Engineering topics

Karpen, Judy T.

Publications and source records attributed to Karpen, Judy T..

6 records

NASA NTRS2011

Prominences: The Key to Understanding Solar Activity

Prominences are spectacular manifestations of both quiescent and eruptive solar activity. The largest examples can be seen with the naked eye during eclipses, making prominences among the first solar features to be described and catalogued. Steady improvements in temporal and spatial resolution from both ground- and space-based instruments have led us to recognize how complex and dynamic these majestic structures really are. Their distinguishing characteristics - cool knots and threads suspended in the hot corona, alignment along inversion lines in the photospheric magnetic field within highly sheared filament channels, and a tendency to disappear through eruption - offer vital clues as to their origin and dynamic evolution. Interpreting these clues has proven to be contentious, however, leading to fundamentally different models that address the basic questions: What is the magnetic structure supporting prominences, and how does so much cool, dense plasma appear in the corona? Despite centuries of increasingly detailed observations, the magnetic and plasma structures in prominences are poorly known. Routine measurements of the vector magnetic field in and around prominences have become possible only recently, while long-term monitoring of the underlying filament-channel formation process also remains scarce. The process responsible for prominence mass is equally difficult to establish, although we have long known that the chromosphere is the only plausible source. As I will discuss, however, the motions and locations of prominence material can be used to trace the coronal field, thus defining the magnetic origins of solar eruptions. A combination of observations, theory, and numerical modeling must be used to determine whether any of the competing theories accurately represents the physics of prominences. I will discuss the criteria for a successful prominence model, compare the leading models, and present in detail one promising, comprehensive scenario for prominence formation and evolution that could answer the two questions posed above.

Karpen, Judy T.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Reconnection Onset in the Breakout Model for CME Initiation

Fast coronal mass ejections (CMEs) are the most massive explosions in the heliosphere, and the primary drivers of geoeffective space weather. Although it is generally agreed that magnetic reconnection is the key to fast CME initiation, different models incorporate reconnection in different ways. One promising model --- the breakout scenario --- involves reconnection in two distinct yet interconnected locations: breakout reconnection ahead of the CME, and flare reconnection behind it. We will discuss what we have learned about the early evolution of breakout and flare reconnection from recent high-resolution 2.5D adaptively refined MHD simulations of CME initiation, including the evolving properties of the breakout and flare current sheets, the conditions that trigger reconnection onset in each sheet, the ensuing positive feedback between breakout and flare reconnections, and implications for electron acceleration in flares.

Karpen, Judy T.↗

NASA NTRS2010

CME Initiation and Reconnection

Coronal mass ejections (CMEs) are the most massive explosions in the heliosphere, and the primary drivers of geoeffective space weather. This talk will be focused on fast CMEs, which travel at Alfvenic speeds as high as 2500 km/s. These ejections are associated with solar flares, prominence eruptions, and energetic particles accelerated near the Sun and in interplanetary space. CMEs require sufficient energy storage, in the form of magnetic stress, and rapid release of this energy. Although it is generally agreed that magnetic reconnection is the key to fast CME initiation, different models incorporate reconnection in different ways. One promising model --- the breakout scenario --- involves reconnection in two distinct yet interconnected locations: breakout reconnection ahead of the CME, and flare reconnect ion behind it. This model has been validated through 2D and 3D MHD simulations and favorable comparison with the observed properties of many fast CMEs. I will discuss what we have learned about the onset and evolution of breakout and flare reconnect ion from recent high-resolution 2D simulations of CME initiation with adaptive mesh refinement and numerical resistivity.

Karpen, Judy T.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Can Thermal Nonequilibrium Explain Coronal Loops?

Any successful model of coronal loops must explain a number of observed properties. For warm (approx. 1 MK) loops, these include: 1. excess density, 2. flat temperature profile, 3. super-hydrostatic scale height, 4. unstructured intensity profile, and 5. 1000-5000 s lifetime. We examine whether thermal nonequilibrium can reproduce the observations by performing hydrodynamic simulations based on steady coronal heating that decreases exponentially with height. We consider both monolithic and multi-stranded loops. The simulations successfully reproduce certain aspects of the observations, including the excess density, but each of them fails in at least one critical way. -Xonolithic models have far too much intensity structure, while multi-strand models are either too structured or too long-lived. Storms of nanoflares remain the only viable explanation for warm loops that has been proposed so far. Our results appear to rule out the widespread existence of heating that is both highly concentrated low in the corona and steady or quasi-steady (slowly varying or impulsive with a rapid cadence). Active regions would have a very different appearance if the dominant heating mechanism had these properties. Thermal nonequilibrium may nonetheless play an important role in prominences and catastrophic cooling e(veen.gts..,coronal rain) that occupy a small fraction of the coronal volume. However, apparent inconsistencies between the models and observations of cooling events have yet to be understood.

Klimchuk, James A.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Prominence Structure and Dynamics

Nonerupting prominences are not dull, static objects. Rather, they are composed of fine-scale blobs and threads that are highly dynamic, often appearing to travel in opposite directions on adjacent tracks (denoted counterstreaming). Because the plasma is largely constrained to travel along the magnetic field, these cool, dense features can serve as tracers of the prominence magnetic structure, a valuable resource in view of the long-standing difficulty of observing the coronal field. Conversely, greater understanding of the fundamental magnetic geometry of filament channels can provide important constraints on the physical processes governing the accumulation, support, motion, and eruption of the cool plasma. Despite over a century of detailed observations, large gaps remain in our knowledge of filament channel/plasma formation and evolution. Resolving these issues will shed light on the physics of coronal heating, helicity transport throughout the solar cycle, and the origins of eruptive activity on the Sun. I will discuss the leading models for the magnetic and plasma structure, and outline how new observations and theory /modeling could solve long-standing uncertainties regarding this majestic solar phenomenon.

Karpen, Judy T.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Explaining Warm Coronal Loops

One of the great mysteries of coronal physics that has come to light in the last few years is the discovery that warn (- 1 INK) coronal loops are much denser than expected for quasi-static equilibrium. Both the excess densities and relatively long lifetimes of the loops can be explained with bundles of unresolved strands that are heated impulsively to very high temperatures. Since neighboring strands are at different stages of cooling, the composite loop bundle is multi-thermal, with the distribution of temperatures depending on the details of the "nanoflare storm." Emission hotter than 2 MK is predicted, but it is not clear that such emission is always observed. We consider two possible explanations for the existence of over-dense warm loops without corresponding hot emission: (1) loops are bundles of nanoflare heated strands, but a significant fraction of the nanoflare energy takes the form of a nonthermal electron beam rather then direct plasma heating; (2) loops are bundles of strands that undergo thermal nonequilibrium that results when steady heating is sufficiently concentrated near the footpoints. We present numerical hydro simulations of both of these possibilities and explore the observational consequences, including the production of hard X-ray emission and absorption by cool material in the corona.

Klimchuk, James A.↗