2005
DOI: 10.5194/angeo-23-2589-2005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Relation between magnetic fields and electric currents in plasmas

Abstract: Abstract. Maxwell's equations allow the magnetic field B to be calculated if the electric current density J is assumed to be completely known as a function of space and time. The charged particles that constitute the current, however, are subject to Newton's laws as well, and J can be changed by forces acting on charged particles. Particularly in plasmas, where the concentration of charged particles is high, the effect of the electromagnetic field calculated from a given J on J itself cannot be ignored. Wherea… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
40
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
1
40
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While Vasyliunas [2005] points out the secondary nature of the electric field as a derived parameter, in the MHD approximation E and V Â B are synonymous. However, as the effects are seen throughout the magnetosphere, we do not think that non-MHD terms in the plasma transport equations cause the differences in the magnetospheric dynamics in the examined cases.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While Vasyliunas [2005] points out the secondary nature of the electric field as a derived parameter, in the MHD approximation E and V Â B are synonymous. However, as the effects are seen throughout the magnetosphere, we do not think that non-MHD terms in the plasma transport equations cause the differences in the magnetospheric dynamics in the examined cases.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the latter, the electric field and current are seen as the primary parameters. As argued by Parker (1996) and Vasyliunas (2005), the B, v paradigm is more satisfactory from a dynamical point of view, whereas the E, j approach relies on assumptions of stationarity (for instance, magnetic field lines are not equipotentials if ∂/∂t = 0). We adopt the B, v paradigm in our discussion, but mention the E, j interpretation when it is the customary point of view.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5, the light speed CourantFriedrichs-Lewy ͑CFL͒ condition on the time step is the same as marginally resolving the plasma frequency when the grid scale is at the electron inertial length. If the electron inertial length is always under-resolved, then the condition on the time step to resolve the plasma frequency is more stringent than the light speed CFL condition.…”
Section: The Electron Inertial Scalementioning
confidence: 99%
“…5 if there did not exist a numerical scheme in which the current density could be found directly from the GOL. For in that case, while the GOL would, in principle, calculate the current on any time or space scale, there would be no way to compute the current from the GOL in practical terms without resolving both the plasma frequency and the electron inertial scale.…”
Section: The Electron Inertial Scalementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation