a o n e . 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 . 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 . r e g a r d l e s s of A .3". 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. o r a many-particle t h i c k n e s s system. shading i n c r e a s e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y . But w i t h r e d u c t i o n i n A t o a f e w degrees. (providing D i s not t o o small). I n t h i s s e c t i o n . I . 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. 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 s i t u a t i o n changes. 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 . 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. 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 . f i r s t of a l l . and. 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. f o r s m a l l A. 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 . consequently. i n t h e o p t i c a l - 1. be due (#l7). 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 h e t h e o r y of mutual shading i s explained. 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. t h i s h a s l i t t l e e f f e c t on t h e Accordingly.

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 10

.

2.

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.
sizes.

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 , 1, and s = 2.5,

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
=

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 16

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 =

=

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 ) ,

r

.

If

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

disk.W - p a r t of V..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. w = (cp/np 3 )W x . and D d e s i g n a t e t h e s u r f a c e . 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 . 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). 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 . 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 .minimum and maximum p a r t i c l e r a d i u s v a l u e s . t o t a l of C and U. Sh. 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 . n. C = 13.= 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 .676 . shallow.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.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 . M. d p2 .5log - 6 v = p - d~- particle radius p.

Barabashov. p. 10.1. M. 1908. "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. t h e Globe..T. p.1. 1940. C.1. Monthly Not. Allen.A. Bobrov.. "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. 9.9. 1896. Arkad'yev. 'I B e l l ..K. Vol. 5 0 . Barnard. No. V 0 1 . V. Chekirda.3313. L. 3. 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 ] . Astrophys. Barnard.3. p. Vo1. E. p..259. Bobrov. 1946. 1933. 1s. Astron. E. N o . . 5.S. '"Fresnel D i f f r a c t i o n . "A S p e c t r o g r a p h i c Examination o f Satiirn' s Rings.40. GITTL. n-ayk.360 ( b ) .. 8.6. p. Vo1. [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.379. /114 2. 6. Akad. A... "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. 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 . "Recent Observations of t h e Rings o f S a t u r n .." Monthly Not.69. 1889 Nov. SPb. Barnard. 11 12. 14. No. and Bright Ring of S a t u r n . Astrophys. 1912. No. Crape Ring.E.Ye. S a t u r n ' s Rings. Barabashov. B.17.. "Monochromatic Photometry of S a t u r n and Its Rings. [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]. "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... A. V 0 1 . 1919.. I 1 Izv. p. Nachr. 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]. 11. Vo1. P .E.. zh.S." Astron. 1890. Vo1.. 7. " 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 . p.E. 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]. p. 6 8 . a s t r o n . 1895. 4. Belopol 1 s k i y .4.139. Vol.. E.107. "Toward t h e Question of t h e Thickness of S a t u r n ' s Rings.4. A. Barnard. 5 0 . - "Photographic Measures o f S a t u r n and I t s Rings. J.... Relopol 1 s k i v .68.E. Vo1. P h y s i c s Department...A. V01." Monthly Not. 1960. 120 ..381. " Trudy Khar'k.P. 1908. M.REFERENCES 1. Semeykin. obs.621. p. 11. 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.. IL. 1914. Astron. p.E.2 (101. 145.. J.." Monthly Not. E. 1909. 3 .44. N . 13 Berry. No. A.W.346 ( a ) . V 0 1 .. zh. V 0 1 . ZhRFKhO. N. E.

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 . M. Rings.669. I . 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. 1964. Bobrov. Coffeen.69. J Vo1. " T r . T. 1956.. "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. 22.. M.8. Gehrels. Vol.S. Bobrov. Vo1. J .. " 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 . 1957. 111. 16. 1960. "On t h e S t r u c t u r e o f S a t u r n ' s Rings.. "Monochromatic Photography of J u p i t e r and S a t u r n . zh.W. p. e d i t e d by Kuiper and M i d d v . p. Bobrov. . zh. Gehrels. 1956.. " 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 ] . vo1.. M . ization. Vo1.14.. Clemence. 23. VI..161 (a). Optik. T. Wood. 1916. p. 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]. H. M. Vo1.39. ~~ ~ I' Photographic 29 Gehrels. S . p..669. "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 f_ i z . 2.33. " Astron..9. "Wavelength Dependence of P o l a r 111. " 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 L . T. Astrophys. p. H." Astrophys. A s t r_ 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. " Astron. 121 . zh. .16. . zh. 17.33. Astrophys.38.310.S. Walter. Bobrov. 1967. zh. 21. 19- Bobrov. 1959. Bobrov.43. p. R.Astron. 20." Astron.. 8 3 .306. H a r r i s . " 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 . p.S.550.. " I N : P l_ anety i sp u t n i k i [ P l a n e t s and S a t e l l i t e s ] .. 1961. 1962. 18. D. M . Vo1." Astron. 'I Optik.123.401. p. p.. J . Vol. T.306. "The Light-Curve and Phase Function of 20 M a s s a l i a . /I15 25 26. M." Astron.3.125. Owings.t a AN KazSSR [The Modern t o l s h c h i n y k o l e t s S a t u r n a . !'Orbits a n d Masses of P l a n e t s and S a t e l l i t e s . p.331. Walter. 1960. Vo1. 27 28...S. e d i t e d by Kuiper and ~ Middlehurst. ch. v01. 1963. p. p..L. J. ...826. N 0 .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.. 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..904 ( b ) . D.. Vo1.i n . ch. 11. Brower. zh. 1956. D.37. J. Magnitudes. The Lunar S u r f a c e . 24.37.. 1957. "Photometric S t u d i e s o f Asteroids. M.130. Vo1. Vol.lt Astron.

p. Bary. " Astron. . Vo1.. 1965. W i s s . Udar [ C o l l i s i o n ] . London A .9 ( a ) . "The S t a b i l i t y of S a t u r n s Rings.. a s t r o n . Astron. Greaves.M. Danjon. 1963.222. Roy. "Photometry and Colorimetry of t h e P l a n e t s Mercury and Venus. B u l l r i c h . Goldsbrough. p. J . A. Deslandres.3. I t Sky and Telescope.101. B e r l i n . A. Vol.. . 1919. " Izv. Vo1. 1963.E. "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. 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 .765. p h y s i c s s e r i e s ] . Acad. Vinnemann. "Photometry of S a t u r n ' s Rings A s Seen Through t h e 1966 S l i t .. p. Goldsbrough. H.." Abhandl. 1922. V 0 1 .." N e w s of t h e of t h e P l a n e t s . G r a v i t a t s i onnaya k o n d e n s a t s i y a .244. A.R. "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 . D o l l f u s .280. Trans.. Vo1. "A N e w S a t e l l i t e of S a t u r n ..D.315.R. p. 122 . AN SSSR. 1961.55..50. 1968. . L.11.. s c i . SOC. "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. Goldsmith. G i e s e . 1967. r." Monthly Not.. A. "The Discovery of Janus. D o l l f u s . C..81.. -Math. " 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 ] . ch. l1 31 32. r.1.71 ( b ) . S a t u r n ' s Ring. G. "Ob o b r a z o v a n i i p l a n e t .3. 1921. "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 .. G. No. A. 43 D o l l f u s . "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 . G. " 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 .H.208. s e r i y a f i z . 1969.822. e d i t e d by Kuiper and Middlehurst. Vo1. G r a v i t a t i o n a l Condensation. Akad.101.264.. 42. "Cause of Encke's D i v i s i o n i n S a t u r n ' s Rings. No. . e d i t e d by Kuiper and Middlehurst. H .14. 1950.. E.15 ( b ) .120. 35. . 40. p. 1949. 41. " p r e p r i n t of t h e Meudon Observatory.unA _ _ Techno. S a t u r n ' s Tenth S a t e l l i t e .14.. V01. . 8 3 . Academy of S c i e n c e s of t h e USSR. "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. I L . Phys.34.R.N. D o l l f u 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 ] . p. I L . I . 1895. I. Vo1. Lebedinskiy.6. and Astrophysics. p. [On t h e Formation I. Nachr. P h i l o s .. 1967. " C. 38 39. No. 1922.. " C. 34. R. 44. 3637. K.~ K1. Vo1. A.2. l1 33 Goldsbrough. Vo1.30 Hertzsprung. Dollfus. Trans." Bull. Acad. A.1.. W.. V01. p. p. s c i . A . Focas. Gurevich. p. E. Dtsch. ch. W. R e f r a c t i v e Index 1. 1951. A. Proc.

