DOCSLIB.ORG

Comment on by Fluctuations in the Magnetosheath and Azimuthal Flow

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Comment on by Fluctuations in the Magnetosheath and Azimuthal Flow Comment on ªB_y fluctuations in the magnetosheath and azimuthal flow velocity transients in the dayside ionosphereº by Newell and Sibeck Article Published Version Lockwood, M., Cowley, S. W. H. and Smith, M. F. (1994) Comment on ªB_y fluctuations in the magnetosheath and azimuthal flow velocity transients in the dayside ionosphereº by Newell and Sibeck. Geophysical Research Letters, 21 (17). pp. 1819-1820. ISSN 00948276 doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/94GL01360 Available at http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/38813/ It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from the work. Published version at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/94GL01360 To link to this article DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/94GL01360 All outputs in CentAUR are protected by Intellectual Property Rights law, including copyright law. Copyright and IPR is retained by the creators or other copyright holders. Terms and conditions for use of this material are defined in the End User Agreement . www.reading.ac.uk/centaur CentAUR Central Archive at the University of Reading Reading's research outputs online GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 21, NO. 17, PAGES 1819-1820, AUGUST 15, 1994 Commenton "Byfluctuations in the magnetosheathand azimuthal flow velocitytransients in the daysideionosphere" by Newell and Sibeck M. Lockwood RutherfordAppleton Laboratory, Chilton, Oxfordshire,U.K. S.W.H. Cowley BlackettLaboratory, Imperial College, London,U.K. M.F. Smith Laboratoryfor ExtraterrestrialPhysics, Goddard SFC, Greenbelt,Maryland, U.S.A. Newelland Sibeck[ 1993] (hereafterN&S) list someobjec- ionosphereinduces flow in the rest of the polar cap" and tions to our interpretationof daysideauroral transients and proceedto demonstratethat the motionof suchtubes through associatedazimuthal flow burstsin termsof pulsedrecom•ec- an otherwisestagnant ionosphere induces flow only in the tion [e.g.Lockwood et al., 1989; 1993a].They presentwhat immediatevicinity of the tube. This discussioncompletely they terman "apparentlyoverlooked" alternative explanation misrepresentsthe C&L model. In fact, C&L describein in terms of steady reconnectionand fluctuationsin the detail how (eg.) a pulse of daysidereconnection alters the magnitudeof theBy component of themagnetosheath field. equilibrium configurationof both the region of open and The objectionsof N&S can all be answeredby referenceto closed flux, generatinglarge scale flows in the magneto- our previouspublications and their alternativeexplanation sphere-ionospheresystem. The "idea" quoted above is was only "overlooked"in so far as it fails to explain the N&S's, is not part of the C&L model and is incorrect. observations.Here we discussjust someof the reasonswhy 3. N&S dismissa large body of evidencethat the solar the objectionsof N&S areinvalid, and then give reasons why wind electricfield doesnot simplymap into the ionosphere, theevents are not simply due to magnetosheathIBylchanges. on timescalesshorter than severalsubstorm cycles, with the phrase"this idea is said to replacethe inapplicableidea of Objectionsof N&S to Bursty Reconnection mapping the solar wind electric field to the ionosphere". They later admit to the possibilityof "dampingof high- 1. N&S state"If the sheathparameters have not changed frequencychanges due to self inductancelimitations". This sincethe openfield linesjust polewardof the NMR merged is true but, without an attemptto define "high frequency", then thoselines too were exposedto preciselythe same meaningless.In this respect,N&S fail to point out that the forcesand shouldmove in the sameway". This we agree inductive circuit analogy they cite [Sanchezet al., 1991] with, given that N&S have renamedwhat we termed the predictsthat the relevanttime constantfor ionosphericflow "newly-openedflux" as a "newly-mergedregion" (NMR). excitation is about 20 min. (Similar values have also been However,despite a correctstatement in their abstract,N&S derived from line-tying arguments,from the EISCAT- incorrectlycontinue their argumentin the main text: "There AMPTE data on ionosphericflow responsesand (by C&L) should be no relative motion observed between the new from the time for newly-openedflux to evolve into the tail mergingand the openlines just poleward.... unless either the lobe). Sanchezet al. stressthat it is even inappropriateto IMF or the magnetosheathflow has changedin the interval map the electricfield over 3-4 hour time scales. betweenthe two mergingepochs". This secondstatement is 4. The argumentsused by N&S aboutpersistence of the in errorbecause it ignoresthe fact that the motion of an open cuspare invalid. N&S state"Observations thus lead us back field line depends on the time elapsed since it was to the conceptthat the cusp is always present".We agree, reconnected.Initially, a newly-openedfield line movesaway with the caveatthat "always"is somethingmore than 80% of fromthe X-line under magnetic "tension". If the IMF IBylis the time [Smithet al., 1992]. However,N&S continue"Day- largethis will yield a strongazimuthal (east/west) flow in the side mergingmust then occur constantly".This is not so. ionosphere.But as the field line evolvesit straightensand Smithet al. pointout that precipitation termed "cusp" persists hencethe tensionforce decays while the sheathflow speed on a newly-openedfield line for over 10 min after it is it experiencesincreases. Hence N&S are not correct when reconnected.Hence for the cuspto be absentrequires that no they statethat the newly-openedflux will move with the reconnectiontake placefor a periodof greaterthan this. The samevelocity as the flux that was openedat someearlier persistenceof a cuspin the observationsN&S cite doesnot time, such that there is no relative motion between them. provethe reconnectionis evencontinuous, let aloneconstant. 2. N&S discussthe Cowleyand Lockwood[1992] (C&L) 5. Despiteciting the Lockwoodet al. [1993a] paperwhich model of ionosphericflow excitation.They state"The idea discusses the differences between observations of 557.7nm- is thatdragging tubes of recoxmectedfield linesthrough the dominant and the associated 630nm-dominant transients, N&S confusethe two. For example,multiple brighteningsof Copyright1994 by the AmericanGeophysical Union. a 557.7nm transient are not a problem for the transient reconnectiontheory - they simply representchanges in the Paper number 94GL01360 stabilityof the requiredupward field alignedcurrent: they are 0094-8534/94/94GL-01360503.00 not seen in the more extensive 630 m-dominant transients. 1819 1820 LOCKWOOD ET AL: COMMENT ON IONOSPHERIC TRANSIENTS Rather,the 630 nm-dominanttransient continuously fades as [Lockwoodet al., 1993b].In addition,Elphic et al. [1990] the newly-opened field lines evolve and fewer sheath reportdayside auroral transients and azimuthalflow enhance- particlesgain accessto the ionosphere.Our modeldescribes mentsseen by EISCAT when the sheathwas directly the 630 nm transientfading at the sunwardedge of the polar observedby ISEE-2at thedayside magnetopause: IBylwas cap whenthe newly-openedflux hasbecome appended to the stable,even during the FTE events(defined by bipolarB N tail lobe: it doesnot penetratefurther into the polar cap [e.g. with a rise in B) that Elphic et al. associatewith the iono- Lockwoodet al., 1993a, figure 1]. N&S state that this is spherictransients (see BM variation in theirFigure 2). These contraryto observation.The 630nm-dominanttransients we eventscannot be interpretedas being due to changesin the have studiedall faded at the sunwardedge of the polar cap magnetosheathBy. [Sandholt et al., 1992]. In summary,the objectionsto ourmodel raised by N&S 6. N&S revive the "rigid moving-cloud"concept, despite areincorrect. The observationsthey cite which fail to detect a full discussionof why that could no longerbe considered thatthe persistent cusp is madeup of a seriesof poleward- applicablein the paperby Smithet al. [1992] citedby N&S. movingtransients do not provethat this is not the case.The Given