An empirical model of the current sheet in Jupiter's magnetosphere

Wang, Jianzhao; Huo, Zhuo-xi; Zhang, Lei

doi:10.1016/j.pss.2021.105395

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(2020) as well as Wang et al. (2021, 2022) has reported LT asymmetry of the Jovian CS, viz., a CS current difference between dayside and nightside, though the latter work stated that the difference was not very large. It however, is also noteworthy here that the LT asymmetry was an averaged view of the Jovian CS using long‐term vector magnetic data ranging from pre‐Galileo or Galileo to Juno eras without considering the possible long‐term variations within the Jovian magnetosphere.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…However, it should be noted here that the long-term variation mainly found in the CS parameters by this study may be subject to change, if we consider either LT or orbit-by-orbit variability or a combination of both. Recently, Lorch et al (2020) as well as Wang et al (2021Wang et al ( , 2022 has reported LT asymmetry of the Jovian CS, viz., a CS current difference between dayside and nightside, though the latter work stated that the difference was not very large. It however, is also noteworthy here that the LT asymmetry was an averaged view of the Jovian CS using long-term vector magnetic data ranging from pre-Galileo or Galileo to Juno eras without considering the possible long-term variations within the Jovian magnetosphere.…”

Section: Examination Of 𝐴𝐴mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Updates of the models using new data by Galileo and/or Juno are further limited (e.g., Connerney et al., 2020; Khurana, 2001; Khurana & Schwarzl, 2005; Lorch et al., 2020; Russel et al., 2001; Vogt et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2022) and have not caught up with the accumulation of the data. Nevertheless, the magnetospheric field models have a wide range of applications such as predicting the magnetic field that a spacecraft may observe (e.g., Kivelson et al., 1997), calculating the magnetic field external to Jupiter's satellites for electromagnetic (EM) induction studies (e.g., Khurana et al., 2009) and so on.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Updated Model Parameters of Current Sheet and Magnetic Field in the Jovian Magnetosphere for Pre‐Galileo, Galileo, and Juno Eras

Momoki

Toh

2022

JGR Planets

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Jovian magnetosphere has been probed by several spacecraft and thus vector magnetic data have also been accumulated intermittently. Since the first flyby to Jupiter by Pioneer 10 in 1973, six spacecraft (Pioneer 11, Voyager 1, Voyager 2, Ulysses, Cassini, and New Horizons) flew by and five out of them (i.e., except New Horizons) conducted magnetic observations. Galileo (Johnson et al., 1992) was the very first orbiter inserted into Jovicentric orbits, and now Juno (Bolton et al., 2017) is in Jupiter's polar orbits. One of the main applications of the magnetic data is modeling of the Jovian magnetic field, which mainly consists of the Jovian intrinsic and magnetospheric magnetic fields.The Jovian intrinsic field is originated from the dynamo action inside Jupiter. Its models have been studied intensively since the first observation by Pioneer 10, for example,

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Examination Of 𝐴𝐴mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Updated Model Parameters of Current Sheet and Magnetic Field in the Jovian Magnetosphere for Pre‐Galileo, Galileo, and Juno Eras

Momoki

Toh

2022

JGR Planets

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, we have shown that the time inversion of the magnetic field is better estimated with JRM33 + CON2020 (Figure 2). Following these observations, a hybrid current-layer model could be built, considering both CON2020 and KK2005 according to their domain of validity, and using the Juno and Galileo dataset as done by Wang et al (2022). Such a hybrid model, by retaining the precision offered by CON2020 in the inner magnetosphere and by including a current sheet bent by local time effects in the outer magnetosphere as modeled by KK2005, would more accurately predict the magnetic field in all the magnetospheric regions of Jupiter.…”

Section: Concluding Remarks and Implications For Futures Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of the Jovian Current Sheet Models on the Mapping of the UV Auroral Footprints of Io, Europa, and Ganymede

Rabia,

Nénon,

André

et al. 2024

JGR Space Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The in situ characterization of moon‐magnetosphere interactions at Jupiter and the mapping of moon auroral footpaths require accurate global models of the magnetospheric magnetic field. In this study, we compare the ability of two widely‐used current sheet models, Khurana‐2005 (KK2005) and Connerney‐2020 (CON2020) combined with the most recent internal magnetic field model of Jupiter (JRM33) to match representative Galileo and Juno measurements acquired at low, medium, and high latitudes. With the adjustments of the KK2005 model to JRM33, we show that in the outer and middle magnetosphere (R > 15RJ), JRM33 + KK2005 is found to be the best model to reproduce the magnetic field observations of Galileo and Juno as it accounts for local time effects. JRM33 + CON2020 gives the most accurate representation of the inner magnetosphere. This finding is drawn from comparisons with Juno in situ magnetic field measurements and confirmed by contrasting the timing of the crossings of the Io, Europa, and Ganymede flux tubes identified in the Juno particles data with the two model estimates. JRM33 + CON2020 also maps more accurately the UV auroral footpath of Io, Europa, and Ganymede observed by Juno than JRM33 + KK2005. The JRM33 + KK2005 model predicts a local time asymmetry in position of the moons' footprints, which is however not detected in Juno's UV measurements. This could indicate that local time effects on the magnetic field are marginal at the orbital locations of Io, Europa, and Ganymede. Finally, the accuracy of the models and their predictions as a function of hemisphere, local time, and longitude is explored.

show abstract

Updated Models of Current Sheet and Magnetic Field in the Jovian Magnetosphere for Pre-Galileo, Galileo and Juno Eras

Momoki

Toh

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An empirical model of the current sheet in Jupiter's magnetosphere

Cited by 5 publications

References 26 publications

Updated Model Parameters of Current Sheet and Magnetic Field in the Jovian Magnetosphere for Pre‐Galileo, Galileo, and Juno Eras

Updated Model Parameters of Current Sheet and Magnetic Field in the Jovian Magnetosphere for Pre‐Galileo, Galileo, and Juno Eras

Influence of the Jovian Current Sheet Models on the Mapping of the UV Auroral Footprints of Io, Europa, and Ganymede

Updated Models of Current Sheet and Magnetic Field in the Jovian Magnetosphere for Pre-Galileo, Galileo and Juno Eras

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About