 |  |
Astron. Astrophys. 330, 381-388 (1998)
3. Test particle calculations
In order to solve the equation of motion (Eq. 1) with a magnetic
and electric field given by Eqs. 2-4 we used a fourth-order
Runge-Kutta method for ordinary differential equations (Press et al.
1992). Starting with a single proton reflected at the shock transition
zone and moving back into the upstream region (cf. Fig. 2) there are
two possibilities as depicted in Fig. 3. Either the proton is able to
go through the approaching SLAMS (denoted by 'escape' in Fig. 3a) or
the proton is reflected and consequently returns to the shock
transition (denoted by 'return' in Fig. 3b). The two protons in Fig. 3
started in a shock-SLAMS-system given by and
. The SLAMS approach the shock transition with
and the particle starting velocities are
and in Fig. 3a and 3b,
respectively. Thus, the only difference between Fig. 3a and b is the
magnitude of the starting velocity.
![[FIGURE]](img78.gif) |
Fig. 3a and b. Test particle trajectories for protons starting with a velocity of a and b and an inclination of . The global geometrical setup of the shock-SLAMS system is the same as in Fig. 2 and is specified by , , , and . The proton from a is able to go through the approaching SLAMS, while the proton from b is reflected and returns to the shock transition.
|
In general, the proton trajectories are influenced by six
parameters (cf. Fig. 2): the magnetic field compression
within the SLAMS, the initial proton velocity
, the initial position of the SLAMS
, and the angles ,
and . In order to study
under which conditions the proton initially reflected at the shock
front returns towards the shock after its interaction with the SLAMS
we analysed situations with three fixed parameters. In a first step we
analysed proton trajectories for fixed magnetic field compression
, starting velocity and
starting angle in a varying shock-SLAMS
geometry, i.e., varying the angles and
(see Fig. 4). In each panel of Fig. 4
representing different magnetic field compressions we find regions, in
which all protons starting at the transition zone with a fixed angle
are either reflected ('return') by the incoming
SLAMS or go through them ('escape'). In the grey shaded regions the
reflection behaviour depends on the starting position
of the SLAMS. The location of the different
kinds of regions is -for fixed - determined by
. The width of the grey shaded area separating
these regions is caused by the magnitude of the starting velocity,
which causes different gyroradii , with
as particle velocity perpendicular to the local
magnetic field b. As long as the particle's gyroradius is small
in comparison with the length scale on which the magnetic field
changes, i.e., , the so-called adiabatic theory
is applicable (e.g. Northrop 1963). According to this theory the
reflection process at magnetic mirrors is purely determined by the
particle's pitch angle ( ,
particle velocity parallel to the local magnetic field). In each panel
of Fig. 4 we show the theoretical computated dividing lines according
to adiabatic theory for two different starting conditions
and . The dividing line
for a quasi-parallel shock without incoming SLAMS
( ) is shown in the right half as a straight
line. The parallel dotted line at shows the
region of shock-reencounter (Schwartz et al. 1983). The second dotted
line ( ) takes into account, that SLAMS exist
within an angular range .
![[FIGURE]](img92.gif) |
Fig. 4a-d. Behaviour of protons starting at the shock transition zone with a velocity of and inclinations of and at SLAMS with different magnetic field compressions. The regions marked by 'escape' and 'return' show the areas, in which all started protons either escape or return to the shock transition for . In the grey shaded areas the proton behaviour depends on the starting position of the SLAMS. The curves and diamonds in these areas show computations according to adiabatic theory and results from our test particle calculations, respectively. The straight line at is the dividing line for the 'escape-return' behaviour without magnetic field perturbations, the dotted line at is the border line of shock-reencounter. The bisecting dotted line indicates the region in which SLAMS exist.
|
The reflection condition in adiabatic theory can be obtained as
follows (e.g. Krall & Trivelpiece 1986). For particles moving in
smoothly varying magnetic fields and vanishing electric fields there
are two constants of motion: the kinetic energy of the particle and
the so-called "magnetic moment" defined by .
From this it follows that the particle is reflected if the pitch angle
of the particle is larger than the so-called
loss-coss angle , with as
maximum value of the total magnetic field strength. In order to use
this simple relationship one has to look for a frame of reference in
which the electric field vanishes, the so-called de Hoffmann-Teller
frame (de Hoffmann & Teller 1950). This frame can be found by
setting ( is the particle
velocity in the shock rest frame), calculating the transformed
electric field and requiring that the transformed electric field is
equal to zero. Thus, using the Lorentz transformation formula for the
electric field in first order of the
transformed electric field is given by . Taking
the magnetic field from Eq. 2 (with ) and the
electric field according to Eq. 3 (with ) we
obtain for the components of the de Hoffmann-Teller velocity
![[EQUATION]](img103.gif)
Furthermore, the reflection condition in the de Hoffmann-Teller
frame can be written as
![[EQUATION]](img104.gif)
![[EQUATION]](img105.gif)
Since the velocities perpendicular and parallel to the magnetic
field in the de Hoffmann-Teller frame contained in
depend on trigonometrical functions of
and (cf. Eq. 5), we
obtain a transcendental equation for the reflection condition. The
theoretical curves in Fig. 4 (the lines in the grey shaded areas) were
computed numerically from Eq. 6 for and
. The difference between the theoretical
computed lines and the results from the test particle calculations are
due to the fact that adiabatic theory is not valid for large
gyroradii. The gyroradii for the proton trajectories depicted in Fig.
3 are about 2 and 4 times the ion inertial length for
and , respectively,
while the scale length of the SLAMS are in the order of 10 ion
inertial lengths. In this velocity ranges the proton behaviour depends
not only on the geometrical starting conditions of the particle, i.e.,
, but also on the specific conditions while
entering the SLAMS.
The difference between the predictions of adiabatic theory and the
effects of a finite gyroradius is also visible in Fig. 5, where we
determined the magnetic field compression that is necessary for a
reflection of the incoming protons. Fig. 5a shows the computated field
compression corresponding to Eq. 6 for and
and the results of our test particle
caculations for protons starting with a velocity of
for different values of
. Fig. 5b shows the adiabatic behaviour for
and and the test
particle analysis for . Thus, Fig. 5 shows two
different effects influencing the proton reflection process: Firstly,
the geometric effect causing the location of the dotted lines. For
protons starting nearly parallel, i.e., a small
, to the propagation direction of the SLAMS
(Fig. 5b) we need a large magnetic field compression to reflect them.
This becomes clear from Eq. 6, which shows that we need a large
to diminish . Secondly,
the effect of a finite Larmor radius causes the different widths of
the reflection zones in Fig. 5a and b. Furthermore, our test particle
calculations showed, that the width for large starting velocities
( ) increases in such a way that the simple
picture of two divided areas for reflection and transmission breaks
down. On the other hand we find for the plasmas under consideration
here, i.e., the plasma in the interplanetary medium, a normalized
thermal proton velocity in the order of 1, so
that the velocity of slightly superthermal particles is smaller than
10.
![[FIGURE]](img125.gif) |
Fig. 5a and b. Proton behaviour at SLAMS with rising magnetic field compression in dependence from the angle for a fixed angle . a 'escape-return' behaviour for and and b 'escape-return' behaviour for and . The dotted lines show the computations for adiabatically moving particles and the different symbols show the results of our test particles computations for three different starting positions of the SLAMS (open squares: , open circles: , diamonds: ).
|
In case of adiabatic particle behaviour the energy gained during
the reflection process can be calculated using the aforementioned de
Hoffmann-Teller frame. In the de Hoffmann-Teller frame the reflection
process is described by and
(see e.g. Krall & Trivelpiece 1986). Thus,
the transformation back into the shock rest frame leads to
![[EQUATION]](img129.gif)
The difference between the starting velocity and the velocity of
the reflected proton parallel to the undisturbed magnetic field
according to this equation obtained for ,
, and
is . On the other hand
we found for the difference between the starting velocity and the mean
velocity of the reflected protons parallel to the shock normal
according to our test particle calculation a mean value of
in good agreement with the theoretical
expectations. Thus, Eq. 7 shows that the velocity gain (in the shock
rest frame) is determined by the shock velocity and geometry on one
hand (second term of the right side of Eq. 7) and by the velocity
(third term) and the geometry (second and third term) of the
approaching SLAMS.
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1998
Online publication: January 8, 1998
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |