Spacequakes

From Science @ NASA.gov Researchers using NASA’s fleet of five THEMIS spacecraft have discovered a form of space weather that packs the punch of an earthquake and plays a key role in sparking bright Northern Lights. They call it “the spacequake.”

Spacequakes (animation, 200px)

A spacequake in action. Click to launch a computer-simulated movie created by Walt Feimer of Goddard’s Scientific Visualization Lab.

A spacequake is a temblor in Earth’s magnetic field. It is felt most strongly in Earth orbit, but is not exclusive to space. The effects can reach all the way down to the surface of Earth itself.

“Magnetic reverberations have been detected at ground stations all around the globe, much like seismic detectors measure a large earthquake,” says THEMIS principal investigator Vassilis Angelopoulos of UCLA.

It’s an apt analogy because “the total energy in a spacequake can rival that of a magnitude 5 or 6 earthquake,” according to Evgeny Panov of the Space Research Institute in Austria. Panov is first author of a paper reporting the results in the April 2010 issue of Geophysical Research Letters (GRL).

In 2007, THEMIS discovered the precursors of spacequakes. The action begins in Earth’s magnetic tail, which is stretched out like a windsock by the million mph solar wind. Sometimes the tail can become so stretched and tension-filled, it snaps back like an over-torqued rubber band. Solar wind plasma trapped in the tail hurtles toward Earth. On more than one occasion, the five THEMIS spacecraft were in the line of fire when these “plasma jets” swept by. Clearly, the jets were going to hit Earth. But what would happen then? The fleet moved closer to the planet to find out.

“Now we know,” says THEMIS project scientist David Sibeck of the Goddard Space Flight Center. “Plasma jets trigger spacequakes.”

Spacequakes (magnetogram, 550px)

During a spacequake, Earth’s magnetic field shakes in a way that is analogous to the shaking of the ground during an earthquake. Image credit: Evgeny Panov, Space Research Institute of Austria. [larger image]

According to THEMIS, the jets crash into the geomagnetic field some 30,000 km above Earth’s equator. The impact sets off a rebounding process, in which the incoming plasma actually bounces up and down on the reverberating magnetic field. Researchers call it “repetitive flow rebuffing.” It’s akin to a tennis ball bouncing up and down on a carpeted floor. The first bounce is a big one, followed by bounces of decreasing amplitude as energy is dissipated in the carpet.

“We’ve long suspected that something like this was happening,” says Sibeck. “By observing the process in situ, however, THEMIS has discovered something new and surprising.”

The surprise is plasma vortices, huge whirls of magnetized gas as wide as Earth itself, spinning on the verge of the quaking magnetic field.

Spacequakes (vortices, 200px)

A THEMIS map of plasma flows during a spacequake. The axes are labeled in Earth radii, so each swirl is about the size of Earth. [larger image]

“When plasma jets hit the inner magnetosphere, vortices with opposite sense of rotation appear and reappear on either side of the plasma jet,” explains Rumi Nakamura of the Space Research Institute in Austria, a co-author of the study. “We believe the vortices can generate substantial electrical currents in the near-Earth environment.”

Acting together, vortices and spacequakes could have a noticeable effect on Earth. The tails of vortices may funnel particles into Earth’s atmosphere, sparking auroras and making waves of ionization that disturb radio communications and GPS. By tugging on surface magnetic fields, spacequakes generate currents in the very ground we walk on. Ground current surges can have profound consequences, in extreme cases bringing down power grids over a wide area.

After THEMIS discovered the jets and quakes, Joachim Birn of the Los Alamos National Lab in New Mexico conducted a computer simulation of the rebounding process. Lo and behold, vortices appeared in good accord with THEMIS measurements. Moreover, the simulations suggest that the rebounding process can be seen from Earth’s surface in the form of ripples and whirls in auroral displays. Ground stations report just such a phenomenon.

“It’s a complicated process, but it all fits together,” says Sibeck.

The work isn’t finished. “We still have a lot to learn,” he adds. “How big can spacequakes become? How many vortices can swirl around Earth at once–and how do they interact with one another?”

Stay tuned for answers from THEMIS.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
114 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
899
July 28, 2010 5:23 am

Gail Combs says:
July 28, 2010 at 2:39 am
WOW! this sounds like one of the “unknowns, we didn’t know that we didn’t know about”
So I wonder how many more unknowns are out there effecting the climate.

Well, there’s that Al Gore ‘crazed sex-poodle’ heat engine which hasn’t been accounted for, that fer shur!
;o)

Joe Lalonde
July 28, 2010 5:24 am

NASA is mighty slow at seeing the light. Flaring from the sun has the same effect when encountering our magnetic field and atmosphere.

July 28, 2010 5:28 am

Earth’s Magnetic Field & Global Warming
Gail Combs says: July 28, 2010 at 2:39 am
WOW! this sounds like one of the “unknowns, we didn’t know that we didn’t know about”
So I wonder how many more unknowns are out there effecting the climate.

steven mosher July 6th, 2010 at 12:05 pm (not WUWT, elsewhere)
.. theres a guy on WUWT who blathers on about this.
Steven, there might be something to it after all.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/LFC1.htm

July 28, 2010 6:20 am

tallbloke says:
July 28, 2010 at 3:36 am
“We believe the vortices can generate substantial electrical currents in the near-Earth environment.”
Numbers man, numbers!

It is nice to get close up and personal observations of what we have surmised for forty years. Here http://www.leif.org/research/Geomagnetic-Response-to-Solar-Wind.pdf you can get the numbers [and those have not changed]. As for the energy involved, it is still many orders of magnitude less than what we get from TSI. The changing magnetic field generates the electric currents [Faraday’s Law] here as everywhere else in the Universe.

July 28, 2010 6:34 am

tallbloke says:
July 28, 2010 at 3:36 am
“We believe the vortices can generate substantial electrical currents in the near-Earth environment.” Numbers man, numbers!
It is nice to get close-up-and-personal observations [again] of the basic process we have surmised for the past forty years. You can get the numbers from the Appendix of http://www.leif.org/research/Geomagnetic-Response-to-Solar-Wind.pdf [where I calculate the energy to be equivalent to a 6.7 Richter scale earthquake]. The numbers have not changed over time. The electric currents are generated by the rapidly changing magnetic field [Faraday’s law] here and everywhere else in the Universe. The energy involved is many orders of magnitude smaller than than delivered by TSI.

rbateman
July 28, 2010 7:45 am

The energy may be several orders of magnitude below that of TSI, but if you can demonstrate that the energy is focused, then there is a discernable effect somewhere on Earth to be reckoned with.

Pascvaks
July 28, 2010 8:00 am

Please allow me to beat one of my favorite dead horses and ask those here in the know if the displays so evident at the following link might possibly be the result of these spacequakes –
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/polar/gif_files/time_lat_t01_2005.gif
As 2005 was more active than present, I use this record of global zonal mean temperature. The disturbances at the poles have been a curiosity I have held on to for some time. Can a spacequake cause polar temps to vary and impact global climate as well?

July 28, 2010 8:08 am

rbateman says:
July 28, 2010 at 7:45 am
The energy may be several orders of magnitude below that of TSI, but if you can demonstrate that the energy is focused, then there is a discernable effect somewhere on Earth to be reckoned with.
The energy is spread out over the magnetosphere and the upper atmosphere in the polar regions, so little focusing going on…

July 28, 2010 8:13 am

So they are finally finding the data I need to develop the dynamics of the mechanism connection to explain what I have been looking at for 30 years, NICE. Check out the research sections of my site, free, commercial free, and totally paid for by myself only.
“The truth is out there” we just need to look for it.

July 28, 2010 8:37 am

Pascvaks says: July 28, 2010 at 8:00 am
Can a spacequake cause polar temps to vary and impact global climate as well?
Scientists will say NO !
With a bit of basic data research and appliance of simple logic, one may start to wander.
Here is what I have come up with, but it should not be taken for granted:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NFC1.htm
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/LFC1.htm
Science does require verification.

July 28, 2010 8:43 am

Pascvaks says:
July 28, 2010 at 8:00 am
Can a spacequake cause polar temps to vary and impact global climate as well?

space quakes occur every day on average, so no climate effects would be expected as also there is not enough energy in them.

solrey
July 28, 2010 8:55 am

Perhaps this is another mechanism for inductive heating of the thermosphere. We might discover this is a significant source of energy when all the events that produce inductive heating are taken as a whole. If that’s the case and inductive heating is mostly being overlooked, it could explain why they’re missing 60% of the energy budget to explain the recent collapse of the thermosphere. Something like an inductively coupled plasma?
Geomagnetic storm heating effects on the low-latitude dayside thermosphere from WINDII observations at equinox

The response of the neutral thermosphere to geomagnetic storms is an important aspect of the study of “space weather”. Yet, this response above the magnetic dip equator has rarely been measured on the dayside because a satellite-borne instrument is required. WINDII, the WIND Imaging Interferometer on board UARS, NASA’s Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite, measured emission rates and apparent temperatures to altitudes as high as 270 km using its O(1S) 558 nm green line channel several days each week during 1993. On 2 days close to equinox in 1993 the maximum Kp index exceeded 7, and these days were selected for comparison with surrounding days of lesser magnetic activity.
Evidence for thermospheric heating is seen in the Doppler broadening increase of 100 K, the green line volume emission rate increase of 30–78%, and the emission rate scale height increase of 5 km, all measured at 250 km in comparisons between storm and non-storm conditions.

That seems to be a respectable increase in temp and O(1S) 558 nm emissions during those days of increased geomagnetic activity. I wonder what the effects of “spacequakes” are on temps and emissions in the thermosphere?
cheers,
Tim Erney

Pascvaks
July 28, 2010 9:32 am

It’s not easy being a Muggle.

Tim Clark
July 28, 2010 9:42 am

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 28, 2010 at 6:34 am
The energy involved is many orders of magnitude smaller than than delivered by TSI.

Is this involved in any way with the occasional “Sudden stratopheric warming” events that occur occasionally?

July 28, 2010 9:52 am


Is this involved in any way with the occasional “Sudden stratopheric warming” events that occur occasionally?

no, space quakes occur all the time

Jeff in Calgary
July 28, 2010 10:17 am

So how often do these things occure?

mike Abbott
July 28, 2010 10:50 am

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 28, 2010 at 8:43 am
space quakes occur every day on average, so no climate effects would be expected as also there is not enough energy in them.

But a quote from the article says “the total energy in a spacequake can rival that of a magnitude 5 or 6 earthquake.” That seems to suggest that a large amount of energy is released…

July 28, 2010 11:57 am

Jeff in Calgary says:
July 28, 2010 at 10:17 am
So how often do these things occure?
from 0 to 5 times a day
mike Abbott says:
July 28, 2010 at 10:50 am

But a quote from the article says “the total energy in a spacequake can rival that of a magnitude 5 or 6 earthquake.” That seems to suggest that a large amount of energy is released…

That is not a large amount in weather/climate terms

mike Abbott
July 28, 2010 12:26 pm

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 28, 2010 at 11:57 am
That is not a large amount in weather/climate terms

Then NASA is intentionally exaggerating the effects of spacequakes by including the quote about earthquakes.

July 28, 2010 12:52 pm

mike Abbott says: July 28, 2010 at 12:26 pm
Then NASA is intentionally exaggerating the effects of spacequakes by including the quote about earthquakes.
I don’t think they do, just that the power available isn’t sufficient for any significant direct effect.
One possibility is that every magnetic ‘hit’ nudges the Earth’s magnetic field in downward direction. GMF and the solar activity are in reverse proportion; in its recorded history going back to 1590, the Earth’s magnetic field was strongest during the Maunder min.
The Arctic currents have varied by factor of 2 as per shoreline erosion by the iceberg flows in Denmark Strait . Earth magnetic field has effect on the saline currents velocity, i.e. conductor in a magnetic field.
Stronger solar activity, weaker GMF (as at the moment), higher ocean’s currents velocity, more heat transferred to the Arctic, more ice melt, lower the Arctic’s albedo, more heat absorbed and so on, until the sun reduces activity, as in the Maunder min, when GMF goes up, the currents slow down, resulting in less heat delivered to the Arctic, more ice, higher albedo, less absorption, in short the LIA.
See links in http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/27/spacequakes/#comment-441450

tallbloke
July 28, 2010 1:01 pm

Leif,
do planetary magnetospheres tail out in a direct radial line from the sun or do they lie at an angle influenced by the curving of the ‘field lines’ in the IMF?

July 28, 2010 1:09 pm

tallbloke says:
July 28, 2010 at 1:01 pm
do planetary magnetospheres tail out in a direct radial line from the sun or do they lie at an angle influenced by the curving of the ‘field lines’ in the IMF?
Neither. E.g. the Earth’s magnetospheric tail is at a 4 degree angle to the radial. It’s an exercise for the student to figure out why 🙂 Hint: why do people hold their umbrella a bit out in front when walking in the rain rather than directly overhead?

July 28, 2010 1:11 pm

vukcevic says:
July 28, 2010 at 12:52 pm
I don’t think they do, just that the power available isn’t sufficient for any significant direct effect. One possibility is that every magnetic ‘hit’ nudges the Earth’s magnetic field in downward direction.
This is not even a possibility.

tallbloke
July 28, 2010 1:21 pm

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 28, 2010 at 1:09 pm
tallbloke says:
July 28, 2010 at 1:01 pm
do planetary magnetospheres tail out in a direct radial line from the sun or do they lie at an angle influenced by the curving of the ‘field lines’ in the IMF?
Neither. E.g. the Earth’s magnetospheric tail is at a 4 degree angle to the radial. It’s an exercise for the student to figure out why 🙂 Hint: why do people hold their umbrella a bit out in front when walking in the rain rather than directly overhead?

4 degrees which way? In the direction of the IMF curvature? Is the offset due to the bowshock or the solar wind after it has passed Earth? Is it an exercise for the student becase the prof doesn’t like admitting he doesn’t know? 🙂
The rain falls on the just and unjust fella, but the unjust stole the just’s umbrella.

tallbloke
July 28, 2010 1:25 pm

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 28, 2010 at 6:20 am (Edit)
changing magnetic field generates the electric currents [Faraday’s Law]

Changing electric currents generate magnetic firlds too [right hand rule]