Magnetospheres of the Mercury, Earth, Jupiter, and Saturn

  • Igor I. Alexeev
  • Elena S. Belenkaya
  • M. S. Grigoryan
Conference paper
Part of the Astrophysics and Space Science Proceedings book series (ASSSP, volume 33)


Physical phenomena in the magnetospheres of the solar system planets that have intrinsic magnetic fields: Mercury, Earth, Jupiter, and Saturn, are discussed. As demonstrated by the evaluation of the Mercury, Earth, Jupiter, and Saturn magnetopauses, all these surfaces can be well approached by a paraboloids of revolution with different subsolar distances and flaring angles (Alexeev and Belenkaya, Ann Geophys 23:809–826, 2005; Alexeev et al., Geophys Res Lett 33:L08101, 2006; Joy et al., J Geophys Res 107(A10):1309,2002; Kanani et al., J Geophys Res 115:A06207, 2010). Based on this fact a universal model of the planetary magnetosphere is constructed. We choose the planets in the inner magnetospheres of which the magnetic field vectors have been measured by spacecraft magnetometers. Modifications of general model that are applied to the individual planets are considered. The proposed models describe the basic physical processes which are responsible for the structure and dynamics of the magnetospheres. Additionally to the inner planetary field the different magnetospheric sources of magnetic field are included in the model.


Solar Wind Solar Wind Plasma Solar Wind Dynamic Pressure Subsolar Point Planetary Magnetosphere 
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.



Work was supported by the RFBR Grants No 11-05-00894. The authors are thankful to the European FP7 project IMPEx (No.262863) for partial support. I.I. Alexeev and E.S. Belenkaya acknowledge the subdivisions of the European research infrastructure EUROPLANET-RI, – the JRA3/EMDAF (European Modelling and Data Analysis Facility; and Science Networking NA2 (working groups WG4 and WG5; for support of their scientific communication and collaboration exchange visits.


  1. 1.
    Alexeev, I. I., The penetration of interplanetary magnetic and electric fields into the magnetosphere. J. Geomag. Geoelectr., 38, 1199–1221, 1986.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alexeev, I. I., et al., A global magnetic model of Saturn’s magnetosphere, and a comparison with Cassini SOI data. Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, L08101, doi:10.1029/2006GL025896, 2006.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alexeev, I. I., E. S. Belenkaya, et al., Mercury’s magnetospheric magnetic field after the first two MESSENGER flybys, Icarus, 209, 23–39, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2010.01.024, 2010.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alexeev, I. I., et al., Paraboloid model of Mercury’s magnetosphere, J. Geophys. Res., 113, A12210, doi:10.1029/2008JA013368, 2008.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alexeev, I. I., and E. S. Belenkaya, Modeling of the jovian magnetosphere. Ann. Geophys., 23, 809–826, 2005.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Arridge, C. S., et al., Modeling the size and shape of Saturn’s magnetopause with variable dynamic pressure, J. Geophys. Res., 111, A11227, doi:10.1029/2005JA011574, 2006.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Belenkaya, E. S., The jovian magnetospheric magnetic and electric fields: effects of the interplanetary magnetic field, Planet. Space Sci., 52, 499–511, 2004.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Belenkaya, E. S., et al., A model of Jupiter’s magnetospheric magnetic field with variable magnetopause flaring, Planet. Space Sci., 53, 863–872, 2005.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chapman, S., and V.C.A. Ferraro, A new theory of magnetic storm, J. Geophys. Res., 36, 77, 1931.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cowley, S.W.H., and E. J. Bunce, Modulation of Jupiter’s main auroral oval emissions by solar wind induced expansions and compressions of the magnetosphere, Planet. Space Sci., 51,57–79, 2003.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fairfield, D. H., Average and unusual locations of the Earth’s magnetopause and bow shock, J. Geophys. Res., 76, 6700, 1971.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Greene, J. M., and R. L. Miller, The field of a screened magnetic dipole, Planet. Space Sci., 42, 895–900, 1994.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Herbert, F., Aurora and magnetic field of Uranus, J. Geophys. Res., 114, A11206, doi: 10.1029/2009JA014394, 2009.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huddleston, D. E., et al., Location and shape of the jovian magnetopause and bow shock, J. Geophys. Res., 103, No E9, 20075–20082, 1998.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Joy, S. P., et al., Probabilistic models of the jovian magnetopause and bow shock locations, J. Geophys. Res., 107, No A10, 1309, doi:10.1029/2001JA009146, 2002.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kanani, S. J., et al., A new form of Saturn’s magnetopause using a dynamic pressure balance model, based on in situ, multi-instrument Cassini measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 115, A06207, doi: 10.1029/2009JA014262, 2010.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kivelson, M. G., and D. J. Southwood, First evidence of IMF control of Jovian magnetospheric boundary locations: Cassini and Galileo magnetic field measurements compared, Planet. Space Sci., 51, 891–898, 2003.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shue, J.-H., et al.,Magnetopause location under extreme solar wind conditions, J. Geophys. Res., 103, No A8, 17961–17700, 1998.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Slavin, J. A., et al., Solar wind flow about the outer planets: Gas dynamic modeling of the Jupiter and Saturn bow shocks, J. Geophys. Res., 90, 6275–6283, 1985.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Igor I. Alexeev
    • 1
  • Elena S. Belenkaya
    • 1
  • M. S. Grigoryan
    • 1
  1. 1.Scobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear PhysicsLomonosov Moscow State UniversityMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations