2011
DOI: 10.1007/s11214-011-9820-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Properties of Near-Earth Magnetic Reconnection from In-Situ Observations

Abstract: Many properties of magnetic reconnection have been determined from in-situ spacecraft observations in the Earth's magnetosphere. Recent studies have focused on ion scale lengths and have largely confirmed theoretical predictions. In addition, some interesting features of reconnection regions on electron scale lengths have been identified. These recent studies have demonstrated the need for combined plasma and field measurements on electron scale lengths in the reconnection diffusion regions at the magnetopause… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
51
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

4
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 77 publications
(52 citation statements)
references
References 92 publications
(139 reference statements)
1
51
0
Order By: Relevance
“…where B MP is the magnitude of the magnetic field immediately inside the magnetopause current layer (DiBraccio et al, 2013;Fuselier & Lewis, 2011;Sonnerup et al, 1981), is provided in ninth column from the left in Table 1.…”
Section: Messenger Magnetometer and Fips Observations Of Hcm Eventsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where B MP is the magnitude of the magnetic field immediately inside the magnetopause current layer (DiBraccio et al, 2013;Fuselier & Lewis, 2011;Sonnerup et al, 1981), is provided in ninth column from the left in Table 1.…”
Section: Messenger Magnetometer and Fips Observations Of Hcm Eventsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A model used at the Earth to predict where the reconnection site is located is the maximum magnetic shear model, developed by Trattner et al (2007). This model has been successfully validated at the Earth in numerous studies (i.e., Trattner et al, 2012;Fuselier & Lewis, 2011;Dunlop et al, 2011;Petrinec et al, 2011). The maximum magnetic shear model drapes a given IMF over an axisymmetric magnetopause by use of an IMF draping model by Kobel and Flückiger (1994).…”
Section: Modeling the Reconnection Location At The Magnetopausementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Assessing the scientific merit of candidate Phase 1 orbits requires knowledge of the statistical location of the reconnection line at the magnetopause. However, establishing the statistical location of the reconnection line is difficult using data from spacecraft magnetopause crossings (see, e.g., Fuselier and Lewis 2011) because it is difficult to determine the location of the reconnection line except when a spacecraft encounters it. These encounters are rare (e.g., , and there are no good statistics on the location of reconnection at the magnetopause from these individual encounters.…”
Section: Phase 1: Targeting the Diffusion Region On The Dayside Magnementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, the ratio of the thickness to the width of the diffusion region is defined by the reconnection rate, and this rate is poorly determined (see, e.g., Fuselier et al 2010 andLewis 2011). At one extreme, the diffusion region at the magnetopause could be as thin as 1 km and the width could be <10 km.…”
Section: Formation Scale Sizementioning
confidence: 99%