From the Sun to the Earth: The 13 May 2005 Coronal Mass Ejection

Bisi, M. M.; Breen, A. R.; Jackson, B. V.; Fallows, R. A.; Walsh, A. P.; Mikić, Z.; Riley, Pete; Owen, C. J.; González-Esparza, A.; Aguilar-Rodríguez, E.; Morgan, Huw; Jensen, E. A.; Wood, Alan; Owens, M. J.; Tokumaru, M.; Manoharan, P. K.; Чашей, И. В.; Giunta, A.; Linker, J. A.; Shishov, V. I.; Tyul’bashev, S. A.; Agalya, G.; Glubokova, S. K.; Hamilton, M. S.; Fujiki, K.; Hick, P. P.; Clover, J. M.; Pintér, Balázs

doi:10.1007/s11207-010-9602-8

Cited by 68 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 162 publications

(222 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second MC that we will study here features one of the most extreme solar wind events of solar cycle 23 and has been the subject of detailed studies from the eruption of the CME on the Sun to its consequences on Earth's environment (see, for example, Dasso et al, 2009;Bisi et al, 2010). The sheath of this MC arrives around 02:40 UT on 15 May 2005 at Earth's bow shock (dotted line in Fig.…”

Section: Event 2: Temporal Variation Of the Mc's Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Magnetic clouds' structure in the magnetosheath as observed by Cluster and Geotail: four case studies

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Magnetic clouds (MCs) are large-scale magnetic flux ropes ejected from the Sun into the interplanetary space. They play a central role in solar-terrestrial relations as they can efficiently drive magnetic activity in the near-Earth environment. Their impact on the Earth's magnetosphere is often attributed to the presence of southward magnetic fields inside the MC, as observed in the upstream solar wind. However, when they arrive in the vicinity of the Earth, MCs first encounter the bow shock, which is expected to modify their properties, including their magnetic field strength and direction. If these changes are significant, they can in turn affect the interaction of the MC with the magnetosphere. In this paper, we use data from the Cluster and Geotail spacecraft inside the magnetosheath and from the Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) upstream of the Earth's environment to investigate the impact of the bow shock's crossing on the magnetic structure of MCs. Through four example MCs, we show that the evolution of the MC's structure from the solar wind to the magnetosheath differs largely from one event to another. The smooth rotation of the MC can either be preserved inside the magnetosheath, be modified, i.e. the magnetic field still rotates slowly but at different angles, or even disappear. The alteration of the magnetic field orientation across the bow shock can vary with time during the MC's passage and with the location inside the magnetosheath. We examine the conditions encountered at the bow shock from direct observations, when Cluster or Geotail cross it, or indirectly by applying a magnetosheath model. We obtain a good agreement between the observed and modelled magnetic field direction and shock configuration, which varies from quasiperpendicular to quasi-parallel in our study. We find that the variations in the angle between the magnetic fields in the solar wind and in the magnetosheath are anti-correlated with the variations in the shock obliquity. When the shock is in a quasi-parallel regime, the magnetic field direction varies significantly from the solar wind to the magnetosheath. In such cases, the magnetic field reaching the magnetopause cannot be approximated by the upstream magnetic field. Therefore, it is important to take into account the conditions at the bow shock when estimating the impact of an MC with the Earth's environment because these conditions are crucial in determining the magnetosheath magnetic field, which then interacts with the magnetosphere.

show abstract

Section: Event 2: Temporal Variation Of the Mc's Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Magnetic clouds' structure in the magnetosheath as observed by Cluster and Geotail: four case studies

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We combine these different data sets with modeling techniques to give a comprehensive view of the two geo-effective CMEs. Although there are some previous studies looking at the 2005 May 13 CME individually (e.g., Yurchyshyn et al 2006;Reiner et al 2007;Bisi et al 2010;Gopalswamy 2010;Manchester et al 2014), we study the two geo-effective CMEs together and pay particular attention to the propagation characteristics of the two CMEs from the Sun far into interplanetary space. It is also interesting to show that although the launch times of the two CMEs are well separated, the CMEs can still interact with each other in interplanetary space.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Propagation Characteristics of Two Coronal Mass Ejections from the Sun Far into Interplanetary Space

Zhao

Liu

et al. 2017

ApJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Propagation of coronal mass ejections (CMEs) from the Sun far into interplanetary space is not well understood, due to limited observations. In this study we examine the propagation characteristics of two geo-effective CMEs, which occurred on 2005 May 6 and 13, respectively. Significant heliospheric consequences associated with the two CMEs are observed, including interplanetary CMEs (ICMEs) at the Earth and Ulysses, interplanetary shocks, a long-duration type II radio burst, and intense geomagnetic storms. We use coronagraph observations from SOHO/ LASCO, frequency drift of the long-duration type II burst, in situ measurements at the Earth and Ulysses, and magnetohydrodynamic propagation of the observed solar wind disturbances at 1 au to track the CMEs from the Sun far into interplanetary space. We find that both of the CMEs underwent a major deceleration within 1 au and thereafter a gradual deceleration when they propagated from the Earth to deep interplanetary space, due to interactions with the ambient solar wind. The results also reveal that the two CMEs interacted with each other in the distant interplanetary space even though their launch times on the Sun were well separated. The intense geomagnetic storm for each case was caused by the southward magnetic fields ahead of the CME, stressing the critical role of the sheath region in geomagnetic storm generation, although for the first case there is a corotating interaction region involved.

show abstract

“…Pinter, 1982;Smart and Shea, 1985;Pinter and Dryer, 1990;Reiner et al, 1998b;Dulk, Leblanc, and Bougeret, 1999;Leblanc et al, 2001;Hoang et al, 2007) and by studies combining information extracted from white-light coronagraph images, low-frequency radio spectra, in-situ spacecraft detections, and/or interplanetary scintillation (IPS) data (Pohjolainen et al, 2007;Cho et al, 2007;Feng et al, 2009;Gonzalez-Esparza and Aguilar-Rodriguez, 2009;Bisi et al, 2010;Liu et al, 2013;Iju, Tokumaru, and Fujiki, 2013). The first joint analysis of white-light, radio, and in-situ observations on a statistically relevant number of cases is that of Reiner, Kaiser, and Bougeret (2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Low-Frequency Type-II Radio Detections and Coronagraph Data Employed to Describe and Forecast the Propagation of 71 CMEs/Shocks

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motivated by improving predictions of arrival times at Earth of shocks driven by coronal mass ejections (CMEs), we have analyzed 71 Earth-directed events in different stages of their propagation. The study is primarily based on approximated locations of interplanetary (IP) shocks derived from Type-II radio emissions detected by the Wind/WAVES experiment during 1997 -2007. Distance-time diagrams resulting from the combination of white-light corona, IP Type-II radio, and in-situ data lead to the formulation of descriptive profiles of each CME's journey toward Earth. Furthermore, two different methods for tracking and predicting the location of CME-driven IP shocks are presented. The linear method, solely based on Wind/WAVES data, arises after key modifications to a pre-existing technique 6 Annapolis, MD, USA H. Cremades et al. that linearly projects the drifting low-frequency Type-II emissions to 1 AU. This upgraded method improves forecasts of shock-arrival times by almost 50 %. The second predictive method is proposed on the basis of information derived from the descriptive profiles and relies on a single CME height-time point and on low-frequency Type-II radio emissions to obtain an approximate value of the shock arrival time at Earth. In addition, we discuss results on CME-radio emission associations, characteristics of IP propagation, and the relative success of the forecasting methods.

show abstract

From the Sun to the Earth: The 13 May 2005 Coronal Mass Ejection

Cited by 68 publications

References 162 publications

Magnetic clouds' structure in the magnetosheath as observed by Cluster and Geotail: four case studies

Magnetic clouds' structure in the magnetosheath as observed by Cluster and Geotail: four case studies

Propagation Characteristics of Two Coronal Mass Ejections from the Sun Far into Interplanetary Space

Low-Frequency Type-II Radio Detections and Coronagraph Data Employed to Describe and Forecast the Propagation of 71 CMEs/Shocks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About