Improved gravity field of the moon from lunar prospector

Science

Volumn 281, Issue 5382, 1998, Pages 1476-1480

  Konopliv, A S ^a   Binder, A B ^b   Hood, L L ^c   Kucinskas, A B ^a   Sjogren, W L ^a   Williams, J G ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b Lunar Research Institute   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GRAVITY; MOON;

ARTICLE; GEOLOGY; GRAVITY; MASS; MOON; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPACE FLIGHT;

EID: 0032483509     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.281.5382.1476     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. E. L. Akim, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 170, 799 (1966).
2. P. M. Muller and W. L. Sjogren, Science 161, 680 (1968). This then new method of determining the gravity was called "line of sight." The Doppler residual, from tracking the spacecraft, measures the velocity in the line-of-sight direction from the tracking station to the spacecraft. The gravity field is found from the Doppler derivative corrected for geometry (mapped to the lunar vertical gravity direction) and spacecraft altitude (downward continued).
3. F. G. Lemoine, D. E. Smith, M. T. Zuber, G. A. Neumann, D. D. Rowlands, J. Geophys. Res. 102, 16339 (1997).
4. M. T. Zuber, D. E. Smith, F. G. Lemoine, G. A. Neumann, Science 266, 1839 (1994).
5. The only polar inclination (i = 90°) orbiters were LO-IV, LO-V, and Clementine. All other spacecraft for which we have data have i < 30°. The LO polar orbits, however, were also elliptical with the only low-altitude data near the lunar equator.
6. Unlike the line-of-sight technique, our spherical harmonic models are fully dynamic in that they numerically integrate the equations of motion for the spacecraft accounting for all forces such as the gravity field, perturbations of other planets, solar radiation pressure on the spacecraft, and relativistic terms. Because we process the LP data with intervals or arcs of 2 days, we see the dynamic effect of the farside on 24 orbits at a time. This dynamic effect combined with the dynamic information of the other spacecraft at different inclinations (10° to 30°) and eccentricities gives the total farside gravity we observe.
7. This gravity solution (LP75G), like the previous solution (LP75D), is available from the Geosciences Data Node of the Planetary Data System (pds-geophys.wustl.edu/pds/lunar_prospector) or can be requested from A.K.
8. W. M. Kaula, Theory of Satellite Geodesy (Blaisdell, Waltham, MA, 1966).
9. The gravity solution is a least squares determination [see C. L. Lawson and R. J. Hanson, Solving Least Squares Problems (Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA, 1995)] with the jet Propulsion Laboratory's Orbit Determination Program (ODP) software [see T. D. Moyer, JPL Technical Report 32-1527 (Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, 1971)].
10. The gravity solution is a least squares determination [see C. L. Lawson and R. J. Hanson, Solving Least Squares Problems (Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA, 1995)] with the jet Propulsion Laboratory's Orbit Determination Program (ODP) software [see T. D. Moyer, JPL Technical Report 32-1527 (Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, 1971)].
11. W. M. Kaula, Science 166, 1581 (1969).
12. B. G. Bills and A. J. Ferrari, J. Geophys. Res. 85, 1013 (1980).
13. D. E. Smith, M. T. Zuber, G. A. Neumann, F. G. Lemoine, ibid. 102, 1591 (1997).
14. K. K. Williams and M. T. Zuber, Icarus 131, 107 (1998).
15. P. D. Spudis, R. A. Reisse, J. J. Gillis, Science 266, 1848 (1994).
