Synthesis of the Morphological Description of Cometary Dust at Comet 67P
Authors:
C. Güttler,
T. Mannel,
A. Rotundi,
S. Merouane,
M. Fulle,
D. Bockelée-Morvan,
J. Lasue,
A. C. Levasseur-Regourd,
J. Blum,
G. Naletto,
H. Sierks,
M. Hilchenbach,
C. Tubiana,
F. Capaccioni,
J. A. Paquette,
A. Flandes,
F. Moreno,
J. Agarwal,
D. Bodewits,
I. Bertini,
G. P. Tozzi,
K. Hornung,
Y. Langevin,
H. Krüger,
A. Longobardo
, et al. (6 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Before Rosetta, the space missions Giotto and Stardust shaped our view on cometary dust, supported by plentiful data from Earth based observations and interplanetary dust particles collected in the Earth's atmosphere. The Rosetta mission at comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko was equipped with a multitude of instruments designed to study cometary dust. While an abundant amount of data was presented in…
▽ More
Before Rosetta, the space missions Giotto and Stardust shaped our view on cometary dust, supported by plentiful data from Earth based observations and interplanetary dust particles collected in the Earth's atmosphere. The Rosetta mission at comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko was equipped with a multitude of instruments designed to study cometary dust. While an abundant amount of data was presented in several individual papers, many focused on a dedicated measurement or topic. Different instruments, methods, and data sources provide different measurement parameters and potentially introduce different biases. This can be an advantage if the complementary aspect of such a complex data set can be exploited. However, it also poses a challenge in the comparison of results in the first place. The aim of this work therefore is to summarise dust results from Rosetta and before. We establish a simple classification as a common framework for inter-comparison. This classification is based on a dust particle's structure, porosity, and strength as well as its size. Depending on the instrumentation, these are not direct measurement parameters but we chose them as they were the most reliable to derive our model. The proposed classification already proved helpful in the Rosetta dust community and we propose to take it into consideration also beyond. In this manner we hope to better identify synergies between different instruments and methods in the future.
△ Less
Submitted 27 February, 2019;
originally announced February 2019.
