Physics
Scientific paper
Dec 2010
adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=2010agufmsm31d..01n&link_type=abstract
American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting 2010, abstract #SM31D-01
Physics
[2704] Magnetospheric Physics / Auroral Phenomena, [2716] Magnetospheric Physics / Energetic Particles: Precipitating, [2784] Magnetospheric Physics / Solar Wind/Magnetosphere Interactions, [2788] Magnetospheric Physics / Magnetic Storms And Substorms
Scientific paper
We use a data base of 4861 substorms identified by global UV images to investigate the substorm cycle dependence of various types of aurora, and to obtain new results on substorm triggering by external driving. Although all types of aurora increase at substorm onset, broadband (Alfvénic) aurora shows a particular association with substorms, and, especially, substorm onset. While diffuse electron and monoenergetic auroral precipitating power rises by 79% and 90% respectively following an onset, broadband aurora rises by 182%. In the first 10-15 minutes following onset, the power associated with Alfvénic acceleration is comparable to monoenergetic acceleration (also called “inverted-V” events). In general, this is not the case prior to onset, or indeed, during recovery. The rise time of the electron diffuse aurora following onset is much slower, about 50 minutes, and thus presumably extends into recovery. We also re-investigate the issue of solar wind triggering of substorms by considering not just changes in the solar wind prior to onset, but how the pattern of changes differs from random and comparable epochs. We verify that a preonset reduction of solar wind driving (“northward turning” in the simplest case of IMF Bz) holds for the superposed epoch mean of the ensemble. Moreover, this reduction is not the result of a small number of substorms with large changes. The reduction starts about 20 min prior to substorm onset, which, although a longer delay than previously suggested, is appropriate given the various propagation time delays involved. Next, we compare the IMF to random solar wind conditions. Not surprisingly, solar wind driving prior to onset averages somewhat higher than random. Although about a quarter of substorms occur for steady northward IMF conditions, more general coupling functions such as the Kan-Lee electric field, the Borovosky function, or our dΦMP/dt, show very few substorms occur following weak dayside merging. We assembled a data base of solar wind times with slightly elevated conditions, chosen to resemble the integrated driving typical before substorm onsets, but otherwise randomly occuring. We looked at how the IMF subsequently changed after these random elevations, compared to the changes preceding substorms. It turns out that mere reversion to the mean leads to a “northward turning” after the imposed selection criterion end. Thus (slightly generalizing the view of Morley and Freeman), substorms require solar wind driving which produces dayside merging, but external triggering is probably insignificant.
Liou Kan
Newell Patrick T.
No associations
LandOfFree
Auroral Acceleration, Solar Wind Driving, and Substorm Triggering (Invited) does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.
If you have personal experience with Auroral Acceleration, Solar Wind Driving, and Substorm Triggering (Invited), we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Auroral Acceleration, Solar Wind Driving, and Substorm Triggering (Invited) will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-1470439