Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-ff9ft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-17T02:45:11.529Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Laboratory Experiments on Current Sheet Disruptions, Double Layers Turbulence and Reconnection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2017

R. L. Stenzel  and
W. Gekelman
R. L. Stenzel
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90024
W. Gekelman
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90024

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The role of laboratory experiments to the understanding of current systems in space plasmas is reviewed. It is shown that laboratory plasmas are uniquely suited to make detailed investigations of basic physical processes in current-carrying plasmas. Examples are given for double layers, current-driven instabilities, and the plasma dynamics at magnetic neutral points during reconnection. Observations of current sheet disruptions show the coupling between local plasma phenomena (double layers) and global circuit properties (magnetic energy storage).

References

Baum, P. J. and Bratenahl, A.: 1980, in Marton, C. (ed.), Advances in Electrons and Electron Physics, Academic, New York, Vol. 54, p. 1.Google Scholar
Das, A. C.: 1981, in Kikuchi, H. (ed.), Relation Between Laboratory and Space Plasmas, D. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht, Holland, p. 241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dungey, J. W.: 1958, Cosmic Electrodynamics, Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Frank, A. G.: 1976, Proc. P. N. Lebedev Phys. Inst. Acad. Sci. USSR Engl. Transl., 74, 107.Google Scholar
Gekelman, W. and Stenzel, R. L.: 1978, Phys. Fluids 21, 2014.Google Scholar
Gekelman, W., Stenzel, R. L., and Wild, N.: 1982, Physica Scripta T2/2, 277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gekelman, W. and Stenzel, R. L.: 1983, J. Geophys. Res. (submitted).Google Scholar
Hollenstein, Ch. and Guyot, M.: 1983, Phys. Fluids 26, 1606.Google Scholar
Ohyabu, N., Okamura, S., and Kawashima, N.: 1974, J. Geophys. Res. 79, 1977.Google Scholar
Sato, N.: 1982, in Michelsen, P. and Rasmussen, J. J. (eds.), Symposium on Plasma Double Layers, Risø National Laboratory, June 16–18, 1982, Risø-R-472, p. 116.Google Scholar
Sonnerup, B. U. O.: 1979, in Space Plasma Physics: The Study of the Solar System, National Academy of Sciences, Washington D. C., Vol. 2, p. 879.Google Scholar
Stenzel, R. L.: 1977, J. Geophys. Res. 82, 4805.Google Scholar
Stenzel, R. L. and Gekelman, W.: 1979, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42, 1055.Google Scholar
Stenzel, R. L., Gekelman, W., and Wild, N.: 1983a, J. Geophys. Res. 88, 4393.Google Scholar
Stenzel, R. L., Gekelman, W., Wild, N., Urrutia, J. M., and Whelan, D.: 1983b, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 54 (in press).Google Scholar
Torvén, S.: 1979, in Palmadesso, P. J. and Papadopoulos, K. (eds.), Wave Instabilities in Space Plasmas, D. Reidel, Hingham, Mass., p. 109.Google Scholar
Vasyliunas, V. M.: 1975. Rev. Geophys. Space Phys. 13, 303.Google Scholar
Whelan, D. A. and Stenzel, R. L.: 1981, Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wild, N., Stenzel, R. L., and Gekelman, W.: 1983, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 54, (in press).Google Scholar