Structure of the low‐latitude boundary layer

Sckopke, N.; Paschmann, G.; Haerendel, G.; Sonnerup, B. U. Ö.; Bame, S. J.; Forbes, T. G.; Hones, E. W.; Russell, C. T.

doi:10.1029/ja086ia04p02099

Cited by 398 publications

(251 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

228

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They speculated that the particles in the mantle enter the magnetosphere as a result of magnetic reconnection at the dayside magnetopause and arrive at the mantle after first passing into and back out of the dayside cusp. The transport concept is basically single-particle drift physics including motion parallel to the Figure I (adopted from Rosenbauer et al [1975] and Kennel [1995]) illustrates the distinguishing features of the two mantle models. We refer to these models as the cusp model and the magnetosheath model, cusp and magnetosheath being the proximate sources of mantle plasma in the two models.…”

Section: Two Mantle Picturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relation between cusp and mantle in MHD simulation

Siscoe¹,

Erickson²,

Sonnerup³

et al. 2001

J. Geophys. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

) illustrates the distinguishing features of the two mantle models. We refer to these models as the cusp model and the magnetosheath model, cusp and magnetosheath being the proximate sources of mantle plasma in the two models. The two models, though conceptually different, are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Instead, as this paper demonstrates, the cusp and the magnetosheath simultaneously feed contiguous layers of the mantle. Plasma parameters and their derivatives change without discontinuity across the interface between the layers. The main differences in the layers fed by the cusp and the magnetosheath are the following. The magnetosheath-fed layer lies outside the cusp-fed layer, carries more plasma and, so, is a more conspicuous mantle feature in Geotail data. However, it diverges from the plasma sheet at least out to 200 R,. and, so, is not a likely source of plasma sheet plasma. The cusp-fed layer occupies a greater volume of the tail than the magnetosheath-fed layer, carries less plasma and, so, is a less conspicuous feature in Geotail data. But it converges on the plasma sheet and. so, is a likely source of plasma sheet plasma. The cusp-fed layer might also contain ionospheric ions, for the simulation shows that the low-altitude cusp also contributes to feeding the mantle. In these simulations the Earth's dipole is perpendicular to the solar wind flow. Results are presented in the geocentric solar ecliptic coordinate system (GSE), which in this case is the same as the geocentric magnetospheric coordinate system (GSM). The ISM code was run for 2.5 hours of magnetosphere time from an initially static condition with a plane interface between the solar wind plasma and the geomagnetic dipole (,i.e., the original Chapman-Ferraro configuration). By 2.5 hours of magnetosphere time after the solar wind starts to flow the global-scale parameters related to magnetopause reconnection have become quasisteady. The time changes that remain in the mantle region are slow compared to the Alfv•n propa. Properties of MHD Code Used for this Study•ation time across the mantle. Results: A Two-Layered MantleWe show results for an ISM run in which the IMF points precisely' south. This is the easiest case to illustrate with 2-D pictures, and the principal results that this case illustrates, which we summarized above. hold also for other IMF orientations and for cases in which Earth's dipole is not perpendicular to the solar

show abstract

Section: Two Mantle Picturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relation between cusp and mantle in MHD simulation

Siscoe¹,

Erickson²,

Sonnerup³

et al. 2001

J. Geophys. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The observations made by ISEE 1/2 at the northerndawn magnetopause were interpreted as evidence of the diffusive entry of magnetosheath plasma into the magnetosphere and of Kelvin-Helmholtz instability at the inner edge of the Low-latitude boundary layer (LLBL) (Sckopke et al, 1981). They have also been interpreted by different authors as indicating magnetic merging and the formation of twisted ropes of interconnected magnetosheath and magnetospheric magnetic lines (Paschmann et al, 1982;Cowley, 1982Cowley, , 1984Cowley, , 1986Saunders, 1983).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Structure of the low-latitude magnetopause: MAGION-4 observations

et al. 1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The aims of this paper are (1) briefly to describe the plasma devices onboard the MAGION-4 satellite, launched on 3 August 1995, of the INTER-BALL project, and (2) to discuss first observations made near the magnetopause region. During the presented boundary crossings the MAGION-4 observed quasiperiodic pulses of magnetosheath-like plasma in a region of low plasma density. This region is located just earthwards of the magnetopause and is populated by a plasma which, except for the density, has the same parameters as in the magnetosheath. Deeper in the magnetosphere, the encounter of a layer of hot electrons and high-energy ions was interpreted as low-latitude boundary layer.

show abstract

“…Some authors use the term LLBL for the entire region between the magnetopause and the plasma sheet (e.g. Fujimoto et al, 1998) while others reserve it for the outermost region with tailward¯ow (Sckopke et al, 1981;Paschmann et al, 1990). In this study we use the wider de®nition.…”

Section: Conjugate Measurements Bymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…11 and 13 is that the region we have designated LLBL is a mosaic of two di erent types of plasmas, tailward¯owing plasma dominating until 0300 UT and transverse-Earthward owing plasma with more plasmasheet-like properties dominating between 3 and 7 UT. In the terminology used by Sckopke et al (1981) the region before 03 is called LLBL while the region after is called the haloregion. Williams et al (1985) in a study of particles above 24 keV used the term stagnation region for the halo region.…”

Section: Conjugate Measurements Bymentioning

confidence: 99%

First results from the hot plasma instrument PROMICS-3 on Interball-2

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The PROMICS-3 instrument on Interball-2 is nominally identical to the PROMICS-3 instrument on Interball-1. It performs three-dimensional measurements of ions in the energy range 4 eV±70 keV with mass separation and of electrons in the energy range 300 eV±35 keV. Interball-2 was launched on August 29, 1996, into an orbit with the same inclination as that of Interball-1, 63 , but with apogee at 20 000 km. In this study the PROMICS-3 instrument on Interball-2 is brie¯y described and examples of the ®rst results are presented. Firstly, we report observations of upward moving molecular ions with energies of up to 700 eV at the poleward edge of the auroral oval. Previous observations of out¯owing molecular ions have been at lower altitudes and lower energies. Secondly, we show observations of dawnside magnetosheath plasma injections. Using conjugate data from both PROMICS-3 instruments we have found dispersion structures above the morningside auroral oval, which occurred simultaneously with isolated``pockets'' of magnetosheath plasma at a distance of X GSM À14 to À12 R E , which had been injected into the inner part of the low-latitude boundary layer. These isolated plasma structures were sites of strong ®eld-aligned currents and are proposed to be the magnetospheric counterparts of the dispersion structures.

show abstract

Structure of the low‐latitude boundary layer

Cited by 398 publications

References 25 publications

Relation between cusp and mantle in MHD simulation

Relation between cusp and mantle in MHD simulation

Structure of the low-latitude magnetopause: MAGION-4 observations

First results from the hot plasma instrument PROMICS-3 on Interball-2

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About