 |  |
Astron. Astrophys. 362, 379-382 (2000)
2. Results
A near-Earth spacecraft encircles the Sun each 27 days in the frame
of reference rotating with the Sun. The spacecraft data on
integrated over this period may be
used in order to estimate the circulation
over the Earth's orbit. It is
important to note that the circulation calculated in the rotating
non-inertial frame of reference will remain the same in the inertial
frame. We used the data on the IMF and on the solar wind velocity
available from National Space Science Data Center
(http://nssdc,gsfc.nasa.gov/omniweb
). Since the data series are not continuous (there were certain
periods when and/or
have not been measured), the
circulation of the IEF was calculated as follows. First, we found the
average value of the -component of
the IEF for each Carrington rotation using all the data available for
this rotation. Then, the circulation of the IEF for this rotation was
estimated as , where a is the
radius of the Earth's orbit. Afterwards, by integrating Maxwell's
equation
![[EQUATION]](img19.gif)
we calculated how the total magnetic flux through the surface
encircled by the Earth's orbit changes with time starting from 1974,
January 1. The results are shown in Fig. 1. One can see clear
11-year variability on the background of the strong linear trend shown
by dotted line. However, this trend seems not to have physical sense.
Indeed, if there is a small systematic shift
in the values of the
-component of the IMF, then the
integration of the quantity will
result in the linear trend. Taking the average value of
km s-1, we
estimate that the observed trend due to
is as small as 0.06 nT. It should be
noted that the data at the OmniSpace set are rounded to the accuracy
of 0.1 nT. The value of averaged
over the whole period of observation (0.06 nT) is smaller than the
quantization of data and, hence, should be neglected. On the other
hand, the presence of this small systematic shift results, after
integration, in linear trend seen in Fig. 1. The 11-years
variations of the calculated magnetic flux are primarily associated
with the values of averaged over one
solar rotation. These values are shown in Fig. 2 (solid line) and
appear to be an order of magnitude larger than the systematic shift
(dashed line). Thus, the linear trend is an artifact due to the
rounding of the data, and it should be subtracted from the calculated
magnetic flux in order to obtain the magnetic flux transferred through
the Earth's orbit. Below, we will also check this statement using data
sets with higher (0.01 nT) resolution for the IMF.
![[FIGURE]](img24.gif) |
Fig. 1. Magnetic flux transferred by the solar wind through the Earth's orbit. Dashed line is a linear fit.
|
![[FIGURE]](img32.gif) |
Fig. 2. Averaged per solar rotation the northward component of the interplanetary magnetic field at R = 1 au. Solid line shows the sliding average over seven solar rotations, dashed line corresponds to the averaged over the whole period of observations (i.e. systematic shift ).
|
The magnetic flux transferred through the Earth's orbit is shown in
Fig. 3. Dashed line in the same Fig. 3 shows the temporal
behaviour of the magnetic flux associated with the dipolar component
of the main solar magnetic field through the Sun's northern
hemisphere. This quantity was calculated by using the solar magnetic
field Gaussian harmonic coefficients at Wilcox Solar Observatory
(http://quake.stanford.edu/~wso
). The resemblance between the two curves is noteworthy. Not only the
temporal profiles of the two quantities are similar, but the absolute
values of the magnetic fluxes are very close: the magnetic flux change
associated with the solar wind flow is only
times smaller than the flux of the
main solar magnetic field.
![[FIGURE]](img35.gif) |
Fig. 3. Solid line shows the change of the magnetic flux (due to the solar wind flow) through the surface encircled by the Earth's orbit. Dotted line corresponds to the solar main dipole magnetic field flux through the northern hemisphere of the Sun.
|
In principle, there is some probability that the coincidence is
accidental. One can try to explain it by means of solar-cycle-driven
periodicities in solar wind parameters. In this sense, the most
suspicious possibility is as follows. The average solar wind velocity
varies with the phases of the solar cycle. If some systematic shift
is present in the IMF
-component (and this is so, indeed,
as one can see from the linear trend in Fig. 1, discussed above),
then the quantity may be responsible
for the magnetic flux changes shown in Fig. 3. We checked this
possibility, and the results are shown in Fig. 4. Solid line here
shows the change of the magnetic flux through the surface encircled by
the Earth's orbit (same as in Fig. 3). Dashed line represents the
integral This value appears to be
ten times smaller than the quantity of interest and has quite
different temporal profile. Thus, the magnetic flux change shown in
Fig. 3, most probably, is associated with the solar wind
flow.
![[FIGURE]](img41.gif) |
Fig. 4. Change of the magnetic flux through the surface encircled by the Earth's orbit (solid line) and the value (dotted line).
|
Fig. 3 compares the solar dipole magnetic flux with the
magnetic flux transferred through the Earth's orbit as observed during
1974-1999 by a number of satellites orbiting the Earth (IMP 1-8:
Explorer 33, 35; HEOS 1 and 2, VELA 3; OGO 5; ISEE 1 and 2; PROGNOZ
10; and Wind). The independent verification can be performed using the
observations of magnetic flux transfer by the interplanetary
spacecraft. In order to make this check possible, (a) the data row
from a spacecraft should be long enough (at least five years) in order
to be comparable with solar periodicities; (b) a spacecraft should
orbit the Sun close to the ecliptic plane; (c) the distance of the
spacecraft to the Sun should not vary significantly. Three missions
satisfy these conditions: Helios-1 (1974-1980), ISEE-3 (1978-1982),
and Pioneer-Venus (1979-1988). We applied the same procedure in order
to calculate the magnetic flux transferred through the orbits of these
spacecrafts.
Fig. 5 shows the results for ISEE-3 data (empty squares) with
near-Earth measurements (solid line). The behaviour of the curves and
the magnitude of the transferred flux are rather similar for these two
independent sets of data. Fig. 6 compares near-Earth measurements
(solid line) with the results for Helios-1 (empty circles) and for
Pioneer-Venus (black dots). Again, the temporal profiles of three
independent measurements of magnetic flux transfer are the same.
However, the magnitude of the magnetic flux transferred through the
Helios and Pioner-Venus orbits is twice larger than that for the Earth
orbit. Note, that the data for ISEE-3, Helios-1 and Pioner-Venus,
whose accuracy is 0.01 nT, does not exhibit significant linear trend.
This fact justifies our above statement that the linear trend in
Fig. 1 is an artifact of data rounding.
![[FIGURE]](img43.gif) |
Fig. 5. Magnetic flux transferred through the Earth's orbit calculated from OMNI data (solid line, same as in Fig. 3) and from ISEE-3 measurements (empty squares).
|
![[FIGURE]](img45.gif) |
Fig. 6. Magnetic flux transferred through the Earth's orbit calculated from OMNI data (solid line, same as in Fig. 3) and magnetic flux transferred through the Helios 1 (empty circles) and Venus (dark dots) orbits.
|
Fig. 7 combines all the available results: solid line
corresponds to the flux through the Earth's orbit (OMNI data set);
empty cirles, empty squares and black dots correspond to Helios-1,
ISEE-3 and Pioner-Venus data, respectively; and dashed line shows the
changes in solar magnetic dipole flux. All independent sets reveal the
same temporal behaviour. The difference in magnitude of the magnetic
fluxes may be explained as follows. Solar dipole magnetic flux (dashed
lines in Fig. 3 and Fig. 7) was calculated for the whole
northern hemisphere of the Sun. As can be seen from Fig. 8, the
magnetic flux transferred through the orbit at the distance R
from the Sun, corresponds to the change of the magnetic flux through a
polar part of the Sun's hemisphere. The equatorward boundary of this
polar cap corresponds to the magnetic field lines (shown by thick
lines in Fig. 8) which cross the equator at the distance R
to the Sun. Thus, the magnetic flux transfer observed by the
spacecraft should be smaller as the spacecraft distance from the Sun
increases. This is indeed true for our data sets. Same values of the
magnetic flux are obtained for ISEE-3 and OMNI set
( au), and for Pioner-Venus
( au) and Helios-1 (average
au), whereas Pioneer-Venus/Helios
fluxes are twice larger than OMNI/ISEE-3 fluxes. The dipole magnetic
flux through the polar region with the boundary at the colatitude
is proportional to
. For our relation between solar
dipole flux and transferred fluxes, one estimates that the Earth's
orbit corresponds to the solar latitude of
, and the Venus' orbit coresponds to
the solar latitude of . However, one
should be cautious with these estimates because of uncertainties in
measurements of the main solar magnetic field.
![[FIGURE]](img54.gif) |
Fig. 7. Solar main dipole magnetic field flux through the northern hemisphere of the Sun (dashed line), and magnetic field flux convected with the solar wind calculated from OMNI data set (solid line), ISEE-3 (empty squares), Helios 1 (empty circles) and PVO (dark dots) data.
|
![[FIGURE]](img56.gif) |
Fig. 8. Cartoon of the interplanetary magnetic field lines. Thick lines show the field lines crossing the equatorial plane at the distance R. The change of the magnetic flux through the circle of radius R in the equatorial plane is equal to the change of the magnetic flux through the polar region of the solar surface encircled by the dashed line.
|
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 2000
Online publication: October 30, 19100
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |