The Quiet Chromosphere - Sami K. Solanki Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Simplified sketch of the QUIET photosphere and chromosphere Wedemeyer-Böhm et al. 2008; similar to an earlier sketch by Rob Rutten
What is special about the chromosphere? Possibly Sun’s most complex layer: waves, gas (thermal energy), flows, magnetic field all have similar energy densities. Radiation needs non-LTE RT treatment, non- equilibrium ionization, ambipolar diffusion, etc. Extremely dynamic and strongly structured Magnetic field and waves structure & dynamics Energy transfer layer: from photosphere to corona Spicules at limb (in Ca II H at SST)
What is special about the chromosphere? Chromosphere far less understood than photosphere. Neglected for many years This is changing: TIP II, IBIS, CRISP, etc. increasingly used to probe the chromosphere IRIS (launch in April) will mainly study upper chromosphere (Mg II lines) & TR Solar C (launch ~2020), will concentrate on the chromosphere and its interaction with photosphere and corona ALMA has chance of studying the solar chromosphere along with IRIS, NST, Gregor; well before Solar C & ATST
Evolving structures with height The convection dominated image of the photosphere (seen in g-band) is replaced by the magnetic field and wave dominated chromosphere when observing in strong spectral lines (Ca II K and Hα) DOT data (Rutten and Sütterlin)
Chromospheric dynamics (DOT)
Chromospheric dynamics: waves At low to medium resolution: Power at 3 min in internetwork Power at longer periods in Network At high spatial resolution: identification of many wave- modes and details about their excitation and propagation Acoustic waves (everywhere) Slow and fast mode waves (MHD) Kink waves (MHD) MHD waves excited by granular Transverse waves seen in buffetting of magnetic features Sunrise data sampling Evidence of wave conversion different heights Energy transported by MHD waves is sufficient to heat corona
Chromospheric dynamics: How important are shock waves? As acoustic waves propagate upwards, they steepen and shock Early 1-D models: Do take into account non-local Centeno etradiation, al. 2009 non-locally controlled atomic levels (time dep. excitations) Start with piston in CZ, consistent with obs. of photospheric oscillations He 10830 Carlsson & Stein 1993, 1995, 1997, 2001
Effect of Ly continuum shock waves on EUV radiation Dashed: temperature at τ ν =1 Solid: intensity & radiation temperature at τ ν =1 Carlsson & Stein 1995
Chromospheric MHD simulation Various MHD codes allow chromospheric structure and dynamics to be computed. The most realistic such code is currently the Bifrost code of the Oslo group. Upper panels: intensity & BZ in photosphere Lower panels: Temperature at 1.7 Mm & B-field direction J. Leenaarts et al. 2012
Do atomic spectral lines sample cool regions of the chromosphere? de la Cruz et al. (2012): Take a NLTE-RT 3D MHD simulatiion of the solar photosphere and chromosphere, compute in 3D a popular chromospheric line (Ca II 8542 Å), invert these synthetic profiles to get the 3D structure of the chromosphere and then compare with the original Results: The inversion works reasonably well in warmer part of chromosphere For cooler gas the inversion can get things wrong
Do atomic spectral lines sample cool regions of the chromosphere? de la Cruz et al. (2012): Reason for fitting computed line profile with too high temperature is that the forward calculation was done in 3D, but the inversion in 1D In reality the effect will be much stronger: Their work assumes perfect spatial resolution, i.e. no PSF, no scattered light Both the inner part of the PSF and the presence of scattered light hide small cool pockets (Ayres effect)
Evidence for cool gas: CO lines at 5 μm From atomic lines From CO lines Ayres 1981, 2002 ApJ, Ayres et al. 1986, 1998 ApJ, Solanki et al. 1994 Science Uitenbroek et al. 1994 ApJ, Uitenbroek 2000a, b 2000
More evidence for inhomogeneous chromosphere with cool component Holzreuter et al. (2006); Holzreuter & Stenflo (2007): in order to reproduce scattering polarization of Ca II K line, two components with rather different temperatures are needed
Sub-mm and mm data as a diagnostic Sub-mm and mm radiation in quiet chromosphere: H--free-free, with source function in LTE: Planck law Rayleigh-Jeans: intensity depends linearly on temperature Radiation sees both hot & cool gas Combines advantages of CO (sees cool gas) & atomic lines (sees hot gas). Additional weighting according to the electron density (not in equilibrium) Main disadvantage: poor spatial resolution of instruments available so far (BIMA, CARMA, VLA) There is a strong need for a higher resolution telescope such as ALMA
Sub-mm and mm “observations” of Carlsson-Stein model Loukitcheva et al. 2004a
Brightness temperature for different wavelengths 9mm 3mm 1mm 0.1mm Wedemeyer-Boehm et al. 2007 Brightness temperature for different spatial resolutions 0.9” 0.6” 0.3” 0.06”
Radiation at mm wavelengths from 3-D MHD simulations of rising bipole 1mm radiation 3mm radiation Movies by M. Loukitcheva, from Bifrost computations, provided by M. Carlsson
Ca II H vs. mm wavelengths mm wavelength radiation allows probing the chromosphere at different heights reaching considerably higher than even the strongest lines in the visible Images by M. Loukitcheva, from Bifrost computations, provided by M. Carlsson
Sunspots Chromospheric layers of sunspots are rather poorly known. Various umbral models exist (based on atomic spectral lines); they differ rather strongly At sub-mm and mm wavelengths they give vastly different signatures About penumbrae, even less is known. Only 3 models, with even larger differences Loukitcheva et al., in preparation
Conclusions The chromosphere is an exciting and relatively poorly studied part of the solar atmosphere Sub-mm and mm-wavelength data have the potential to provide information beyond that given by atomic lines ALMA will have the necessary spatial resolution to fulfil this potential See also talks by M. Loukitcheva and S. Wedemeyer-Böhm for more on modelling S. White for more on observations
Thank you for your attention
You can also read