2014
DOI: 10.5194/angeo-32-925-2014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Radial diffusion simulations of the 20 September 2007 radiation belt dropout

Abstract: Abstract. This is a study of a dropout of radiation belt electrons, associated with an isolated solar wind density pulse on 20 September 2007, as seen by the solid-state telescopes (SST) detectors on THEMIS (Time History of Events and Macroscale Interactions during Substorms). Omnidirectional fluxes were converted to phase space density at constant invariants M = 700 MeV G −1 and K = 0.014 R E G 1/2 , with the assumption of local pitch angle α ≈ 80 • and using the T04 magnetic field model. The last closed drif… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Rapid, large‐scale dropouts of radiation belt electrons, usually (though not only) seen during the main phase of storms, are not well understood. Both outward radial diffusion and precipitation due to pitch angle scattering by cyclotron‐resonant waves are frequently invoked, but as currently modeled, they seem insufficiently effective at L ∗ ∼4 or below and at energy below ∼1 MeV, respectively (Albert, ; Morley et al, ; Turner et al, ; Yu et al, ). Here L ∗ , or Roederer L , is the well‐known quantity corresponding to the third adiabatic invariant associated with azimuthal drift around the Earth.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rapid, large‐scale dropouts of radiation belt electrons, usually (though not only) seen during the main phase of storms, are not well understood. Both outward radial diffusion and precipitation due to pitch angle scattering by cyclotron‐resonant waves are frequently invoked, but as currently modeled, they seem insufficiently effective at L ∗ ∼4 or below and at energy below ∼1 MeV, respectively (Albert, ; Morley et al, ; Turner et al, ; Yu et al, ). Here L ∗ , or Roederer L , is the well‐known quantity corresponding to the third adiabatic invariant associated with azimuthal drift around the Earth.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Parallel to the acceleration processes, there have been two dominant loss paradigms (Albert, ). One paradigm (Li et al, ) is the radial loss to the magnetopause (boundary of the magnetosphere).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The existence in the inner magnetosphere of rapid dropouts of almost whole populations of energetic electrons (with energies E ∼25–200 keV) is now well known [e.g., see Millan and Thorne , ; Morley et al , ; Turner et al , , , ; Albert , ; Gao et al , ; Hwang et al , , and references therein], as well as the disappearance in various situations of nearly equatorially mirroring energetic electrons, leading to the formation of so‐called butterfly distributions in equatorial pitch angle α 0 [e.g., see Gannon et al , ; Gu et al , ; Zhao et al , ]. Such rapid variations of the distribution of energetic electrons may have profound and direct mitigating consequences on internal charging hazards inside various spacecrafts [e.g., see Mulligan‐Skov et al , ; Tian et al , ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…And more specifically, how to solve the problem of nearly equatorially mirroring energetic electron scattering and loss? During storm periods of strong magnetic field perturbations and/or high L > 6 (with L McIlwain's number), drift shell splitting and enhanced outward radial diffusion up to the magnetopause can certainly operate [ Sibeck et al , ; Shprits et al , ; Kim et al , ; Albert , ; Turner et al , ]. Magnetopause shadowing may progressively entail losses at lower L , down to L ∼ 4, due to strong radial diffusion by ultralow frequency (ULF) waves in the presence of a steeply decreasing phase space density toward higher L [ Elkington et al , ; Shprits et al , ; Ukhorskiy et al , ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation