1 / 17

Wei Liu 1 , Vahé Petrosian 2 , Brian Dennis 1 , & Gordon Holman 1

Conjugate Hard X-ray Footpoints in the ‘03/10/29 X10 Flare: Unshearing Motions, Asymmetries, and Correlations. Wei Liu 1 , Vahé Petrosian 2 , Brian Dennis 1 , & Gordon Holman 1 1 NASA Goddard Space Flight Center 2 Stanford University. 1. Introduction

nathaniel-waller
Télécharger la présentation

Wei Liu 1 , Vahé Petrosian 2 , Brian Dennis 1 , & Gordon Holman 1

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Conjugate Hard X-ray Footpoints in the ‘03/10/29 X10 Flare: Unshearing Motions, Asymmetries, and Correlations Wei Liu1, Vahé Petrosian2, Brian Dennis1, & Gordon Holman1 1NASA Goddard Space Flight Center 2 Stanford University

  2. 1. Introduction 2. RHESSI observations of the hard X-ray footpoints in the 2003/10/29 X10 flare (a million $ event: Xu+04, Metcalf+04, Liu,C.+05, Krucker+05, Ji+08,…) 2.1 Source motions – footpoint unshearing & loop-top downward motion 2.2 Asymmetries – hard X-ray flux, magnetic field 2.3 Correlation – between hard X-ray flux and magnetic field strength 3. Summary and discussion Contents

  3. 1. Introduction: Classic picture of two-ribbon flares (pre-RHESSI) corona Loop-top X-rays surface surface Footpoint X-rays (movie courtesy of T. Forbes) Original models: Sturrock (1966), Hirayama (1974), Kopp & Pneuman (1976)

  4. 2. RHESSI X-ray observations of the 2003/10/29 X10 flare X-ray & microwave fluxes

  5. Footpoint migration (on MDI) 2.1 Source motions Loop-Top: red cntr, +’sFootPoints: cyan cntr, trianglesbkgrd: TRACE 195

  6. Source motions in detail Anti-parallel (to N.L.) motion early on (also Sakao+98, Masuda+’00) Note the rotated “L” shape. (Liu, Petrosian, Dennis, & Holman, ApJ, 2009 March, in press)

  7. Source motions (vs. time) Rapid decrease of footpoint shear cotemporary w/ loop-top downward motion (see also Ji, H. et al. 2008)

  8. Downward motion More loop-top downward motion: 2003/11/03 X3.9 flare (Liu et al. 2004; see also Sui & Holman 2003, Sui et al. 2004, Holman et al. 2005)

  9. Cotemporary Footpoint unshearing & loop-top downward motions – interpretation & Discussion * Ji et al (‘07): lower-lying, less sheared field lines=> less free-energy. Can such topological transition actually take place? * Hudson (‘00): Implosion; * Loop-top downward motion: Longcope, Guidoni, & Linton (’08): gas-dynamic shock heating. c.f. Forbes & Acton (’96): Yohkoh SXR loop shrinkage; Veronig et al. (‘06): Betatron acceleration, don’t expect footpoints to move. No clear explanation yet.

  10. Different loss-cones Different electron precipitating rates & HXR fluxes, I1/I2~B2/B1 Weak HXR Strong HXR slow motion fast motion 2.2 Asymmetric footpoint hard X-ray fluxes & magnetic field strengths Different field convergence (Cartoon – courtesy of L. Fletcher)

  11. but not all the time! • Alternative – asymmetric column densities to footpoints? • Need spectral info Hard X-rays & magnetic field strengths E-FP X-ray brighter and B-field weaker than W-FP – Consistent with asymmetric mirroring,

  12. Spectra of footpoint & loop-top sources E-FP: slightly harder (flatter or smaller spectral index)

  13. Spectral index evolution of footpoints – E-FP: consistently harder spectrum, smaller column density from loop-top

  14. Effects of asymmetric column densities alone on HXR flux and spectral index –> contradiction(c.f, Falewicz & Siarkowski ‘07) Consistent w/ Saint-Hilaire et al. (‘08)

  15. Footpoint Asymmetry: Discussion Mirroring or column density alone – inconsistent w/ data … combined – possible Other transport effects: Non-uniform target ionization (Brown; Kontar) – Yes (E-FP: brighter, harder) Photospheric albedo (Langer & Petrosian, Bai & Ramaty) – No (E-FP: softer) Relativistic beaming (McTiernan & Petrosian) – No (E-FP: softer) Return current – ? Acceleration, asymmetric (McClements & Alexander ‘05) – ? Final answer yet to come from detailed modeling.

  16. 2.3 Correlation between hard X-ray flux (log) & magnetic field strength • Implications: • Stochastic acceleration – particle acceleration rate strongly depends on B; • Electric field acceleration – larger electric field => larger electron flux and harder spectrum

  17. 3. Summary & Discussion 1. Footpoints unshearing motion & simultaneous loop-top downward motion – c.f, classic flare model. 2. Asymmetric hard X-ray footpoints – asymmetric magnetic mirroring, column densities, and other transport effects. 3. Correlation between hard X-ray flux and magnetic field strength – implication for particle acceleration mechanisms. Preprints (hardcopy & pdf) available here

More Related