Stable reconnection at the dusk flank magnetopause

Gomez, R. G.; Vines, S. K.; Fuselier, S. A.; Cassak, P. A.; Strangeway, R. J.; Petrinec, S. M.; Burch, J. L.; Trattner, K. J.; Russell, C. T.; Torbert, R. B.; Pollock, C. J.; Young, D. T.; Lewis, W. S.; Mukherjee, J.

doi:10.1002/2016gl069692

Cited by 8 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 36 publications

(82 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If the magnetosheath flow is between 1 and 2 times the Alfvén speed, then reconnection X‐lines may convect with the magnetosheath flow such that the flow is Alfvénic in the deHoffmann‐Teller frame [see, e.g., Gosling et al , ], but reconnection is not possible if the magnetosheath flow is faster. Observations at the high‐latitude magnetopause [ Fuselier et al , ; Lavraud et al , ] and on the flanks [ Gomez et al , ] of stable reconnection X‐lines in magnetosheath flow conditions that were marginally sub‐Alfvénic appear to support this suggestion. However, there is also evidence of motion of the X‐line in the presence of magnetosheath flow [ Wilder et al , ] and a suggestion that an isolated reconnection X‐line may convect with the flow even if the flow is sub‐Alfvénic [ Doss et al , ].…”

Section: Magnetosheath Flow Velocitiesmentioning

confidence: 91%

Large‐scale characteristics of reconnection diffusion regions and associated magnetopause crossings observed by MMS

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) mission was designed to make observations in the very small electron diffusion region (EDR), where magnetic reconnection takes place. From a data set of over 4500 magnetopause crossings obtained in the first phase of the mission, MMS had encounters near or within 12 EDRs. These 12 events and associated magnetopause crossings are considered as a group to determine if they span the widest possible range of external and internal conditions (i.e., in the solar wind and magnetosphere). In addition, observations from MMS are used to determine if there are multiple X‐lines present and also to provide information on X‐line location relative to the spacecraft. These 12 events represent nearly the widest possible range of conditions at the dayside magnetopause. They occur over a wide range of local times and magnetic shear angles between the magnetosheath and magnetospheric magnetic fields. Most show evidence for multiple reconnection sites.

show abstract

Section: Magnetosheath Flow Velocitiesmentioning

confidence: 91%

Large‐scale characteristics of reconnection diffusion regions and associated magnetopause crossings observed by MMS

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bursts of ≥500 eV electrons in the MSBL that switch from being primarily antiparallel streaming (relative to the magnetic field) to parallel streaming or vice versa provide independent evidence of the proximity of an X line to the spacecraft. Both of these types of observations indicate connection to a nearby reconnection site that is moving relatively northward or southward over the spacecraft [see Gomez et al ., ] or passing through the reconnection site in or near the diffusion region [see Wilder et al ., ]. Finally, oppositely directed ion jets or oppositely directed electron bursts observed on two different spacecraft provide a third, independent way to demonstrate that the spacecraft were “straddling” a reconnection X line.…”

Section: Survey Methodology and Data Setsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Shown in Figure 1, C1 is northward and duskward of C3 and is north of the predicted component reconnection line. If the flow reversals observed by C1 were a consequence of the reconnection line responding to changes in the IMF, a mechanism suggested by Gomez et al [2016] and Trattner et al [2016], then C1 should have observed northward ion jets primarily. For C1, then, the motion of the reconnection site inferred from the ion flow reversals could be due to magnetic islands convecting away from the primary reconnection site, or possibly from observations of a second, active reconnection site at higher latitudes.…”

Section: Shown Inmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Occurrence frequency and location of magnetic islands at the dayside magnetopause

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simulations of magnetic reconnection often predict the formation of magnetic islands forming and propagating out through the reconnection exhaust region. However, to date, only a few observations of magnetic islands at the Earth's magnetopause have been identified and analyzed. Crossings near reconnection sites at the dayside magnetopause by Cluster from 2001 to 2009 are examined in a systematic effort to determine the frequency and location of magnetic islands. Using the maximum magnetic shear model as a guide for the distance to the reconnection site, 47 magnetopause crossings within 3 RE of the predicted reconnection site are examined. The occurrence of island structures in the reconnection exhaust is investigated in the context of how the type of reconnection, antiparallel or component, affects the frequency of formation of the islands. For Cluster magnetopause crossings confirmed to be near reconnection sites, island signatures, primarily bidirectional streaming electrons in the magnetosheath boundary layer, are seen for approximately 85% of the crossings and are common features for both antiparallel and component reconnection.

show abstract

“…Combining simple mathematical expressions to approximate the global picture of conditions adjacent to a planetary magnetopause has been extensively used to investigate the interaction between the solar wind and Earth's magnetosphere (Cooling et al, ; Crooker, ; Dunlop et al, ; Fuselier et al, , , ; Gomez et al, ; Kobel & Flückiger, ; Komar et al, ; Luhmann et al, ; Petrinec & Russell, ; Petrinec et al, , , , ; Souza et al, ; Trattner et al, , , , , , ; Vines et al, ; Wilder et al, ). This considerable terrestrial modeling heritage formed the foundation of recent, similar investigations of the solar wind interaction with Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune (Masters, , , ), and these giant planet models are precursors of the present Jupiter model.…”

Section: Modeling Conditions At Jupiter's Magnetopause Under Steady Smentioning

confidence: 99%

Model‐Based Assessments of Magnetic Reconnection and Kelvin‐Helmholtz Instability at Jupiter's Magnetopause

Masters

2017

JGR Space Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interaction between the solar wind and Jupiter's magnetic field confines the planetary field to the largest magnetosphere in the Solar System. However, the full picture of when and where key processes operate at the magnetopause boundary of the system remains unclear. This is essential for testing understanding with observations and for determining the relative importance of different drivers of Jovian magnetospheric dynamics. Here we present a global analytical model of Jovian magnetopause conditions under steady state, which forms the basis of boundary process assessments. Sites of magnetic reconnection at Jupiter's magnetopause are expected to be in regions of sufficiently high magnetic shear across the boundary, controlled by the orientation of the interplanetary magnetic field. Reconnection rates are also most sensitive to changes in the highly variable IMF, followed by changes in the solar wind plasma mass density. The largest plasma flow shear across the boundary is in the equatorial dawn region, producing a region that is typically unstable to growth of the Kelvin‐Helmholtz (K‐H) instability. Compared to magnetopause reconnection site locations, this K‐H‐unstable region at dawn is less sensitive to changing conditions. Motion of K‐H boundary perturbations typically includes dawn‐to‐dusk motion across the subsolar region. Model‐predicted reconnection voltages are typically hundreds of kV but rely on steady solar wind conditions on a time scale that is longer than typical at Jupiter's orbit. How the reconnection voltage compares to the voltage applied due to the “viscous‐like” interaction involving K‐H instability remains unclear.

show abstract

Stable reconnection at the dusk flank magnetopause

Cited by 8 publications

References 36 publications

Large‐scale characteristics of reconnection diffusion regions and associated magnetopause crossings observed by MMS

Large‐scale characteristics of reconnection diffusion regions and associated magnetopause crossings observed by MMS

Occurrence frequency and location of magnetic islands at the dayside magnetopause

Model‐Based Assessments of Magnetic Reconnection and Kelvin‐Helmholtz Instability at Jupiter's Magnetopause

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About