Identification of prominence ejecta by the proton distribution function and magnetic fine structure in interplanetary coronal mass ejections in the inner heliosphere

Abstract

This work presents in situ solar wind observations of three magnetic clouds (MCs) that contain cold high‐density material when Helios 2 was located at 0.3 AU on 9 May 1979, 0.5 AU on 30 March 1976, and 0.7 AU on 24 December 1978. In the cold high‐density regions embedded in the interplanetary coronal mass ejections we find (1) that the number density of protons is higher than in other regions inside the magnetic cloud, (2) the possible existence of He+, (3) that the thermal velocity distribution functions are more isotropic and appear to be colder than in the other regions of the MC, and the proton temperature is lower than that of the ambient plasma, and (4) that the associated magnetic field configuration can for all three MC events be identified as a flux rope. This cold high‐density region is located at the polarity inversion line in the center of the bipolar structure of the MC magnetic field (consistent with previous solar observation work that found that a prominence lies over the neutral line of the related bipolar solar magnetic field). Specifically, for the first magnetic cloud event on 8 May 1979, a coronal mass ejection (CME) was related to an eruptive prominence previously reported as a result of the observation of Solwind (P78‐1). Therefore, we identify the cold and dense region in the MC as the prominence material. It is the first time that prominence ejecta were identified by both the plasma and magnetic field features inside 1 AU, and it is also the first time that the thermal ion velocity distribution functions were used to investigate the microstate of the prominence material. Moreover, from our three cases, we also found that this material tended to fall behind the magnetic cloud and become smaller as it propagated farther away from the Sun, which confirms speculations in previous work. Overall, our in situ observations are consistent with three‐part CME models.