In their comment, Gombosi et al. [this issue] (hereinafter referred to as GPL99) claim that the conclusions reachedby Raeder [1999] (hereinafter referred to as R99) are not correct and not supported by their simulations. Specifically, they raise the issues of (1) results from other codes for northward interplanetary magnetic field (IMF), (2) the inherent numerical resistivity of different schemes, (3) mesh convergence, and (4) the diffusion of the bow shock in the highresistivity cases. Each of these issues warrants clarification.GPL99 essentially claim that their model is more accurate than anyone else' s. This assertion is based on the notion of "mesh convergence." As I shall discuss below, mesh convergence is at most necessary, but not sufficient for validating a simulation. GPL99 do not offer any physical explanation for their results, that is, why there should be a closed magnetosphere with a 50 R• short tail as a result of a moderately northward IME Neither do they show any conclusive experimental evidence to support their assertion. They do, however, present a simulation based on the first-order accurate and highly diffusive Rusanov scheme (as I do in this reply) which shows a closed magnetosphere. These simulations corroborate the main result of R99, namely, that large values of resistivity produce a closed magnetosphere for northward
Numerical ResistivityGPL99 point out correctly that any discrete numerical scheme to solve the MHD equations will lead to diffusion and that these artificial effects are difficult to quantify. It is an unfortunate reality of computational physics that there is no method to solve hyperbolic equations, such as the ideal MHD equations, numerically without introducing numerical diffusion and dispersion when discontinuities are present in the solution [Sod, 1985]. The quest has always been to minimize these effects. While schemes with no diffusion can be constructed (for example, central second-order spatial differences with leap-frog time stepping), they suffer from excessive numerical dispersion which makes them useless for computations that involve shocks and discontinuities. The Zalesak, 1979;van Leer, 1973van Leer, , 1974van Leer, , 1977 Harten and Zwas, 1972;Harten, 1983Harten, , 1984Sweby, 1984;Yee, 1985Yee, , 1987 try to achieve monotonicity with high global accuracy by blending high order fluxes with low order fluxes, using so-called "flux limiters" or "smoothness monitors." In essence, these schemes are of high order every-13,149