Influence of Time-dependent Processes and Background Magnetic Field on Shock Properties N. Lugaz, I. Roussev and C. Downs Institute for Astronomy Igor.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

On the link between the solar energetic particles and eruptive coronal phenomena On the link between the solar energetic particles and eruptive coronal.

Advertisements

THREE-DIMENSIONAL ANISOTROPIC TRANSPORT OF SOLAR ENERGETIC PARTICLES IN THE INNER HELIOSPHERE CRISM- 2011, Montpellier, 27 June – 1 July, Collaborators:

Global Properties of Heliospheric Disturbances Observed by Interplanetary Scintillation M. Tokumaru, M. Kojima, K. Fujiki, and M. Yamashita (Solar-Terrestrial.

Heliospheric Propagation of ICMEs: The Drag-Based Model B. Vršnak 1, T. Žic 1, M. Dumbović 1, J. Čalogović 1, A. Veronig 2, M. Temmer 2, C. Moestl 2, T.

Hot Precursor Ejecta and Other Peculiarities of the 2012 May 17 Ground Level Enhancement Event N. Gopalswamy 2, H. Xie 1,2, N. V. Nitta 3, I. Usoskin 4,

Extreme CME Events from the Sun Nat Gopalswamy NASA/GSFC Extreme Space Weather Events (ESWE) workshop, Boulder, CO May 14-17, 2012.

Lecture 4 The Formation and Evolution of CMEs. Coronal Mass Ejections (CMEs) Appear as loop like features that breakup helmet streamers in the corona.

Magnetic Reconnection Across the HCS Mark Moldwin UM and Megan Cartwright UC-Berkeley Isradynamics April 2010 With thanks to Mark Linton at NRL Linton.

CAS Key Laboratory of Geospace Environment, USTC The Deflection of 2008 September 13 CME in Heliosphere Space ISEST, Hvar, Croatia,2013 June 17 Collaborators:

Interaction of coronal mass ejections with large-scale structures N. Gopalswamy, S. Yashiro, H. Xie, S. Akiyama, and P. Mäkelä IHY – ISWI Regional meeting.

Strength of Coronal Mass Ejection- driven Shocks Near the Sun and Its Importance in Predicting Solar Energetic Particle Events Chenglong Shen 1, Yuming.

M. J. Reiner, 1 st STEREO Workshop, March, 2002, Paris.

1 Diagnostics of Solar Wind Processes Using the Total Perpendicular Pressure Lan Jian, C. T. Russell, and J. T. Gosling How does the magnetic structure.

STEREO AND SPACE WEATHER Variable conditions in space that can have adverse effects on human life and society Space Weather: Variable conditions in space.

SHINE Campaign Event: 1-2 May 1998 Brian Welsch (& Yan Li) Space Sciences Laboratory, UC Berkeley Introduction: Data, Context, etc. Work: Completed & Ongoing.

30-Day Science Plan Angelos Vourlidas, Russ Howard SECCHI Consortium Meeting IAS 8 March 2007.

Coronal IP Shocks Nat Gopalswamy NASA/GSFC Elmau CME Workshop, 2003 February 7 Plenary talk Sun Earth.

Center for Space Environment Modeling T. H. Zurbuchen, on behalf of W. Manchester, J. Kota, I. Roussev, T. H. Zurbuchen, N.

CME-driven Shocks in White Light Observations SOHO/LASCO C3 – CME May 5 th, 1999 CME-driven Shock We demonstrate that CME-driven shocks: (1) can be detected.

Center for Space Environment Modeling Ward Manchester University of Michigan Yuhong Fan High Altitude Observatory SHINE July.

CME Interactions and Particle Acceleration N. Gopalswamy (NASA/GSFC) 2003 February 11 Elmau CME workshop, Group-C Presentation (B. Klecker’s Group)

The nature of impulsive solar energetic particle events N. V. Nitta a, H. S. Hudson b, M. L. Derosa a a Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory.

Coronal and Heliospheric Modeling of the May 12, 1997 MURI Event MURI Project Review, NASA/GSFC, MD, August 5-6, 2003 Dusan Odstrcil University of Colorado/CIRES.

The “cone model” was originally developed by Zhao et al. ~10 (?) years ago in order to interpret the times of arrival of ICME ejecta following SOHO LASCO.

1. Background2. Flux variation3. Polarity reversal4. Electron evolution5. Conclusions The role of coronal mass ejections in the solar cycle evolution of.

