The Transition Between Antiparallel and Component Magnetic Reconnection at Earth's Dayside Magnetopause

Trattner, K. J.; Burch, J. L.; Cassak, P. A.; Ergun, R. E.; Eriksson, S.; Fuselier, S. A.; Giles, B. L.; Gomez, R. G.; Grimes, E. W.; Petrinec, S. M.; Webster, J.; Wilder, F. D.

doi:10.1029/2018ja026081

Cited by 13 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Here we use the maximum magnetic shear model by Trattner et al () to estimate the possible source region of FTE cascades. The FTE cascades in our study appear during those IMF conditions (southward IMF with a strong B y component) for which the maximum magnetic shear model gives an excellent agreement with observations of normal reconnection events (Trattner et al, , , , ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…These include, according to Trattner et al (2012), pure southward IMF and dominant IMF B x cases (the model predicts in those cases only reconnection along bifurcated antiparallel reconnection regions, which could not be confirmed observationally) and equinox and midwinter cases with IMF clock angles around 140°and 240° (Trattner et al, 2017). As shown in Trattner et al (2018), the equinox and midwinter deviations disappear when extending the antiparallel reconnection regions to include all field lines that contain antiparallel reconnection somewhere along the field lines. The model deviation from observations for pure southward and dominant B x with observations still needs to be resolved.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Difference Between Isolated Flux Transfer Events and Flux Transfer Event Cascades

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This flux transfer event (FTE) study is based on 984 FTEs originally identified by Wang et al. (2005, https://doi:10.1029/2005JA011150) in Cluster data. Due to Cluster's orbit, the FTE list exclusively contains events detected at the high‐latitude dayside magnetopause and low‐latitude flanks. The focus of this study is on FTE separation time. The results show that FTEs appearing in cascades are mainly located at the northern dusk and southern dawn magnetopause, while isolated FTEs are equally spread over the region covered by Cluster. This difference may be explained by the different interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) conditions during which the subsets occur. For isolated FTEs, average IMF By is close to zero. During such conditions, FTEs are expected to form at arbitrary longitudes along an equatorial merging line. After formation, they propagate northward and southward, causing an equal distribution at higher latitudes. In contrast, FTE cascades typically occur during weakly southward IMF with a negative By component. Their asymmetric distribution at higher latitudes is consistent with both the component and the antiparallel merging model for nonzero By. In both scenarios, newly formed FTEs are expected to move to the northern dusk and southern dawn regions, as observed. Many FTE cascades appearing during northward IMF are located close to the low‐latitude flanks, confirming previous reports. We discovered that such FTEs appear during large IMF values. Another new result is that 16% of all isolated FTEs appear during small IMF cone angles, suggesting that these may form as a result of magnetosheath jets impacting on the magnetopause.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Difference Between Isolated Flux Transfer Events and Flux Transfer Event Cascades

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The models used in this study require the upstream solar wind observations as input parameters to create magnetic shear angle plots for the magnetopause. To determine the correct solar wind convection times to the magnetopause for the upstream observations by the Wind satellite (Lepping et al, 1995; Ogilvie et al, 1995), solar wind magnetic field rotations observed at the Wind satellite are individually lined‐up with the magnetosheath magnetic field rotations observed by MMS/FGM (e.g., Trattner, Burch, et al, 2017; Trattner et al, 2018).…”

Section: Observationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the dawn sector, the anti‐parallel reconnection region is located in the northern hemisphere and extends straight toward the northern cusp. In the dusk sector, the anti‐parallel reconnection region is wrapped around both hemispheres, creating a shape resembling a “Hook” (e.g., Trattner et al, 2018), before extending to the southern cusp region. The white line crossing the dayside magnetopause represents the location of the predicted component reconnection tilted X‐line based on the maximum magnetic shear model.…”

Section: Observationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The process occurs in a relatively small region known as the electron diffusion region (e.g., Burch, Torbert, et al, 2016, Burch & Phan, 2016; Chen et al, 2017; Eriksson et al, 2016; Fuselier et al, 2017; Khotyaintsev et al, 2016; Lavraud et al, 2016; Norgren et al, 2016). In addition to micro‐scale results, observations from this mission have also improved our understanding of the location of the magnetopause reconnection locations during various solar wind and IMF conditions (e.g., Trattner et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The 18 November 2015 Magnetopause Crossing: The GEM Dayside Kinetic Challenge Event Observed by MMS/HPCA

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At Earth's dayside magnetopause, the fundamental process known as magnetic reconnection is responsible for connecting geomagnetic field lines to interplanetary magnetic field lines and converting magnetic energy into particle energy and heat. As part of a coordinated analysis effort by the Geospace Environment Modeling (GEM) community to determine the reconnection location and other aspects of reconnection, a magnetopause crossing by the Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) mission on 18 November 2015 was selected. The crossing occurred during stable solar wind and dominantly southward interplanetary magnetic field conditions. The MMS satellites were located close to the subsolar region and observed southward accelerated ion jets during encounters with the magnetopause boundary layers, indicating the presence of an active X‐line north of the satellites. Using proton distributions from the Hot Plasma Composition Analyzer (HPCA) instruments, the distance from the spacecraft to the reconnection site was initially determined to be between 5 to 7 RE. A slight rotation of the interplanetary magnetic field caused a change of the magnetic topology at the magnetopause. This topology change produced conditions which are known to change the location of the X‐line. After the change, the location of the component reconnection line was estimated to be less than 4 RE, but most likely was much closer to the observing satellites.

show abstract

The Location of Magnetic Reconnection at Earth’s Magnetopause

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the major questions about magnetic reconnection is how specific solar wind and interplanetary magnetic field conditions influence where reconnection occurs at the Earth’s magnetopause. There are two reconnection scenarios discussed in the literature: a) anti-parallel reconnection and b) component reconnection. Early spacecraft observations were limited to the detection of accelerated ion beams in the magnetopause boundary layer to determine the general direction of the reconnection X-line location with respect to the spacecraft. An improved view of the reconnection location at the magnetopause evolved from ionospheric emissions observed by polar-orbiting imagers. These observations and the observations of accelerated ion beams revealed that both scenarios occur at the magnetopause. Improved methodology using the time-of-flight effect of precipitating ions in the cusp regions and the cutoff velocity of the precipitating and mirroring ion populations was used to pinpoint magnetopause reconnection locations for a wide range of solar wind conditions. The results from these methodologies have been used to construct an empirical reconnection X-line model known as the Maximum Magnetic Shear model. Since this model’s inception, several tests have confirmed its validity and have resulted in modifications to the model for certain solar wind conditions. This review article summarizes the observational evidence for the location of magnetic reconnection at the Earth’s magnetopause, emphasizing the properties and efficacy of the Maximum Magnetic Shear Model.

show abstract

The Transition Between Antiparallel and Component Magnetic Reconnection at Earth's Dayside Magnetopause

Cited by 13 publications

References 50 publications

The Difference Between Isolated Flux Transfer Events and Flux Transfer Event Cascades

The Difference Between Isolated Flux Transfer Events and Flux Transfer Event Cascades

The 18 November 2015 Magnetopause Crossing: The GEM Dayside Kinetic Challenge Event Observed by MMS/HPCA

The Location of Magnetic Reconnection at Earth’s Magnetopause

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About