arXiv subjects

M. Gkioulidou

Publications and source records attributed to M. Gkioulidou.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Signatures of Reconnection and a Split Heliospheric Tail in High-Energy Energetic Neutral Atoms

The shape of the heliosphere, regarded as comet-like since the 1960s, has recently been the subject of intense debate in the last decade. There is disagreement whether the heliospheric tail extends to $\sim$10,000 au in a comet-like shape or if it is short ($\sim$400 au) with a split. Energetic neutral atom (ENA) maps from Cassini/INCA at energies from 5.2 to 13.5 keV revealed a global structure extending from the nose to the heliospheric tail known as the Belt whose origin has remained largely unexplored. Here, we use a state-of-the-art multi-ion magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) model and a novel reconnection simulation to establish that the Belt structure is consistent with a split tail heliosphere but not with a comet-like heliosphere. In a split-tail heliosphere there is a region of low-$β$ (ratio of thermal to magnetic pressure) in the downwind direction close to the heliopause. Direct simulations of this region reveal that magnetic reconnection is strong and drives the energetic particles that produce the >5.2keV ENAs measured by INCA in the low latitude portion of the Belt. Since the comet-like heliosphere does not produce this low-$β$ region and the resultant reconnection-drive mechanism for the >5.2keV ENAs, our results indicate that the INCA observations are inconsistent with a comet-like heliosphere. Further, these simulations and analysis establish for the first time that magnetic reconnection in the complex magnetic fields, expected in astrospheres across the universe, are likely to be a source of energetic particles and radiation.

astro-ph.SR↗

arXiv2021

Signature of a heliotail organized by the solar magnetic field and the role of non-ideal processes in modeled IBEX ENA maps: a comparison of the BU and Moscow MHD models

Energetic neutral atom (ENA) models typically require post-processing routines to convert the distributions of plasma and H atoms into ENA maps. Here we investigate how two different kinetic-MHD models of the heliosphere (the BU and Moscow models) manifest in modeled ENA maps using the same prescription and how they compare with Interstellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX) observations. Both MHD models treat the solar wind as a single-ion plasma for protons, which include thermal solar wind ions, pick-up ions (PUIs), and electrons. Our ENA prescription partitions the plasma into three distinct ion populations (thermal solar wind, PUIs transmitted and ones energized at the termination shock) and models the populations with Maxwellian distributions. Both kinetic-MHD heliospheric models produce a heliotail with heliosheath plasma organized by the solar magnetic field into two distinct north and south columns that become lobes of high mass flux flowing down the heliotail, though in the BU model the ISM flows between the two lobes at distances in the heliotail larger than 300 AU. While our prescription produces similar ENA maps for the two different plasma and H atom solutions at the IBEX-Hi energy range (0.5 - 6 keV), the modeled ENA maps require a scaling factor of ~2 to be in agreement with the data. This problem is present in other ENA models with the Maxwellian approximation of multiple ion species and indicates that a higher neutral density or some acceleration of PUIs in the heliosheath is required.

astro-ph.SR↗

arXiv2021

The development of a split-tail heliosphere and the role of non-ideal processes: a comparison of the BU and Moscow models

Global models of the heliosphere are critical tools used in the interpretation of heliospheric observations. There are several three-dimensional magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) heliospheric models that rely on different strategies and assumptions. Until now only one paper has compared global heliosphere models, but without magnetic field effects. We compare the results of two different MHD models, the BU and Moscow models. Both models use identical boundary conditions to compare how different numerical approaches and physical assumptions contribute to the heliospheric solution. Based on the different numerical treatments of discontinuities, the BU model allows for the presence of magnetic reconnection, while the Moscow model does not. Both models predict collimation of the solar outflow in the heliosheath by the solar magnetic field and produce a split-tail where the solar magnetic field confines the charged solar particles into distinct north and south columns that become lobes. In the BU model, the ISM flows between the two lobes at large distances due to MHD instabilities and reconnection. Reconnection in the BU model at the port flank affects the draping of the interstellar magnetic field in the immediate vicinity of the heliopause. Different draping in the models cause different ISM pressures, yielding different heliosheath thicknesses and boundary locations, with the largest effects at high latitudes. The BU model heliosheath is 15% thinner and the heliopause is 7% more inwards at the north pole relative to the Moscow model. These differences in the two plasma solutions may manifest themselves in energetic neutral atom measurements of the heliosphere.

astro-ph.SR↗