Search

Energetic plasma is everywhere in the Universe. The terrestrial Magnetospheric System is a key case where direct measures of plasma energization and energy transport can be made in situ at high resolution. Despite the large amount of available observations, we still do not fully understand how plasma energization and energy transport work. Key physical processes driving much plasma energization and energy transport occur where plasma on fluid scales couple to the smaller ion kinetic scales. These scales (1 RE) are strongly related to the larger mesoscales (several RE) at which large-scale plasma energization and energy transport structures form. All these scales and processes need to be resolved experimentally, however existing multi-point in situ observations do not have a sufficient number of measurement points. New multiscale observations simultaneously covering scales from mesoscales to ion kinetic scales are needed. The implementation of these observations requires a strong international collaboration in the coming years between the major space agencies. The Plasma Observatory is a mission concept tailored to resolve scale coupling in plasma energization and energy transport at fluid and ion scales. It targets the two ESA-led Medium Mission themes Magnetospheric Systems and Plasma Cross-scale Coupling of the ESA Voyage 2050 report and is currently under evaluation as a candidate for the ESA M7 mission. MagCon (Magnetospheric Constellation) is a mission concept being studied by NASA aiming at studying the flow of mass, momentum, and energy through the Earth magnetosphere at mesoscales. Coordination between Plasma Observatory and MagCon missions would allow us for the first time to simultaneously cover from mesoscales to ion kinetic scales leading to a paradigm shift in the understanding of the Earth Magnetospheric System., Comment: A White Paper submitted for the Decadal Survey for Solar and Space Physics (Heliophysics) 2024-2033

The pulsating aurora covers a broad range of fluctuating shapes that are poorly characterized. The purpose of this paper is therefore to provide objective and quantitative measures of the extent to which pulsating auroral patches maintain their shape, drift and fluctuate in a coherent fashion. We present results from a careful analysis of pulsating auroral patches using all-sky cameras. We have identified four well-defined individual patches that we follow in the patch frame of reference. In this way we avoid the space-time ambiguity which complicates rocket and satellite measurements. We find that the shape of the patches is remarkably persistent with 85-100% of the patch being repeated for 4.5-8.5 min. Each of the three largest patches has a temporal correlation with a negative dependence on distance, and thus does not fluctuate in a coherent fashion. A time-delayed response within the patches indicates that the so-called streaming mode might explain the incoherency. The patches appear to drift differently from the SuperDARN-determined $\stackrel{\rightarrow}{E}$ X $\stackrel{\rightarrow}{B}$ convection velocity. However, in a nonrotating reference frame the patches drift with 230-287 m/s in a north eastward direction, which is what typically could be expected for the convection return flow.

We present a careful statistical analysis of pulsating aurora (PA) using all-sky green line (557.7 nm) images obtained at 3.3 Hz. Six well-defined individual PA patches are identified and extracted using a contouring technique. Quantitative parameters such as the patch duration (on-time and off-time), peak intensity, and integrated intensity are determined for each patch and each pulsation. The resulting characteristics serve as strict observational constraints that any of the many competing theories attempting to explain PA must predict. The purpose of this paper is to determine the characteristics of PA patches in order to provide better observational constraints on the suggested mechanisms. All aspects of the temporal behavior of the individual patches appear to be erratic. Historically, PA has been defined very loosely and we argue that the use of the term "pulsating" is inappropriate since our findings and other published results are not regularly periodic and thus a more appropriate term may be fluctuating aurora. Further, we find that the observational constraints do not fit well with the flow cyclotron maser theory, which in particular is suggested to create PA patches. There is no clear candidate of the suggested mechanisms and drivers to explain the observational constraints set by the PA patches in a satisfactory manner.