The Helicity Sign of Flux Transfer Event Flux Ropes and Its Relationship to the Guide Field and Hall Physics in Magnetic Reconnection at the Magnetopause

Flux Transfer Events (FTEs) are transient magnetic flux ropes typically found at the Earth's magnetopause on the dayside. While it is known that FTEs are generated by magnetic reconnection, it remains unclear how the details of magnetic reconnection controls their properties. A recent study showed that the helicity sign of FTEs positively correlates with the east‐west (By) component of the Interplanetary Magnetic Field (IMF). With data from the Cluster and Magnetospheric Multiscale missions, we performed a statistical study of 166 quasi force‐free FTEs. We focus on their helicity sign and possible association with upstream solar wind conditions and local magnetic reconnection properties. Using both in situ data and magnetic shear modeling, we find that FTEs whose helicity sign corresponds to the IMF By are associated with moderate magnetic shears while those that do not correspond to the IMF By are associated with higher magnetic shears. While uncertainty in IMF propagation to the magnetopause may lead to randomness in the determination of the flux rope core field and helicity, we rather propose that for small IMF By, which corresponds to high shear and low guide field, the Hall pattern of magnetic reconnection determines the FTE core field and helicity sign. In that context we explain how the temporal sequence of multiple X‐line formation and the reconnection rate are important in determining the flux rope helicity sign. This work highlights a fundamental connection between kinetic processes at work in magnetic reconnection and the macroscale structure of FTEs.

[1]  Sanchita Pal.  Uncovering the process that transports magnetic helicity to coronal mass ejection flux ropes , 2021, Advances in Space Research.

[2]  Q. Lu,et al.  Structure and Coalescence of Magnetopause Flux Ropes and Their Dependence on IMF Clock Angle: Three‐Dimensional Global Hybrid Simulations , 2021, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics.

[3]  B. Lavraud,et al.  Statistical Relationship Between Interplanetary Magnetic Field Conditions and the Helicity Sign of Flux Transfer Event Flux Ropes , 2020, Geophysical Research Letters.

[4]  J. Slavin,et al.  Comparative Analysis of the Vlasiator Simulations and MMS Observations of Multiple X‐Line Reconnection and Flux Transfer Events , 2020, Journal of geophysical research. Space physics.

[5]  R. Gillies,et al.  Sequential Observations of Flux Transfer Events, Poleward‐Moving Auroral Forms, and Polar Cap Patches , 2020, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics.

[6]  S. Badman,et al.  Modeling Non‐Force‐Free and Deformed Flux Ropes in Titan's Ionosphere , 2020, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics.

[7]  J. Sauvaud,et al.  On the Ubiquity of Magnetic Reconnection Inside Flux Transfer Event‐Like Structures at the Earth's Magnetopause , 2020, Geophysical Research Letters.

[8]  S. Markidis,et al.  Magnetohydrodynamic With Embedded Particle‐In‐Cell Simulation of the Geospace Environment Modeling Dayside Kinetic Processes Challenge Event , 2020, Earth and Space Science.

[9]  J. Slavin,et al.  MMS Observations of Plasma Heating Associated With FTE Growth , 2019, Geophysical Research Letters.

[10]  J. Eastwood,et al.  Signatures of Magnetic Separatrices at the Borders of a Crater Flux Transfer Event Connected to an Active X‐Line , 2019, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics.

[11]  X. Blanco‐Cano,et al.  Properties of Magnetic Reconnection and FTEs on the Dayside Magnetopause With and Without Positive IMF Bx Component During Southward IMF , 2019, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics.

[12]  L. Dai.  Structures of Hall Fields in Asymmetric Magnetic Reconnection , 2018, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics.

[13]  P. Lindqvist,et al.  Quantitative analysis of a Hall system in the exhaust of asymmetric magnetic reconnection , 2017 .

[14]  R. Torbert,et al.  Reconnection guide field and quadrupolar structure observed by MMS on 16 October 2015 at 1307 UT , 2016 .

[15]  U. Gliese,et al.  Fast Plasma Investigation for Magnetospheric Multiscale , 2016 .

[16]  Wolfgang Baumjohann,et al.  The Magnetospheric Multiscale Magnetometers , 2016 .

[17]  Thomas E. Moore,et al.  Magnetospheric Multiscale Overview and Science Objectives , 2016 .

[18]  M. Abdullah,et al.  Evidence for the core field polarity of magnetic flux ropes against the reconnection guide field , 2014 .

[19]  H. Karimabadi,et al.  Correlation of core field polarity of magnetotail flux ropes with the IMF By: Reconnection guide field dependency , 2014 .

[20]  M. Shay,et al.  Influence of asymmetries and guide fields on the magnetic reconnection diffusion region in collisionless space plasmas , 2013 .

[21]  C. Russell.  Magnetic flux ropes in the ionosphere of Venus , 2013 .

[22]  V. Angelopoulos,et al.  Survival of flux transfer event (FTE) flux ropes far along the tail magnetopause , 2012 .

[23]  M. Kivelson,et al.  Generation and properties of in vivo flux transfer events , 2012 .

[24]  M. Palmroth,et al.  Seasonal and clock angle control of the location of flux transfer event signatures at the magnetopause , 2012 .

[25]  V. Angelopoulos,et al.  Direct evidence for a three-dimensional magnetic flux rope flanked by two active magnetic reconnection X lines at Earth's magnetopause. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[26]  A. Vaivads,et al.  The proton pressure tensor as a new proxy of the proton decoupling region in collisionless magnetic reconnection , 2011 .

[27]  M. F. Marcucci,et al.  TC-1 observations of a flux rope: Generation by multiple X line reconnection , 2011 .

[28]  F. Mozer,et al.  Scaling the energy conversion rate from magnetic field reconnection to different bodies , 2010, 1008.2454.

[29]  O. D. Constantinescu,et al.  Evidence for a flux transfer event generated by multiple X‐line reconnection at the magnetopause , 2010 .

[30]  M. Kivelson,et al.  Evidence that crater flux transfer events are initial stages of typical flux transfer events , 2010 .

[31]  C. Russell,et al.  Comparison study of magnetic flux ropes in the ionospheres of Venus, Mars and Titan , 2010 .

[32]  C. Owen,et al.  “Crater” flux transfer events: Highroad to the X line? , 2009 .

[33]  J. Egedal,et al.  Equations of state for collisionless guide-field reconnection. , 2009, Physical review letters.

[34]  K. Glassmeier,et al.  Crater FTEs: Simulation results and THEMIS observations , 2008 .

[35]  Ashis Bhattacharjee,et al.  On the generation and topology of flux transfer events , 2008 .

[36]  S. Petrinec,et al.  Location of the reconnection line at the magnetopause during southward IMF conditions , 2007 .

[37]  Joachim Raeder,et al.  Flux Transfer Events: 1. generation mechanism for strong southward IMF , 2006 .

[38]  A. Balogh,et al.  Cluster encounter of a magnetic reconnection diffusion region in the near‐Earth magnetotail on September 19, 2003 , 2005 .

[39]  J. King,et al.  Solar wind spatial scales in and comparisons of hourly Wind and ACE plasma and magnetic field data , 2005 .

[40]  A. Pevtsov,et al.  Helicity of magnetic clouds and their associated active regions , 2004 .

[41]  P. Démoulin,et al.  Magnetic helicity analysis of an interplanetary twisted flux tube , 2003 .

[42]  Yoshitaka Saito,et al.  Geotail observations of the Hall current system: Evidence of magnetic reconnection in the magnetotail , 2001 .

[43]  M. Fehringer,et al.  Introduction The Cluster mission , 2001 .

[44]  M. W. Dunlop,et al.  The Cluster Magnetic Field Investigation: overview of in-flight performance and initial results , 2001 .

[45]  C. J. Owen,et al.  Role of the magnetosheath flow in determining the motion of open flux tubes , 2001 .

[46]  M. Berger.  Introduction to magnetic helicity , 1999 .

[47]  N. Omidi,et al.  Magnetic structure of the reconnection layer and core field generation in plasmoids , 1999 .

[48]  Hideaki Kawano,et al.  Magnetopause location under extreme solar wind conditions , 1998 .

[49]  V. Bothmer,et al.  The structure and origin of magnetic clouds in the solar wind , 1997 .

[50]  James F. Drake,et al.  Transition to whistler mediated magnetic reconnection , 1994 .

[51]  L. Burlaga,et al.  Magnetic field structure of interplanetary magnetic clouds at 1 AU , 1990 .

[52]  M. Berger,et al.  The interior structure of reconnected flux tubes in a sheared plasma flow , 1990 .

[53]  R. Lysak,et al.  Evaluation of twist helicity of flux transfer event flux tubes , 1989 .

[54]  C. Farrugia,et al.  A multi‐instrument study of flux transfer event structure , 1988 .

[55]  L. Burlaga,et al.  Magnetic clouds and force‐free fields with constant alpha , 1988 .

[56]  Charles J. Farrugia,et al.  What are flux transfer events , 1988 .

[57]  Manfred Scholer,et al.  Magnetic flux transfer at the magnetopause based on single X line bursty reconnection , 1988 .

[58]  Wolfgang Baumjohann,et al.  AMPTE IRM observations of waves associated with flux transfer events in the magnetosphere , 1987 .

[59]  Lou‐Chuang Lee,et al.  A theory of magnetic flux transfer at the Earth's magnetopause , 1985 .

[60]  M. Berger,et al.  The topological properties of magnetic helicity , 1984, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[61]  Christopher T. Russell,et al.  Flux transfer events: Scale size and interior structure , 1984 .

[62]  C. Russell,et al.  Observations of reverse polarity flux transfer events at the Earth's dayside magnetopause , 1982, Nature.

[63]  M. Berger.  Rapid Reconnection and the Conservation of Magnetic Helicity , 1982 .

[64]  S. Cowley.  The causes of convection in the Earth's magnetosphere: A review of developments during the IMS , 1982 .

[65]  I. Papamastorakis,et al.  Plasma and magnetic field characteristics of magnetic flux transfer events , 1982 .

[66]  Christopher T. Russell,et al.  ISEE observations of flux transfer events at the dayside magnetopause , 1979 .

[67]  Christopher T. Russell,et al.  Initial ISEE magnetometer results - Magnetopause observations , 1978 .