Magnetospheric Response to Solar Wind Forcing: ULF Wave – Particle Interaction Perspective

Solar wind forcing, e.g. interplanetary shock and/or solar wind dynamic pressure pulses impact on the Earth’s magnetosphere manifests many fundamental important space physics phenomena including producing electromagnetic waves, plasma heating and energetic particle acceleration. This paper summarizes our present understanding of the magnetospheric response to solar wind forcing in the aspects of radiation belt electrons, ring current ions and plasmaspheric plasma physics based on in situ spacecraft measurements, ground-based magnetometer data, MHD and kinetic simulations. Magnetosphere response to solar wind forcing, is not just a “one-kick” scenario. It is found that after the impact of solar wind forcing on the Earth’s magnetosphere, plasma heating and energetic particle acceleration started nearly immediately and could last for a few hours. Even a small dynamic pressure change of interplanetary shock or solar wind pressure pulse can play a non-negligible role in magnetospheric physics. The impact leads to generate series kind of waves including poloidal mode ultra-low frequency (ULF) waves. The fast acceleration of energetic electrons in the radiation belt and energetic ions in the ring current region response to the impact usually contains two contributing steps: (1) the initial adiabatic acceleration due to the magnetospheric compression; (2) followed by the wave-particle resonant acceleration dominated by global or localized poloidal ULF waves excited at various L-shells. Generalized theory of drift and drift-bounce resonance with growth or decay localized ULF waves has been developed to explain in situ spacecraft observations. The wave related observational features like distorted energy spectrum, boomerang and fishbone pitch angle distributions of radiation belt electrons, ring current ions and plasmaspheric plasma can be explained in the frame work of this generalized theory. It is worthy to point out here that poloidal ULF waves are much more efficient to accelerate and modulate electrons (fundamental mode) in the radiation belt and charged ions (second harmonic) in the ring current region. The results presented in this paper can be widely used in solar wind interacting with other planets such as Mercury, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune, and other astrophysical objects with magnetic fields.

Influence of different types of ionospheric disturbances on GPS signals at polar latitudes

The comparative research of the influence of different types of auroral particle precipitation and polar cap patches (PCPs) on the global positioning system (GPS) signals disturbances in the polar ionosphere was done. For this purpose, we use the GPS scintillation receivers at Ny-Ålesund and Skibotn, operated by the University of Oslo. The presence of the auroral particle precipitation and polar cap patches was determined by using data from the EISCAT 42m radar on Svalbard. The optical aurora observations in 557.7 and 630.0 nm spectrum lines on Svalbard were used as well for the detection of ionospheric disturbances. The cusp identification was done with using SuperDARN (Hankasalmi) data. We consider events when the simultaneous EISCAT 42m and GPS data were available for the years 2010–2017, and in this paper we present, in detail, typical examples describing the overall picture, and we present the statistics for 120 events. We considered the dayside/cusp precipitation, substorm precipitation, daytime and nighttime PCPs, and precipitation associated with the interplanetary shock wave arrival. We demonstrate that substorm-associated precipitation (even without PCPs) can lead to a strong GPS phase (σϕ) scintillations up to ∼ 1.5–3 radians, which is much stronger than those usually produced by other types of considered ionosphere disturbances. The value of the substorm-phase scintillations in general correlate with the value of the geomagnetic field disturbance. But sometimes even a small geomagnetic substorm, when combined with the PCPs, produces quite strong phase scintillations. Cusp phase scintillations are lower than dayside PCPs scintillations. PCPs can lead to stronger ROT (rate of total electron content) variations than other types of ionosphere disturbances. So our observations suggest that the substorms and PCPs, being different types of the high-latitude disturbances, lead to the development of different types and scales of ionospheric irregularities.

What Solar–Terrestrial Link Researchers Should Know about Interplanetary Drivers

One of the most promising methods of research in solar–terrestrial physics is the comparison of the responses of the magnetosphere–ionosphere–atmosphere system to various types of interplanetary disturbances (so-called “interplanetary drivers”). Numerous studies have shown that different types of drivers result in different reactions of the system for identical variations in the interplanetary magnetic field. In particular, the sheaths—compression regions before fast interplanetary CMEs (ICMEs)—have higher efficiency in terms of the generation of magnetic storms than ICMEs. The growing popularity of this method of research is accompanied by the growth of incorrect methodological approaches in such studies. These errors can be divided into four main classes: (i) using incorrect data with the identification of driver types published in other studies; (ii) using incorrect methods to identify the types of drivers and, as a result, misclassify the causes of magnetospheric-ionospheric disturbances; (iii) ignoring a frequent case with a complex, composite, nature of the driver (the presence of a sequence of several simple drivers) and matching the system response with only one of the drivers; for example, a magnetic storm is often generated by a sheath in front of ICME, although the authors consider these events to be a so-called “CME-induced” storm, rather than a “sheath-induced” storm; (iv) ignoring the compression regions before the fast CME in the case when there is no interplanetary shock (IS) in front of the compression region (“sheath without IS” or the so-called “lost driver”), although this type of driver generates about 10% of moderate and large magnetic storms. Possible ways of solving this problem are discussed.

Unusual Location of the Geotail Magnetopause Near Lunar Orbit: A Case Study

<p>The Earth's magnetopause is highly variable in location and shape and is modulated by solar wind conditions. On 8 March 2012, the ARTEMIS probes were located near the tail current sheet when an interplanetary shock arrived under northward interplanetary magnetic field conditions and recorded an abrupt tail compression at ∼(-60, 0, -5) Re in Geocentric Solar Ecliptic coordinate in the deep magnetotail. ~ 10 minutes later, the probes crossed the magnetopause many times within an hour after the oblique interplanetary shock passed by. The solar wind velocity vector downstream from the shock was not directed along the Sun-Earth line but had a significant Y component. We propose that the compressed tail was pushed aside by the appreciable solar wind flow in the Y direction. Using a virtual spacecraft in a global magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) simulation, we reproduce the sequence of magnetopause crossings in the X-Y plane observed by ARTEMIS under oblique shock conditions, demonstrating that the compressed magnetopause is sharply deflected at lunar distances in response to the shock and solar wind Vy effects. The results from two global MHD simulations show that the shocked magnetotail at lunar distances is mainly controlled by the solar wind direction with a timescale of about a quarter hour, which appears to be consistent with the windsock effect. The results also provide some references for investigating interactions between the solar wind/magnetosheath and lunar nearside surface during full moon time intervals, which should not happen in general.</p>