this discussionby Smith et al., N&S need to justify alternativeexplanation offered by N&S cannotexplain the their assumptionthat the region of newly-openedflux (for observationsof daysideauroral transient/flow burst events enhancedBy) is ellipticaland remains elliptical, despite being whichmove repetitively in oneazimuthal direction, nor those draggedpast other field lines. The changeof shapeof the eventswhich move poleward with little azimuthalmotion and newly-openedflux as the systemreturns to an equilibrium constantplasma flow direction.Because all our observations configurationis an integralpan of our theory [Smith et al., fall into one of thesetwo classes,the model of N&S fails to 1992] and is a vital part of our predictionof the observed explainany of the eventswe have observed. cusp ion energyjumps. Note that Lockwoodet al. [1993a] use an ellipse only for an order of magnitudeestimate of References event area:N&S's conclusionthat only local flow is excited is wholly dependenton their assumptionsof a rigid elliptical Cowley, S.W.H. and M. Lockwood,Excitation and decayof tubedown which the motional solar wind electric field maps. solar-winddriven flows in the magnetosphere-ionosphere 7. N&S argue that sunward-movingevents away from system,Annales Geophys., 10, 103, 1992. nooncatmot map to the noonmagnetosphere where FTEs are Cowley, S.W.H., et al., Dependence of convective observed.In fact, an explanationof suchmapping was given flows and particleprecipitation in the high-latitudedayside by Cowleyet al. [1991]. Likewise,N&S arguethat the large ionosphereon theX
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THEMIS Observations of a Hot Flow Anomaly: Solar Wind, Magnetosheath, and Ground-Based Measurements J
    THEMIS observations of a hot flow anomaly: Solar wind, magnetosheath, and ground-based measurements J. Eastwood, D. Sibeck, V. Angelopoulos, T. Phan, S. Bale, J. Mcfadden, C. Cully, S. Mende, D. Larson, S. Frey, et al. To cite this version: J. Eastwood, D. Sibeck, V. Angelopoulos, T. Phan, S. Bale, et al.. THEMIS observations of a hot flow anomaly: Solar wind, magnetosheath, and ground-based measurements. Geophysical Research Letters, American Geophysical Union, 2008, 35 (17), pp.L17S03. 10.1029/2008GL033475. hal- 03086705 HAL Id: hal-03086705 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03086705 Submitted on 23 Dec 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 35, L17S03, doi:10.1029/2008GL033475, 2008 THEMIS observations of a hot flow anomaly: Solar wind, magnetosheath, and ground-based measurements J. P. Eastwood,1 D. G. Sibeck,2 V. Angelopoulos,3 T. D. Phan,1 S. D. Bale,1,4 J. P. McFadden,1 C. M. Cully,5,6 S. B. Mende,1 D. Larson,1 S. Frey,1 C. W. Carlson,1 K.-H. Glassmeier,7 H. U. Auster,7 A. Roux,8 and O.
    [Show full text]
  • Solar Wind Properties and Geospace Impact of Coronal Mass Ejection-Driven Sheath Regions: Variation and Driver Dependence E
    Solar Wind Properties and Geospace Impact of Coronal Mass Ejection-Driven Sheath Regions: Variation and Driver Dependence E. K. J. Kilpua, D. Fontaine, C. Moissard, M. Ala-lahti, E. Palmerio, E. Yordanova, S. Good, M. M. H. Kalliokoski, E. Lumme, A. Osmane, et al. To cite this version: E. K. J. Kilpua, D. Fontaine, C. Moissard, M. Ala-lahti, E. Palmerio, et al.. Solar Wind Properties and Geospace Impact of Coronal Mass Ejection-Driven Sheath Regions: Variation and Driver Dependence. Space Weather: The International Journal of Research and Applications, American Geophysical Union (AGU), 2019, 17 (8), pp.1257-1280. 10.1029/2019SW002217. hal-03087107 HAL Id: hal-03087107 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03087107 Submitted on 23 Dec 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. RESEARCH ARTICLE Solar Wind Properties and Geospace Impact of Coronal 10.1029/2019SW002217 Mass Ejection-Driven Sheath Regions: Variation and Key Points: Driver Dependence • Variation of interplanetary properties and geoeffectiveness of CME-driven sheaths and their dependence on the E. K. J. Kilpua1 , D. Fontaine2 , C. Moissard2 , M. Ala-Lahti1 , E. Palmerio1 , ejecta properties are determined E.
    [Show full text]
  • Interplanetary Conditions Causing Intense Geomagnetic Storms (Dst 100 Nt) During Solar Cycle 23 (1996–2006) E
    JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 113, A05221, doi:10.1029/2007JA012744, 2008 Interplanetary conditions causing intense geomagnetic storms (Dst ÀÀÀ100 nT) during solar cycle 23 (1996–2006) E. Echer,1 W. D. Gonzalez,1 B. T. Tsurutani,2 and A. L. C. Gonzalez1 Received 21 August 2007; revised 24 January 2008; accepted 8 February 2008; published 30 May 2008. [1] The interplanetary causes of intense geomagnetic storms and their solar dependence occurring during solar cycle 23 (1996–2006) are identified. During this solar cycle, all intense (Dst À100 nT) geomagnetic storms are found to occur when the interplanetary magnetic field was southwardly directed (in GSM coordinates) for long durations of time. This implies that the most likely cause of the geomagnetic storms was magnetic reconnection between the southward IMF and magnetopause fields. Out of 90 storm events, none of them occurred during purely northward IMF, purely intense IMF By fields or during purely high speed streams. We have found that the most important interplanetary structures leading to intense southward Bz (and intense magnetic storms) are magnetic clouds which drove fast shocks (sMC) causing 24% of the storms, sheath fields (Sh) also causing 24% of the storms, combined sheath and MC fields (Sh+MC) causing 16% of the storms, and corotating interaction regions (CIRs), causing 13% of the storms. These four interplanetary structures are responsible for three quarters of the intense magnetic storms studied. The other interplanetary structures causing geomagnetic storms were: magnetic clouds that did not drive a shock (nsMC), non magnetic clouds ICMEs, complex structures resulting from the interaction of ICMEs, and structures resulting from the interaction of shocks, heliospheric current sheets and high speed stream Alfve´n waves.
    [Show full text]
  • Juno Observations of Large-Scale Compressions of Jupiter's Dawnside
    PUBLICATIONS Geophysical Research Letters RESEARCH LETTER Juno observations of large-scale compressions 10.1002/2017GL073132 of Jupiter’s dawnside magnetopause Special Section: Daniel J. Gershman1,2 , Gina A. DiBraccio2,3 , John E. P. Connerney2,4 , George Hospodarsky5 , Early Results: Juno at Jupiter William S. Kurth5 , Robert W. Ebert6 , Jamey R. Szalay6 , Robert J. Wilson7 , Frederic Allegrini6,7 , Phil Valek6,7 , David J. McComas6,8,9 , Fran Bagenal10 , Key Points: Steve Levin11 , and Scott J. Bolton6 • Jupiter’s dawnside magnetosphere is highly compressible and subject to 1Department of Astronomy, University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, Maryland, USA, 2NASA Goddard Spaceflight strong Alfvén-magnetosonic mode Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA, 3Universities Space Research Association, Columbia, Maryland, USA, 4Space Research coupling 5 • Magnetospheric compressions may Corporation, Annapolis, Maryland, USA, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA, 6 7 enhance reconnection rates and Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas, USA, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Texas at San increase mass transport across the Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 8Department of Astrophysical Sciences, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, USA, magnetopause 9Office of the VP for the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, USA, • Total pressure increases inside the 10Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, University of Colorado
    [Show full text]
  • Current Sheets, Magnetic Islands, and Associated Particle Acceleration in the Solar Wind As Observed by Ulysses Near the Ecliptic Plane
