j. büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

46
Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004 Consequences of LHDI for three-dimensional collisionless reconnection through thin current sheets J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were: J. Kuska, B. Nikutowski, I.Silin, Th.Wiegelmann J. Kuska, B. Nikutowski, I.Silin, Th.Wiegelmann all at: Max-Planck Institut für Sonnensystem- all at: Max-Planck Institut für Sonnensystem- forschung in Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany forschung in Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany (for „Solar System Research“ starting 1.7.2004 after (for „Solar System Research“ starting 1.7.2004 after being „for Aeronomy“ the last 40 years) being „for Aeronomy“ the last 40 years)

Upload: kimball

Post on 12-Jan-2016

20 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

DESCRIPTION

Consequences of LHDI for three-dimensional collisionless reconnection through thin current sheets. J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were: J. Kuska, B. Nikutowski, I.Silin, Th.Wiegelmann all at: Max-Planck Institut für Sonnensystem-forschung in Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Consequences of LHDI for three-dimensional collisionless reconnection through thin current sheets

J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were: were:

J. Kuska, B. Nikutowski, I.Silin, Th.Wiegelmann J. Kuska, B. Nikutowski, I.Silin, Th.Wiegelmann

all at: Max-Planck Institut für Sonnensystem-all at: Max-Planck Institut für Sonnensystem-forschung in Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany forschung in Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany

(for „Solar System Research“ starting 1.7.2004 (for „Solar System Research“ starting 1.7.2004 after being „for Aeronomy“ the last 40 years)after being „for Aeronomy“ the last 40 years)

Page 2: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Topics• Gradient and current-driven plasma instabilities in

current sheets • Initiation of 3D collisionless reconnection (PIC->Vlasov-

simulation approach) in / through– anti-parallel magnetic fields– creation / annihilation of helicity density– non-anti-parallel, finite guide magnetic field case– asymmetric (magnetopause) current sheet case

• „Anomalous resistivity“ approach to introduce kinetic results into large scale MHD

• EUV Bright Points (BP): MHD modeling of the dynamic evolution (photospheric flows) + anomalous transport=> Null point <or> finite B <or> QSL reconnection ???

Page 3: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

3D current sheet instabilities• 1970th: quasi/linear theory: LHD-instability at the edges

(Drake, Huba, Davidson, Winske, Tanaka & Sato ... )• 1996: 3D PIC simulations showed: global (kink/sausage)

mode current sheet instabilities can initiate reconnection

(Pritchett et al.; Zhu & Winglee; Büchner & Kuska 1996)• 1998...now: New theory - and simulation results about

current-driven and drift instabilities at sheet center

(Horiuchi & Sato; Büchner, Kuska & Silin; Daughton et al.)• Our latest move:

From PIC to Vlasov-codes to test wave-particle

interactions, resonances etc. which can initiate

current sheet instabilities and reconnection

Page 4: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Vlasov equation: 0)(1

v

fBv

cE

m

e

r

fv

t

f j

j

jjj

Linear perturbation of distribution functions

tdv

fBvEc

cm

etf

tj

j

jj

0111 )(

Resulting perturbation of density and current

vdfvej

vdfe

jjj

jjj

11

11

Maxwell equations for the fields or wave equation for the potentials

121

2

21

121

2

21

41

41

jct

A

cA

tc

Kinetic stability investigation

Page 5: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

-> > 20o: Eigenmodes are linearily stable(k=k0 cos ex +k0 sin ey)

Linear stability of oblique eigenmodes at current sheet center

Page 6: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Vlasov simulation code

vdfvej

vdfe

ei

Veijei

V

eieij

ei

3,

,,

3,

,,

121

2

21

121

2

21

41

41

jct

A

cA

tc

0)(1 ,

,

,,,

v

fBv

cE

m

e

r

fv

t

f ei

ei

eieiei

Page 7: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Nonlinear LHDI (anti-parallel fields: Vlasov kinetic simulation)

Page 8: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Non-local penetration of LHD unstable waves

Page 9: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Simulation shows: the Ey fluctuations grow also at the center

Page 10: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Drift-resonance instability (DRI)

1D ion distribution in the current direction

1D electron distribution in the current direction

Ions drive waves → plateau-formation → electron-heating

Page 11: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

DRI: 3D distribution function

3D Ion distribution function 3D electron distribution

Page 12: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

3D current sheet instability

(Plasma density perturbation; case of antiparallel fields) (Plasma density perturbation; case of antiparallel fields)

Page 13: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Current sheet thickness C1<->C4 (7.9.01, 19:00>23:00)

Page 14: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Current sheet waves ~21:00 UT

Page 15: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Current sheet waves –observed by Cluster as predicted

Page 16: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Waves initiate 3D reconnection

Page 17: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Mechanism:Wave- reconnection coupling:

Dashed: LHDI (edge) ; Solid: LHDI at the center; Dashed-dotted: reconnecting mode

Page 18: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

3D reconnection island:

Page 19: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

2.) Helicity density evolution:a.) 3D antiparallel

reconnection

0 const. B)d (A H 3M x

Spheres: quadrants 1 and 4

Squares: quadrants 2 and 3

Solid line - total helicity:

Page 20: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Antiparallel -> finite guide field By

guide field By -> flux ropesguide field By -> flux ropesQuadrupolar By fieldQuadrupolar By field

-> Bending of B-fields-> Bending of B-fields

Page 21: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Finite guide field case -> non 180o magnetic shear Guide fields change the shear angle between the ambient B-fields

1 8 0 °

M S P M S HJ

1 2 5 °

M S P M S H

J

2 1 0 °

M S P M S HJ

180o

(J = direction of sheet current and of reconnection E- field)

Negative Co-

helicity HMo < 0

Positive Co-helicity

HMo > 0 0 B)d (A H 3Mo x

Page 22: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

3D guide field reconnection: initially positive co-helicity case

oi t = 1 oi t = 25

Page 23: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

2D / 3D positive co-helicity reconnection („pull reconnection“)

Dotted: quadrants 1 and 4

Dashed: quadrants 2 and 3

Solid line - total helicity:

0d B) (E2- H 3M

xdt

d

Page 24: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

oi t = 1

oi t = 23

3D guide field reconnection: initially negative co-helicity case

Page 25: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

2D / 3D negative co-helicity reconnection („push reconnection“)

Dotted: quadrants 1 and 4

Dashed: quadrants 2 and 3

Solid line - total helicity:

0d B) (E2- H 3M

xdt

d

Page 26: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

3.) Resonant DRI in the guide field case:

The growth rate of the instability decreases proportionally to the number of resonant ions.

For stronger guide fields the cross-field

propagation direction turns

further away from the current direction.

Page 27: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Reconnection wave in a non- anti-parallel (guide field) current sheet

Bz in linear presentation for the polarity of magnetic bubbles

Bz in log presentation turbulence -> structure

Page 28: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Result: patchy reconnection in the

non-anti-parallel, guide field case:

The B field opens the boundary throug local patches (blue: below, red: above)

Page 29: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Simulation model

The pressure being locally balanced; drift Maxwellians,

drifts

currents

4: Non-symmetric case (MP)

-> fields rotate through a tangential magnetic boundary

Bc

j

4

eiei TTuu //

Page 30: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Instability of a non-symmetric magnetic boundary current sheet

LHD instability first on magnetospheric side (z<0) -> penetrates to the magnetosheath side (z>0) and triggers reconnection - island formation

Magnetic

field Bz:

Page 31: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Magnetopause observation (Cluster)

A. Vaivadset al., 2004

Page 32: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

5.) Quasilinear estimate of the WP momentum exchange (-> “anomalous collision frequency;-> “... resistivity”)

(Davidson and Gladd, Phys. Fluids, 1975)

Page 33: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Anomalous momentum exchangedue to nonlinear DRI in a current sheet:

Page 34: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

6.) X-ray & EUV Bright Points (BPs): quiet-sun reconnection

- XBP are formed inside diffuse clouds, which grow at 1 km/s up to 20 Mm and then form a bright core 3 Mm wide, they last, typically, 8 h

Vaiana, 1970: rockets; Golub et al. 1974-77: Skylab More recently: SOHO and TRACE observations

-Later (Soho...) : also many EUV BP investigated

-> BP are assumed to be prime candidates for reconnection: they well correlate with separated photospheric dipolar (opposite polarity) photospheric magnetic fluxes

Page 35: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Soho-MDI and EIT: EUV BP

MDI line-of sight magnetic

field

( 40” x 40”)

EIT (195 A) same field of

view

17-18.10.1996 (M. Madjarska et al., 2003)

Page 36: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Reconnection models for BP

- Due to the B separation in the photosphere -> Reconnection between bipoles

assumed to take place in the corona, -> magnetohydrostatic models, e.g.

- Newly Emerging Flux Model (EMF) Heyvaerts, Priest & Rust 1977

- Converging flux model Priest, Parnell, Martin & Gollup, 1994- Separator Reconnection in MCC

Longcope, 1998

Page 37: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

But: dynamical footpoint motion:

-> currents are driven into the chromosphere/corona

Page 38: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Model, starting with extrapolated B-fields ...

Page 39: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

... and footpoint motion (here after 1:39 ...and density-heightUT 18.10.96): profile (VAL):

Page 40: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Density Evolution -> t=128

Page 41: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Parallel electric fields and parallel currents at t=128

Page 42: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Transition region parallel electric fields

Page 43: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Transition region reconnection

Page 44: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Reconnection due to resistivity switched on enhanced current (velocity)

Page 45: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Not at a null, but between two nulls (separator through 35,20,5 ?)

<- Iso-surfaces of a smalltotal magnetic field, henceembedding the nulls

Page 46: J. Büchner+collaborators, at different times, were:

Magnetic Reconnection Theory, Newton Institute Cambridge, August 20, 2004

Further work planned on:• Current sheet instabilities for more

realistic current and field models and their consequences for reconnection

• resulting anomalous transport as an approach toward quantifying the coupling between MHD and kinetic scales for solar and magnetospheric applications

• Reconnection at neutral points vs. separator reconnection vs. quasi-separatrix layer - reconnection in the course of the dynamically evolving „magnetic carpet“ („tectonics“)