p.581. ~ 54. zh. R . "Frequency of O c c u l t a t i o n s by S a t u r n . 51.._ . Amer. and Zheleznyakov... 2 K l .. 55. lIAdditions and Comments t o L a p l a c e ' s Examination of 123 ." 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. " 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 . 57. "Observation o f S a t u r n a t 11. p. ~~ 59. p... 1964.. H.N. Vo1.." Astrophys. Keeler. L e t t e r s . R. 1895. Vo1. -B a y e r . 48. M. and S a t u r n a t 21. Akad.. 1964. p. "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 .H.. "Photometric Measures of S a t u r n and of I t s Ring. "The Zone of A s t e r o i d s and t h e Ring of S a t u r n . p. Vo1. " Astron. Vo1.E.. 56. p. H. " Trudy GAISh [On t h e S t a b i l i t y of S a t u r n ' s Rings." Monthly ' . S e e l i g e r . H.C. 60.16. v01.Akad. 1947. Monthly Not. P h i l o s . 1958.. J. M a r s .D. Proceedings o f GAISh]. p.F.3 Centimeters.467.107.177. "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.. 2 K l . p.. " Astron. "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. Carmichel. "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. SOC. /116 50. . "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 . D. 58. 1881. "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 . October.172.231.21. G. p. 46. Duboshin.247. v01. S e e l i g e r .41. Vo1. Ye. . p.. p. S e e l i g e r . Vo1.893.955. "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 . V01..260 ( a ) . J e f f r e y s .H..D. H... "Microwave Spectrum of S a t u r n . V. Beard." P l a n e t . Nature. "On t h e I l l u m i n a t i o n of Dusty Masses. " Abhandl. Vo1.133.. Vo1..Ya. ~.13." Abhandl. 1966.l. "Observations of t h e Continuum Emission From Venus. 1967. R. 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 ] . p. Kowalewsky. 53. Space Science.21.. 1966. Vo1.Wiss. 1893. . 1968. "The R e l a t i o n of Cohesion t o Roche's L i m i t . " Astron.V. - Nachr. 49. Kirkwood. Kiladze. 47. S..14.45. H.15. p.18. " Monthly Not. 1887. Phys..H. I . -~ Rev. Kiev.263.V. 1884.. H. and P a r t i c u l a r l y of S a t u r n .263. Not Vo1. Davies. 52. S. J . 61. Davies. F. B. astrophys. Drake. 1940. zh.14.44. p. W i l l i a m s .D. Cooper." Vo1. p..1.. .195. " Proc..Bayer.. D.100. J u p i t e r .325. J e f f r e y s . . W i s s ..2 c m Wavelength. 1962. Vo1. 1947. Yabushita. Ann.107. Z l o t n i k .416.

on t h e S t a b i l i t y of S a t u r n ' s Rings.10. Cook. 8 .188..A. A. N. 1958. t h e Planet Saturn..378-379.1301. Nature. 74. J u p i t e r .391.. 1960. V. G. GAO AN SSSR v Pulkove [Water Vapor i n S a t u r n ' s Ring . obs.E. = 8 mm. Trans.161. F.. a s t r o n . Astron. Lebedinets. " 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. p. p. "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 . 1953. Arnold. Pa254 ( a ) . Vol. p. No. v01-9. MGcanique cgle-ste. Transmission. J. A.3. 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 ] ..62.12. Cross. Obs. F r a n k l i n .67. Astron.P. L. Kozyrev. V01. Nachr. 1957. 1966. Union. "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 . "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. 66.A. Laplace. 56-62. Vo1.. Meudon.. F. V01.. I1Rediscussion of M a x w e l l ' s Adams P r i z e Essay 11. p. F. J. " Trudy Khar'k. Kutuza.J. Kuiper. Kuiper. 71 72 sect. 1966.2. " Dokl..38..ll Astronomie. Astrophys." S a t u r n a na Reports o f t h e AN SSSR]. J.143. pp. V01.111.P. J. A. 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]. Low. Kuiper..184.. Lyot. I I 124 . J. p. G. 69 Cook. 147-150. p.. 70 . v01. " 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 . 1929.245 ( b ) ..Il l 1 I I I t h e Shape o f S a t u r n ' s Ring. Contribs.J.179." Astron.S.B. 67. Vo1. Ann.71. Proceedings of t h e Khar'kov Astronomical Observatory]. 75..Ye. 1957. A 20 p .A. Cook. "Radioizlucheniye = 8 m m . AN SSSR [Radio Emission o f S a t u r n a t ) ... Lyot. A... F. B a i r .N. 68. V01. Vo1. 1951.. " Astron. 1965. "Optical P r o p e r t i e s of S a t u r n ' s Rings. 1885.69. "Observations of Venus. p.Ya. C. Low. pp.69.P.3. and S a t u r n a t . 1802. B.. 1966. P..F. vo1. p. Vo1.. IL. M. 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.A. p. G . J. B. 46. [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 . B.G Losovskiy. F r a n k l i n .. I. P-9963 64. " Izv.G. F r a n k l i n .F.. 76 Vo1. 65. Internat. "Radio D e t e c t i o n o f Cook.167. V 0 1 .. Astron.71. 73. p.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 ." Astron. p..393. I . Smiths. F. 1964.377.J. 62. B. 1957..F. 1968.. Salomonovich. "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..

R u s s e l l .. . P-177." Astron. Astron. Pavlov. Astrophys..39.77.1..W. C. G. 1946.231.. " S a t u r n ' s Rings. 91. ~ __G T T I .. 6 3 .C. Ricerca Maggini. Rabe. Meinel. Cambridge. . "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 . 90. p. H. W. 1910... Coblentz. V . I . I L . p." 93.H.C.. D. 1890). No.D. 88." Astron.B.2. 81. "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. P-39. Fizmatgiz.. Murray. No. 1961.. 1893.. p.196. W.. J. _ _ Astron. Moroz. S.184. L. W. 80. P. 89. 1958.193. Vol. P r e s s ..L. 1961. p. Vo1. Nachr. 78. . VAGO. 1952. V. p..P a p e Vol . A. I'Photographs of S a t u r n Made by Light of D i f f e r e n t Colours. M u l l e r . " Astron. " Potsdam Publ. Mertz.. . 1859 ( r e p r i n t e d i n S c i e n t i f i c . ~. I.J . B. 1927. Wildey. p. zh. ser. 84. Astrpn.V.71.. "On t h e Resolving Power of t h e Eye." 86. Wright.. v01. Vo1. p. 1926. D. 94. "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. ~ .V.153. r963. J . 3 8 . 87.-Maksumov. p. 8 . " 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 .. E.32. 1966. ~ Vol. L o w e l l . Vol. 1937.234. I N : Teleskopy [Telescopes]. e d i t e d by Kuiper and Middlehurst. SOC. zh. y e a r 8 ..29 (36)." r s-of ... Pubis. Coleman. 85. 125 . M. 83...5 Astron. P a c i f i c . L. s c i e n t . !!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. Cambridge Univ. C . J.. l .1080. Astronomicheskaya ~o p t i k a [Astronomical Optics].306. b).601..29.N. M.. 82.70." Byull. Maxwell. . Lampland. Astron.692. Maxwell. Derived From W a t e r .137. p.614. Astrophys. Vol.5-6. "Astronomical I n f r a r e d Spectrometer. J. Popul. Vo1. Nicholson.. R.. J . v01.9-2. " S t e l l a r and P l a n e t a r y Observations a t 10 1963. V 0 1 .. A.747" I n f r a r e d Spectrum o f S a t u r n ' s Ring. Microns. p. "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. No.5 4 8 Mertz. "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. Minnaert.177. 1965..Radziyevskiy. "The Recent Disappearance of S a t u r n ' s Ring. =et i t~svetv p r i r o d e [ L i g h t and Color i n Nature]. V 0 1 .H. P e t t i t . 92. "Planetary Temperatures Menzel. 1928.. Nachr.O.C e l l Transmission. 79. V 0 1 . 1924.

Russk.205. V01. 1966. "Observing S a t u r n ' s Edgewise Rings.5.10. . Astrophys. 1922..A. Stebbins. Nature."Dvukhtsvetnyye f o t o g r a f i i Marsa i S a t u r n a . V01. N. Rougier. 1928.30. J . Sobolev. "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. 126 ... 1916.E.799. J. Lohman. Obs. p. R.N. 3 r d e d i t i o n .. Astron. If Izv. 1898.158.. W. V. 1908.4. No. 1933..3. 108.146. p. vo1. a s t r o n . H. R u s s e l l . . J.. .43. G.. Thornton.A. nauk.A. W. Jacobsen.Astrophys. ser. p. Perenos l u c h i s t o y e n e r g i i v atmosferakh zvezd i-planet [ 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 ] . Vo1.. Rev.18. P. S t r a s b o u r g . " Lick Obs. L e t t e r s . 109. G. Refractor. " Phys. "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 . 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 . "Phenomena i n Connection With t h e E a r t h T r a n s i t . Sloanaker.13. D. Moon. 1956. I t Sky J.M. Publ.2.123..33. 3200 Mc/sec R a d i a t i o n From S a t u r n . . R.. p. Moscow. S t e b b i n s . Vo1. S l i p h e r .. 1956. N e w s o f t h e Russian Astronomical Observatory]. J . 1911. No. J. Welch. of Vision a t Low Values o f B r i g h t n e s s . "Linear P o l a r i z a t i o n o f t h e 1963.232. " 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 . ~ .2. T. ~ 97 98. E. Poulkova. Vo1." Ann. 95 96 .. Uchpedgiz. Texereau. Obs. Bologna.. d e M o n t p e l l i e r ( S c i e n c e s .11. Timiryazev. ch. 1967. "Concerning t h e ID' 107. 104.K.. G W I . and Mercury a t 1.S "Further Photometric Measures of J u p i t e r S a t e l l i t e s and Uranus. NO.C o l o u r Photometry of S t a r s . p.180. V01.8.of t h e P l a n e of S a t u r n ' s Rings i n 1920-21..793. P. Astrophys. 99. E.4. 100. W . f f Astrophys.53 c m . Vol.214. ~ 0 1 . Vo1. ob-sa [Dichromatic Photographs o f Mars and S a t u r n . If Ring of S a t u r n . Bull. No. A. Tikhov. J . G. p. p. "The S t e l l a r Magnitudes o f t h e Sun." Popul. Vol. - /118 106. 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 . J .. . 103. 105. .17.103 - It Rose. " Uch.27. zap. Vol.1. 1966. 1850). Roche.440.N. Vo1. s e r i y a m a t e m . October. p.C.. With T e s t s of t h e S o l a r C o n s t a n t . Acad. 102.V. and Telescope. H.2 3 0 . "Observations of J u p i t e r .. Feibelman. 1949... " P h o t o e l e c t r i c Photometry of t h e Moon. 101.. p. 1 2 3 .D. and P l a n e t s . 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].K. Kron.226.M. LGU. 1956. 1968.. 9 i x . G. S a t u r n .

1965.4545. P. Vol. 1963. 1914.7 0 4 .A. "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 . 117.19". . I L . "Absolute Photographic Photometry of S a t u r n ' s Disk.. No.. A.231.5. Nachr. "Photometric S t u d i e s of Complex S u r f a c e s ..226. F r a n k l i n . p.Not. 122. M." J. J.Fizmatgiz. Astron. 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].14. 121. "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 .V. V. 1958. 1928. Vo1.115. J.. V. Vo1.. I L . 1921. Vol. Hapke. p. 123. Sharonov." 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 ] . Fennicae.G. p. Hapke.4. " P l a n e t a r y Observations a t a Wavelength of 6 cm. Shayn.57... V. 111. 1935.. Isotropic Scattering. "Saturn i n 1957. Two-colour Phase Curves o f t h e Two B r i g h t Rings.. 118. No.. GAO AN SSSR. 120. p.. van Horn.1017.70. Vo1.. Obs. S c i . "Photometric Examinations o f J u p i t e r and t h e System o f S a t u r n . V01.16. Astron. 112. V.68. Acad. 1952.. Fesenkov.. Sharonov.. Transparency of Ring A . V. 114.ll P l a n e t ... Ann. Cook. G. ~ . 124. Shoenberg. . 1917. and Other D e t a i l s Appearing on t h e Photograph. Vo1. 1963. p.229. "The X and y Functions f o r Vo1.. A . F r a n k l i n . P r ir o d a p l a n e t [Nature of t k e P l a ~ e t s l . 11. 115. B a r n a r d ' s Photograph on 1911 Nov... ." Monthly . P-244. Byull.. and Space S c i . 1927. " S t a b i l i t y of t h e S o l a r System. 1958.. P. .24. Chandrasekhar.26-27. "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 . Nachr.B. 1926. Dorpat. Shoenberg. _ Geophys.B. Sharonov. E. Astron. R e s . Geophys. 1935. obs.F.110." Astron. Hughes.721. Nachr. 113.24. B.68. E l b e r t .227. S. ch. V 0 1 . IlPhotometric Observations o f t h e P l a n e t S a t u r n . R e s .. 1963. p. a s t r o n .H. B r i t . s e r . F. llOptical P r o p e r t i e s of S a t u r n ' s Rings.. Astron. 6 8 . Hagihara. Assoc.V.4571. V01. Heath. obs." J.127. E.. 1939. " Publ. p. 1966.. p. p. - .9. 116.V. H. Vo1.. Vo1. W i t h A p p l i c a t i o n s t o t h e Moon." T s i r k .13. Y.9. D. 'I J. Vo1. I . 119. 127 125. T s i r k . Hepburn. M..P.37. A. e d i t e d by Kuiper and Middlehurst.A. 1953. ~Chandrasekhar. Pulk. ~Astrophys. S. "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. (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..

. GTTI. 302. Shifrin. ~~ 127. 4. E . .387. Theoretische Photometrie. B . Schoenberg. p. Shnyrev.. Astron. 1. 2. Grechushnikov.. E. Ges. Schoenberg.I. Berlin. tsirk." Lick Obs.126. 1907. "An Investigation of the Infrared Spectrum of Saturn by the Fourier Transform Method. 1964..D. -Hancbuch der Astrophysik [Theoretical Photometry. 130.S. Vol. 1929. 1933. p. Vol. . 129. Vol. 128 F-701 -30 .. p ." Astron.. 1 . Bull. No. I t Vierteljahresschr. Rasseyaniye sveta mutnoy srgde ~[Light Scattering in a Scattering Medium]. 68. "hew Investigations of Saturn's Ring . "Observations of Saturn's Rings in 1907. 128. R. V. K. 1951. 181. Handbook of Astrophysics3 . Moroz. G. Aitken. Part 1.G. p... N .

and a lasting contribution to existing knowledge. . PO546 . D. CONTRACTOR REPORTS: Scientific and technical information generated under a NASA contract or grant and considered an important contribution to existing knowledge. SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS: Information derived from or of value to NASA activities. handbooks. monographs.” -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS A N D SPACE ACT OF 1958 NASA SCIENTIFIC A N D TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS TECHNICAL REPORTS: Scientific and technical information considered important. D. Publications include Tech Briefs. or other reasons. complete. security classification. -~ 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 .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 . TECHNICAL NOTES: 1nformation.C.C.less broad in scope but nevertheless of importance as a contribution to existing knowledge. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION PUBLICATIONS: Information on technology used by NASA that may be of particular interest in commercial and other non-aerospace applications. 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. The Administration shall provide for the widest practicable and afipropriate dissemination of inforiliation concerning its actiidies and the res& thereof. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUMS: Information receiving limited distribution because of preliminary data. t o the expansion of human knowledge of phenoiliena in the atmosphere and space. Technology Utilization Reports and Technology Surveys. . TECHNICAL TRANSLATIONS: Information published in a foreign language considered to merit NASA distribution in English. and special bibliographies. sourcebooks. Publications include conference proceedings. data compilations.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful