300 likes | 486 Views
Helicity on the Sun. If you worry about publicity Do not speak of Current Helicity Jan Stenflo. Dr. Alexei A. Pevtsov. Helicity on the Sun:. What is it good for anyway?. Dr. Alexei A. Pevtsov. Outline. Definition of helicity (incl. graphic repr.)
E N D
Helicity on the Sun. If you worry about publicity Do not speak of Current Helicity Jan Stenflo Dr. Alexei A. Pevtsov
Helicity on the Sun: What is it good for anyway? Dr. Alexei A. Pevtsov
Outline • Definition of helicity (incl. graphic repr.) • Hemispheric helicity rule (observations, origin, cycle variation) • Helicity transport • Fitting pieces of puzzle together???
Knots and Bolts H = 0
Knots and Bolts H = 0 H= -1
Writhe and Twist W = -1; T=0 H = W+T T = -1; W=0
Magnetic Helicity Helicities A – vector potential, B – magnetic induction. Current Helicity For liner force-free field (a = constant) Kinetic Helicity where Y isarbitrary scalar function , where E is magnetic energy • topological invariant • conserves better than energy (Woltjer, 1958; Taylor 1974; Ji et al, 1995) • dynamo, reconnection, stability energy decay – 4-10.5% • helicity dissipation – 1.3-5.1%
What We Observe Observations: Force-free field(1): Pevtsov et al, 1995, Longcope et al, 1998 Current helicity density(2): Abramenko et al, 1996 Bao and Zhang, 1998 WL, H-alpha, X-ray Morphology:
What We Observe Relative helicity: (Berger, 1985) (e.g. Chae, 2001)
Seehafer, 1990 Pevtsov et al, 1995, Abramenko et al, 1996 Longcope et al, 1998, Bao and Zhang, 1998, Pevtsov et al. 2001, Hagino and Sakurai, 2002 60-80%, hemispheric helicity rule 466 active regions observed 1988-2000 by Haleakala Stokes Polarimeter r= -0.23, Likelihood of no correlation is 2.5x10-7 N/(-) S/(+) 69% 75% (cycle 22, Pevtsov et al, 1995) 63% 70% (cycle 23, Pevtsov et al, 2001)
Cycle variation? Bao et al, 1999, reverse sign for hc at the beginning Cycle 23 Hagino & Sakurai, 2002, some periods disobey the rule Nandi & Choudhuri 2004 – cycle variation of helicity rule abest g Lat g < 0 Pevtsov et al 2001
Longcope et al, 1999 Holder et al, 2003; Tian et al., 2001 Chae 2001, Green et al 2003 Demoulin et al 2003 Seehafer et al, 2003 • direct action of Coriolis force and differential rotation produce insufficient • amount of helicity andcannot explain significant scatter in latitudinal dependency • dynamo does not produce enough helicity. • - S-effect can do it all?
Nandy, 2006 • ~ F-0.69 Scatter is latitude-independent Trend, scatter agree with S-effect
For liner force-free field (a = constant) where Y isarbitraryscalar function Helicity Transport Lepping et al (1990) fitted 18 MCs, a=10-10 m-1, B0=0.0002 G, F=1021 Mx. HMC=(La/2p) F2= 5 x 1042 Mx2 Larson et al (1995), HMC= 4 x 1042 Mx2 Demoulin et al, 2002, AR7978 52 x 1042 Mx2 (26 CMEs, 1 rotation) 5 rotations - ? Total helicity ejected by MCs often exceeds coronal helicity (diff. rotation cannot replenish).
Helicity Transport via Reconnection Independent flux systems: Hm= H1+ H2+ H3; e.g. H1=0.5Hcrit; H2=0.4Hcrit; H3=0.2Hcrit Hm>Hcrit Pevtsov et al 1996 Canfield & Reardon, 1998
Twist in Emerging Flux Tube • Longcope and Welsch, 2000: • vortical motions responsible for helicity injection • cannot be driven by pressure gradient and cannot • be produced by coupling motions of non-mag. plasma • magnetic torque at photosphere-corona transition • cannot be countered by pressure gradients.
Evolution of ARs and their Helicity • - MDI full disk magnetograms • SoHO EIT 195A images • 6 emerging active regions Maleev et al, 2002
Modeling Flux Emergence • no twist at emergence • emergence – linear increase in d • d increases in constant rate until t1
Sunspot Rotation • Kempf, P., Astron. Nachrichten, 1910, Nr. 4429, • Bd. 195, 197 • -Brown, et al, Solar Phys., 2003, 216, 79 • Pevtsov, A. A. and Sattarov, I.S., Soln. Dannye, 1985, • No. 3, 65. Courtesy R. Nightingale
Sunspot Rotation(R. Nightingale data) * Correct sign of twist; “hemispheric preference” is in agreement with the hemispheric helicity rule * No good correlation between sign of current helicity and direction of rotation
Kinetic Helicity and flares See poster by F. Hill et al
How These All Might Fit Together? • Solar magnetic fields exhibit hemispheric sign asymmetry. Helicity (ARs) is created in upper CZN (S-effect explains large scatter and helicity amplitude; solar cycle variations???). • Helicity is removed from AR as a result of eruption. • Subphotospheric portion of flux tube may serve as “reservoir” of helicity, supplying helicity between flares/CMEs. • Sunspot rotation and subphotospheric pattern of kinetic helicity may be indications of helicity transport via torsional waves.
Open Questions • Evolution of kinetic helicity (before/after flare/flux emergence). • Timing of sunspot rotation vs. flare • Is helicity of active region determined at their emergence, or maybe, significant amount of helicity can be injected later during AR lifetime?