On the Dipolarization Front and Magnetopause: 3. Evidence of Electron Kelvin–Helmholtz Instability at Dipolarization Front
Rattachement africain : cn, es, us, at. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Abstract Over the past 6 decades, Kelvin–Helmholtz (K–H) vortices, arising from quasi‐viscous flow velocity shear on the flanks of the magnetopause, have been extensively studied and are recognized as a key pathway for solar wind entry into the magnetosphere. Recent research by W. D. Fu et al. (2025a, ( https://doi.org/10.1029/2025ja033633 ), 2025b), ( https://doi.org/10.1029/2025ja033894 ) has shown that the magnetopause and dipolarization front share many similar characteristics, implying that such instabilities could also be triggered on the flanks of dipolarization fronts. Here, we report a DF crossing event observed by the Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) mission, during which the spacecraft traversed from the dawnside flank of the front. Electron flow vortices were detected at the boundary, which are confirmed to result from electron K–H instability, developed by velocity shear in the electron flows. Using the FOTE‐V method, we reconstruct the local velocity topology and identify a vortex with a characteristic scale of ∼6 d e , in agreement with theoretical predictions. These results provide direct evidence for electron K–H instability at the DF flanks, unveiling a new layer of complexity in boundary dynamics and offering a powerful window for studying these fundamental instabilities across different scales.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- On the Dipolarization Front and Magnetopause: 3. Evidence of Electron Kelvin–Helmholtz Instability at Dipolarization Front
- Date Crossref
- 01/08/2025
- Éditeur
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.