GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 29, NO. 16, 10.
1029/2002GL015265, 2002
Solitary Wave Structure in Magnetized Plasmas and the
Source Region of BEN
C. L. Grabbe
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Received 4 April 2002; revised 4 June 2002; accepted 6 June 2002; published 29 August 2002.
[1] A theoretical analysis of nonlinear electrostatic waves
using coupled equations for a magnetized plasma yields a
generalized BGK-like equation for trapped-particle
distributions that produce these structures in the guiding-
center approximation. A conditional requirement is found for
electron trapping, and the amount of trapping decreases as the
angle of the electric field relative to the backgrounnd
magnetic field increases, ceasing at a critical finite angle.
The results are applied to broadband electrostatic waves
(BEN) in the magnetail. For BEN, trapping can occur over
larger angles in the near-Earth case because of the large
magnetic field there, whereas trapping is confined to close
alignment with the magnetic field further out (e.g., under 20

at distances out 13 RE and above), and strongly supports the
conclusion that in cases further out into the magnetotail that
solitary waves are highly field-aligned. INDEX TERMS:
7815 Space Plasma Physics: Electrostatic structures; 2744
Magnetospheric Physics: Magnetotail; 2772 Magnetospheric
Physics: Plasma waves and instabilities; 7839 Space Plasma
Physics: Nonlinear phenomena
1. Introduction
[2] Several interesting wave observations in recent years
have been ascribed to phase-space vortices described by the
classic BGK analysis [Bernstein et al, 1957; Davidson,
1971; Schamel, 1986]. Electron holes are created in waves
from trapping of the electrons in the potential well of the
wave. For non-magnetized plasmas they can be spatially
localized as the solutions of the Vlasov-Poisson equations,
and these solutions have become prime candidates for
explaining certain large-amplitude structures that are
observed in the plasmas-sheet boundary layer (PSBL),
spanning the magnetotail from the near-Earth auroral zone
to the far-distant regions over 100 Earth radii (RE) away.
However, the effect of the Earth’s magnetic field on these
structures has received less attention, and definitely needs
further examination on its role in these solitary structures.
[3] Broadband electrostatic ‘‘noise’’ (BEN) consists of
plasma waves that are observed in a broad band of frequen-
cies w from the lower hybrid (wlh) up to the plasma
frequency (wpe) or above, and were first discovered Gurnett
et al [1976]. Normally w
wci (the ion cyclotron fre-
quency) for all w in BEN, so the ions can be generally
treated as unmagnetized in its analysis. Observations of
BEN range from the distant magnetotail [e.g., Coroniti et al,
1990] to the the near-Earth extension of the magnetotail
[e.g., Grabbe and Menietti, 2002].
Copyright 2002 by the American Geophysical Union.
0094-8276/02/2002GL015265
51 - 1
[4] Early theory focused on incoherent-beam generation
[e.g., Grabbe and Eastman, 1984; Schriver and Ashour-
Abdalla, 1990] but the after the discovery of unusual pulse-
like waveforms in BEN [Kojima et al, 1994; Matsumoto et
al, 1994] (electron solitary waves (ESW), indicating a
coherence where BEN was generally seen as incoherent
‘‘noise’’ before), considerable effort has gone into explain-
ing BEN with nonlinear trapped-electron modes. Such
electron-hole modes had been proposed earlier to explain
narrowband electrostatic noise that is observed upstream of
slow shocks [Coroniti and Ashour-Abdalla, 1989; Coroniti
et al., 1993].
[5] Electron trapping in these waves requires electron
beams, and the linear beam instability determined as a good
candidate for evolving into a nonlinear trapped-electron
mode was found to be the gentle-bump instability [Omura
et al, 1996]. Simulations of these have shown success in
accounting for the large-emplitude ESW that are observed
in BEN very close to the source region [e.g., Matsumoto et
al, 1998, 1999; Omura et al, 1999].
[6] However, some recent papers have emphasized there
is a second part of BEN that is clearly not from trapped
electrons, and which is is observed over much broader
regions surrounding the source regions of BEN [Grabbe,
2000a, 2000b; Grabbe and Menietti, 2002]. Furthermore, in
Grabbe and Menietti [2002] a new form of the solitary-like
structure observed on POLAR which is reminiscent of
electron-hole waves was also reported. These observations
demonstrate that the magnetic field must be included in the
theoretical analysis.
[7] In this paper the magnetized plasma equations will be
analyzed for the theory of such trapped-particle structures.
The analysis will determine the magnetic effects on these
nonlinear waves, and will show that the magnetic field is
indeed very important in influencing and constraining the
existence of these trapped-particle modes in general. Impli-
cations in particular for BEN in Earth’s magnetotail will be
analyzed.
2. Trapping in Magnetized Plasmas
[8] For electrostatic modes the coupled equations to be
solved are the Vlasov and Poisson equation. The Vlasov
equation for species a (ion i or electron e) is:
@fa @fa @fa
þv þ ðE þ v  B Þ  ¼0 ð1Þ
@t @x @v
and Poisson’s equation is:
r2 f ¼ eðNe ZNi Þ=0 ð2Þ
51 - 2 GRABBE: SOLITARY WAVES IN MAGNETIZED PLASMAS AND BEN

where v is the particle velocity of the species a being motion, and the ion motion is approximately unmagnetized.
considered,R E the electric field, B the background magnetic Hence the variable U for the ions is approximately:
field, f = E  dl the electrostatic potential,  2 Z
Z mi v
U¼ þ Ze E  dl ð11Þ
Na ¼ fa ðvÞd 3 v ð3Þ 2

the density of particle species a, and Z the charge number [11] Using these U for the electrons and ions, we can
for the ions. Using characteristics, the general stationary change variables to convert the integrals in equation (2) to
solution of the Vlasov equation for a is: the generalized form for the f ’s in equation (5). For the
 Z Z  electrons the integration over v? factors out, so:
ma v 2
fa ¼ f þ qa E  dl þ qa v  B  dl ð4Þ
2 Z1
fefree ðU ÞdU
Ne ¼ 2p h i1=2
To use the general solution of (5) in (2), we must convert 0 2me ðU þ eV Þ ðme E? =BÞ2
the right-hand side integrals in (2) to integrals over the !
Z 0
general energy variable for each a: fetrapped ðU ÞdU
Z Z þ h i1=2 ð12Þ
ma v 2 eV þðme E?
2 =2B2
Þ 2me ðU þ eV Þ ðme E? =BÞ2
U¼ þ qa E  dl þ qa v  B  dl ð5Þ
2

Although this conversion is not easy to do directly, let us and

first consider v for each a from the equation of motion: Z 1
fi ðU ÞdU
Ni ¼ ð13Þ
@v Zef ½2mi ðU ZefÞ1=2
ma ¼ qa ðE þ v  BÞ ð6Þ
@t R R
where V = Ez  dl and f = E  dl.
By taking the vector cross-product of (6) with B, with B [12] Equation (2) with the right-hand side integrals given
taken to be along z for a cylindrical coordinate system, the in equations (12) and (13) now forms the BGK-type
velocity exhibits its 3 contributions: equation generalized to the case of a background magnetic
field in the plasma. Comparing the energy of the trapped
EB @v B electrons equation (9) to that for BGK in an unmagnetized
v ¼ vz þ sgnðqa Þ  ð7Þ
B2 @t wca B plasma provides essential insight into the nonlinear wave
solutions of this equation. Trapping of the electrons occurs
where wca
B|qa|/ma. The first term vz is just the component when U is negative:
of v parallel to B which is driven by the Ez. The second terms " #
is the E  B drift of particle a perpendicular to B. The last m  E 2 Z
e ? 2
term arises from the cyclotron orbit around B. þvz < e Ez  dl ð14Þ
2 B
[9] For the electrons, over a full cyclotron orbit the
cyclotron velocity component
R around B makes virtually whereas in the unmagnetized case, trapping requires
no net contribution to v  B  dl because of the perpen- [Davidson, 1971]:
dicular nature of the path and particle acceleration. Fur-
Z
thermore, even for those instances where the particle has a me v2
<e E  dl ð15Þ
collision before completing a full cyclotron orbit, the small 2
contribution to the net kinetic energy that results is gen-
erally negligible compared to that of the E  B drift plus the In contrast to the unmagnetized case, in which the full E
vz motion. Thus the guiding-center approximation is good contributes to trapping of the particles, in the magnetized
here for the electrons: case only the component Ez parallel to the magnetic field
contributes to the trapping, while the component E?
EB perpendicular to the magnetic field actually counteracts
v¼e þ vz ð8Þ
B2 the trapping, decreasing the effect of the parallel compo-
nent. Thus there is always a critical angle above which
and we can write U for the electrons as: trapping cannot occur, since as the angle grows in size, the
" #
m  E 2 Z LHS of equation (14) is positive and continually grows in
e ?
U¼ þv2z e Ez  dl ð9Þ size, whereas the RHS continually falls, going to 0 as the
2 B
angle approaches 90
.
where part of the E-integral has been cancelled out by the [13] These conclusions substantially extend recent analy-
v  B-integral, with the electric field denoted as: ses of BGK modes in magnetized plasmas made by
Muschietti et al [1999, 2000], and by Chen and Parks
E ¼ ðE ? ; E z Þ ð10Þ [2002], which did not include the anisotropic term in the
Vlasov equation that gives rise to E  B drifts. This
[10] Applying (6) to the ions, the very large mi/me ratio anisotropic term is very important in limiting and erasing
makes |v| much smaller for the ions than it is for the electrons, the trapping at finite angles with respect to the magnetic
while the E  B drift is of the same size for the ions as it is for field. This is the first analysis of 3D magnetized analysis of
the electrons. Thus |v  B|  |E| in the ion equation of wave trapping which includes this drift motion, and it pushes
 GRABBE: SOLITARY WAVES IN MAGNETIZED PLASMAS AND BEN 51 - 3

open questions on ESW from electron trapping into new

directions.

3. Implications of Trapping Condition for BEN

in the Magnetotail
[14] The last section indicates that primarily field-aligned
waves are likely to trap particles so they become an inherent
part of the nonlinear wave structure. This can be seen in the
physics of a growing wave and particle trapping. Equation
(14) shows that for particle trapping the component Ez along
the magnetic field B must grow till it is more energetic than
the kinetic energy of the particles. Yet both Ez and the
component E? perpendicular to the magnetic field will be
growing at the same time. But the drift contribution to the
particles grows as the square of E?, so it can quickly
outgrow Ez unless sinq is very small and/or B is very large.
[15] Thus trapped-particle (BGK-type) waves are limited
to sufficiently small sin q combined with sufficiently large Figure 1. Maximum angles at which electrons can be
B. The physical process of drifting countering particle trapped byelectrostatic waves as a function of distance into
trapping in waves was alluded to in Grabbe [2000], in the magnetotail measured in units of Earth radii RE. The
which it was pointed out that the bulk of the BEN waves curves cover a gamut of possible values of nb, ntw , and nE,
observed outside the PSBL are propagating at oblique with inputs taken to vary only as the magnetotail magnetic
angles and are not likely BGK modes, whereas the closely field varies.
field-aligned waves cofined to the PSBL are much more
likely to be BGK-like waves. [17] An interesting feature can be observed in equation
[16] Equation (14) will be examined further for its (17) by noting the dependence of the ns on the magnetic
restrictions on how large an angle q these trapped-particle field. We have a the following dependences:
modes can exist in magnetotail plasmas. Approximating the
right-hand side of equation (14) in the form: nE  B 1 ð22Þ
Z  
E
w
Ez  dL  cos q ð16Þ nb  B0 ð23Þ
2

where
w is the reduced or effective width of the trapped- ntw  B1 ð24Þ

particle packet. Using this and setting vz to the electron
beam velocity vb, equation (14) can be converted into a Thus as B tends toward smaller values, as it does with the
quadratic inequality for cos q. In dimensionless form, the increasing distance away from the Earth in the magnetotail,
solution for this inequality is: with other parameters remaining the same, then q similarly
 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi tends toward smaller values. This rate of decrease is
1 particular fast when nE and nb happen to roughly the same
cos q > n2E þ n2b þ n2tw n2tw ð17Þ
nE size or smaller than ntw , as may be possible in the near-
Earth plasma. The further out into the magnetotail one goes,
where the smaller is the allowed angular maximum for these
trapped-particle waves.
nE
ð E=cBÞ ð18Þ 18]ffiffiffi The magnetic field in the magnetotail falls off as
[p
1= R beyond the distance R = 20RE [Kivelson and Russell,
nb
ðvb =cÞ ð19Þ 1995] but very close to Earth has the normal dipole 1/R3
falloff. Thus to parameterize the magnetic field for our
ntw
ð2
wwce =cÞ ð20Þ model it is reasonably accurate to use the combined form:

Here E/B
vdmax is the maximum value of the perpendi-
cular drift velocity, so nE is vdmax weighed over c. Similarly,
nb is the weighed electron beam velocity, and ntw can be
interpreted by rewriting it in the form:
R/RE. All other parameters in equation (17) will
ntw ¼ ðvte =cÞð2
w=rce Þ ð21Þ
Here vte is the electron thermal velocity, and rce = vte/wce is
the electron cyclotron radius, so ntw is the electron thermal
velocity in units of c, multiplied by the effective width of
the trapped-particle packet in units of electron cyclotron
orbit radii.
28; 000 125
Bðin gÞ ¼ þ pffiffi ð25Þ
r3 r
where r
be taken to be constant in R in the analysis.
[19] In Figure 1 the value of the maximum angle for
trapping qmax is graphed as a function of the ratio R/RE for a
large gamut of ratios of the n’s in equation (17). It clearly
shows that the maximum-angle allowed for particle trapping
is quite small at larger distances out, being less than 20
at
distances of 12RE or greater. Note that this does not
necessarily mean that at angles below these maximum angle
51 - 4 GRABBE: SOLITARY WAVES IN MAGNETIZED PLASMAS AND BEN
borders that electron trapping produces solitary waves, but
only that some electrom trapping is possible in the waves.
However, it does mean that no trapped-particle wave exists
at angles as large or larger than these borders, as no electron
trapping can occur there.
[20] Figure 1 clearly show that the BEN everywhere in
the magnetotail except for the near-Earth plasma that is
observed propagating at significant oblique angles with
respect to the magnetic field very likely cannot arise from
trapped-particle solitary waves. This most probably includes
all the observations out in the lobe reported in from ISEE-1
in Grabbe and Eastman [1984], Grabbe [1989], and ISEE-3
in Coroniti et al [1990].
[21] The solitary waves generally observed in plasma sheet
boundary layer source, with the exception of the ones
reported near the Earth such as in Grabbe and Menietti
[2002], have a trapped-particle structure and are confined
to moving within small angles with respect to the magnetic
field. On the other hand, BEN observed over much broader
regions outside the source region generally proagate at
greater angles, and appears to be associated with beam
instabilities that have little or no particle trapping.
[22] These results can be compared with recent simula-
tions of trapped-particle structures and with observations
recently made from POLAR of the structures. In [Miyake et
al., 1998], 2-dimensional particle simulations were made of
structures arising from particle-trapping in an electron-beam
In runs investigating the evolution of energy in time, the
energy in Ek is seen to quickly dominate generally well over
that in E?, in spite of initial conditions being set so that Ek =
E?. That is consistent with the findings in this paper.
[23] In [Oppenheim et al., 1999] the simulations were
generalized to 2 spatial and 1 velocity dimension. In those
simulations the trapped particles created electron tubes with
structure perpendicular to the magnetic field, but with E
parallel. This structure is somewhat akin to the coherent
structure of that type proposed as being triggered by
counterstreaming electron beams in Mottez et al. [1997].
Those findings are similarly quite consistent with the
conclusions of this paper.
[24] POLAR observations revealed characteristics of elec-
tron holes from near-Earth out to the mid-magnetotail [Franz
et al., 2000]. The data reported shows that E? is generally
small compared with Ek whenever wce < wpe (a condition
well satisfied for R > 10RE in the magnetotail, and generally
E? only becomes as large as Ek when wce > wpe (correspond-
ing to near-Earth conditions). These observations agree
remarkably well with the predictions shown in Figure 1,
and provide a degree of confirmation for the results of this
theory.
[25] Acknowledgments. I would like to thank Don Gurnett, James
van Allen, and Doug Menietti for discussions on these predictions and on
magnetotail data related to BEN. This research was sponsored by the
National Science Foundation under grant ATM-97-06874.
References
Bernstein, I. B., J. M. Greene, and M. D. Kruskal, Exact nonlinear solution
of the plasma equations, Physical Review, 108, 546, 1957.
Chen L.-J., and G. Parks, BGK electron solitary waves: 1D and 3D, Non-
linear Processes in Geophysics, 9, 111, 2002.
Coroniti, F. V., and M. Ashour-Abdalla, Electron velocity space hole modes
and narrowband electrostatic noise in the distant tail, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
16, 747 – 750, 1989.
Coroniti, F. V., E. W. Greenstadt, B. T. Tsuritani, E. J. Smith, R. D. Zwickel,
and J. T. Gosling, Plasma waves in the distant geomagnetic tail: ISEE 3,
J. Geophys. Res., 95, 20,977, 1990.
Coroniti, F. V., M. Ashour-Abdalla, and R. L. Richard, Electron velocity
space hole modes, J. Geophys. Res., 98, 11,349 – 11,358, 1993.
Davidson, R. C., Methods in Nonlinear Plasma Theory, Academic Press,
New York, 1971.
Dubouloz, N., R. Pottelette, M. Malingre, and R. A. Treumann, Generation
of broadband electrostatic noise by electron acoustic solitons, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 18, 155, 1991.
Dubouloz, N., R. A. Treumann, R. Pottelette, and M. Malingre, Turbulence
generated by a gas of electron-acoustic solitons, J. Geophys. Res., 98,
17,415, 1993.
Franz, J. R., P. M. Kintner, and J. S. Pickett, POLAR observations of
coherent electric field structure, J. Geophys. Res., 25, 1277, 1998.
Franz, J. R., P. M. Kintner, C. E. Seylor, J. S. Pickett, and J. S. Scudder, On
the perpendicular scale of electron phase-space holes, J. Geophys. Res.,
27, 169 – 172, 2000.
Grabbe, C. L., New results on the generation of broadband electrostatic
waves in the magnetotail, J. Geophys. Res., 12, 483, 1985.
Grabbe, C. L., Wave propagation effects of ion beam instabilities onbroad-
band electrostatic noise in the magnetotail, J. Geophys. Res., 94, 17,299
and 17,329, 1989.
Grabbe, C. L., Generation of broadband electrostatic waves in Earth’s
magnetotail, Phys. Rev. Lett., 84, 3614, 2000a.
Grabbe, C. L., Origins of broadband electrostatic waves in the magnetotail,
invited paper in Pandalai (Ed.), Recent Research Developments in Plas-
mas, 1, 89, 2000b.
Grabbe, C. L., and T. E. Eastman, Generation of broadband electrostatic
noise by ion beam instabilities in the magnetotail, J. Geophys. Res., 89,
3865 and 3977, 1984.
Grabbe, C. L., and J. D. Menietti, Electrostatic wave variety and the origins
of BEN, Planetary & Space Science, 2002 (in press).
Kojima, H., H. Matsumoto, T. Miyatake, I. Nagano, A. Fujita, L. A. Frank,
T. Mukai, W. R. Paterson, Y. Sato, S. Machida, and R. R. Anderson,
Relation between electrostatic solitary waves and hot plasma flow in the
plasma sheet boundary layer: GEOTAIL observations, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 21, 2919, 1994.
Matsumoto, H., Plasma waves in Geospace Geotail observations, in New
Perspectives on the Earth’s Magnetotail, edited by A. Nishida, D. N.
Baker, and S. W. H. Cowley, American Geophysical Union, Washington,
DC, 1998.
Matsumoto, H., H. Kojima, T. Miyatake, Y. Omura, M. Okada, I. Nagano,
and M. Tsutsui, Electrostatic solitary waves (ESW) in themagnetotail:
BEN wave forms observed by GEOTAIL, Geophys. Res. Lett., 21,
2915, 1994.
Matsumoto, H., L. A. Frank, Y. Omura, H. Kojima, W. R. Paterson,
M. Tsuitsui, R. R. Anderson, S. Horiyama, S. Kokubun, and T. Yama-
moto, Generation mechanism of ESW based on GEOTAIL plasma wave
observation, plasma observation, and particle simulation, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 26, 421, 1999.
Miyake, T., Y. Omura, H. Matsumoto, and H. Kojima, Two-dimensional-
computer simulations of electrostatic solitary waves observed by Geotail-
spacecraft, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 11,841, 1998.
Mottez, S. Perraut, A. Roux, and P. Louarn, Coherent structures in the
magnetotail triggered by counterstreaming electron beams, J. Geophys.
Res., 102, 11,399, 1997.
Muschietti, L., R. E. Ergun, I. Roth, and C. W. Carlson, Phase-space elec-
tron holes along magnetic field lines, Geophys. Res. Lett., 26, 1093, 1999.
Muschietti, L., I. Roth, C. W. Carlson, and R. E. Ergun, Transverse in-
stability of magnetized electron holes, Phys. Rev. Lett., 85, 94, 2000.
Omura, Y., H. Matsumoto, T. Miyake, and H. Kojima, Electron beam
instabilities as generation mechanism of electrostatic solitary waves in
the magnetotail, J. Geophys. Res., 101, 2685, 1996.
Omura, Y., H. Kojima, N. Miki, T. Mukai, H. Matsumoto, and R. Anderson,
Electrostatic solitary waves carried by diffused electron beams observed
by the Geotail spacecraft, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 14,627, 1999.
Oppenheim, M., D. L. Newman, and M. V. Goldman, Evolution of electron
phase-space holes in a 2D magnetized plasma, Phys. Rev. Lett., 83, 2344,
1999.
Schamel, H., Electron holes, ion holes, and double layers, Phys. Reports,
140, 161 – 191, 1986.
Schriver, D., and M. Ashour-Abdalla, Cold plasma heating in the plasma
sheet boundary layer: Theory and simulation, J. Geophys. Res., 95, 3987,
1990.
C. L. Grabbe, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Iowa,
Iowa City, Iowa 52242, USA. (Grabbe@Einstein.physics.UIowa.edu)