Sharing a bit of good news in these strange times! Recently Wiley informed me that that two of my latest works were among the top 10 % downloaded papers published in Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics between January 2018 and December 2019.
Interestingly, both papers provide brief reviews on a particular topic in radiation belt research: 1) adiabatic invariant theory, and 2) radial diffusion
The second paper, entitled “Analytic Expressions for Radial Diffusion”, discusses existing theoretical formulas to quantify radial diffusion. Unfortunately, there were many unexplained errors during the production process, and many misprints were present in the first published version of the article. The issue is now fixed. All of this is to say: make sure you have downloaded the latest version of the paper!
I prepared the latter article while I was working with Peter Kollmann and others on a big scientific review on “Radial Diffusion at Earth and Beyond” that is now published in Space Science Reviews. Don’t hesitate to have a look if you are interested in learning more about adiabatic theory and radial diffusion! You can also navigate the website and scroll through the various seminar slides on the topic.
Thanks again for your interest in the works! and thanks all for the clicks!
“Synthesis is an important task in science, because it can often lead to a paradigm change” Akasofu, S.-I., 2007, preface of the second edition of “Exploring the Secrets of the Aurora”
At the very beginning of my phD studies, my supervisor asked me to work on radiation belt radial diffusion. For months, I felt bewildered.
It took me a lot of time to find clarifications, and to answer my own questions – Why is the process diffusive? What are the drivers of this diffusion? What ingredients does one need to quantify the process?
Because radial diffusion is one of the oldest research topics of radiation belt science, its understanding evolved over time. I think that is one of the reasons why this concept can be so difficult to grasp.
As time went on, I realized that I was far from the only one facing this radial diffusion challenge. That is what motivated the writing of this review.
A Team Project
I was excited at the idea of writing a review. Yet, I could not do this on my own.
I want to say THANK YOU to Sarah, Adnane, and Peter, the early career researchers who agreed to get involved with this project. They all dedicated countless hours to help. I am also grateful to all the experienced researchers who answered my emails and helped me submit the review. To all, thanks for caring!
I hope that this review will be useful for our community … and perhaps – who knows! – lead to a paradigm shift.
So please go ahead, give it a try, and let me know what you think! All significant contributions will be acknowledged in the revised version of the manuscript – currently under review for publication in Space Science Reviews -. Merci 🙂
The characteristics of particle injections in the Earth’s inner magnetosphere question our traditional representation for the large-scale electric fields. We argue that including a localized source of electric fields known as the SAPS is the key.
The interaction between the Sun and the Earth’s magnetic field often transmits significant energy to the electrons and protons present in the magnetospheric tail, a region of space located far from the Earth’s night-side. As a result, these particles move closer to the Earth. They are “injected” into the Earth’s inner space environment.
Since the 1970s, scientists have theorized that electrons and protons with the same initial kinetic energy starting from the same radial location have about the same distance of closest approach to the Earth.
Yet, recent observations from the Van Allen Probes reveal that this is not the case!
Electrons appear to be systematically injected “deeper” than protons. So what happens along the way to make electrons approach Earth at closer distances?
Our latest research combines observations from both space and the ground. We show that a localized source of electric fields called a Sub-Auroral Polarization Stream (aka a “SAPS”) is always present during these injections. We argue that a SAPS acts like a marathon aid station for electrons in that it provides them with additional energy. As a result, electrons “move faster” and approach the Earth at closer distances.
New research published in Geophysical Research Letters extends this, analyzing the effect of space weather on plasma transport. The findings are similar to what one would expect in on-the-ground traffic: the worse the weather conditions, the slower the traffic flows (in space, this is the case below an altitude of about 13 000 km = 8 000 miles).
Yet, there is no rain or snow in space … so how does weather manifest?!
The Sun constantly emits both particles and energy, but it can be the scene of violent phenomena. While most of the particles and energy emitted by the Sun and flowing towards Earth are deflected by the Earth’s magnetic field, some of them can be transmitted to Near-Earth space.
On the plus side: this can lead to the appearance of magnificent auroras.
On the minus side: this can pose a hazard for human activities, because space-borne and ground-based technological systems can be affected.
Just like “weather” refers to the state of the Earth’s atmosphere, the term “space weather” is the used to describe conditions in space. And just like “weather” conditions affect traffic flows of cars and trucks, we expected that “space weather” would affect the flow of ions and electrons in space, although we were not sure how. For the first time, we could answer that question.
It is often assumed that the Sun directly affects near-Earth space. Our study highlights the important role of go-between played by the ionosphere. Our findings offer new context to existing theories and they provide a starting point to better monitoring space weather.
I am thrilled to be the co-author of Juan Roederer’s latest commentary entitled “Coordinates for representing radiation belt flux”. In a nutshell, the objective of this work is to briefly review the history of radiation belt parametrization, to present some “recipes” on how to compute adiabatic parameters (you may be familiar with L*… but have you ever heard of E*? and what about α*?), and to apply these recipes to a real event in which magnetospheric disturbances adiabatically affect the particle fluxes measured onboard the Van Allen Probes.
Juan G. Roederer is one of the founding fathers of radiation belt science. In the community, he is known primarily (1) for his classic textbook on radiation belt dynamics (Dynamics of Geomagnetically Trapped Radiation, 1970) and (2) for the coordinate that he introduced 50 years ago, namely “L-star”, a.k.a. “Roederer-L”.
One might wonder why I am involved in this work.
In fact, the story is pretty uplifting, so let me tell you how I became Roederer’s coauthor.
During my first year as a phD student in Toulouse, France, my supervisor introduced me to adiabatic theory and I dove into the classics: Northrop, Schulz and Lanzerotti, and (of course!) Roederer, whose book happened to be my supervisor’s favorite. I had precise questions on some aspects of Roederer’s book which I brought to my supervisor. He said I should try asking Roederer directly. “Try sending him an email. Worst case scenario: he won’t answer”.
I spent half a day with Google Translate, trying to formulate the most polite and accurate email in order to maximize my chances for a response.
I got a response!
But the first answer I got was not quite what I had expected. Juan said that I had caught him at the wrong time, that he was giving an organ recital in Göttigen, Germany, and that later he would be traveling to China. He also wrote that he would answer my questions in a month or so. I was a bit confused given that he was supposed to be an 80 year-old scientist living in Fairbanks, Alaska. How could he be more active than me?
About a month later, he did indeed answer my science questions. We started discussing some details of his book, and in particular the time variations of L* (the building block of “radial diffusion”). As a result of these exchanges, Juan invited me to review one appendix of the new edition of his classic textbook. Next thing I knew, he sent me another appendix, then a chapter, and finally he sent me the whole draft version of the book (twice!).
In 2014, we finally met in real life at my first AGU conference in San Francisco, California. I had defended my thesis and was a postdoc. It was more than three years after our first email exchange, and a few months after the publication of the 2nd edition of the Dynamics of Magnetically Trapped Particles. Needless to say, I had received my autographed copy.
One of my ambitions at the time was to co-author an article with Juan. We were both intrigued by these “zebra stripe” observations that were being advertised by the Van Allen Probe mission. So we met and worked on that topic for a week. Juan made drawings on a paper board, and I elaborated on the equations after work. A few months later, our paper was published. (and yes, I have also a post on the zebra stripes).
The commentary that we have just published is the continuation of our collaboration.
For this work, I was in charge of the computations, figures, and editing.
First, Juan tells the history of radiation belt parametrization. The differences between “distance to the equatorial point of a field line”, McIlwain’s L-value, and the trapped particle’s adiabatic L*parameter are explained (this can be pretty confusing given that these parameters all merge in a dipole magnetic field!). Then, we present a readjustment on adiabatic theory, and we explain how to reformulate measurements in terms of L*, E*, α* (and j*!). Finally, we illustrate the method on a real event.
It is our hope that this work will send out an “adiabatic wake-up call” to the community, for it demonstrates the importance of a rigorous use of adiabatic theory in order to deliver higher quality research. We are looking forward to your feedback!
Years ago I left the small town of Givet, France as I pursued studies and a career in science. But last month, I returned to Givet… as a space scientist!
Givet is a small town in the northeastern part of France, close to the Belgian border. It is from where I am, it is where most of my family lives, and it is where I spent the first eighteen years of my life. Nothing changes as fast as in big cities there. My teacher from 1994-1995 (more than 20 years ago!) invited me to return to my primary school, l’école Saint-Hilaire, to meet her and her current class of 9 year old students. She asked me if I could tell the kids about my job as a space scientist in Berkeley, California. I was delighted to accept. But I had no clear idea what a 9 year old could be interested in. The oldest kid I know in my private circle is my godson and he is only 3.
A side note: This particular teacher was one of the first to introduce us to the English language. And, being there, I could still remember the songs we sang (Head and shoulder knees and toes; Old Mac Donald has a farm; …) and the Muzzy movie we watched oh so religiously that year.
Preparing the visit: iron filing and tinsel flying
Electric and magnetic fields are at the core of my job. But they are usually introduced in an abstract way. I set out to design a few simple experiments to help the students see some electromagnetic forces at play.
I spent a Saturday afternoon at the Exploratorium in San Francisco, in search of some cool science ideas that would illustrate my work. At the end of that day, I decided that (1) we would play with some magnets and iron fillings, to visualize some magnetic field lines, and that (2) we would make a tinsel fly, to show the action of electro-static forces. The tinsel flying experiment consists of rubbing a piece of Styrofoam with wool, and to use it to (slightly) charge an aluminum pie pan. As one drops a tinsel above the charged pan, the electrostatic force compensates gravity and the tinsel levitates! For those of you interested in doing that too: I would recommend a few hours to half-day of preparation and get-to-know the experiment before going public. I had spent some time testing the night before, as I had no tinsel, so I created my own loops out of thin aluminum tied into tiny loops. Here is a video of me practicing to become a tinsel flying champion.
In parallel, the students were preparing for the visit too. They were learning about the solar system, and about the auroras. I had recommended two Japanese mangas, one about the magnetic field and one about the auroras, translated from English to French by Pr. Fabrice Mottez (merci!), and available on his website.
The day we met, the students were ready with questions for an interview. They were the best: curious, fun, excited, interested! We had a blast.
Here is a few of the questions that were asked to me:
How did you become scientist?
Is it a difficult job?
Have you ever seen auroras? (they knew I had spent some time close to the Arctic Circle, in Kiruna, Sweden)
Is there a chance that we will ever see an aurora in Givet?
Have you ever met Donald Trump? (true story)
Then, as an aside:
“ Have you ever met some stars?”
(Me, proudly): “yes, I went to a Ben Harper concert”
[Look of incomprehension]
(Me, trying again to be cool): “I saw Erykah Badu once”
[Look of incomprehension]
(Me, giving up): “…”
No, but I mean: have you ever met Rihanna for example?
(Me, feeling not cool anymore): “well, no I am sorry I have not”
Back on task, we dissected the word “geostationary” and we discussed the “midnight sun” phenomenon. We concluded with the experiments. First, I gave some glass jars filled with a mixture (oil + iron fillings), together with some magnets. I did not tell them what they were. I asked them to gather in groups, think about it, and then to tell me what was going on. The only rule of the road was that they could not open the jars. Instinctively, they did what scientists do: they made observations, they built a theory, they discussed it with peers, they questioned themselves, they thought of ways to test their theory, and then they made new observations. At some point, their views converged and they ended up agreeing: they told me what they were looking at the magnetic field of the magnets in the jars. I was very impressed. We concluded with some tinsel flying and let me tell you: that was a mega hit!
Access to all you need to know about the flying tinsel experiment [here]
Download the magnetic field manga (in French) [here]
Maps are developed to best describe what surrounds us. That is true on the ground, and it is also true in space. There, the most interesting maps are maps of traffic conditions, i.e., maps that tell us how fast transport is, and in what the direction the flow is, depending on location. The only slight difference is that in space we are dealing with plasma transport, ions and electrons, rather than flows of cars and trucks.
To detail traffic in space, we must know both the magnetic field and the electric field: how strong are they? In what direction are they pointing? But unlike the magnetic field, the electric field is very difficult to measure, especially close to Earth! To circumvent this challenge, scientists have made assumptions and used theoretical considerations, rather than observations, to draw a simple picture of what they think the electric field should be around Earth.
This simple picture implies that the traffic conditions are as if the cold plasma was riding a giant merry-go-round, with the Earth in the center. In other words, the cold plasma is thought to rotate at the same speed as the Earth’s rotational speed, i.e., to be in corotation with the planet. Yet, this has not been proven experimentally. In fact, some sporadic particle measurements have already indicated that the merry-go-round picture was not quite right.
Using data from the Van Allen Probe satellites, we managed to make the first ever comprehensive observations of plasma transport due to the electric field close to Earth. This is a technical feat that allows us to test our 50 year old theories, at last! And the results are exciting!
Based on an analysis of more than 2 years of data, we confirmed that the cold plasma was not simply riding along a merry-go-round. In particular, we found that the speed and direction at which the plasma was drifting depended on the time of the day (or, in other words, that they depended on the location with respect to the Sun). We also found that, on average, the rotational speed of the cold plasma was 5 to 10% slower than that of the Earth. We must now understand why!
In short, our observations offer new context to existing theories; theories that merit reviews in our ongoing quest to better understand near Earth space!
Electric fields play a fundamental role in space physics. Yet, experimentally, they are difficult to observe. Closest to Earth, in the inner belt and slot region, electric field measurements are impeded by spacecraft motion, for instance. When a spacecraft passes through perigee, it does so very fast, travelling tens of kilometers per second. As a result, the sensors inevitably detect a large motional electric field; but in reality this is an illusion. For the Van Allen Probes, the motional electric field constitutes at least 95% of the electric fields measured close to perigee. A measurement accuracy much better than 95% is therefore required to observe the electric field in the inner magnetosphere. In an article which has just been published in Geophysical Research Letters, it is shown that the Van Allen Probes achieve such accuracy.
Together with Pr. Forrest Mozer, we present an analysis of two years of electric and magnetic measurement at one altitude chosen to enable comparisons with ground observations (L=1.4). The measurements of electric drift (ExB/B2) revealed departures from the traditional motion of corotation with the Earth in 2 ways.
We found that the electric fields lead to a rotational angular speed 10% smaller than the rotational angular speed of the Earth.
We detected the ionosphere dynamo electric fields, which lead to a magnetic local time dependence of the electric fields, in both radial and azimuthal directions.
Such pieces of information are important when discussing, for instance, the structure and dynamics of the plasmasphere or the radial transport of trapped particles at lowest altitudes.
“Zebra Stripes in Outer Space”: Long-standing mystery of radiation belt signature explained
For some months, I had the privilege to work with Juan Roederer on a new theory to explain the existence of “zebra stripes” in the Earth’s Van Allen radiation belt particles, these zebra-like patterns in energy spectrograms that indicate highly organized compressions and expansions of the radiation belt particles as they circle the Earth. The result of our cogitation is the object of an article published in the Journal of Geophysical Research – Space Physics.
In 3 tweets, we argue that:
“Zebra stripes” are signature of an azimuthal dependence in trapped particle distributions below L ~ 3.
High-altitude ionospheric winds affect the azimuthal distribution of radiation belt intensity.
The number of stripes indicates how many hours the population spent drifting under quiet conditions.
The mechanism that we propose to explain such feature can be likened to what happens in multi-lane highway traffic during rush hour, when an initial group of evenly spaced cars is segregated into high/low density bunches according to their acceleration power and the varying speed limits along their route. In the case of the Van Allen belt particles, it is the upper atmosphere that acts as the “traffic regulator”: ionospheric zonal winds in equatorial regions, which during quiet solar activity conditions blow eastward around midnight and westward around noon, induce electric fields which speed up or slow down the drift of the particles around the planet.
The effect of a variation in speed on the density of cars (aka the particles!) is illustrated in the following video: