Geomagnetic field fluctuations during the passage at the Earth’s orbit of the tail of the 15–16 July 2000 ejecta

Francia, P.; Lepidi, S.; Yumoto, K.

doi:10.5194/angeo-20-1143-2002

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In conflict with these findings, Baker et al [2003] surveyed 10 years of CANOPUS Churchill line observations and concluded for no enhancements in the frequency distribution. Analysis at other sites reported similar sets of repeated frequencies [Provan and Yeoman, 1997;Chisham and Orr, 1997;Mathie et al, 1999;Francia and Villante, 1997;Villante et al, 2001;Francia et al, 2002Francia et al, , 2005Norouzi-Sedeh et al, 2015].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 62%

The identification of solar wind waves at discrete frequencies and the role of the spectral analysis techniques

Matteo

Villante

2017

JGR Space Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The occurrence of waves at discrete frequencies in the solar wind (SW) parameters has been reported in the scientific literature with some controversial results, mostly concerning the existence (and stability) of favored sets of frequencies. On the other hand, the experimental results might be influenced by the analytical methods adopted for the spectral analysis. We focused attention on the fluctuations of the SW dynamic pressure (PSW) occurring in the leading edges of streams following interplanetary shocks and compared the results of the Welch method (WM) with those of the multitaper method (MTM). The results of a simulation analysis demonstrate that the identification of the wave occurrence and the frequency estimate might be strongly influenced by the signal characteristics and analytical methods, especially in the presence of multicomponent signals. In SW streams, PSW oscillations are routinely detected in the entire range f ≈ 1.2–5.0 mHz; nevertheless, the WM/MTM agreement in the identification and frequency estimate occurs in ≈50% of events and different sets of favored frequencies would be proposed for the same set of events by the WM and MTM analysis. The histogram of the frequency distribution of the events identified by both methods suggests more relevant percentages between f ≈ 1.7–1.9, f ≈ 2.7–3.4, and f ≈ 3.9–4.4 (with a most relevant peak at f ≈ 4.2 mHz). Extremely severe thresholds select a small number (14) of remarkable events, with a one‐to‐one correspondence between WM and MTM: interestingly, these events reveal a tendency for a favored occurrence in bins centered at f ≈ 2.9 and at f ≈ 4.2 mHz.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 62%

The identification of solar wind waves at discrete frequencies and the role of the spectral analysis techniques

Matteo

Villante

2017

JGR Space Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… Mathie et al [1999] presented further occurrence of a discrete frequency at f ≈ 4.0–4.2 mHz. Moreover, studies of single events showed that oscillations at discrete frequencies are often associated with the arrival of coronal mass ejections and/or the impact of pulses of the solar wind (SW) dynamic pressure on the magnetopause [ Shimazu et al , 1995; Villante et al , 1998; Lepidi et al , 1999; Francia et al , 2002]. These fluctuations were basically interpreted in terms of global cavity/waveguide modes of the entire magnetosphere [ Kivelson et al , 1984; Kivelson and Southwood , 1985, 1986; Allan et al , 1986; Samson et al , 1991, 1992]; consequently, discrete frequencies are now currently known also as “CMS” frequencies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long‐period oscillations at discrete frequencies: A comparative analysis of ground, magnetospheric, and interplanetary observations

et al. 2007

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[1] The power spectra of remarkable events of long-period fluctuations of the geomagnetic field (as identified at a low-latitude station, L'Aquila, l % 36°) reveal a tendency for a repeated occurrence of power enhancements in the same frequency bands (f % 0.9-1.0, 1.2-1.4, 2.1-2.3, 2.5-2.7 mHz), often coincident with CMS frequencies. In four cases the data availability and the results of the spectral analysis allowed unambiguous conclusions on the correspondence between ground, magnetospheric, and solar wind fluctuations. For most wave packets, the comparative analysis reveals an unprecedented one-to-one correspondence in terms of frequency, onset, and duration; it suggests that geomagnetic fluctuations can be driven directly by fluctuations of the solar wind density at the same frequencies. On the other hand, the repeated occurrence in the same frequency bands and some evidence for amplification processes suggest additional contributions possibly related with cavity/waveguide resonances.Citation: Villante, U., P. Francia, M. Vellante, P. Di Giuseppe, A. Nubile, and M. Piersanti (2007), Long-period oscillations at discrete frequencies: A comparative analysis of ground, magnetospheric, and interplanetary observations,

show abstract

“…4, no clear phase delay appears between stations located at different longitudes but at similar latitudes. Francia et al (2002) showed the solar wind pressure variations correspondence in the geomagnetic oscillation observed on July 16, 2000. The toroidal standing Alfven waves might be coupled to impulsive fast mode waves by solar wind dynamic pressure perturbation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Energetic Electron and Proton Interactions with Pc5 Ultra Low Frequency (ULF) Waves during the Great Geomagnetic Storm of 15–16 July 2000

Lee¹,

Mann²,

Ozeke³

2022

Journal of Astronomy and Space Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dynamics of the outer zone radiation belt has received a lot of attention mainly due to the correlation between the occurrence of enhancing relativistic electron flux and spacecraft operation anomalies or even failures (e.g., Baker et al. 1994). Relativistic electron events are often observed during great storms associated with ultra low frequency (ULF) waves. For example, a large buildup of relativistic electrons was observed during the great storm of March 24, 1991 (e.g., Li et al. 1993; Hudson et al. 1995; Mann et al. 2013). However, the dominant processes which accelerate magnetospheric radiation belt electrons to MeV energies are not well understood. In this paper, we present observations of Pc5 ULF waves in the recovery phase of the Bastille day storm of July 16, 2000 and electron and proton flux simultaneously oscillating with the same frequencies as the waves. The mechanism for the observed electron and proton flux modulations is examined using groundbased and satellite observations. During this storm time, multiple packets of discrete frequency Pc5 ULF waves appeared associated with energetic particle flux oscillations. We model the drift paths of electrons and protons to determine if the particles drift through the ULF wave to understand why some particle fluxes are modulated by the ULF waves and others are not. We also analyze the flux oscillations of electrons and protons as a function of energy to determine if the particle modulations are caused by a ULF wave drift resonance or advection of a particle density gradient. We suggest that the energetic electron and proton modulations by Pc5 ULF waves provide further evidence in support of the important role that ULF waves play in outer radiation belt dyanamics during storm times.

show abstract

Geomagnetic field fluctuations during the passage at the Earth’s orbit of the tail of the 15–16 July 2000 ejecta

Cited by 6 publications

References 40 publications

The identification of solar wind waves at discrete frequencies and the role of the spectral analysis techniques

The identification of solar wind waves at discrete frequencies and the role of the spectral analysis techniques

Long‐period oscillations at discrete frequencies: A comparative analysis of ground, magnetospheric, and interplanetary observations

Energetic Electron and Proton Interactions with Pc5 Ultra Low Frequency (ULF) Waves during the Great Geomagnetic Storm of 15–16 July 2000

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About