Preprint

Article

Solar Wind Charge-Exchange X-ray Emissions from the O⁵⁺ Ions in the Earth’s Magnetosheath

Altmetrics

Downloads

Views

Comments

A peer-reviewed article of this preprint also exists.

Zhicheng Zhang,

Fei He^*

Xiao-Xin Zhang,Guiyun Liang,Xueyi Wang,Yong Wei

Zhicheng Zhang,

Fei He^*

Xiao-Xin Zhang,Guiyun Liang,Xueyi Wang,Yong Wei

This version is not peer-reviewed

Abstract

The spectra and global distributions of the X-ray emissions generated by the solar wind charge-exchange (SWCX) process in the terrestrial magnetosheath are investigated based on a global hybrid model and a global geocoronal hydrogen model. The solar wind O6+ ions which are the primary charge state for oxygen ions in solar wind are considered. The line emissivity of the charge-exchange born O5+ ions are calculated by Spectral Analysis System for Astrophysical and Lab oratory (SASAL). It is found that the emission lines from the O5+ ranges from 105.607 to 118.291 eV with the strong line at 107.047 eV. We then simulated the magnetosheath X-ray emission intensity distributions with a virtual camera at two positions of north pole and dusk at six stages during the passing of a perpendicular interplanetary shock combined with a tangential discontinuity structure through the Earth’s magnetosphere. During this process, the X-ray emission intensity increases with time, and the maximum value is 27.11 keV cm-2 s-1 sr-1 on the dayside, which is 4.5 times that before the solar wind structure reaches the Earth. A clear shock structure can be seen in the magnetosheath and moves earthward. The maximum emission intensity seen at dusk is always higher than that seen at north pole.

Keywords:

Subject: Environmental and Earth Sciences - Space and Planetary Science

1. Introduction

The Earth's magnetic field is compressed by solar wind to form a magnetosphere. The boundary layer between the magnetosphere and the magnetosheath flow is the magnetopause. The magnetosheath is confined between the most two important boundaries of the Earth’s magnetosphere, namely the bow shock and the magnetopause. Pioneer 1, launched in 1958, was the first to conduct in-situ detection of the Earth's magnetosheath [1]. With advances in aerospace and computer technology, in situ measurement data and computer numerical simulations are used to gain a more complete understanding of the Earth's magnetosheath. The magnetosheath plasma comes from the solar wind heated after the bow shock. The density decreases with the distance from the Earth's center, but it is always higher than the magnetospheric plasma density. Earth's particles reach the magnetosheath by magnetic reconnecting at the magnetopause. Since the ion-electron temperature ratio of the magnetosheath is 6 to 7 times that of the solar wind, the temperature of the solar wind plasma increases even more after entering the magnetosheath, while the electron temperature does not change significantly. The temperature anisotropy of the magnetosheath plasma becomes stronger near the top of the magnetosphere, and the ion temperature anisotropy is much stronger than the temperature anisotropy. Nabert et al. [2] used global MHD simulations to obtain the distribution of magnetosheath plasma density and velocity. They found that the magnetosheath plasma flows from the subsolar point to the two flanks, and the plasma density decreases as the distance from the center of the earth increases. Dimmock and Nykyri [3] used 5-year measurement data from THEMIS satellite to confirm the reliability of Nabert et al.'s MHD model and found that the magnetosheath plasma parameters were axially asymmetric. Using global hybrid simulations, Omidi et al. [4] found differences in the magnetosheath density perturbations for different Mach numbers. Interplanetary shocks and fractures keep the plasma and magnetic field in the magnetosheath in a changing state and are related to the type of bow shock perturbations. The magnetic field perturbation is severe downstream of the quasi-parallel bow shock but is smaller in the case of the quasi-perpendicular bow shock. There are various free energies (such as ion beam current, temperature anisotropy, etc.) in the magnetosheath, which can excite various plasma waves or instabilities [5,6]. The magnetic field in the magnetosheath profoundly affects the solar wind-magnetosphere interactions. For example, when the magnetosheath magnetic field has a southward component, magnetic field reconnection will occur at the top of the low-latitude magnetosphere. At this time, the energy and momentum transferred to the magnetosphere, plasma and magnetic flux increased significantly.

The SWCX [7] mechanism is that highly charged solar wind heavy ions (such as C⁵⁺, C⁶⁺, N⁷⁺, O⁶⁺, O⁷⁺ and O⁸⁺) collide with neutral particles from the Earth or comets, and the solar wind heavy ions obtain an electron. The electrons are at an excited state, and then the excited solar wind ions de-excite and transmit photons in extreme ultraviolet (EUV) [8] or soft X-rays (Soft X-ray, SXR) [9]. Regardless of the line of sight, X-ray emission produced by SWCX in interplanetary space contaminates every astrophysical observation. However, the main emission spectral lines of SWCX also happen to be an important diagnostic method for astrophysical plasmas [10].

Zhou et al. [11] used the Suzaku X-ray satellite to observe the SWCX event driven by the corona mass ejection (CME) and found that the arrival time of SWCX and CME magnetic clouds were consistent. They simulated the light curve changes of SWCX and concluded that the solar wind has anisotropy in the extreme tip region. Ishikawa et al. [12] analyzed the intense SWCX X-ray data obtained by the Suzaku satellite during geomagnetic storms and found the time-varying changes in diffuse SXR emission related to the solar wind proton flux. Ringuette et al. [13] successfully separated the SWCX emissions from the X-ray spectrum obtained by HaloSat at low ecliptic latitudes. Zhang et al. [14] compared the ROSAT all-sky survey (RASS) data and the Quiet method (a quiet observation data method, which uses the same satellite to observe the same target for a long time) using XMM-Newton when solar wind conditions change dramatically. XMM-Newton observed SWCX emissions from the magnetosheath. The results show that the SWCX spectral composition of the magnetosheath obtained is close for the two methods, and the temporal changes of the intensity are similar. However, significant differences exist at energies lower than 0.7 keV between the two methods. Connor et al. [15] used global magnetohydrodynamics model to simulate the strong SXR emissions in the magnetosheath and cusps regions and proposed that the magnetopause reconnection can be investigated with the X-ray images. Sun et al. [16] simulated different solar wind conditions, and the virtual camera observed X-ray images of the Earth's magnetosheath and cusps regions. These images can capture the main responses of the magnetopause and cusps regions. Therefore, soft X-ray large-scale imaging technology can be used to perform long-distance panoramic imaging of the magnetosphere, thereby understanding the basic mode of solar wind-magnetosphere interaction on a large scale. Based on these simulations, the Solar wind Magnetosphere Ionosphere Link Explorer (SMILE) [17] will conduct X-ray imaging of the magnetosheath. Collier et al. [18] provided the development progress of the wide-field SXR imager (Soft X-ray Imager, SXI) for the ESA AXIOM mission. Somana et al. [19] gave the design, detection, optimization, performance prediction and further work of the CCD370 equipped with SXI on the SMILE satellite. The SMILE satellite is planned to be launched in 2025.

The solar wind-magnetosphere interaction produces a variety of plasma physical processes, such as magnetic field reconnection, turbulence, particle acceleration and heating, etc., which subsequently triggers various space weather effects such as magnetic storms, substorms, and auroral brightening, ultimately affecting satellite navigation, and having a profound impact on terrestrial communications, power grid maintenance and human life. Therefore, strengthening the research on changes in the solar-terrestrial space environment is not only of scientific significance, but also of practical significance.

In this paper, a three-dimensional (3-D) global hybrid model will be used to obtain solar wind heavy ion parameters (including the O⁶⁺ ion number density

n_{O^{6 +}}

, the solar wind speed V_SW, and temperature T_SW). The distribution of neutral hydrogen atoms near the Earth was obtained through the 3-D geocoronal hydrogen model. The SXR spectrum and corresponding efficiency factor α produced by the collision between O⁶⁺ ions and hydrogen atoms were obtained through the Spectral Analysis System for Astrophysical and Laboratory (SASAL). We then establish a spatial coordinate system and bring the above parameters into the X-ray emission integral equation, and finally simulated with a virtual X-ray camera.

We then extract the efficiency factor data of the spectral line with the strongest emission intensity and simulate the magnetosheath X-ray images at two special positions a: (0.0, 0.0, 60.0 R_E) and b: (0.0, 60.0 R_E, 0.0), at six stages (Stage 1-6) during the passage of a fast forward perpendicular interplanetary shock (IP shock) embedded with a tangential discontinuity (TD) with it normal along the X_GSM direction (Hereafter referred to as IP-TD). Finally, the positions of the bow shock and the magnetopause on the Sun-Earth line are extracted from the hybrid simulation results and compare with the SXR images to explore the feasibility of SXR imaging of the magnetosheath.

2. Methods

The SXR spectrum in the SWCX process is determined by the efficiency factor of each particle type, charge state, and energy level transition participating in the reaction. Therefore, this section will introduce the SWCX mechanism and the relevant models.

2.1. SWCX Mechanism

O⁶⁺ ions are the main charge state of oxygen ions in both the fast and slow solar winds [20], and the reaction rate of O⁶⁺ ions is significantly higher than other charge states. The collisions between O⁶⁺ ions and hydrogen atoms produce O^5+* ions (excited state) and hydrogen ions. The reaction equation is as follows:

O^{6 +} + H \to O^{{5 +}^{*}} + H^{+}

(1)

During the decay of O^5+* to the low energy state O⁵⁺, the corresponding X-ray emission intensity (I, keV cm^-2 s^-2 sr^-1) can be calculated by the following integration along line of sight (LOS):

I = \frac{1}{4 π} \int_{L O S}^{\infty} n_{O^{6 +}} (s) u_{O^{6 +}} (s) n_{H} (s) α (u_{O^{6 +}}) d s,

(2)

where s=s(r,θ,φ) represents a point in LOS in the Geocentric Solar Magnetospheric (GSM) coordinate system,

n_{O^{6 +}}

is the density of O⁶⁺ ions,

u_{O^{6 +}}

is the relative collision speed between O⁶⁺ ions and hydrogen atoms, n_H is the exospheric hydrogen density, and α is the efficiency factor. Normally, the speed of exospheric hydrogen atoms is much slower than the solar wind ions, and the speed of O⁶⁺ ions can be represented by the solar wind speed V_SW. Besides, the thermal velocity V_th mush be considered in the magnetosheath region [21]. The formula for calculating the thermal velocity is

V_{t h} = \sqrt{\frac{3 k_{B} T_{s w}}{m_{O}}},

(3)

where k_B is Boltzmann's constant, and m_O is the mass of O⁶⁺ ions. The relative collision speed of O⁶⁺ ions and hydrogen atoms is

u_{O^{6 +}} = \sqrt{V_{s w}^{2} + V_{t h}^{2}} .

(4)

2.2.3-D Global Hybrid Model

In the 3-D global hybrid model treats the ions as discrete particles and the electrons as massless fluids [22,23,24]. Both the dayside and nightside magnetosphere are included in the model. By assuming quasi-electric neutrality, the motion equation of particles in the simulation unit is:

\frac{{d v}_{p}}{d t} = E + v_{p} \times B - ν (V_{p} - V_{e}),

(5)

where v_p is the ion velocity, B is the magnetic field, E is the electric field, ν is the collision frequency related to the current, and V_p and V_e are the bulk flow velocities of ions and electrons, respectively. In the inner magnetosphere region (r<6.5 R_E) the number density of cold ionic fluid is

N_{f} = (1000 / r^{3}) [1 - t a n h (r - 6.5)],

(6)

where r is the distance to the center of the Earth in R_E.

The input parameters for the hybrid model are V_SW, N_SW, T_SW, interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) components Bx, By and Bz, and the ratio of O⁶⁺ ions in the solar wind

f_{O^{6 +}}

. According to previous studies, the He²⁺/H⁺ ratio is ~5% [25], and the He²⁺/O⁶⁺ ratio is ~50 [26], and the O/H flux ratio observed by Ulysses is ~0.001 [27]. Therefore, throughout the study, we adopt the value of

f_{O^{6 +}}

=0.001.

2.3. 3-D Geocoronal Hydrogen Model

The Monte Carlo simulation method of planetary exosphere was developed from early studies of the lunar atmosphere. The regolith displayed by the moon provides a clear exosphere [28]. Assuming that particles in the planet's exosphere do not collide with each other, the atoms leaving the exosphere obey the Maxwell velocity distribution. Particles distributed in the high-energy tail will break away from the planet and escape from the planet. The remaining particles pass through the exosphere on ballistic trajectories and then return to the exobase. Brinkmann [29] studied the collision between the neutral particles at the bottom of the exosphere and the escaping neutral particles and found that since the downward velocity of H or He atoms when they returned to the distribution at the bottom of the exosphere did not exceed the escape velocity, This shows that there is energy dissipation after the neutral particles escape. Cole [30] believed that the charge exchange between hot hydrogen atoms and hot protons in the ionosphere would increase the escape of hydrogen atoms. Subsequent calculations by Hodges et al. [31] provided quite strong arguments for charge exchange being the cause of hydrogen escaping from the planets.

This article adopts the Hodges model [28]. Compared with other models, Hodges' 3-D Monte Carlo model considered the interaction process between neutral particles and the interaction process between ions and neutral particles. At a certain position (r, θ, φ), the density of hydrogen atoms is

n_{H} (r, θ, φ) = N (r) \sqrt{4 π} \sum_{l = 0}^{3} \sum_{m = 0}^{l} \{A_{l m} \cos (m ϕ) + B_{l m} \sin (m ϕ)\} Y_{l m} (θ),

(7)

where N(r), A_lm and B_lm are given by Hodges [28], and Y_lm(θ) is the spherical harmonic Legendre function.

2.4. SASAL

The SASAL [32] adopts the optically thin assumption (when light passes through a thin transparent medium, its propagation path can be approximately regarded as linear propagation) to describe the atomic model of solar wind heavy ion spectral line emission, including collision excitation of solar wind heavy ions, electron/photon ionization, dielectronic/radiative recombination (DR/RR), charge transfer caused by collision with neutral ions, etc.

The SASAL uses the nuclear number from H to Zn ion data in Chianti version 7 as the baseline data for this model. In terms of calculating photoionization, the data provided by Verner et al. [33] were added to SASAL, and the analysis method used was consistent with the non-relativistic calculation of the ground state of atoms and ions. For the cross section of charge exchange, the multichannel Landau–Zener theory with rotational coupling [34] was adopted in the SASAL.

In this article, SASAL can be simplified accordingly, that is, only the collision of heavy ions and neutral atoms is considered. Electrons are usually captured to an energy level with a given quantum number nq, which can be expressed as [35]:

n_{q} = q {(2 |I_{H}| (1 + \frac{q - 1}{2 \sqrt{q} + 1}))}^{- \frac{1}{2}},

(8)

where I_H is the ionization potential of hydrogen atoms. Liang et al. [35] gave a detailed calculation process. Then, by solving the following rate equation [36], the O⁵⁺ density of the i-th energy state (

N_{i}^{5 +}

) is obtained through the equation:

\frac{d}{d t} N_{i}^{5 +} (r) = \sum_{j > i} N_{i}^{5 +} (r) A_{j i} - \sum_{j < i} N_{i}^{5 +} A_{i j} + n_{H} (r) n_{O^{6 +}} C_{0 i} (v) + n_{H} \sum_{j \neq i} [N_{i}^{5 +} (r) Q_{j i} (T_{e}) - N_{j}^{5 +} (r) Q_{i j} (T_{e})] = 0,

(9)

where

C_{i j} \equiv 〈v σ_{c x} (v)〉

is the single electron capture rate coefficient, v is the relative collision speed of O⁶⁺ ions and H,

σ_{c x} (v) = σ_{O^{6 +}} (u_{O^{6 +}})

is the cross section of the single electron transfer process, A_ij is the radiative attenuation rate of a specific transition i→j, and Q_ij(T_e) is the proton impact excitation rate at a given temperature T_e. Once

N_{i}^{5 +}

of a given i energy state is determined, the efficiency factor corresponding to a given transition i→j can be determined as

α_{i j} = σ_{O^{6 +}} (u_{O^{6 +}}) \frac{N_{i}^{5 +}}{n_{O^{6 +}}} {∆ E}_{i j}

(10)

where

{∆ E}_{i j}

is the transition energy.

3. Results

3.1. Distributions of O⁶⁺ Ions and Hydrogen Atoms

An example of the distributions of

n_{O^{6 +}}

, V_SW, and temperature T_SW for solar wind conditions of N_SW =6 cm^-3, V_SW =700 km s^-1, T_SW =10 eV, IMF magnitude B_T=8 nT, IMF clock angle 𝜃_c=0° (northward), and

f_{O^{6 +}}

=0.001 are shown in Figure 1 a-i. The distributions of hydrogen atoms obtained from the 3-D geocoronal hydrogen model are shown in Figure 1 j-l.

In Figure 1 a-c, the O⁶⁺ number density reaches 0.3 cm^-3 in the dayside magnetosheath. Clear bow shock and magnetopause structures are shown. There are obvious O⁶⁺ ions transported along the magnetic field lines into the magnetosphere, reaching a density peak of 0.5 cm^-3 at about 3 R_E. The solar wind speed is significantly slowed down downstream of the bow shock, especially in the subsolar region (Figure 1 d-f). From Figure 1d, a region with fast O⁶⁺ ion speed can be seen at X_GSM ≤ -15 R_E on the night side of the Earth. This is due to the dawn-dusk asymmetry of the plasma sheet. More high-speed reconnection flows occur on the dusk side than on the dawn side, and O⁶⁺ ions are possibly accelerated through reconnection [22].

3.2. Spectrum of O⁶⁺ Ions during SWCX Process

Through the SASAL model mentioned above, the emission spectrum of O^5+* ion can be calculated as shown in Table 1. The excited state O^5+* ions are generated by collisions between O⁶⁺ ions and hydrogen atoms through the SWCX process, and then the O^5+* ions de-excite from one higher energy state to lower (indicated by → in the table) to generate the SXR photons with corresponding energy. It can be seen from the table that the spectral lines of O^5+* are in a narrow energy range between 105.607~118.291 eV. The 106.561 eV SXR produced by the O^5+* ion deexcitation process 5 in the table is consistent with the SXR produced on comets through the SWCX process of O⁶⁺ [38].

Figure 2 shows the curves of the efficiency factor 𝛼 for various spectral lines as a function of collision speed. The 𝛼 value for 11.582 nm is the highest compared with other spectral lines. The 𝛼 values for 11.582 nm and 11.583 nm lines are very sensitive to the collision speed. As the collision speed increases, their 𝛼 values can be reduced to up to 1/3 of the original values. For other spectral lines, no obvious correlation is found between the 𝛼 values and the collision speed, and their 𝛼 values are always at a low level.

Finally, the plasma parameters in the magnetosheath and the efficiency factors are input into the integration equation (Equation 2) to calculate the line-of-sight emission intensity. A virtual SXR camera is set at position b: (0.0, 60.0 R_E, 0.0). The field of view of the camera is 40º and the spatial resolution is 0.2º in the projection plane of GSM xz. The simulated images for the nine spectral lines are shown in Figure 3.

Taking Figure 3 c as an example, it can be clearly seen that there is a red broadband area (magnetosheath) that is symmetrical to the X_GSM axis, and its left boundary is the bow shock. The strongest emission intensity on the dayside is generated near the cusp region, and the strongest emission intensity on the nightside is located in the area near the magnetopause in the magnetosheath. The simulation results of SXR emission intensity in the magnetosheath of different O^5+* ion energy states have almost the same distribution pattern. The small differences may be due to the relationship of the efficiency factor to the collision speed.

The strongest emission intensities for the nine spectral lines on the dayside (red) and nightside (blue) are shown in Figure 4. When the O^5+* ion energy state is deexcited from 1s² 4d 2P1/2 to 1s² 2p 2D3/2, the emission intensity is the strongest, and the spectral line energy is 107.047 eV. The second largest emission intensity is the deexcitation of O^5+* ions from 1s² 4p 2P1/2 to 1s² 2p 2P3/2, with a spectral line energy of 107.040 eV. The strongest emission intensity is 6.07 keV cm^-2 s^-1 sr^-1, and the difference between the strongest emission intensity between day and night is basically maintained at half an order of magnitude.

3.3. Effects of Interplanetary Shock Waves on Soft X-ray Emission

In this section, we simulate the effect of a forward interplanetary shock passing through the Earth with a virtual camera at two special positions a and b. During this process, six stages are chosen (shown by the dashed vertical lines in Figure 5). All images are simulated at the strongest spectral line (energy 107.047 eV).

First, the initial solar wind parameters (N_SW=6 cm^-3, V_SW=700 km s^-1, T_SW=10 eV, B_T=8 nT, θ_c=0°, and

f_{O^{6 +}} = 0.001

, the same as those adopted in Figure 1) were input into the hybrid model and run until an equilibrium state was achieved. Then, the solar wind IP-TD structure was inserted into the model run. The IMF was turned southward (θ_c=180°) with B_T increased to 16 nT, N_SW was doubled to 12 cm^-3, and T_SW was enhanced to 15 eV. The value of

f_{O^{6 +}}

in solar wind was kept at 0.001. During the following evolution of the solar wind-magnetosphere interaction, five stages after the IP-TD structure arrived the dayside bow shock were selected to investigate the temporal variations of the X-ray emissions.

In the first stage, when the IP-TD structure does not reach the bow shock, X-ray emission intensity is low (Figure 6a,b, similar to Figure 3c). In Stage 2, when the IP-TD structure reaches about 10 R_E upstream of the Earth and collides with the bow shock, the dayside maximum emission intensity occurs in the area where the IP-TD structure contacts the magnetosheath, i.e., subsolar region. As can be seen in Stages 3-6 in Figure 6, after IP-TD structure passing through the cusp, the cusp is always the area with the highest emission intensity. An obvious signature in Figure 6 is that the X-ray emission intensity in the subsolar and low latitude magnetosheath region is generally lower than the intensities in the flank region or the high latitude region, possibly because the ion velocities in the subsolar and low latitude region are significantly lower than those in other regions (Figure 1d-e). One can also see that a clear shock structure passed from the upstream towards the Earth and becomes not clear after State 5.

3.4. Emission Intensity Enhancement

The dayside and nightside SXR emission intensity peak values in Figure 6 are further plotted in Figure 7. During the passing of the IP-TD structure, the emission intensity of X-ray increases with time, and the maximum value achieves 27.11 keV cm^-2 s^-2 sr^-1 on the dayside, which are 4.5 times that before the IP-TD structure reaches the bow shock. This means that when the solar wind density increased by 2 times with southward IMF turning, the X-ray emission intensity can enhance by at least 4 times. Such an emission intensity enhancement is significantly smaller than the EUV emissions which could increase 40 times (38). The maximum emission intensity imaged at location b is always higher than that at location a, especially under conditions of enhanced solar wind conditions. The increase in the nightside is small, only about twice the initial. This may be because heavier solar wind ions (O⁶⁺) are difficult to be transported to the nightside magnetosphere, while He²⁺ ions are lighter and can be transported to the nightside magnetosphere [38].

3.5. Bow Shock and Magnetopause Compressions

The data of the plasma temperature on the Earth's dayside along the X_GSM axis are extracted from the hybrid simulation result (Figure 8). The corresponding color of each stage is displayed in the upper right corner of the figure. In the first and second stages (green and purple lines in the figure), the temperature rises rapidly from ~1.0 eV at 11.5 R_E, and quickly reaches ~1.0 keV at 10.9 R_E. This sharp boundary corresponds to the bow shock. Downstream of the bow shock, there is a boundary with sharp temperature decrease at ~8.0 R_E, corresponding to the magnetopause. Therefore, the positions where the temperature dramatically increases and decreases are identified as the positions of bow shock and magnetopause, respectively.

From State 3 on, when the IP-TD structure enters the magnetosheath, both the bow shock and the magnetopause are significantly compressed and move towards the Earth. We extract the position data of the bow shock and magnetopause in the six stages in Figure 8 and draw a line chart of the position changes in Figure 9. It can be clearly seen that the bow shock moves from 11.4 R_E to 9.3 R_E, and the magnetopause moves from 7.8 R_E to 6.6 R_E. This is a very strong compression of the magnetosphere. The compression is the most significant during the period when the IP-TD contact the dayside bow shock and pass through the dayside magnetopause (State 2 to Stage 3).

Figure 10 shows the simulated SXR emission profiles along the X_GSM axis from position a. The vertical solid and dashed lines show the positions of bow shock and magnetopause in Figure 8, respectively. It is shown that the position of the bow shock corresponds well with the right edge of the radial profile of SXR emission, that is, the position of the bow shock is consistent with the coordinates of the first sudden increase in SXR emission. Therefore, the SXR emission can be reliably utilized to identify the location and shape of the bow shock in future X-ray imaging. However, the magnetopause structure in SXR images may be not so clear due to the LOS overlapping effect. Other method should be investigated in future to extract the magnetopause structures in the X-ray images.

5. Conclusions

This paper uses the global hybrid simulation model, the geocoronal hydrogen model and the SASAL to simulate the spectral lines of solar wind O⁶⁺ ions to study the impact of interplanetary shock on SXR emission in the Earth's magnetosheath. The main results are summarized as follows:

A global hybrid model is used to simulate the number density, velocity, and temperature distribution of O⁶⁺ in the magnetosheath. Then the SASAL is used to calculate the state distributions of excited O^5+* ions, which is generated in the collisions between O⁶⁺ ions and hydrogen atoms, to obtain the efficiency factors for the X-ray emissions. Then the X-ray emission intensities are simulated at 60.0 R_E at dusk side and at north pole.
It is found that there are two closed strong emission lines for O^5+* at 10.582 nm and 10.583 nm, corresponding to energy of 107.047 eV and 107.040 eV. The efficiency factors of both lines vary significantly with collision speed. All energy states of O^5+* ions have almost the same distribution pattern in the simulate images. The strongest emission intensity on the day side is generated in the cusp region, and the strongest emission intensity on the night side is in the area near the magnetopause in the magnetosheath.
During the passage of an IP-TD structure, significant emission intensity enhancement and compressions of both bow shock and magnetopause are observed in the simulations. The passage of the shock in the magnetosheath is clearly shown in the simulated images. The emission intensities simulated at dusk are always stronger than those simulated at north pole, possibly because that the solar wind heavy ions in the magnetosheath are mainly confined near the equatorial region.
The emission intensity profiles can reliably be used to extract the location of bow shock, while the location of the magnetopause is difficult to be identified possibly due to the LOS overlapping effect.

During the passing of solar wind structures (such as CME, discontinuity, IP shock, etc.) in the magnetosphere, the influence in the magnetosheath can be clearly observed in the X-ray images, such as the earthward motions of bow shock and magnetopause. Thus, imagers with large field of view (e.g., the SMILE SXI and other EUV imagers in future) will be powerful to monitor the large-scale dynamic evolution of the magnetosheath and reveal the mass and energy transportation from solar wind into the magnetosphere. If the imagers are capable of distinguishing X-ray spectral lines, dynamics of specific heavy ions in the magnetosheath can be traced. The emission properties for other solar wind heavy ions will be investigated in future.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.H.; methodology, F.H., Z.Z., G.L. and X.W; software, F.H., Z.Z. G.L. and X.W; validation, F.H., X.-X.Z. and X.W; formal analysis, Z.Z.; investigation, Z.Z. and F.H; writing—original draft preparation, Z.Z.; writing—review and editing, F.H., X.-X.Z., G.Y., X.W., and Y.W; visualization, Z.Z.; supervision, F.H.; project administration, F.H.; funding acquisition, F.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Key R&D Program of China (2021YFA0718600) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (42222408, 41931073). F.H was supported by the Youth Innovation Promotion Association of CAS (Y2021027).

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in the article are available upon request from the author at the following email address: hefei@mail.iggcas.ac.cn.

Acknowledgments

We appreciate the reviewers for valuable comments and suggestions.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

