Jupiter's complex transient auroras

May 25, 2017, RIKEN
This is Jupiter's Great Red Spot in 2000 as seen by NASA's Cassini orbiter. Credit: NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute

Combined observations from three spacecraft show that Jupiter's brightest auroral features recorded to date are powered by both the volcanic moon Io and interaction with the solar wind.

At Earth, auroras are clearly driven by the solar that streams past the planet. But Jupiter's gigantic auroras—magnitudes more powerful than those on Earth—are believed to be mainly driven by factors within the Jovian system. Now, by combining observations from three spacecraft, scientists from an international collaboration led by a researcher at the RIKEN Nishina Center for Accelerator-Based Science have shown that the picture is complex—volcanoes on Io, one of Jupiter's moons—and the most active volcanic body in the solar system—are responsible for powering some of Jupiter's brightest auroral features through interactions with the shock wave caused by the arrival of the solar wind.

To perform the study, the group looked at data from three space-based sources—Japan's Hisaki satellite, an earth-orbiting extreme ultraviolet observatory that was launched into low-earth orbit in 2013, the Juno spacecraft, which entered into orbit around Jupiter in July 2016, and the Hubble Space Telescope, which took high-resolution far ultraviolet photos of Jupiter as Juno entered into orbit. By combining the data from the three spacecraft—including snapshots taken by Hisaki at ten-minute intervals for a period of more than six months, the team was able to more precisely map out the process through which the sulfur gas emerging from Io's powerful volcanoes is stored in the area far from Jupiter, transiently accelerated, transferred toward Jupiter, and channeled into Jupiter's polar region where it drives the aurora. These findings were detected during a "transient brightening" of Jupiter's aurora—with the phenomenon moving from the toward the equator—that was detected in May 2016, as Juno was approaching. The data showed that the energy from Io's gas emission was somehow transferred toward Jupiter at a speed approaching 400 to 800 kilometers per second in the equatorial region of the space around Jupiter.

Previous observations had been made combining the data from Hisaki and the HST had concluded that the solar wind had little to do with the transient auroras. "What is special about our observations," says lead author Tomoki Kimura, a Special Postdoctoral Researcher at RIKEN, "is that we were able to time the observations with the arrival of the Juno spacecraft into Jovian orbit. It turns out that Juno detected a shock wave originating from the solar wind, and this led us to infer that the was, along with Io, playing a role in the process by driving the energy toward Jupiter."

In the past, it was generally considered that the magnetic field of a rotating astronomical body is powerful enough to completely dominate azimuthal movements of energy and mass near it, but the team's findings challenge this assumption, as the energy seems to move from the area far from Jupiter toward Jupiter.. Moreover, this process seems to hold for other rotating bodies such as neutron stars.

Looking to the future, Kimura continues, "The Jovian system is known to contain several icy moons, namely Europa and Ganymede, which may potentially have extraterrestrial life in their underground oceans of liquid water, and the energy driven from the far area toward Jupiter could provide support for chemical processes on the icy surface of the moons. In the past we did not know how the energy was accelerated to such tremendous velocities, but now, thanks to these findings, we have a better idea. Now that Juno is in orbit around Jupiter, we will continue to receive new observational data that will help us pin down how the is transferred, again allowing us to gain insights in our search for life in those icy worlds."

The work is published in Geophysical Research Letters.

Explore further: Juno spacecraft set for fifth Jupiter flyby

More information: T. Kimura et al, Transient brightening of Jupiter's aurora observed by the Hisaki satellite and Hubble Space Telescope during approach phase of the Juno spacecraft, Geophysical Research Letters (2017). DOI: 10.1002/2017GL072912

Related Stories

Hubble captures vivid auroras in Jupiter's atmosphere

June 30, 2016

Astronomers are using the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope to study auroras—stunning light shows in a planet's atmosphere—on the poles of the largest planet in the Solar System, Jupiter. This observation programme is supported ...

Image: Juno captures Jovian approach

June 28, 2016

NASA's Juno spacecraft obtained this color view on June 21, 2016, at a distance of 6.8 million miles (10.9 million kilometers) from Jupiter. Juno will arrive at Jupiter on July 4.

Recommended for you

NASA engineers dream big with small spacecraft

April 20, 2018

Many of NASA's most iconic spacecraft towered over the engineers who built them: think Voyagers 1 and 2, Cassini or Galileo—all large machines that could measure up to a school bus.

Unveiling the secrets of the Milky Way galaxy

April 20, 2018

A multinational team of astronomers involving the University of Adelaide has catalogued over 70 sources of very high energy gamma rays, including 16 previously undiscovered ones, in a survey of the Milky Way using gamma ray ...

Where is the universe's missing matter?

April 19, 2018

Astronomers using ESA's XMM-Newton space observatory have probed the gas-filled haloes around galaxies in a quest to find 'missing' matter thought to reside there, but have come up empty-handed – so where is it?

18 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Solon
1 / 5 (6) May 25, 2017
Not a word about plasma or electricity of course.
cantdrive85
2.1 / 5 (7) May 25, 2017
have shown that the picture is complex—volcanoes on Io, one of Jupiter's moons—and the most active volcanic body in the solar system—are responsible for powering some of Jupiter's brightest auroral features

The volcanoes and aurora are driven by electric currents, as usual they have the cart in front of the horse.
The data showed that the energy from Io's gas emission was somehow transferred toward Jupiter at a speed approaching 400 to 800 kilometers per second in the equatorial region

Somehow is by those previously mentioned electric currents.

In the past, it was generally considered that the magnetic field of a rotating astronomical body is powerful enough to completely dominate azimuthal movements of energy and mass near it, but the team's findings challenge this assumption

They have believed this since Chapman promoted this 100 or so years ago in spite of Birkeland's experimentally based approach. Alas, the thought experiment fails again.
691Boat
4 / 5 (8) May 26, 2017
Not a word about plasma or electricity of course.

Aw, how cute! the EU supporter doesn't even recognize that the solar wind is a plasma. Even non-EU supporters know this.
But not mentioning electric currents? Likely a good reason for that: THERE IS NO EVIDENCE/PROOF/GOOD REASON FOR THEIR EXISTENCE
cantdrive85
2.8 / 5 (6) May 30, 2017
But not mentioning electric currents? Likely a good reason for that: THERE IS NO EVIDENCE/PROOF/GOOD REASON FOR THEIR EXISTENCE

Nice use of the CAPSLOCK button. Are you the new Cap'n CAPSLOCK?
Oh, and regarding the 5 million amp electric currents you seem to be so proudly ignorant of, here you go.
https://ase.tufts...?id=1174
Captain Stumpy
not rated yet May 30, 2017
@idiot electric cult conspiracy moron
Nice use of the CAPSLOCK button. Are you the new Cap'n CAPSLOCK?
nice use of the capslock button. are you the new Cap'n Capslock?
they have the cart in front of the horse
you really need to learn how to read... this isn't speculation based upon belief, like the eu stupidity - it's observed and measured, ya moron

.

.

Not a word about plasma or electricity of course.
@solong to science, yet another eu cult idiot
you are worse- you ignored the study for the stupidity of your beliefs
These results imply that the magnetospheric disturbance is initiated via the tail reconnection and rapidly expands toward the inner magnetosphere, followed by the hot plasma injection reaching the plasma torus
perhaps next time you should consider using this link ( http://readingbear.org/ ) before posting
691Boat
5 / 5 (4) May 31, 2017
Oh, and regarding the 5 million amp electric currents you seem to be so proudly ignorant of, here you go.
https://ase.tufts...?id=1174

OK, so there is a plasma current between a planet and one of its moons. Last I heard, the planets are powered from the sun. Where's that current?
cantdrive85
3 / 5 (4) May 31, 2017
Oh, and regarding the 5 million amp electric currents you seem to be so proudly ignorant of, here you go.
https://ase.tufts...?id=1174

OK, so there is a plasma current between a planet and one of its moons. Last I heard, the planets are powered from the sun. Where's that current?

It's okay to call it what it is, an electric current.
Not really sure what you mean by "the planets are powered from the sun", but in spite of your wilful ignorance those electric currents also exist;
https://science.n...oct_ftes
Although they call them "magnetic portals" they too are electric currents.
691Boat
5 / 5 (4) May 31, 2017
Although they call them "magnetic portals" they too are electric currents.

You keep bringing up this article as if it explains everything. If I am in an "EU" frame of mind, this seems like a short circuit to me. That being said, lots of bad things tend to happen with short circuits. If this did happen every 8 minutes and it is carrying the electric current your theory says it does, why do we not actively see the effects of this? We see the Aurora events, but should we see this huge spike in them every 8 minutes?
Or is it simply because it isn't actually an electric current?
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) May 31, 2017
@nazi sympathizing eu pseudoscience cult peon
Not really sure what you mean by "the planets are powered from the sun"
try reading your eu cult propaganda, you moron
It's okay to call it what it is
taking advice from a science illiterate eu cult idiot about space, astrophysics or physics is like asking a squirt gun owner to bring up to code and replace all plumbing in a high-rise apartment building because ownership of the squirt gun includes working knowledge of hydraulics, physics and plumbing (code or application)

when someone talks about astrophysics, the terminology should come from the typical astrophysics lexicon to insure clarity and accuracy of communication

this is why the eu cult doesn't comprehend the physics being discussed - you guys make sh*t up then hope your new techno-lingo makes you sound smart

that's not how astrophysics or science in general works
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (3) May 31, 2017
Or is it simply because it isn't actually an electric current?

I guess you would assume it is a magical magnetic portal that springs forth from dark matter then? What exactly do you think this "magnetic portal" is then, if not an electric current. Last I heard you're not going to get said structure without a charged particle flow, i.e. an electric current.
barakn
5 / 5 (4) Jun 01, 2017
It's okay to call it what it is, an electric current.
Not really sure what you mean by "the planets are powered from the sun", but in spite of your wilful ignorance those electric currents also exist;
https://science.n...oct_ftes
Although they call them "magnetic portals" they too are electric currents. -cantdrive85

Since the article you linked to mentions the magnetic portals form by magnetic reconnection, you have now tacitly accepted the existence of magnetic reconnection. Good job!
cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (6) Jun 01, 2017
It's okay to call it what it is, an electric current.
Not really sure what you mean by "the planets are powered from the sun", but in spite of your wilful ignorance those electric currents also exist;
https://science.n...oct_ftes
Although they call them "magnetic portals" they too are electric currents. -cantdrive85

Since the article you linked to mentions the magnetic portals form by magnetic reconnection, you have now tacitly accepted the existence of magnetic reconnection. Good job!

Just because the plasma ignoramuses go out of their way to avoid any mention of electric currents and circuits doesn't mean I adhere to their pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo. The important aspect of the article is the observation, not their perception.
691Boat
5 / 5 (4) Jun 01, 2017
The important aspect of the article is the observation, not their perception.

hahaha!
I fixed it for you:
"The important aspect of the article is my made up interpretation of what I think they observed, not their actual science backed by theory, models and evidence."
cantdrive85
1.8 / 5 (5) Jun 01, 2017
not their actual science backed by theory, models and evidence."

Oh, you mean the part where they said;
""Ten years ago I was pretty sure they didn't exist, but now the evidence is incontrovertible.""
And...
""We were wrong. The connections are not steady at all. They are often brief, bursty and very dynamic.""
"There are many unanswered questions: Why do the portals form every 8 minutes? How do magnetic fields inside the cylinder twist and coil? "We're doing some heavy thinking about this at the Workshop," says Sibeck."

Yep, that's some swell science backed by theory and models that did not predict it and their a priori attempts to explain this observation with their "heavy thinking".
691Boat
5 / 5 (3) Jun 01, 2017
@CD: Go ahead and name off all the EU predictions your EU theory has proven/disproved so far. Last I heard, you don't actually have any real predictions. You look at work scientists have already done, interpret it, and try to make it fit your EU model through the use of made up key phrases and ignorance.
Oh, and the real scientists with theories and models that can be proven/disproved have math to back up the current state of their work. EU simply has observation of other peoples work and black and white pictures from one guys lab from over 50 years ago that they claim can explain everything.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Jun 02, 2017
@nazi sympathizing eu pseudoscience cult peon
that did not predict it
1- just because it wasn't predicted doesn't mean it aint science: science didn't predict you, specifically, are a conspiracy theorist attempting to kill the populace with your deranged beliefs, but you still refuse to vaccinate because you're an idiot conspiracy theorist attempting to kill the populace with your deranged beliefs

2- one important thing you are not pointing out is: the eu didn't predict this either

in fact, you can list every single thing that the eu predicts in a text box with only one character
that character is the zero

more to the point: prediction, by definition, must happen before the event, not after, like your "predictions" of D/1993 F2 which was proven to be not only false, but also proven that you idiot eu cult regurgitators didn't predict anything at all
cantdrive85
2 / 5 (4) Jun 02, 2017
@CD: Go ahead and name off all the EU predictions your EU theory has proven/disproved so far.

Start with two, the aurora are caused by "corpusal rays from the Sun" as predicted by Birkeland over 100 years ago based on observation and experimentation. He was ignored and mocked for decades by supporters/perveyors of the standard theory.
In 1937 Hannes Alfvén predicted the presence of galactic magnetic fields, again mocked and met with scorn for decades until proven correct.
The key being that the EU is only expounding upon known/experimentally supported aspects of real scientific priciples unlike the "heavy thinking" thought experiments to which you so gleefully adhere/believe.
Captain Stumpy
not rated yet Jun 03, 2017
@nazi sympathizing eu pseudoscience cult idiot peon
Start with two
first you must start with a hypothesis that has moved to the "theory" stage using the scientific method

but even dismissing that, you don't have a hypothesis that makes this prediction

you have your interpretations of Birkeland's nad Alfven's work... which doesn't necessarily reflect the facts as you didn't link the specific study as reference for others to validate

more to the point: historically speaking, (and this is validated here: https://phys.org/...ggs.html ) you have yet to demonstrate even a cursory knowledge of basic physics and understanding of science

this is especially true as you still keep making the same blatantly false claims about plasma physics and astrophysicists, as you do here: https://phys.org/...ion.html

the same plasma physicists you admonish are typically the ones you claim support your eu beliefs

epic eu fail

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.