GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25, 2008 1 Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics University of California, Los Angeles THEMIS observations.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Near-Earth Magnetotail Reconnection and Plasmoid Formation in Connection With a Substorm Onset on 27 August 2001 S. Eriksson 1, M. Oieroset 2, D. N. Baker.
Advertisements

Occurrence and properties of substorms associated with pseudobreakups Anita Kullen Space & Plasma Physics, EES.
Peter Boakes 1, Steve Milan 2, Adrian Grocott 2, Mervyn Freeman 3, Gareth Chisham 3, Gary Abel 3, Benoit Hubert 4, Victor Sergeev 5 Rumi Nakamura 1, Wolfgang.
Ground and Space-based Magnetic Fields during a THEMIS Double-onset Substorm M. Connors 1, C. T. Russell 2, I. Voronkov 1, E. Donovan 3, V. Angelopoulos.
Observations of the ballooning and interchange instabilities in the near-Earth magnetotail at substorm expansion onsets Yukinaga Miyashita (STEL, Nagoya.
Walen and Slow-mode Shock Analyses Applied to High-Speed Flows of the Near-Earth Magnetotail S. Eriksson 1, C. Mouikis 2, M. W. Dunlop 3, M. Oieroset 4,
Substorm Parameters: A Progress Report Christine Gabrielse Sergey Apatenkov, Nathaniel Frissell, Stefan Kiehas, Jiang Liu, Kyle Murphy,
Onsets and Flapping Studied using a Dynamic Harris Sheet Model M. Connors 1, R. Lerner 1, G. Jaugey 2, B. Lavraud 3, M. Volwerk 4, R. L. McPherron 5 1.
Observation and Theory of Substorm Onset C. Z. (Frank) Cheng (1,2), T. F. Chang (2), Sorin Zaharia (3), N. N. Gorelenkov (4) (1)Plasma and Space Science.
Magnetoseismology: Pi 2 Travel Time Peter Chi (IGPP/UCLA) 2008 GEM Summer Workshop, Miday, Utah 1998-Jul-22 ▲Maximum deviation in  H-  D plane Pi 2 arrival.
Magnetic Field and Plasma Responses in the Near-Earth Magnetotail and Magnetospheric Boundary Layer During an Encounter of Heliospheric Current Sheet Motoharu.
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.
THEMIS and ARTEMIS David G. Sibeck THEMIS Project Scientist NASA/GSFC 2/17/2007 Cape Canaveral.
Magnetosphere-Ionosphere coupling processes reflected in
EISCAT-Cluster observations of quiet-time near-Earth magnetotail fast flows and their signatures in the ionosphere Nordic Cluster Meeting, Uppsala, Sweden,
Constraining Substorm Onset from Space- and Ground-Based Observations Department of Space & Climate Physics Mullard Space Science Laboratory A. P. Walsh.
Large-Amplitude Electric Fields Associated with Bursty Bulk Flow Braking in the Earth’s Plasma Sheet R. E. Ergun et al., JGR (2014) Speaker: Zhao Duo.
A T Y Lui, V Angelopoulos, S B Mende, O LeContel, H Frey, E Donovan, D G Sibeck, W Liu, H U Auster, X Li, M Nose, and M O Fillingim Outline  Conjunction.
Kinetic-scale electric field structures at plasma boundaries in the inner magnetosphere (including injection fronts) David Malaspina 1, John Wygant 2,
Magnetic Flux Transport and Pressure Variations at Magnetotail Plasma Flow Bursts during Geomagnetically Quiet Times Motoharu Nowada ( 野和田 基晴 :
THEMIS SWT, SSL Berkeley, Dec 20, THEMIS First Tail Season: What Did We Learn? In-situ data analyst view.
Recent THEMIS and coordinated GBO measurements of substorm expansion onset: Do we finally have an answer? Larry Kepko NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center.
1 THEMIS Inner Magnetosphere Review, Dec 20, 2008 Summary of THEMIS results in the inner magnetosphere Future mission operations discussion: –Science targets.
ISSI Workshop on Mercury, 26–30 June, 2006, Bern Substorm, reconnection, magnetotail in Mercury Rumi Nakamura Space Research Institute, Austrian Academy.
Relationship of Plasma Sheet and Plasma Sheet Boundary Layer to Auroras George K. Parks Space Sciences Laboratory University of California, Berkeley, CA.
PHYSICS AND ENGINEERING PHYSICS The Disruption Zone Model of Magnetospheric Substorms George Sofko, Kathryn McWilliams, Chad Bryant I SuperDARN 2011 Workshop,
Chapman Conference “Fundamental Properties and Processes of Magnetotails” 12 March 2013, Tuesday, p.m. Structure of Magnetic Reconnection in the.
GEOSYNCHRONOUS SIGNATURES OF AURORAL SUBSTORMS PRECEDED BY PSEUDOBREAKUPS A. Kullen (1), S. Ohtani (2), and H. Singer (3) A. Kullen (1), S. Ohtani (2),
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.
Simulation Study of Magnetic Reconnection in the Magnetotail and Solar Corona Zhi-Wei Ma Zhejiang University & Institute of Plasma Physics Beijing,
EGU General Assembly 2006, 2-7 April, 2006, Wien ST6 Multi-point measurements of solar-terrestrial plasma: results and future perspectives Scientific objectives.
Catalogued parameters… Current sheet normal vector and velocity, derived using a timing analysis. Later used to calculate an accurate measure of current.
Sani 1 June 15, 2009 Introduction on bursty flows Particle distributions and ion acceleration Electron acceleration and effects Linear and non-linear waves:
Cluster 911 Plasmoid Substorm Sept 11, 2002 DOY 254 Onset at 1600 UT Shock at Cluster 16:23 Plasmoid 16: :40 UT.
1 Joachim Birn LANL Karl Schindler Ruhr-Univ. Bochum Michael Hesse NASA/GSFC Thin Electron Current Sheets and Auroral Arcs Relationship between magnetospheric.
Magnetic reconnection in the magnetotail: Geotail observations T. Nagai Tokyo Institute of Technology World Space Environment Forum 2005 May 4, 2005 Wednesday.
Space Science MO&DA Programs - November Page 1 SS It is well known that intense auroral disturbances occur in association with substorms and are.
MULTI-INSTRUMENT STUDY OF THE ENERGY STEP STRUCTURES OF O + AND H + IONS IN THE CUSP AND POLAR CAP REGIONS Yulia V. Bogdanova, Berndt Klecker and CIS TEAM.
Joint Cluster-THEMIS SWT 1 Sep 23-26, 2008 Vassilis Angelopoulos, James P. McFadden, Davin Larson, Charles W. Carlson, Stephen B. Mende, Harald Frey, Tai.
Joint Cluster-THEMIS SWT 1 Sep 23-26, 2008 Vassilis Angelopoulos, James P. McFadden, Davin Larson, Charles W. Carlson, Stephen B. Mende, Harald Frey, Tai.
MHD Simulations of magnetotail reconnection (J. Birn) Observations MHD simulation: overview Propagation of dipolarization signals Generation of pulsations:
Substorm Parameters: A Progress Report Christine Gabrielse Sergey Apatenkov, Nathaniel Frissell, Stefan Kiehas, Jiang Liu, Kyle Murphy,
Magnetotail Reconnection T. Nagai Tokyo Institute of Technology Harry Petschek Symposium on Magnetic Reconnection March 22, 2006 Wednesday 12:00 – 12:30.
Chapman Conference “Fundamental Properties and Processes of Magnetotails” 12 March 2013, Tuesday, p.m. Structure of Magnetic Reconnection in the.
The Magnetospheric Source Location of the Proton Aurora
Definitive Mapping in the Late Growth Phase
E. Spanswick, E. Donovan, J. Liang, J. McFadden, T. -S. Hsu, C. -P
Substorm current wedge, Alfven waves, ion injections, Pi2 pulsations, and ion outflows: A THEMIS look The THEMIS team.
March 5th, 2008 substorm event ( UT) Waves observations
Significant results from 2 years of operations
THEMIS observations at a substorm onset on March 1, 2008
THEMIS GBO/ASI Minor intensification GBAY 01:48:42 KUUJ 01:48:51
Substorm current wedge, Alfven waves, ion injections, Pi2 pulsations, and ion outflows: A THEMIS look The THEMIS team.
THEMIS SWG, Annapolis, Sept. 14, 2011 Supported by NSF grant #
First 10 months (Feb 2007-Dec 2007)
On Feb 12, a minor THEMIS conjunction, TH-C at 18RE in the tail, observed the first indication of reconnection Earthward of it. Substorm ~03:00-04:30UT.
First 10 months Angelopoulos, 2008 Space Sci. Rev. In Press
March 23 J. McFadden UC Berkeley SSL.
Analysis of Substorms during the Second THEMIS Tail Season
High-Speed Plasma Flows Observed in the Magnetotail during Geomagemtically Quiet Times: Relationship between Magnetic Reconnection, Substorm and High-Speed.
1IGPP/UCLA, 2SSL/UCB, 3LASP, 4Univ. Calgary, 5TUB, 6UNH
Jan. 29, 2008 substorm event ( UT) Waves/particles
Particle energization by substorm dipolarizations
Response to Comment on “Tail Reconnection Triggering Substorm Onset”
Determination of the Substorm Initiation Region From a Major Conjunction Interval of THEMIS Satellites A T Y Lui, V Angelopoulos, S B Mende, O LeContel,
Determination of the Substorm Initiation Region From a Major Conjunction Interval of THEMIS Satellites A T Y Lui, V Angelopoulos, S B Mende, O LeContel,
Dynamics of reconnection and multiple activation of substorms
Determination of the Substorm Initiation Region From a Major Conjunction Interval of THEMIS Satellites A T Y Lui, V Angelopoulos, S B Mende, O LeContel,
Presentation transcript:

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25, Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics University of California, Los Angeles THEMIS observations at a substorm onset on March 1, 2008 A. Runov 1, V. Angelopoulos 1, X.-Z. Zhou 1, V.A. Sergeev 2, M. V. Kubyshkina 2, S. Apatenkov 2, I. Voronkov 3, J. McFadden 4, D. Larson 4, K.-H. Glassmeier 5, U. Auster 5, W. Magnes 6, R. Nakamura 6, C. T. Russell 1, I. Mann 7, S. Mende 2, H. Frey 2, L. Kepko 8, and H.J. Singer 9 1. IGPP/ESS, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA 2. St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russia 3. Athabasca University, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada 4. SSL, University of California at Berkeley, CA, USA 5. TUBS, Braunschweig, Germany 6. IWF OEAW, Graz, Austria 7. University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada 8. SSC, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, USA 9. NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center, Boulder, CO, USA Correspondence to:

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25, P1 P2 P3 P4 G12 01:48:50 UT GBAY G10 THEMIS GBO: Auroral onsets P1 P3 P4 G12 01:54:30 UT G10 P2 1 st (minor) intensification 0148:42 UT GBAY 2 nd (major) intensification 0152:27 UT SNKQ SNKQ

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25, WIND (time shifted) GBAY DRBY LOYS KUUJ CHGB

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25, THEMIS and GOES observations /0100 – 0210 UT 01:48:50 UT 0148:42

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25,  Observations in the mid-tail PS  P2: X=-17.4 RE  Tailward fast flows  Bz and By variations  Ion & electron energization

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25,  Observations in the mid-tail PS  P1: X=-22.7 RE  Same as at P2, but ~30 s later on

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25, Timing of ion fluxes (SST and ESA) variations during the first tailward flow P2 P1 SST: 50 – 200 keV ESA: 5 – 21 keV P2/THC: Tailward flux 60 keV-Ion flux increases at 0148:25 UT; 190 keV flux increases at 0148:55 UT.  Inversed Velocity Dispersion (IVD, Sarafopoulos and Sarris, 1988)  SC are in the PS: IVD due to the acceleration by the inductive electric field (Taktakishvili et al., 1993)  SC are close to the acceleration region (1-3 RE)

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25, Electron PA distributions at P1 and P2 First tailward flow 0148:25

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25,  Observations in the near-Earth PS  P4: X=-8.0 RE  ~6 min later than the first activity in the mid-tail PS;  Magnetic field (and cross-tail current) reduction;  Dipolarization;  Bursty Ion and electron energization  A step-like increase of plasma density and pressure.

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25,  Observations in the near-Earth PS  P3: X=-9.3 RE  The same as at P4, but ~40 s later on  Tailward propagation of the step-like plasma pressure front at a velocity of 150 km/s.

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25, P3 and P4 FGM measurements (field-aligned coordinates):  Main field (B z ) at P3 and P4 continuously increases (growth phase) until ~0955 UT  Perpendicular components, δB y and δB x started at 0148:20 – 0148:40 UT, indicating outward FAC underneath the SC. GOES 10 (PEN coordinates):  Positive δB n (eastward!) at UT  G10 was underneath of the FAC GOES10, 12:  Dipolarization at ~0154:20 UT Magnetic field variations at P3, P4, GOES 10, GOES 12

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25, /0140 – 0205 UT Event Timing 0148:25 high-energy electron flux increase at P2 (transient reconnection?) 0148:25 ~60 keV ion flux increase at P2 (acceleration by the inductive E-field) 0148:40 dBy at P3, P4, G10 (FAC) 0148:42 minor auroral onset at GBAY (pseudo-breakup) 0148:45 Pi2 onset at GBAY 0148:45 Tailward fast ion flow, dBy & dBz at P2 0149:30 Tailward fast ion flow, dBy and dBz at P1 0152:21 Auroral onset at SNKQ (substorm) 0153:30 Dipolarization at G :20 Dipolarization at P4 0154:30 Tailward flow, dBy & dBz at P1 0154:40 Drop of Bt at P4 (cross-tail current reduction/disruption) 0155:00 Tailward flow at P2 0155:21 Auroral onset at KUUJ 0155:50 Dipolarization at P3 0155:50 dVy and dVz at P3 0155:50 Drop of Bt at P3

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25, A Possible Scenario The observations suggest a two-step development of the activity:  First step: An initial disturbance (probably reconnection) in the mid magnetotail (X~ RE) led to the particle acceleration, the Bz and By perturbations, the plasma bulk flow, and the FAC formation, associated with the first (minor) auroral activation (precursor). The FAC was, likely, generated by the Earthward reconnection outflow. The cross tail current in the near-Earth magnetotail (X~-9 RE) continued building up.  Second step: The rapid reduction (disruption) of the cross-tail current due to hot plasma pile-up, associated with the major onset, developed in the near-Earth plasma sheet. The second tailward flow, observed by P1 and P2, was, likely, generated by a process in the mid tail (probably reconnection), acting simultaneously with (and independent from) the current disruption, observed by P3 and P4 in the near-Earth plasma sheet.

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25, Back up slides

GEM 2008 Summer Workshop, Zermatt, Utah, June 25, March 1, 2008 THEMIS major conjunction event 0148:50 UT 0155:00 UT 01:54:30 UT