Dynamic Coupling of Magnetosphere and Ionosphere/Thermosphere

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Bimodal Solar Wind-Magnetosphere- Ionosphere System George Siscoe Center for Space Physics Boston University ●Vasyliunas Dichotomization Momentum transfer.
Advertisements

MURI,2008 Electric Field Variability and Impact on the Thermosphere Yue Deng 1,2, Astrid Maute 1, Arthur D. Richmond 1 and Ray G. Roble 1 1.HAO National.
Generation of the transpolar potential Ramon E. Lopez Dept. of Physics UT Arlington.
MHD Simulations of the January 10-11, 1997 Magnetic Storm Scientific visualizations provide both scientist and the general public with unprecedented view.
Principles of Global Modeling Paul Song Department of Physics, and Center for Atmospheric Research, University of Massachusetts Lowell Introduction Principles.
Auroral dynamics EISCAT Svalbard Radar: field-aligned beam  complicated spatial structure (
Magnetohydrodynamic waves
The Structure of the Parallel Electric Field and Particle Acceleration During Magnetic Reconnection J. F. Drake M.Swisdak M. Shay M. Hesse C. Cattell University.
Carlson et al. ‘01 Three Characteristic Acceleration Regions.
Relation Between Electric Fields and Ionospheric/magnetospheric Plasma Flows at Very Low Latitudes Paul Song Center for Atmospheric Research University.
Global Distribution / Structure of Aurora Photograph by Jan Curtis Synthetic Aurora pre- midnight,multi-banded Resonant ULF waves produce pre- midnight,
5. Simplified Transport Equations We want to derive two fundamental transport properties, diffusion and viscosity. Unable to handle the 13-moment system.
Generation of field-aligned currents by solar wind impulse S. Fujita Meteorological College.
Inductive-Dynamic Magnetosphere-Ionosphere Coupling via MHD Waves Jiannan Tu Center for Atmospheric Research University of Massachusetts Collaborators:
Figure 1: show a causal chain for how Joule heating occurs in the earth’s ionosphere Figure 5: Is of the same format as figure four but the left panels.
Next Generation of Magnetosphere- Ionosphere-Thermosphere Coupling Models P. Song University of Massachusetts Lowell Acknowledgments: V. M. Vasyliūnas,
Collisions and transport phenomena Collisions in partly and fully ionized plasmas Typical collision parameters Conductivity and transport coefficients.
Challenging problems in kinetic simulation of turbulence and transport in tokamaks Yang Chen Center for Integrated Plasma Studies University of Colorado.
Vytenis M. Vasyliūnas Max-Planck-Institut für Sonnensystemforschung,
Thursday, May 14, 2009Cluster Workshop – UppsalaR. J. Strangeway – 1 The Auroral Acceleration Region: Lessons from FAST, Questions for Cluster Robert J.
1 Cambridge 2004 Wolfgang Baumjohann IWF/ÖAW Graz, Austria With help from: R. Nakamura, A. Runov, Y. Asano & V.A. Sergeev Magnetotail Transport and Substorms.
Boundaries, shocks, and discontinuities. How discontinuities form Often due to “wave steepening” Example in ordinary fluid: –V s 2 = dP/d  m –P/  
Chromosphere Model: Heating, Structures, and Circulation P. Song 1, and V. M. Vasyliūnas 1,2 1.Center for Atmospheric Research, University of Massachusetts.
Space Science MO&DA Programs - September Page 1 SS It is known that the aurora is created by intense electron beams which impact the upper atmosphere.
PAPER I. ENA DATA ANALYSIS RESULTS. The Imager for Magnetopause-to- Aurora Global Exploration (IMAGE) missionis the first NASA Mid-size Explorer (MIDEX)
1 Non-neutral Plasma Shock HU Xiwei (胡希伟) 工 HU Xiwei (胡希伟) HE Yong (何勇) HE Yong (何勇) Hu Yemin (胡业民) Hu Yemin (胡业民) Huazhong University of Science and.
Introduction to Space Weather Jie Zhang CSI 662 / PHYS 660 Spring, 2012 Copyright © Ionosphere II: Radio Waves April 19, 2012.
Drift Resonant Interactions of Radiation Belt Electrons with ULF waves. L. G. Ozeke, I. R. Mann, A. Degeling, V. Amalraj, and I. J. Rae University of Alberta.
Ionospheric Current and Aurora CSI 662 / ASTR 769 Lect. 12 Spring 2007 April 24, 2007 References: Prolss: Chap , P (main) Tascione: Chap.
Response of the Magnetosphere and Ionosphere to Solar Wind Dynamic Pressure Pulse KYUNG SUN PARK 1, TATSUKI OGINO 2, and DAE-YOUNG LEE 3 1 School of Space.
Coupling of the Magnetosphere and Ionosphere by Alfvén Waves at High and Mid-Latitudes Bob Lysak, Yan Song, University of Minnesota, MN, USA Murray Sciffer,
ESS 7 Lecture 13 October 29, 2008 Substorms. Time Series of Images of the Auroral Substorm This set of images in the ultra-violet from the Polar satellite.
Session SA33A : Anomalous ionospheric conductances caused by plasma turbulence in high-latitude E-region electrojets Wednesday, December 15, :40PM.
1 ESS200C Pulsations and Waves Lecture Magnetic Pulsations The field lines of the Earth vibrate at different frequencies. The energy for these vibrations.
A Model of the Chromosphere: Heating, Structures, and Convection P. Song 1, and V. M. Vasyliūnas 1,2 1.Center for Atmospheric Research and Department of.
A shock is a discontinuity separating two different regimes in a continuous media. –Shocks form when velocities exceed the signal speed in the medium.
Substorms: Ionospheric Manifestation of Magnetospheric Disturbances P. Song, V. M. Vasyliūnas, and J. Tu University of Massachusetts Lowell Substorms:
ASEN 5335 Aerospace Environments -- Magnetospheres 1 As the magnetized solar wind flows past the Earth, the plasma interacts with Earth’s magnetic field.
Lecture 15 Modeling the Inner Magnetosphere. The Inner Magnetosphere The inner magnetosphere includes the ring current made up of electrons and ions in.
Energy inputs from Magnetosphere to the Ionosphere/Thermosphere ASP research review Yue Deng April 12 nd, 2007.
1 Fluid Theory: Magnetohydrodynamics (MHD). 2 3.
A Global Hybrid Simulation Study of the Solar Wind Interaction with the Moon David Schriver ESS 265 – June 2, 2005.
Magnetosphere-Ionosphere Coupling: Alfven Wave Reflection, Transmission and Mode Conversion P. Song and V. M. Vasyliūnas Center for Atmospheric Research.
Evolution of the poloidal Alfven waves in 3D dipole geometry Jiwon Choi and Dong-Hun Lee School of Space Research, Kyung Hee University 5 th East-Asia.
Cluster observation of electron acceleration by ULF Alfvén waves
GEM Student Tutorial: GGCM Modeling (MHD Backbone)
Challenges The topological status of the magnetosphere: open or closed? Driver(s) of ionospheric sunward flow Source(s) of NBZ currents Key problem: are.
Paul Song Center for Atmospheric Research
The Ionosphere and Thermosphere GEM 2013 Student Tutorial
High-latitude Neutral Density Maxima
Alfvén Dynamics in High-Latitude IT Heating
W. D. Cramer1, J. Raeder1, F. R. Toffoletto2, M. Gilson1,3, B. Hu2,4
Evidence for Dayside Interhemispheric Field-Aligned Currents During Strong IMF By Conditions Seen by SuperDARN Radars Joseph B.H. Baker, Bharat Kunduri.
The Physics of Space Plasmas
Introduction to Space Weather
Effect of Horizontally Inhomogeneous Heating on Flow and Magnetic Field in the Chromosphere of the Sun Paul Song and Vytenis M. Vasyliūnas Space Science.
Fluid Theory: Magnetohydrodynamics (MHD)
A Model of the Solar Chromosphere: Structure and Internal Circulation
ESS 154/200C Lecture 19 Waves in Plasmas 2
Principles of Global Modeling
Solar Wind-Magnetosphere Interaction: Reconnection and IMF Dependence
Paul Song and V. M. Vasyliūnas
Earth’s Ionosphere Lecture 13
Energy conversion boundaries
Coronal Loop Oscillations observed by TRACE
Fluid Theory: Magnetohydrodynamics (MHD)
Dynamic Coupling between the Magnetosphere and the Ionosphere
by Andreas Keiling, Scott Thaller, John Wygant, and John Dombeck
SP-UK-TRISTATIC Meso-scale ion-neutral coupling
Three Regions of Auroral Acceleration
Presentation transcript:

Dynamic Coupling of Magnetosphere and Ionosphere/Thermosphere P. Song and J. Tu University of Massachusetts Lowell Acknowledgments: V. M. Vasyliūnas Conventional M-I-T Coupling: E-J paradigm New M-I-T Coupling: B-V paradigm Physical differences 2-D simulations Summary

Field-aligned Current Coupling Models Full dynamics Electrostatic Steady state (density and neutrals time varying) coupled via field-aligned current, closed with Pedersen current Ohm’s law gives the electric field and Hall current electric drift gives the ion motion

M-I Coupling Explain the observed ionospheric responses to solar wind condition/changes, substorms and auroras etc. and feedback to the magnetosphere (not to simply couple codes) Conventional: E-J paradigm: Electric potential (mostly measured from velocity!) Electric potential mapping ExB drift (but V should be derived from momentum equation!) Field-aligned current (mostly measured from magnetic perturbations!) Pedersen currents Hall currents (inferred from magnetic field variations on ground) New concepts: B-V paradigm: Convection: velocity, V, dV Magnetic perturbation: B, dB Magnetic tension force Poynting flux, wave propagation/reflection Alfven wave, fast mode wave The two descriptions are identical in steady state

Theoretical Basis for Conventional Coupling Models B0 >>δB and B0 is treated as time independent in the approach, and δB is produced to compare with observations not a bad approximation questionable for short time scales: dynamics questionable for short time scales BUT Time scale to reach quasi-steady state δt~δLδB/δE given δL, from the magnetopause to ionosphere, 20 Re δB, in the ionosphere, 1000 nT δE, in the ionosphere, for V~1 km/s, 6x10-2 V/m δt ~ 2000 sec, 30 min, substorm time scale! Conventional theory is not applicable to substorms, auroral brightening!

Eugene Parker (2007): “It is here that a fundamental misunderstanding has become widely accepted, mistaking the electric current j and electric field E to be fundamental physical entities… Magnetospheric physics has suffered severely from this misdirection…” The success of the E-J paradigm in description of slow processes (quasi-steady state) has been used to justify the E-J approach and generalize to dynamic processes For dynamic processes-- substorms, auroral brightening-– the E-J paradigm cannot describe the overshoot processes and the substorms have been the leading outstanding problem in magnetospheric physics Time scale for “fast” <30 min

North Pole, Winter Solstice

Ionospheric Dynamic Processes Epoch analysis showing on average an overshoot in ionospheric velocity for 30 min. An overshoot lasting 40 min was seen on ground but not in geosynchronous orbits; indicating the overshoot is related to the ionospheric processes Huang et al, 2009

Ion-neutral Interaction Magnetic field is frozen-in with electrons Plasma (red dots) is driven with the magnetic field (solid line) perturbation from above Neutrals do not directly feel the perturbation while plasma moves Ion-neutral collisions accelerate neutrals (open circles), strong friction/heating Longer than the neutral-ion collision time, the plasma and neutrals move nearly together with a small slippage. Weak friction/heating On very long time scales, the plasma and neutrals move together: no collision/no heating

Ionosphere Reaction to Magnetospheric Motion Slow down wave propagation (neutral inertia loading) Partial reflection Drive ionosphere convection Large distance at the magnetopause corresponds to small distance in the ionosphere In the ionosphere, horizontal perturbations propagate in fast mode speed Ionospheric convection modifies magnetospheric convection (true 2-way coupling)

Global Consequence of A Poleward Motion Antisunward motion of open field line in the open-closed boundary creates a high pressure region in the open field region (compressional wave), and a low pressure region in the closed field region (rarefaction wave) Continuity requirement produces convection cells through fast mode waves in the ionosphere and motion in closed field regions. Poleward motion of the feet of the flux tube propagates to equator and produces upward motion in the equator. Ionospheric convection will drive/modify magnetospheric convection

Expected Heating Distribution sun For uniform conductivity, velocity pattern coincides with the magnetic perturbation. FAC forms at the center of the convection cells Poynting flux is proportional to V2, weakest at the center of convection cells Neglecting the heating from precipitation particles, Conventional model (EJ paradigm) predicts heating, J2/p, is highest at the FAC New model (BV paradigm) predicts heating, iniV2, is highest at compression region of dayside and nightside cusps and strong along the noon-midnight meridian

M-I Coupling via Waves (Perturbations) The interface between magnetosphere and ionosphere can be idealized as a contact discontinuity with possible small deformation as the wave oscillates Magnetospheric (fast/Alfvenic) perturbation incident onto the ionospheric interface For a field-aligned fast/Alfvenic incidence (for example on cusp ionosphere) B  k, B0 : B in a plane normal to k (2 possible components) Polarizations (reflected and transmitted) (noon-midnight meridian) Alfven mode (toroidal mode) B,u  k-B0 plane Fast/slow modes (poloidal mode) B,u in k-B0 plane Antisunward ionospheric motion =>fast/slow modes (poloidal) => NOT Alfven mode (toroidal) Magnetosphere Ionosphere

Amplification of Magnetic Perturbation at the Ionosphere At the magnetosphere-ionosphere boundary, the boundary conditions are maintained by the incident, reflected and transmitted perturbations. The reflected perturbations have a phase reversal between dB and dV from the incident. The inertia of the ionospheric plasma minimizes the velocity change across the boundary The magnetic perturbation nearly doubles across the boundary => forming a strong current

Comparison of Steady-state Coupling with Dynamic Coupling Coupling speed Vphase Steady-state Coupling Original model (Vasyliunas, 1970, Wolf, 1970): not specific, presumed to be VA Implemented in simulations:  (instantaneously) Dynamic Coupling: Vphase ~ α1/2 VA ( is neutral inertia loading factor) Coupling time δt Original model: not specified, Implemented in simulations: ~0 Dynamic Coupling: 1~2 min (Alfvén transient) 30 min (M-I equilibrium) 1~3 hours (neutral acceleration)

Comparison of Steady-state Coupling with Dynamic Coupling, cont. Reflection Steady-state Coupling Original model: Multiple reflections assumed, V,B = final result, (depends on ionospheric conductivity) Implemented in simulations: No reflection, E=Einc, V and δB are derived Dynamic Coupling: Total=I+R for both δB and V Reflection coefficient γ: depends on gradient (height) and frequency (time lapse); Reflection may be produced continuously over height Incident perturbation may consist of a spectrum: dispersion effect A phase delay φ due to propagation to and from the reflection point

Basic Equations Continuity equations Momentum equations Temperature equations Faraday’s Law and Ampere's Law (E-field is derived from steady state electron momentum equation) s = e, i or n, and es = -e, e or 0 Field-aligned flow allowed

1-D Simulation Along Northern Pole The noon-midnight and dawn-dusk components of the perturbation magnetic field, Bx and By.. Tu et al., 2014 The noon-midnight and dawn-dusk components of the plasma velocity Vx and Vy. Tu et al., 2014

Heating rate q as function of Alfvén travel time and height Heating rate q as function of Alfvén travel time and height. The heating rate at each height becomes a constant after about 30 Alfvén travel times. The Alfvén time is the time normalized by tA, which is defined as If the driver is at the magnetopause, the Alfvén time is about 1 min. Height variations of frictional heating rate and true Joule heating rate at a selected time. The Joule heating rate is negligibly small. The heating is essentially frictional in nature. Tu et al., 2011

Heating rate divided by total mass density (neutral mass density plus plasma mass density) as function of Alfvén travel time and height. The heating rate per unit mass is peaked in the F layer of the ionosphere, around about 300 km in this case. Time variation of height integrated heating rate. After about 30 Alfvén travel times, the heating rate reaches a constant. This steady-state heating rate is equivalent to the steady-state heating rate calculated using conventional Joule heating rate J∙(E+unxB) defined in the frame moving with the neutral wind. In the transition period, the heating rate can be two times larger than the steady-state heating rate. Tu et al., 2011

2-D Simulation of the Dawn-Dusk Meridian Plane

Alfven Wave Propagation     Imposed antisunward velocity drives downward propagating velocity and magnetic field perturbations. Both propagate with the Alfven speed. Velocity perturbation in the polar cap in both hemispheres is antisunward and reverse direction at lower latitudes Magnetic field perturbation in the two hemisphere has opposite directions

Dawn-Dusk Electric Field Dawn-dusk electric field as a function of magnetic latitude and altitude for the Northern Hemisphere at selected times. Negative values are duskward. Tu and Song, 2016.

Field-Aligned and Closure Currents Region 1 and 2 FACs evolve with the Alfven waves At the front of FACs there are horizontal closure currents Pedersen currents form when the FACs reach ~100 - 120 km Has important implication to substorm current wedge Tu and Song, 2016

2-D Simulation of the Noon-Midnight Meridian Plane 2000 m/s 200 m/s T=120 s Driver in the polar cap

High to Low Latitude Ionosphere Coupling Time variation of the average ion velocity component within the noon-midnight magnetic meridian and perpendicular to the magnetic field for several magnetic altitudes at 510.73 km (panel a) and 194 km (panel b). Positive values represent poleward (at high and middle latitudes) or upward (at low and equatorial latitudes) velocities

Eastward (normal to the noon-midnight meridian plane) electric field as a function of time and height. Upper panel for magnetic latitude of 59.5˚ and bottom panel for 24.5˚. The increase of the electric field is delayed toward the lower altitude. The oscillation frequency of the electric field is higher at higher latitudes, showing that the ionosphere is a low pass filter for the MHD wave propagation.

Eastward electric field as a function of time and magnetic latitude Eastward electric field as a function of time and magnetic latitude. Upper panel for height of 510.73 km and bottom panel for 194 km. The arrival of the electric field perturbations is delayed toward the low latitudes and the high frequency oscillation of the perturbations almost completely disappears.

Summary In MHD limit, low frequency, E and J do not evolve by themselves. They are secondary derived quantities B and V becomes primary quantities determining the evolution of a system In steady state, E, J, B, and V are mutually self-consistently determined: no causual relation. A magnetosphere-ionosphere-thermosphere coupling model Including continuity, momentum equation, and energy equation for each species of multi fluids Including Maxwell’s equations Including photochemistry No imposed E-field is necessary, and no imposed field-aligned current is necessary There are 4 major differences between the dynamic (and inductive) coupling and the steady-state coupling Transient time for M-I equilibrium: not Alfvén travel time, but 10-20  tA ~ 20-30 min. Reflection effect: enhanced Poynting flux and heating rate during the dynamic transient period can be a factor of 1.5 greater than that given in of steady-state coupling Plasma inertia effect: velocity, magnetic field, and electric field perturbations depend on density profile during the transition period Field-aligned upflow allowed The field-aligned currents and Pedersen currents are carried down by the Alfven wave and enhanced by reflection. Along the noon-midnight plane, field-aligned perturbations become fast mode in the ionosphere and can propagate to the equator The global dawn-dusk electric field is formed by the fast mode propagation, as required by the continuity condition.