4.3 Editorial Material

Explanation of dominant oblique radio emission at Jupiter and comparison to the terrestrial case

Journal

PLANETARY AND SPACE SCIENCE
Volume 58, Issue 10, Pages 1414-1422

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pss.2010.05.012

Keywords

Jupiter-lo interaction; S-bursts; Radio emissions; Electron acceleration; Potential drops; Earth AKR

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The lo-Jupiter S-bursts are series of quasi-periodic impulsive decameter radio emissions from the magnetic flux tube connecting Jupiter to its closest galilean satellite lo. This paper discusses the possibility, suggested by previous works by Hess et al., that the S-bursts are triggered by upgoing electrons accelerated (downward) by trapped Alfven waves, that have mirrored above the Jupiter ionosphere. According to this theory, the S-bursts would correspond to wave modes that propagate at oblique angles with respect to the magnetic field. Oblique propagation is also inferred for the more slowly varying components of lo-Jupiter radio emissions. Previous works, mainly based on observations of the terrestrial AKR, whose generation process is closely related to those of S-bursts, showed that these waves are emitted on perpendicular wave modes. This discrepancy between the Jovian and Terrestrial cases has led to a controversy about the credibility of the S-bursts model by Hess et al. In the present paper, we show that indeed, the most unstable wave modes for Earth AKR, and lo-Jupiter S-bursts, as they are seen from ground based radio-telescopes, are not the same. Several causes are evaluated: observational bias, the different degree of plasma magnetization above Earth and Jupiter, the role of a cold plasma component and of plasma auroral cavities. Furthermore, we make predictions about what kind of radiation modes a probe crossing the low altitude lo-Jupiter flux tube will see. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available