skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Search for: All records

Creators/Authors contains: "Davies, Emma"

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. Abstract Coronal mass ejections (CMEs) are large-scale eruptions with a typical radial size at 1 au of 0.21 au but their angular width in interplanetary space is still mostly unknown, especially for the magnetic ejecta (ME) part of the CME. We take advantage of STEREO-A angular separation of 20°–60° from the Sun–Earth line from 2020 October to 2022 August, and perform a two-part study to constrain the angular width of MEs in the ecliptic plane: (a) we study all CMEs that are observed remotely to propagate between the Sun–STEREO-A and the Sun–Earth lines and determine how many impact one or both spacecraft in situ, and (b) we investigate all in situ measurements at STEREO-A or at L1 of CMEs during the same time period to quantify how many are measured by the two spacecraft. A key finding is that out of 21 CMEs propagating within 30° of either spacecraft only four impacted both spacecraft and none provided clean magnetic cloud-like signatures at both spacecraft. Combining the two approaches, we conclude that the typical angular width of an ME at 1 au is ∼20°–30°, or 2–3 times less than often assumed and consistent with a 2:1 elliptical cross section of an ellipsoidal ME. We discuss the consequences of this finding for future multi-spacecraft mission designs and for the coherence of CMEs. 
    more » « less
  2. This perspective article discusses the knowledge gaps and open questions regarding the solar and interplanetary drivers of space weather conditions experienced at Mars during active and quiescent solar periods, and the need for continuous, routine observations to address them. For both advancing science and as part of the strategic planning for human exploration at Mars by the late 2030s, now is the time to consider a network of upstream space weather monitors at Mars. Our main recommendations for the heliophysics community are the following: 1. Support the advancement for understanding heliophysics and space weather science at ∼1.5 AU and continue the support of planetary science payloads and missions that provide such measurements. 2. Prioritize an upstream Mars L1 monitor and/or areostationary orbiters for providing dedicated, continuous observations of solar activity and interplanetary conditions at ∼1.5 AU. 3. Establish new or support existing 1) joint efforts between federal agencies and their divisions and 2) international collaborations to carry out #1 and #2. 
    more » « less
  3. Magnetic flux ropes manifest as twisted bundles of magnetic field lines. They carry significant amounts of solar mass in the heliosphere. This paper underlines the need to advance our understanding of the fundamental physics of heliospheric flux ropes and provides the motivation to significantly improve the status quo of flux rope research through novel and requisite approaches. It briefly discusses the current understanding of flux rope formation and evolution, and summarizes the strategies that have been undertaken to understand the dynamics of heliospheric structures. The challenges and recommendations put forward to address them are expected to broaden the in-depth knowledge of our nearest star, its dynamics, and its role in its region of influence, the heliosphere. 
    more » « less
  4. This perspective paper brings to light the need for comprehensive studies on the evolution of interplanetary coronal mass ejection (ICME) complexity during propagation. To date, few studies of ICME complexity exist. Here, we define ICME complexity and associated changes in complexity, describe recent works and their limitations, and outline key science questions that need to be tackled. Fundamental research on ICME complexity changes from the solar corona to 1 AU and beyond is critical to our physical understanding of the evolution and interaction of transients in the inner heliosphere. Furthermore, a comprehensive understanding of such changes is required to understand the space weather impact of ICMEs at different heliospheric locations and to improve on predictive space weather models. 
    more » « less
  5. Abstract We present an analysis of in situ and remote-sensing measurements of a coronal mass ejection (CME) that erupted on 2021 February 20 and impacted both the Solar TErrestrial RElations Observatory (STEREO)-A and the Wind spacecraft, which were separated longitudinally by 55°. Measurements on 2021 February 24 at both spacecraft are consistent with the passage of a magnetic ejecta (ME), making this one of the widest reported multispacecraft ME detections. The CME is associated with a low-inclined and wide filament eruption from the Sun’s southern hemisphere, which propagates between STEREO-A and Wind around E34. At STEREO-A, the measurements indicate the passage of a moderately fast (∼425 km s−1) shock-driving ME, occurring 2–3 days after the end of a high speed stream (HSS). At Wind, the measurements show a faster (∼490 km s−1) and much shorter ME, not preceded by a shock nor a sheath, and occurring inside the back portion of the HSS. The ME orientation measured at both spacecraft is consistent with a passage close to the legs of a curved flux rope. The short duration of the ME observed at Wind and the difference in the suprathermal electron pitch-angle data between the two spacecraft are the only results that do not satisfy common expectations. We discuss the consequence of these measurements on our understanding of the CME shape and extent and the lack of clear signatures of the interaction between the CME and the HSS. 
    more » « less