    The Astrophysical Journal, 881:116 (20pp), 2019 August 20 https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ab289a © 2019. The American Astronomical Society. All rights reserved. Current Sheets, Magnetic Islands, and Associated Particle Acceleration in the Solar Wind as Observed by Ulysses near the Ecliptic Plane Olga Malandraki1 , Olga Khabarova2,17 , Roberto Bruno3 , Gary P. Zank4 , Gang Li4 , Bernard Jackson5 , Mario M. Bisi6 , Antonella Greco7 , Oreste Pezzi8,9,10 , William Matthaeus11 , Alexandros Chasapis Giannakopoulos11 , Sergio Servidio7, Helmi Malova12,13 , Roman Kislov2,13 , Frederic Effenberger14,15 , Jakobus le Roux4 , Yu Chen4 , Qiang Hu4 , and N. Eugene Engelbrecht16 1 IAASARS, National Observatory of Athens, Penteli, Greece 2 Heliophysical Laboratory, Pushkov Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism, Ionosphere and Radio Wave Propagation of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IZMIRAN), Moscow, Russia; [email protected] 3 Istituto di Astrofisica e Planetologia Spaziali, Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (IAPS-INAF), Roma, Italy 4 Center for Space Plasma and Aeronomic Research (CSPAR) and Department of Space Science, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, AL 35805, USA 5 University of California, San Diego, CASS/UCSD, La Jolla, CA, USA 6 RAL Space, United Kingdom Research and Innovation—Science & Technology Facilities Council—Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Harwell Campus, Oxfordshire, OX11 0QX, UK 7 Physics Department, University of Calabria, Italy 8 Gran Sasso Science Institute, Viale F. Crispi 7, I-67100 L’Aquila, Italy 9 INFN/Laboratori
    [Show full text]
  • The Magnetic Structure of Saturn's Magnetosheath
    JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEACH, VOL. 119, 5651 - 5661, DOI: 10.1002/2014JA020019 The Magnetic Structure of Saturn’s Magnetosheath 1 2 1 3 Ali H. Sulaiman, Adam Masters, Michele K. Dougherty, and Xianzhe Jia __________ Corresponding author: A.H. Sulaiman, Space and Atmospheric Physics, Blackett Laboratory, Imperial College London, London, UK. ([email protected]) 1Space and Atmospheric Physics, Blackett Laboratory, Imperial College London, London, UK. 2Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, 3- 1-1 Yoshinodai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210, Japan. 3Department of Atmospheric, Oceanic and Space Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Page 1 of 31 SULAIMAN ET AL.: MAGNETIC STRUCTURE OF SATURN’S MAGNETOSHEATH Abstract A planet’s magnetosheath extends from downstream of its bow shock up to the magnetopause where the solar wind flow is deflected around the magnetosphere and the solar wind embedded magnetic field lines are draped. This makes the region an important site for plasma turbulence, instabilities, reconnection and plasma depletion layers. A relatively high Alfvén Mach number solar wind and a polar-flattened magnetosphere make the magnetosheath of Saturn both physically and geometrically distinct from the Earth’s. The polar flattening is predicted to affect the magnetosheath magnetic field structure and thus the solar wind-magnetosphere interaction. Here we investigate the magnetic field in the magnetosheath with the expectation that polar flattening is manifested in the overall draping pattern. We compare an accumulation of Cassini data between 2004 and 2010 with global magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) simulations and an analytical model representative of a draped field between axisymmetric boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction Magnetosheath Jets Resulted Database Summary
    Creation & Classification of Magnetosheath Jet Database using Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) Savvas Raptis1, Tomas Karlsson1, Per-Arne L. Lindqvist1 1Space and Plasma Physics, School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden Introduction Simplified Algorithm Resulted Database Magnetosheath Jets are enhancements of dynamic Step 1: Classifying MMS measurements pressure above the general fluctuation level, indicating a local plasma flow. They manifest in the Based on statistical properties: region between the bowshock and the magnetopause of the Earth, called Magnetosheath. Magnetosheath / Solar wind / Magnetosphere Step 2: Finding Jets in magnetosheath region 푃푑푦푛, > 2 1 푃 푑푦푛 ±5 푚푛 Where, 2 푃푑푦푛 = 푚푝푛V 2 Step 3: Combining adjacent Jets (1, 2, … ,n) Figure 1: Visualization of the Quasi parallel and perpendicular region. The ion foreshock is much patchier and disturbed in the quasi parallel case. Figure Courtesy: L. B. Wilson (2016). 푡푒푛푑, − 푡푠푡푎푟푡,+1 < 60 sec 3 Jets are believed to be a key element to the coupling of the solar wind and the magnetosphere while Step 4: Generating High energetic jet database possibly associated with other physical phenomena Saving data for every jet (currently: 푛 = 8499) 푃 > 1 nPa such as magnetic reconnection, auroral features 푑푦푛,푚푎푥 4 and radiations belts. Finally, it is assumed that they are a universal phenomenon that can appear in other Step 5: Subcategories planetary and astrophysical shocks. 1. Quasi Parallel Jets Direct properties – MSH/Jet (MMS) 2. Quasi Perpendicular Jets 3. Boundary • Jet time intervals −푡푠푡푎푟푡, 푡푒푛푑 4. Encapsulated • Magnetic Field − Βx, By, Bz, B 5. Border Jets • Electric Field − E , E , E , E Magnetosheath Jets 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Simulations of Solar Wind – Magnetosheath – Magnetopause Interactions
    132 CONTRIBUTIONS SIMULATIONS OF SOLAR WIND – MAGNETOSHEATH – MAGNETOPAUSE INTERACTIONS SANNI HOILIJOKI FINNISH METEOROLOGICAL INSTITUTE CONTRIBUTIONS No. 132 SIMULATIONS OF SOLAR WIND – MAGNETOSHEATH – MAGNETOPAUSE INTERACTIONS Sanni Hoilijoki Department of Physics Faculty of Science University of Helsinki Helsinki, Finland ACADEMIC DISSERTATION in theoretical physics To be presented, with the permission of the Faculty of Science of the Uni- versity of Helsinki, for public criticism in auditorium E204 at noon (12 o’clock) on May 19th, 2017. Finnish Meteorological Institute Helsinki, 2017 Supervising professor Professor Hannu E. J. Koskinen, University of Helsinki, Finland Thesis supervisor Professor Minna Palmroth, University of Helsinki, Finland Pre-examiners Professor Tuija Pulkkinen, Aalto University, Finland Professor William Lotko, Dartmouth College, USA Opponent Professor Michael W. Liemohn, University of Michigan, USA ISBN 978-952-336-018-1 (paperback) ISBN 978-952-336-019-8 (pdf) ISSN 0782-6117 Erweko Helsinki, 2017 Series title, number and report code of publication Published by Finnish Meteorological Institute Contributions 132, FMI-CONT-132 (Erik Palménin aukio 1) , P.O. Box 503 FIN-00101 Helsinki, Finland Date May 2017 Author Sanni Hoilijoki Title Simulations of solar wind – magnetosheath – magnetopause interactions Abstract This thesis investigates interactions between solar wind and the magnetosphere of the Earth using two global magneto- spheric simulation models, GUMICS-4 and Vlasiator, which are both developed in Finland. The main topic of the thesis is magnetic reconnection at the dayside magnetopause, its drivers and global effects. Magnetosheath mirror mode waves and their evolution, identification and impacts on the local reconnection rates at the magnetopause are also discussed. This thesis consists of four peer-reviewed papers and an introductory part.
    [Show full text]
  • Magnetosheath High‐Speed Jets: Internal Structure and Interaction
    Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics RESEARCH ARTICLE Magnetosheath High-Speed Jets: Internal Structure 10.1002/2017JA024471 and Interaction With Ambient Plasma Special Section: 1 2 3 4,5 1,6 1 Magnetospheric Multiscale F. Plaschke , T. Karlsson , H. Hietala , M. Archer , Z. Vörös , R. Nakamura , (MMS) mission results W. Magnes1 , W. Baumjohann1 , R. B. Torbert7 ,C. T. Russell3 , and B. L. Giles8 throughout the first primary mission phase 1Space Research Institute, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Graz, Austria, 2Space and Plasma Physics, School of Electrical Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, 3Department of Earth, Planetary, and Space Key Points: Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 4School of Physics and Astronomy, Queen Mary University of • Rich internal jet structure resolved London, London, UK, 5Blackett Laboratory, Imperial College, London, UK, 6Institute of Physics, University of Graz, Graz, for the first time revealing large Austria, 7Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans, and Space, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, USA, 8NASA amplitude variations • There are indications of jets stirring Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, USA ambient magnetosheath plasma causing anomalous sunward flows • Jets modify magnetosheath magnetic Abstract For the first time, we have studied the rich internal structure of a magnetosheath high-speed field aligning it with their propagation jet. Measurements by the Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) spacecraft reveal large-amplitude density, direction temperature, and magnetic field variations inside the jet. The propagation velocity and normal direction of planar magnetic field structures (i.e., current sheets and waves) are investigated via four-spacecraft Correspondence to: timing. We find structures to mainly convect with the jet plasma.
    [Show full text]
  • Magnetosheath Electrons at Lunar Distance
    RICE UNIVERSITY Magnetosheath Electrons at Lunar Distance by Patricia R. Moore A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE Thesis Director's Signature: Houston, Texas April, 1974 Magnetosheath Electrons at Lunar Distance by Patricia R. Moore ABSTRACT Properties of the electron population in the magnetosheath at lunar distance have been analyzed using measurements from the Apollo 14 Charged Particle Lunar Environment Experiment (CPLEE). Average magnetopause and bow shock locations are computed, and it is shown that the axis of symmetry of each is aligned with the aberrated solar-wind direction within the standard deviations of the measurements. Measured electron differential-flux spectra are fitted to appropriate distribution functions, and the distribution functions are integrated to yield number densities, most probable thermal energies, and flow velocities based on assumed flow directions. The lowest-energy electrons (40 eV < E < 100 eV) are well characterized by a nearly isotropic Maxwellian distribution, with number densities ranging from -3 -3 about 4-8 (cm ) at the bow shock to 1-3 (cm ) near the magnetopause. Most probable thermal energies fall in the range 15-25 eV. The spectra exhibit non-Maxwellian high-energy "tails", with flux enhance¬ ments at higher energies (100 eV < E < 2000 eV). The high-energy flux is anisotropic, and in general is more intense and more energetic in the dawn sheath, often taking the form of a secondary peak. This secondary peak is similar both in
    [Show full text]
  • Jim Wild Lancaster University
    Double Star, Cluster, and Ground-based Observations of Magnetic Reconnection During an Interval of Duskward-Oriented IMF Jim Wild Lancaster University S.E. Milan, J.A. Davies, C.M. Carr, M.W. Dunlop, E. Lucek, A. Marchaudon, A. N. Fazakerley, R. Fear, J.M. Bosqued, H. Rème, D.M. Wright and H. Laakso (and many, many others!) With grateful acknowledgements to… The EISCAT Scientific Association, SuperDARN PIs, the ACE Science Centre, the IMAGE and SAMNET magnetometer networks and the Cluster & Double Star ground-based working group [email protected] Combining remotely sensed & in situ measurements SuperDARN EISCAT [email protected] Today I will talk about… Present an example (25 th March 2004): • Demonstrate the efficacy of combined space- and ground-based investigations • Dynamics associated with dayside reconnection • Multi-instrument & simple modelling Cluster Double Star EISCAT SuperDARN IMAGE & SAMNET ground magnetometers Doppler Pulsation Experiment (DOPE) [email protected] 25th March 2004: Cluster & Double Star TC1 Cluster B field M’SHEATH M’SPHERE TC1 Electrons Ions Double Star TC1 data [email protected] 25th March 2004: Cluster & Double Star TC1 Cluster B field M’SPHERE M’SHEATH TC1 Electrons Ions Cluster 1 data [email protected] Bipolar signatures of FTEs FGM Electron energy (eV) energy Electron PEACE antiparallelPEACE fluxes “Normal” (+/-) polarity bipolar B N fluctuations observed at Cluster and Double Star! [email protected] The motion of open flux tubes in the magnetosheath V A VA VA Estimate
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 14-15: Planetary Magnetospheres
    Lecture 14-15: Planetary magnetospheres o Today’s topics: o Planetary magnetic fields. o Interaction of solar wind with solar system objects. o Planetary magnetospheres. Venus in the solar wind o Click on “About Venus” at http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Venus_Express/ Planetary magnetism o Conducting fluid in motion generates magnetic field. o Earth’s liquid outer core is conducting fluid => free electrons are released from metals (Fe & Ni) by friction and heat. o Variations in the global magnetic field represent changes in fluid flow in the core. o Defined magnetic field implies a planet has: 1. A large, liquid core 2. A core rich in metals 3. A high rotation rate o These three properties are required for a planet to generate an intrinsic magnetosphere. Planetary magnetism o Earth: Satisfies all three. Earth is only Earth terrestrial planet with a strong B-field. o Moon: No B-field today. It has no core or it solidified and ceased convection. o Mars: No B-field today. Core solidified. o Venus: Molten layer, but has a slow, 243 day Mars rotation period => too slow to generate field. o Mercury: Rotation period 59 days, small B- field. Possibly due to large core, or magnetised crust, or loss of crust on impact. o Jupiter: Has large B-field, due to large liquid, metallic core, which is rotating quickly. Planetary magnetic fields o Gauss showed that the magnetic field of the Earth could be described by: ˆ ˆ B = −µ0∇V (rˆ ) = −µ ∇ˆ (V i + V e ) 0 where Vi is the magnetic scalar potential due to sources inside the Earth, and Ve is the scalar€ potential due to external sources.
    [Show full text]