Advertisement

Space Science Reviews

, Volume 22, Issue 6, pp 681–715 | Cite as

Initial ISEE magnetometer results: magnetopause observations

  • C. T. Russell
  • R. C. Elphic
Article

Abstract

The magnetic field profiles across the magnetopause obtained by the ISEE-1 and -2 spacecraft separated by only a few hundred kilometers are examined for four passes. During one of these passes the magnetosheath field was northward, during one it was slightly southward, and in two it was strongly southward. The velocity of the magnetopause is found to be highly irregular ranging from 4 to over 40 km s-1 and varying in less time than it takes for a spacecraft to cross the boundary. Thicknesses ranged from 500 to over 1000 km.

Clear evidence for reconnection is found in the data when the magnetosheath field is southward. However, this evidence is not in the form of classic rotational discontinuity signatures. Rather, it is in the form of flux transfer events, in which reconnection starts and stops in a matter of minutes or less, resulting in the ripping off of flux tubes from the magnetosphere. Evidence for flux transfer events can be found both in the magnetosheath and the outer magnetosphere due to their alteration of the boundary normal. In particular, their presence at the time of magnetopause crossings invalidates the usual 2-dimensional analysis of magnetopause structure. Not only are these flux transfer events probably the dominant means of reconnection on the magnetopause, but they may also serve as an important source of magnetopause oscillations, and hence of pulsations in the outer magnetosphere. On two days the flux transfer rate was estimated to be of the order of 2 × 1012 Maxwells per second by the flux transfer events detected at ISEE. Events not detectable at ISEE and continued reconnection after passage of an FTE past ISEE could have resulted in an even greater reconnection rate at these times.

Keywords

Magnetic Field Transfer Rate Transfer Event Flux Tube Field Profile 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arnoldy, R. L.: 1971, ‘Signature in the Interplanetary Medium for Substorms’, J. Geophys. Res. 76, 5189.Google Scholar
  2. Aubry, M. P., Russell, C. T., and Kivelson, M. G.: 1970, ‘Inward Motion of the Magnetopause Before a Substorm’, J. Geophys. Res. 75, 7018.Google Scholar
  3. Aubry, M. P., Kivelson, M. G., and Russell, C. T.: 1971, ‘Motion and Structure of the Magnetopause’, J. Geophys. Res. 76, 1673.Google Scholar
  4. Binsack, J. H.: 1968, ‘Shock and Magnetopause Boundary Observations with IMP-2’, in R. L. Carovillano, J. F. McClay, and H. R. Radoski (eds.), Physics of the Magnetosphere, D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht, p. 605.Google Scholar
  5. Boller, B. R. and Stolov, H. L.: 1970, ‘Kelvin-Helmholtz Instability and the Semi-Annual Variation of Geomagnetic Activity’, J. Geophys. Res. 75, 6073.Google Scholar
  6. Boller, B. R. and Stolov, H. L.: 1973, ‘Explorer-18 Study of the Stability of the Magnetopause Using a Kelvin-Helmholtz Instability Criterion’, J. Geophys. Res. 78, 8078.Google Scholar
  7. Bridge, H., Egidi, A., Lazarus, A., Lyon, E., and Jacobson, L: 1965, ‘Preliminary Results of Plasma Measurements on IMP-A’, Space Research V, North-Holland Publ. Co., Amsterdam, p. 969.Google Scholar
  8. Burton, R. K., McPherron, R. C., and Russell, C. T.: 1975, ‘An Interplanetary Relationship Between Interplanetary Conditions and Dst’, J. Geophys. Res. 80, 4204.Google Scholar
  9. Cahill, L. J. and Amazeen, P. G.: 1963, ‘The Boundary of the Geomagnetic Field’, J. Geophys. Res. 68, 1835.Google Scholar
  10. Cahill, L. J. and Patel, V. L.: 1967, ‘The Boundary of the Geomagnetic Field, August to November, 1961’, Planetary Space Sci. 15, 997.Google Scholar
  11. Cummings, W. D. and Coleman, P. J., Jr.: 1968, ‘Magnetic Fields in the Magnetopause and Vicinity at Synchronous Altitude’, J. Geophys. Res. 73, 5699.Google Scholar
  12. Fairfield, D. H.: 1971, ‘Average and Unusual Locations of the Earth's Magnetopause and Bow Shock’, J. Geophys. Res. 76, 6700.Google Scholar
  13. Feldstein, Y. L: 1970, ‘Auroras and Associated Phenomena’, in E. R. Dyer (ed.), Solar Terrestrial Physics, Part III, D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht, p. 152.Google Scholar
  14. Frank, L. A. and Van Allen, J. A.: 1964, ‘Intensity of Electrons in the Earth's Inner Radiation Zone’, J. Geophys. Res. 69, 4923.Google Scholar
  15. Freeman, J. W., Jr.: 1964, ‘Detection of an Intense Flux of Low-Energy Protons or Ions Trapped in the Inner Radiation Zone’, J. Geophys. Res. 69, 1691.Google Scholar
  16. Gosling, J. T., Asbridge, J. R., Bame, S. J., and Strong, I. B.: 1967, ‘Vela-2 Measurements of the Magnetopause and Bow Shock Positions’, J. Geophys. Res. 72, 101.Google Scholar
  17. Haerendel, G., Paschmann, G., Sckopke, N., Rosenbauer, H., and Hedgecock, P. C.: 1978, ‘The Frontside Boundary Layer of the Magnetosphere and the Problem of Reconnection’, J. Geophys. Res. 83, 3195.Google Scholar
  18. Heppner, J. P., Sugiura, M., Skillman, T. L., Ledley, B. G., and Campbell, M.: 1967, ‘OGO-A Magnetic Field Observations’, J. Geophys. Res. 72, 5417.Google Scholar
  19. Holzer, R. E. and Slavin, J. A.: 1978, ‘Magnetic Flux Transfer Associated with Expansions and Contractions of the Dayside Magnetosphere’, J. Geophys. Res. 83, 3831.Google Scholar
  20. Holzer, R. E., McLeod, M. G., and Smith, E. J.: 1966, ‘Preliminary Results from the OGO-1 Search Coil Magnetometer: Boundary Positions and Magnetic Noise Spectra’, J. Geophys. Res. 71, 1481.Google Scholar
  21. Kaufmann, R. L. and Konradi, A.: 1969, ‘Explorer-12 Magnetopause Observations: Large-Scale Non-Uniform Motion’, J. Geophys. Res. 74, 3609.Google Scholar
  22. Kaufmann, R. L. and Konradi, A.: 1973, ‘Speed and Thickness of the Magnetopause’, J. Geophys. Res. 78, 6549.Google Scholar
  23. Ledley, B. G.: 1971, ‘Magnetopause Attitudes During OGO-5 Crossings’, J. Geophys. Res. 76, 6736.Google Scholar
  24. Meng, G.-I.: 1970, ‘Variation of the Magnetopause Position with Substorm Activity’, J. Geophys. Res. 75, 3252.Google Scholar
  25. Mozer, F. S., Torbert, R. B., Fahleson, U. V., Fälthammar, C.-G., Gonfalone, A., Pedersen, A., and Russell, C. T.: 1978, Geophys. Res. Letters, submitted.Google Scholar
  26. Ness, N. F., Sceorce, C. S., and Seek: 1964, ‘Initial Results of the IMP-1 Magnetic Field Experiment’, J. Geophys. Res. 69, 3531.Google Scholar
  27. Ness, N. F.: 1967, in J. W. King and W. S. Newman (eds.), Solar Terrestrial Physics, Academic Press, London, p. 57.Google Scholar
  28. Neugebauer, M., Russell, C. T., and Smith, E. J.: 1974, ‘Observations of the Internal Structure of the Magnetopause’, J. Geophys. Res. 79, 499.Google Scholar
  29. Ogilvie, K. W., Scudder, J. D., and Sugiura, M.: 1971, ‘Magnetic Field and Electron Observations Near the Dawn Magnetopause’, J. Geophys. Res. 76, 3574.Google Scholar
  30. Paschmann, G., Sckopke, N., Haerendel, G., Papamastorakis, J., Bame, S. J., Asbridge, J. R., Gosling, J. T., Hones, E. W., Jr, and Tech, E. R.: 1978, ‘ISEE Plasma Observations Near the Subsolar Magnetopause’, Space Sci. Rev. 22, 717.Google Scholar
  31. Patel, V. L. and Dessler, A. J.: 1966, ‘Geomagnetic Activity and Size of Magnetospheric Cavity’, J. Geophys. Res. 71, 1940.Google Scholar
  32. Russell, C. T.: 1978, ‘The ISEE-1 and -2 Fluxgate Magnetometers’, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Electr. GE-16, 239.Google Scholar
  33. Russell, C. T. and Greenstadt, E. W.: 1979, ‘Initial ISEE Magnetometer Results: Shock Observations,’ Space Sci. Rev. 23, in press.Google Scholar
  34. Russell, C. T. and McPherron, R. L.: 1973, ‘The Magnetotail and Substorms’, Space Sci. Rev. 15, 205.Google Scholar
  35. Russell, C. T., Neugebauer, M., and Kivelson, M. G.: 1974, ‘OGO-5 Observations of the Magnetopause’, in D. E. Page (ed.), Correlated Interplanetary and Magnetospheric Observations, D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht, p. 139.Google Scholar
  36. Sonnerup, B. U. O.: 1971, ‘Magnetopause Structure During the Magnetic Storm of September 24, 1961’, J. Geophys. Res. 76, 6717.Google Scholar
  37. Sonnerup, B. U. O. and Cahill, L. J., Jr.: 1967, ‘Magnetopause Structure and Attitude from Explorer-12 Observations’, J. Geophys. Res. 72, 171.Google Scholar
  38. Sonnerup, B. U. O. and Cahill, L. J., Jr.: 1968, ‘Explorer-12 Observations of the Magnetopause Current Layer’, J. Geophys. Res. 73, 1757.Google Scholar
  39. Sonnerup, B. U. O. and Ledley, B. G.: 1974, ‘Magnetopause Rotational Forms’, J. Geophys. Res. 79, 4309.Google Scholar
  40. Sonnerup, B. U. O. and Ledley, B. G.: 1978, ‘OGO-5 Magnetopause Structure and Classical Reconnection’, J. Geophys. Res., submitted.Google Scholar
  41. Wolfe, J. H., Silva, R. W., and Meyers, M. A.: 1966, ‘Observations of the Solar Wind During the Flight of IMP-1’, J. Geophys. Res. 71, 1319.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© D. Reidel Publishing Company 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. T. Russell
    • 1
  • R. C. Elphic
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, University of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations