Talk:THEMIS

Spaceflight Mid‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Weather: Space Low‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Space weather task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Substorms => sunstorms? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.105.245.11 (talk • contribs) 11:54, 19 February 2007

Due to the close proximity of the B and N on the keyboard, I too thought that it was a typo, but I have checked, and it is correct; according to the NASA website, it is substorms. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 19:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Move. —Wknight94 (talk) 16:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

THEMIS (satellite) → THEMIS — Title is somewhat misleading, as it implies singularity, when THEMIS actually consists of five satellites. Seeing as THEMIS redirects here, it is probably best to use that as the title. —GW_Simulations^{User Page | Talk} 08:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Support - I can't see any need for disambiguation here. Terraxos (talk) 03:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. See Themis and Themis (disambiguation) for other uses. Not sure that all capitals is sufficient to disambiguate... but since you will go elsewhere unless you type in all caps, will support on condition otheruses template is added to top of article. Someone with caps lock stuck on may be searching for the Greek titan after all. Iamaleopard (talk) 19:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- That is fair. Please can admin hurry up and close this. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 19:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The otheruses template is now in place. (sdsds - talk) 21:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Added paragraph on recent Dec 2007 THEMIS press releases

Saw that the article requested update for current events (though, I wasn't sure if the additions were sufficient to remove the template, so I've left the update template in there for someone else to decide). Hopefully the additions are pretty non-controversial, as they all came from NASA. Added the paragraph to the Mission Status section. Hopefully that's the right place for it. Feel free to add other verifiable mission results (before or after), as needed. Mgmirkin (talk) 19:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since there was some minor controversy over my use of the term "Birkeland current" as applied to the THEMIS finding over on the Birkeland current article, I've more fully explained the reasoning for including the term and the specific refrences, which should be non-controversial. In an effort to avoid such a misunderstanding on this page, I'll copy the relevant portions of the discussion. Mgmirkin (talk) 07:35, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that the articles do not use the two words "Birkeland current" does not negate the fact that they precisely fit the description given in the opening paragraph of the Birkeland current article (IE, "field-aligned currents").

According to the Birkeland current article:

A Birkeland current generally refers to any electric current in a space plasma, but more specifically when charged particles in the current follow magnetic field lines (hence, Birkeland currents are also known as field-aligned currents).
Birkeland currents often show filamentary, or twisted "rope-like" magnetic structure.

Mgmirkin (talk) 07:02, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With respect to the two articles on the THEMIS discovery:

According to the first NASA press release on the THEMIS discovery:

"The satellites have found evidence of magnetic ropes connecting Earth's upper atmosphere directly to the sun," said David Sibeck, project scientist for the mission at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md. "We believe that solar wind particles flow in along these ropes, providing energy for geomagnetic storms and auroras."
A magnetic rope is a twisted bundle of magnetic fields organized much like the twisted hemp of a mariner's rope.

Charged particles from the solar wind flow along magnetic field lines. This fits the description of "field-aligned currents" mentioned in the opening paragraph of the Birkeland current article.

Mgmirkin (talk) 07:02, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to the second NASA press release on the THEMIS discovery:

THEMIS observed [a magnetic flux rope] recently with a total energy of five hundred thousand billion (5 x 1014) Joules. "That's approximately equivalent to the energy of a magnitude 5 earthquake,"
"The satellites have detected magnetic 'ropes' connecting Earth's upper atmosphere directly to the Sun," says Dave Sibeck, project scientist for the mission at the Goddard Space Flight Center. "We believe that solar wind particles flow in along these ropes, providing energy for geomagnetic storms and auroras."

Again, this press release mirrors the first. Charged particles from the solar wind follow magnetic field lines, delivering five hundred trillion Joules of energy to the arctic region. This again fits the definition of "field-aligned currents" used in the opening paragraph of the Birkeland current article.

Mgmirkin (talk) 07:02, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel the above two articles' descriptions do not fit the description of field-aligned currents (or currents in general), please see the multimedia from the THEMIS press release. Specifically the image wherein they state:

Flux Ropes Power the Magnetosphere!
Flux ropes pump 650,000 Amp current into the Arctic!
They then liken the interaction to a "30 kiloVolt battery in space."

If the prior two articles were insufficient support, NASA's explanation of the interaction in terms of a current of 650,000 Amps leave little to the imagination. These are clearly identified in the NASA press releases as electric currents flowing along magnetic fields ("field-aligned currents," AKA Birkeland currents).

Mgmirkin (talk) 07:02, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully, the above should clear up any confusion in advance, should similar questions arise on this article. Mgmirkin (talk) 07:35, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trigger for substorms detected

Added a brief, self-explanatory description of events that transpired in Feb 2008 concerning the trigger mechanism of magnetospheric substorms. Derekmcd (talk) 21:28, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/16dec_giantbreach.htm

somebody needs to write more about this breach that was discovered in the magnetosphere —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.114.107 (talk) 10:33, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]