Sonett, C.P.; Abrams, I.J. The distant geomagnetic field: 3. Disorder and shocks in the magnetopause. J. Geophys. Res. 1963, 68, 1233–1263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Nabert, C.; Glassmeier, K.H.; Plaschke, F. A new method for solving the MHD equations in the magnetosheath. In Annales Geophysicae; Copernicus Publications: Göttingen, Germany, Göttingen, 2013. [Google Scholar]
Dimmock, A.P.; Nykyri, K. The statistical mapping of magnetosheath plasma properties based on THEMIS measurements in the magnetosheath interplanetary medium reference frame. J Geophys Res-Space. 2013, 118, 4963–4976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Omidi, N.; Zhang, H.; Chu, C.; Turner, D. Parametric dependencies of spontaneous hot flow anomalies. J Geophys Res-Space. 2014, 119, 9823–9833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Breuillard, H.; LeConte, O.l; Chust, T.; Berthomier, M.; Retino, A.; Turner, D.L.; Nakamura, R.; Baumjohann, W.; G. Cozzani; Catapano, F.; Alexandrova, A.; et al. The properties of Lion roars and electron dynamics in mirror mode waves observed by the Magnetospheric MultiScale Mission. J Geophys Res-Space 2018, 123, 93–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Zhao, J.; Wang, T.; Shi, C.; Graham, D.B.; Dunlop, M.W.; He, J.; Tsurutani, B.T.; Wu, D. Ion and electron dynamics in the presence of mirror, electromagnetic ion cyclotron, and whistler waves. ApJL 2019, 883, 185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Cravens T, E. Comet Hyakutake X-ray source: Charge transfer of solar wind heavy ions. GRL 1997, 24, 105–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Paresce, F.; Fahr, H.; Lay, G. A search for interplanetary He II, 304-A emission. J Geophys Res-Space 1981, 86, 10038–10048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Lisse, C.M.; Christian, D.J.; Dennerl, K.; Meech, K.J.; Petre, R.; Weaver, H.A.; Wolr, S.J. Charge exchange-induced X-ray emission from Comet C/1999 S4 (LINEAR). Science 2001, 292, 1343–1348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Ringuette, R.; Koutroumpa, D.; Kuntz K, D.; Kaaret, P.; Jahoda, K.; LaRocca, D.; Kounkel, M.; Richardson, J.; Zajczyk, A.; Bluem, J. HaloSat observations of heliospheric solar wind charge exchange. ApJL 2021, 918, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Zhou, Y.; Yamasaki, N.Y.; Toriumi, S.; Mitsuda, K. Geocoronal Solar Wind Charge Exchange Process Associated With the 2006-December-13 Coronal Mass Ejection Event. J Geophysl Res-Space 2023, 128, e2023JA032069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ishikawa, K.; Ezoe, Y.; Miyoshi, Y.; Terada, N.; Mitsuda, K.; Ohashi, T. Suzaku observation of strong solar-wind charge-exchange emission from the terrestrial exosphere during a geomagnetic storm. PASJ 2013, 65, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ringuette, R.; Kuntz, K.D.; Koutroumpa, D.; Kaaret, P.; LaRocca, D.; Richardson, J. Observations of Magnetospheric Solar Wind Charge Exchange. ApJL 2023, 955, 139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Zhang, Y.J.; Sun, T.R.; Carter, J.A.; Liu, W.H.; Sembay, S.; Zhang, S.N.; Ji, L.; Wang, C. Two methods for separating the magnetospheric solar wind charge exchange soft X-ray emission from the diffuse X-ray background. EPP 2023, 8, 119–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Connor, H.K.; Sibeck, D.G.; Collier, M.R.; Baliukin, I.I.; Branduardi-Raymont, G.; Brandt, P.C.; Buzulukova, N.Y.; Collado-Vega, Y.M.; Escoubet, C.P.; Fok, M.-C.; et al. Soft X-ray and ENA Imaging of the Earth's Dayside Magnetosphere. J Geophys Res-Space 2021, 126, e2020JA028816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Sun, T.R.; Wang, C.; Sembay, S.F.; Lopez, R.E.; Escoubet, C.P.; Branduardi-Raymont, G.; Zheng, J.H.; Yu, X.Z.; Guo, X.C.; Dai, L.; et al. Soft X-ray imaging of the magnetosheath and cusps under different solar wind conditions: MHD simulations. J Geophys Res Space 2019, 124, 2435–2450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Raab, W.; Branduardi-Raymont, G.; Wang, C.; Dai, L.; Donovan, E.; Enno, G.; Escoubet, P.; Holland, A.; Li, J.; Kataria, D.; et al. SMILE: A joint ESA/CAS mission to investigate the interaction between the solar wind and Earth's magnetosphere. Proc SPIE 2016, 9905, 990502–1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Collier, M.R.; Porter, F.S.; Sibeck, D.G.; Carter, J.A.; Chiao, M.P.; Chornay, D.J.; Cravens, T.; Galeazzi, M.; Keller, J.W.; Koutroumpa, D.; Kuntz, K.; et al. Prototyping a global soft X-ray imaging instrument for heliophysics, planetary science, and astrophysics science. Astron Nachr 2012, 333, 378–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Somana, M.R.; Halla, D.J.; Hollanda, A.D.; Burgona, R.; Buggeya, T.; Skottfelta, J.; Sembayb, S.; Drummb, P.; Thornhillb, J.; Readb, A.; et al. The SMILE Soft X-ray Imager (SXI) CCD design and development. JINST 2018, 13, C01022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Schwadron, N.A.; Cravens, T.E. Implications of solar wind composition for cometary X-rays. ApJL 2000, 544, 558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Robertson, I.P.; Collier, M.R.; Cravens, T.E.; Fok, M.-C. X-ray emission from the terrestrial magnetosheath including the cusps. J Geophys Res-Space.
Lin, Y.; Wang, X.Y.; Lu, S.; Perez, J.D.; Lu, Q. Investigation of storm time magnetotail and ion injection using three-dimensional global hybrid simulation. J Geophys Res-Space 2014, 119, 7413–7432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Lin, Y.; Wang, X.Y. Three-dimensional global hybrid simulation of dayside dynamics associated with the quasi-parallel bow shock. J Geophys Res-Space 2005, 110, A12216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Swift, D.W. Use of a hybrid code for global-scale plasma simulation. J Comput Phys 1996, 126, 109–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Kivelson, *!!! REPLACE !!!*; Margaret, G.; Christopher, T. 25. Kivelson; Margaret, G.; Christopher, T. Russell, eds. Introduction to space physics. Cambridge university press, 1995. [Google Scholar]
Lepri, S.T.; Landi, E.; Zurbuchen, T.H. Solar wind heavy ions over solar cycle 23: ACE/SWICS measurements. ApJL 2013, 768, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Von Steiger, R.; Zurbuchen, T.H.; McComas, D.J. Oxygen flux in the solar wind: Ulysses observations. GRL 2010, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Hodges, R.R., Jr. Monte Carlo simulation of the terrestrial hydrogen exosphere. J Geophys Res-Space 1994, 99, 23229–23247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Brinkmann R, T. Departures from Jeans' escape rate for H and He in the Earth's atmosphere. PSS 1970, 18, 449–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Cole K, D. Theory of some Quiet Magnetospheric [Phenomena related to the Geomagnetic Tail. Nature 1966, 211, 1385–1387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Hodges, R.R., Jr.; Tinsley, B.A. Charge exchange in the Venus ionosphere as the source of the hot exospheric hydrogen. J Geophys Res-Space 1981, 86, 7649–7656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Liang, G.Y.; Li, F.; Wang, F.L.; Wu, Y.; Zhong, J.Y.; Zhao, G. X-ray and EUV spectroscopy of various astrophysical and laboratory plasmas: Collisional, photoionization and charge-exchange plasmas. ApJL 2014, 783, 124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Verner, D.A.; Ferland, G.J.; Korista, K.T.; Yakovlev, D.G. Atomic data for astrophysics. II. New analytic fits for photoionization cross sections of atoms and ions. Astrophys J 1996, 465, 487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Salop, A.; Olson, R.E. Charge exchange between H(1s) and fully stripped heavy ions at low-keV impact energies. Phys Rev A 1976, 13, 1312–1320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Liang, G.Y.; Zhu, X.L.; Wei, H.G.; Yuan, D.W.; Zhong, J.Y.; Wu, Y.; Hutton, R.; Cui, W.; Cui, X.W.; Zhao, G. Charge-exchange soft X-ray emission of highly charged ions with inclusion of multiple-electron capture. MNRAS 2021, 508, 2194–2203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Liang, G.Y.; Sun, T.R.; Lu, H.Y.; Zhu, X.L.; Wu, Y.; Li, S.B.; Wei, H.G.; Yuan, D.W.; Zhong, J.Y.; Cui, W.; et al. X-ray morphology due to charge-exchange emissions used to study the global structure around Mars. ApJL 2023, 943, 85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Kharchenko, V.; Dalgarno, A. Spectra of cometary X rays induced by solar wind ions. J Geophys Res-Space 2000, 105, 18351–18359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
He, F.; Zhang, X.X.; Wang, X.Y.; Chen, B. EUV emissions from solar wind charge exchange in the Earth's magnetosheath: Three-dimensional global hybrid simulation. J Geophys Res-Space 2015, 120, 138–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Figure 1. Plasma parameter profile. From top to bottom are the O⁶⁺ ion number density

n_{O^{6 +}}

, solar wind speed V_SW, solar wind temperature T_SW and hydrogen atom number density n_H. From left to right in the figure are the parameters of the xy, xz, and yz planes in the GSM coordinate system. The ribbon is shown on the right. The SW-IMF parameters are: N_SW=6 cm^-3, V_SW=700 km s^-1, T_SW=10 eV, B_T=8 nT, 𝜃c=0°, and

f_{O^{6 +}}

=0.001.

Figure 1. Plasma parameter profile. From top to bottom are the O⁶⁺ ion number density

n_{O^{6 +}}

f_{O^{6 +}}

=0.001.

Figure 2. Changes of different SXR 𝛼 parameters with collision speed. The colors of different energies are shown in the upper right corner.

Figure 3. Intensity distribution for all spectral lines of O⁶⁺ integrated along the line of sight at position b. The energy of the spectral line, the peak intensity in the dayside (indicated by crosses), and the peak intensity in the nightside (indicated by asterisks) are shown in the upper right corners, lower left corners, and low right corners of each panel. The conical angle of the field of the virtual camera is 40°, and the dotted circles indicate a 15° field of view. The image is projected in the GSM xz plane, with the +X_GSM axis pointing towards left and the +Z_GSM axis pointing towards up. The logarithmically scaled color bar is located at the bottom.

Figure 4. The strongest day and night emission intensity of SXR with different energies.

Figure 5. The IP-TD structure in the solar wind is added to the simulation. The time nodes of the six stages of simulation are represented by vertical dashed lines in the figure.

Figure 6. Magnetosheath X-ray emission intensity simulated at the two locations in a (0.0, 0.0, 60.0 R_E) and b (0.0, 60.0 R_E, 0.0) at six stages (Stage 1-6) during the passing of the IP-TD in Figure 5. The column labelled with ‘Location a’ shows the images in the GSM xy plane and the column labelled with ‘Location b’ shows the images in the GSM xz plane. The Sun is always located on the left.

Figure 7. Magnetosheath SXR emission intensity peaks at different stages during the IP-TD passage.

Figure 8. Plasma temperature along the X_GSM axis at six stages. The solid and dashed lines represent the positions of the bow shock and the magnetopause in the six stages, respectively. The corresponding color for each stage is shown in the upper right corner.

Figure 9. Bow shock and magnetopause position diagram at different stages.

Figure 10. Changes in SXR emission intensity of perspective + XGSM axis at position a at different stages. The solid and dashed lines represent the positions of the bow shock and the magnetopause in the six stages, respectively.

Table 1. O^5+* ion energy state changes correspond to SXR wavelength and energy.

Number	energy state	Wavelength (nm)	Energy (eV)
1	1s² 5d 2P1/2 → 1s² 2p 2D3/2	10.481	118.291
2	1s² 5p 2P1/2 → 1s² 2p 2P3/2	10.481	118.291
3	1s² 4d 2P1/2 → 1s² 2p 2D3/2	11.582	107.047
4	1s² 4p 2P1/2 → 1s² 2p 2P3/2	11.583	107.040
5	1s² 5d 2P3/2 → 1s² 2p 2D5/2	11.635	106.561
6	1s² 5f 2P1/2 → 1s² 3s 2F5/2	11.642	106.496
7	1s² 5d 2P1/2 → 1s² 3s 2D5/2	11.642	106.495
8	1s² 5p 2P3/2 → 1s² 2p 2P1/2	11.732	105.673
9	1s² 5p 2P1/2 → 1s² 3s 2P1/2	11.740	105.607

¹ Since SWCX research lies at the intersection of multiple research fields, it is important to avoid confusion and conflict. For example, in this article, astrophysicists call it the O⁶⁺ line, and space physicists call it the O⁵⁺ line. Astrophysics conventions will be used uniformly throughout this article. ² Where 2P1/2 means that this electron occupies 1/2 subshell of the second energy level p orbital of the atom.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.

Submitted:

01 April 2024

Posted:

02 April 2024

You are already at the latest version

Alerts

Abstract

Keywords:

Subject: Environmental and Earth Sciences - Space and Planetary Science

1. Introduction

In this paper, a three-dimensional (3-D) global hybrid model will be used to obtain solar wind heavy ion parameters (including the O⁶⁺ ion number density

n_{O^{6 +}}