Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T09:15:50.290Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Polarimetric Measurements of Scattered Light by Dust Grains In Earth and Microgravity Conditions. Tentative Interpretation of the Dichotomy between Comets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2018

E. Hadamcik ,
A.C. Levasseur-Regourd  and
J.C. Worms
E. Hadamcik
Affiliation:
Aéronomie/Université Paris 6, BP3, 91371 Verrières le Buisson, France J.B. Renard, LPCE/CNRS Orléans France
A.C. Levasseur-Regourd
Affiliation:
Aéronomie/Université Paris 6, BP3, 91371 Verrières le Buisson, France J.B. Renard, LPCE/CNRS Orléans France
J.C. Worms
Affiliation:
Aéronomie/Université Paris 6, BP3, 91371 Verrières le Buisson, France J.B. Renard, LPCE/CNRS Orléans France

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The evolution of the polarization of light scattered by dust particles (e.g. cometary dust) with the phase angle is an indicator of the physical properties of the particles. For grains large compared to the wavelength, the maximum value of polarization Pmax increases with increasing size. A dichotomy is pointed out in the cometary poiarimetric phase curves, showing two ranges of values for Pmax. A comparison between laboratory measurements performed under Earth and microgravity conditions is presented. Pmax and the corresponding αmax appear to be smaller in microgravity than for ground based measurements. The comparison between ground based, microgravity and cometary results is then tentatively discussed in term of physical properties of the grains.

Type
X. Cometary Dust
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 150: Physics, Chemistry and Dynamics of Interplanetary Dust , 1996 , pp. 391 - 394
Copyright
Copyright © Astronomical Society of the Pacific 1996

References

Dollfus, A., E., Bowell and Titulaer, C., Astron. Astrophys. 10, 450–466 (1971)Google Scholar
Geake, J.E. and Geake, M., Mon. Not. R. Soc. 245, 46–55 (1990)Google Scholar
Giese, R.H., Weiss, K., Zerull, R.H. and Ono, T., Astron. Astrophys. 65, 265–272 (1978)Google Scholar
Greenberg, M. and Hage, J., Astrophys. J. 361, 260–274 (1990)Google Scholar
Hadamcik, E., stage DEA Université Paris 6 (1994)Google Scholar
Hanner, M., Lynch, D.K. and Russel, R.W., Astrophys. J. 425, 274–285 (1994)Google Scholar
Levasseur-Regourd, A.C., Hadamcik, E. and Renard, J.B., Astron. Astrophys., accepted (1995a)Google Scholar
Levasseur-Regourd, A.C., Worms, J.C., Renard, J.B., and Hadamcik, E., Planet. Space Sci., submitted (1995b)Google Scholar
Renard, J.B., Levasseur-Regourd, A.C. and Dollfus, A., Ann. Geophysicae 10, 288–292 (1992)Google Scholar
Watanabe, T., Mukai, T. and Okamoto, H., 25th ISAS Lunar and Planetary Symp., 244-248 (1992)Google Scholar
Worms, J.C., Levasseur-Regourd, A.C., Renard, J.B., Hadamcik, E., ESA WPP-90, 175-185 (1995a)Google Scholar
Worms, J.C, A.C Levasseur-Regourd, E. D. Bourras, Hadamcik, Renard, J.B., this book (1995b)Google Scholar