1: % Last modified on Nov 15, 2008
2: %
3: \documentclass[twocolumn,showpacs,prl,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
4: %\documentclass[preprint,showpacs,prl,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
5:
6: \usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files
7: \usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point
8: \usepackage{bm}% bold math
9:
10: %\voffset=2.3cm
11:
12: \begin{document}
13:
14:
15: \title{A model of Hall reconnection}
16:
17: \author{Leonid M. Malyshkin}
18: \email{leonmal@uchicago.edu}
19: \affiliation{Department of Astronomy \& Astrophysics,
20: University of Chicago, 5640 S. Ellis Ave., Chicago, IL 60637}
21: \date{\today}
22:
23: \begin{abstract}
24: The rate of quasi-stationary, two-dimensional magnetic reconnection is
25: calculated in the framework of incompressible Hall magnetohydrodynamics (MHD),
26: which includes the Hall and electron pressure terms in the Ohm's law.
27: The Hall-MHD equations are solved in a local region across the reconnection
28: electron layer, including only the upstream region and the layer center. In
29: the case when the ion inertial length $d_i$ is larger than the Sweet-Parker
30: reconnection layer thickness, the dimensionless reconnection rate is found
31: to be independent of the electrical resistivity and equal to $d_i/L$, where
32: $L$ is the scale length of the external magnetic field in the upstream region
33: outside the electron layer, and the ion layer thickness is found to be $d_i$.
34: \end{abstract}
35:
36: \pacs{52.35.Vd, 94.30.cp, 96.60.Iv, 52.30.Ex}
37: %52.25.Xz Magnetized plasmas (Plasma properties)
38: %52.30.Ex Two-fluid and multi-fluid plasmas (Plasma dynamics and flow)
39: %52.35.Vd Magnetic reconnection (Waves, oscillations, and instabilities in plasmas and intense beams)
40: %94.30.cp Magnetic reconnection (Physics of the magnetosphere)
41: %96.60.Iv Magnetic reconnection (Solar physics)
42:
43: \maketitle
44:
45: %---------------------------------------------------------------------
46:
47: \section{\label{INTRODUCTION}
48: Introduction
49: }
50: Magnetic reconnection is a fundamental process of breaking and
51: topological rearrangement of magnetic field lines in magnetized
52: plasmas. Reconnection converts magnetic energy into kinetic and
53: thermal energy and is believed to be responsible for many phenomena
54: observed in the laboratory and cosmic
55: plasmas~\citep{biskamp_2000,kulsrud_2005}. Because electrical
56: resistivity is very low in hot plasmas, magnetic reconnection
57: due to resistive dissipation of magnetic field is typically a very
58: slow process~\citep{biskamp_2000,kulsrud_2005,yamada_2009}.
59: Reconnection can become much faster in the case when
60: resistivity is anomalously high due to local plasma
61: instabilities~\citep{kulsrud_2001,malyshkin_2005,yamada_2009}.
62: Another possibility is fast reconnection made possible because of
63: two-fluid plasma effects~\citep{biskamp_2000}, which require a
64: two-fluid magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) description of plasma. In the
65: limit of zero electron-to-ion mass ratio, two-fluid MHD equations
66: simplify and reduce to Hall-MHD equations. The later include
67: the Hall and electron pressure terms in the Ohm's law, in
68: addition to the resistivity term present in single-fluid
69: MHD. Because of its relative simplicity, Hall-MHD description of
70: plasma has been extensively used in numerical simulations of magnetic
71: reconnection~\citep{hesse_2001,fitzpatrick_2004,huba_2004,murphy_2008}.
72: However, to the best of our knowledge, a simple self-consistent
73: analytical model of Hall reconnection, similar to the classical
74: Sweet-Parker model of resistive reconnection, has not been constructed.
75: In this paper we consider Hall-MHD equations and present a
76: theoretical model of Hall reconnection. Full two-fluid calculations
77: for magnetic reconnection will be considered elsewhere. The analytical
78: derivations of this paper are similar to the derivations done by
79: \citet{malyshkin_2005} for the case of resistive single-fluid MHD
80: reconnection.
81:
82:
83: %---------------------------------------------------------------------
84:
85: \section{\label{HALL}
86: Hall-MHD equations
87: }
88: For simplicity and brevity,
89: we use physical units in which the speed of light $c$ and four times
90: $\pi$ are replaced by unity, $c=1$ and $4\pi=1$. To rewrite our
91: equations in the CGS units, one needs to make the following
92: substitutions: magnetic field
93: ${\bf B}\rightarrow {\bf B}/\sqrt{4\pi}$, electric field
94: ${\bf E}\rightarrow c{\bf E}/\sqrt{4\pi}$, electric current
95: ${\bf j}\rightarrow\sqrt{4\pi}\,{\bf j}/c$, electrical resistivity
96: $\eta\rightarrow\eta c^2/4\pi$, and the proton electric charge
97: $e\rightarrow\sqrt{4\pi}\,e/c$.
98:
99: We assume the plasma is non-relativistic, with both phase and physical
100: velocities much smaller than the speed of light. We neglect
101: electron inertia for the Hall-MHD description of plasma.
102: The generalized Ohm's law is~\citep{sturrock_1994}
103: \begin{eqnarray}
104: {\bf E}&=&-{\bf V}\times{\bf B}+\eta{\bf j}
105: +\frac{m_i}{\rho e}{\bf j}\times{\bf B}
106: -\frac{m_i}{\rho e}{\bf\nabla}\cdot P_e,
107: \label{OHMS_LAW}
108: \end{eqnarray}
109: where $m_i$ is the ion mass, $\rho$ is the plasma density,
110: ${\bf V}$ is the plasma velocity (equal to the ion velocity),
111: $P_e$ is the tensor of the electron pressure.
