Planetary-scale waves are thought to play a role in powering the yet-unexplained atmospheric superrotation of Venus. Puzzlingly, while Kelvin, Rossby and stationary waves manifest at the upper clouds (65--70 km), no planetary-scale waves or stationary patterns have been reported in the intervening level of the lower clouds (48--55 km), although the latter are probably Lee waves. Using observations by the Akatsuki orbiter and ground-based telescopes, we show that the lower clouds follow a regular cycle punctuated between 30$^{\circ}$N--40$^{\circ}$S by a sharp discontinuity or disruption with potential implications to Venus's general circulation and thermal structure. This disruption exhibits a westward rotation period of $\sim$4.9 days faster than winds at this level ($\sim$6-day period), alters clouds' properties and aerosols, and remains coherent during weeks. Past observations reveal its recurrent nature since at least 1983, and numerical simulations show that a nonlinear Kelvin wave reproduces many of its properties.

It has been a common assumption of interior models that the outer planets of our solar system are convective, and that the internal temperature distributions are therefore adiabatic. This assumption is also often applied to exoplanets. However, if a large portion of the thermal flux can be transferred by conduction, or if convection is inhibited, the thermal profile could be substantially different and would therefore affect the inferred planetary composition. Here we investigate how the assumption of non-adiabatic temperature profiles in Uranus and Neptune affects their internal structures and compositions. We use a set of plausible temperature profiles together with density profiles that match the measured gravitational fields to derive the planets' compositions. We find that the inferred compositions of both Uranus and Neptune are quite sensitive to the assumed thermal profile in the outer layers, but relatively insensitive to the thermal profile in the central, high pressure region. The overall value of the heavy element mass fraction, $Z$, for these planets is between 0.8 and 0.9. Finally, we suggest that large parts of Uranus' interior might be conductive, a conclusion that is consistent with Uranus dynamo models and a hot central inner region.

The New Horizons mission to the Kuiper Belt has recently revealed intriguing features on the surface of Charon, including a network of chasmata, cutting across or around a series of high topography features, conjoining to form a belt. It is proposed that this tectonic belt is a consequence of contraction/expansion episodes in the moon's evolution associated particularly with compaction, differentiation and geochemical reactions of the interior. The proposed scenario involves no need for solidification of a vast subsurface ocean and/or a warm initial state. This scenario is based on a new, detailed thermo-physical evolution model of Charon that includes multiple processes. According to the model, Charon experiences two contraction/expansion episodes in its history that may provide the proper environment for the formation of the tectonic belt. This outcome remains qualitatively the same, for several different initial conditions and parameter variations. The precise orientation of Charon's tectonic belt, and the cryovolcanic features observed south of the tectonic belt may have involved a planetary-scale impact, that occurred only after the belt had already formed.

The moment of inertia of a giant planet reveals important information about the planet's internal density structure and this information is not identical to that contained in the gravitational moments. The forthcoming Juno mission to Jupiter might determine Jupiter's normalized moment of inertia NMoI=C/MR^2 by measuring Jupiter's pole precession and the Lense-Thirring acceleration of the spacecraft (C is the axial moment of inertia, and M and R are Jupiter's mass and mean radius, respectively). We investigate the possible range of NMoI values for Jupiter based on its measured gravitational field using a simple core/envelope model of the planet assuming that J_2 and J_4 are perfectly known and are equal to their measured values. The model suggests that for fixed values of J_2 and J_4 a range of NMOI values between 0.2629 and 0.2645 can be found. The Radau-Darwin relation gives a NMoI value that is larger than the model values by less than 1%. A low NMoI of ~ 0.236, inferred from a dynamical model (Ward & Canup, 2006, ApJ, 640, L91) is inconsistent with this range, but the range is model dependent. Although we conclude that the NMoI is tightly constrained by the gravity coefficients, a measurement of Jupiter's NMoI to a few tenths of percent by Juno could provide an important constraint on Jupiter's internal structure. We carry out a simplified assessment of the error involved in Juno's possible determination of Jupiter's NMoI.

The exact solution for the shape and gravitational field of a rotating two-layer Maclaurin ellipsoid of revolution is compared with predictions of the theory of figures up to third order in the small rotational parameter of the theory of figures. An explicit formula is derived for the external gravitational coefficient $J_2$ of the exact solution. A new approach to the evaluation of the theory of figures based on numerical integration of ordinary differential equations is presented. The classical Radau-Darwin formula is found not to be valid for the rotational parameter \epsilon_2 = \Omega^2/(2\pi G\rho_2) >= 0.17 since the formula then predicts a surface eccentricity that is smaller than the eccentricity of the core-envelope boundary. Interface eccentricity must be smaller than surface eccentricity. In the formula for $\epsilon_2$, $\Omega$ is the angular velocity of the two-layer body, $\rho_2$ is the density of the outer layer, and G is the gravitational constant. For an envelope density of 3000 kg m^(-3) the failure of the Radau-Darwin formula corresponds to a rotation period of about 3 hr. Application of the exact solution and the theory of figures is made to models of Earth, Mars, Uranus, and Neptune. The two-layer model with constant densities in the layers can provide realistic approximations to terrestrial planets and icy outer planet satellites. The two-layer model needs to be generalized to allow for a continuous envelope (outer layer) radial density profile in order to realistically model a gas or ice giant planet.

'Empirical' models (pressure vs. density) of Uranus and Neptune interiors constrained by the gravitational coefficients J_2, J_4, the planetary radii and masses, and Voyager solid-body rotation periods are presented. The empirical pressure-density profiles are then interpreted in terms of physical equations of state of hydrogen, helium, ice (H_2O), and rock (SiO_2) to test the physical plausibility of the models. The compositions of Uranus and Neptune are found to be similar with somewhat different distributions of the high-Z material. The big difference between the two planets is that Neptune requires a non-solar envelope while Uranus is best matched with a solar composition envelope. Our analysis suggests that the heavier elements in both Uranus' and Neptune's interior might increase gradually towards the planetary centers. Indeed it is possible to fit the gravitational moments without sharp compositional transitions.

Both Uranus and Neptune are thought to have strong zonal winds with velocities of several hundred meters per second. These wind velocities, however, assume solid-body rotation periods based on Voyager 2 measurements of periodic variations in the planets' radio signals and of fits to the planets' magnetic fields; 17.24h and 16.11h for Uranus and Neptune, respectively. The realization that the radio period of Saturn does not represent the planet's deep interior rotation and the complexity of the magnetic fields of Uranus and Neptune raise the possibility that the Voyager 2 radio and magnetic periods might not represent the deep interior rotation periods of the ice giants. Moreover, if there is deep differential rotation within Uranus and Neptune no single solid-body rotation period could characterize the bulk rotation of the planets. We use wind and shape data to investigate the rotation of Uranus and Neptune. The shapes (flattening) of the ice giants are not measured, but only inferred from atmospheric wind speeds and radio occultation measurements at a single latitude. The inferred oblateness values of Uranus and Neptune do not correspond to bodies rotating with the Voyager rotation periods. Minimization of wind velocities or dynamic heights of the 1 bar isosurfaces, constrained by the single occultation radii and gravitational coefficients of the planets, leads to solid-body rotation periods of ~16.58h for Uranus and ~17.46h for Neptune. Uranus might be rotating faster and Neptune slower than Voyager rotation speeds. We derive shapes for the planets based on these rotation rates. Wind velocities with respect to these rotation periods are essentially identical on Uranus and Neptune and wind speeds are slower than previously thought. Alternatively, if we interpret wind measurements in terms of differential rotation on cylinders there are essentially no residual atmospheric winds.

Recommendations by the Origins Working Group for EJSM mission - JGO and JEO spacecrafts.

Anderson & Schubert (2007, Science,317,1384) proposed that Saturn's rotation period can be ascertained by minimizing the dynamic heights of the 100 mbar isosurface with respect to the geoid; they derived a rotation period of 10h 32m 35s. We investigate the same approach for Jupiter to see if the Jovian rotation period is predicted by minimizing the dynamical heights of its isobaric (1 bar pressure level) surface using zonal wind data. A rotation period of 9h 54m 29s is found. Further, we investigate the minimization method by fitting Pioneer and Voyager occultation radii for both Jupiter and Saturn. Rotation periods of 9h 55m 30s and 10h 32m 35s are found to minimize the dynamical heights for Jupiter and Saturn, respectively. Though there is no dynamical principle requiring the minimization of the dynamical heights of an isobaric surface, the successful application of the method to Jupiter lends support to its relevance for Saturn. We derive Jupiter and Saturn rotation periods using equilibrium theory in which the solid-body rotation period (no winds) that gives the observed equatorial and polar radii at the 100 mbar level is found. Rotation periods of 9h 55m 20s and 10h 31m 49s are found for Jupiter and Saturn, respectively. We show that both Jupiter's and Saturn's shapes can be derived using solid-body rotation, suggesting that zonal winds have a minor effect on the planetary shape for both planets. The agreement in the values of Saturn's rotation period predicted by the different approaches supports the conclusion that the planet's period of rotation is about 10h 32m.

We calculate heavy element enrichment in a Jupiter-mass protoplanet formed by disk instability at various radial distances from the star, considering different disk masses and surface density distributions. Although the available mass for accretion increases with radial distance (a) for disk solid surface density (sigma) functions sigma=sigma_0*a^(-alpha) with alpha < 2, the accretion timescale is significantly longer at larger radial distances. Efficient accretion is limited to the first ~ 1E5 years of planetary evolution, when the planet is extended and before gap opening and type II migration take place. The accreted mass is calculated for disk masses of 0.01, 0.05 and 0.1 M_sun with alpha = 1/2, 1, and 3/2. We show that a Jupiter-mass protoplanet can accrete 1 to 110 M_earth of heavy elements, depending on the disk properties. Our results explain the large variation in heavy element enrichment found in extra-solar giant planets. Since higher disk surface density is found to lead to larger heavy element enrichment, our model results are consistent with the correlation between heavy element enrichment and stellar metallicity. Our calculations also suggest that Jupiter could have formed at a larger radial distance than its current location while still accreting the mass of heavy elements predicted by interior models. We conclude that in the disk instability model the final composition of a giant planet is strongly determined by its formation environment. The heavy element abundance of a giant planet does not discriminate between its origin by either disk instability or core accretion.

We present 'empirical' models (pressure vs. density) of Saturn's interior constrained by the gravitational coefficients J_2, J_4, and J_6 for different assumed rotation rates of the planet. The empirical pressure-density profile is interpreted in terms of a hydrogen and helium physical equation of state to deduce the hydrogen to helium ratio in Saturn and to constrain the depth dependence of helium and heavy element abundances. The planet's internal structure (pressure vs. density) and composition are found to be insensitive to the assumed rotation rate for periods between 10h:32m:35s and 10h:41m:35s. We find that helium is depleted in the upper envelope, while in the high pressure region (P >~ 1 Mbar) either the helium abundance or the concentration of heavier elements is significantly enhanced. Taking the ratio of hydrogen to helium in Saturn to be solar, we find that the maximum mass of heavy elements in Saturn's interior ranges from ~ 6 to 20 M_Earth. The empirical models of Saturn's interior yield a moment of inertia factor varying from 0.22271 to 0.22599 for rotation periods between 10h:32m:35s and 10h:41m:35s, respectively. A long-term precession rate of about 0.754" yr^{-1} is found to be consistent with the derived moment of inertia values and assumed rotation rates over the entire range of investigated rotation rates. This suggests that the long-term precession period of Saturn is somewhat shorter than the generally assumed value of 1.77 x 10^6 years inferred from modeling and observations.

Sedimentation rates of silicate grains in gas giant protoplanets formed by disk instability are calculated for protoplanetary masses between 1 M_Saturn to 10 M_Jupiter. Giant protoplanets with masses of 5 M_Jupiter or larger are found to be too hot for grain sedimentation to form a silicate core. Smaller protoplanets are cold enough to allow grain settling and core formation. Grain sedimentation and core formation occur in the low mass protoplanets because of their slow contraction rate and low internal temperature. It is predicted that massive giant planets will not have cores, while smaller planets will have small rocky cores whose masses depend on the planetary mass, the amount of solids within the body, and the disk environment. The protoplanets are found to be too hot to allow the existence of icy grains, and therefore the cores are predicted not to contain any ices. It is suggested that the atmospheres of low mass giant planets are depleted in refractory elements compared with the atmospheres of more massive planets. These predictions provide a test of the disk instability model of gas giant planet formation. The core masses of Jupiter and Saturn were found to be ~0.25 M_Earth and ~0.5 M_Earth, respectively. The core masses of Jupiter and Saturn can be substantially larger if planetesimal accretion is included. The final core mass will depend on planetesimal size, the time at which planetesimals are formed, and the size distribution of the material added to the protoplanet. Jupiter's core mass can vary from 2 to 12 M_Earth. Saturn's core mass is found to be ~8 M_Earth.

A two-layer spherical $\alpha^2$-dynamo model consisting of an inner electrically conducting core (magnetic diffusivity $\lambda_i$ and radius $r_i$) with $\alpha = 0$ surrounded by an electrically conducting spherical shell (magnetic diffusivity $\lambda_o$ and radius $r_o$) with a constant $\alpha$ is shown to exhibit oscillatory behavior for values of $\beta = \lambda_i/\lambda_o$ and $r_i/r_o$ relevant to the solar dynamo. Time-dependent dynamo solutions require $r_i/r_o \geq 0.55$ and $\beta \leq O(1)$. For the Sun, $r_i/r_o$ is about 0.8 and $\beta\approx 10^{-3}$. The time scale of the oscillations matches the 22 year period of the sunspot cycle for $\lambda_0 = O(10^2 km^2 s^{-1}$). It is unnecessary to hypothesize an $\alpha\omega$-dynamo to obtain oscillatory dynamo solutions; an $\alpha^2$-dynamo suffices provided the spherical shell region of dynamo action lies above a large, less magnetically diffusive core, as is the case for the solar dynamo.

We review the results from {\it Mariner 10} regarding Mercury's gravity field and the results from radar ranging regarding topography. We discuss the implications of improving these results, including a determination of the polar component, as well as the opportunity to perform relativistic gravity tests with a future {\it Mercury Orbiter}. With a spacecraft placed in orbit with periherm at 400 km altitude, apherm at 16,800 km, period 13.45 hr and latitude of periherm at +30 deg, one can expect a significant improvement in our knowledge of Mercury's gravity field and geophysical properties. The 2000 Plus mission that evolved during the European Space Agency (ESA) {\it Mercury Orbiter} assessment study can provide a global gravity field complete through the 25th degree and order in spherical harmonics. If after completion of the main mission, the periherm could be lowered to 200 km altitude, the gravity field could be extended to 50th degree and order. We discuss the possibility that a search for a Hermean ionosphere could be performed during the mission phases featuring Earth occultations. Because of its relatively large eccentricity and close proximity to the Sun, Mercury's orbital motion provides one of the best solar-system tests of general relativity. Consequently, we emphasize the number of feasible relativistic gravity tests that can be performed within the context of the parameterized post-Newtonian formalism - a useful framework for testing modern gravitational theories. We pointed out that current results on relativistic precession of Mercury's perihelion are uncertain by 0.5 %, and we discuss the expected improvement using {\it Mercury Orbiter}. We discuss the importance of {\it Mercury Orbiter} for setting limits on a possible time variation in the