Origin and Evolution of Saturn's Ring System

The origin and long-term evolution of Saturn's rings is still an unsolved problem in modern planetary science. In this chapter we review the current state of our knowledge on this long-standing question for the main rings (A, Cassini Division, B, C), the F Ring, and the diffuse rings (E and G). During the Voyager era, models of evolutionary processes affecting the rings on long time scales (erosion, viscous spreading, accretion, ballistic transport, etc.) had suggested that Saturn's rings are not older than 100 My. In addition, Saturn's large system of diffuse rings has been thought to be the result of material loss from one or more of Saturn's satellites. In the Cassini era, high spatial and spectral resolution data have allowed progress to be made on some of these questions. Discoveries such as the ''propellers'' in the A ring, the shape of ring-embedded moonlets, the clumps in the F Ring, and Enceladus' plume provide new constraints on evolutionary processes in Saturn's rings. At the same time, advances in numerical simulations over the last 20 years have opened the way to realistic models of the rings's fine scale structure, and progress in our understanding of the formation of the Solar System provides a better-defined historical context in which to understand ring formation. All these elements have important implications for the origin and long-term evolution of Saturn's rings. They strengthen the idea that Saturn's rings are very dynamical and rapidly evolving, while new arguments suggest that the rings could be older than previously believed, provided that they are regularly renewed. Key evolutionary processes, timescales and possible scenarios for the rings's origin are reviewed in the light of tComment: Chapter 17 of the book ''Saturn After Cassini-Huygens'' Saturn from Cassini-Huygens, Dougherty, M.K.; Esposito, L.W.; Krimigis, S.M. (Ed.) (2009) 537-57

Same data, different conclusions: Radical dispersion in empirical results when independent analysts operationalize and test the same hypothesis

In this crowdsourced initiative, independent analysts used the same dataset to test two hypotheses regarding the effects of scientists’ gender and professional status on verbosity during group meetings. Not only the analytic approach but also the operationalizations of key variables were left unconstrained and up to individual analysts. For instance, analysts could choose to operationalize status as job title, institutional ranking, citation counts, or some combination. To maximize transparency regarding the process by which analytic choices are made, the analysts used a platform we developed called DataExplained to justify both preferred and rejected analytic paths in real time. Analyses lacking sufficient detail, reproducible code, or with statistical errors were excluded, resulting in 29 analyses in the final sample. Researchers reported radically different analyses and dispersed empirical outcomes, in a number of cases obtaining significant effects in opposite directions for the same research question. A Boba multiverse analysis demonstrates that decisions about how to operationalize variables explain variability in outcomes above and beyond statistical choices (e.g., covariates). Subjective researcher decisions play a critical role in driving the reported empirical results, underscoring the need for open data, systematic robustness checks, and transparency regarding both analytic paths taken and not taken. Implications for organizations and leaders, whose decision making relies in part on scientific findings, consulting reports, and internal analyses by data scientists, are discussed

Skalierfaehige Si/SiGe-HBT-Niedertemperaturtechnologie (LOTUS) Abschlussbericht

Available from TIB Hannover: F97B2380+a / FIZ - Fachinformationszzentrum Karlsruhe / TIB - Technische InformationsbibliothekSIGLEBundesministerium fuer Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und Technologie, Bonn (Germany)DEGerman