Welcome to visit Communications in Theoretical Physics,
Atomic, Molecular, Optical (AMO) and Plasma Physics, Chemical Physics

Ion-acoustic shock and solitary waves in magnetized plasma with Cairns–Gurevich distribution electrons

  • Rui Huo , ,
  • Jiulin Du ,
Expand
  • Department of Physics, School of Science, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300350, China

Authors to whom any correspondence should be addressed.

Received date: 2024-09-02

  Revised date: 2024-12-13

  Accepted date: 2024-12-16

  Online published: 2025-02-28

Copyright

© 2025 Institute of Theoretical Physics CAS, Chinese Physical Society and IOP Publishing. All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
This article is available under the terms of the IOP-Standard License.

Cite this article

Rui Huo , Jiulin Du . Ion-acoustic shock and solitary waves in magnetized plasma with Cairns–Gurevich distribution electrons[J]. Communications in Theoretical Physics, 2025 , 77(6) : 065501 . DOI: 10.1088/1572-9494/ad9f4c

1. Introduction

In recent years, nonlinear structures such as solitons, shocks, and double layers have become the focus of theoretical and experimental research in plasma [14]. Among various kinds of nonlinear structures, nonlinear ion-acoustic structures in plasma have been investigated by many researchers in different forms [58]. It is known that the formation of ion-acoustic solitary waves is due to the balance of nonlinearity and dispersion. However, when the dissipation is presented in a plasma medium, then shock waves are formed. Dissipation is influenced by many factors, such as wave-particle interactions, dust charge fluctuations, anomalous viscosity, and so on [911]. To better understand the properties of the solitary waves and shock waves in plasma, we can study the Korteweg–de Vries (KdV) equation and Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers (KdVB) equation to describe them by using the reductive perturbation method. In fact, many researchers have made contributions to this area [1220].
Presence of external magnetic fields can affect characteristics of the nonlinear waves. Some researchers have studied the effects of an ambient external magnetic field on nonlinear shock, and solitary waves in various plasma [21, 22]. The viscous effects, which depend on the strength of the external magnetic field, are no longer neglected when the gyrofrequency of plasma particles becomes comparable with their collisional frequency. The impact of viscous effects on the properties of shock structures has also been investigated by many authors [23, 24].
Trapping of particles has attracted great attention in the study of nonlinear structures. The so-called trapped particles are that, some plasma particles are confined to a finite region of phase space where they bounce back and forth [25]. Schamel generalized a KdV-like equation, often called the Schamel equation, for nonlinear waves modified by trapped electrons [26, 27]. This provided a general method for studying the nonlinear behavior of plasma waves in the presence of trapped particles. Many theoretical studies have confirmed that the main properties of various nonlinear structures are significantly affected by trapped particles [2831].
More and more spacecraft observations from different regions of space plasmas have confirmed that the behavior of charged particles deviates significantly from that with a Maxwellian distribution. These charged particles can be better described by various non-Maxwellian distributions, such as the q-distribution in nonextensive statistics [32], the kappa distribution [33], the (r, q) distribution [34], Cairns distribution [35], and so on. These non-Maxwellian distribution functions have been widely applied to study waves and instabilities in space plasmas [3639]. Recently, many works focused on different kinds nonlinear structures in space plasma in the presence of non-Maxwellian trapped particles [4045]. These non-Maxwellian trapped particles are described by different Gurevich-distributions. Among these distributions, the Cairns–Gurevich distribution can better describe the trapped nonthermal particles in space plasma such as Earth's magnetosphere and ionosphere [46], auroral regions [47], etc. Ouazene and Amour studied the dust-acoustic solitons in a collisionless dusty plasma with Cairns–Gurevich distributed ions [48]. Arab et al investigated the effect of Cairns–Gurevich polarization force on dust-acoustic solitons in dusty plasmas [49]. Sabrina et al discussed the charge fluctuation induced solitary wave anomalous damping in a dusty plasma in the presence of Cairns–Gurevich distributed ions [50]. More recently, Alharthi studied the role of Cairns–Gurevich ion distribution on nonlinear wave propagation in dusty plasma by deriving the nonlinear Zakharov–Kuznetsov (ZK) equation [51, 52]. However, to our knowledge, the effect of Cairns–Gurevich distribution electrons on ion-acoustic shock and solitary waves in a magnetized plasma has never been discussed. Therefore, in this article, we investigate the propagation properties of nonlinear ion-acoustic shock and solitary waves in a magnetized plasma with Cairns–Gurevich distribution electrons.
The paper is organized as follows. In section 2, the expression of nonthermal trapped electrons number density and basic equations are given in the considered plasma system. In section 3, the nonlinear Schamel–Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers (SKdVB) equation and ion-acoustic shock and solitary waves solutions for different limiting cases are derived. In section 4, the impact of various plasma parameters on shock and solitary waves is analyzed numerically. In section 5, the conclusion is given.

2. Governing equation

We are considering a dissipative magnetized ion-electron plasma consisting of cold fluid ions and trapped nonthermal electrons following the Cairns distribution. The external magnetic field is along the z-axis, i.e., ${\boldsymbol{B}}=B\hat{z}$. At equilibrium, the quasi-neutrality condition for the plasma reads as ${Z}_{i}{n}_{i0}-{n}_{e0}=0$, where ni0 and ne0 are the unperturbed number density of ions and electrons, respectively, and Zi is the charge state of the ion component. In this case, the nonlinear dynamics of the ion-acoustic waves can be described by [20]:
$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {n}_{i}}{\partial T}+{\rm{\nabla }}\cdot \left({n}_{i}{{\boldsymbol{u}}}_{i}\right)=0,\end{eqnarray}$
$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {{\boldsymbol{u}}}_{i}}{\partial T}+\left({{\boldsymbol{u}}}_{i}\cdot {\rm{\nabla }}\right){{\boldsymbol{u}}}_{i}=-\displaystyle \frac{{Z}_{i}e}{{m}_{i}}{\rm{\nabla }}\phi +{\omega }_{ci}\left({{\boldsymbol{u}}}_{i}\times \hat{z}\right)+{\eta }_{i}{{\rm{\nabla }}}^{2}{{\boldsymbol{u}}}_{i},\end{eqnarray}$
$\begin{eqnarray}{{\rm{\nabla }}}^{2}\phi =4\pi e\left({n}_{e}-{Z}_{i}{n}_{i}\right),\end{eqnarray}$
where the quantities ni (ne) and ui indicate the unnormalized ion (electron) number density and ion fluid velocity, respectively. φ is the unnormalized electrostatic wave potential, mi denotes the ion mass, and e represents the magnitude of electron charge. ηi is the ion kinematic viscosity.
The three-dimensional Cairns velocity distribution that the adiabatic trapped nonthermal electrons follow can be written as [44]
$\begin{eqnarray}\begin{array}{lll}{f}_{e}\left({v}_{e}\right) & = & \displaystyle \frac{{n}_{eo}}{\left(1+15\alpha \right)}{\left(\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi {v}_{te}^{2}}\right)}^{3/2}\\ & & \times \left\{\begin{array}{ll}\left[1+\alpha {\left(\displaystyle \frac{{v}_{e}^{2}}{{v}_{te}^{2}}-\displaystyle \frac{2e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right)}^{2}\right]\exp \left(-\displaystyle \frac{{v}_{e}^{2}}{2{v}_{te}^{2}}+\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right), & {\rm{for}}\left|{v}_{e}\right|\gt \sqrt{2e\phi /{m}_{e}}.\\ 1, & {\rm{for}}\left|{v}_{e}\right|\leqslant \sqrt{2e\phi /{m}_{e}}.\end{array}\right.\end{array}\end{eqnarray}$
Equation (4) is what is called the Cairns–Gurevich distribution function. The electron number density ne can be obtained by integrating equation (4) over the velocity space, namely
$\begin{eqnarray}{n}_{e}=\displaystyle {\int }_{\infty }^{-\infty }\displaystyle {\int }_{\infty }^{-\infty }\displaystyle {\int }_{\infty }^{-\infty }{f}_{e}\left({v}_{e}\right){\rm{d}}{v}_{x}{\rm{d}}{v}_{y}{\rm{d}}{v}_{z},\end{eqnarray}$
which can be written as in the spherical coordinate (ve, θ, φ),
$\begin{eqnarray}\begin{array}{lll}{n}_{e} & = & \displaystyle \frac{{n}_{e0}}{1+15\alpha }{\left(\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi {v}_{te}^{2}}\right)}^{3/2}\displaystyle {\int }_{0}^{2\pi }{\rm{d}}\varphi \\ & & \displaystyle \times {\int }_{0}^{\pi }\sin \,\theta {\rm{d}}\theta \left\{\displaystyle {\int }_{0}^{\sqrt{2e\phi /{m}_{e}}}{v}_{e}^{2}\right.{\rm{d}}{v}_{e}\\ & & +\displaystyle {\int }_{\sqrt{2e\phi /{m}_{e}}}^{\infty }{v}_{e}^{2}\left[1+\alpha {\left(\displaystyle \frac{{v}_{e}^{2}}{{v}_{te}^{2}}-\displaystyle \frac{2e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right)}^{2}\right]\\ & & \times \,\exp \left(-\displaystyle \frac{{v}_{e}^{2}}{2{v}_{te}^{2}}+\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right){\rm{d}}{v}_{e}.\end{array}\end{eqnarray}$
Calculating the integral above and arranging them, electron number density (including nonthermal free electrons and trapped electrons) can be expressed
$\begin{eqnarray}{n}_{e}={n}_{e0}\left[{F}_{1}\exp \left(\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right){\rm{erfc}}\left(\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right)+{F}_{2}\sqrt{\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{\pi {T}_{e}}}\right],\end{eqnarray}$
with
$\begin{eqnarray}\begin{array}{lll}{F}_{1} & = & 1-\displaystyle \frac{12\alpha }{1+15\alpha }\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}+\displaystyle \frac{4\alpha }{1+15\alpha }{\left(\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right)}^{2}\,{\rm{and}}\\ {F}_{2} & = & 2+\left[\displaystyle \frac{4\alpha }{1+15\alpha }+\displaystyle \frac{4}{3\left(1+15\alpha \right)}\right]\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}},\end{array}\end{eqnarray}$
where ${\rm{erfc}}\left(x\right)=1-{\rm{erf}}\left(x\right)=\tfrac{2}{\sqrt{\pi }}\displaystyle {\int }_{x}^{\infty }{{\rm{e}}}^{-{y}^{2}}{\rm{d}}y$ is the complementary error function. The first term in equation (7) corresponds to free electrons with the Cairns distribution, while the trapped electrons are described by the second term. When α = 0, we get the three-dimensional Gurevich density expression [26, 27],
$\begin{eqnarray}{n}_{e}={n}_{e0}\left\{\exp \left(\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right){\rm{erfc}}\left(\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right)+\left[2+\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right]\sqrt{\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{\pi {T}_{e}}}\right\}.\end{eqnarray}$
If we neglect the trapping effects, equation (7) will recover the original nonthermal electron density
$\begin{eqnarray}\begin{array}{lll}{n}_{e} & = & {n}_{e0}\left[\left(1-\displaystyle \frac{12\alpha }{1+15\alpha }\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}+\displaystyle \frac{4\alpha }{1+15\alpha }{\left(\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right)}^{2}\right)\right.\\ & & \left.\times \,\exp \left(\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right)\right].\end{array}\end{eqnarray}$
In the case of the small amplitude limit (φ ≪ 1), equation (7) can be expanded in power series as
$\begin{eqnarray}{n}_{e}={n}_{e0}\left[1+{a}_{1}\left(\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right)+{a}_{2}{\left(\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right)}^{3/2}+{a}_{3}{\left(\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}}\right)}^{2}\right],\end{eqnarray}$
which
$\begin{eqnarray*}\begin{array}{lll}{a}_{1} & = & 1-\displaystyle \frac{12\alpha }{1+15\alpha },\,{a}_{2}=\displaystyle \frac{4\left(1+3\alpha \right)}{3\sqrt{\pi }\left(1+15\alpha \right)},\\ {a}_{3} & = & \displaystyle \frac{1}{2}-\displaystyle \frac{8\alpha }{1+15\alpha }.\end{array}\end{eqnarray*}$
Then we introduce the following dimensionless physical quantities:
$\begin{eqnarray*}n={n}_{i}/{n}_{i0},\,u={u}_{i}/{C}_{i},\,\hat{{\rm{\nabla }}}={\rm{\nabla }}/{\lambda }_{D},\end{eqnarray*}$
$\begin{eqnarray}t=T{\omega }_{pi},\,{\boldsymbol{\Omega }}={\omega }_{ci}/{\omega }_{pi},\,\varphi =\displaystyle \frac{e\phi }{{T}_{e}},\,\eta ={\eta }_{i}/{\omega }_{pi}{\lambda }_{D}^{2},\end{eqnarray}$
where ${C}_{i}={\left({Z}_{i}{T}_{e}/{m}_{i}\right)}^{1/2}$ is the ion sound speed, ${\lambda }_{D}\,={\left({T}_{e}/4\pi {e}^{2}{Z}_{i}{n}_{i0}\right)}^{1/2}$ is the Debye length, ${\omega }_{pi}\,={\left(4\pi {e}^{2}{Z}_{i}^{2}{n}_{i0}/{m}_{i}\right)}^{1/2}$ is the ion plasma frequency. The dynamic equations of ion-acoustic waves can be written as
$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \frac{\partial n}{\partial t}+\hat{{\rm{\nabla }}}\cdot \left(n{\boldsymbol{u}}\right)=0,\end{eqnarray}$
$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {\boldsymbol{u}}}{\partial t}+\left({\boldsymbol{u}}\cdot \hat{{\rm{\nabla }}}\right){\boldsymbol{u}}=-\hat{{\rm{\nabla }}}\varphi +{\rm{\Omega }}\left({\boldsymbol{u}}\times \hat{z}\right)+\eta {\hat{{\rm{\nabla }}}}^{2}{\boldsymbol{u}},\end{eqnarray}$
$\begin{eqnarray}{\hat{{\rm{\nabla }}}}^{2}\varphi =-n+1+{a}_{1}\varphi +{a}_{2}{\varphi }^{3/2}+{a}_{3}{\varphi }^{2}.\end{eqnarray}$

3. Derivation of the nonlinear equations

To describe the properties of small-amplitude ion-acoustic excitations with our plasma model, we study the Schamel–Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers (SKdVB) equation and its solutions. For this, we follow the reductive perturbation technique and consider the coordinate transformation as [27]
$\begin{eqnarray}\begin{array}{lll}\xi & = & {\varepsilon }^{1/4}\left({l}_{x}\hat{x}+{l}_{y}\hat{y}+{l}_{z}\hat{z}-{V}_{p}t\right),\\ & & \tau ={\varepsilon }^{3/4}t,\end{array}\end{eqnarray}$
where ϵ (<<1) is a small parameter that measures the system's nonlinearity strength. lx, ly, and lz are three direction cosines of wave vector k along the x, y and z axes, and thus, ${l}_{x}^{2}+{l}_{y}^{2}+{l}_{z}^{2}=1$. Vp is the phase speed of ion-acoustic waves normalized by the ion sound speed, i.e. ${C}_{i}={\left({Z}_{i}{T}_{e}/{m}_{i}\right)}^{1/2}$. The assumptions ϵ1/4 with the spatial coordinates and ϵ3/4 with the temporal coordinate in the above transformations are at first introduced by Schamel, which can better smoothly describe the motion of the ion-acoustic waves. By using the transformation, the nonlinear ion-acoustic waves can be transformed to the frame where they are stationary and the perturbation only depends on the spatial and temporal coordinates. Therefore, using equation (16), the set of equations (13)–(15) becomes that
$\begin{eqnarray}\begin{array}{c}-{V}_{p}{\varepsilon }^{1/4}\displaystyle \frac{\partial n}{\partial \xi }+{\varepsilon }^{3/4}\displaystyle \frac{\partial n}{\partial \tau }+{\varepsilon }^{1/4}{l}_{x}\displaystyle \frac{\partial \left(n{u}_{x}\right)}{\partial \xi }\\ \,+{\varepsilon }^{1/4}{l}_{y}\displaystyle \frac{\partial \left(n{u}_{y}\right)}{\partial \xi }+{\varepsilon }^{1/4}{l}_{z}\displaystyle \frac{\partial \left(n{u}_{z}\right)}{\partial \xi }=0,\end{array}\end{eqnarray}$
$\begin{eqnarray}\begin{array}{c}{\varepsilon }^{3/4}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {u}_{x}}{\partial \tau }+{\varepsilon }^{1/4}\left(-{V}_{p}+{u}_{x}{l}_{x}+{u}_{y}{l}_{y}+{u}_{z}{l}_{z}\right)\displaystyle \frac{\partial {u}_{x}}{\partial \xi }\\ \,+{\varepsilon }^{1/4}{l}_{x}\displaystyle \frac{\partial \varphi }{\partial \xi }-{\rm{\Omega }}{u}_{y}-{\varepsilon }^{1/2}\eta \displaystyle \frac{{\partial }^{2}{u}_{x}}{\partial {\xi }^{2}}=0,\end{array}\end{eqnarray}$
$\begin{eqnarray}\begin{array}{c}{\varepsilon }^{3/4}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {u}_{y}}{\partial \tau }+{\varepsilon }^{1/4}\left(-{V}_{p}+{u}_{x}{l}_{x}+{u}_{y}{l}_{y}+{u}_{z}{l}_{z}\right)\displaystyle \frac{\partial {u}_{y}}{\partial \xi }\\ \,+{\varepsilon }^{1/4}{l}_{y}\displaystyle \frac{\partial \varphi }{\partial \xi }+{\rm{\Omega }}{u}_{x}-{\varepsilon }^{1/2}\eta \displaystyle \frac{{\partial }^{2}{u}_{y}}{\partial {\xi }^{2}}=0,\end{array}\end{eqnarray}$
$\begin{eqnarray}\begin{array}{c}{\varepsilon }^{3/4}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {u}_{z}}{\partial \tau }+{\varepsilon }^{1/4}\left(-{V}_{p}+{u}_{x}{l}_{x}+{u}_{y}{l}_{y}+{u}_{z}{l}_{z}\right)\displaystyle \frac{\partial {u}_{z}}{\partial \xi }\\ \,+{\varepsilon }^{1/4}{l}_{z}\displaystyle \frac{\partial \varphi }{\partial \xi }-{\varepsilon }^{1/2}\eta \displaystyle \frac{{\partial }^{2}{u}_{z}}{\partial {\xi }^{2}}=0,\end{array}\end{eqnarray}$
$\begin{eqnarray}{\varepsilon }^{1/2}\displaystyle \frac{{\partial }^{2}\varphi }{\partial {\xi }^{2}}=-n+1+{a}_{1}\varphi +{a}_{2}{\varphi }^{3/2}+{a}_{3}{\varphi }^{2}.\end{eqnarray}$
Then, for the small-amplitude of IA waves, we expand the dependent variables n, u and φ in a power series of ϵ in near equilibrium as [41]
$\begin{eqnarray}\begin{array}{lll}n & = & 1+\varepsilon {n}^{\left(1\right)}+{\varepsilon }^{3/2}{n}^{\left(2\right)}+\cdots ,\\ {u}_{x} & = & {\varepsilon }^{5/4}{u}_{x}^{\left(1\right)}+{\varepsilon }^{3/2}{u}_{x}^{\left(2\right)}+\cdots ,\\ {u}_{y} & = & {\varepsilon }^{5/4}{u}_{y}^{\left(1\right)}+{\varepsilon }^{3/2}{u}_{y}^{\left(2\right)}+\cdots ,\\ {u}_{z} & = & \varepsilon {u}_{z}^{\left(1\right)}+{\varepsilon }^{3/2}{u}_{z}^{\left(2\right)}+\cdots ,\\ \varphi & = & \varepsilon {\varphi }^{\left(1\right)}+{\varepsilon }^{3/2}{\varphi }^{\left(2\right)}+\cdots ,\\ \eta & = & {\varepsilon }^{1/4}{\eta }_{0}+\cdots ,\end{array}\end{eqnarray}$
where ${u}_{x}^{\left(1\right)}$ and ${u}_{y}^{\left(1\right)}$ are assumed to vary on a slower scale caused by E × B drift in magnetized plasma. We also consider the weak dissipation for finite ion kinematic viscosity by assuming $\eta ={\varepsilon }^{1/4}{\eta }_{0}$. Substituting equation (22) into equations (17)–(21), we get the following terms from the lowest order of ϵ,
$\begin{eqnarray*}{n}^{\left(1\right)}=\displaystyle \frac{{l}_{z}}{{V}_{p}}{u}_{z}^{\left(1\right)},\,{u}_{y}^{\left(1\right)}=\displaystyle \frac{{l}_{x}}{{\rm{\Omega }}}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {\varphi }^{\left(1\right)}}{\partial \xi },\end{eqnarray*}$
$\begin{eqnarray}{u}_{x}^{\left(1\right)}=-\displaystyle \frac{{l}_{y}}{{\rm{\Omega }}}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {\varphi }^{\left(1\right)}}{\partial \xi },\,{u}_{z}^{\left(1\right)}=\displaystyle \frac{{l}_{z}}{{V}_{p}}{\varphi }^{\left(1\right)},\,{n}^{\left(1\right)}={a}_{1}{\varphi }^{\left(1\right)},\end{eqnarray}$
where we have used the boundary conditions, i.e., the first-order perturbations of variables n, u and φ tend to zero when $\xi \to \pm \infty $. From above, we can get the expression for the phase speed Vp, i.e., ${V}_{p}={l}_{z}/\sqrt{{a}_{1}}$. Considering the next higher order in ϵ, we obtain the following set of equations
$\begin{eqnarray*}-{V}_{p}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {n}^{\left(2\right)}}{\partial \xi }+\displaystyle \frac{\partial {n}^{\left(1\right)}}{\partial \tau }+{l}_{x}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {u}_{x}^{\left(2\right)}}{\partial \xi }+{l}_{y}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {u}_{y}^{\left(2\right)}}{\partial \xi }+{l}_{z}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {u}_{z}^{\left(2\right)}}{\partial \xi }=0,\end{eqnarray*}$
