Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Jul 8;5(7):e01976.
doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01976. eCollection 2019 Jul.

Periodic low-frequency electric field structures in a magnetized non-thermal auroral plasma

Affiliations

Periodic low-frequency electric field structures in a magnetized non-thermal auroral plasma

O R Rufai. Heliyon. .

Abstract

The theoretical explanation of electric field structures associated with density depletion in the Earth's upper ionosphere is presented. Using the quasi-neutrality hypothesis, the effect of excess energetic electron species is studied on the evolution of nonlinear low-frequency ion-cyclotron and ion-acoustic waves in a magnetized auroral plasma. The dynamics of the cold ion beam is governed by the fluid equations and the electron is treated as energetic species with non-thermal density distribution. Numerical computations appear in a series of periodic oscillations, such as spiky, sawtooth and sinusoidal waveforms. The present model can generate up to 18 mV/m electric field amplitude, which is in the range of the FREJA satellite measurements in the auroral acceleration region.

Keywords: Auroral plasma; Computational mathematics; Electric field structures; Geophysics; Low-frequency; Non-thermal electrons; Nonlinear physics; Plasma physics; Quasi-neutrality condition; Wave physics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The electric field structures observed by FREJA satellite (taken from Kjus et al. [19]).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Geometry of the model.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Normalized electric field structures E(ψ,M) vs ξ for M = 1.25, θ = 2°, δ = 0.2, E0 = 1.1, α = 0.00 (a), 0.05 (b), 0.1 (c), 0.199 (d).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Normalized electric field E(ψ,M) vs ξ for α = 0.199, θ = 2°, δ = 0.2, E0 = 1.1, M = 0.22 (a), 1.0 (b), 1.20 (c), 1.25 (d).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Normalized electric field E(ψ,M) vs ξ for α = 0.199, θ = 2°, M = 1.25, E0 = 1.1, δ = −0.1 (a), 0.0 (b), 0.1 (c), 0.2 (d).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Normalized electric field E(ψ,M) vs ξ for α = 0.199, θ = 2°, δ = 0.2, M = 1.25, E0 = 0.01 (a), 0.1 (b), 0.8 (c), 1.1 (d).
Figure 7
Figure 7
Normalized electric field E(ψ,M) vs ξ for α = 0.199, M = 1.25, δ = 0.2, E0 = 1.1, θ = 2° (a), 20° (b), 50° (c), 85° (d).

References

    1. Singh S.V., Reddy R.V., Lakhina G.S. Adv. Space Res. 2001;28(11):1643–1648.
    1. Temerin M., Cerny K., Lotko W., Mozer F.S. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1982;48:1175.
    1. Matsumoto H., Kojima H., Miyatake T., Omura Y., Okada M., Tsurutani M. Geophys. Res. Lett. 1994;21:2915.
    1. Tsurutani B.T., Arballo J.K., Lakhina G.S., Ho C.M., Buti B. Geophys. Res. Lett. 1998;25:4117.
    1. Franz J.R., Kintner P.M., Pickett J.S. Geophys. Res. Lett. 1998;25:1277.

LinkOut - more resources