Abstract
The works in the alternative direction of magnetospheric studies are reviewed. In contrast to the traditional approach, where the basis process is magnetic field line reconnection, transformation of kinetic energy into electromagnetic one at the bow shock front is the basis process in the proposed approach. It has been indicated that this new paradigm makes it possible to overcome the main difficulties that remained within the scope of the previous paradigm. It has been briefly demonstrated how several following processes and phenomena are explained within the scope of the new approach: (1) transformation of the solar wind kinetic energy into the electromagnetic energy; (2) electromagnetic energy transfer into the magnetosphere; (3) organization of the system of bulk currents, formation of field-aligned currents from the magnetosphere, and compatibility of these currents with the ionospheric current systems; (4) shape, value, and dynamics of the particle precipitation auroral regions; and (5) substorm expansion (auroral breakup). Other possibilities of the new approach and paradigm replacement consequences are briefly considered.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
L. M. Alekseeva, “Is a Substorm an Anodic Explosion?” Geomagn. Aeron. 19(5), 884–890 (1979).
A. A. Anistratenko and E. A. Ponomarev, “Modeling the Conditions for Formation of the Zones of Corpuscular Precipitation and Electric Currents in the Nightside Polar Ionosphere,” Issled. Geomagn. Aeron. Fiz. Solntsa, No. 53, 15–26 (1981).
W. I. Axford and C. O. Hines, “A Unified Theory of High-Latitude Geophysical Phenomena and Geomagnetic Storms,” Can. J. Phys. 39, 1433–1464 (1961).
K. Birkeland, “The Norvegian Auaora Polaris Expedition (1903–1908),” Cristiania 1, 1220 (1913).
R. A. Bostrom, “A Model of the Auroral Electrojets,” J. Geophys. Res. 69, 4983–5000 (1964).
A. D. Chertkov, “magnetic Field Line “Re-Connection”: Incorrect Terminology or Incorrect Concept,” in Proceedings of an International Conference “Problems of Geocosmos,” St. Petersburg, Russia, 1996, pp. 187–198.
M. Harel, R. A. Wolf, and P. H. Reif, “Quantitative Simulation of a Magnetospheric Substorm. 1. Model Logic and Overview,” J. Geophys. Res. 86, 2217–2241 (1981).
M. Harel, R. A. Wolf, and P. H. Reif, “Quantitative Simulation of a Magnetospheric Substorm. 2. Comparison with Observation,” J. Geophys. Res. 86, 2242–2260 (1981).
W. J. Heikkila, “Interpretation of Recent AMPTE Data at the Magnetopause,” J. Geophys. Res. 102, 2115–2124 (1997).
J. P. Heppner, “Empirical Models of High-Latitude Electric Fields,” J. Geophys. Res. 82(7), 1115–1125 (1977).
T. Iijima and T. A. Potemra, “Large-Scale Characteristics of Field-Aligned Currents Associated with Substorms,” J. Geophys. Res. 83, 599–615 (1978).
Y. Kamide, “Substorm 4. Results from ICS-4,” Int. SCOSTEP Newsletters 4(4), 4 (1998).
C. F. Kennel, “Consequence of a Magnetospheric Plasma,” Rev. Geophys. 7(1–2), 379–419 (1969).
C. F. Kennel, “Consequences of Magnetospheric Plasma Existence,” in Magnetospheric Physics (Mir, Moscow, 1972), pp. 462–516 [in Russian].
G. A. Korn and T. M. Korn, Mathematical Handbook for Scientists and Engineers (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968; Nauka, Moscow, 1970).
I. V. Kovalevskii, “Certain Aspects of the Energy of Solar-Terrestrial Coupling,” in Interplanetary Medium and the Earth’s Magnetosphere (Nauka, Moscow, 1982), pp. 25–64 [in Russian].
V. I. Kozlov and P. F. Krymskii, Physical Backgrounds for Predicting Catastrophic Geophysical Phenomena (Yakut. Nauch. Tsentr SO RAN, Yakutsk, 1983) [in Russian].
E. Madelung, Mathematical Apparatus in Physics (Gosud. Izd. Fiz.-Mat. Lit., Moscow, 1960) [in Russian].
O. V. Mager and E. A. Ponomarev, “Magnetospheric Model,” Soln.-Zemn. Fiz., No. 2, 228–229 (2002).
P. Perreault and S.-I. Akasofu, “A Study of Geomagnetic Storms,” Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 54, 547–558 (1978).