$\begin{eqnarray*}{u}_{y}^{\left(2\right)}=-\displaystyle \frac{{V}_{p}}{{\rm{\Omega }}}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {u}_{x}^{\left(1\right)}}{\partial \xi },\,{u}_{x}^{\left(2\right)}=\displaystyle \frac{{V}_{p}}{{\rm{\Omega }}}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {u}_{y}^{\left(1\right)}}{\partial \xi },\end{eqnarray*}$
$\begin{eqnarray*}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {u}_{z}^{\left(1\right)}}{\partial \tau }-{V}_{p}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {u}_{z}^{\left(2\right)}}{\partial \xi }+{l}_{z}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {\varphi }^{\left(2\right)}}{\partial \xi }-{\eta }_{0}\displaystyle \frac{{\partial }^{2}{u}_{z}^{\left(1\right)}}{\partial {\xi }^{2}}=0,\end{eqnarray*}$
$\begin{eqnarray}{n}^{\left(2\right)}={a}_{1}{\varphi }^{\left(2\right)}+{a}_{2}{\left({\varphi }^{\left(1\right)}\right)}^{3/2}-\displaystyle \frac{{\partial }^{2}{\varphi }^{\left(1\right)}}{\partial {\xi }^{2}}.\end{eqnarray}$
From equations (23) and (24), we can derive the SKdVB equation for ion-acoustic shock waves in the plasma,
$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {\rm{\Phi }}}{\partial \tau }+A{{\rm{\Phi }}}^{1/2}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {\rm{\Phi }}}{\partial \xi }+B\displaystyle \frac{{\partial }^{3}{\rm{\Phi }}}{\partial {\xi }^{3}}-C\displaystyle \frac{{\partial }^{2}{\rm{\Phi }}}{\partial {\xi }^{2}}=0,\end{eqnarray}$
where we have denoted ${\rm{\Phi }}={\varphi }^{\left(1\right)}$. The SKdVB equation is just valid for trapped electron distribution. If we ignore the effect of ion kinematic viscosity and make α = 0, equation (25) recovers to the Maxwellian distribution case [27]. The other coefficients are expressed as,
$\begin{eqnarray}A=-\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}\displaystyle \frac{{a}_{2}}{{a}_{1}^{3/2}}{l}_{z},\,B=\displaystyle \frac{{l}_{z}}{2{a}_{1}^{3/2}}\left(1+\displaystyle \frac{1-{l}_{z}^{2}}{{{\rm{\Omega }}}^{2}}\right),\,C=\displaystyle \frac{{\eta }_{0}}{2},\end{eqnarray}$
where A, B, and C are the nonlinearity, dispersion, and dissipation coefficients, respectively. Figure 1 shows the absolute of the nonlinearity coefficient A increases with the increase of values of α and lz. Figure 2 shows the dispersion coefficient B increases with the increase of values of α but decreases with the increase of values of lz. By combining equation (26), it is concluded that the nonlinearity (corresponding to steepness) of ion-acoustic waves is influenced by the nonthermal parameter α and obliqueness lz. The dispersion (corresponding to broadening) is affected by the nonthermal parameter α, external magnetic field Ω and obliqueness lz. The ion kinematic viscosity η0 is only responsible for the dissipation of ion-acoustic waves.
Figure 1. The nonlinearity coefficient A as a function of α for different values of lz.
Figure 2. The dispersion coefficient B as a function of α for different values of lz at ${\Omega }=0.5$.
Case I: Presence of ion kinematic viscosity effect
In the presence of ion kinematic viscosity effect ($C\ne 0$), equation (25) leads to the single-shock wave solution [53]. we consider the transformation $\delta =\lambda \left(\xi -U\tau \right)$, where U is the velocity of the ion-acoustic shock waves. Using the well-known hyperbolic tangent approach [54] and the appropriate boundary conditions, i.e., ${\rm{\Phi }}\to 0$, ${\rm{d}}{\rm{\Phi }}/{\rm{d}}\xi \to 0$, ${{\rm{d}}}^{2}{\rm{\Phi }}/{\rm{d}}{\xi }^{2}\to 0$ at $\xi \to \pm \infty $, we obtain the shock wave solution for equation (25) in the form [41]
$\begin{eqnarray}{\rm{\Phi }}\left(\delta \right)={{\rm{\Phi }}}_{0}{\left(1+\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}{{\rm{sech}} }^{2}\left(\delta \right)-\,\tanh \left(\delta \right)\right)}^{2},\end{eqnarray}$
where ${{\rm{\Phi }}}_{0}={\left(5{C}^{2}/27AB\right)}^{2}$, $U=28{C}^{2}/81B$ and $\theta ={\lambda }^{-1}\,=18B/C$ are the speed and the width of ion-acoustic shock waves, respectively. Using boundary conditions ${\rm{\Phi }}=0$ at $\delta \to +\infty $ and ${\rm{\Phi }}=4{{\rm{\Phi }}}_{0}$ at $\delta \to -\infty $, we get the amplitude of shock waves in the form
$\begin{eqnarray}{{\rm{\Phi }}}_{m}={\left(\displaystyle \frac{10{C}^{2}}{27AB}\right)}^{2}.\end{eqnarray}$
Case II: Absence of ion kinematic viscosity effect
In the absence of ion kinematic viscosity effect (${\eta }_{0}=0$), then C = 0, equation (25) leads to the solitary wave solution and it becomes:
$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {\rm{\Phi }}}{\partial \tau }+A{{\rm{\Phi }}}^{1/2}\displaystyle \frac{\partial {\rm{\Phi }}}{\partial \xi }+B\displaystyle \frac{{\partial }^{3}{\rm{\Phi }}}{\partial {\xi }^{3}}=0.\end{eqnarray}$
To obtain a stationary solution of equation (29), we transform the independent variables ξ and τ to $\chi =\xi -{U}_{0}\tau $, where U0 is the speed of the ion-acoustic solitary waves. Using the appropriate boundary conditions, equation (29) can be written as
$\begin{eqnarray}-{U}_{0}\displaystyle \frac{{\rm{d}}{\rm{\Phi }}}{{\rm{d}}\chi }+A{{\rm{\Phi }}}^{1/2}\displaystyle \frac{{\rm{d}}{\rm{\Phi }}}{{\rm{d}}\chi }+B\displaystyle \frac{{{\rm{d}}}^{3}{\rm{\Phi }}}{{\rm{d}}{\chi }^{3}}=0.\end{eqnarray}$
After some calculation, we can derive the stationary solitary wave solution [30, 31], which is given by
$\begin{eqnarray}{\rm{\Phi }}={{\rm{\Phi }}}_{m}{{\rm{sech}} }^{4}\left(\displaystyle \frac{\xi -{U}_{0}\tau }{{\rm{\Delta }}}\right),\end{eqnarray}$
where ${{\rm{\Phi }}}_{m}={\left(15{U}_{0}/8A\right)}^{2}$ and ${\rm{\Delta }}={\left(16B/{U}_{0}\right)}^{1/2}$ are the amplitude and width of ion-acoustic solitary wave.

