4.3 Article

Lunar energetic neutral atom (ENA) spectra measured by the interstellar boundary explorer (IBEX)

Journal

PLANETARY AND SPACE SCIENCE
Volume 85, Issue -, Pages 232-242

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pss.2013.06.014

Keywords

Energetic neutral atoms; ENA Moon albedo; Solar wind; IBEX

Funding

  1. Swiss national Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The solar wind continuously flows out from the Sun, filling interplanetary space and directly interacting with the surfaces of small planetary bodies and other objects throughout the solar system. A significant fraction of these ions backscatter from the surface as energetic neutral atoms (ENAs). The first observations of these ENA emissions from the Moon were recently reported from the Interstellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX). These observations yielded a lunar ENA albedo of similar to 10% and showed that the Moon reflects similar to 150 metric tons of neutral hydrogen per year. More recently, a survey of the first 2.5 years of IBEX observations of lunar ENAs was conducted for times when the Moon was in the solar wind. Here, we present the first IBEX ENA observations when the Moon is inside the terrestrial magnetosheath and compare them with observations when the Moon is in the solar wind. Our analysis shows that: (1) the ENA intensities are on average higher when the Moon is in the magnetosheath, (2) the energy spectra are similar above similar to 0.6* solar wind energy but below there are large differences of the order of a factor of 10, (3) the energy spectra resemble a power law with a hump at similar to 0.6 * solar wind energy, and (4) this hump is broader when the Moon is in the magnetosheath. We explore potential scenarios to explain the differences, namely the effects of the topography of the lunar surface and the consequences of a very different Mach number in the solar wind versus in the magnetosheath. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available