http://elf.gi.alaska.edu/
VERY VERY DIFFERENT?
Is this why there is so much that Bush wants to do in Alaska?

Characteristics of Blue Jets
Blue jets are a second high altitude optical phenomenon, distinct from sprites, observed above thunderstorms using low light television systems. As their name implies, blue jets are optical ejections from the top of the electrically active core regions of thunderstorms. Following their emergence from the top of the thundercloud, they typically propagate upward in narrow cones of about 15 degrees full width at vertical speeds of roughly 100 km/s (Mach 300), fanning out and disappearing at heights of about 40-50 km. Their intensities are on the order of 800 kR near the base, decreasing to about 10 kR near the upper terminus. These correspond to an estimated optical energy of about 4 kJ, a total energy of about 30 MJ, and an energy density on the order of a few mJ/m^3. Blue jets are not aligned with the local magnetic field.

A movie of a jet is available (46K mpeg).

Return to top of page


Why Haven't Sprites and Jets Been Reported Before?
Sprites appear to be elusive for several reasons.

(1) Sprites only occur above active thunderstorm systems. To see them requires visual access to the region above the storm, unobstructed by intervening clouds, and viewing against a dark stellar background. In most locations these conditions occur only rarely.

(2) Sprites are dim and can only been seen with the dark adapted eye. On average, their brightness compares to moderately bright aurorae, 10-50 kiloRayleighs. In the human eye, this corresponds approximately to the crossover threshold intensities of cones of the retina, which respond to color, and the somewhat more sensitive but achromatic parfoveal rods, which permit night vision. The dark adapted eye most readily sees sprites in parfoveal vision, when not directly looking at them. Thus, they may quite literally appear only as flashes out of the corner of the eye. Because of their dimness, sprites cannot be viewed in the presence of nearby bright lights, as would be found in a city.

(3) Cloud illumination from sprite-producing cloud-to-ground or intracloud lightning activity is often orders of magnitude brighter than sprites. This lightning activity can easily distract the casual observer from noticing the fleeting and delicate dance of red sprites high in the sky above the storm raging below.

(4) Sprites appear to have a duration of only a few (3-10) milliseconds. This is too brief to permit shifting one's gaze to obtain a visual fix.

(5) Sprites occur randomly with only about one percent of lightning strokes. The mere occurrence of lightning therefore cannot be used as an event marker to indicate that a sprite has occurred above a thunderstorm.

When all of these factors are taken together it is not surprising that sprites have been so elusive. However, they can be seen with the unaided human eye.

Return to top of page


How to Look for Sprites and Jets

A clear view above a thunderstorm is required. This generally means the thunderstorm activity must be on the horizon. Additionally, there must be very little intervening cloud cover.

Best viewing distance from storm is 100-200 miles (200-300 km). At these distances sprites will subtend a vertical angular distance of 10-20 degrees. This is 2-4 times the separation of the pointer stars in the Big Dipper.

For observing sprites, it must be completely dark. (i. e. no longer twilight)

Eyes must be completely dark adapted. Use same criteria for this as for astronomical observing. If you can see the Milky Way, then it is probably dark enough and the eyes have adapted enough to see sprites.

Fix your gaze on the space above an active thunderstorm. Do not be distracted by underlying lightning activity in the storm. Block out the lightning if necessary using a piece of dark paper in such a way as to still being able to view what is going on above the cloud.

Sprites will be very brief flashes just on the edge of perceptability. They occur too quickly to follow with the eyes, but their strange vertically striated structure and dull red color may be perceived.

Patience will be rewarded. If the right kind of storm is present and one's viewing geometry is favorable, then there is a greater likelihood of seeing a sprite than of seeing a shooting star or comet.

If you have observed a sprite or any other optical emission above a thunderstorm, please report it.

Return to top of page


Current Research Focus
Intense efforts, both experimental and theoretical, are presently underway to determine the full extent to which these new phenomena form a part of the terrestrial electrical environment. Although optical images seem likely to remain the principal experimental form of "ground truth" in sprite detection, focus has already shifted to employing other diagnostics that will yield more specific information about the detailed physical mechanisms. These include optical spectra, including height profiles, radio (ELF-HF) measurements of the electromagnetic emissions from sprites and their accompanying tropospheric lightning strokes, VLF measurements of associated ionospheric heating effects, and continuous wave radar probes of sprites to determine electron densities.

Interest has also emerged in the possible electrochemical effects of sprites and jets on the mesosphere and stratosphere, respectively.

Investigations are underway to ascertain whether they may create locally or globally significant long lived electrochemical residues within the upper atmosphere. The production of ionized or electronically excited species, by RF electrolysis or other means, could conceivably lead to the creation of reactive species or to the activation of catalytic species that would otherwise be absent.

The recent MEIDEX experiment was used to studying sprites from the shuttle. An upcoming satellite experiment, called ISUAL, on the ROCSAT-3 satellite will be studying sprites from space. The groups at New Mexico Tech and Stanford are both active in sprites research and maintain web pages with details of their work and some great photos and data. FMA Research has hosted many research groups and has produced educational materials (see the "100 Year Search for Sprites") and maintains a web page here Return to top of page


Speculations
From what is known to date, it may be speculated that sprites or jets, or both, are an integral feature of every thunderstorm system of moderate size or larger in the terrestrial system, and may be an essential element of the earth's global electrical circuit. Further, it seems likely that they have been a part of thunderstorms that have occurred over previous millions of years or longer. One may speculate about the possible occurrences of similar phenomena associated with lightning on other planets where lightning has been detected, most notably Jupiter and Venus.

Return to top of page



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related Topics
In addition to sprites and jets, but possibly related, there have recently been observed from space two other types of unexpected emissions that appear to originate in thunderstorms. Short duration (~1 ms) gamma ray (>1 MeV) bursts of terrestrial origin have been detected by the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory They are observed to occur over thunderstorm regions, and their source is believed to lie at altitudes greater than 30 km. Finally, extremely intense pairs of VHF pulses (Trans-Ionospheric Pulse Pairs, or TIPPS (TIPP Paper Postscript Source ) originating from thunderstorm regions, but some 10,000 times stronger than sferics produced by normal lightning activity, have been observed by the ALEXIS satellite.


Some of the other groups making sprite observations include:

FMA Research
Stanford Sprite Research
New Mexico Tech
August 1997 Scientific American article on Sprites
Some of the recently completed dissertations describing aspects of sprites research include:

Fast Photometric Imaging of High Altitude Optical Flashes Above Thunderstorms, by Chris Barrington-Leigh.
Lightning and Ionospheric Remote Sensing Using VLF/ELF Radio Atmospherics, by Steve Cummer.
Telescopic Imaging of Streamer and Diffuse Glow Dynamics in Sprites [PDF 5.16 MB], by Elizabeth Gerken.
Optical Spectroscopic Observations of Sprites, Blue Jets, and Elves: Inferred Microphysical Processes and their Macrophysical Implications, by Matt Heavner.
Relativistic Runaway Electrons Above Thunderstorms [PDF, 1257 kB], by Nikolai Lehtinen.
Sprites and Other Optical Phenomena above Thunderstorms, Dana Moudry
Dynamic Coupling of Quasi-Electrostatic Thundercloud Fields to the Mesosphere and Lower Ionosphere, by Victor Pasko.
Remote Sensing of the Electrodynamic Coupling Between Thunderstorm Systems and the Mesosphere/Lower Ionosphere [PDF, 3516KB], Steve Reising.
Sprites and their Parent Discharges, Mark Stanley.
Interaction with the Lower Ionosphere of Electromagnetic Pulses from Lightning: Heating, Attachment, Ionization, and Optical Emissions, by Yuri Taranenko.
The Physics of High Altitude Lightning, by Juan Valdivia.
Return to top of page


This research on red sprites and blue jets is being conducted by researchers at the Geophysical Institute of the University of Alaska Fairbanks.


The URL for this page is: http://elf.gi.alaska.edu/

If you know of other references please bring them to my attention.

Matt Heavner


WELL, this is very inique.
~~~thinking~~~
ISIS

http://c3po.barnesos.net/homepage/lpl/grapeplasma/
Warning: Do Not prepare this unless you have a fire extinguisher
at the same time-you get ready to do this experiment!

Microwave Grape Plasma

There are many photos here.....
{ when you go to this site]
Its the damnedest thing you've ever seen. Please realize that although we haven't actually damaged any of the ovens we've done this with, the potential exists to damage or destroy the microwave that this is done in, and the possibility also exists that it could harm a human being if the proper precautions are not made. Please see to it that you are willing to pay $200 for a new microwave before you try this, and that you have a fire extinguisher nearby. If you are under age 18, please seek the supervision of a parent or guardian. I accept no responsibility should this experiment cause damage or injury. How to make a glowing ball of plasma in your microwave with a grape:

Find your microwave hotspots
Take a damp paper towel and place it on top of 5-10 other paper towels in the bottom of your microwave. On top of it, place a sheet of themally sensitive fax paper, the kind that old crappy fax machines use. Credit card recipts also work, but they'd be harder to tile the bottom of your microwave with. The extra towels at the bottom provide some insulation. Turn the microwave on for a while. The first areas on the paper to turn dark are the hot spots
Grape preparation
Cut a grape in half equatorially (assume that the stem goes through the pole). Then place the new cut surface against a paper towel or other paper product to dry it. Don't squeeze it to death, but try to try it as much as possible. Lay the grape half with the wet side up, and slice it in half top to bottom, leaving a small (~3-7 mm) bridge of skin between the halves. Dry the new surfaces.

Plasmification
Place the grape with the cut ends up like two adjacent bowls on a plate or saucer of some sort and place the grape in your microwave's hotspot. Turn on the microwave for 15 seconds.
Troubleshooting
Normally to keep the grape in the hotspot you should remove the turntable, but if you aren't getting a show, try putting the turntable back in and letting the grape explore the microwave by being turned around all over it. Really make sure that the ends are dry, as if they're wet they tend to short-circuit across the ends and you don't get electrical discharging


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What's going on? Well, I only have an idea for some parts. The first part is speculation -- the sparks are resulting from an electrical discharge between the sides of the grape, as is evident by watching and as supported by the 120Hz buzz that coincides with the grape flaming. It could be that the particular size of the grape relative to the wavelengths of the microwaves in the oven causes the discharge, but I don't know if I believe this yet. What is the mechanism for charge separation?

The discharges vaporize the sugars in the grape and then cause them to combust. The combustion products, if they get hot enough due to the continued electrical arcing, form a plasma (gas where the nuclei and electrons have been ripped apart from one another). This plasma is electricially conductive, and so absorbs microwaves keeping itself warm, and causing the cloud to glow. Since the cloud is hot, it rises to the top of the oven. However, the cloud seems to stay remarkably coherent. Why doesn't the could dissipate over timescales of several seconds?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

grape04.JPG BIG
Cut your grape in half, then cut the half into halves (quarter-grapes) leaving a small bridge between the halves. Dry the cut surfaces.
grape05.JPG BIG
Place the cut crape with the cut surfaces up onto a platter.
grape08.JPG BIG
Put them in the microwave's hot spot.
grape09.JPG BIG
Within 3-4 seconds of turning on the microwave electrical arcing between the two grape quarters emits light, a buzzing noise, and periodic flames as the sugars in the grape burn.
grape02.JPG BIG
If you've been lucky and good, you may get treated to a show of a ball of glowing plasma rising through your microwave oven.

The experiment to make this plasma, is only a small tip of the iceberg, because if you think how many people have been folled by plasma bursts
throughout photos, in the air, and throughout the years- then maybe many photos can be reproduced with a structure that is equivalent to show how
plasma of many different levels is made.
The dum-dum effect for humans will be finally over-and give humans a much more conscientious look at their every day self and see the answers
are closer to the truth-than the questions of not knowing-be a minuet
of [ holding the bag over one's eyes] like a hologram-and pull the bag off just
in time to see a hologram. SEE?
ISIS

PLASMA BURSTS
http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/27/
INTERBALL OBSERVATIONS OF THE DAYSIDE MAGNETOPAUSE

O.L.Vaisberg1, L.A.Avanov1, V.N.Smirnov1, J.L.Burch2, J.H.Waite, Jr.2, A.A.Petrukovich1, and A.A.Skalsky1

1 Space Research Institute, 84/32 Profsoyuznaya str., 117810 Moscow, Russia, E-mail: olegv@afed.iki.rssi.ru
2 Southwest Research Institute, 6220 Culebra Rd., P.O.Drawer 28510, San Antonio, TX 78228-0510, USA

ABSTRACT

The high-apogee Interball Tail Probe crosses the magnetopause in two latitude ranges: one is close to the equator, and the other is at middle and high latitudes. A brief description of dayside magnetopause observations from the fast plasma analyzer SCA-1 is given. We give examples of plasma regimes observed at low latitudes that show evidence for plasma cloud penetration into the magnetosphere. Nonstationary reconnection is suggested as a possible mechanism for the observed near-magnetopause structures.

INTRODUCTION

The magnetopause is considered to be a primary site for the transfer of energy, mass, and momentum from the shocked solar wind to the geomagnetosphere. Three major processes were considered as candidates for this coupling: reconnection (Dungey, 1963), diffusion (Eastman et al., 1976, Eastman and Hones, 1979), and the Kelvin-Helmholtz instability (Dungey, 1955, Axford and Hines, 1961). Another important entry region is the polar cusp (Haerendel et al., 1978).

Signatures associated with reconnection include acceleration of the magnetosheath plasma to speeds greater than those in the adjacent magnetosheath upon open field lines (Sonnerup et al., 1981), Paschmann et al., (1979, 1986, 1990), (Gosling et al., (1990a), FTEs (Russell and Elphic, 1978), and the separation of the electron edge earthward of ion edge during accelerated flow events (Vaisberg et al., 1980), and (Gosling et al., 1990b).

Quasiperiodic pulses of magnetosheath-like plasma on magnetic field lines near the dawn magnetopause observed on ISEE 1/2 were interpreted as evidence for strong diffusion of magnetosheath plasma across the magnetopause and the Kelvin-Helmholtz (K-H) instability at the inner edge of the LLBL (Sckopke et al., 1981), as evidence for magnetic merging and the formation of twisted flux ropes of interconnected magnetosheath and magnetospheric filed lines (Paschmann et al., 1982), and as quasi-periodic magnetopause motion and the observation of draped northward magnetosheath magnetic field lines in the plasma depletion layer (Sibeck, 1990). The K-H instability can accelerate the reconnection rate (LaBelle-Hammer et al., 1988), (Liu and Hu, 1988). Reconnection and the K-H instability may be interconnected. Observations suggest that accelerated flow associated with reconnection can excite the K-H instability (Saunders, 1989).

Three-dimensional observations of ions provide a useful tool for the analysis of different processes at the magnetopause. We give a description of the three-dimensional fast plasma analyzer SCA-1 installed on Interball-1/Tail Probe satellite. We present the results of observations of two dayside magnetopause crossings, discuss quasi-periodic plasma pulses of magnetosheath-like plasma near dayside magnetopause, ion dispersive beams, and the evolution with time of fluid and kinetic behavior of ions after the first magnetopause crossing. Evidence of reconnection signatures is given. We also discuss multiple magnetopause crossings vs. the plasma penetration alternative, and give evidence of impulsive penetration of magnetosheath-like plasma into the magnetosphere, suggesting a possible source for magnetospheric plasma.

INSTRUMENTATION.

The ion spectrometer SCA-1 (Vaisberg et al., 1995) has full 3-D capabilities. Its two identical sensor heads EU-1/1 and EU-1/2 cover two hemispheres. Each sensor head consists of a toroidal electrostatic analyzer (ESA) followed by a channel electron multiplier with 8-sectored anode. The energy range of the instrument is 50 eV/Q to ~ 5.0 keV/Q,. An electrostatic scanner in front of each electrostatic analyzer provides measurements over a nearly-2 field of view. In basic fast mode the SCA-1 measures E/Q spectra over 15 energy steps in 64 directions: 8 equally spaced (by 45o) azimuthal directions by 8 polar angles relative to the Sun-directed satellite’s axis: 2o, 17o, 40o, 65o, 115o, 140o, 163o, and 178o. A narrow field of view (2o), and narrow energy passband
(~ 10 %) provide non-averaging velocity space measurements. Measurements of complete energy-angular distribution of ions are performed about every 10 s.

OBSERVATIONS.

A number of SCA-1 fast mode measurement periods were focused at the magnetopause region. Figure 1 gives the locations of the dayside magnetopause crossings observed in the fast mode of SCA-1. The solar magnetospheric coordinates of the satellite are given when SCA-1 observed the magnetopause and boundary layer. Two magnetopause crossings are discussed in this paper: on September 2, 1995 and on February 15, 1996. They are marked on Figure 1 by dates of measurements. Figure 2 shows September 2, 1995 magnetopause crossing that occurred at about 01:45 UT as seen in SCA-1 plasma data and FM-3 magnetic field data. This magnetopause crossing was already discussed by Vaisberg et al., (1996). Interball-1 was moving approximately along the -Y-axis and crossed the magnetopause at SM coordinates: sm = 10.2o (latitude), and LMT =06.13 hours. The color scale on the right shows "integrated" counts over these cones over an accumulation time of 0.09 sec.

Fig.1.
Fig. 2.

Panels ©, (d), and (e) are calculated flow parameters (moments of the ion distribution function, calculated assuming that all ions are protons): number density (N), total flow velocity, (Vo). and ion temperature, (Ti). Panels (f), (g), and (h) are FM-3 (Nozdrachev et al., 1995) magnetic field components in normal coordinates (Russell and Elphic, 1978): Bn along the normal to the magnetopause, Bl along the magnetospheric magnetic field, and Bm completing the right-hand coordinate system. The magnetic field magnitude is given on panel (i). The normal to the magnetopause was calculated as a minimum variance direction for magnetic field measurements in a time interval of about 40 min centered at the magnetopause crossing.

Magnetosheath flow with the maximum counts at about 300 eV and a highly anisotropic distribution is seen in panels (a) and ( before 01:45 UT. At that time the magnetosheath spectrum changes to a magnetospheric spectrum which is much more isotropic and is seen at all angles as an increased counting rate in the upper part of the energy range. Additional detail at the magnetopause is a narrow beam in panel (, = 140o. This beam has an energy dispersion such that lower energies are observed first, close to the magnetopause.

Number density in the magnetosheath remained nearly constant during about a 45 min time interval. Two dropouts (at ~ 01:27 UT, and at ~ 01:39 UT) are associated with velocity jumps (panel (d). The velocity of the magnetosheath plasma slightly increased during time the interval shown, and exhibits several jumps, ranging from about 30 km/s to 70 km/s. The first velocity jump, at ~ 01:13 UT, is accompanied by leakage of magnetospheric particles, and the largest jump, at about 01:26, marks the start of the region of permanent magnetospheric ion leakage to the magnetosheath (the ions in the energy range above 1 keV are seen as a separate part of the distribution in the counts of the antisunward-looking analyzer) at about 01:26 UT and continued to be registered through the magnetopause. A velocity increase of about 30 km/s is also seen just before the magnetopause crossing. Ion temperature was approximately constant before 01:26 UT, and increased after the time, when magnetospheric ions are added to magnetosheath flow. This increase is apparently associated with this admixture. However, the temperature drops somewhat before the magnetopause crossing. Slight temperature increases are associated with velocity bursts, except for a burst at ~ 01:13 UT, that marks the magnetosheath ion leakage region, in front of which the temperature increased by a factor of two. The leakage of magnetospheric ions through the magnetopause is considered as an indication of reconnection (see, for example, Phan et al., 1994). Permanent presence of magnetospheric ions on the magnetosheath magnetic field lines may be an indication of a steady reconnection.

Magnetic field parameters for this magnetopause crossing were obtained from measurements of the FM-3 magnetometer that has a sampling rate for the September 2 pass of one vector every 32 sec. This low sampling rate complicates attempts to make a detailed comparison with temporal variations of the plasma. The magnetic field in the magnetosphere is about 25 nT and was directed approximately along the Z axis. The magnetic field in the magnetosheath had a negative Bm component that facilitates reconnection. All velocity bursts in the magnetosheath after 01:27 UT are accompanied by changes of B, and the magnetic field within these events approaches the magnetospheric direction. This is another indication of reconnection processes.

Many plasma features seen during the time interval after the first magnetopause crossing until ~ 02:21 UT resemble successive crossings of the magnetopause. These bursts of ions have nearly the same energy spectrum as the magnetosheath spectrum on the panel (a) (sunward hemisphere). However, trailing parts of the bursts as well as bursts observed after ~ 02:21 UT show decreased counting rate in sunward hemisphere and increased counting rate in antisunward hemisphere. In the lower panel (antisunward hemisphere) these bursts are wider in time scale, and appear as envelopes of bursts seen in the sunward hemisphere. One notice the energy dispersion in the antisunward hemisphere (panel (, resembling the beam observed at the magnetopause crossing. It is easy to see that where the flux has a maximum in the solar hemisphere, there is minimum flux in the antisunward hemisphere (see the bursts at 01:47 UT, 02:19 UT, and 02:33 UT). The lower energy cutoff and the average energy in the plasma burst are progressively displaced to higher values. Plasma sheet-type particles are slightly depressed within the burst (see one at 02:49 UT). Part of these features are also seen in some earlier bursts (02:14, 02:29).

The trend in the properties of plasma bursts along the spacecraft trajectory is also seen in the flow parameters (panels ©, (d), and (e) on Fig. 2). Number density in the plasma bursts decreases as satellite penetrates deeper into the magnetosphere, although the maximum number density reaches its magnetosheath value in the first half of the magnetospheric region shown. Maximum velocity values observed in the leading parts of plasma bursts in the magnetosphere initially reach higher values than the average velocity in the magnetosheath (time interval 01:48 UT - 02:09 UT), then sometimes reach the magnetosheath value (within the time interval 02:18 UT - 02:32 UT), but the average flow velocity in the bursts continually decreases with increasing distance from the magnetopause, and all plasma bursts observed after about 02:10 UT are non-convected (except for front edge of burst at 01:44 UT and part of burst at 01:59 UT). At this time the plasma ram pressure drops below the magnetic field pressure. Velocity correlates quite well with number density. The ion temperature in plasma bursts in the magnetosphere shows the systematic increase from its magnetosheath value (about 70 eV) to the temperature value of magnetospheric ions (about 2 keV), and is approximately inversely correlated with ion number density.

The ion distribution function within plasma clouds also changes with time from the first magnetopause crossing (Vaisberg et al., 1996). In the dense parts of the plasma bursts the ion velocity distribution resemble a heated convected beam of magnetosheath-like plasma. The ion velocity distribution in the less dense parts of the bursts is quite different.

Figure 3 shows the cross-sections of the ion velocity distributions as measured by SCA-1. Each square panel is a plane cross-section of the velocity distribution with horizontal axis Vx directed to the Sun (Sun is on the left) and vertical axis as the other velocity component Vy on the plane. The scales are in km/s. The horizontal row is a complete set of 4 cross-sections along meridional planes of the instrument separated by 45o (meridional direction of the plane is shown on the top of each frame). Velocity components as well as total velocity in the plane were calculated from the plane cross-section and are given under respective frame. Three successive sets of measurements within one of the first plasma bursts after magnetopause crossing (time of measurements is indicated above respective row) are shown.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3 indicates that the ion velocity distribution within plasma burst is no longer magnetosheath distribution. It consists of the beams with velocity spread close to those in the magnetosheath flow, suggesting the break-up of magnetosheath velocity distribution into the beams. As the burst density and convection velocity decrease the energy of beams constituting it increases. Least dense bursts contain ion beams that have the energy approaching the energy of magnetospheric plasma. Ion velocity distributions observed in the leading and in the trailing parts of the bursts reflect an asymmetry seen in dynamic spectra and in flow parameters: velocity distributions in the trailing parts have more complicated, beam-like structure than those in the leading parts of the bursts.

Figure 4 shows magnetopause crossing observed with SCA-1 at ~ 22:50 UT on February 15, 1996 at SM coordinates sm = 24.8o, and LMT = 18.48. It has the same format as Figure 2. There is striking similarity between this magnetopause crossing and that of September 2, 1995, except for smaller number of plasma bursts in February 15, 1996 case. The reconnection signatures in the magnetosheath include velocity jumps and number density dropouts accompanied by the leakage of magnetospheric particles. Magnetic field measurements in the magnetosphere show that the satellite was on the closed field lines. This is supported by the observations of the hot nearly isotropic ions. The duration of observations of disturbances in the magnetosheath and in the magnetosphere is close to what was seen in the case discussed above. The plasma bursts have very similar appearance and properties to those observed in September 2, 1995 case. The high-density bursts have high-density front edge, depleted magnetospheric population and energy-dispersive envelope of ion flux in antisolar hemisphere. The weaker the burst, the higher average ion energy and the larger relative ion flux coming from antisolar hemisphere.

Fig. 4.

Advantage of February 15, 1996 observations is a high sampling rate of the magnetic field measurements (16 Hz). This gives better perspective of magnetic structure of bursts compared to September 2, 1995 case. It is clearly seen from Figure 4 that about 2-min duration plasma burst at ~ 23:35 UT and about 5-min plasma burst at ~ 23:54 UT have distinct FTE signatures with bipolar Bn profile.

So many features of February 15, 1996 magnetopause crossing are similar to those of September 2, 1995 crossing. The ion velocity distributions in the plasma bursts on February 15, 1996 case also show the transition to beam-like and quasi-isotropic distribution both becoming more pronounced with the decrease of ion density. However, the ion beams in the February 15, 1996 case do not increase their energy so fast as they do in September 1995 case. This may be associated with different magnetospheric locations of two magnetopause crossings.

DISCUSSION

Two cases at the low-latitude dayside magnetopause illustrate the transient plasma phenomena at the magnetopause, including velocity bursts in the magnetosheath, the mixture of magnetosheath and magnetospheric plasma and plasma bursts in the magnetosphere. The two cases discussed are close to the equator, but significantly separated in local time. The September 2, 1995 case is on the dawn flank of the geomagnetosphere, while the February 15, 1996 case is on the dusk flank.

Transients in the September 2 case are seen as velocity bursts in the magnetosheath and as plasma bursts in the magnetosphere (Fig. 2). The magnitudes of the velocity increases are in the range of 10s km/s. Only in 2 cases out of 8 velocity bursts does the magnitude reach about 0.5 VA, with an average of about 0.3 VA. Some of the velocity bursts are accompanied by density decreases. Only a small fraction of magnetosheath bursts are accompanied by temperature increases. Plasma bursts on the magnetospheric side of this pass also show velocity increases above the mean magnetosheath value by about 50 km/s, comparable in magnitude to velocity jumps in magnetosheath. However, also in these cases noticeable temperature jumps were not observed.

The angle between magnetic field directions in the magnetosheath and in the magnetosphere was about 103o for September 2, 1995 case and ~ 159o for February 15, 1996 case, that suggests reconnection as a reason for velocity jumps in the magnetosheath and for plasma bursts in the magnetosphere. This is supported by the leakage of hot magnetospheric ions in the magnetosheath. Another possible reason for the velocity bursts in the magnetosheath and plasma bursts in the magnetosphere observed on September 2 could be the Kelvin-Helmholtz instability.

The duration of disturbances observed in the magnetosheath is nearly equal to the duration of plasma bursts in the magnetosphere. For September 2, 1995 magnetopause crossing the time interval where velocity bursts and the leakage of magnetospheric ions are observed continuously (01:26 UT - 01:45 UT) is about 19 min, comparable to about 20 min duration of disturbances seen on the magnetospheric side, where the plasma bursts are strongest (01:45 UT -02:05 UT). The total time interval of transients in the magnetosheath from the first velocity burst (01:13 UT - 01:45 UT) is about 32 min, and can be compared to the time interval of observation of moderate bursts still bearing some signatures of magnetosheath plasma (01:45 UT - 02:25 UT), about 40 min. This suggests that the same process is responsible for the disturbances in the two regions. If we assume that the magnetopause was, on average, in nearly the same location during the satellite transition through disturbance regions, we may estimate the width of the strong interaction regions on both sides of the magnetopause to be about 4-5 thousand km.

The duration of strong disturbances seen in the magnetosheath on February 15, 1996 is about 37 min, comparable to September 2, 1995 case. The duration of observation of moderate bursts in the magnetosphere still bearing some signatures of magnetosheath plasma in February 15, 1996 case is slightly above 1 hour, again of comparable magnitude with September 2, 1995 case.

Plasma bursts observed on the magnetospheric side of the September 2 case show evolution with time or rather distance from the magnetopause. Initially they very much resemble successive magnetopause crossings. The trend in the properties of plasma bursts along the spacecraft trajectory is seen in the flow parameters. The average number density and transport velocity decrease as the satellite moves deeper into the magnetosphere, and the temperature increases. As one can see in the counting rate spectrograms (panels (a) and ( on Fig. 2), the average energy of ions and the low-energy cut-off increases with distance from the magnetopause, and the relative flux from the antisunward hemisphere increases. Ion thermal pressure remains approximately constant along the satellite’s pass. It seems reasonable to assume that we are observing the evolution of plasma clouds as the satellite moves deeper into the magnetosphere. This trend is also seen in the bursts observed in February 15, 1996 magnetopause crossing.

The evolution of dynamic spectra and velocity distribution moments is confirmed by the evolution of the ion distribution function that was discussed for the September 2 case (Vaisberg et al., 1996) and is seen in Figure 3 for September 2, 1995 case. Initially the ions have velocity distribution similar to that of the magnetosheath. Kinetic effects are seen at that time only on the edges of the burst. Later the ion distribution function changes drastically. The central part of the plasma burst has a quite different velocity distribution, and ion beams constitute a significant portion of it. This trend is seen through the succession of plasma bursts and supports the supposition that we observe evolution of magnetosheath plasma clouds that entered the magnetosphere.

The mean energy of ions in plasma cloud systematically increases with time on September 2, 1995 as the satellite moves deeper into the magnetosphere. The energy per ion increases well above that available from convective and thermal ion motion in the adjacent magnetosheath and in the plasma clouds observed close to the magnetopause crossing. It means that the energization mechanism operates during the same time as the plasma cloud dissipates. This mechanism may probably be identified with a detailed analysis of plasma and magnetic field data.

Energization of ions in plasma clouds observed further from the magnetopause crossing and the observed evolution of the distribution function suggest, that this plasma may subsequently integrate to a hot magnetospheric population on the closed field lines. This is clearly seen in the very dilute plasma clouds in which average ion energy in the beams are higher and they are barely distinguishable from the hot magnetospheric population. Ions in plasma clouds moving up in energy tend to join the hot magnetospheric plasma population. The evolution of plasma bursts observed in two magnetopause crossings suggests that it may be a relatively common phenomenon. Penetration of clouds from the magnetosheath into the magnetosphere may be one possible source of the plasma observed in the outer magnetosphere on closed magnetic field lines. Its importance of this mechanism is unclear at this time and requires analysis of a statistically significant number of cases.

Of 21 low-latitude dayside magnetopause crossings (Fig.1) observed in the fast mode of SCA-1 for which WIND magnetic filed data were available all but two show plasma bursts. For the majority of crossings Z-component of IMF changed sign during period of observations of the bursts. During negative Bz component of IMF the number of observed bursts varied from 1 to 11 with the median value of 5. Two magnetopause crossings without the bursts occurred during positive Bz and one more magnetopause crossing occurred during positive Bz showed two bursts. This may be another evidence of the influence of reconnection on the bursts’ appearance.

Kinetic effects at the magnetopause associated with steady reconnection were observed by Fuselier at al., 1991, Fuselier, 1995 and by Smith and Rogers, 1991. Their results showed reflected and transmitted populations both for magnetospheric and for magnetosheath plasma. The observations discussed here also show kinetic effects at the magnetopause and within the boundary layer. What we think is new is a demonstration of evolution of plasma clouds within the boundary layer as an indication of penetration of solar with plasma clouds in to the magnetosphere (initially proposed by Lemaire and Roth, 1978), and possible role of this mechanism in population of the dayside magnetosphere.

At least in some cases magnetic signatures of observed plasma bursts or plasma clouds on magnetospheric side bear the signature of FTEs. By analogy with FTEs this may be called PTEs for Plasma Transfer Events.

CONCLUSIONS

1. The dayside magnetopause crossings show transient phenomena: number density, velocity, and temperature jumps and a leakage of hot magnetospheric ions into the magnetosheath that suggest non-stationary reconnection as the most probable reason for observed transients.

2. Plasma bursts observed after the first magnetopause crossing show nearly-continuous evolution in time as the satellite moves deeper into the magnetosphere: a decrease of transport velocity and number density, and a strong increase of temperature. The distribution function of ions in plasma bursts changes from fluid-like to beam-like systematically as time passes from the first magnetopause crossing. These changes suggest that the satellite observed the evolution of plasma clouds penetrating into the magnetosphere as a result of an instability at the magnetopause.

3. Energy per ion increases as plasma clouds penetrate deeper into the magnetosphere suggesting the action of heating or an acceleration mechanism.

4. Dispersive ion beams were observed at the magnetopause and at the edges of plasma clouds in the magnetosphere. This suggests the gyromotion of ions on the edge of the cloud, and allows one to estimate the spatial scale of observed events. These observations also suggest the erosion of plasma from the cloud’s boundary.

5. Injected plasma clouds may provide a source of magnetospheric plasma.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Work at IKI was supported by RSF 94-02-04232 grant, ISF MQ8300 grant, and INTAS-93-2031 grant. Authors are grateful to E.B.Ivanova for the help in data visualization.

REFERENCES

Axford W.I. and C.O.Hines, A unifying theory of high-latitude geophysical phenomena and geomagnetic storms, Can.J.Phys., 39, 1422, 1961.

Dungey, J.W., Electrodynamics of the outer atmosphere, in: Proceedings of the Ionosphere Conference, Physical society of London, p.225, 1955.

Dungey, J.W., The structure of the exosphere or adventures in velocity space, in: Geophysics, The Earth’s Environment, edited by C.DeWitt, J.Hieblot, and A.Lebeau, pp. 505-550, Gordon and Breach, New York, 1963.

Eastman T.E., E.W.Hones, Jr., S.Bame, and J.R.Asbridge, The magnetospheric boundary layer: Site of plasma, momentum and energy transfer from the magnetosheath into the magnetosphere, J.Geophys. Res., 3, 695, 1976.

Eastman T.E., and E.W.Hones, Jr., Characteristics of the magnetospheric boundary layer and magnetopause layer as observed by IMP 6, J.Geophys. Res., 84, 2019, 1979.

Fuselier S.A., Kinetic aspects of reconnection at the magnetopause, in: Physics of the magnetopause, ed. by P.Song, B.U.O.Sonnerup, and M.F.Thomsen, Geophysical monograph 60, AGU, 1995, pp. 181-187.

Fuselier S.A., D.M.Klumpar and E.G.Shelley, Ion reflection and transmission during reconnection at the Earth’s subsolar magnetopause, J.Geophys. Res.,
3935, 1991.

Gosling J.T., M.F.Thomsen, S.J.Bame, R.C.Elphic, and C.T.Russell, Plasma flow reversal at dayside magnetopause and the origin of asymmetric polar cup convection, J. Geophys. Res., 95, 8073, 1990a.

Gosling J.T., M.F.Thomsen, S.J.Bame, T.G.Onsager, and C.T.Russell, The electron edge of the low latitude boundary layer during accelerated flow events, Geophys. Res. Lett., 17, 1833-1836, 1990b.

Haerendel G. Paschmann, N.Sckopke, H.Rosenbauer, and P.C.Hedgecock, The frontside boundary layer of the magnetosphere and the problem of reconnection, J.Geophys. Res., 83, 3195-3216, 1978.

LaBelle-Hammer A.L., Z.F.Fu, and L.C.Lee, A mechanism for patchy reconnection at the dayside magnetopause, Geophys. Res. Lett., 15, 152, 1988.

Lemaire, J., and M.Roth, Penetration of solar wind plasma elements into the magnetosphere, J. Atm. Terr. Phys., 40, 331, 1978.

Liu Z.X. and Hu Y.D., Local magnetic reconnection caused by vortices in the flow field, Geophys. Res. Lett., 15, 752, 1988.

Nozdrachev M.N., V.A.Styazhkin, A.A.Zarutsky, S.I.Klimov, S.P.Savin, et al., Magnetic field measurements onboard the Interball Tail spacecraft: the FM-3I instrument, in: INTERBALL Mission and Payload, IKI-RSA-CNES, 1995, pp. 228-229.

Paschmann G., B.U.O.Sonnerup, I.Papamastorakis, N.Sckopke, G.Haerendel, et al., Plasma acceleration at the Earth’s magnetopause: Evidence for reconnection, Nature, 282, 243, 1979.

Paschmann, G., G.Haerendel, J.Papamastarakis, N.Sckopke, S.J.Bame, and C.T.Russell, Plasma and magnetic field characteristics of magnetic flux transfer events, J.Geophys. Res., 87, 2159, 1982.

Paschmann, G., I.Papamastorakis, W.Baumjohann, N.Sckopke, C.W.Carlson, et al., J. Geophys. Res., 91, 11.099-11,115, 1986.

Paschmann, G., B.Sonnerup, I.Papamastorakis, W.Baumjohann, N.Sckopke, et al, The magnetopause and boundary layer for small magnetic shear: Convection electric fields and reconnection, Geophys. Res. Lett., 17, 1829, 1990.

Phan, T.-D., G.Paschmann, W.Baumjohann, N.Sckopke, and H.Luehr, The magnetosheath region adjacent to the dayside magnetopause: AMPTE/IRM observations, J. Geophys. Res., 99, 121-141, 1994.

Russell, C.T. and R.C.Elphic, Initial ISEE magnetometer results: Magnetopause observations, Space Sci. Rev., 22, 691, 1978.

Sonnerup, B.U.O., G.Paschmann, I.Papamastorakis, N.Sckopke, G.Haerendel, et al., Evidence for magnetic field reconnection at the Earth’s magnetopause,. J.Geophys. Res., 86, 10,049-10,067, 1981.

Sckopke N., G.Paschmann, G.Haerendel, B.U.O.Sonnerup, S.J.Bame, et al., Structure of the low latitude boundary layer, J. Geophys. Res., 86, 2099, 1981.

Sibeck, D., R.P.Lepping, and A.J.Lazarus, Magnetic field line draping in the plasma depletion layer, J.Geophys. Res., 95, 5489, 1990.

Smith, M.F., and D.J.Rogers, Ion distributions at the dayside magnetopause, J.Geophys. Res., 96, 11617, 1991.

Saunders, M.A., Possible Kelvin-Helmholtz waves driven by reconnection accelerated flows, Geophys. Res. Lett., 16, 1031, 1989.

Vaisberg, O.L., A.N.Omel’chenko, and V.N.Smirnov, Observation of the Plasma Structures Injected into the High-Latitude Boundary Layer of the Earth’s Magnetosphere, Cosmic Research, Vol. 18, No. 2, 195-201, 1980.

Vaisberg O.L., A.W.Leybov, L.A.Avanov, V.N.Smirnov, E.I.Ivanovs, et al., Complex plasma spectrometer SKA-1, in: INTERBALL Mission and Payload, IKI-RSA-CNES, 1995, pp. 170-175.

Vaisberg, O.L., L.A.Avanov, V.N.Smirnov, J.L.Burch, A.W.Leibov, et al., Initial observations of fine plasma structures at the flank magnetopause with complex plasma analyzer SCA-1 onboard Interball tail probe, Ann. Geophys., submitted, 1996.


ISIS

http://van.hep.uiuc.edu/van/demos/Plasma%2...asma%20Ball.htm

Plasma Ball

Electricity



Materials:

Plasma Ball
Fluorescent light bulb
Neon light tube
Rubber mat or insulating stool




Key Points:

Similar concept to Van de Graaff generator.
A transformer collects (negative) charges on the small center sphere.
Like charges repel. Opposite charges attract.
The charges in the center want to get away from each other. They jump off the sphere to get farther away from the other charges.
The gas inside the Plasma Ball glows where the electricity passes through the air.
The charges are trying to go where there is no built up charge.
The sphere builds up charge really fast because it’s small. The earth is REALLY big so you can pour charges into it forever and they’ll never build up.
Charges always take the shortest, easiest path.
If your friend lives next door, you wouldn’t walk around the block just to go to their house. It would be easier to just walk straight there.
Now if someone puts up a really tall fence between your two houses, then climbing over it might be a SHORTER path, but it’s probably EASIER to just walk around it. This is important: "shortest path" doesn’t always mean distance. "Easier path" is more accurate.
If the charges are given an easy enough path to the earth, they will ALL go that way (instead of spreading out all over the Plasma Ball and traveling through the air). When you touch your hand to the surface, the electricity flows from the Plasma Ball through your body, down to the ground (earth).


Warnings:

Keep anyone with a heart condition or pacemaker away from all our electricity demos.
Touching something metal (like the edge of the table) while touching the plasma ball can shock you. It’s not dangerous, but it can be startling.
Leaving your hand on the sphere in one place for a long time generates heat. When chaining people together, it can get hot pretty fast for the person holding the Plasma Ball.


Things to talk about:

Discuss how the Plasma Ball is like the Van de Graaff generator (charges collecting on inner sphere)
Like charges repel. Opposite charges attract. This is at the heart of all our electricity demos.
Explain that the colored arcs are caused by the charges moving through the gas (this works the same way as lightning in the air).
Tell them that charges want to get to ground (the earth). See above for a good explanation.
Talk about "easiest path" by choosing a good example (or use the one we included). Try not to get bogged down with a story that doesn’t illustrate your point simply.
After talking about these things, put your hand on the Plasma Ball as an example. This and the next several points are just illustrating these same concepts in different ways.
Explain that electricity flows through people pretty easily (compared to air, plastic, wood, etc). The amount of power from the Plasma Ball is very small so it’s safe. But electric outlets are much more powerful, so that’s why they’re dangerous.
You can show that electricity is really flowing through you by holding the end of the neon tube or fluorescent light and touching the other end to the Plasma Ball. Use your other hand to trace the path of the charges. Explain that the charges start in the Plasma Ball, go into your arm, then down your body, to the floor. (Note that putting the bulb near the surface will light it up. This is because of the changing electric fields due to moving charges. It’s probably best not to worry about explaining this one.)


Try putting your hand in the middle of the bulb. Only half of the bulb lights because the easiest path for the charge is still to go out through your hand (then down your arm, etc..)

To show just how good conductors people are, try "daisy chaining" several van members together: Have the first person touch the Plasma Ball and hold hands with the rest of the chain. The last two people should hold the light bulb between them to show that the electricity is still flowing. When the first person is touching the sphere, the bulb will light up at the other end of the chain! Make a big deal about how the electricity is flowing from the Plasma Ball, all the way through the chain, through the light bulb, and down the last person to the floor.
It’s important to insulate the whole chain from the ground except for the last person, or else the charge will flow out before it gets to the light.
The light will be pretty dim after all that resistance, so the room needs to be pretty dark.
To get the light started, you might need the last person to touch it near the middle and then draw their hand back. This lowers the starting resistance


Click here for the Adobe PDF version of this demo (text only), for printing purposes.



About || Q & A || Shows || Demos || Pictures || Links || Search

This is just a fun research page for everyone.

ISIS

http://www.plasmas.org/fusion-icf.htm
So if, Iran and others got this technology- maybe we would CARE
ALOT MORE- but this date is from Lawrence Livermore Lab.
You be the judge.

The Z machine, Sandia National Laboratories


Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

In high energy density experiments, multiple laser or particle beams are guided to converge on a small fusion fuel pellet or filament. Rapid compression leads to fusion conditions and ignition followed by efflux of energy exceeding the input which is called the energy gain. In the case of laser experiments such as NOVA or the National Ignition Facility (NIF), presently under construction, powerful laser beams enter holes and strike the inside wall of a 'hohlraum' which is a small cylinder containing a pea-size fusion fuel capsule. Laser energy heats the inside of the hohlraum creating x rays that surround the spherical capsule or target. The x rays rapidly heat the capsule inside the hohlraum (1) causing the capsule's surface to fly outward (2). This outward force causes an opposing inward force that compresses the fusion fuel (hydrogen isotopes) inside the capsule. When the compression reaches the center, temperatures increase to 100,000,000 degrees Centigrade, igniting the fusion fuel (3) and producing a laser fusion thermonuclear burn that generates fusion energy output many times the laser energy input, thus providing a large energy gain.
Inertial fusion science and applications has come to be referred to as 'inertial fusion energy' or IFE whereas 'inertial confinement fusion' or ICF denotes high energy density phenomena produced by either multiple, high-energy laser beams or energetic pulsed power systems.
The phrase 'high energy density physics' or HED is used here to refer inclusively to IFE, ICF and pulsed power systems. Accelerators for IFE or ICF application are also included here within HED. This web page includes lower-energy 'table-top' plasma accelerators as well.

Web Sites for high energy density physics and accelerators

U.S. Research Centers

U.S. University Centers

Research Centers (non-U.S.)

U.S. Research Centers emphasizing high energy density physics and accelerators
National Ignition Facility NIF, participants: GA, LLNL, LANL, NRL, Sandia, LLE Rochester
Argonne Wakefield Accelerator, High Energy Physics, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois
laser-plasma wakefield acceleration research, experiment: wakefield accelerator AWA
General Atomics Fusion Group, General Atomics, San Diego, California
ICF research, target support, software: transport code ONETWO, equilibrium EFIT, data analysis 4D, equilibrium TOQ, experiments: ICF target support for five ICF laboratories
Accelerator and Fusion Research, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, California
heavy ion inertial fusion (HIF) research, heavy ion fusion engineering R&D, plasma lens, ion source development, relativistic klystron, accelerator research, experiments: klystron two-beam accelerator RK-TBA
Lawrence Livermore Research Laboratory, Livermore, California
Physics and Space Technology Directorate
(V, X divisions) high-energy density physics, laboratory astrophysics, ultra-short pulse lasers, turbulence, plasma spectroscopy, tokamak spectroscopy, gamma-ray spectroscopy, plasma processing simulations, laser-plasma interactions
(H, V, X divisions) inertial confinement fusion research, NIF target design and hohlraum physics, plasma instabilities, plasma characterization, laser-plasma interactions, fast ignitor project, heavy ion fusion, X-ray lasers, pulsed power, sonoluminescence,
(N division) sonoluminescence, positron trapping, nonneutral plasmas
(Plasma Physics Research Institute - PPRI) plasma processing simulations, waves, instabilities, turbulence, laser-plasma interactions, medical laser-tissue interactions, plasma processing reactor, reduction of NO in diesel engine exhaust (B. Penetrante), experiments: National Ignition Facility NIF, NOVA laser system for ICF, TRIDENT laser driver electron beam ion trap, EBIT large-area plasma processing reactor, software: PIC, hybrid and fluid codes - Lasnex, ICF3D, Yorick (analysis of numerical data), plasma processing simulations, HULLAC codes
Science on Lasers LLNL
laser-plasma interactions, heavy ion fusion, inertial fusion energy, micropower impulse radar MIR - cardiovascular monitor, experiments, ion beam theory, simulation, experiment
Los Alamos National Laboratory Los Alamos, New Mexico
Plasma Physics Group, P-24
laser matter-plasma interactions, plasma-based materials processing, inertial confinement fusion, magnetic fusion energy, high-energy density physics, weapons stockpile stewardship, pulsed power research, plasma spectroscopy, electron-positron plasmas, stimulated Raman and Brillouin scattering, parametric instabilities, ponderomotive effects, relativistic self-focusing and filamentation, laser beam channeling, experiments: Trident Laser facility, pulsed power facility,, plasma processing facility
Applied Physics Division, LANL, X-1 Plasma Physics
plasma physics applications, plasma processing, plasma etching feedback and control,weapons stockpile stewardship
LANL Fusion Energy Program Office
alternate concepts, magnetized target fusion, Penning fusion experiment
Plasma Physics Division, Naval Research Laboratory Washington, D.C.
laser plasma, pulsed power, beam physics, nonlinear plasma dynamics, plasma spectroscopy, dense plasma physics, pulsed power, strongly coupled and degenerate plasmas, high power laser development, compact accelerator using relativistic klystron concept, microwave sources, fast radar, diagnostics, electron beam generators, beam propagation, high energy density plasmas, high-power switching, plasma opening switch, high power pulsed systems and loads such as bremsstrahlung x-ray diodes and plasma radiation sources, ultra high field laser-plasma interactions, high frequency microwave research, coherent radiation sources (gyrotrons, cyclotron masers, free electron lasers), laser-plasma driven accelerators,beam transport simulations, large-scale numerical simulations,nuclear weapon effects, inductive energy storage, experiments: krypton-fluoride laser NIKE, dense Z-pinch, inductive storage PAWN, HAWK, pulse line generator Gamble II, high power relativistic klystron laboratory, high power gyrotron laboratory
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico
plasma-based work, especially strong in the area of pulsed power technology including high energy density and inertial confinement fusion (featuring monthly highlights), and engineering and exploratory technologies
fusion research, pulsed power, stockpile stewardship, x-ray and gamma ray sources, high energy density physics, z pinches, hohlraum physics, shock physics, ion beam technology, pulsed power sources, nuclear survivability and hardness testing, radiation effects, hydrodynamic radiography, light-ion-beam inertial confinement fusion, materials processing, waste and product sterilization, food purification, diagnostics, modeling,
experiments: pulsed power x-ray source, Z machine, Saturn, HERMES III, Repetitive High-Energy Pulsed Power (RHEPP) software: PIC and fluid codes - QUICKSILVER, ALEGRA
Microwave / Millimeter Wave Tech, Accelerators and Light Sources, Diagnostics UC Davis
Laboratory for Laser Energetics, Dept of Physics University of Rochester, Rochester, New York
interaction of intense radiation with matter, implosion experiments, inertial confinement fusion), high energy density physics, plasma and fusion physics, superstrong matter-field interactions, laser-fusion plasmas, plasma hydrodynamics, nonlinear optics of plasmas, stimulated Raman and Brillouin scatting, nonlinear laser beam focusing, experiments: OMEGA laser system

section top page top

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

U.S. University Centers emphasizing high energy density physics and accelerators

Dept of Physics and Astronomy, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
(computational plasma physics group) plasma accelerators and light sources, laser plasma interactions, PIC simulations (particle beam physics lab) beam-plasma interaction, nonlinear plasma wake field acceleration
UCI Fusion Energy and Pulsed Power Research, University of California Irvine
colliding beam fusion reactor, field reversed configuration (FRC), high beta system
Plasma Accelerator Group, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California laser-plasma accelerator simulations, GeV wakefield acceleration, Cerenkov radiation source
Center for Integrated Plasma Studies, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado
(particle accelerator group) nonlinear dynamics, application to plasma and beam physics
Laboratory of Plasma Studies, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York
fusion plasmas, pulsed power, electron and ion beams, plasma radiation, electromagnetics
Lasers, Electro-Optics, and Plasmas, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois fusion technology, plasma spectroscopy, discharge physics, pulsed power, computer simulations
Institute for Research in Electronics and Applied Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland
high power microwave generation, plasma radiation, fluctuations, intense beam focusing and stability, heavy ion fusion, laser plasma interactions, charged particle transport, wave-particle interactions, diagnostics, laser fusion theory, free electron lasers, microwave generation, experiments: University of Maryland Electron Ring
Plasma Science & Fusion Center, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts
laser-plasma interactions, ICF experiments, gyroton oscillators and amplifiers, high gradient electron acceleration, intense beam theory, experiments: LDX (with Columbia; year 2000) experimental accelerator research using RF gun, software: data analysis & acquisition MDS
Laboratory for Laser Energetics, Dept of Physics University of Rochester, Rochester, New York
interaction of intense radiation with matter, implosion experiments, inertial confinement fusion), high energy density physics, plasma and fusion physics, superstrong matter-field interactions, laser-fusion plasmas, plasma hydrodynamics, nonlinear optics of plasmas, stimulated Raman and Brillouin scatting, nonlinear laser beam focusing, experiments: OMEGA laser system
Dept of Physics, University of Texas, Austin, Texas
laser wavefield accelerator, theory and experiment of laser wakefield accelerator structures excited and probed by femtosecond laser pulses with electric field gradients up to GV/cm

section top page top

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Research Centers emphasizing high energy density physics and accelerators (non-U.S.) (alphabetical by country)
Institute for the Physics of Plasmas, University of Buenos Aires (UBA)
plasma focus experiments
Plasma Research Laboratory, Australian National University, Canberra, Australlia
pulsed plasma, simulation
Electromagnetics, Photonics, and Plasmas, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
laser plasma interactions, laser plasma theory
French Commissariat a' l'Energie Atomique CEA, France
Laser- und Plasmaphysik, Technische Universitat Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany
plasma focus, Excimer, CO2 and ion lasers
Plasma Physics at GSI Darmstadt
heavy ion plasma physics, laser-generated ion sources,
Laser Plasma Division, Centre for Advanced Technology, Indore, India
hot, dense laser-produced plasma, plasma diagnostics
Free Electron Laser Project, Tel-Aviv University Tel-Aviv, Israel
high power laser research - flexible, tunable source of coherent radiation, materials processing, fusion reactor heating, isotope separation and photochemistry, air pollutant management, free space energy transmission, experiments: free electron laser (FEL)s
Intense Laser Irradiation Laboratory, Pisa, Italy
laser-plasma interactions, dense plasma physics, collective phenomena and instabilities, EM wave propagation in plasmas, inertial confinement fusion studies, acceleration, plasma processing, medical and biological laser interactions, intense sources for x-ray microscopy and microlithography
Institute of Laser Engineering, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
laser plasma experiments, theory and simulation, ICF research, experiments: ICF glass laser system GEKKO XII (Kongoh project), software: laser driven implosion HISHO, Rayleigh-Taylor instability IMPACT, laser produced plasma SCOPE
Institute of Plasma Physics and Laser Microfusion, National Atomic Energy Agency, Warsaw, Poland
intense laser-beam interaction, current pulse generators of plasma-focus type, generation of high pulsed magnetic field, high power lasers, theory and modeling of hot plasmas, fast-varying process diagnostics, lightning research, experiments: PF-1000 plasma focus device
Grupo de Lasers e Plasmas GoLP, Instituto Superior Tecnico, Lisbon, Portugal
high-intensity laser-plasma interactions, acceleration of ultra-short laser pulses, theory of neutrino-plasma interaction, electron surfatron acceleration, and photon acceleration
Institute of Applied Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia
laser-plasma interactions
Plasma Physics Group, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London, United Kingdom
inertial confinement fusion studies with central laser at RAL, Z-pinch studies, laser wakefield accelerators, short-pulse laser solid interactions, experiments: dense Z-pinch MAGPIE, plasma accelerator using Raman Forward Scatter
Atomic Weapons Establishment AWE, United Kingdom
Orion laser


So, maybe the race for Nuclear material, has so much more to do with
domination- or wiping out races- out just the scientific purposes for energy..

~~~thinking~~~
ISIS

tl/dr

IS it possible that this electromagnetic field that will become stronger
with grants through the Congress, that this large massive icelandic
areas will be the 'area where massive electromagnetic fields can and will pulse
all over the nation,and other nations in the pathways of these fields
where the easy it is for these energies to travel over water,through moist
vapors, and through moisture which becomes a rain-where these emissions
will hit every man woman and child that will surrender its objectivity to be
the spatial and delectable usage of the government leveraging its
viable volatile interests onto the unsuspecting public?
Through these uninvited currents then, people will become
puppets of this massive capability of 'everyone thinking alike'
through mind manipulation -control mind- and then with each
adaptive opportunity, such as putting a computer chip in the right hand,
or forehead, or the dog, or cat...seem like every day wants,needs....?
Subliminally, making each human a virtual target for comforts at
the wants and whims of the mind?

~~~thinking~~~
ISIS

http://chesapeake.towson.edu/data/all_electro.asp

References:

[ Many photos, colors shown here!]

NASA Earth Observatory: Remote Sensing
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Library/RemoteSensing/

NASA Observatorium Education-Reference Module: Electromagnetic Spectrum
http://observe.arc.ndasa.gov/nasa/educatio...emspectrum.html

NASA Observatorium Education-Reference Module: MultiSpectral Remote Sensing
http://observe.arc.ndasa.gov/nasa/educatio...i/spectrum.html

NASA Observatorium Education-Reference Module: Thermal Infrared
http://observe.arc.ndasa.gov/nasa/educatio...rm/therm_1.html

NASA Observatorium Education-Reference Module: Reflected Infrared
http://observe.arc.ndasa.gov/nasa/educatio...reflect/ir.html
[ Many photos,colors shown here!]


http://www.enterprisemission.com/_articles...After-Part2.htm

"There is much to read here."
The Neupert Effect as a Function of Temperature
Before reading this, It's a good idea to go over jimm's last poster , on SXT and BCS differential emission measures for solar flares, presented at the June, 97 SPD meeting. This is a continuation of that work, and will be presented as another poster at the Fall, 97 AGU meeting in San Fransisco.

Given the Soft X-ray DEM , we would like to see how the solar flare plasma relates to the hard X-ray burst as a function of temperature. It is well-known that soft X-ray time derivative is similar to the hard X-ray (or microwave) light curve. This is thought of as evidence for "chromosphseric evaporation"; i.e., the idea that the soft X-ray emission comes from a plasma that is heated by the nonthermal electrons which are responsible for the hard X-rays. The nonthermal electrons lose most of their energy via Coulomb collisions in the chromosphere. The temperature rises and a high pressure region forms which drives material both upward and downward ("chromospheric evaporation and condensation"). The coronal temperature and density increase as the evaporated material rises, resulting in soft X-rays. The hard X-ray light curves are proportional to the time profile of the input electrons. The soft X-rays, which come from the plasma heated by the nonthermal electrons, are proportional to the accumulated energy of the electrons up to a given time. The soft X-ray emission is thus proportional to the time integration of the profile of the input electrons, and the time derivative of the soft X-ray profile will look like the hard X-ray time profile. This is known as "derivativity" or the "Neupert Effect".

In a study of large flares observed by HXRBS, B. Dennis and D. Zarro (1993, Solar Physics, 146, 177) found that 80% of the flares showed good correlations between hard X-ray peaks and peaks in the time derivatives of the soft X-rays. They noted that gradual hard X-ray flares were less likely to show correlations. Here we will use a less restrictive definition of the Neupert effect: Instead of requiring that the peaks in the soft X-ray time derivative be correlated with the hard X-ray peaks, we simply require that the time derivative of the soft X-ray energy be positive during the hard X-ray burst.

Sometimes it works
The question here is: How does the Neupert effect manifest itself at different temperatures?

The answer is: It's different for different flares; not too surprising. Figure 1 shows typical behavior for some flares, in particular those flares that have a distinct high temperature hump in the DEM . The top plot is of the energy in the SXR plasma for the flare of 13-Jan-1992. The white dashed line shows the total energy, the red line shows the energy in high temperature plasma (T > 18 MK), the blue line shows the energy in low temperature plasma (3 MK < T < 18 MK). Note that for the energy calculation, we've assumed that the volume and filling factor are the same for all temperatures. ("Filling Factor": how much of a given volume actually has hot plasma in it.)



Figure 1. Top--The thermal energy (actually the square root of the integral over dT of T2 times the DEM) as a function of time for the 13-Jan-1992 flare, total (white dashed lines), high-T (red line), low-T (Blue line). Dash-dot vertical lines indicate the peaks for the different components. Bottom--The time derivatives of the energy for each component (same colors), plotted along with the hard X-ray time profile as seen in the HXT-M2 and HI channels (arbitrarily scaled, green line), covering the energy range above 33 keV.

The bottom plot shows the time derivatives for each component, compared with the 30 keV hard X-ray time profile as seen by the HXT. The color scheme is the same, and as you can see, the total energy and high-T component look similar to the HXR burst. The high-T derivative peaks before the HXR's and goes to zero at the end of the HXR burst, consistent with the Neupert effect. The total energy derivative is positive until 2 minutes after the HXR burst. This implies that there is another heating source along with nonthermal electrons. The low-T component behaves a bit differently. Its derivative has a small peak at the same time as the HXR peak, but it remains positive for 5 minutes after the HXR burst. This late increase in low-T plasma is due to cooling of the high temperature plasma, not heating, since the total energy is decreasing by this time.

How do we interpret this in terms of chromospheric evaporation? Here's my try at it: The electrons pump up plasma to high (> 18 MK) temper