4. Numerical analyses

In this section, we make numerical analyses to show the main characteristics (amplitude and width) of ion-acoustic shock and solitary waves. The effect of nonthermal parameter α and some other plasma parameters (i.e., obliqueness lz, external magnetic field Ω, and the ion kinematic viscosity η0) on ion-acoustic shock and solitary wave are discussed.
In figure 3, we described the variation of the ion-acoustic shock waves potential Φ given in equation (27) as a function of δ with different parameters. Figure 3(a) shows the effect of nonthermal parameter α on the ion-acoustic shock waves potential Φ. It is found that the amplitude (width) of shock waves in nonthermal plasma is smaller (wider) than those in Maxwellian plasma. Figure 3(b) shows how the external magnetic field Ω affects the shock waves potential Φ. It is observed that the larger parameter Ω will lead to the larger values of the amplitude of shock waves. Besides, from equation (26), we found that with the increase of values of Ω, the dispersion coefficient B decreases so that the width of shock waves is expected to decrease. Figure 3(c) shows the variation of shock wave potential Φ with obliqueness lz. It is concluded that as the obliqueness lz increases, the amplitude of the shock waves decreases and the width increases. Based on the above conclusion, we also can compare the nature of shock waves in magnetized plasma and unmagnetized plasma. When lz = 1, the shock waves in an unmagnetized plasma with trapped nonthermal electrons are recovered. The amplitude (width) of shock waves in an unmagnetized plasma is smaller (wider) than those in a magnetized plasma. Figure 3(d) shows the impact of viscous coefficient η0 on the shock waves. It is clear that with the increase of values of the viscous coefficient η0, the amplitude (width) of shock waves increases (decreases). The reason is that the dissipative term dominates over the dispersion term with the increase of values of the viscous coefficient η0. From figures 3(b) and (d), it is found that the stronger magnetic field contributes to weaken the dispersion and the stronger ion kinematic viscosity contributes to enhance the dissipation, which allows for the formation of larger amplitude and narrower width for shock waves.
Figure 3. Ion-acoustic shock waves potential Φ as a function of δ (given in equation (28)) is shown for different values of (a) nonthermal parameter α for η0 = 0.5, Ω = 0.6, lz = 0.7. (b) external magnetic field Ω for α = 0.1, η0 = 0.5, lz = 0.7. (c) obliqueness lz for α = 0.1, Ω = 0.6, η0 = 0.5. (d) viscous coefficient η0 for α = 0.1, Ω = 0.6, lz = 0.7.
In figure 4, we described the variation of ion-acoustic solitary waves potential Φ given in equation (31) as a function of χ with different parameters. Figure 4(a) shows the effect of nonthermal parameter α on the ion-acoustic solitary waves potential Φ. It is found that the amplitude of solitary waves decreases but the width of solitary waves increases by increasing the values of nonthermal parameter α. This implies that the fewer number of nonthermal electrons, the steeper and the wider the solitary waves. By combining equation (26), it is concluded that in the case of solitary structures, nonlinear parameter A is responsible for the amplitude of the waves, while the dispersion parameter B determines the width of the waves. Figure 4(b) shows the effect of external magnetic field Ω on the solitary waves. It can be concluded that the magnitude of the external magnetic field will not affect the amplitude of solitary waves. However, the width of solitary waves decreases with the increase of values of the external magnetic field Ω. Figure 4(c) shows the effect of wave speed U0 on the solitary waves. The increasing value of U0 enhances the amplitude of the solitary waves but makes the width of the waves narrow. Figure 4(d) shows the impact of obliqueness lz on solitary waves. It is obvious that with the increase of the values of obliqueness lz, the amplitude of solitary waves decreases but the width of the waves increases. We can also find that the amplitude (width) of the solitary waves in an unmagnetized plasma is smaller (wider) than those in a magnetized plasma.
Figure 4. Ion-acoustic solitary waves potential Φ as a function of χ (given in equation (32)) is shown for different values of (a) nonthermal parameter α for Ω = 0.6, U0 = 0.2, lz = 0.4. (b) External magnetic field Ω for α = 0.1, U0 = 0.2, lz = 0.7. (c) Wave speed U0 for α = 0.1, Ω = 0.6, lz = 0.4 (d) obliqueness lz for α = 0.1, Ω = 0.6, U0 = 0.2.

5. Conclusions

In this paper, the propagation characteristics of ion-acoustic shock and solitary waves have been studied in a magnetized viscous plasma with trapped nonthermal electrons. The expression of the trapped electrons' number density following the Cairns–Gurevich distribution has been reexamined. By adopting the reductive perturbation method, the nonlinear Schamel–Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers (SKdVB) equation has been derived. Under different limiting cases, the shock and solitary wave solutions of SKdVB have been derived. We found that the impact of nonthermal parameter α, external magnetic field Ω, obliqueness lz, wave speed U0, and the ion kinematic viscosity η0 may significantly change the characteristics of ion-acoustic shock and solitary waves. The amplitude (width) of ion-acoustic shock and solitary waves is observed to be larger (narrower) in a magnetized Maxwellian plasma than in a magnetized nonthermal plasma. The amplitude (width) of ion-acoustic shock waves is observed to increase (decrease) with the increase of values of external magnetic field Ω. The external magnetic field Ω has also been observed to modify only the width of ion-acoustic solitary waves. The amplitude (width) for both shock and solitary waves decreases (increases) as the value of obliqueness lz increases. The higher values of the viscous coefficient η0 lead to larger amplitude and narrower width for shock waves.
In summary, the presence of nonthermal [3639] and trapped particles [2831] in space and laboratory plasma systems have been reported extensively. Our present work may be useful in understanding the obliquely propagating nonlinear structures (i.e., shock waves, solitary waves) in space plasma (i.e. Earth's magnetosphere and ionosphere [46], auroral regions [47]) and laboratory devices.
1
Gao D N 2022 Nonplanar ion acoustic solitary waves in an electronegative plasma by damped Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers equation Chin. J. Phys. 77 1789

DOI

2
Mushtaq A, Zulfiqar A, Farooq M, Usman S 2024 Nonlinear electrostatic Kelvin–Helmholtz shock waves in a viscous electron-positron-ion plasma with non-maxwellian distribution Phys. Scr. 99 015602

DOI

3
Habib K, Hassan M R, Alam M S, Sultana S 2024 An overview of ion-acoustic solitary and shock waves in a magnetized nonthermal plasma: influence of trapped positrons and electrons Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 66 065027

DOI

4
Hatami M M, Niknam A R 2021 Effects of two-temperature nonextensive electrons on ion-acoustic double layers Physica A 564 125533

DOI

5
Washimi H, Taniuti T 1966 Propagation of ion-acoustic solitary waves of small amplitude Phys. Rev. Lett. 17 996

DOI

6
Sagdeev R Z 1966 Cooperative phenomena and shock waves in collisionless plasmas Rev. Plasma Phys. 4 23

7
Ikezi H, Tailor R J, Basker D R 1970 Formation and interaction of ion-acoustic solitions Phys. Rev. Lett. 25 11

DOI

8
Willington N T, Varghese A, Saritha A C, Sajeeth P N, Venugopal C 2021 Ion acoustic shock waves with drifting ions in a five components cometary plasma Adv. Space Res. 68 4292

DOI

9
Shukla P K, Mamun A A 2003 Solitons, shocks and vortices in dusty plasmas New J. Phys. 5 17

DOI

10
Xue J K 2003 Cylindrical and spherical dust–ion acoustic shock waves Phys. Plasmas 10 4893

DOI

11
Sahu B, Roychoudhury R 2007 Quantum ion acoustic shock waves in planar and nonplanar geometry Phys. Plasmas 14 072310

DOI

12
Sahu B 2012 Ion acoustic solitary and shock waves with nonextensive electrons and thermal positrons in nonplanar geometry Astrophys. Space Sci. 338 251

DOI

13
Alinejad H 2010 Dust ion-acoustic solitary and shock waves in a dusty plasma with non-thermal electrons Astrophys. Space Sci. 327 131

DOI

14
Hussain S, Mahmood S 2011 Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers equation for magnetosonic wave in plasma Phys. Plasmas 18 052308

DOI

15
Akhtar N, Hussain S 2011 Ion acoustic shock waves in degenerate plasmas Phys. Plasmas 18 072103

DOI

16
Hussain S, Abdykian A, Mahmood S 2019 Two-dimensional magnetosonic shock wave propagation in dense electron–positron–ion plasmas Contrib. Plasma Phys. 59 e201800113

DOI

17
Chettri K, Prasad P K, Chatterjee P, Saha A 2024 Dynamics of nonlinear ion-acoustic waves in Venus' upper ionosphere Adv. Space Res. 74 3583

DOI

18
Chettri K et al 2024 Dynamics of nonlinear ion-acoustic waves in Venus' lower ionosphere Astrophys. Space Sci. 369 44

DOI

19
Das C, Chandra S, Saha A, Chatterjee P 2024 Field modulations of ion acoustic waves in plasma with Vasyliunas–Schamel distributed electrons IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 52 2541

DOI

20
Saha A, Banerjee S 2021 Dynamical Systems and Nonlinear Waves in Plasmas Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press

DOI

21
Ali S et al 2023 The attributes of the dust-acoustic solitary and periodic structures in the Saturn's inner magnetosphere Phys. Fluids 35 023101

DOI

22
Kaur M, Saini N S 2022 KP, MKP, and CKP dust ion acoustic solitons in a multispecies non-Maxwellian plasma Phys. Plasmas 29 033701

DOI

23
El-Monier S Y, El-Helbawy A S, Elsayed M M, Saad M 2023 Dust ion acoustic shock and solitary waves in a magnetized multi-component plasma with superthermal electrons Phys. Scr. 98 065602

DOI

24
Masood W et al 2022 Formation of acoustic nonlinear structures in non-Maxwellian trapping plasmas Phys. Fluids 34 053113

DOI

25
Luque A, Schamel H 2005 Electrostatic trapping as a key to the dynamics of plasmas, fluids and other collective systems Phys. Rep. 415 261

DOI

26
Schamel H 1972 Stationary solitary, snoidal and sinusoidal ion acoustic waves Plasma Phys. 14 905

DOI

27
Schamel H 1973 A modified Korteweg–de Vries equation for ion acoustic wavess due to resonant electrons J. Plasma Phys. 9 377

DOI

28
Shah H A, Masood W, Ali Z 2013 Adiabatic trapping in coupled kinetic Alfvén-acoustic waves Phys. Plasmas 20 032301

DOI

29
Soliman G H, Zahran M A, Elkamash I S 2023 Effect of trapping and reflection on dust acoustic solitary waves in nonthermal opposite polarity dust plasmas Phys. Scr. 98 115617

DOI

30
Orani M M, Akter J, Mamun A A 2023 Electrostatic ion-acoustic waves in a magnetized positively charged dust plasma in the presence of trapped electrons IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 51 2705

DOI

31
Sultana S, Islam S, Mamun A A, Schlickeiser R 2019 Oblique propagation of ion-acoustic solitary waves in a magnetized plasma with electrons following a generalized distribution function Phys. Plasmas 26 012107

DOI

32
Du J 2004 Nonextensivity in nonequilibrium plasma systems with Coulombian long-range interactions Phys. Lett. 329 262

DOI

33
Vasyliunas V M 1968 A survey of low-energy electrons in the evening sector of the magnetosphere with OGO 1 and OGO 3 J. Geophys. Res. 73 2839

DOI

34
Qureshi M, Shi J, Ma S 2006 Influence of generalized (r,q) distribution function on electrostatic waves Commun. Theor. Phys. 45 550

DOI

35
Cairns R A et al 1995 Ion sound solitary waves with density depressions J. de Phys. IV 5 C6 43

DOI

36
Liu L, Du J 2008 Ion acoustic waves in the plasma with the power-law q-distribution in nonextensive statistics Physica A 387 4821

DOI

37
Wang H, Du J, Huo R 2021 The collision frequency of electron-neutral particle in weakly ionized plasmas with non-Maxwellian velocity distributions Commun. Theor. Phys. 73 095501

DOI

38
Wang H, Du J 2022 The ion acoustic solitary waves in the four-component complex plasma with a Cairns–Tsallis distribution Chin. J. Phys. 77 521

DOI

39
Wang H, Du J, Guo R 2023 Small amplitude ion-acoustic solitary waves in a four-component magneto-rotating plasma with a modified Cairns–Tsallis distribution Phys. Scr. 98 015204

DOI

40
Fermous R, Benzekka M, Merriche A 2022 Effect of adiabatically trapped-suprathermal electrons on ion-acoustic solitons in electron-ion plasma Astrophys. Space Sci. 367 105

DOI

41
Sultana S 2021 Shock waves in magnetized plasmas with superthermal trapped electrons Chin. J. Phys. 69 206

DOI

42
Demiray H, El-Zahar E R 2018 Cylindrical and spherical solitary waves in an electron-acoustic plasma with vortex electron distribution Phys. Plasmas 25 042102

DOI

43
Fellah S, Kerrouchi S, Amour R 2021 Low-frequency variable charge solitary waves in a collisionless dusty plasma with a Cairns–Gurevich ion velocity distribution Contrib. Plasma Phys. 62 e202100035

DOI

44
Bouchemla N, Merriche A, Amour R 2021 Weakly nonlinear dust-ion-acoustic solitons in an electronegative collisionless dusty plasma with Cairns–Gurevich distributed electrons IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 49 3951

DOI

45
Abdikian A, Eghbali M 2023 The role of trapped electrons and charge dust fluctuation on dust-ion-acoustic solitary waves Indian J. Phys. 97 7

DOI

46
Elwakil S A, El-Shewy E K, Abdelwahed H G 2010 Envelope ion-acoustic solitary waves in a plasma with positive-negative ions and nonthermal electrons Phys. Plasma 17 052301

DOI

47
Bostrom R 1992 Observations of weak double layers on auroral field lines IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 20 756

DOI

48
Ouazene M, Amour R 2019 Dust acoustic solitons in a dusty plasma with Cairns–Gurevich distributed ions Astrophys. Space Sci. 364 20

DOI

49
Arab N, Amour R, Benzekka M 2020 Effect of Cairns–Gurevich polarization force on dust-acoustic solitons in collisionless dusty plasmas Eur. Phys. J. Plus 135 872

DOI

50
Sabrina F et al 2022 Charge fluctuation induced solitary wave anomalous damping in collisionless dusty plasmas: effect of trapped-nonthermal ions Eur. Phys. J. Plus 137 55

DOI

51
Alharthi N S 2024 Nonlinear wave phenomena in Jupiter's magnetosphere: Cnoidal waves and shock-like waves Res. Phys. 58 107462

DOI

52
Alharthi N S 2024 Role of Cairns–Gurevich ion distribution on nonlinear wave propagation in negatively charged dusty plasma Res. Engin. 24 102896

DOI

53
Kourakis I, Sultana S, Verheest F 2012 Note on the single-shock solutions of the Korteweg–de Vries–Burgers equation Astrophys. Space Sci. 338 245

DOI

54
Malfliet W, Hereman W 1996 The tanh method: I. Exact solutions of nonlinear evolution and wave equations Phys. Scr. 54 563

DOI

Outlines

/