Search for: All records

This report briefly summarizes the key mentors in my scientific career and some lessons learned from those influential people. My primary advice to others: it is okay to do something wrong. By doing science we are doing something hard that, by definition, has not been done before. I believe that impostor syndrome is a real threat to researcher wellbeing and we should acknowledge its presence and support each other to get through it. Regarding an approach to science, I encourage you to get started and make something bad. Also, take time for yourself, it really does help your productivity. To lead others, I recommend to be enthusiastic, actively listen, and make connections across disciplines. I think it is important to foster creativity in those around you. I advocate that you actively make the future that you want to have.

 

The space physics research community is not diverse. This is especially true at the senior experience levels, but is even true for our student populations, which are also not matching the demographics of the general public. Striving towards a demographic shift to match the general population promotes equity and inclusion. In addition, diversity increases research productivity. Unfortunately, bias exists, including within the space physics research community, and this negatively impacts hiring practices and perpetuates the demographic mismatch. Yet there are many strategies and tactics that can be adopted to counter this problem. A number of these methods are presented and discussed, specifically those regarding the search process for hiring new research group members. The key methods for achieving an equitable search process are as follows: develop a holistic rubric early, even before the job ad is posted; slow down the downselect from the full applicant pool to the short list of finalists so that the rubric can be carefully applied to each candidate; make the interview process as equitable as possible by considering the ways in which it could be biased; and conduct a fair decision-making process that focuses on the job-relevant criteria and avoids global rankings until the final vote.

 

A major obstacle in cultivating a robust Heliophysics (and broader scientific) community is the lack of diversity throughout science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. For many years, this has been understood as a “leaky pipeline” analogy, in which predominately minority students initially interested in STEM gradually fall (or are pushed) out of the field on their way to a scientific research position. However, this ignores critical structural and policy issues which drive even later career Ph.D.s out of a career in Heliophysics. We identify here several systemic problems that inhibit many from participating fully in the Heliophysics community, including soft money pressure, lack of accessibility and equity, power imbalances, lack of accountability, friction in collaboration, and difficulties in forming mentorship bonds. We present several recommendations to empower research-supporting organizations to help create a culture of inclusion, openness, and innovative science.

 

The PI Launchpad attempts to provide an entry level explanation of the process of space mission development for new Principal Investigators (PIs). In particular, PI launchpad has a focus on building teams, making partnerships, and science concept maturity for a space mission concept, not necessarily technical or engineering practices. Here we briefly summarize the goals of the PI Launchpad workshops and present some results from the workshops held in 2019 and 2021. The workshop attempts to describe the current process of space mission development (i.e. space-based telescopes and instrument platforms, planetary missions of all types,etc.), covering a wide range of topics that a new PI may need to successfully develop a team and write a proposal. It is not designed to replace real experience but to provide an easily accessible resource for potential PIs who seek to learn more about what it takes to submit a space mission proposal, and what the first steps to take can be. The PI Launchpad was created in response to the high barrier to entry for early career or any scientist who is unfamiliar with mission design. These barriers have been outlined in several recent papers and reports, and are called out in recent space science Decadal reports.

 

A large number of heliophysicists from across career levels, institution types, and job titles came together to support a poster at Heliophysics 2050 and the position papers for the 2024 Heliophysics decadal survey titled “Cultivating a Culture of Inclusivity in Heliophysics,” “The Importance of Policies: It’s not just a pipeline problem,” and “Mentorship within Heliophysics.” While writing these position papers, the number of people who privately shareddisturbing stories and experiences of bullying and harassmentwas shocking. The number of people who privately expressed howburned outthey were was staggering. The number of people who privately spoke about how theyconsidered leaving the field for their and their family’s healthwas astounding. And for as much good there is in our community, it is still atoxic environmentfor many. If we fail to do something now, our field will continue to suffer. While acknowledging the ongoing growth that we as individuals must work toward, we call on our colleagues to join us in working on organizational, group, and personal levels toward a truly inclusive culture, for the wellbeing of our colleagues and the success of our field. This work includes policies, processes, and commitments to promote:accountabilityfor bad actors;financial securitythrough removing the constant anxiety about funding;prioritizationof mental health and community through removing constant deadlines and constant last-minute requests;a collaborative culturerather than a hyper-competitive one; anda community where people can thrive as whole personsand do not have to give up a healthy or well-rounded life to succeed.

 

The performance of three global magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) models in estimating the Earth's magnetopause location and ionospheric cross polar cap potential (CPCP) have been presented. Using the Community Coordinated Modeling Center's Run-on-Request system and extensive database on results of various magnetospheric scenarios simulated for a variety of solar weather patterns, the aforementioned model predictions have been compared with magnetopause standoff distance estimations obtained from six empirical models, and with cross polar cap potential estimations obtained from the Assimilative Mapping of Ionospheric Electrodynamics (AMIE) Model and the Super Dual Auroral Radar Network (SuperDARN) observations. We have considered a range of events spanning different space weather activity to analyze the performance of these models. Using a fit performance metric analysis for each event, the models' reproducibility of magnetopause standoff distances and CPCP against empirically-predicted observations were quantified, and salient features that govern the performance characteristics of the modeled magnetospheric and ionospheric quantities were identified. Results indicate mixed outcomes for different models during different events, with almost all models underperforming during the extreme-most events. The quantification also indicates a tendency to underpredict magnetopause distances in the absence of an inner magnetospheric model, and an inclination toward over predicting CPCP values under general conditions. 

Cold H⁺produced via charge exchange reactions between ring current ions and exospheric neutral hydrogen constitutes an additional source of cold plasma that further contributes to the plasmasphere and affects the plasma dynamics in the Earth's magnetosphere system; however, its production and associated effects on the plasmasphere dynamics have not been fully assessed and quantified. In this study, we perform numerical simulations mimicking an idealized three‐phase geomagnetic storm to investigate the role of heavy ion composition in the ring current (O⁺vs. N⁺) and exospheric neutral hydrogen density in the production of cold H⁺via charge exchange reactions. It is found that ring current heavy ions produce more than 50% of the total cold H⁺via charge exchange reactions, and energetic N⁺is more efficient in producing cold H⁺via charge exchange reactions than O⁺. Furthermore, the density structure of the cold H⁺is highly dependent on the mass of the parent ion; that is, cold H⁺deriving from charge exchange reactions involving energetic O⁺with neutral hydrogen, populates the lower L‐shells, while cold H⁺deriving from charge exchange reactions involving energetic N⁺with neutral hydrogen populates the higher L‐shells. In addition, the density of cold H⁺produced via charge exchange reactions involving N⁺can be peak at values up to one order of magnitude larger than the local plasmaspheric density, suggesting that solely considering the supply of cold plasma from the ionosphere to the plasmasphere can lead to a significant underestimation of plasmasphere density.