112: The first two terms on the right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{OHMS_LAW})
113: are the single-fluid MHD terms, the third and fourth terms are
114: the Hall and electron pressure terms.
115: The equation of plasma motion is~\citep{sturrock_1994}
116: \begin{eqnarray}
117: \rho\frac{\partial{\bf V}}{\partial t}
118: +\rho({\bf V}\cdot{\bf\nabla}){\bf V}=-{\bf\nabla}\cdot P
119: +{\bf j}\times{\bf B},
120: \label{MOTION_LAW}
121: \end{eqnarray}
122: where $P$ is the tensor of the total pressure (equal to the
123: sum of the electron and ion pressure tensors), and we neglect
124: plasma viscosity. Equation~(\ref{MOTION_LAW}) appears
125: exactly the same as in the case of single-fluid MHD. Note
126: that ${\bf\nabla}\cdot{\bf B}=0$, and, for
127: non-relativistic plasma, ${\bf\nabla}\cdot{\bf j}=0$.
128:
129: We consider Hall magnetic reconnection in the classical
130: two-dimensional Sweet-Parker-Petschek reconnection layer, shown in
131: Fig.~\ref{FIGURE_LAYER}. The layer is in the x-y plane with the
132: x- and y-axes being perpendicular to and along the layer
133: respectively. All $\partial/\partial z$ derivatives are zero.
134: The thickness of the reconnection layer is $2\delta$,
135: which is defined as the thickness of the out-of-plane current ($j_z$)
136: profile across the layer. Note that $2\delta$ is approximately equal
137: to the electron layer thickness, while the ion layer thickness $2\Delta$
138: can be much larger.
139: Velocity $V_{in}$ is the plasma inflow velocity in the upstream
140: region at point~$M$, outside the electron layer.
141: The magnetic field $B_m$ at point~$M$ is in the y-direction.
142: The out-of-plane field $B_z$ is assumed to have a quadrupole structure
143: (see Fig.~\ref{FIGURE_LAYER}), in agreement with
144: numerical simulations and laboratory experiments of two-fluid
145: reconnection~\citep{mandt_1994,shay_1999,hesse_2001,bhattacharjee_2001,
146: daughton_2004,fitzpatrick_2004,horiuchi_2004,huba_2004,shay_2004,
147: yamada_2006,murphy_2008} (a nearly uniform ``guide''
148: field component of $B_z$ is taken to be zero).
149: The reconnection layer is assumed to have a
150: point symmetry with respect to its geometric center point~$O$ in
151: Fig.~\ref{FIGURE_LAYER} and reflection symmetries with
152: respect to the axes $x$ and $y$.
153: Thus, the x-, y- and z-components of ${\bf V}$, ${\bf B}$ and
154: ${\bf j}$ have the following simple symmetries:
155: $V_x(\pm x,\mp y)=\pm V_x(x,y)$, $V_y(\pm x,\mp y)=\mp V_y(x,y)$,
156: $V_z(\pm x,\mp y)=V_z(x,y)$,
157: $B_x(\pm x,\mp y)=\mp B_x(x,y)$, $B_y(\pm x,\mp y)=\pm B_y(x,y)$,
158: $B_z(\pm x,\mp y)=-B_z(x,y)$,
159: $j_x(\pm x,\mp y)=\pm j_x(x,y)$, $j_y(\pm x,\mp y)=\mp j_y(x,y)$ and
160: $j_z(\pm x,\mp y)=j_z(x,y)$. In the derivations presented below we
161: will extensively use these symmetries.
162:
163:
164:
165: \begin{figure}[t]
166: \vspace{3.6truecm}
167: \special{psfile=layer_horizontal.eps voffset=0 hoffset=10 vscale=47 hscale=47 angle=0}
168: \caption{Geometrical configuration of the reconnection layer.
169: }
170: \label{FIGURE_LAYER}
171: \end{figure}
172:
173:
174: %---------------------------------------------------------------------
175:
176: \section{\label{SOLUTION}
177: Solution for Hall reconnection
178: }
179:
180: Now let us list four assumptions that we make in this study.
181: First, we assume that the plasma flow is incompressible inside
182: the reconnection layer, $\rho={\rm constant}$.
183: Second, we assume that the electrical resistivity $\eta$ is
184: constant and very small, so that the Lundquist number is very large.
185: Third, we assume that the reconnection process is slow and
186: quasi-stationary, so that we can neglect all time-derivatives
187: $\partial/\partial t$ in Eqs.~(\ref{OHMS_LAW})--(\ref{MOTION_LAW})
188: and below. This assumption is satisfied if the reconnection rate is
189: slow, $E_z\ll V_AB_m$, and there are no plasma instabilities in the
190: reconnection layer.
191: Fourth, we assume that the electron and ion pressure tensors are
192: isotropic, so that the pressure tensors in
193: Eqs.~(\ref{OHMS_LAW}) and~(\ref{MOTION_LAW}) are scalars.
194:
195: Using Ampere's law and neglecting the displacement current,
196: we find the x- and y-components of the current to be
197: $j_x=\partial_y B_z$ and $j_y=-\partial_x B_z$.
198: Here and below we use convenient notations
199: $\partial_x\equiv\partial/\partial x$,
200: $\partial_y\equiv\partial/\partial y$,
201: $\partial_{yy}^2\equiv\partial^2/\partial y^2$,
202: $\partial_{xyy}^3\equiv\partial^3/\partial x\partial y^2$, and etc.
203: The z-component of the current at the reconnection layer
204: central point~$O$ is
205: \begin{eqnarray}
206: j_o\equiv (j_z)_o=
207: \left(\partial_x B_y-\partial_y B_x\right)_o
208: \approx B_m/\delta,
209: \label{AMPERES_LAW}
210: \end{eqnarray}
211: where we use estimates $(\partial_y B_x)_o\ll (\partial_x B_y)_o$
212: and $(\partial_x B_y)_o\approx B_m/\delta$ at point~$O$.
213:
214: Next, neglecting the time derivative in Eq.~(\ref{MOTION_LAW}),
215: the equation for acceleration of plasma along the reconnection
216: layer, in the y-direction, is
217: $\rho({\bf V}\cdot{\bf\nabla})V_y=-\partial_y P+j_zB_x-j_xB_z$.
218: We calculate the first order partial derivative $\partial/\partial y$
219: of this equation at point~O and obtain
220: \begin{eqnarray}
221: \rho{(\partial_y V_y)_o}^2 &=&
222: -(\partial_{yy}^2P)_o+j_o(\partial_y B_x)_o
223: \nonumber\\
224: &\approx& -B_m(\partial_{yy}^2 B_y)_m+j_o(\partial_y B_x)_o,
225: \nonumber\\
226: &=& 2B_m^2/L^2+j_o(\partial_y B_x)_o.
227: \label{ACCELERATION}
228: \end{eqnarray}
229: Here, we used the fact that
230: the pressure term is $(\partial_{yy}^2 P)_o\approx
231: (\partial_{yy}^2B_y^2/2)_m-(\partial_{yy}^2B_z^2/2)_o=
232: B_m(\partial_{yy}^2 B_y)_m<0$. Thus, the drop of pressure
233: $P$ along the layer is equal to the magnetic pressure drop of the parallel
234: field component outside the layer. This result follows from the force balance
235: condition for the plasma across the reconnection layer (in analogy with the
236: Sweet-Parker derivations for slowly inflowing plasma), and its rigorous
237: proof can be found in~\citep{malyshkin_2005}. The
238: last expression in Eq.~(\ref{ACCELERATION}) is obtained by defining the
239: magnetic field external scale as
240: \begin{eqnarray}
241: L^2\equiv -2B_m\left/(\partial_{yy}^2 B_y)_m\right..
242: \label{L}
243: \end{eqnarray}
244: This is the scale of magnetic field just outside the reconnection electron
245: layer (at point M) and can be interpreted as the length of the layer.
246: %Equation~(\ref{ACCELERATION}) demonstrates that plasma is accelerated
247: %along the reconnection layer by the pressure force $2B_m^2/L^2$
248: %and by the magnetic tension force $j_o(\partial_y B_x)_o$.
249: The $(\partial_y V_y)_o$ derivative on the left-hand-side
250: of Eq.~(\ref{ACCELERATION}) can be estimated from plasma
251: incompressibility condition at the O-point,
252: \begin{eqnarray}
253: (\partial_y V_y)_o=-(\partial_x V_x)_o\approx V_{in}/\delta,
254: \label{V_DERIVATIVE}
255: \end{eqnarray}
256: where we use an estimate $(\partial_x V_x)_o\approx-V_{in}/\delta$.
257:
258: Next, the Faraday's law
259: ${{\bf\nabla}\times{\bf E}}=-\partial{\bf B}/\partial t$ for
260: the x- and y-components of a quasi-stationary magnetic field in two
261: dimensions is
262: $\partial E_z/\partial y=-\partial B_x/\partial t\approx0$
263: and $\partial E_z/\partial x=\partial B_y/\partial t\approx0$.
264: Therefore, the electric field z-component $E_z$ is constant
265: in space, and from generalized Ohm's law~(\ref{OHMS_LAW})
266: we obtain
267: \begin{eqnarray}
268: \mbox{constant in space} \!&\approx&\! E_z
269: =-V_xB_y+V_yB_x+\eta j_z
270: \nonumber\\
271: &&+(m_p/\rho e)(j_xB_y-j_yB_x).
272: \qquad
273: \label{OHMS_LAW_Z}
274: \end{eqnarray}
275: Now, we use Eq.~(\ref{OHMS_LAW_Z}) to calculate $E_z$ at points~O
276: and~M (see Fig.~\ref{FIGURE_LAYER}). At point~O we have
277: $E_z=\eta j_o$. At point~M we have
278: $E_z=V_{in}B_m+\eta(j_z)_m+(m_p/\rho e)B_m(j_x)_m\approx
279: V_{in}B_m+\eta (j_z)_m+(m_p/\rho e)B_m(\partial_{xy}^2B_z)_o\delta$,
280: where we use an estimate
281: $(j_x)_m\approx(\partial_xj_x)_o\delta=(\partial_{xy}^2B_z)_o\delta$.
282: Equating these two expressions for $E_z$ at points~O and~M and neglecting
283: the resistive term outside the reconnection layer at point~M,
284: $\eta(j_z)_m\approx\eta B_m/L\ll\eta j_o$, we obtain
285: \begin{eqnarray}
286: \eta j_o\approx V_{in}B_m+(m_p/\rho e)B_m(\partial_{xy}^2B_z)_o\delta.
287: \label{E_Z_PERPENDICULAR}
288: \end{eqnarray}
289: Next, we calculate the second order partial derivative
290: $\partial^2/\partial y^2$ of Eq.~(\ref{OHMS_LAW_Z}) at point~O. We have
291: \begin{eqnarray}
292: 0 &\approx&
293: 2(\partial_y V_y)_o(\partial_y B_x)_o+\eta(\partial_{yy}^2 j_z)_o
294: \nonumber\\
295: && -2(m_p/\rho e)(\partial_y j_y)_o(\partial_y B_x)_o
296: \nonumber\\
297: &\approx&
298: 2(\partial_y V_y)_o(\partial_y B_x)_o-\eta(2j_o/L^2)
299: \nonumber\\
300: && +2(m_p/\rho e)(\partial_{xy}^2B_z)_o(\partial_y B_x)_o.
301: \label{E_Z_PARALLEL}
302: \end{eqnarray}
303: Here, to obtain the final expression, we use the fact that
304: the y-scale of the current $j_z$, to a factor of order unity, is
305: about the same as the y-scale of the outside magnetic field,
306: $j_o^{-1}(\partial_{yy}^2j_z)_o
307: \approx B_m^{-1}(\partial_{yy}^2B_y)_m=-2/L^2$.
308: This result can be understood by taking the $\partial^2/\partial y^2$
309: partial derivative of the Ampere's law equation $j_o\approx B_m/\delta$,
310: see Eq.~(\ref{AMPERES_LAW}), while keeping $\delta$ constant because
311: the partial derivative in $y$ is to be taken at constant
312: $x=\delta$ (for details see~\citep{malyshkin_2005}).
313:
314: Next, we use the z-component of the Faraday's law. We have
315: $0\approx-\partial B_z/\partial t=\partial_x E_y-\partial_y E_x$.
316: We calculate the $\partial^2/\partial x\partial y$ partial derivative
317: of this equation at point~O and use Ohm's law~(\ref{OHMS_LAW}) for
318: $E_x$ and $E_y$. After tedious but straightforward derivations, we obtain
319: \begin{eqnarray}
320: 0 &\approx&
321: -\eta\left[(\partial_{xyxx}^4 B_z)_o+(\partial_{xyyy}^4 B_z)_o\right]
322: \nonumber\\
323: &&-\left[(\partial_y B_x)_o(\partial_{xx}^2V_z)_o+
324: (\partial_x B_y)_o(\partial_{yy}^2V_z)_o\right]
325: \nonumber\\
326: &&+(m_p/\rho e)\left[(\partial_y B_x)_o(\partial_{xx}^2j_z)_o+
327: (\partial_x B_y)_o(\partial_{yy}^2j_z)_o\right]
328: \nonumber\\
329: &\approx&
330: 2\eta(\partial_{xy}^2 B_z)_o/\delta^2
331: \nonumber\\
332: &&-2(m_p/\rho e)\left[(j_o/\delta^2)(\partial_y B_x)_o+
333: j_o^2/L^2\right].
334: \label{E_XY}
335: \end{eqnarray}
336: Here, to derive the final expression, we use
337: $(\partial_{xyxx}^4 B_z)_o\approx-2(\partial_{xy}^2 B_z)_o/\delta^2$,
338: $(\partial_{xyyy}^4 B_z)_o\ll(\partial_{xyxx}^4 B_z)_o$,
339: $(\partial_{xx}^2j_z)_o\approx-2j_o/\delta^2$,
340: $(\partial_{yy}^2j_z)_o\approx-2j_o/L^2$ and $(\partial_x B_y)_o\approx j_o$.
341: We also use formula $(\partial_y B_x)_o(\partial_{xx}^2V_z)_o+
342: (\partial_x B_y)_o(\partial_{yy}^2V_z)_o\equiv0$. To prove it, let us
343: consider the z-component of plasma motion equation~(\ref{MOTION_LAW}),
344: which is $\rho V_x(\partial_x V_z)+\rho V_y(\partial_y V_z)=j_xB_y-j_yB_x$.
345: We calculate the $\partial^2/\partial x^2$ and $\partial^2/\partial y^2$
346: derivatives of this equation at point~O and obtain
347: $2\rho(\partial_x V_x)_o(\partial_{xx}^2V_z)_o=
348: 2(\partial_x j_x)_o(\partial_x B_y)_o$ and
349: $2\rho(\partial_y V_y)_o(\partial_{yy}^2V_z)_o=
350: -2(\partial_y j_y)_o(\partial_y B_x)_o$. Thus, we have
351: $(\partial_{xx}^2V_z)_o
352: %=(\partial_x j_x)_o(\partial_x B_y)_o/\rho(\partial_x V_x)_o
353: =-(\partial_{xy}^2 B_z)_o(\partial_x B_y)_o/\rho(\partial_y V_y)_o<0$,
354: $(\partial_{yy}^2V_z)_o
355: %=-2(\partial_y j_y)_o(\partial_y B_x)_o/\rho(\partial_y V_y)_o
356: =(\partial_{xy}^2 B_z)_o(\partial_y B_x)_o/\rho(\partial_y V_y)_o>0$ and
357: $(\partial_y B_x)_o(\partial_{xx}^2V_z)_o+
358: (\partial_x B_y)_o(\partial_{yy}^2V_z)_o\equiv0$.
359:
360: Now, we have six
361: equations~(\ref{AMPERES_LAW}),~(\ref{ACCELERATION}),~(\ref{V_DERIVATIVE}),
362: ~(\ref{E_Z_PERPENDICULAR}),~(\ref{E_Z_PARALLEL})
363: and~(\ref{E_XY}), and we have six unknowns: $j_o$, $\delta$,
364: $V_{in}$, $(\partial_y V_y)_o$, $(\partial_y B_x)_o$ and
365: $(\partial_{xy}^2 B_z)_o$. Thus, we can solve for all unknown quantities.
366: For convenience of presentation, we express the solution in terms of
367: the Alfven velocity $V_A=B_m/\sqrt{\rho}$, the ion inertial length
368: $d_i=m_i/e\sqrt{\rho}$ and the Lundquist number $S=LV_A/\eta$.
369: The solution is
370: \begin{eqnarray}
371: j_o &\approx& \frac{B_m}{L}\left(S\sqrt{3}+\left.2S^2d_i^2\right/L^2\right)^{1/2},
372: \label{J_O}
373: \\
374: \delta &\approx& L\left(S\sqrt{3}+\left.2S^2d_i^2\right/L^2\right)^{-1/2},
375: \label{DELTA_O}
376: \\
377: V_{in} &\approx& \sqrt{3}\,V_A\left(S\sqrt{3}+\left.2S^2d_i^2\right/L^2\right)^{-1/2},
378: \label{V_in_O}
379: \\
380: (\partial_y V_y)_o &\approx& \sqrt{3}\,V_A\big/L,
381: \label{Vy_Y}
382: \\
383: (\partial_y B_x)_o &\approx&
384: \frac{B_m}{L}\left(S\sqrt{3}+\left.2S^2d_i^2\right/L^2\right)^{-1/2},
385: \label{Bx_Y}
386: \\
387: (\partial_{xy} B_z)_o &\approx& 2Sd_iB_m\big/L^3,
388: \label{Bz_XY}
389: \\
390: E_z=\eta j_o &\approx&
391: V_AB_m\left(S^{-1}\sqrt{3}+\left.2d_i^2\right/L^2\right)^{1/2}.
392: \label{Ez}
393: \end{eqnarray}
394: The last equation gives the reconnection rate $E_z$. In the limit $S\gg1$
395: and $d_i\ll L$ the reconnection rate is slow, $E_z\ll V_AB_m$, and our
396: assumption of a quasi-stationary reconnection process is self-consistent.
397: Equation~(\ref{Vy_Y}) implies that the ions are accelerated up to
398: approximately Alfven velocity $V_A$ along the reconnection layer of
399: length $L$. At the same time, the rate of electron acceleration along
400: the layer at point~O is
401: $(\partial_y V_y^{e})_o=(\partial_y V_y)_o-(m_i/\rho e)(\partial_y j_y)_o
402: =(\partial_y V_y)_o+(V_Ad_i/B_m)(\partial_{xy} B_z)_o
403: \approx (V_A/L)(\sqrt{3}+2Sd_i^2/L^2)$, where ${\bf V}^{e}$
404: denotes the electron velocity.
405:
406: The ion layer thickness $2\Delta$ can be estimated as follows. In the
407: upstream region outside the ion layer at $x=\Delta$ ideal single-fluid
408: MHD applies. Therefore, at $x=\Delta$ and $y=0$ the resistive and Hall
409: terms in Eq.~(\ref{OHMS_LAW_Z}) can be neglected and $E_z\approx V_RB_m$,
410: where $V_R$ is the plasma inflow velocity outside the ion layer. Velocity
411: $V_R\approx E_z/B_m$ is called the reconnection velocity.
412: It can also be estimated as $V_R\approx (\partial_y V_y)_o\Delta$. Thus,
413: \begin{eqnarray}
414: \Delta \approx\frac{E_z}{(\partial_y V_y)_oB_m} \approx
415: \frac{L}{\sqrt{3}}\left(S^{-1}\sqrt{3}+\left.2d_i^2\right/L^2\right)^{1/2}.
416: \label{DELTA_ION}
417: \end{eqnarray}
418:
419: We discuss the solution~(\ref{J_O})-(\ref{DELTA_ION}) in the next section.
420: Now, let us make an important remark. Our analytical derivations
421: involve an approximate solution of the Hall-MHD equations
422: in the infinitesimal neighborhood of line~OM across the reconnection
423: electron layer (see Fig.~\ref{FIGURE_LAYER}). All physical quantities,
424: $j_o$, $\delta$, $V_{in}$, $(\partial_y V_y)_o$,
425: $(\partial_y B_x)_o$, $(\partial_{xy} B_z)_o$, $B_m$ and $L$, are
426: defined either at point~O (the layer center) or at
427: point~M (the upstream region). In other words, all our derivations
428: involve only the upstream region and the layer center, and we do not
429: need to consider the downstream region for estimation of the
430: reconnection rate. This ``local'' equations approach was first
431: developed in~\citep{malyshkin_2005} for single-fluid MHD reconnection
432: with anomalous electrical resistivity, and this approach works for
433: Hall-MHD reconnection as well. Note however, that we define the
434: field scale $L$ by Eq.~(\ref{L}), and its exact value, as well as
435: the value of field $B_m$ in the upstream region, depend on the
436: ``global'' solution of the Hall-MHD equations outside the
437: reconnection layer. Both $L$ and $B_m$ enter our model as parameters.
438: Determination of their values requires numerical simulations of
439: the global field configuration and is not considered here.
440:
441:
442: %---------------------------------------------------------------------
443:
444: \section{\label{DISCUSSION}
445: Discussion
446: }
447:
448: When $d_i\ll L/\sqrt{S}=\delta_{\rm SP}$ ($\delta_{\rm SP}$ is
449: the Sweet-Parker layer thickness), the
450: solution~(\ref{J_O})-(\ref{DELTA_ION})
451: reduces to the Sweet-Parker solution:
452: $j_o\approx\sqrt{S}\,B_m/L$,
453: $\delta\approx \Delta\approx L/\sqrt{S}=\delta_{\rm SP}$,
454: $V_{in}\approx V_A/\sqrt{S}$,
455: $(\partial_y V_y)_o\approx V_A/L$,
456: $(\partial_y B_x)_o\approx B_m/L\sqrt{S}$,
457: $E_z\approx V_AB_m/\sqrt{S}$ and
458: $(\partial_y V_y^{e})_o\approx(\partial_y V_y)_o\approx V_A/L$.
459:
460: In the opposite limit, when
461: $d_i\gg L/\sqrt{S}=\delta_{\rm SP}$ and reconnection
462: is in a collisionless Hall regime, we have
463: \begin{eqnarray}
464: j_o &\approx& Sd_iB_m/L^2\gg \sqrt{S}\,B_m/L,
465: \label{J_O_COLLISIONLESS}
466: \\
467: \delta &\approx& L^2/Sd_i\ll L/\sqrt{S}=\delta_{\rm SP},
468: \label{DELTA_O_COLLISIONLESS}
469: \\
470: \Delta &\approx& d_i\gg L/\sqrt{S}=\delta_{\rm SP},
471: \label{DELTA_ION_COLLISIONLESS}
472: \\
473: V_{in} &\approx& V_AL/Sd_i\ll V_A/\sqrt{S},
474: \label{V_in_O_COLLISIONLESS}
475: \\
476: (\partial_y V_y)_o &\approx& V_A/L,
477: \label{Vy_Y_COLLISIONLESS}
478: \\
479: (\partial_y B_x)_o &\approx& B_m/Sd_i,
480: \label{Bx_Y_COLLISIONLESS}
481: \\
482: (\partial_{xy} B_z)_o &\approx& 2Sd_iB_m/L^3,
483: \label{Bz_XY_COLLISIONLESS}
484: \\
485: E_z &\approx& (d_i/L)\,V_AB_m\gg V_AB_m/\sqrt{S}.
486: \label{Ez_COLLISIONLESS}
487: \end{eqnarray}
488: The electron acceleration rate along the reconnection layer
489: at O-point is
490: $(\partial_y V_y^{e})_o\approx Sd_i^2V_A/L^3\gg (\partial_y V_y)_o$.
491: Fast electron outflow along the layer creates the quadrupole field
492: $B_z$~\citep{uzdensky_2006}.
493: From Eq.~(\ref{Ez_COLLISIONLESS}) we find that the rate of
494: collisionless Hall reconnection, $E_z=(d_i/L)\,V_AB_m$, is
495: independent of the electrical resistivity $\eta$~\citep{cowley_1985}.
496: The reconnection velocity is $V_R\approx E_z/B_m\approx(d_i/L)V_A$.
497: From Eq.~(\ref{DELTA_ION_COLLISIONLESS}) we find $\Delta\approx d_i$
498: for the ion layer thickness, which is in agreement with
499: experiment~\citep{yamada_2006}.
500:
501: In it noteworthy that in the absence of collisions, when $\eta\to0$,
502: it is an anisotropic electron pressure that balances $E_z$ field at point~O.
503: In this case electrons are accelerated by $E_z$ field during time
504: $\sim L/V_{eT}$, while they are unmagnetized and are traveling with
505: thermal speed $V_{eT}$ inside the electron layer of length $L$
506: \citep{yamada_2009,kulsrud_etal_2005}.
507: As a result, the effective resistivity becomes
508: $\eta_{\rm eff}\approx d_e^2V_{eT}/L$, where
509: $d_e=\sqrt{m_im_e}/e\sqrt{\rho}$ is the electron inertial length
510: ($m_e$ is the electron mass). Thus, pressure anisotropy and electron
511: inertia become important (they will be considered elsewhere).
512:
513: In the end of this paper, let us briefly discuss possible mechanisms
514: of fast reconnection, which is independent of the macroscopic size
515: of the reconnecting system. First, note that the collisionless Hall
516: reconnection rate $E_z=(d_i/L)\,V_AB_m$ is high when the
517: reconnection electron layer length $L$ is microscopically small and
518: comparable to $d_i$. Although the value of $L$ cannot be determined
519: in our model, numerical simulations find that $L$ can indeed
520: be much smaller than the macroscopic system
521: size~\citep{mandt_1994,shay_1999,bhattacharjee_2001,fitzpatrick_2004,
522: huba_2004,shay_2004}. For example, $L$ can be as small as
523: $\approx10d_i$ during quasi-stationary collisionless reconnection,
524: resulting in a very fast reconnection rate
525: $E_z\approx0.1\,V_AB_m$~\citep{shay_1999,huba_2004,shay_2004}.
526:
527: Another possible mechanism of fast reconnection can result from
528: the dependence of the reconnection rate on the density $\rho$ and
529: temperature $T$ of the plasma. We have
530: $\eta\propto T^{-3/2}$~\citep{sturrock_1994},
531: $V_A\propto\rho^{-1/2}$, $S\propto\rho^{-1/2}T^{3/2}$,
532: $d_i^2\propto\rho^{-1}$. Therefore,
533: $d_i/\delta_{\rm SP}\propto(T/\rho)^{3/4}$, and the
534: collisionless Hall reconnection rate is $E_z\propto\rho^{-1}$.
535: Thus, even if initially $L\gg d_i$, as reconnection proceeds,
536: the plasma is heated up by Joule heating, the plasma temperature rises,
537: the plasma density drops, and the reconnection becomes more and more
538: collisionless and faster and faster. This run-away reconnection
539: process can possibly operate in solar corona and Earth's magnetosphere.
540: The dependence $E_z\propto\rho^{-1}$ also supports a model of
541: self-regulation heating in solar corona~\citep{uzdensky_2007}.
542:
543: I am especially grateful to Russell Kulsrud for many very helpful discussions
544: and for pointing out to me the importance of electron pressure anisotropy.
545: I would also like to thank Ellen Zweibel, Fausto Cattaneo, Masaaki Yamada,
546: Boon Chye (BC) Low, Eugene Parker, Alex Obabko, Dmitri Uzdensky, Hantao Ji,
547: Viacheslav Titov, Amitava Bhattacharjee and the anonymous referee for their
548: interest in this work, discussions and for useful comments. This work was
549: supported by the NSF Center for Magnetic Self-Organization (CMSO) in
550: Laboratory and Astrophysical Plasmas at the University of Chicago.
551: \\
552:
553: {\it A note added after publication:} After the publication of his
554: paper, the author has became aware that Simakov and Chacon (2008) have
555: independently obtained a Hall reconnection rate formula, which is the
556: same as Eq.~(17) up to numerical factors of order
557: unity~\citep{symakov_2008}. Although the final result is basically the
558: same, the two derivations are significantly different. The author has
559: used a rigorous local analysis, in which the Hall-MHD equations are
560: solved only in the upstream region and in the center of the
561: reconnection layer. By contrast, Simakov and Chacon (2008) have used a
562: different approach that also considers the downstream region. In
563: particular, they have assumed that the thickness of the ion layer is
564: given by $\max\{d_i,\delta\}$, and obtained their reconnection rate
565: formula as an approximate interpolation between the rates in the
566: collisional and collisionless regimes. There are also minor
567: differences in the problem formulation; that of Simakov and Chacon
568: (2008) includes electron viscosity, which is neglected by the author,
569: and neglects electron pressure, which is included by the author.
570: Expression $(d_i/L)\,V_A$ for the reconnection velocity in the
571: collisionless regime was obtained earlier by Stanley W. H. Cowley
572: (1985)~\citep{cowley_1985}.
573:
574:
575: %---------------------------------------------------------------------
576:
577: \begin{thebibliography}{}
578:
579: \bibitem{biskamp_2000}
580: D. Biskamp, {\it Magnetic Reconnection in Plasmas}
581: (Cambridge University Press, England, 2000).
582:
583: %\bibitem{bc_low_2004}
584: %B. C. Low, in {\it Current Theoretical Models and Future
585: %High Resolution Solar Observations: Preparing for
586: %ATST, ASP Conference Series, Vol. 286, NSO, Sunspot,
587: %New Mexico, 2002}, edited by A. A. Pevtsov and H. Uitenbroek
588: %(San Francisco: Astr. Soc. Pacific, 2003), 335.
589:
590: \bibitem{kulsrud_2005}
591: R. M. Kulsrud, {\it Plasma Physics for Astrophysics}
592: (Princeton University Press, 2005).
593:
594: \bibitem{yamada_2009}
595: M. Yamada, R. Kulsrud and H. Ji,
596: upcoming in Rev. Mod. Phys. (2009).
597:
598: %\bibitem{sweet_1958}
599: %P. A. Sweet, in {\it Electromagnetic Phenomena in Ionized Gases},
600: %edited by B. Lehnert (Cambridge University Press, New York, 1958),
601: %p. 123.
602:
603: %\bibitem{parker_1963}
604: %E. N. Parker, Astrophys. J., Suppl. Ser. {\bf 8}, 177 (1963).
605:
606: %\bibitem{biskamp_1986}
607: %D. Biskamp, Phys. Fluids {\bf 29}, 1520 (1986).
608:
609: %\bibitem{tsuda_1977}
610: %T. Tsuda and M. Ugai, J. Plasma Phys. {\bf 18}, 451 (1977).
611:
612: %\bibitem{ugai_1977}
613: %M. Ugai and T. Tsuda, J. Plasma Phys. {\bf 17}, 337 (1977).
614:
615: %\bibitem{hayashi_1978}
616: %T. Hayashi and T. Sato, J. Geophys. Res. {\bf 83}, 217 (1978).
617:
618: %\bibitem{sato_1979}
619: %T. Sato and T. Hayashi, Phys. Fluids {\bf 22}, 1189 (1979).
620:
621: %\bibitem{scholer_1989}
622: %M. Scholer, J. Geophys. Res. {\bf 94}, 8805 (1989).
623:
624: \bibitem{kulsrud_2001}
625: R. M. Kulsrud, Earth, Planets and Space {\bf 53}, 417 (2001);
626: arXiv:astro-ph/0007075.
627:
628: \bibitem[Malyshkin, Linde \& Kulsrud(2005)]{malyshkin_2005}
629: L. M. Malyshkin, T. Linde and R. M. Kulsrud,
630: Physics of Plasmas {\bf 12}, 102902 (2005).
631:
632: %\bibitem{ma_2001}
633: %Z. W. Ma and A. Bhattacharjee,
634: %J. Geophys. Res., {\bf 106}, 3773 (2001).
635:
636: \bibitem{hesse_2001}
637: M. Hesse, J. Birn and M. Kuznetsova,
638: J. Geophys. Res., {\bf 106}, 3721 (2001).
639:
640: \bibitem{fitzpatrick_2004}
641: R. Fitzpatrick, Phys. Plasmas, {\bf 11}, 937 (2004).
642:
643: \bibitem{huba_2004}
644: J. D. Huba and L. I. Rudakov,
645: Phys. Rev. Lett., {\bf 93}, 175003 (2004).
646:
647: \bibitem{murphy_2008}
648: N. A. Murphy and C. R. Sovinec,
649: Phys. Plasmas, {\bf 15}, 042313 (2008).
650:
651: \bibitem{sturrock_1994}
652: P. A. Sturrock, {\it Plasma Physics}
653: (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1994).
654:
655: %\bibitem{drake_2006}
656: %J. F. Drake and M. A. Shay,
657: %{\it The fundamentals of collisionless reconnection}, book chapter in
658: %{\it Reconnection of Magnetic Fields: Magnetohydrodynamics and
659: %Collisionless Theory and Observations}, J. Birn and
660: %E. P. Priest, editors
661: %(Cambridge University Press, England, 2006).
662:
663: \bibitem{daughton_2004}
664: P. Ricci, J. U. Brackbill, W. Daughton and G. Lapenta,
665: Phys. Plasmas, {\bf 11}, 4102 (2004).
666:
667: \bibitem{horiuchi_2004}
668: A. Ishizawa, R. Horiuchi and H. Ohtani,
669: Phys. Plasmas {\bf 11}, 3579 (2004).
670:
671: %\bibitem{hesse_2007}
672: %J. P. Eastwood, T.-D. Phan, F. S. Mozer, M. A. Shay, M. Fujimoto,
673: %A. Retino, M. Hesse, A. Balogh, E. A. Lucek and I. Dandouras,
674: %J. Geophys. Res., {\bf 112}, A06235 (2007).
675:
676: %\bibitem{ji_2008}
677: %H. Ji, Y. Ren, M. Yamada, S. Dorfman, W. Daughton and S. P. Gerhardt,
678: %Geophys. Res. Lett., {\bf 35}, L13106 (2008).
679:
680: %\bibitem{yamada_2008}
681: %Y. Ren, M. Yamada, H. Ji, S. Dorfman, S. Gerhardt, R. Kulsrud,
682: %Phys. Plasmas, {\bf 15}, 082113 (2008).
683:
684: \bibitem{yamada_2006}
685: M. Yamada, Y. Ren, H. Ji, J. Breslau, S. Gerhardt, R. Kulsrud and A. Kuritsyn,
686: Phys. Plasmas {\bf 13}, 052119 (2006).
687:
688: \bibitem{mandt_1994}
689: M. E. Mandt, R. E. Denton and J. F. Drake,
690: Geophys. Res. Lett. {\bf 21}, 73 (1994).
691:
692: \bibitem{bhattacharjee_2001}
693: A. Bhattacharjee, Z. W. Ma and X. Wang,
694: Phys. Plasmas {\bf 8}, 1829 (2001).
695:
696: \bibitem{shay_1999}
697: M. A. Shay, J. F. Drake, B. N. Rogers and R. E. Denton,
698: Geophys. Res. Lett. {\bf 26}, 2163 (1999).
699:
700: \bibitem{shay_2004}
701: M. A. Shay, J. F. Drake, M. Swisdak and B. N. Rogers,
702: Phys. Plasmas, {\bf 11}, 2199 (2004).
703:
704: \bibitem{uzdensky_2006}
705: D. A. Uzdensky and R. M. Kulsrud,
706: Phys. Plasmas, {\bf 13}, 062305 (2006).
707:
708: \bibitem{cowley_1985}
709: S.~W.~H.~Cowley, in {\it Solar System Magnetic Fields},
710: edited by E. R. Priest
711: (D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1985), 121.
712:
713: \bibitem{kulsrud_etal_2005}
714: R. Kulsrud, H. Ji, W. Fox and M. Yamada,
715: Phys. Plasmas {\bf 12}, 082301 (2005).
716:
717: \bibitem{uzdensky_2007}
718: D. A. Uzdensky,
719: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 99}, 261101 (2007).
720:
721: \bibitem{symakov_2008}
722: A. N. Simakov and L. Chacon,
723: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 101}, 105003 (2008).
724:
725: \end{thebibliography}
726:
727: %---------------------------------------------------------------------
728:
729: \end{document}
730:
731: % LocalWords: collisionless Malyshkin parker biskamp kulsrud ugai tsuda sato
732: % LocalWords: hayashi scholer malyshkin MHD CGS sturrock ec pn Eq Petschek eps
733: % LocalWords: Alfven psfile voffset hoffset vscale hscale online Lundquist LV
734: % LocalWords: const Eqs viscousless cB zB xB yB mV cS yj Sd cE uzdensky Ser ph
735: % LocalWords: Lehnert Astrophys Geophys astro Linde Birn Lett xyy xy xj xyxx
736: % LocalWords: incompressibility xyyy yy iB Poynting bc bhattacharjee hesse ji
737: % LocalWords: fitzpatrick huba murphy daughton horiuchi yamada Zweibel Fausto
738: % LocalWords: Cattaneo Obabko Hantao Masaaki Chye Viacheslav Titov Amitava NSO
739: % LocalWords: CMSO ATST Pevtsov Uitenbroek Astr Kuznetsova Rudakov Sovinec Ren
740: % LocalWords: Ricci Brackbill Lapenta Ishizawa Ohtani Phan Mozer Fujimoto oB
741: % LocalWords: Retino Balogh Lucek Dandouras Dorfman mandt eT im Denton Breslau
742: % LocalWords: Kuritsyn Swisdak eff etal
743: