. \[R2\_fig\]. Indeed, when the satellite grows over a timescale $\tau_s\gg6.2$ yrs ([*i.e.*]{} $\tau_s\gg4800$ orbits), the ring responds adiabatically to forcing by the slowly growing Mimas, and shows only a forced $m=2$ pattern that corotates with Mimas, with the free $m=2$ pattern having a negligible amplitude. Consequently, only the $\sigma_0=280, 320$, and $360$ gm/cm$^2$ simulations in Fig. \[R2\_fig\] are faithful in their attempt to reproduce a B ring whose free epicyclic amplitude $\tilde{R}_2$ is slightly larger than the forced amplitude $R_2$. However the lower-surface density simulations have free patterns whose amplitudes are smaller than the forced patterns, and these simulated rings have outer edges whose longitude of periapse librate about Mimas’ longitude, rather than circulate.

Also of interest here is the so-called radial depth of the $m=2$ disturbance, $\Delta a_{e/10}$, which is defined as the semimajor axis separation between the ring’s outer edge and the streamline whose mean eccentricity is one-tenth that of the edge’s eccentricity. For these $m=2$ simulations the radial depth is $\Delta a_{e/10}=154$km, so the radial width of the simulated part of the ring is $w=4.3\Delta a_{e/10}$.

### sensitivity to resonance location and other factors {#edge_sensitivity}

The surface density $\sigma_0$ that is inferred from the amplitude of the ring’s forced motion $R_2$ is very sensitive to the uncertainty in the ring’s semimajor axis, which is $\delta a_{\mbox{\scriptsize edge}}$. For example, when the B ring is simulated again but with its outer edge instead extending further out by $\delta a_{\mbox{\scriptsize edge}}=4$ km, those simulations show that the ring’s forced amplitude $R_2$ is larger by about 6 km, which requires increasing $\sigma_0$ by $\delta\sigma_0=60$ gm/cm$^2$ so that the simulated $R_2$ is in agreement with the observed value. Similarly, when the simulated ring’s edge is moved inwards by $\delta a_{\mbox
.   \[R2\_fig\ ]. Indeed, when the satellite grows over a timescale $ \tau_s\gg6.2 $ yrs ([ * i.e. * ] { } $ \tau_s\gg4800 $ orbits), the ring respond adiabatically to force by the slowly grow Mimas, and prove only a forced $ m=2 $ convention that corotates with Mimas, with the barren $ m=2 $ pattern have a negligible amplitude. Consequently, only the $ \sigma_0=280, 320 $, and $ 360 $ gm / cm$^2 $ pretense in Fig.   \[R2\_fig\ ] are faithful in their attempt to reproduce a bel ring whose spare epicyclic amplitude $ \tilde{R}_2 $ is slightly larger than the storm amplitude $ R_2$. However the lower - surface density pretense have free patterns whose amplitudes are small than the forced patterns, and these simulated rings have extinct edges whose longitude of periapse librate about Mimas ’ longitude, rather than circulate. 

 Also of interest here is the therefore - called radial depth of the $ m=2 $ disturbance, $ \Delta a_{e/10}$, which is defined as the semimajor axis separation between the ring ’s outer edge and the streamline whose mean eccentricity is one - one-tenth that of the boundary ’s eccentricity. For these $ m=2 $ simulations the radial depth is $ \Delta a_{e/10}=154$km, so the radial width of the simulated character of the ring is $ w=4.3\Delta a_{e/10}$. 

 # # # sensitivity to resonance location and early factors { # edge_sensitivity } 

 The open density $ \sigma_0 $ that is inferred from the amplitude of the gang ’s forced motion $ R_2 $ is very sensitive to the uncertainty in the ring ’s semimajor axis, which is $ \delta a_{\mbox{\scriptsize edge}}$. For exemplar, when the B ring is simulated again but with its outer boundary instead extend further out by $ \delta a_{\mbox{\scriptsize edge}}=4 $ km, those simulations show that the gang ’s forced amplitude $ R_2 $ is larger by about 6 kilometer, which requires increase $ \sigma_0 $ by $ \delta\sigma_0=60 $ gm / cm$^2 $ so that the simulated $ R_2 $ is in agreement with the ascertained value. Similarly, when the simulated ring ’s edge is moved inwards by $ \delta a_{\mbox
. \[R2\_fih\]. Indeed, when the satelllte grows over a timescele $\tau_a\gg6.2$ yrs ([*k.e.*]{} $\tau_s\gg4800$ orbits), the ring redpinds qdiabatically to forcivg by the slowly trowmng Mimas, and shows only a fordcd $m=2$ 'avtern that corojates with Mhmas, with the xrde $m=2$ pattern having a negligible amplytude. Cpndequently, only the $\figmz_0=280, 320$, and $360$ gm/cm$^2$ simulations in Fig. \[R2\_fif\] are feithful in theit attempt to reproduce a B rinh whose free epicyflic amplitose $\eulde{R}_2$ is sliehtly largtr than the rorced amplitude $R_2$. However the uower-xurface debsuty vimulations have free patterkx whosa ampliyudes are smalker thqn the forced patternv, and these simulajed rings vare outer edges whose oobgituge ox pefuapre miurafe abokt Jimas’ longjtude, rathee than circulate.

Alsp jd interest hede is ehq so-called radial depth of the $m=2$ disturtande, $\Delta a_{e/10}$, which is dedined as the semimajot axis sepwration between the ring’s outer edge and the stredmlinx dhowe owaj eccentricity is one-tenth that of the edge’s qdctntgicity. For these $i=2$ simulatioms tng radial depth is $\Delta a_{e/10}=154$km, so the radiap width of tye simulaued psrt of the ring is $w=4.3\Delta a_{w/10}$.

### sensitivitj to resonance locatiou and other yactorx {#edgr_sensitivity}

The surface denaity $\sigma_0$ hhat is ihwerred from the xmpkidude of ufe ring’s forced mjtion $R_2$ iw vexy sensigive to thq uncertaijty ik the ring’s semimajlr axns, whhch is $\delha a_{\mbox{\scriptsize edge}}$. For example, when the N sinc is simblated again but wieh its outer ebge instzad exgending fugther out by $\delta a_{\ibox{\scriptsiza edge}}=4$ km, thove simulwtiobs syow thag the ring’s forved amplinube $R_2$ is lqrger by about 6 km, whkdh requires incxtasung $\sigma_0$ by $\dekta\rigia_0=60$ gk/ci$^2$ so that the simjlagrd $R_2$ ks in agreendnt eith the observed vanue. Aimilarly, when the slmulated ting’s edgq is moved ineards by $\delta a_{\mblx
. \[R2\_fig\]. Indeed, when the satellite grows timescale yrs ([*i.e.*]{} orbits), the ring the growing Mimas, and only a forced pattern that corotates with Mimas, with free $m=2$ pattern having a negligible amplitude. Consequently, only the $\sigma_0=280, 320$, and gm/cm$^2$ simulations in Fig. \[R2\_fig\] are faithful in their attempt to reproduce a ring free amplitude is slightly larger than the forced amplitude $R_2$. However the lower-surface density simulations have free patterns amplitudes are smaller than the forced patterns, and simulated rings have outer whose longitude of periapse librate Mimas’ rather than Also interest is the so-called depth of the $m=2$ disturbance, $\Delta a_{e/10}$, which is defined as the semimajor axis separation between the outer edge streamline whose eccentricity one-tenth of the edge’s these $m=2$ simulations the radial depth so the radial width of the simulated part the ring $w=4.3\Delta a_{e/10}$. ### sensitivity to resonance and other factors {#edge_sensitivity} The surface density $\sigma_0$ is inferred from the amplitude of the ring’s forced motion $R_2$ is very sensitive to in the ring’s semimajor which is $\delta edge}}$. example, the ring is again but with its outer edge instead extending further out by a_{\mbox{\scriptsize edge}}=4$ km, those simulations show that the ring’s forced is by about 6 which requires increasing $\sigma_0$ $\delta\sigma_0=60$ so that the simulated in with Similarly, the ring’s edge is moved by $\delta a_{\mbox
. \[R2\_fig\]. Indeed, when the satellitE grows over A timeScaLe $\tAu_S\gg6.2$ yRs ([*i.e.*]{} $\Tau_s\gg4800$ orbits), thE Ring Responds adiabatically tO forcInG By thE SlOwly gRowing MIMaS, ANd sHoWs OnlY a FOrCed $m=2$ pAttErn that Corotates wIth miMas, with the frEE $m=2$ Pattern havIng A negligible aMplItude. COnSeqUEntly, OnlY the $\sIgma_0=280, 320$, anD $360$ Gm/cm$^2$ siMulations In fIg. \[R2\_fig\] ARe faithFUL iN theIr attempt to reprodUCe A b ring whose free EpicycLiC AmPLItuDe $\tIlde{R}_2$ is sliGhTly laRGer than THe FORCed AMplitude $R_2$. HoweVer the lower-SUrfAce denSiTy sIMulatiOns haVe FRee Patterns whoSe amPlitudes aRe smalLEr than tHE forced PatterNs, aNd tHese SImUlAteD rINgs HAvE ouTEr eDges whosE lOnGitudE of pERIAPse lIbrAte aBout MImas’ longitude, RatHer tHAn cIrculAte.

AlSo of InTeresT here iS the sO-cAlled radial deptH of tHe $m=2$ disturBanCe, $\delTa A_{e/10}$, whiCH is defIneD as The semiMajor axIS sePaRATIoN between the ring’s ouTeR EDgE and the sTreamlINe WhOSe mean ecCeNtrIcitY IS one-tEnth THaT of the edGe’s eccENtRiCity. For ThEse $m=2$ siMuLatIonS the rADial Depth iS $\Delta a_{e/10}=154$Km, so tHE radial width of THe simulated paRT oF THe RIng iS $w=4.3\DElta a_{e/10}$.

### sensiTiviTY to rEsonANcE loCAtion And otHeR FaCTors {#edge_sensitivity}

thE surfaCe denSity $\sigma_0$ that Is inferred FROM the amplItudE Of THe ring’s forced mOtion $r_2$ is very senSItive to tHe uncErtainty In the ring’S SEmimajor AxiS, whIch Is $\dELTa A_{\mbox{\scriptsiZE Edge}}$. foR examplE, whEn the B rIng Is sImuLatEd Again but wIth its ouTeR eDgE iNstEad exTEnding fuRtHer OuT by $\Delta A_{\Mbox{\scRiptsIze eDgE}}=4$ kM, ThoSe simulATiONS shoW tHaT the RinG’s ForceD ampLItuDe $R_2$ is laRger by aboUt 6 kM, WhicH rEqUires inCreasing $\sigma_0$ By $\Delta\sigma_0=60$ Gm/Cm$^2$ sO that tHE SimulateD $R_2$ is in agreement with the oBServed vAluE. SimiLarlY, when the sImuLated rIng’S Edge is Moved iNwardS bY $\deLTA a_{\mboX
. \[R2\_fig\]. Indeed, whe n the sate llite  gr ows  o vera ti mescale $\tau_ s \gg6 .2$ yrs ([*i.e.*]{} $\ tau_s \g g 4800 $  o rbits ), ther in g res po nd s a di a ba tical lyto forc ing by the  sl ow ly growing M i ma s, and sho wsonly a force d $ m=2$ p at ter n  that  co rotat es wit h  Mimas , with th ef ree $m = 2$ patt e r nhavi ng a negligible a m pl i tude. Conseque ntly,on l yt h e $ \si gma_0=280,  3 20$,a nd $360 $  g m / c m$^ 2 $ simulations  in Fig. \[ R 2\_ fig\]ar e f a ithful  in t he i r a ttempt to r epro duce a Bring w h ose fre e  epicyc lic am pli tud e $\ t il de {R} _2 $  is sl igh t lylarger t ha nthe f orce d a m plit ude  $R_ 2$. H owever the lo wer -sur f ace  dens ity s imul at ionshave f ree p at terns whose amp litu des are s mal le r t ha n the forced  pa tte rns, an d these sim ul a t e drings have outer e dg e s  w hose lon gitude of  p e riapse l ib rat e ab o u t Mim as’l on gitude,rather th an  circul at e.

Al so  of  in teres t  her e is t he so-ca lledr adial depth of the $m=2$ dis t ur b a nc e , $\ Del ta a_{e/10} $, w h ichis d e fi ned as th e sem im a jo r  axis separation be tw een th e rin g’s outer edg e and thes t r eamlinewhos e  m e an eccentricit y isone-tentht hat of t he ed ge’s ecc entricity . For thes e $ m=2 $ s imu l a ti ons the radia l dept his $\De lta  a_{e/1 0}= 154 $km , s othe radia l widthof  t he  s imu lated part ofth e r in g i s $w= 4 .3\Del ta a_ {e/1 0} $. 
## # sensi t iv i t y to  r es onan celo catio n an d  ot her fac tors {#ed ge_ s ensi ti vi ty}

Th e surface den si ty $\sigma _0 $ t hat is i nferredfrom the amplitude of t h e ring’ s f orced  mot ion $R_2$  is  verysen s itiveto the  unce rt ain t y  in t h e  r ing ’s  semimajor a xis , whi ch  is$\delta  a_{\mbox{\scripts i zeedge}}$. Forexa mple , wh ent he B r in g  is s imulated againbut with i ts ou ter edge i n ste ad  extend ing fur thero ut by $ \delta a_ {\mbox{\s cr ipts i z e e dge}}=4$ k m, those  simulati o ns sh o wthatthe  ring’ sfor ced a mplitu d e $ R_2$is lar ge r by a bout6km, whic h requires increasing $ \sigma _0$ b y $ \delta\si gma _ 0=6 0$ gm/cm$ ^2$so that th e s imu lated  $R _ 2$ is  ina gr eem e nt wi th t h e observe d  v alu e .  S imilarly, w h e n  th e sim ula t ed rin g’sedge is moved inw a rds by $\delta  a_{ \ m box 
. \[R2\_fig\]. Indeed,_when the_satellite grows over a_timescale $\tau_s\gg6.2$_yrs_([*i.e.*]{} $\tau_s\gg4800$_orbits),_the ring responds_adiabatically to forcing_by the slowly growing_Mimas, and shows_only_a forced $m=2$ pattern that corotates with Mimas, with the free $m=2$ pattern having_a_negligible amplitude._Consequently,_only_the $\sigma_0=280, 320$, and $360$_gm/cm$^2$ simulations in Fig. \[R2\_fig\] are_faithful in_their attempt to reproduce a B ring whose_free_epicyclic amplitude $\tilde{R}_2$_is slightly larger than the forced amplitude $R_2$. However_the lower-surface density simulations have free_patterns whose amplitudes_are_smaller_than the forced patterns,_and these simulated rings have outer_edges whose longitude of periapse librate_about Mimas’ longitude, rather than circulate.

Also of_interest here is the so-called radial_depth of the $m=2$ disturbance,_$\Delta a_{e/10}$,_which is defined as the_semimajor axis separation_between the_ring’s outer edge_and the streamline whose mean eccentricity_is one-tenth that_of the edge’s eccentricity. For these_$m=2$_simulations the radial_depth_is_$\Delta a_{e/10}=154$km,_so the radial_width_of the_simulated_part of the ring is $w=4.3\Delta_a_{e/10}$.

###_sensitivity to resonance location and other factors_{#edge_sensitivity}

The surface density $\sigma_0$_that_is inferred from the_amplitude of the ring’s forced_motion $R_2$ is very sensitive to_the uncertainty_in the_ring’s semimajor axis, which is $\delta a_{\mbox{\scriptsize edge}}$. For example, when_the B ring is simulated again_but with its outer_edge instead_extending_further out by_$\delta_a_{\mbox{\scriptsize edge}}=4$_km, those simulations show that the ring’s_forced amplitude_$R_2$ is larger by about 6_km, which requires increasing_$\sigma_0$_by $\delta\sigma_0=60$ gm/cm$^2$ so that the_simulated $R_2$ is in agreement with_the observed value. Similarly, when_the_simulated_ring’s edge is moved inwards_by $\delta a_{\mbox