(2012)

The link refers to the page that describes what was planned (2012). The more interesting part is what they found [0] (2016). Though at the level of detail of the pages both appear to describe the same.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-directly-obse...

Thank you for the follow-up link.

Here's a link to the actual Science article:

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaf2939

I wish that popular science would not label scientific phenomenon after unrelated science fiction phenomenon to gain public interest. The research is interesting in its own right. I Also wish that popular science websites had an automated mechanism to link follow up articles so that late readers can easily follow the story from its origin to the most current publication -- this can be automated now.

> I Also wish that popular science websites had an automated mechanism to link follow up articles so that late readers can easily follow the story from its origin to the most current publication -- this can be automated now.

Great idea! Let me work on that

The tools used to analyze these data are now available in Python:

https://github.com/spedas/pyspedas

Examples loading/plotting/analyzing MMS data can be found at:

https://github.com/spedas/mms-examples