Plasma Unbound: Coronal Heating and

1. Plasma Unbound:Coronal Heating and New Insights into Solar/Stellar Winds Steven R. CranmerHarvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

2. Outline: • Overview and brief historical background • Heating the coronal base (reconnection & turbulence) • 3. Heating and accelerating the extended corona • (waves & turbulence) • 4. The young Sun accretion-powered winds? Plasma Unbound:Coronal Heating and New Insights into Solar/Stellar Winds Steven R. CranmerHarvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

3. Motivations Solar corona & solar wind: • Space weather can affect satellites, power grids, and astronaut safety. • The Sun’s mass-loss & X-ray history impacted planetary formation and atmospheric erosion. • The Sun is a “laboratory without walls” for many basic processes in physics, at regimes (T, P) inaccessible on Earth! • plasma physics • nuclear physics • non-equilibrium thermodynamics • electromagnetic theory

4. Heating is everywhere . . . . . . and everything is in motion The extended solar atmosphere

5. Heating is everywhere . . . . . . and everything is in motion The extended solar atmosphere

6. 1860–1950: Evidence slowly builds for outflowing magnetized plasma in the solar system: • solar flares  aurora, telegraph snafus, geomagnetic “storms” • comet ion tails point anti-sunward (no matter comet’s motion) • 1958: Eugene Parker proposed that the hot corona provides enough gas pressure to counteract gravity and accelerate a “solar wind.” Too-brief history • Total eclipses let us see the vibrant outer solar corona: but what is it? • 1870s: spectrographs pointed at corona: • 1930s: Lines identified as highly ionized ions: Ca+12 , Fe+9 to Fe+13 it’s hot! • Fraunhofer lines (not moon-related) • unknown bright lines

7. fast slow speed (km/s) Tp(105 K) Te(105 K) Tion / Tp O7+/O6+, Mg/O 600–800 2.4 1.0 > mion/mp low 300–500 0.4 1.3 < mion/mp high In situ solar wind: properties • 1962: Mariner 2 detected two phases of solar wind: slow (mostly) + fast streams • Uncertainties about which type is “ambient” persisted because measurements were limited to the ecliptic plane . . . • Ulysses left the ecliptic; provided 3D view of the wind’s source regions. By ~1990, it was clear the fast wind needs something besides gas pressure to accelerate so fast!

8. Ulysses’ view over the poles McComas et al. (2008)

9. Exploring the solar wind (1970s to present) Space probes have pushed out the boundaries of the “known” solar wind . . . • Helios 1 & 2: inner solar wind (Earth to Mercury) • Ulysses: outer solar wind (Earth to Jupiter, also flew over N/S poles) • Voyager 1 & 2: far out past Pluto: recently passed the boundary between the solar wind and the interstellar medium • CLUSTER: multiple spacecraft probe time and space variations simultaneously

10. Particles are not in “thermal equilibrium” …especially in the high-speed wind. mag. field WIND at 1 AU (Steinberg et al. 1996) Helios at 0.3 AU (e.g., Marsch et al. 1982) WIND at 1 AU (Collier et al. 1996)

11. Overview of coronal observations • Plasma at 106 K emits most of its spectrum in the UV and X-ray . . . Coronal hole (open) “Quiet” regions Active regions

12. Wang et al. (2000) Solar wind: connectivity to the corona • High-speed wind: strong connections to the largest coronal holes hole/streamer boundary (streamer “edge”) streamer plasma sheet (“cusp/stalk”) small coronal holes active regions • Low-speed wind: still no agreement on the full range of coronal sources:

13. 1990s: SOHO’s new view of the corona

14. The coronal heating problem • We still don’t understand the physical processes responsible for heating up the coronal plasma. A lot of the heating occurs in a narrow “shell.” • Most suggested ideas involve 3 general steps: 1. Churning convective motions that tangle up magnetic fields on the surface. 2. Energy is stored in tiny twisted & braided magnetic flux tubes. 3. Collisions between ions and electrons (i.e., friction?) release energy as heat. Heating Solar wind acceleration!

15. Coronal heating mechanisms • So many ideas, taxonomy is needed! (Mandrini et al. 2000; Aschwanden et al. 2001) • Where does the mechanical energy come from? vs.

16. Coronal heating mechanisms • So many ideas, taxonomy is needed! (Mandrini et al. 2000; Aschwanden et al. 2001) • Where does the mechanical energy come from? • How rapidly is this energy coupled to the coronal plasma? vs. waves shocks eddies (“AC”) twisting braiding shear (“DC”) vs.

17. Coronal heating mechanisms • So many ideas, taxonomy is needed! (Mandrini et al. 2000; Aschwanden et al. 2001) • Where does the mechanical energy come from? • How rapidly is this energy coupled to the coronal plasma? • How is the energy dissipated and converted to heat? vs. waves shocks eddies (“AC”) twisting braiding shear (“DC”) vs. interact with inhomog./nonlin. turbulence reconnection collisions (visc, cond, resist, friction) or collisionless

18. Turbulence • It is highly likely that somewhere in the solar atmosphere, the fluctuations become turbulent and cascade from large to small scales. • The original Kolmogorov (1941) theory of incompressible fluid turbulence describes a constant energy flux from the largest “stirring” scales to the smallest “dissipation” scales. • Largest eddies have kinetic energy ~ ρv2 and a turnover time-scale  =l/v, so the rate of transfer of energy goes as ρv2/ ~ ρv3/l . • Dimensional analysis can give the spectrum of energy vs. eddy-wavenumber k: Ek ~ k–5/3

19. Turbulence in coronal loops? • Many stochastic processes can be described roughly using a turbulent “language.” • Coronal loops are always in motion, with waves & bulk flows propagating back and forth along the field lines. • Counter-propagating Alfvén waves interact over shorter time intervals  thus the cascade takes longer to develop. • However, the weaker character of the cascade makes it able to “send” more energy down the ladder of ever-smaller eddies, and thus lead to more dissipation! n =0 (Kolmogorov), 3/2 (Gomez et al. 2000), 5/3 (Kraichnan), 2 (van Ballegooijen; Rappazzo et al.)

20. Reconnection & Turbulence • Ultimately, the actual dissipation and heating in loops appears to occur in regions of magnetic reconnection. • This is still understandable from a turbulence paradigm, since on its smallest scales, MHD turbulence tends to: • break up into thin reconnecting sheets. • accelerate electrons along the field to generate currents. Dmitruk et al. (2004) Rappazzo et al. (2008) • Even pre-existing current sheets are unstable in a variety of ways to growth of turbulent motions, which may dominate the energy loss & particle acceleration. Onofri et al. (2006)

21. X The need for extended heating • The basal coronal heating problem is not yet solved, but the field seems to be “homing in on” the interplay between emerging flux, reconnection, turbulence, and helicity (shear/twist). • Above ~2 Rs, some other kind of energy deposition is needed in order to . . . • accelerate the fast solar wind (without artificially boosting mass loss and peak Te), • produce the proton/electron temperatures seen in situ (also magnetic moment!), • produce the strong preferential heating and temperature anisotropy of ions (in the wind’s acceleration region) seen with UV spectroscopy.

22. Waves? Start in the photosphere . . . • The photosphere shows convective motion on a broad range of time/space scales: β << 1 β ~ 1 β > 1

23. Alfvén waves from cradle to grave • In dark intergranular lanes, strong-field photospheric flux tubes are shaken by an observed spectrum of horizontal motions. • In mainly open-field regions, Alfvén waves propagate up along the field, and partly reflect back down (non-WKB). • Nonlinear couplings allow a (mainly perpendicular) turbulent cascade, terminated by damping → gradual heating over several solar radii.

24. MHD turbulence: two kinds of “anisotropy” • Outside closed loops, we can revert to “standard” Kolmogorov (1941) scaling, but with two modifications: • With a strong background field, it is easier to mix field lines (perp. to B) than it is to bend them (parallel to B). • Also, the energy transport along the field is far from isotropic. Z– Z– Z+ (e.g., Hossain et al. 1995; Matthaeus et al. 1999; Dmitruk et al. 2001, 2002; Oughton et al. 2006)

25. “The kitchen sink” • Cranmer, van Ballegooijen, & Edgar (2007) computed self-consistent solutions of waves & background one-fluid plasma state along various flux tubes... going from the photosphere to the heliosphere. • Ingredients: • Alfvén waves: non-WKB reflection with full spectrum, turbulent damping, wave-pressure acceleration • Acoustic waves: shock steepening, TdS & conductive damping, full spectrum, wave-pressure acceleration • Radiative losses: transition from optically thick (LTE) to optically thin (CHIANTI + PANDORA) • Heat conduction: transition from collisional (electron & neutral H) to collisionless “streaming”

26. T (K) reflection coefficient Results: turbulent heating & acceleration Ulysses SWOOPS Goldstein et al. (1996)

27. Multi-fluid collisionless effects?

28. Multi-fluid collisionless effects? O+5 O+6 protons electrons

29. Exploring the extended corona • “Off-limb” measurements (in the solar wind acceleration region ) allow dynamic non-equilibrium plasma states to be followed as the asymptotic conditions at 1 AU are gradually established. Occultation is required because extended corona is 5 to 10 orders of magnitude less bright than the disk! Spectroscopy provides detailed plasma diagnostics that imaging alone cannot. • The Ultraviolet Coronagraph Spectrometer (UVCS) on SOHO combines these features to measure plasma properties of coronal protons, ions, and electrons between 1.5 and 10 solar radii.

30. Preferential ion heating & acceleration • UVCS observations have rekindled theoretical efforts to understand heating and acceleration of the plasma in the (collisionless?) acceleration region of the wind.

31. Alfven wave’s oscillating E and B fields ion’s Larmor motion around radial B-field something else? Preferential ion heating & acceleration • UVCS observations have rekindled theoretical efforts to understand heating and acceleration of the plasma in the (collisionless?) acceleration region of the wind. • Ion cyclotron waves (10–10,000 Hz) suggested as a “natural” energy source that can be tapped to preferentially heat & accelerate heavy ions. cyclotron resonance-like phenomena MHD turbulence

32. The Young Sun . . . • Kelvin-Helmholz contraction: ISMcloud fragment becomes a protostar; gravitational energy converted to heat. • Hayashi track: protostar reaches approx. hydrostatic equilibrium, but slower gravitational contraction continues. Observed as the T Tauri phase. • Henyey track: Tcore reaches ~107 K and hydrogen burning dominates; some accretion and gravitational contraction remain, but both slow to a halt at ZAMS.

33. T Tauri stars: active accretion & outflows • T Tauri stars exhibit signatures of disk accretion (outer parts), “magnetospheric accretion streams” & X-ray corona (inner parts), and various (polar?) outflows. • Nearly every observational diagnostic varies in time, sometimes with stellar rotation, but often more irregularly. (Romanova et al. 2007) (Matt & Pudritz 2005, 2008)

34. Accretion-driven T Tauri winds • Cranmer (2008) extended the solar wave/turbulence models to outer atmospheres of young, solar-type stars. • The impact of inhomogeneous “clumps” on the stellar surface generates MHD waves that propagate horizontally (like solar Moreton & EIT waves!). • These “extra” waves input orders of magnitude more energy into a turbulent MHD cascade, and can give rise to stellar winds with dM/dt up to 106 times solar!

35. Accretion-driven T Tauri winds • Results: wind mass loss rate increases ~similarly to the accretion rate. • For high enough densities, radiative cooling “kills” coronal heating!

36. Freytag et al. (2002) Synergy with other systems • Pulsating hot (O, B, Wolf-Rayet) stars: Pulsations “leak” outwards as non-WKB waves and shocks. New insights from solar wave theory are being extended. • Red giants & supergiants: Strong pulsations & shocks, with dense/slow winds (radiatively cooled?) and variability from dust, thermal instabilities, etc. • AGN accretion flows: A similarly collisionless (but pressure-dominated) plasma undergoing anisotropic MHD cascade and kinetic wave-particle interactions...

37. Conclusions • The Sun/heliosphere system is a nearby “laboratory without walls” for studying plasma physics in regimes of parameter space inaccessible in Earth-based laboratories. • Theoretical advances in MHD turbulence continue to feed back into global models of coronal heating and the solar wind. • The extreme plasma conditions in coronal holes (Tion>> Tp > Te ) have guided us to discard some candidate processes, further investigate others, and have cross-fertilized other areas of plasma physics & astrophysics. For more information: http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~scranmer/

38. Extra slides . . .

39. “New stars” 1572: Tycho’s supernova 1600: P Cygni outburst (“Revenante of the Swan”) 1604: Kepler’s supernova in “Serepentarius” First observations of “stellar outflows” • Coronae & Aurorae seen since antiquity . . .

40. The solar activity cycle Yohkoh/SXT

41. Energy re-emitted as light Incoming particle Electron absorbs energy What produces “emission lines” in a spectrum? • There are 2 general ways of producing extra photons at a specific wavelength. • Both mechanisms depend on the quantum nature of atoms: “bound” electrons have discrete energies . . . • The incoming particle can be either: • A free electron from some other ionized atom (“collisional excitation”) • A photon at the right wavelength from the bright solar disk (“resonant scattering”) • There is some spread in wavelength

42. Mirror motions select height • UVCS “rolls” independently of spacecraft • 2 UV channels: • 1 white-light polarimetry channel LYA (120–135 nm) OVI (95–120 nm + 2nd ord.) The UVCS instrument on SOHO • 1979–1995: Rocket flights and Shuttle-deployed Spartan 201 laid groundwork. • 1996–present: The Ultraviolet Coronagraph Spectrometer (UVCS) measures plasma properties of coronal protons, ions, and electrons between 1.5 and 10 solar radii. • Combines “occultation” with spectroscopy to reveal the solar wind acceleration region! slit field of view:

43. On-disk profiles: T = 1–3 million K Off-limb profiles: T > 100 million K ! UVCS results: over the poles (1996-1997) • The fastest solar wind flow is expected to come from dim coronal holes. • In June 1996, the first measurements of heavy ion (e.g., O+5) line emission in the extended corona revealed surprisingly wide line profiles . . .

44. Emission lines as plasma diagnostics • Many of the lines seen by UVCS are formed by resonantly scattered disk photons. • If profiles are Doppler shifted up or down in wavelength (from the known rest wavelength), this indicates the bulk flow speed along the line-of-sight. • The widths of the profiles tell us about random motions along the line-of-sight (i.e., temperature) • The total intensity (i.e., number of photons) tells us mainly about the density of atoms, but for resonant scattering there’s also another “hidden” Doppler effect that tells us about the flow speedsperpendicular to the line-of-sight. • If atoms are flow in the same direction as incoming disk photons, “Doppler dimming/pumping” occurs.

45. Doppler dimming & pumping • After H I Lyman alpha, the O VI 1032, 1037 doublet are the next brightest lines in the extended corona. • The isolated 1032 line Doppler dims like Lyman alpha. • The 1037 line is “Doppler pumped” by neighboring C II line photons when O5+ outflow speed passes 175 and 370 km/s. • The ratio R of 1032 to 1037 intensity depends on both the bulk outflow speed (of O5+ ions) and their parallel temperature. . . • The line widths constrain perpendicular temperature to be > 100 million K. • R < 1 implies anisotropy!

46. Coronal holes: over the solar cycle • Even though large coronal holes have similar outflow speeds at 1 AU (>600 km/s), their acceleration (in O+5) in the corona is different! (Miralles et al. 2001) Solar minimum: Solar maximum:

47. Intensity modulations . . . • Motion tracking in images . . . • Doppler shifts . . . • Doppler broadening . . . • Radio sounding . . . Waves: remote-sensing techniques The following techniques are direct… (UVCS ion heating was more indirect) Tomczyk et al. (2007)

48. Alfvén waves: from Sun to Earth • Velocity amplitudes of fluctuations measured (mainly) perpendicular to the background magnetic field.

49. Why is the fast (slow) wind fast (slow)? • What determines how much energy and momentum goes into the solar wind? • Waves & turbulence input from below? • Reconnection & mass input from loops? vs. • Cranmer et al. (2007) explored the wave/turbulence paradigm with self-consistent 1D models of individual open flux tubes. • Boundary conditions imposed only at the photosphere (no arbitrary “heating functions”). • Wind acceleration determined by a combination of magnetic flux-tube geometry, gradual Alfvén-wave reflection, and outward wave pressure.

50. Do blobs trace out the slow wind? • The blobs are very low-contrast and thus may be passive “leaves in the wind.” Sheeley et al. (1997)