Physics‐Based Analytical Model of the Planetary Bow Shock Position and Shape

Abstract

Studies of physical processes near the Earth and near other planets often require a robust and convenient bow shock model for data classification and analysis. These processes include: Electron and ion foreshock formation, plasma wave generation by secularly and diffusely reflected ions, mechanisms of the solar wind deceleration in the shock foot and shock itself, plasma wave propagation along the shock surface, processes of shock overshoot formation, plasma turbulence generation inside the magnetosheath, generation of micropulsations at the bow shock and magnetopause, etc.The bow shock can be modeled using several different approaches. For example, magneto-hydrodynamics (MHD) description of solar wind interaction with a planet is often used (e.g.,

A Fast Bow Shock Location Predictor‐Estimator From 2D and 3D Analytical Models: Application to Mars and the MAVEN Mission

“…( 2003 ) and recently in Kotova et al. ( 2021 ). These studies present analytical functions describing the curvature, bluntness, and skewing angle of the shock structure, which are arguably better suited to the fitting of the shock flanks; they are applicable to many planetary bow shock conditions.…”

“…Thus, in these two cases, no physical interpretation should be drawn from the axes orientations of the ellipsoid and the fit should only be valid for near‐subsolar crossings. More robust physics‐based analytical models could be used to overcome these fitting issues (Kotova et al., 2021 ).…”

A fast bow shock location predictor-estimator from 2D and 3D analytical models: Application to Mars and the MAVEN mission

“…Thus, in these two cases, no physical interpretation should be drawn from the axes orientations of the ellipsoid and the fit should be only valid for near-subsolar crossings. More robust physics-based analytical models could be used to overcome these fitting issues (Kotova et al, 2021).…”

“…More advanced physics-based models have also been proposed as a complement to those empirical attempts. A good introduction into analytical models of the bow shock, based on gas dynamic theory and magnetohydrodynamics solutions, is given in Verigin et al (2003) and recently in Kotova et al (2021). These studies present analytical functions describing the curvature, bluntness and skewing angle of the shock structure, which are arguably better suited to the fitting of the shock flanks; they are applicable to many planetary bow shock conditions.…”

Strong Bow Shocks: Turbulence and an Exact Self-similar Asymptotic

“…The bow shock with infinite Mach number is a classic problem dating back many decades with analytical formulations discussed in the works of Chester (1956aChester ( , 1956b, Freeman (1956), van Dyke (1957), Hayes & Probstein (1959), and Yakura (1962), to name a few of the earliest works in the hydrodynamics approximation. However, even magnetospheric bow shocks can be studied in the hydrodynamic limit given that the Alfvén and slow rotational magnetosonic waves remain small while the magnetohydrodynamic Mach number is large (Spreiter et al 1966;Spreiter & Stahara 1980;Slavin & Holzer 1981;Verigin et al 2003;Kotova et al 2020Kotova et al , 2021. In this work, we are interested in the asymptotic shape of the bow shock far from the obstacle in the astrophysical context, and we highlight the steady-state solution that was explored with direct hydrodynamical simulation in Yalinewich & Sari (2016, hereafter YS16).…”