RT Modelling of CMEs Using WSA- ENLIL Cone Model

Characterization of Coronal Mass Ejection Deflection using Coronagraph Image Sequences Jenna L. Zink, GMU Undergraduate Research Scholars Program, Rebekah.

High-Cadence EUV Imaging, Radio, and In-Situ Observations of Coronal Shocks and Energetic Particles: Implications for Particle Acceleration K. A. Kozarev.

The Sun and the Heliosphere: some basic concepts…

Evolution of the 2012 July 12 CME from the Sun to the Earth: Data- Constrained Three-Dimensional MHD Simulations F. Shen 1, C. Shen 2, J. Zhang 3, P. Hess.

Assessing Predictions of CME Time- of-Arrival and 1 AU Speed to Observations Angelos Vourlidas Vourlidas- SHINE

A Catalog of Halo Coronal Mass Ejections from SOHO N. Gopalswamy 1, S. Yashiro 2, G. Michalek 3, H. Xie 3, G. Stenborg 2, A. Vourlidas 4, R. A. Howard.

Relation between Type II Bursts and CMEs Inferred from STEREO Observations N. Gopalswamy, W. Thompson, J. Davila, M. Kaiser NASA Goddard Space Flight Center,

Outline of WG 2 Sessions: Interplanetary Phenomena Working Group Leaders: Ian Richardson and Ilia Roussev.

Space Weather from Coronal Holes and High Speed Streams M. Leila Mays (NASA/GSFC and CUA) SW REDISW REDI 2014 June 2-13.

On the February 14-15, 2011 CME-CME interaction event and consequences for Space Weather Manuela Temmer(1), Astrid Veronig(1), Vanessa Peinhart(1), Bojan.

Arrival time of halo coronal mass ejections In the vicinity of the Earth G. Michalek, N. Gopalswamy, A. Lara, and P.K. Manoharan A&A 423, (2004)

SHINE SEP Campaign Events: Long-term development of solar corona in build-up to the SEP events of 21 April 2002 and 24 August 2002 A. J. Coyner, D. Alexander,

Extremely Fast Coronal Mass Ejection on 23 July Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, Maryland,20723, USA 2 NOAA Space Weather.

1 20 January 2005: Session Summary SHINE 2006 Zermatt, Utah, 31 July - 4 August Invited Talks Riley: what was the Alfven speed in the corona at.

2004 September 11CAWSES Theme 2 Meeting, Beijing Solar Sources of Geoeffective Disturbances N. Gopalswamy NASA/GSFC Greenbelt, MD

Validation of the SWMF Coupled Model for Solar Corona – Inner Heliosphere – CME With the Observations of the May 12, 1997 Event Ofer Cohen(1), Igor V.

1 SEP “Campaign Events” for SHINE 2003 Question: Can we identify solar/interplanetary factors that drive SEP spectral and compositional variability at.

SHINE SEP Campaign Events: Detailed comparison of active regions AR9906 and AR0069 in the build-up to the SEP events of 21 Apr 2002 and 24 Aug 2002 D.

Lessons for STEREO - learned from Helios Presented at the STEREO/Solar B Workshop, Rainer Schwenn, MPS Lindau The Helios.

Forecast of Geomagnetic Storm based on CME and IP condition R.-S. Kim 1, K.-S. Cho 2, Y.-J. Moon 3, Yu Yi 1, K.-H. Kim 3 1 Chungnam National University.

Solar origin of SEP events and dynamical behaviour of the corona Monique Pick, Dalmiro Maia, and S. Edward Hawkins LESIA, Observatoire de Paris, Meudon,

CME-associated dimming regions Alysha Reinard 12, Doug Biesecker 1, Tim Howard 3 1 NOAA/SEC 2 University of Colorado 3 Montana State University SHINE 2006.

The Space Weather Week Monique Pick LESIA, Observatoire de Paris November 2006.

Modeling of CME-driven Shock propagation with ENLIL simulations using flux-rope and cone-model inputs Using observations from STEREO/SECCHI and SOHO/LASCO,

CASS/UCSD ILWS 2009 SMEI 3D reconstructions of density behind shocks B.V. Jackson, P.P. Hick, A. Buffington, M.M. Bisi, J.M. Clover, S. Hamilton Center.

SEP Event Onsets: Far Backside Solar Sources and the East-West Hemispheric Asymmetry S. W. Kahler AFRL Space Vehicles Directorate, Kirtland AFB, New Mexico,

Heliospheric Simulations of the SHINE Campaign Events SHINE Workshop, Big Sky, MT, June 27 – July 2, 2004 Dusan Odstrcil 1,2 1 University of Colorado/CIRES,

Observations –Morphology –Quantitative properties Underlying Physics –Aly-Sturrock limit Present Theories/Models Coronal Mass Ejections (CME) S. K. Antiochos,

Analysis of 3 and 8 April 2010 Coronal Mass Ejections and their Influence on the Earth Magnetic Field Marilena Mierla and SECCHI teams at ROB, USO and.

Shocks in the IPS Wageesh Mishra Eun-kyung Joo Shih-pin Chen.

Solar Origins of the October November 2003 Extreme Events N. Gopalswamy NASA/GSFC SHINE 2004 WG3 Thursday, June 1 Big Sky, Montana Photo.

1 Test Particle Simulations of Solar Energetic Particle Propagation for Space Weather Mike Marsh, S. Dalla, J. Kelly & T. Laitinen University of Central.

Complexity of Solar Eruptions Nat Gopalswamy, NASA GSFC, Greenbelt, MD

3D Morphology of CME-driven Shocks (work in progress) V. Ontiveros, A. Vourlidas, A. Thernisien.

Relationships between flares and CMEs FRIDAY 9:00 am – 12:00 pm SHINE 2009.

Interplanetary proton and electron enhancements associated with radio-loud and radio-quiet CME-driven shocks P. Mäkelä 1,2, N. Gopalswamy 2, H. Xie 1,2,

CME-driven Shocks in White Light Observations Verónica Ontiveros National University of Mexico, MEXICO George Mason University,USA Angelos Vourlidas Naval.

An Introduction to Observing Coronal Mass Ejections

Introduction to Space Weather Interplanetary Transients

Particle Acceleration at Coronal Shocks: the Effect of Large-scale Streamer-like Magnetic Field Structures Fan Guo (Los Alamos National Lab), Xiangliang.

Corona Mass Ejection (CME) Solar Energetic Particle Events

SMALL SEP EVENTS WITH METRIC TYPE II RADIO BURSTS

Introduction to Space Weather

Taiyou Zasshikai on May 17, 2004

Presentation transcript:

Influence of Time-dependent Processes and Background Magnetic Field on Shock Properties N. Lugaz, I. Roussev and C. Downs Institute for Astronomy Igor Sokolov University of Michigan Carla Jacobs KU Leuven SHINE workshop, August 7, 2009

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 What do we know about shocks? (1)  Observations In situ: some Helios data, otherwise above 0.6 AU only. Only single point (two-three points at best) From coronagraphs: directly and through streamers’ deflection. Ontiveros & Vourlidas, ApJ, 2009 Vourlidas et al., ApJ, 2003 Shocks observed at 3-5 R Sun

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 What do we know about shocks? (2)  Observations From radio emissions: Type II (metric, decamteric (DH)) From energetic protons/ions: SEP/GLE  Simulations are useful tools (e.g. Evans et al & Liu et al., ApJ, 2008), but corona is not the place best reproduced by MHD.  There might be a energy dependency regarding the release time of particles (GLE).  There might be important effects associated with the shock geometry (quasi- perp. vs. quasi parallel). Shock may form as low as 1.5 R sun (also from Reiner et al. 2001) Gopalswamy et al., Sol. Phys., 2009

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 What don’t we know about shocks?  Simulations show the existence of a Alfvén “hump” around 3-4 R s. Is this really important?  Presence of previous ejections is important for transport but also for seed particle energy and composition. Tan et al., 2008/2009, ApJ

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 More we don’t know  The pre-event magnetic topology is important to determine the shock geometry and the connectivity (different from simple Parker spiral).  CMEs can get deflected in the corona, how is this important for SEP acceleration?  Reconnection during an eruption can result in a change of the magnetic topology and different connectivity with Earth. Ippolito, A&A, 2005

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 Importance of pre-eruption topology Beyond Parker spiral  August 24, 2002 CME: AR is W 81, so we don’t expect it to be connected to Earth before the eruption.  However, field lines connected to the vicinity of Earth (within 10 o ) have footprints between S15W10 and N20W70.

