Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byYahir Haddock Modified over 10 years ago
2
Solar Irradiance, Diameter, Shape, and Activity J.R. Kuhn, Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawaii Rock Bush Marcelo Emilio Isabelle Scholl Phil Scherrer GONG10, June 2010
3
What can we learn about the solar cycle from precise “global” measurements?
4
…since 2002 A solar cycle of MDI; HMI debuts More than a solar cycle of helioseismic measurements COROT, “night-time solar physics”
5
Global solar properties Luminosity and irradiance Luminosity, radius, temp Frequency, magnetic field, temperature ‘Even’ m-dependent frequency splittings
6
Is solar the irradiance change primarily luminosity change?
7
Frequencies and F10.7 Broomhall et al. 2009
8
Even coefficient frequency splittings Splitting coefficient temporal variability qualitatively describes surface magnetism changes
9
Its hard to change the solar surface temperature by changing solar luminosity
10
The solar limb is largely fixed by rapid opacity decline “few km” thick transition from opaque to transparent
11
Solar radius, past results from under the atmosphere….
12
A fluctuating solar radius is seen from the ground 76 yr fluctuation with 0.2 arcsec half-amplitude 11 yr fluctuation, smallest sun at peak in sunspot number with 0.1 arcsec half- amplitude 76 yrs
13
Solar astrometry: Is the Sun shrinking? 0.05 – 0.2 arcsec/century Gilliland, 1981
14
Limb astrometry from Space dr Angle of arrival fluctuations define dr dI Photometric gain uncertainty (flatfielding) defines dr In practice limb isn’t knife edge, spacecraft pointing jitter is about 0.01 pixel (and correlated!), long term stability limitations are due to optics thermal drifts [(MDI) 1px=2”] NB: Telescope diffraction limit has very little to do with astrometric accuracy
15
Limb Astrometry Systematic Errors Spacecraft pointing jitter (not limiting) – “coherent” –MDI, 0.02 arcsec Optical errors (limiting) –Temporal stability Thermal changes, dimensional stability, index changes –Spatial changes Field focus variations –Two orders of magnitude larger than solar signals (MDI, 0.5arcsec) –“Roll” calibration essential MDI approach –Measure and calibrate all aspects of instrument –PROVEN: Shape measurements essentially achieved photometric precision (i.e. oblateness/hexadecapole uncertainty 0.5 mas in 12 images)
16
HMI Solar Limb Astrometry What Limb Astrometry from HMI? –The solar radius –The solar radius variations with time (and oscillations) –The solar radius variations with central angle (shape, and oscillations) Why Do This With HMI? –Can’t be done on the ground with HMI accuracy (in some cases by two orders of magnitude) –HMI will surpass MDI astrometric accuracy by at least one order of magnitude –These are difficult measurements, no other space experiment addresses the same technical issues and no other space experiment reproduces the HMI astrometric approach What are the pressing questions? –Does the solar radius change (at all) with solar cycle? Knowledge of radius changes and irradiance or luminosity changes constrains the solar cycle mechanisms… a long debated problem –What is the Sun’s shape and is this consistent with solar system limits on its gravitational potential and the internal rotation rate? –Limb Oscillations (p-modes, g-modes, r-modes) dispersion relation information has yet to be carefully measured and interpreted
17
Satellite limb profiles
18
MDI Raw Radius Data
19
Calibrated MDI astrometry systematics Front window: 6C gradient 1.5km focal length 0.84” Primary lens: 10C temperature focal shift -0.2” OSS expansion: 10C temperature change expansion 0.75”
20
Instrument changes
21
The solar radius change…
22
The solar radius over time km
23
No solar cycle radius changes! W = dr/r / dL/L < 2 x 10 -2 –Solar cycle luminosity is much smaller than irradiance change –Solar asphericity and 2D atmosphere structure dominates dR and dL –Solar cycle frequency changes not due primarily to changing geometry (s) Some models can predict small W, c.f. Mullan et al. 2007 (although H- opacity effects on ‘radius’ ignored? )
24
Asphericity and solar shape Are solar cycle irradiance variations due to redistribution of emergent solar luminosity? –Latitudinal variation, dR(μ)/R –MDI and HMI solar shape measurements Modern ground-based solar shape measurements
25
Limb astrometry, MDI 6-50 pixel annulus 480pix MDI: 1.96” pixel HMI: 0.5” pix
26
HMI raw shape and limb photometry See GONG10 Bush et al. poster equator pole
27
Rolling HMI separates solar shape from optical distortion cos2θ cos3θ cos4θ cos5θ Satellite roll angle
28
MDI and HMI sun during some rolls has no magnetic activity MDI: March 1997HMI: April 9 2010HMI: April 16 2010 MDI: Nov. 2009 MDI roll in 2001 available, but active sun HMI roll available every 6 months
29
Oblateness from 1997-2010 MDI and HMI observations without magnetic corrections 1997 MDI 2009 MDI 2010a HMI 2010b HMI
30
MDI Solar minimum (1997) and maximum (2001) roll data
31
MDI limb shape analysis, magnetic contamination – e.g. 2001 Magnetic contamination increases limb brightness, decreases limb radius Note scale: 40mas radius decrease, 0.01 intensity increase
32
After accounting for magnetic activity, the limb shape is still variable Active latitutes: If we missed magnetic contributions, oblateness would be even larger!
33
Solar oblateness isn’t constant But note: Fivian et al. 2007 from RHESSI claim 2006 oblateness is surface value MDI and HMI Solar shape data
34
RHESSI photometry technique Fivian, Hudson, Lin, 2007
35
Oblateness coefficient variability from RHESSI
36
Helioseismic splittings also sample solar shape These are tiny shape variations, 2001 to 2010 Req- Rpole change is about 2.5km, smaller than our limits on the solar cycle mean radius variation Helioseismic “oblateness” (the “even” frequency splitting coefficients) are anticorrelated with geometric oblateness Acoustic (interior) atmosphere non-homologously expanding with respect to “surface” (Kosovichev, Lefebvre 1995, 1996) Oblateness changes are too small to account for even coefficient variations (and opposite in sign)
37
The solar brightness, ground, MDI, HMI Ground Oblateness Measurements HMI MDI
38
Solar cycle acoustic changes Primarily NOT geometric effects (in mean frequencies or splittings) The solar atmosphere change with cycle is not well described by any 1-dimensional model (either magnetic or thermal) Diffuse, unresolved, magnetic flux and surface brightness is needed
39
“Superficial” vs. “seeing the tachocline” Tough problem: “everything” is correlated with possibly complex causal connections (cf. Basu et al. 2009 “hints of tachocline” visible in helioseismic time dependence) Magnetic vs. “thermal”
40
Deep origins of magnetized plasma must carry excess entropy to surface Convection Zone Radiative Zone Tachocline region Photosphere Over a solar cycle magnetized fluid over 11yr increases entropy by 0.1% at base of SCZ Radiative flux through magnetized fluid sees lower opacity and increased entropy relative to non-magnetized fluid Solar cycle magnetic fields Magnetized fluid is “hotter” Thermal “antishadows” Temperature gradient enhanced stable stratification becomes unstable
41
Alternatively, vertical surface B fields decrease vertical “irradiance” The integrated disk brightness change due to bright faculae is 38% of the faint faculae NB: cf. Ken Topka facular contrast results “Bright” faculae are dark, at any wavelength near disk center Data from the Precision Photometric Solar Telescope Continuum contrast vs. vertical orientation and CaK contrast
42
Magnetic fields and irradiance
43
Fast and slow B vs. irradiance Fast variations: B increases “I”Slow variations: B decreases I
44
Frequency variations are not determined simply by solar activity (from Broomhall et al. 2009)
45
Global photometric timeseries analysis Solar and stellar observations converge studies of resolved stellar magnetic atmospheres are happening: Night-time solar physics
46
Spots and faculae may produce only a tiny luminosity pertubation (flux redistribution) dI time Use solar rotation to describe angular variation in active region or spot “irradiance” … luminosity T/4
47
Full-disk observations show flux redistribution (data high-pass filtered with 60d moving-mean) Regardless of phase of the solar cycle (min-to-max) the irradiance autocorrelation shows clear evidence that active regions (faculaea nd sunspots) redistribute flux. Low temporal frequency signal shows evidence of additional luminosity signal
48
CoRoT Photometry – stay tuned
49
Conclusions Very precise global solar measurements are important for understanding the solar cycle Solar cycle helioseismic effects are primarily thermal or magnetic sound speed effects (not geometry) One-dimensional models don’t convincingly account for cycle variations heterogenous, unresolved (mixed) magnetic field effects are required
51
Magnetized plasma from RZ is hotter P 3E5cm B P 6MG, l P 3E5cm At the top of the radiative zone... Tachocline shear layer unresolved helioseismically, l O 0.018R (Schatzman et al. 2000) Tachocline region l
54
A useful solar cycle model must connect and explain all of these observations, none exists yet Surface brightness changes Helioseismic changes Irradiance changes
55
What was the question? Boundaries are great “Superficialist” problems Listening to the data Clocks
56
Driving the Solar Cycle
57
Irradiance changes This plot shows the residual from the 150d moving means. +0.1W/m^2/G -0.2W/m^2/G The slow variations using 30d averages are plotted here
58
Helioseismic asphericity (Vorontsov, 2002) (Antia et al. 2001) 26 nHz/G 140 nHz/K (1989)
59
Irradiance/luminosity change Suppose 4 DT/T = DI/I, so 0.1W/m^2/G implies 0.1 K/G solar cycle change If magnetic field causes thermal stratification change and frequency shifts then 26/140 K/G = 0.18 K/G
60
The tachocline: Where luminosity perturbations come from? Convection Zone Radiative Zone Tachocline region Photosphere Over a solar cycle magnetized fluid over 11yr increases entropy by 0.1% at base of SCZ Radiative flux through magnetized fluid sees lower opacity and increased entropy relative to non-magnetized fluid Solar cycle magnetic fields Magnetized fluid is “hotter” Thermal “antishadows” Temperature gradient enhanced stable stratification becomes unstable
61
Magnetized plasma from RZ is hotter P 3E5cm B P 6MG, l P 3E5cm At the top of the radiative zone... Tachocline shear layer unresolved helioseismically, l O 0.018R (Schatzman et al. 2000) Tachocline region l
62
More numbers...
63
During the solar cycle a thin layer of magnetized plasma at the top of the radiative zone is eroded away from above by convective penetration, brought on by this radiative instability. This “relaxation oscillator” could be characterized by the condition on B that leads to instability and the higher enthalpy per magnetic energy density. Observable: Flux which originates from the RZ must have a higher enthalpy/magnetic energy density than magnetized fluid generated by CZ or photospheric mechanisms.
64
Superficial two component (faculae+spots) irradiance models Models based on resolved CaK images or B flux have been used to “explain” irradiance Observed time-variable irradiance Observed time and latitudinal facular/spot dist. (determined by proxy) Facular/spot irradiance contrast function.m is cosine central angle Models which use a statistical fit to determine the coefficients b and k can account for 70-90% of the irradiance variability (c.f. Solanki, Lean and collaborators)
65
Superficial, two component faculae + spot models are empirical and imcomplete The integrated disk brightness change due to bright faculae is 38% of the faint faculae NB: Ken Topka substantially made this point 8 years ago! “Bright” faculae are dark, at any wavelength near disk center Data from the Precision Photometric Solar Telescope
66
How does the convection zone transport heat? mixing-length diffusion conflicts
67
MLT convection fails to estimate SCZ conductivity Non-mixing length theory (realistic) solar convection has highly correlated vertical flows. The effective conductivity of the solar convection zone is far from mixing length theory approximations (images from Georgobiani Stein, and Kuhn) small perturbations are diffusive but anisotropic and with conductivity much smaller than mixing length predictions
68
Transport properties of the perturbed convection zone aren’t analogous to a “high conductivity silver slab.” Correlated flows over many density scale heights make the CZ anisotropic and not as well mixed as mixing length models predict.
69
Superficial models miss time dependence of irradiance componets Spot and facular signals peak about 1 year before luminosity signal F = 0.08 E 0.005 B -0.09 E 0.01 dB/dt sunspot peak Total irradiance
70
Spots and faculae may produce only a tiny luminosity pertubation (flux redistribution) dI time We use solar rotation to describe angular variation in active region or spot “irradiance” … luminosity T/4 If irradianceis due to flux redistribution, its autocorelation must yield a negative “dip” at T/4=7d due to opposite sign flux enhancements between normal and near-tangent viewing angles
71
Full-disk observations show flux redistribution (data high-pass filtered with 60d moving-mean) Regardless of phase of the solar cycle (min-to-max) the irradiance autocorrelation shows clear evidence that active regions (faculae and sunspots) redistribute flux. Low temporal frequency signal shows evidence of additional luminosity signal. NB Frolich finds more complex behavior in VIRGO data...
72
Superficial models miss irradiance and luminosity distinction Immediate effect of B flux appearing at low latitudes is to decrease irradiance (flux directed away from normal direction) -- this is dB/dt term of regression for I(t) Long term effect is from higher entropy magnetized plasma to increase solar luminosity in proportion to B flux
73
Superficial models miss diffuse irradiance component
74
Solar cycle changes Photometry from Mt. Wilson, previous cycle implied this limb temperature Most of a solar cycle was obtained from Mt. Wilson oblateness expt. MDI Roll data photometry imply this limb temperature distribution
75
Phase properties
76
Delayed Oscillator RZ CZ BfBf F(t) G(t) Flux storage and “heating” in RZ, G[ a,e] Flux diffusion and winding in CZ, F[ b,d]
77
Delayed Oscillator Output
78
Solar Cycle Effects Delayed oscillator - correlated driving amplitude and phase delay in RZ. Higher amplitudes imply shorter periods (8%)...
79
Solar cycle phase regulation Solar cycle coherence and amplitude variability hint at a stable storage or steady flux transport process, i.e. Babcock- Leighton stochastic flux transport, not intrinsically non-linearity mechanisms
80
To do... find the complete luminosity budget of surface magnetic fields find B (and dB/dt) at tachocline determine dQ/dB from first principles build a relaxation delayed oscillator model for the full CZ
82
Convection Zone Radiative Zone Tachocline region Photosphere Over a solar cycle magnetized fluid over 11yr increases entropy by 0.1% at base of SCZ Radiative flux through magnetized fluid sees lower opacity and increased entropy relative to non-magnetized fluid Solar cycle magnetic fields Magnetized fluid is “hotter” Thermal “antishadows” Temperature gradient enhanced stable stratification becomes unstable
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.