Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T12:42:27.850Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Turbulent diffusion in the photosphere as observational constraint on dynamo theories

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 November 2018

Valentina I. Abramenko
Valentina I. Abramenko*
Affiliation:
Crimean Astrophysical Observatory, p/o Nauchny, Crimea, 298409, Russia email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We utilized line-of-sight magnetograms acquired by HMI/SDO to derive the value of turbulent magnetic diffusivity in undisturbed photosphere. Two areas, a coronal hole area (CH) and an area a super-granulation pattern, SG, were analyzed. The behavior of the turbulent diffusion coefficient on time scales of 1000-40000 s and spatial scales of 500-6000 km was explored. Small magnetic elements in both CH and SG areas disperse in the same way and they are more mobile than the large elements. The regime of super-diffusivity is found for small elements (the turbulent diffusion coefficient K growths from 100 to 300 km2 s−1). Large magnetic elements disperse differently in the CH and SG areas. Comparison of these results with the previously published shows that there is a tendency of saturation of the diffusion coefficient on large scales, i.e., the turbulent regime of super-diffusivity gradually ceases so that normal diffusion with a constant value of K ≈ 500 km2 s−1 might be observed on time scales longer than a day. The results show that the turbulent diffusivity should not be considered in modeling as a scalar, the flux- and scale-dependence is obvious.

Keywords

Sun: magnetic fieldsSun: photosphereSun: fundamental parametersmethods: data analysis
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 13 , Symposium S340: Long-term Datasets for the Understanding of Solar and Stellar Magnetic Cycles , February 2018 , pp. 281 - 284
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2018 

References

Abramenko, V. I., Carbone, V., Yurchyshyn, V., and 5 coauthors, 2011, ApJ, 743, 133Google Scholar
Dikpati, M. & Charbonneau, P., 1999, ApJ, 518, 508Google Scholar
Giannattasio, F., Stangalini, M., Berrilli, F., Del Moro, D., & Bellot Rubio, L., 2014, ApJ, 788, 137Google Scholar
Jafarzadeh, S., Rutten, R. J., Solanki, S. K., and 14 coauthors, 2017, ApJ (Supplement Series), 229, 11Google Scholar
Jiang, J., Cameron, R., Schmitt, D., & Schussler, M., 2010, ApJ, 709, 301Google Scholar
Jouve, L. & Brun, A. S., 2007, A&A, 474, 239Google Scholar
Jouve, L., Brun, A. S., Arlt, R., and 9 coauthors., 2008, A&A, 483, 949Google Scholar
Lepreti, F., Carbone, V., Abramenko, V. I., and 4 coauthors, 2012, ApJ (Letters), 759, L17Google Scholar
Monin, A. S. & Yaglom, A. M. 1975, Statistical Fluid Mechanics, ed. Lumley, J. (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)Google Scholar
Scherrer, P. H., Schou, J., Bush, R. I., and 10 co-authors., 2012, Solar Phys, 275, 207Google Scholar
Utz, D., Hanslmeier, A., Muller, R., Veronig, A., Rybak, J., & Muthsam, H., 2010, A&A, 511, A39Google Scholar
Yeates, A. R., Nandy, D., & Mackay, D. H., 2008, ApJ, 673, 544Google Scholar