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 SEP (2): Shock formation  Field lines connecting to the vicinity of Earth: some of them reconnect through the null point at the end of the shearing phase, connecting Earth and AR 69. Possible consequences for SEP seed particles.  The shock can clearly form by 1 hour around 6 R sun. Field lines connecting 10 o around Earth Isosurface of Aflven Mach > 1 after 1 hour This shows the maximum extent of the shock

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 Pre-condition of the magnetic field  Ejection in August 22, 2002 about 900 km s hours before main eruption.  Same active region but possibly different topology (SE null). Flare: S07W62  We want to study how the topology and the magnetic connectivity with Earth changed. The possible influence of this ejection on the propagation of the 08/24 CME. The difference in SEP acceleration/shock formation

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, /22/2002: Coronal deflection and reconnection 1hr) reconnection Field line connecting the erupting active region with Earth through reconnection at the null point.

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 Evolution of the Sun-Earth magnetic connectivity

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 Heliospheric evolution: which shock was observed at Earth? shock only reaches 35 o west from Earth. Shock reaches Earth but 2 days too early. August 24 CME? August 22 CME?  Requirement to associate shock with these CMEs: Large deflection Large (>130 deg) angular extent Large deceleration (to 400 km/s)  For 08/22, 4.5 day transit.  For 08/24, 2.5 day transit.  Solution: partial halo CME on 08/23 near 15 UT. Filament near disk center?  This would explain why the shock arrival at 1 AU is not associated with any particle flux enhancement.

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 Some things I should know about shocks but don’t  What proportion of iCMEs are associated with shock? 66% at 1 AU from Jian et al. (2007, 2008) 46% at 0.72 AU from Jian et al % below 0.5 AU from Jian et al. poster at this SHINE Around 30% below.8 AU from the same poster No more than 30% from the top of my head (LASCO CDAW catalog) 25% of CMEs faster than 550 km/s. Remember slow CMEs may form shock when faster ones don’t (Shen et al., 2008, ApJ) There were about DH Type II bursts during last solar cycle (~12000 CMEs)

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 Alfvénic speed evolution in the heliosphere  Alfven/Fast speeds decrease fast at first then slower.  But CMEs also decelerate fast at first then slower.  Jian et al. (2008) paper: is 79 km/s is 72 km/s  Cohen et al. (2008) solar wind model is 64 km/s is 53 km/s is 270 km/s from Manchester et al., 2004, JGR  Where do interplanetary CME-driven shocks form? My guess is a large majority (80-90%) within Rsun Medium-speed CMEs ( km/s) may sometimes drive a shock at larger distances. Shock formation at larger distances might be associated with change of background properties.

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 April 26, 2008 CME Best example yet of a CME observed by the two spacecraft. Followed until 1 AU in HIs (A). In-situ measurements by STEREO-B and ACE. How can we use STEREO to learn more about CME Heliospheric evolution?

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 Determining position from elongation angle in SECCHI/HIs  Two main methods have strong assumptions: Point-P: spherically symmetric, centered at the Sun. Fixed-Phi: narrow, fixed radial trajectory.  Improvement for wide CMEs: assumes self-similar expansion of spherical CME Resulting distance is the harmonic mean of P-P and F-Phi  Same general procedure as that presented by Ying Liu. Multi- spacecraft measurements can give us the radial and angular position. From COR-2 data: Phi = -21 (Thernisien) or Phi = -48 (Colaninno)

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 Conclusions  Lots we don’t know about shocks.  Some indications they may form as low as 1.5 R sun (see Carla Jacobs talk).  Recently people have focused on shock geometry mostly, and presence/absence of a magnetic barrier (previous iCME) to understand SEP events.  Previous CMEs are also important to change the background alfvenic speed, length of the field lines and connectivity.  CME deflection is something to consider.  I don’t believe: Alfvén speed hump plays an important role for SEP production. More than a very few CMEs have a shock forming beyond 0.2 AU.

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 Advertisement  SH 03 session Fall AGU: CME heliospheric properties (beyond 0.1 AU) Deflection Rotation Acceleration/deceleration/drag force Deformation (pancake, indentation, etc…) Expansion  Multi-spacecraft, SECCHI, SMEI, IPS observations  Simulations  Invited speakers: Odstrcil (Colorado), Liu (Berkeley), Rouillard (NRL),  Deadline: September 3, midnight ET  Conveners: Lugaz, Vourlidas & Webb

Institute for Astronomy University of Hawaii SHINE workshop Wolfville, August 7, 2009 Thank you! These studies have been made possible by the following grants: NSF-CAREER ATM , NSF-NSWP ATM and NASA-LWS NNX08AQ16G.