Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T04:37:33.953Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Equation of State of Hydrogen and its Use in Models of Major Planets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 August 2015

R. S. Hawke
R. S. Hawke*
Affiliation:
University of California Lawrence Livermore Lab.**, Calif., U.S.A.

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.

Since Jupiter and Saturn are considered to be composed primarily of hydrogen, its pressure-density equation of state is needed for computational models of their interiors. Until recently, experimental data were limited to 20 kbar statically and 40 kbar dynamically. Since the majority of a major planet is at a pressure in excess of this, there were only theoretical calculations available for modeling.

Wigner-Seitz type calculations have been shown to be accurate at determining the equations of state of the alkali metals. Hence, it has been assumed that the equation of state of metallic hydrogen can be calculated in the same way with fair confidence. However, the molecular hydrogen equation of state has been much more ellusive. The many attempts at modeling the interatomic forces have led to rather scattered pressure density relationships.

The planetary model situation is further complicated by the expectation that the transition from the molecular to the metallic phase will be in conjunction with a relatively large density change.

Recently, data from new experiments have become available; in one case up to 8 Mbar. The data are not in disagreement with many calculations on hydrogen, but the resolution is not yet adequate to determine accurately and confidently, the pressure and the densities of the molecular to metallic phase transition. The accuracy of these parameters in turn affect the models of the planetary interiors, such as the radii of the metallic sphere and high density core.

This paper will discuss the details of these relations and the possible affects of the speculative properties of metallic hydrogen.

Type
Part III Outer Planets and Their Satellites
Information
Symposium - International Astronomical Union , Volume 65: Exploration of the Planetary System , 1974 , pp. 329 - 335
Copyright
Copyright © Reidel 1974 

References

Abrikosov, A. A.: 1954, Astron. Zh. 31, 112.Google Scholar
Al'tschuler, L. V., Dynin, E. A., and Svidinski, V. A.: 1973, Zh. Experim. Theor. Fiz. 17, 20.Google Scholar
Ashcroft, N. W.: 1968, Phys. Rev. Letters 21, 1748.Google Scholar
Brovman, E. G., Kagan, Yu., and Kholas, A.: 1971, Zh. Experim. Theor. Fiz. 61, 2429.Google Scholar
Chapline, G. F.: 1972, Phys. Rev. B6, 2067.Google Scholar
DeMarcus, W. C.: 1958, Astron. J. 63, 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dick, R.: 1972, in Kerley, G. L. (ed.), High Pressure Physics and Planetary Interiors, North Holland Publ. Co., p. 78.Google Scholar
Estrin, E. I.: 1971, Soviet Phys. JETP Letters 13, 510.Google Scholar
Etters, R. D., Raich, J. C., and Chand, P. J.: 1971, Low Temp. Phys. 5, 6711.Google Scholar
Grigoryev, F. V., Kormer, S. B., Mikhailova, O. L., Tolochko, A. P., and Urlin, V. D.: 1972, JETP Letters 5, 286.Google Scholar
Hawke, R. S., Duerre, D. E., Huebel, J. G., Keeler, R. N., and Klapper, H.: 1972, in Kerley, G. L. (ed.), High Pressure Physics and Planetary Interiors, North Holland Publ. Co., p. 44.Google Scholar
Hoover, W. G., Keeler, R. N., Van Thiel, M., Hord, B. L., Hawke, R. S., Olness, R. J., Ross, M., Rogers, F. J., and Bender, C. F.: 1973, Adv. Cryogenic Engin. 18, 447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubbard, W. B.: 1968, Astrophys. J. 152, 745.Google Scholar
Kronig, R., DeBoer, J., and Korringa, J.: 1946, Physica, 12, 245.Google Scholar
Liberman, D. A.: 1972, Los Alamos Sci. Lab., Report LA 4727-MS.Google Scholar
Rogers, F. J., and Neece, G. A., Hoover, W. G.: 1971, J. Compt. Phys. 7, 621.Google Scholar
Østgaard, E.: 1972, Z. Phys. 252, 95.Google Scholar
Peebles, P. J. E.: 1964, Astrophys. J. 140, 328.Google Scholar
Pollack, E. L., Bruce, T. A., Chester, G. V., and Krumhansl, J. A.: 1972, Phys. Rev. 5, 4180.Google Scholar
Ramsey, W. H.: 1950, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc. 110, 325.Google Scholar
Ross, M.: 1970, Lawrence Livermore Report, UCRL 50911.Google Scholar
Salpeter, E. E.: 1972, Phys. Rev. Letters 28, 560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salpeter, E. E.: 1973, Astrophys. J. 181, L83.Google Scholar
Schneider, T.: 1969, Helv. Phys. Acta 42, 957.Google Scholar
Smoluchowski, R.: 1967, Nature 215, 691.Google Scholar
Smoluchowski, R.: 1973, Astrophys J. 185, L95.Google Scholar
Stewart, J. W.: 1956, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 1, 145.Google Scholar
Street, W. P.: 1973, Astrophys. J. 186, 1107.Google Scholar
Trubitsyn, V. P.: 1966, Soviet Phys. Solid State 7, 2708.Google Scholar
Van Thiel, M., Ross, M., Hord, B. L., Mitchel, A. C., Gust, W. A., D'Addario, M. J., Keeler, R. N., and Boutnell, K.: 1972, Phys. Rev. Letters 31, 979.Google Scholar
Wigner, E. P. and Sietz, F.: 1933, Phys. Rev. 43, 804.Google Scholar
Wigner, E. P. and Hunington, H. B.: 1935, J. Chem. Phys. 3, 764.Google Scholar