1 / 14

ISSI meeting 31 Mars-04 April

ISSI meeting 31 Mars-04 April. Critical questions and tasks. Organization. Identified question. Possible answers using experimental data: Constraints list Expertise available Definition of tasks and task coordinator Selection of events Data sets available. Almost perpendicular.

jaclyn
Download Presentation

ISSI meeting 31 Mars-04 April

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ISSI meeting 31 Mars-04 April Critical questions and tasks

  2. Organization • Identified question. • Possible answers using experimental data: • Constraints list • Expertise available • Definition of tasks and task coordinator • Selection of events • Data sets available

  3. Almost perpendicular • Crucial issues: • The data of observations clearly show the presence of the short scales as small as several c / ωpe. • Authors interpretation: Hada-Lembege, that means the dependence upon “the NUMBER OF REFLECTED IONS”.

  4. Almost perpendicular – testable features • Scale independent model: final solution does not contain other scale but ion Larmor radius Strongly dependent upon ion temperature: nonstationarity does not exist for ion beta larger than 0.3, electron dynamics has no any importance Critical question: potential should become larger than the energy of almost ALL upstream flowing particles

  5. Almost perpendicular case – gradient catastrophe scenario • Testable features: • the steepening of the fronts grows, in terms of experimental data analysis it will be “scales decrease” • the localized potential electric field increase, • the gradients become larger than some limit, the overturning occurs • electron dynamics is important: adiabatic-non-adiabatic heating

  6. Testable features • Electric field versus magnetic field scales • Small scale electrostatic structures that can supply up to 20 % - 30 % of the whole potential jump • Electric field scales analysis is crucial • The remark to be addressed to the simulations: the results will be very sensitive to the grid size.

  7. Wave activity (common for QPerp and AP) • Definition of wave modes and their characteristics (omega – k dependence), • Shock front generated waves versus generated by instabilities • Pointing vector determination (where possible) • Events selection

  8. Instabilities associated mechanisms • Waves identification • Energy fluxes (Pointing vector) • Necessary to have long foot and close to Perp

  9. Almost Perp event for the simulations

  10. QuasiPerp • Why not to complet 24 of January by electric field scales, potential, density and wave energy Pointing vector having our version of QPerp • There exists already electric field statistics for some quasi-perpendicular

  11. Biscamp mechanism • Wave properties determination

  12. Ripples • An important issue about almost tangential crossings where the « remote features » can appear

  13. Simulations • Two shocks : • 24 January 2001 case • 2D –Bertrand, 400 mass ratio, and • Omega_p/ omega_c (2) • Manfred 1D realistic mass ratio (1000) omega_p/omega_c (10) • David long system hybrid • Second shock: small beta, angle close to 90° • The simulations: two codes (not 2D)

More Related