Paper detail

Numerical Modeling of the 2009 Impact Event on Jupiter

We have investigated the 2009 July impact event on Jupiter using the ZEUS-MP 2 three-dimensional hydrodynamics code. We studied the impact itself and the following plume development. Eight impactors were considered: 0.5 km and 1 km porous (ρ= 1.760 g cm^{-3}) and non-porous (ρ= 2.700 g cm^{-3}) basalt impactors, and 0.5 km and 1 km porous (ρ= 0.600 g cm^{-3}) and non-porous ρ= 0.917 g cm^{-3}) ice impactors. The simulations consisted of these bolides colliding with Jupiter at an incident angle of θ= 69 degrees from the vertical and with an impact velocity of v = 61.4 km s^{-1}. Our simulations show the development of relatively larger, faster plumes created after impacts involving 1 km diameter bodies. Comparing simulations of the 2009 event with simulations of the Shoemaker-Levy 9 events reveals a difference in plume development, with the higher incident angle of the 2009 impact leading to a shallower terminal depth and a smaller and slower plume. We also studied the amount of dynamical chaos present in the simulations conducted at the 2009 incident angle. Compared to the chaos of the SL9 simulations, where θis approximately 45 degrees, we find no significant difference in chaos at the higher 2009 incident angle.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.