Paper detail

Europa's surface water ice crystallinity: Discrepancy between observations and thermophysical and particle flux modeling

Physical processing of Europan surface water ice by thermal relaxation, charged particle bombardment, and possible cryovolcanic activity can alter the percentage of the crystalline form of water ice compared to that of the amorphous form of water ice (the ''crystallinity'') on Europa's surface. The timescales over which amorphous water ice is thermally transformed to crystalline water ice at Europan surface temperatures suggests that the water ice there should be primarily in the crystalline form, however, surface bombardment by charged particles induced by Jupiter's magnetic field, and vapor deposition of water ice from Europan plumes, can produce amorphous water ice surface deposits on short timescales. The purpose of this investigation is to determine whether the Europan surface water ice crystallinity derived from ground-based spectroscopic measurements is in agreement with the crystallinity expected based on temperature and radiation modeling. Using a 1D thermophysical model of Europa's surface, we calculate a full-disk crystallinity of Europa's leading hemisphere by incorporating the thermal relaxation of amorphous to crystalline water ice and the degradation of crystalline to amorphous water ice by irradiation. Concurrently, we derive the full-disk crystallinity of Europa's leading hemisphere using a comparison of near-infrared ground-based spectral observations from Grundy et al. (1999), Busarev et al. (2018), and the Apache Point Observatory with laboratory spectra from Mastrapa et al. (2018) and the Ice Spectroscopy Lab at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. We calculate a modeled crystallinity significantly higher than crystallinities derived from ground-based observations and laboratory spectra. This discrepancy may be a result of geophysical processes, such as by vapor-deposited plume material, or it may arise from assumptions and uncertainties in the crystallinity calculations.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.