spectra of magnetic energy and secular variation in a
play

Spectra of magnetic energy and secular variation in a dynamo model - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Spectra of magnetic energy and secular variation in a dynamo model of Jupiter Yue-Kin Tsang School of Mathematics, University of Leeds Chris Jones ( Leeds) Lets start on Earth . . . CRUST various types of rocks MANTLE magnesium-iron


  1. Spectra of magnetic energy and secular variation in a dynamo model of Jupiter Yue-Kin Tsang School of Mathematics, University of Leeds Chris Jones ( Leeds)

  2. Let’s start on Earth . . . CRUST various types of rocks MANTLE magnesium-iron silicate OUTER CORE liquid iron + nickle INNER CORE solid iron + nickle CMB (not to scale) core-mantle boundary (CMB): sharp boundary between the non-conducting mantle and the conducting outer core ⇒ dynamo action entirely confined within the outer core dynamo radius r dyn : top of the dynamo region ≈ r cmb one way to deduce r cmb from observation at the surface : magnetic energy spectrum

  3. Gauss coefficients g lm and h lm Outside the dynamo region, r > r dyn : j = 0 j = 0 dynamo region r dyn ∇ × B = µ 0 j = 0 = ⇒ B = −∇ Ψ ⇒ ∇ 2 Ψ = 0 ∇ · B = 0 = a a = radius of Earth Consider only internal sources, ∞ l � l +1 ˆ � a � � Ψ( r, θ, φ ) = a P lm (cos θ )( g lm cos mφ + h lm sin mφ ) r m =0 l =1 ˆ P lm : Schmidt’s semi-normalised associated Legendre polynomials g lm and h lm can be determined from magnetic field measured at the planetary surface ( r ≈ a )

  4. The Lowes spectrum Average magnetic energy over a spherical surface of radius r 1 1 � | B ( r, θ, φ ) | 2 sin θ d θ d φ E B ( r ) = 2 µ 0 4 π Inside the source-free region r dyn < r < a , ∞ l � � a � � � 2 l +4 � � g 2 lm + h 2 � 2 µ 0 E B ( r ) = ( l + 1) lm r l =1 m =0 Lowes spectrum (magnetic energy as a function of l ): l � a � 2 l +4 � g 2 lm + h 2 � � R l ( r ) = ( l + 1) lm r m =0 � a � 2 l +4 = R l ( a ) (downward continuation) r

  5. Estimate location of CMB using the Lowes spectrum 2 l +4 � � a R l ( a ) R l ( r cmb ) = R l ( a ) r cmb a = Earth’s radius (Robert Parker, UCSD) downward continuation from a to r cmb through the mantle ( j = 0 ): � r cmb � r cmb � � ln R l ( a ) = 2 ln l + 4 ln + ln R l ( r cmb ) a a white source hypothesis : turbulence in the core leads to an even distribution of magnetic energy across different scales l , R l ( r cmb ) is independent of l r cmb ≈ 0 . 55 a ≈ 3486 km agrees very well with results from seismic waves observations

  6. Interior structure of Jupiter (NASA JPL) theoretical σ ( r ) (French et al. 2012) low temperature and pressure near surface ⇒ gaseous molecular H/He extremely high temperature and pressure inside ⇒ liquid metallic H core? transition from molecular to metallic hydrogen is continuous conductivity σ ( r ) varies smoothly with radius r At what depth does dynamo action start?

  7. Lowes spectrum from the Juno mission Juno’s spacecraft reached Jupiter on 4th July, 2016 currently in a 53-day orbit, measuring Jupiter’s magnetic field (and other data) R l ( r J ) up to l = 10 from latest measurement (8 flybys) Lowes’ radius: r lowes ≈ 0 . 85 r J ( r J = 6.9894 × 10 7 m) (Connerney et al. 2018)

  8. Lowes spectrum from the Juno mission Juno’s spacecraft reached Jupiter on 4th July, 2016 currently in a 53-day orbit, measuring Jupiter’s magnetic field (and other data) R l ( r J ) up to l = 10 from latest measurement (8 flybys) Lowes’ radius: r lowes ≈ 0 . 85 r J ( r J = 6.9894 × 10 7 m) Questions : with the conductivity profile σ ( r ) varying smoothly, meaning of r lowes ? r lowes = r dyn ? white source hypothesis valid? concept of “dynamo radius” r dyn (Connerney et al. 2018) well-defined?

  9. A numerical model of Jupiter spherical shell of radius ratio r in /r out = 0 . 0963 (small core) rotating fluid with electrical conductivity σ ( r ) driven by buoyancy convection forced by secular cooling of the planet ρ, ¯ anelastic:linearise about a hydrostatic adiabatic basic state(¯ T, ¯ p, . . . ) dimensionless numbers: Ra, Pm, Ek, Pr ∇ · (¯ ρ u ) = 0 � ∂ u � EkRaPm S d ¯ � z × u = −∇ Π ′ + 1 � Ek T r + Ek F ν ∂t + ( u · ∇ ) u + 2ˆ ρ ( ∇ × B ) × B − d r ˆ Pm ¯ Pr ρ ¯ ∂ B ∂t = ∇ × ( u × B ) − ∇ × ( η ∇ × B ) � ∂S � + Pm Pr � 1 � + Pm ρ ¯ ¯ T ∂t + u · ∇ S Pr ∇ · F Q = Q ν + Ek Q J Pr H S RaPm Boundary conditions: no-slip at r in and stress-free at r out , S ( r in ) = 1 and S ( r out ) = 0, electrically insulating outside r in < r < r out . (Jones 2014)

  10. A numerical model of Jupiter spherical shell of radius ratio r in /r out = 0 . 0963 (small core) rotating fluid with electrical conductivity σ ( r ) driven by buoyancy convection forced by secular cooling of the planet ρ, ¯ anelastic:linearise about a hydrostatic adiabatic basic state(¯ T, ¯ p, . . . ) dimensionless numbers: Ra, Pm, Ek, Pr a Jupiter basic state: C.A. Jones / Icarus 241 (2014) 148–159 1 ρ ( r ) ¯ η ( r ) = 5000 14 µ 0 σ ( r ) 4500 12 4000 10 3500 Density (kg/m 3 ) log 10 η (m 2 /s) 3000 8 2500 6 2000 cut−off 4 + Data points from French et al. 2012 1500 2 Hyperbolic fit 1000 + Data points from French et al. 2012 0 500 Rational polynomial fit cut−off 0 −2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 x 10 7 x 10 7 (a) radius (metres) (b) radius (metres)

  11. Ra = 2 × 10 7 , Ek = 1 . 5 × 10 − 5 , Pm = 10 , Pr = 0 . 1 radial magnetic field, B r ( r, θ, φ ) r = r out dipolar r = 0 . 75 r out small scales

  12. Where does the current start flowing? 10 6 10 5 10 4 10 3 10 2 10 1 10 0 < ( r ) 10 ! 1 j rms ( r ) 10 ! 2 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 r=r J average current over a spherical surface of radius r µ 0 j = ∇ × B � 2 π � π rms ( r, t ) ≡ 1 | j | 2 sin θ d θ d φ j 2 4 π 0 0 j rms drops quickly but smoothly in the transition region, not clear how to define a characteristic “dynamo radius”

  13. Magnetic energy spectrum, F l ( r ) average magnetic energy over a spherical surface: 1 1 � | B ( r, θ, φ ) | 2 sin θ d θ d φ E B ( r ) = 2 µ 0 4 π Lowes spectrum: recall that if j = 0 , we solve ∇ 2 Ψ = 0, then ∞ l ∞ � � a � � � 2 l +4 � � � g 2 lm + h 2 � 2 µ 0 E B ( r ) = ( l + 1) = R l ( r ) lm r m =0 l =1 l =1 generally, for the numerical model, B ∼ � lm b lm ( r ) Y lm ( θ, φ ), ∞ 2 µ 0 E B ( r ) = 1 � | B ( r, θ, φ ) | 2 sin θ d θ d φ = � F l ( r ) 4 π l =1 j ( r, θ, φ ) = 0 exactly = ⇒ R l ( r ) = F l ( r )

  14. Magnetic energy spectrum at different depth r F l ( r ): solid lines R l ( r ): circles r > 0 . 9 r J : slope of F l ( r ) decreases rapidly with r r < 0 . 9 r J : F l ( r ) maintains the same shape and slope ⇒ a shift in the dynamics of the system r > 0 . 9 r J : F l ( r ) ≈ R l ( r ) r < 0 . 9 r J : F l ( r ) deviates from R l ( r ) ⇒ electric current becomes important below 0 . 9 r J suggests a dynamo radius r dyn ≈ 0 . 9 r J

  15. Spectral slope of F l ( r ) and R l ( r ) log 10 F l ( r ) ∼ − α ( r ) l log 10 R l ( r ) ∼ − β ( r ) l � r out � 2 l +4 R l ( r out ) R l ( r ) = r r out β ( r ) = β ( r out ) − 2 log 10 r sharp transition in α ( r ) indicates r dyn = 0 . 907 r J F l ( r ) inside dynamo region is not exactly flat ( α dyn = 0 . 024): white source assumption is only approximate r lowes provides a lower bound to r dyn : β = 0 at r lowes = 0 . 883 General picture: α ( r out ) and α dyn control r dyn and r lowes

  16. Comparison with Juno data noise in Juno data ⇒ results depend on fitting range larger Pm gives smaller α dyn , however α ( r out ) also becomes smaller ⇒ r dyn remains roughly the same R l ( r J ) is shallower in the numerical model than from Juno observation the metallic hydrogen layer could be deeper than predicted by theoretical calculation the existence of a stably stratified layer below the molecular layer our numerical model has more small-scale forcing than Jupiter does

  17. Time variation of B r at the surface Pm=10 dipole is slowly varying compared to other modes B = ∂ B ˙ secular variation: ∂t for j = 0 , Lowes spectrum for secular variation: l � a � 2 l +4 � � � g 2 lm + ˙ h 2 R ˙ B ( l, r ) = ( l + 1) ˙ lm r m =0

  18. Secular variation spectrum F ˙ B ( l, r ) ∞ B ( l, r ) = 1 � B ( r, θ, φ ) | 2 sin θ d θ d φ � | ˙ F ˙ 4 π l =1 geomagnetic SV surface (Holme & Olsen 2006) 10000 ufm (1980) 2 ) –1 ) undamped Mean square surface SV ( (nT yr 1000 CO2003 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 Spherical harmonic degree l Figure 1. Spectra of SV models at Earth’s surface. CMB (Holme et al. 2011) Figure 2. Spectra of the CHAOS-4 SV at the CMB, r = c . Green line gives theoretical model, dashed lines approximate 1 σ error bounds.

  19. A spectral correlation time τ l a correlation time for different mode l : �� � F ( l, r ) τ l ( r ) = F ˙ B ( l, r ) t for j = 0 , τ l becomes independent of r : �� � l � g 2 lm + h 2 � � � m =0 lm τ l = � � � � lm + ˙ � l g 2 h 2 ˙ m =0 lm t two-parameter power law (e.g. Holme & Olsen 2006): τ l = τ SV · l − γ , 1 . 32 < γ < 1 . 45 τ SV ∼ a secular variation time scale one-parameter power law (e.g. Christensen & Tilgner 2004): τ l = τ SV · l − 1

  20. Example of τ l in geodynamo τ l = τ SV · l − 1 (Lhuillier et al. 2011)

  21. Spectral correlation time τ l in Jupiter dynamo model

  22. γ and τ SV in Jupiter dynamo model τ l = τ SV · l − γ Pm = 10 Pm = 3

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend