Paper detail

Development of a cometosheath at comet 67P/Churuyumov-Gerasimenko: A case study comparison of Rosetta observations

Context: The ionosphere of a comet is known to deflect the solar wind through mass loading, but the interaction is dependent on cometary activity. We investigate the details of this process at comet 67P using the Rosetta Ion Composition Analyzer. Aims: This study aims to compare the interaction of the solar wind and cometary ions during two different time periods in the Rosetta mission. Methods: We compared both the integrated ion moments (density, velocity, and momentum flux) and the velocity distribution functions for two days, four months apart. The velocity distribution functions were projected into a coordinate system dependent on the magnetic field direction and averaged over three hours. Results: The first case shows highly scattered H+ in both ion moments and velocity distribution function. The He2+ ions are somewhat scattered, but less so, and appear more like those of H2O+ pickup ions. The second case shows characteristic evidence of mass-loading, where the solar wind species are deflected, but the velocity distribution function is not significantly changed. Conclusions: The distributions of H+ in the first case, when compared to He2+ and H2O+ pickup ions, are indicative of a narrow cometosheath on the scale of the H+ gyroradius. Thus, He2+ and H2O+, with larger gyroradii, are largely able to pass through this cometosheath. An examination of the momentum flux tensor suggests that all species in the first case have a significant non-gyrotropic momentum flux component that is higher than that of the second mass-loaded case. Mass loading is not a sufficient explanation for the distribution functions and momentum flux tensor in the first case, and so we assume this is evidence of bow shock formation.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.