<LI><A NAME="tex2html1" HREF="node2.html#16">Schematic of Earth's bow shock, magnetosheath, and magnetopause [Cravens, 
1997]. 
</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html2" HREF="node2.html#462">A disturbance moves out isotropically at  <IMG WIDTH=18 HEIGHT=22 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline706" SRC="img1.gif"  >  
but is carried downstream at  <IMG WIDTH=23 HEIGHT=14 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline708" SRC="img2.gif"  > . The tangent to the circle from 
the initial point defines the Alfven Mach cone. 
</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html3" HREF="node2.html#466">Changes in the shock's shape and location with variations in  <IMG WIDTH=24 HEIGHT=22 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline710" SRC="img3.gif"  >  [unpublished 
work by Cairns and Lyon, 1996]:  <IMG WIDTH=68 HEIGHT=23 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline712" SRC="img4.gif"  >  (solid curves), 4.9 (dashed), 1.9 (dotted), 
and 1.4 (fancy). 
</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html4" HREF="node3.html#203">Crossing of Earth's bow shock in a region where the shock is quasi-perpendicular 
and supercritical [Schopke et al., 1983]. The figure demonstrates that Earth's bow 
shock is a 
fast mode shock, as well as showing the presence of gyrating ions in the shock's foot. 
</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html5" HREF="node3.html#209">Traversal of Earth's bow shock into the solar wind with a subsequent 
return into the magnetosheath [Lepidi et al., 1997]. 
</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html6" HREF="node3.html#213">Comparison of observational data (open symbols with error bars) for the first 
shock crossing in Figure 13.5 with predictions based on the Rankine-Hugoniot 
conditions (solid lines with dashed lines showing the uncertainty limits) 
[Lepidi et al., 1997]. 
</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html7" HREF="node4.html#229">The top panel shows a laminar bow shock profile while the 
bottom panel shows a turbulent shock profile [Livesey et al., 1984; 
Gosling and Robson, 1985]. 
</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html8" HREF="node4.html#472">Ion velocity distributions observed downstream from a 
marginally supercritical shock with  <IMG WIDTH=62 HEIGHT=24 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline720" SRC="img5.gif"  >  degrees 
and  <IMG WIDTH=12 HEIGHT=11 ALIGN=BOTTOM ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline722" SRC="img6.gif"  >  almost perpendicular to the instrument's measurement plane 
[Schopke et al., 1983]. The dashed circle in the second frame shows 
the predicted locus for specularly reflected ions.  </A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html9" HREF="node4.html#243">Schematic illustration of the quasi-parallel and quasi-perpendicular 
regions of Earth's bow shock and the foreshock region upstream of the shock 
[Greenstadt and Fredericks, 1979]. Note 
that the foreshock region upstream of the quasi-parallell shock is extremely 
turbulent, often making it difficult to identify the shock transition itself. .
</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html10" HREF="node4.html#475">Schematic from Gosling and Robson [1985]. (a) Sketch of the trajectory of 
an ion specularly reflecting off a shock with  <IMG WIDTH=62 HEIGHT=24 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline724" SRC="img7.gif"  >  degrees. (b) Idealized 
2-D ion velocity distributions at several distances from the shock ramp. Specularly 
reflected particles move along a circle of radius  <IMG WIDTH=70 HEIGHT=24 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline900" SRC="img8.gif"  >  centred 
at the bulk flow velocity. The dashed lines are aligned parallel to the shock 
surface. </A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html11" HREF="node4.html#481">Ion phase space plots  <IMG WIDTH=43 HEIGHT=23 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline728" SRC="img9.gif"  >  and  <IMG WIDTH=42 HEIGHT=24 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline730" SRC="img10.gif"  >  from hybrid shock simulations 
[Leroy et al., 1982; Goodrich, 1985]. Here <I>x</I> is the coordinate along the shock normal 
and the magnetic field is in the <I>z</I> direction,  <IMG WIDTH=54 HEIGHT=22 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline736" SRC="img11.gif"  > , and 
 <IMG WIDTH=82 HEIGHT=24 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline738" SRC="img12.gif"  > . The times for each panel are (a) <I>t</I> = 0, (b)  <IMG WIDTH=47 HEIGHT=29 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline742" SRC="img13.gif"  > , 
(c)  <IMG WIDTH=47 HEIGHT=29 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline744" SRC="img14.gif"  > , (d)  <IMG WIDTH=47 HEIGHT=29 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline746" SRC="img15.gif"  >  , and (e)  <IMG WIDTH=47 HEIGHT=29 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline748" SRC="img16.gif"  > . 
Note the development of the gyrating ion beams. 
</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html12" HREF="node4.html#315">Plots of the magnetic field and cross-shock potentials as a function of <I>x</I> and 
time for the simulations in Figure 13.11 [Leroy et al., 1982; Goodrich, 1985]. Note 
the development of the foot and overshoot in the potential and magnetic field. 
</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html13" HREF="node5.html#329">The location of the foreshock relative to the bow shock, together with 
definitions for important coordinates and velocities [Cairns and Robinson, 1999].</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html14" HREF="node5.html#333">Foreshock structure in 3-D [Lacombe et al., 1988].</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html15" HREF="node5.html#488">Lines of constant  <IMG WIDTH=12 HEIGHT=14 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline752" SRC="img17.gif"  >  in the foreshock [Cairns, 1987], showing that  <IMG WIDTH=12 HEIGHT=14 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline752" SRC="img17.gif"  >  and so the 
speed of beams varies substantially with position in the foreshock, and that the only regions 
with large  <IMG WIDTH=12 HEIGHT=14 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline752" SRC="img17.gif"  >  and fast beams are very close to the foreshock boundary. 
</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html16" HREF="node5.html#490">ISEE-1 observations near the leading edge of the 
foreshock (left), deeper in the foreshock (centre) and deep in 
the foreshock (right). The top panels show the 2-D electron distributions, 
the middle panels the differences  <IMG WIDTH=162 HEIGHT=26 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline758" SRC="img18.gif"  > , 
and the bottom panels the reduced distributions  <IMG WIDTH=179 HEIGHT=28 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline998" SRC="img96.gif"  > . The vertical lines show the predicted value of  <IMG WIDTH=12 HEIGHT=14 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline752" SRC="img17.gif"  >  for the 
observation location. Beams and loss-cone features are visible, as is very good agreement 
between  <IMG WIDTH=12 HEIGHT=14 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline752" SRC="img17.gif"  >  and the observed beam speeds. 
</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html17" HREF="node5.html#492">Predicted electron distribution functions corresponding to the observations in 
Figure 13.16 [Fitzenreiter et al., 1990]. These are constructed by following particle paths 
using the Boltzmann equation with no source/loss terms and including mirror reflection 
and magnetospheric leakage at the shock. Note the cutoff distribution at  <IMG WIDTH=12 HEIGHT=14 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline752" SRC="img17.gif"  >  and 
loss cone features. The bottom panels show the effects of limited instrumental 
resolution. 
</A>
<LI><A NAME="tex2html18" HREF="node5.html#494">ISEE-1 grayscale dynamic spectrogram showing Langmuir waves in the foreshock and 
solar wind, ion acoustic waves in the foreshock,  <IMG WIDTH=21 HEIGHT=23 ALIGN=MIDDLE ALT="tex2html_wrap_inline768" SRC="img20.gif"  >  radiation generated in the 
foreshock, type III solar radio bursts, and Auroral Kilometric Radiation (AKR). 
This interval is discussed more by Cairns et al.  [1997]. 
</A>
