Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-14T03:58:13.163Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Review of the Theories of Motion of the Natural Satellites

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 August 2015

P. J. Message
P. J. Message*
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, Liverpool University, Liverpool, England

Extract

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.

Most of the natural satellites of the planets of the solar system may be put into one of three main groups, according as to which of three main influences dominate the perturbation of their motion from Keplerian motion about the primary planet. The first of these is the attraction of the Sun, which governs the perturbations of the Moon's motion about the Earth, and those of the outer satellites of Jupiter (satellites VI to XIII), and Saturn's satellite Phoebe. The second is the departure of the gravitational field of the planet from that of a spherically symmetric body (the “figure terms”), and this governs the perturbations of the two satellites of Mars, Jupiter's satellite Amalthea (V), Neptune's satellite Triton, is probably the most important influence on Uranus' satellites, and is important, though not dominant, for the inner satellites of Saturn. The third influence is the mutual attraction of the satellites themselves. An order of magnitude argument suggests that periodic perturbations from this cause could scarcely be expected to be measureable from Earth, were it not that the frequent appearance of small-integer near-commensurabilities of pairs of orbital periods, and the consequent argumentation of the associated perturbations by a variety of types of resonance effects, in the systems of Jupiter and Saturn, causes mutual perturbations to dominate the orbital theories of three of the four great satellites of Jupiter, and six of the nine satellites of Saturn, and enables the masses of most of the satellites involved to be determined with otherwise unexpected relative precision (in some favourable cases, of the order of one per-cent) from Earth based data. Let us now consider the satellite systems of each of the outer planets in a little more detail.

Type
Part IV: Satellites and Rings
Information
Symposium - International Astronomical Union , Volume 81: Dynamics of the Solar System , 1979 , pp. 159 - 166
Copyright
Copyright © Reidel 1979 

References

Aksnes, K.: 1974, Icarus, 21, 100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aksnes, K. and Franklin, F. A.: 1975, Astron. J., 80, 56.Google Scholar
Aksnes, K. and Franklin, F. A.: 1975, Nature, 258, 503.Google Scholar
Aksnes, K. and Franklin, F. A.: 1976, Astron. J., 81, 464.Google Scholar
Born, G. and Duxbury, T.: 1975, Cel. Mech., 12, 77.Google Scholar
Bobone, J.: 1935, Astron. J., 45, 189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bobone, J.: 1937, Astron. Nachr., 262, 321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, E. W.: 1923, Astron. J., 25, 1.Google Scholar
Brown, E. W.: 1930, Yale Obs. Trans., 6, 65.Google Scholar
Brown, E. W. and Brouwer, D.: 1937, Yale Obs. Trans., 6, 189.Google Scholar
Charnow, M., Musen, P., and Maury, J.: 1968, Journ. Astronaut. Sci., 15, 303.Google Scholar
Cowell, P. H. and Crommelin, A. E.: 1908, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc., 68, 576.Google Scholar
de Sitter, W.: 1918, Ann. d. Sternw. Leiden, 12, Pt. 1.Google Scholar
de Sitter, W.: 1925, Ann. d. Sternw. Leiden, 12, Pt. 3.Google Scholar
de Sitter, W.: 1931, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc., 91, 706.Google Scholar
Dunham, D.: 1971, , .Google Scholar
Eichelberger, W. S. and Newton, A.: 1926, Astron. Pap. Amer. Ephem., No. 9, Pt. 3.Google Scholar
Garcia, H. A.: 1972, Astron. J., 77, 684.Google Scholar
Gill, J. and Gault, B.: 1968, Astron. J., 73, 595.Google Scholar
Greenberg, R.: 1975, Icarus, 24, 325.Google Scholar
Grosch, H. J.: 1947, Astron. J., 53, 180.Google Scholar
Hagihara, Y.: 1927, Ann. Tokyo Obs., Appx. 17.Google Scholar
Herget, P.: 1968, Astron. J., 73, 737.Google Scholar
Hori, G.: 1957, Publ. Astron. Soc. Japan, 9, 51.Google Scholar
Hori, G.: 1958, Proc. Japan Acad., 34, 263.Google Scholar
Hori, G.: 1966, Publ. Astron. Soc. Japan, 18, 287.Google Scholar
Jeffreys, H.: 1953, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc., 113, 81.Google Scholar
Jeffreys, H.: 1954, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc., 114, 433.Google Scholar
Kovalevsky, J.: 1958, Astron. J., 63, 452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kozai, Y.: 1955, Proc. Japan Acad., 31, 6.Google Scholar
Kozai, Y.: 1956, Ann. Tokyo Obs., Ser. 2, 4, 191.Google Scholar
Kozai, Y.: 1957, Ann. Tokyo Obs., Ser. 2, 5, 73.Google Scholar
Kozai, Y.: 1976, Publ. Astron. Soc. Japan, 28, 675.Google Scholar
Lieske, J. H.: 1974, Astron. Astrophys., 31, 137.Google Scholar
Lieske, J. H.: 1977, Astron. Astrophys., 56, 333.Google Scholar
Newcomb, S.: 1891, Astron. Pap. Amer. Ephem., 3, 347.Google Scholar
Peters, C. F.: 1973, Astron. J., 78, 951.Google Scholar
Rapaport, M.: 1973, Astron. Astrophys., 22, 179.Google Scholar
Rapaport, M.: 1976, Astron. Astrophys., 51, 51.Google Scholar
Ross, F. E.: 1905, Harvard Ann., 53, No. 6.Google Scholar
Ross, F. E.: 1906, Lick Bull., 4, 110.Google Scholar
Ross, F. E.: 1917, Astron. Nachr., 174, 359.Google Scholar
Sampson, R. A.: 1921, Mem. Roy. Astron. Soc., 63.Google Scholar
Sharpies, B. P.: 1945, Astron. J., 51, 185.Google Scholar
Shor, V. A.: 1975, Cel. Mech., 12, 61.Google Scholar
Sinclair, A. T.: 1972, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc., 155, 249.Google Scholar
Sinclair, A. T.: 1974, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc., 169, 591.Google Scholar
Sinclair, A. T.: 1975, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc., 171, 59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, A. T.: 1977, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc., 180, 447.Google Scholar
Struve, G.: 1926, Veroff. Berlin Ber., 6, Pt. 2.Google Scholar
Struve, G.: 1933, Veroff. Berlin Ber., 6, Pt. 5.Google Scholar
Struve, H.: 1898, Publ. Obs. Cent. Nicholas, 11.Google Scholar
Sudbury, P. V.: 1969, Icarus, 10, 116.Google Scholar
van Biesbroeck, G.: 1951, Astron. J., 56, 110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Woerkom, A. J. J.: 1950, Astron. Pap. Amer. Ephem., 13, Pt. 1.Google Scholar
Whitaker, E. A. and Greenberg, R. J.: 1973, 165, 15.Google Scholar
Wilkins, G. A.: 1968, in Colombo, G. (ed.), Modern Questions of Celestial Mechanics, Edizione Cremonese, Rome, p. 221.Google Scholar
Woltjer, J.: 1922, Bull. Astron. Inst. Netherlds., 1, 175.Google Scholar
Woltjer, J.: 1928, Ann. Sternw. Leiden, 16, Pt. 3.Google Scholar
Zadunaisky, P. E.: 1954, Astron. J., 59, 1.Google Scholar