16. J. Arkani-Hamed, J. Geophys. Res. 103, 3709 (1998).
17. H. J. Melosh and W. B. McKinnon, Geophys. Res. Lett. 5, 985 (1978); S. C. Solomon, R. P. Comer, J. W. Head, J. Geophys. Res. 87, 3975 (1982); S. R. Bratt, S. C. Solomon, J. W. Head, ibid. 90, 12415 (1985).
18. H. J. Melosh and W. B. McKinnon, Geophys. Res. Lett. 5, 985 (1978); S. C. Solomon, R. P. Comer, J. W. Head, J. Geophys. Res. 87, 3975 (1982); S. R. Bratt, S. C. Solomon, J. W. Head, ibid. 90, 12415 (1985).
19. H. J. Melosh and W. B. McKinnon, Geophys. Res. Lett. 5, 985 (1978); S. C. Solomon, R. P. Comer, J. W. Head, J. Geophys. Res. 87, 3975 (1982); S. R. Bratt, S. C. Solomon, J. W. Head, ibid. 90, 12415 (1985).
20. D. U. Wise and M. T. Yates, J. Geophys. Res. 75, 261 (1970).
21. R. J. Phillips, J. E. Conel, E. A. Abbott, W. L. Sjogren, J. B. Norton, ibid. 77, 7106 (1972).
22. S. R. Bratt, S. C. Solomon, J. W. Head, C. H. Thurber, ibid. 90, 3049 (1985).
23. S. C. Solomon and J. W. Head, ibid. 84, 1667 (1979).
24. S. R. Taylor, Planetary Science: A Lunar Perspective (Lunar and Planetary Institute, Houston, TX, 1982).
25. G. A. Neumann, M. T. Zuber, D. E. Smith, F. G. Lemoine, J. Geophys. Res. 101, 16841 (1996).
26. J. Arkani-Hamed, Proc. Lunar Sci. Conf. 4, 2673 (1973).
27. J. W. Head, Rev. Geophys. 14, 265 (1976).
28. H. J. Melosh, Proc. Lunar Sci. Conf. 9, 3513 (1978); S. C. Solomon and J. W. Head, Rev. Geophys. 18, 107 (1980); R. J. Willemann and D. L Turcotte, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci. 12B, 837 (1981).
29. H. J. Melosh, Proc. Lunar Sci. Conf. 9, 3513 (1978); S. C. Solomon and J. W. Head, Rev. Geophys. 18, 107 (1980); R. J. Willemann and D. L Turcotte, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci. 12B, 837 (1981).
30. H. J. Melosh, Proc. Lunar Sci. Conf. 9, 3513 (1978); S. C. Solomon and J. W. Head, Rev. Geophys. 18, 107 (1980); R. J. Willemann and D. L Turcotte, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci. 12B, 837 (1981).
31. M. A. Wieczorek and R. J. Phillips, J. Geophys. Res. 103, 1715 (1998).
32. 3 for the mantle.
33. 3 for the mantle.
34. 2 in TDB units [J. C. Ries, R. J. Eanes, C. K. Shum, M. M. Watkins, Geophys. Res. Lett. 19, 529 (1992)].
35. J. O. Dickey et al., Science 265, 482 (1994).
36. J. G. Williams, X. X. Newhall, J. O. Dickey, Planet. Space Sci. 44, 1077 (1996).
37. B. G. Bills, J. Geophys. Res. 100, 26297 (1995).
38. L. L. Hood and J. H. Jones, ibid. 92, 396 (1987).
39. S. Mueller, G. J. Taylor, R. J. Phillips, ibid. 93, 6338 (1988).
40. A. B. Binder, ibid. 85, 4872 (1980).
41. For example, see H. E. Newsom, in Origin of the Moon, W. K. Hartmann, R. J. Phillips, G. J. Taylor, Eds. (Lunar and Planetary Institute, Houston, TX, 1986), pp. 203-230.
42. A. G. W. Cameron, Icarus 126, 126 (1997); R. M. Canup and L. W. Esposito, ibid. 119, 427 (1996).
43. A. G. W. Cameron, Icarus 126, 126 (1997); R. M. Canup and L. W. Esposito, ibid. 119, 427 (1996).
44. A. G. W. Cameron and R. M. Canup, paper presented at 29th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, Lunar and Planetary Institute, Houston, TX, 16 to 20 March 1998.
45. We thank G. Neumann and M. Zuber for providing the latest lunar topography solutions from Clementine and F. Lemoine for his lunar gravity field and spacecraft model information for processing the Clementine tracking data. Helpful discussions with D. Turcotte are appreciated. LLR solutions were done with the help of D. H. Boggs, and LP data were processed with the help of E. Carranza, D. N. Yuan, and N. Rappaport. The research was carried out by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with NASA.