E. A. Ponomarev, Mechanisms of Magnetospheric Substorms (Nauka, Moscow, 1985) [in Russian].
E. A. Ponomarev, P. A. Sedykh, O. V. Mager, and V. D. Urbanovich, “An Alternative Approach to Explaining Magnetospheric Processes,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Substorms-7, Levi, Finland, 2004, p. 41.
E. A. Ponomarev, P. A. Sedykh, O. V. Mager, and V. D. Urbanovich, “Electric Field Generation in the Earth’s Magnetosphere Due to the Processes in the Bow Shock,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference “Solar-Terrestrial Coupling and Electromagnetic Precursors of Earthquakes.” Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskii, 2004, Part II, pp. 110–118.
E. A. Ponomarev, P. A. Sedykh, O. V. Mager, and V. D. Urbanovich, http://zhurnal.ape.relarn.ru/articles/2003/090.pdf/
E. A. Ponomarev, P. A. Sedykh, O. V. Mager, and V. D. Urbanovich, “Bow Shock as the Power Source for Magnetospheric Processes,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Problems of Geocosmos, St. Petersburg, Russia, 2004, pp. 136–137.
E. A. Ponomarev, P. A. Sedykh, O. V. Mager, and V. D. Urbanovich, http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0306041.
E. A. Ponomarev, V. D. Urbanovich, and E. I. Nemtsova, “To the Problem of Energy Transfer from the Solar Wind into the Earth’s Magnetosphere,” Issled. Geomag. Aeron. Fiz. Solntsa 112, 66–77 (2001).
E. A. Ponomarev, V. D. Urbanovich, and E. I. Nemtsova, “On the Excitation Mechanism of Magnetospheric Convection by the Solar Wind,” in Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Substorms, St. Petersburg, Russia, 2000, pp. 553–556.
J. Raeder and N. C. Maynard, “Foreword,” J. Geophys. Res. 106A, 345–348 (2001).
G. Rostoker, “Why We Have Not Yet Solved the Substorm Problem?” in Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Substorms, Washington, 2002, pp. 1–8.
P. A. Sedykh and E. A. Ponomarev, “Magnetosphere-Ionosphere Coupling in the Region of Auroral Electrojets,” Geomagn. Aeron. 42(5), 613–618 (2002) [Geomagn. Aeron. 42, 582–587 (2002)].
P. A. Sedykh, “On the Mechanism of the Loading-Unloading Process in the Magnetosphere,” in Proceedings of the 3-Rd Russian-Chinese Space Weather Conference, Irkutsk, 2002, p. 25.
P. A. Sedykh, E. A. Ponomarev, and O. V. Mager, “Concerning the Compatibility of Field-Aligned Currents,” in Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Substorms, Levi, Finland, 2004, pp. 111–115.
P. A. Sedykh, E. A. Ponomarev, and O. V. Mager, “Concerning the Magnetosphere-Ionosphere Coupling,” in Proceedings of the 6th International Conference “Problems of Geocosmos,” St. Petersburg, Russia, 2002, pp. 158–164.
R. W. Spiro, M. Harel, R. A. Wolf, and P. H. Reif, “Quantitative Simulation of a Magnetospheric Substorm. 3. Plasmaspheric Electric Fields and Evolution of Plasmapause,” J. Geophys. Res. 86, 2261–2272 (1981).
Yu. I. Vakulin, K. I. Gorelyi, and R. Kh. Dvinskikh, “Substorm in the Background Luminosity of the High-Latitude Ionosphere and Geomagnetic Variations,” Issled. Geomagn. Aeron. Fiz. Solntsa, No. 46, 3–12 (1979).
H. Volland, “Models of Global Electric Fields within the Magnetosphere,” Ann. Geophys. 31, 1–30 (1975).
Y. C. Whang, “Slow Shocks and Their Transition to Fast Shocks in the Inner Solar Wind,” J. Geophys. Res. 92(5), 4349–4356 (1987).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Original Russian Text © E.A. Ponomarev, P.A. Sedykh, 2006, published in Geomagnetizm i Aeronomiya, 2006, Vol. 46, No. 4, pp. 560–575.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ponomarev, E.A., Sedykh, P.A. How can we solve the problem of substorms? (A review). Geomagn. Aeron. 46, 530–544 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016793206040177
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016793206040177