Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-18T02:44:19.811Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

MHD intermediate shock discontinuities. Part 1. Rankine—Hugoniot conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 March 2009

C. F. Kennel ,
R. D. Blandford  and
P. Coppi
C. F. Kennel
Affiliation:
Theoretical Astrophysics, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125, U.S.A.
R. D. Blandford
Affiliation:
Theoretical Astrophysics, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125, U.S.A.
P. Coppi
Affiliation:
Theoretical Astrophysics, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent numerical investigations have focused attention once more on the role of intermediate shocks in MHD. Four types of intermediate shock are identified using a graphical representation of the MHD Rankine-Hugoniot conditions. This same representation can be used to exhibit the close relationship of intermediate shocks to switch-on shocks and rotational discontinuities. The conditions under which intermediate discontinuities can be found are elucidated. The variations in velocity, pressure, entropy and magnetic-field jumps with upstream parameters in intermediate shocks are exhibited graphically. The evolutionary arguments traditionally advanced against intermediate shocks may fail because the equations of classical MHD are not strictly hyperbolic.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Plasma Physics , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , October 1989 , pp. 299 - 319
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Akhiezer, A. I., Liubarskii, G. Ia. & Polovin, R. V. 1959 Soviet Phys. JETP 35, 507.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. E. 1962 Magnetohydrodynamic Shocks. M.I.T. Monograph.Google Scholar
De Hoffmann, F. & Teller, E. 1950 Phys. Rev. 80, 692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Germain, P. 1960 Rev. Mod. Phys. 32, 951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeffrey, A. & Taniuti, T. 1964 Nonlinear Wave Propagation. Academic.Google Scholar
Kantrowitz, A. R. & Petschek, H. E. 1966 Plasma Physics in Theory and Application (ed. Kunkel, W. B.), p. 148. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Kennel, C. F. & Edmiston, J. P. 1988 J. Geophys. Res. 93, 11 363.Google Scholar
Kennel, C. F., Blandford, R. D. & Wu, C. C. 1989 Structure and evolution of small amplitude intermediate shock waves. To be published.Google Scholar
Lax, P. D. 1957 Commun. Pure Appl. Maths, 10, 537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liberman, M. A. & Velikhovich, A. L. 1986 Physics of Shock Waves in Gases and Plasmas. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tidman, D. & Krall, N. 1971 Shock Waves in Collisionless Plasma. Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar
Wu, C. C. 1988 a J. Geophys. Res. 93, 3969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, C. C. 1988 b J. Geophys. Res. 93, 9897.Google Scholar