arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.sr] 18 Jul 2013

Transcription

1 Astronomy & Astrophysics manuscript no. paper c ESO 2013 July 19, 2013 Magnetic flux concentrations in a polytropic atmosphere I. R. Losada 1,2, A. Brandenburg 1,2, N. Kleeorin 3,1,4, I. Rogachevskii 3,1,4 1 Nordita, KTH Royal Institute of Technology and Stockholm University, Roslagstullsbacken 23, Stockholm, Sweden 2 Department of Astronomy, AlbaNova University Center, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden 3 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, POB 653, Beer-Sheva 84105, Israel 4 Department of Radio Physics, N. I. Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod, Russia July 19, 2013, Revision: arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.sr] 18 Jul 2013 ABSTRACT Context. Strongly stratified hydromagnetic turbulence has recently been identified as a candidate for explaining the spontaneous formation of magnetic flux concentrations by the negative effective magnetic pressure instability (NEMPI). Much of this work has been done for isothermal layers for which the density scale height is constant throughout. Aims. We now want to know whether earlier conclusions regarding the size of magnetic structures and their growth rates carry over to the case of polytropic layers, for which the scale height decreases sharply as one approaches the surface. Methods. To allow for a continuous transition from isothermal to polytropic layers, we employ a generalization of the exponential function known as the q-exponential. This implies that the top of the polytropic layer shifts with changing polytropic index such that the scale height at some reference height is always the same. We use both mean-field and direct numerical simulations of forced stratified turbulence to determine the resulting flux concentrations. Both horizontal and vertical applied magnetic fields are considered. Results. Magnetic structures begin to form at a depth where the magnetic field strength is about 3 4% of the local equipartition field strength with respect to the turbulent kinetic energy. Unlike the isothermal case, in which stronger fields can give rise to magnetic flux concentrations at larger depths, in the polytropic case the growth rates decrease for structures deeper down. Moreover, the structures that form higher up have smaller horizontal scale of about four times their local depth. For vertical fields, magnetic structures of super-equipartition strengths are formed, because such fields survive downward advection that causes NEMPI with horizontal magnetic fields to reach premature nonlinear saturation by what is called the potato-sack effect. The horizontal cross-section of such structures is approximately circular, which is reproduced with mean-field simulations of NEMPI using a vertical magnetic field. Conclusions. Results based on isothermal models can be applied locally to polytropic layers. For vertical fields, magnetic flux concentrations of super-equipartition strengths form, which supports suggestions that sunspot formation might be a shallow phenomenon. Key words. magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) hydrodynamics turbulence Sun: dynamo 1. Introduction In a turbulent medium, the turbulent pressure can lead to dynamically important effects. In particular, a stratified layer can attain a density distribution that is significantly altered compared to the non-turbulent case. The addition of magnetic fields can change the situation further, because it can locally suppress the turbulence and thus reduce the turbulent pressure. Over the scale of sufficiently many turbulent eddies, such a pressure reduction must be compensated by additional gas pressure, which can lead to a density enhancement and thus to magnetic structures that become heavier than the surroundings and sink (Brandenburg et al., 2011). This is quite opposite to magnetic buoyancy, which is still expected to operate on the smaller scale of magnetic flux tubes and in the absence of turbulence. Both effects can lead to instability; the latter one is the magnetic buoyancy or interchange instability (Newcomb, 1961; Parker, 1966) and the former one is now often referred to as negative effective magnetic pressure instability (NEMPI), which has been studied at the level of mean-field theory for over the last two decades (Kleeorin et al., 1989, 1990, 1993, 1996; Kleeorin & Rogachevskii, 1994; Rogachevskii & Kleeorin, 2007). These are instabilities of a stratified continuous magnetic field. They are quite different from those related to the buoyancy of initially separated horizontal magnetic flux tubes (Parker, 1955; Spruit, 1981; Schüssler et al., 1994). Contrary to the above mentioned instabilities, NEMPI occurs at the expense of turbulent energy rather than the energy of the gravitational field. The latter is the energy source of the magnetic buoyancy or interchange instability. NEMPI is caused by a negative turbulent contribution to the effective mean magnetic pressure (the sum of non-turbulent and turbulent contributions). For large Reynolds numbers, this turbulent contribution to the effective magnetic pressure is larger than the non-turbulent one. This results in the excitation of NEMPI and the formation of large-scale magnetic structures even from an originally uniform mean magnetic field. Direct numerical simulations (DNS) have recently demonstrated the operation of NEMPI in isothermally stratified layers (Brandenburg et al., 2011; Kemel et al., 2012b). This is a particularly simple case in that the density scale height is constant, i.e., the computational burden of covering large density variation is distributed over the entire layer. In spite of this simplification, NEMPI has been argued to be important for explaining prominent features in the manifestation of solar surface activity. In particular, it has been associated with the formation of active regions (Kemel et al., 2012c) and sunspots (Brandenburg et al., 2013). However, it is now important to examine the validity of conclusions based on such simplifications using more realistic models. In this paper, we therefore consider instead a polytropic 1

2 stratification, for which the density scale height is smallest in the upper layers, and the density variation therefore largest. NEMPI has already been studied previously for polytropic layers in mean-field simulations (MFS) (Brandenburg et al., 2010; Käpylä et al., 2012), but no systematic comparison has been made with NEMPI in isothermal or in polytropic layers with different values of the polytropic index. This will be studied in the present paper. Furthermore, in addition to MFS, we also consider DNS to quantify the degree of predictive power of the MFS. Indeed, recent work has demonstrated that it is possible to perform realistic MFS that allow one to study behaviors that are also seen in DNS (Kemel et al., 2012c). An example is the suppression of NEMPI in a rotating system where MFS have been used to show that NEMPI shuts off when the Coriolis number reaches values as small as 0.03 (Losada et al., 2012). This result was later also reproduced in DNS (Losada et al., 2013). It was instrumental in demonstrating that in the Sun, NEMPI could only work in the top 1% by solar radius at a depth of about6mm where the density scale height is H ρ 4Mm and the turbulent correlation time is around 2 hours (Losada et al., 2013). As a by-product, our present study supports ideas about a shallow origin of active regions and sunspots (Brandenburg, 2005; Brandenburg et al., 2010; Kitiashvili et al., 2010; Stein & Nordlund, 2012), contrary to common thinking that sunspots form near the bottom of the convective zone (Parker, 1975; Spiegel & Weiss, 1980; D Silva & Choudhuri, 1993). More specifically, our studies point toward the possibility that magnetic flux concentrations form in the top 6 Mm, i.e., in the upper part of the supergranulation layer. 2. Governing parameters and estimates NEMPI is a large-scale instability that can be excited in stratified small-scale turbulence. This requires (i) sufficient scale separation in the sense that the maximum scale of turbulent motions must be much smaller than the scale of the perturbations and (ii) strong density stratification such that NEMPI can be excited. However, both the size of turbulent motions and the typical size of perturbations due to NEMPI can be related to the density scale height. More importantly, earlier work of Kemel et al. (2012c) using isothermal layers showed that the scale of perturbations due to NEMPI exceeds the typical density scale height. Unlike the isothermal case, in which the scale height is constant, in a polytropic layer it decreases rapidly with height. It is then unclear how such structures could fit into the narrow space left by the stratification, and whether the scalings derived for the isothermal case can still be applied locally to polytropic layers. The purpose of this section is therefore to summarize the findings for the isothermal case. One of the key results is the prediction of the growth rate of NEMPI. The work of Kemel et al. (2012c) showed that in the ideal case (no turbulent diffusion), the growth rate λ is well approximated by λ β u rms /H ρ (no turbulent diffusion). (1) Here, β is a parameter of order unity, u rms is the rms velocity of the turbulence, and H ρ is the density scale height. However, turbulent magnetic diffusion, η t, can clearly not be neglected and is chiefly responsible for shutting off NEMPI if the turbulent eddies are too big and η t too large. This was demonstrated in Figure 17 of Brandenburg et al. (2012). A heuristic ansatz, which is motivated by similar circumstances in mean-field dynamo theory (Krause & Rädler, 1980), is to add a term η t k 2 to the right hand side of Eq. (1), where k is the wavenumber of NEMPI. To specify the expression for λ, we normalize the wavenumber of the perturbations by the inverse density scale height and denote this by κ kh ρ. The wavenumber of the energycarrying turbulent eddies k f is in non-dimensional form κ f k f H ρ, and the normalized horizontal wavenumber of the resulting magnetic structures is referred to as κ = k H ρ. For NEMPI, these values have been estimated to be κ = Using an approximate aspect ratio of unity for magnetic structures, we have κ = 2κ Furthermore, κ f = 2πγ/α mix 6.5, where α mix 1.6 is the nondimensional mixing length parameter used in the mixing length theory (Vitense, 1953). Here, γ = c p /c v is the ratio of specific heats at constant pressure and constant density, respectively. [Due to a confusion between pressure and density scale heights, this value was underestimated by Kemel et al. (2012c) to be 2.4, although an independent calculation from convection simulations would still be useful.] Using η t u rms /3k f, the turbulent magnetic diffusive rate is, for an isothermal atmosphere, given by η t k 2 = u rms 3H ρ κ 2 κ f, (2) and the growth rate of NEMPI in that normalization is λ η t k 2 = 3β κ f 1. (3) κ2 Using β = 0.23, which is the relevant value for large magnetic Reynolds numbers (Brandenburg et al., 2012), we find λ/η t k However, these estimates for the growth rate of NEMPI are likely to be modified for a polytropic layer, where H ρ varies strongly with height z. Indeed, in a polytropic atmosphere, H ρ is proportional to depth. Thus, at any given depth there is a layer beneath, where the stratification is less strong and the growth rate of NEMPI is smaller. In addition, there is a thinner, more strongly stratified layer above, where NEMPI might grow faster if only the structures generated by NEMPI have enough room to develop before they touch the top of the atmosphere atz, where the temperature vanishes. In Figure 1 we have sketched a situation in which the radius of each structure, R, is half the depth. With ρ (z z) n, where n is the polytropic index, the density scale height is H ρ (z) = (z z)/n. Thus, Figure 1 applies to a case in which R = (z z)/2 = (n/2)h ρ (z). The solar convection zone is nearly isentropic and well described by n = 3/2. This means that the structures of Figure 1 have R = (3/4)H ρ (z). On the other hand, the results of Kemel et al. (2012c) suggest that κ 1, so the horizontal wavelength is 2πH ρ. One wavelength corresponds to the distance between two nodes, i.e., the distance between two spheres, which is 4R. Thus, the isothermal result of R/H ρ = 2π/4 1.5 would imply that such a structure would not fit into the isentropic atmosphere described above. This provides an important motivation for our present work. 3. Our model setup 3.1. Polytropic stratification In a Cartesian plane-parallel layer with polytropic stratification, the temperature gradient is constant, so the temperature goes linearly to zero at z. The temperature, T, is proportional to the 2

3 Fig. 1. Sketch showing the expected size distribution of the nearly circular NEMPI eigenfunction structures at different heights. square of the sound speed, c 2 s, and thus also to H ρ(z), which is given by H ρ = c 2 s/g for isentropic stratification. The density ρ is proportional tot n, and the pressurep is proportional tot n+1 such thatp/ρ is proportional tot, as is the case for a perfect gas. Furthermore, we havep(z) ρ(z) Γ, whereγ = (n+1)/n. For a perfect gas, the specific entropy can be defined (up to an additive constant) as s = c v ln(p/ρ γ ). For a polytropic stratification, we have exp(s/c v ) = p/ρ γ ρ Γ γ, (4) so s is constant when Γ = γ, which is the case for an isentropic stratification. In the following, we shall make this assumption and specify from now only the value of γ. For a monatomic gas we have γ = 5/3, which is relevant for the Sun, while for a diatomic molecular gas we have γ = 7/5, which is relevant for air. In those cases, a stratification with Γ = γ can be motivated by assuming perfect mixing across the layer. The isothermal case with γ = 1 can be motivated by assuming rapid heating/cooling to a constant temperature, whileγ = 1.2 is an intermediate case. Our aim is to study in a continuous fashion the change of properties of NEMPI as we go from an isothermally stratified layer to a polytropic one. In the latter case, the fluid density varies in a power law fashion, ρ (z z) n, while in the former case it varies exponentially, ρ exp(z z). This is shown in Figure 2 where we compare the exponential isothermal atmosphere with a family of polytropic atmospheres with γ = 1.2, 1.4, and 5/3. Clearly, there is no continuous connection between the isothermal case and the polytropic one in the limit γ 1. One immediate problem with this description is that for polytropic solutions the density is always zero atz = z, but finite in the isothermal case. These different behaviors between isothermal and polytropic atmospheres can be unified by using the generalized exponential function known as the q-exponential (see, e.g., Yamano, 2002), which is defined as e q (x) = [1+(1 q)x] 1/(1 q), (5) where the parameter q is related to γ via q = 2 γ. This generalization of the usual exponential function was originally introduced by Tsallis (1988) in connection with a possible generalization of the Boltzmann-Gibbs statistics. It s usefulness in connection with stellar polytropes has been employed by Fig. 2. Isothermal and polytropic relations for different values of γ when calculated using the conventional formulaρ (z z) n withn = 1/(γ 1). Plastino & Plastino (1993). Thus, the density stratification is given by [ ( ρ = 1+(γ 1) z )] 1/(γ 1) ( = 1 z ) n, (6) ρ 0 H ρ0 nh ρ0 which reduces to ρ/ρ 0 = exp( z/h ρ0 ) for isothermal stratification withγ 1 andn. The density scale height is then given by H ρ (z) = H ρ0 (γ 1)z = H ρ0 z/n. (7) In the following, we measure lengths in units ofh ρ0 = H ρ (0). In Figure 3 we show the dependencies of ρ(z) and H ρ for different values ofγ. Comparing with Figure 2, wherez is held fixed, in Figure 3 it is equal toz = nh ρ0 = H ρ0 /(γ 1). Note that the total density contrast is roughly the same in all four cases for different γ, but for increasing values of γ the vertical density gradient becomes progressively stronger in the upper layers Governing equations In the following, we consider both MFS and DNS. The governing equations for the mean quantities (denoted by an overbar) are rather similar to those for the original equations, except that in the MFS viscosity and magnetic diffusivity are replaced by their turbulent counterparts, and the mean Lorentz force is supplemented by a parameterization of the turbulent contribution to the effective magnetic pressure. In the DNS, on the other hand, turbulence is driven by an externally imposed stochastic force f Mean-field equations The evolution equations for mean vector potential A, mean velocityu, and mean densityρ, are A = U B η T µ 0 J, t (8) DU = 1 [ J B + (qp B 2 /2µ 0 ) ] ν T Q H, Dt ρ (9) Dρ = ρ U, Dt (10) 3

4 ρ/ρ 0 H ρ /H ρ γ =5/3 γ =1 γ =1 γ =5/ z/h ρ0 Fig. 3. Polytropes [Eq. (6)] with γ = 1 (solid line), 1.2 (dashdotted), 1.4 (dotted), and 5/3 (dashed) and density scale height [Eq. (7)] for 4 z/h ρ Note that the total density contrast is similar forγ = 1 and 5/3. where D/Dt = / t + U is the advective derivative with respect to the mean flow, ρ is the mean density, H = h + Φ is the mean reduced enthalpy, h = c p T is the mean enthalpy, T ρ γ 1 is the mean temperature,φis the gravitational potential, η T = η t + η and ν T = ν t + ν are the sums of turbulent and microphysical values of magnetic diffusivity and kinematic viscosities, respectively, J = B/µ 0 is the mean current density,µ 0 is the vacuum permeability, Q = 2 U U +2S lnρ (11) is a term appearing in the viscous force, wheresis the traceless rate of strain tensor of the mean flow with components S ij = 1 2 (U i,j+u j,i ) 1 3 δ ij U, and finally the term (q p B 2 /2µ 0 ) on the right hand side of Eq. (9) determines the turbulent contribution to the effective magnetic pressure. Here, q p depends on the local field strength (see below). Note that this term enters with a plus sign, so positive values of q p correspond to a suppression of the total turbulent pressure. The net effect of the mean magnetic field leads to an effective mean magnetic pressure p eff = (1 q p )B 2 /2µ 0 that becomes negative for q p > 1. This can indeed be the case for magnetic Reynolds numbers well above unity (Brandenburg et al., 2012). Following Kemel et al. (2012a), the function q p (β) is approximated by: q p0 q p (β) = 1+β 2 /βp 2 = β2 βp 2 (12) +β2, where q p0 and β p are constants, β = β p q 1/2 p0 was already discussed in Section 2,β = B /B eq is the modulus of the normalized mean magnetic field, andb eq = µ 0 ρu rms is the equipartition field strength Comparison with DNS We also compare our MFS results with those of DNS (Brandenburg et al., 2011; Kemel et al., 2012c) using a similar polytropic setup. Thus, we solve the equations for the magnetic vector potentiala, the velocityu, and the densityρ, in the form A t =U B ηµ 0J, (13) DU = 1 J B +f νq H, Dt ρ (14) Dρ = ρ U, Dt (15) where D/Dt = / t + U is the advective derivative with respect to the actual (turbulent) flow, B = B 0 + A is the magnetic field, B 0 is the imposed uniform field, J = B/µ 0 is the current density, µ 0 is the vacuum permeability, F ν = (2νρS) is the viscous force, and S ij = 1 2 ( ju i + i U j ) 1 3 δ ij U is the traceless rate-of-strain tensor of the flow. As in Losada et al. (2012), z corresponds to radius, x to colatitude, and y to azimuth. The forcing function f consists of random, white-in-time, plane, non-polarized waves with a certain average wavenumberk f Boundary conditions and parameters Both in the DNS and the MFS we use stress-free boundary conditions for the velocity at top and bottom, i.e., U x,z = U y,z = U z = 0. For the magnetic field we use either perfect conductor boundary conditions, A x = A y = A z,z = 0, or vertical field conditions, A x,z = A y,z = A z = 0, again both at top and bottom. All variables are assumed periodic in thexandy directions. These conditions also apply to the corresponding mean quantities with overbars. The turbulent rms velocity is approximately independent of z with u rms = u 2 1/2 0.1c s. The gravitational acceleration g = (0,0, g) is chosen such that k 1 H ρ0 = 1. With one exception (Section 4.6) we always use for the scale separation ratio the value k f /k 1 = 30. For B 0 we choose either a horizontal field pointing in the y direction or a vertical one pointing in the z direction. The latter case, B 0 = (0,0,B 0 ), is usually combined with the use of the vertical field boundary condition, while the former one, B 0 = (0,B 0,0), is combined with using perfect conductor boundary conditions. The strength of the imposed field is expressed in terms of B eq0 = B eq (0), which is the equipartition field strength at z = 0 (see the upper panel of Figure 3). The imposed field normalized in this way is then denoted as β 0 = B 0 /B eq0. Time is expressed in terms of the turbulent-diffusive time, τ td = H 2 ρ0/η t0, where η t0 = η t in the MFS andη t0 = u rms /3k f in the DNS; see Sur et al. (2008). Our values of ν and η are characterized by specifying the Reynolds kinetic and magnetic Reynolds numbers, Re = u rms /νk f, R m = u rms /ηk f. (16) In most of this paper (except in Section 4.6) we use Re = 36 and R m = 18, which are also the values used by Kemel et al. (2012c). Both the DNS and MFS are performed with the PENCIL CODE, which uses sixth-order explicit finite differences in space and a third-order accurate time stepping method. We use a numerical resolution of256 3 mesh points. 4

5 Fig. 4. Comparison of P eff (z) and λ 0 (z) for polytropic layers with four values of γ (top to bottom) and three values of β (different line types) Expected vertical dependence of NEMPI To get an idea about the vertical dependence of NEMPI, we now consider the resulting dependencies of P eff (z) = p eff /B 2 eq; see the left-hand panels of Figure 4. Note thatp eff = 1 2 (1 q p)β 2 is just a function of β. With this definition for P eff, we can obtain approximate local growth rates (see Appendix of Kemel et al., 2012c) λ 0 = v ( A 2 dp ) 1 eff 2, (17) H ρ0 dβ 2 which are plotted in the right-hand panels of Figure 4 for q p0 = 32 and β p = These are also the values used in the rest of this paper. This corresponds to β = β p q 1/2 p0 0.33, which is appropriate for magnetic Reynolds numbers 60 (Brandenburg et al., 2012). 4. Results 4.1. Results from MFS for horizontal fields In the upper panel of Figure 5 we plot the growth rate λ (in units of η t /Hρ0 2 ) versus the horizontal imposed magnetic field, B 0 /B eq. It turns out that λ attains a maximum at some value B 0 = B max, and then decreases with increasing B 0, while in an isothermal run λ is nearly constant, except near the surface where the proximity to the boundary is too small, which reduces the growth rate. Indeed, forγ = 1, the decline ofλbegins to happen when the distance to the top boundary (z top z B 1.2H ρ0 Fig. 5. Dependence of growth rate and height where the eigenfunction attains its maximum value (the optimal depth of NEMPI) on field strength for different values of γ in the presence of a horizontal field using the perfect conductor boundary condition. for β 0 = 0.02) is less than the radius of magnetic structures (R 2π/k 1.5H ρ0 usingk H ρ0 = 1). In an isothermal layer, the height where the eigenfunction peaks is known to decrease with increasing field strength; see Figure 6 of Kemel et al. (2012a). One might have expected this decrease to be less steep in the polytropic case, because the optimal depth where NEMPI occurs cannot easily be decreased without suffering a dramatic decrease of the growth rate. This is however not the case, and we find that the optimal depth of NEMPI is now falling off more quickly; see the second panel of Figure 5. This means that in a polytropic layer, NEMPI works more effectively and its growth rate is fastest when the magnetic field is not too strong. At the same time, the optimal depth of NEMPI increases, i.e., the resulting value ofz B increases asb 0 decreases. The resulting growth rates are somewhat smaller than those of earlier mean-field calculations of Kemel et al. (2012b), who found λh 2 p0 /η t 9.7, but this was for different mean-field parameters (q p0 = 40, β p = 0.05, which corresponds to β = 0.32, which is however similar to the value ofβ = 0.33 used in the present paper). Visualizations of the resulting field structure are shown in Figure 6 for three values ofγ andb 0. Increase of the parameter γ results in a stronger localization of the instability at the surface layer, where the density scale height is minimum and the growth rate of NEMPI is maximum Comparison with DNS for horizontal fields For a detailed comparison between DNS and MFS for γ = 1 we refer to the work of Kemel et al. (2012c). In particular, the growth rate of NEMPI was found to be slightly smaller in DNS 5

6 Fig. 6. Snapshots ofb y during the kinematic growth phase for different values ofγ andb 0 /B eq0 forγ = 1 (top row), 1.4 (middle row), and 5/3 (bottom row) and β 0 = 0.01 (left column), 0.02, (middle column), and 0.05 (right column) in the presence of a horizontal field using the perfect conductor boundary condition. than in MFS, but the dependence of the optimal depth of NEMPI, z B (β 0 ), was found to be similar. Here we focus on DNS for γ = 5/3 and show in Figure 7 visualizations of B y at different instants for three values of the imposed horizontal magnetic field strength. For β 0 = 0.02, a magnetic structure is clearly visible att/τ td = 1.43, while forβ 0 = 0.05 structures are already fully developed at t/τ td = In that case (β 0 = 0.05), at early times (t/τ td = 0.42), there are two structures, which then begin to merge at t/τ td = This is also seen in the corresponding MFS of Figure 6 forβ Comparing the DNS with MFS, we can conclude that for γ = 5/3 the magnetic structures become smaller (k H ρ0 = 2) near the surface, which is the case for β This is seen both in DNS and in MFS. In the nonlinear regime, i.e., at late times, the structures move downward due to the so-called potato-sack effect, which was first seen in MFS (Brandenburg et al., 2010) and later confirmed in DNS (Brandenburg et al., 2011). To demonstrate that this is also true for our current MFS, we show in Figure 8 the case with β 0 = 0.02 and γ = 5/3. This sequence of images is a continuation of that shown in the last row of Figure 6. The magnetic structures sink in the nonlinear stage of NEMPI, because an increase of the mean magnetic field inside the horizontal magnetic flux tube increases the absolute value of the effective magnetic pressure. On the other hand, the negative effective magnetic pressure is compensated by an increased gas pressure, which in turn leads to larger density, so the magnetic structures become heavier than the surroundings and sink Results from MFS for vertical fields In the presence of a vertical field, the flux concentrations from NEMPI are much stronger compared to the case of a horizontal field and it leads to the formation of magnetic flux concentrations of equipartition field strength (Brandenburg et al., 2013). This is possible because the resulting vertical flux tube is not advected downward with the flow that develops as a consequence of NEMPI. The latter effect is the aforementioned potato-sack effect, which acts as nonlinear saturation of NEMPI with the horizontal field. We have performed mean-field calculations under the assumption that the absolute values of the minimum of the effective magnetic pressure are the same for horizontal and vertical magnetic fields. This is at present not well founded. The only hint that this assumption is not unrealistic comes from the fact that DNS show that the maximum growth rates for vertical fields (Brandenburg et al., 2013) are similar to the case of horizontal fields (Brandenburg et al., 2011; Kemel et al., 2012b) and are of the order ofτ 1 td. In Figure 9 we show corresponding mean-field results for the case γ = 1 and in Figure 10 for γ = 5/3. In the latter case, NEMPI is much more strongly confined to the uppermost layers. There, the density scale height is smaller than in deeper layers, and the wavelength of the dominant mode is about half the value found for γ = 1, i.e., k H ρ0 = 2. However, at later times when NEMPI is fully developed, structures can merge, after which their field strengths get enhanced further. The merging of structures was also seen for horizontal fields, but then the 6

7 Fig. 7. Snapshots of B y from DNS for γ = 5/3 and β 0 = 0.02 (upper row), 0.05 (middle row), and 0.1 (lower row) at different times (indicated in turbulent-diffusive times, increasing from left to right) in the presence of a horizontal field using the perfect conductor boundary condition. Fig. 8. Snapshots of B y during the nonlinear phase for γ = 5/3 and β 0 = 0.02 at different times (indicated in turbulent-diffusive times). Note the merging of two structures and subsequent sinking. structures sink (Figure 8), so the possibility of magnetic field enhancement becomes less striking Comparison with DNS for vertical fields Recent DNS using isothermal layers have shown that strong circular flux concentrations can be produced in the case of a vertical magnetic field (Brandenburg et al., 2013). This is also observed in the present study of a polytropic layer (see Figure 11), where we show the evolution of B z on the periphery of the computational domain for γ = 5/3 and β 0 = 0.05 at different times. A difference to the DNS for γ = 1 (Brandenburg et al., 2013) seems to be that for γ = 5/3 the magnetic structures are shallower than forγ = 1; see Figure 11. One might wonder whether the origin of circular structures seen in Figure 11 is associated with the occurrence of new parameterizations of the mean-field stress tensor. For example, earlier work of Kemel et al. (2012a) has shown that a negative contribution to the mean-field magnetic stress tensor (as opposed to the mean-field magnetic pressure) can lead to more isolated and perhaps more circular structures. However, a negative contribution to the effective (mean-field) magnetic stress tensor was never confirmed in DNS. Another reason for circular structures might just be an effect of the macroscopic geometry in that the two horizontal directions are equally preferred in the case of a vertical field. If that is the case, a corresponding MFS with the usual q p term should reproduce this. In Figure 12 we show that this is indeed the case, and quasi-circular magnetic structures are also produced in MFS Comparison of horizontal and vertical field cases In this section we focus on a comparison of the growth rates obtained from MFS for horizontal and vertical fields. In Figure 13 we plot the growth rate λ (in units of η t /H 2 ρ0) and the height where the eigenfunction attains the maximum value versus β 0 = B 0 /B eq0. Corresponding values of β 0, z B, and β(z B ) = B 0 /B eq (z B ) are compared in Table 1 with the case of a horizontal imposed magnetic field presented in Figure 5. It turns out that for horizontal fields, β(z B ) is 3 4%, while for vertical fields, it 7

8 Fig. 9. Snapshots of B z from MFS for γ = 1 and β 0 = 0.02 at different times (indicated in turbulent-diffusive times) in the presence of a vertical field using the vertical field condition on both boundaries. Fig. 10. Snapshots of B z from MFS for γ = 5/3 and β 0 = 0.02 at different times (indicated in turbulent-diffusive times) in the presence of a vertical field using the vertical field condition on both boundaries. is 3 6%, with the larger value being attained in the isothermal limit. Note thatβ(z B ) = β 0 e 2 γ (z B /2H ρ0 ), wheree q (x) is the q-exponential function defined by Eq. (5). In the following, we discuss the non-monotonous behavior of the growth rates in Figure 13 forγ = 1 andb 0 /B eq0 = 0.06, 0.07, and This is seen explicitly in Figure 14, where we compare the time evolution of the rms velocities of the mean 8

9 Fig. 11. Snapshots from DNS showing B z on the periphery of the computational domain for γ = 5/3 and β 0 = 0.05 at different times for the case of a vertical field using the vertical field boundary condition. Fig. 12. Snapshots from MFS showing B z on the periphery of the computational domain for γ = 5/3 and β 0 = 0.05 at different times for the case of a vertical field using the vertical field boundary condition. flow for different values of the imposed vertical magnetic field. The growth rate for the intermediate case with β 0 = 0.07 is clearly larger than for 0.06 or Nevertheless, the eigenfunctions for these three runs look rather similar; see Figure 15. This non-monotonic behavior can therefore not simply be interpreted as a consequence of a difference in mode selection. On the other hand, some type of mode selection must clearly take place, as is indicated by the presence of jumps in the growth rates of the rms velocities in Figure 14. Those, however, are associated with the merging of structures and do not explain the differences at β 0 = 0.07, which are still related to the linear growth phase of NEMPI. Table 1. Comparison of the optimal depth z B and the corresponding relative magnetic field strengthβ(z B ) for three values of γ for imposed horizontal and vertical magnetic fields of relative strengthsβ 0 = B 0 /B eq0. horizontal field vertical field γ β 0 z B/H ρ0 β(z B) β 0 z B/H ρ0 β(z B) / Mean-field transport coefficients for horizontal field In this paper we have assumed that the function q p (β) is independent of the nature of the stratification. This function has been determined from DNS for isothermally stratified forced turbulence (Brandenburg et al., 2010, 2012) and for turbulent convection (Käpylä et al., 2012). To see whether the nature of polytropic stratification has an influence on those results, we use DNS in the presence of a horizontal field. (The case of a vertical field is more complicated and will be addressed in a separate publication.) In this section, we employ horizontal averages denoted by an overbar and denote departures from the average 9

10 Fig. 13. Dependence of growth rate and optimal depth of NEMPI on field strength for different values of γ in the presence of a vertical field using the vertical field condition on both boundaries. Fig. 16. Effective magnetic pressure and other transport coefficients obtained from DNS in a polytropic layer. Fig. 14. Comparison of the rms velocity of the mean flow for the runs with vertical fields of strengthsb 0 /B eq0 = 0.06, 0.07, and Note the rather different growth rate for the run with B 0 /B eq0 = The dots indicate the times for which the eigenfunctions have been analyzed in Figure 15. Fig. 15. Comparison of the resulting field structures for the same runs as in Figure 14. The times are chosen such that U rms is similar; see the dots in Figure 14. Fig. 17. Comparison of U rms for the model of Figure 12 with q p0 = 32 and β p = (corresponding to β = 0.33, solid line), and q p0 = 9 and β p = 0.21 (corresponding to β = 0.63, dashed line). In both cases we have γ = 5/3 and an imposed vertical magnetic field withβ 0 = by lower case characters, so u = U U and b = B B are velocity and magnetic field fluctuations. 10

11 To determineq p (β) and other similar functions in the parameterization of the mean momentum stress tensor, it is sufficient to measure its three diagonal components, Π f ij = ρu iu j δ ijb 2 b i b j, (18) both with and without an imposed magnetic field. The difference between the two, Π f ij = Πf,B ij Π f,0 ij, is caused by the mean field and is parameterized in the form Π f ij = q s B i B j q p δ ij B 2 /2 q g ĝ i ĝ j B 2. (19) Here, q s and q g are coefficients that characterize the turbulent contributions to effective magnetic stress and anisotropic effective magnetic pressure, respectively, and ĝ is the unit vector of gravity. Previous DNS study (Brandenburg et al., 2012; Käpylä et al., 2012) have shown that q s is negligible for forced turbulence, but negative for convection, while q g was found to be positive in both cases, but small in comparison with q p. To avoid the formation of magnetic structures in the nonlinear stage of NEMPI, which would modify our results, we use here a lower scale separation ratio, k f /k 1 = 5, as was also done in Brandenburg et al. (2012). Furthermore, we use Re = 140 and R m = 70, which were also values considered by Brandenburg et al. (2012). In Figure 16 we present the results for an analogous study of forced turbulence in the polytropic layer with γ = 5/3. It turns out that P eff = (1 q p )β 2 /2 has a rather deep minimum of P eff 0.1 at β 0.3, which is reminiscent of similar results for turbulent convection (Käpylä et al., 2012). Our result is well described using Equation (12) with β p = 0.21 and β = 0.64, which corresponds to q p0 = 9. Following earlier work we find q s to be compatible with zero, while q g is negative, but small relative to q p MFS for vertical field with new transport coefficients We expect that a larger value of β will lead to a larger growth rate and might speed up the comparatively slow evolution in the MFS of Figure 12 compared with the DNS of Figure 11. To verify this, we show in Figure 17 a comparison of U rms for the model of Figure 12 withq p0 = 32 andβ p = (corresponding to β = 0.33) and a model with q p0 = 9 and β p = 0.21 (corresponding to β = 0.63), with γ = 5/3 and β 0 = 0.05 in both cases. The growth rate has now increased by a factor of 2.4 (fromλh 2 ρ0/η t = 3.9 to 9.5), which is slightly more than what is expected fromβ, which increased by a factor of 1.9. We conclude that these new coefficients fit the DNS better, which is also seen by comparing Figure 18 with Figure 11, but our basic conclusions formulated in this paper are not affected. The parameter combination describing the functionq p (β) is somewhat unusual (largeβ and smallq p0 ), and should therefore be used with caution. One important caveat that has been discussed in the past (Brandenburg et al., 2012) is poor scale separation, especially in the present case with k f /k 1 = k f H ρ0 = 5. In that case, one might need to replace the multiplication between q p and B 2 in Equation (9) by a convolution. This possibility is rather speculative and requires a separate investigation. Nevertheless, in spite of these issues, it is important to emphasize that the qualitative agreement between DNS and MFS is already surprisingly good. 5. Conclusions The present work has demonstrated that in a polytropic layer, NEMPI develops preferentially in the uppermost layers, provided the mean magnetic field is not too strong. If the field gets stronger, NEMPI can still develop, but the magnetic structures now occur at larger depths and the growth rate of NEMPI is smaller. However, at some point when the magnetic field gets too strong, NEMPI is suppressed in the case of a polytropic layer, while in the isothermal case it would still operate, provided the domain is deep enough. The slow-down of NEMPI is not directly a consequence of a longer turnover time at greater depths, but it is related to the fact that stratification is too weak for NEMPI to be excited. By and large, the scaling relations determined previously for isothermal layers with constant scale height seem still to apply locally to polytropic layers with variable scale height. In particular the horizontal scale of structures was previously determined to be about 6 8H ρ (Kemel et al., 2012c). Looking now at Figure 7, we see that for β 0 = 0.02 and γ = 5/3, the structures have a wavelength of 3H ρ0, but this is at a depth where H ρ 0.3H ρ0. Thus, locally we have a wavelength of 10H ρ. The situation is similar in the next panel where the wavelength is 6H ρ0 and the structures are at a depth where H ρ 1.5H ρ0, so locally we have a wavelength of 9H ρ. We can therefore conclude that our earlier results for isothermal layers can still be applied locally to polytropic layers. A new aspect, however, that was not yet anticipated at the time, concerns the importance of NEMPI for vertical fields. While NEMPI with horizontal magnetic field still leads to downflows in the nonlinear regime (the potato-sack effect), our present work now confirms that structures consisting of vertical fields do not sink, but reach a strength comparable to or in excess of the equipartition value (Brandenburg et al., 2013). This makes NEMPI a viable mechanism for spontaneously producing magnetic spots in the surface layers. There are obviously many other issues of NEMPI that need to be understood before it can be applied in a meaningful way to the formation of active regions and sunspots. One question is whether the hydrogen ionization layer in the Sun is important in providing a sharp temperature drop and whether this would enhance the growth rate of NEMPI, just like strong density stratification does. Another important question concerns the relevance of a radiating surface, which also enhances the density contrast. Finally, of course, one needs to verify that the assumption of forced turbulence is useful in representing stellar convection. Many groups have considered magnetic flux concentrations using realistic turbulent convection (Kitiashvili et al., 2010; Rempel, 2011; Stein & Nordlund, 2012). However, only at sufficiently large resolution can one expect strong enough scale separation between the scale of the smallest eddies and the size of magnetic structures. That is why forced turbulence has an advantage over convection. Ultimately, however, such assumptions should no longer be necessary. Acknowledgements. This work was supported in part by the European Research Council under the AstroDyn Research Project No , by the Swedish Research Council under the project grants and (IRL, AB), by EU COST Action MP0806, by the European Research Council under the Atmospheric Research Project No , and by a grant from the Government of the Russian Federation under contract No. 11.G (NK, IR). We acknowledge the allocation of computing resources provided by the Swedish National Allocations Committee at the Center for Parallel Computers at the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm and the National Supercomputer Centers in Linköping, the High Performance Computing Center North in Umeå, and the Nordic High Performance Computing Center in Reykjavik. 11

12 Fig. 18. Similar to Figure 12, but with the new mean-field coefficients, q p0 = 9, β p = 0.21, corresponding to β = 0.64, at times similar to those in the DNS of Figure 11. Note that there are now more structures than in the earlier MFS of Figure 12, and that they develop more rapidly. References Brandenburg, A. 2005, ApJ, 625, 539 Brandenburg, A., Kemel, K., Kleeorin, N., Mitra, D., & Rogachevskii, I. 2011, ApJ, 740, L50 Brandenburg, A., Kemel, K., Kleeorin, N., & Rogachevskii, I. 2012, ApJ, 749, 179 Brandenburg, A., Kleeorin, N., & Rogachevskii, I. 2010, Astron. Nachr., 331, 5 Brandenburg, A., Kleeorin, N., & Rogachevskii, I. 2013, ApJL, submitted, arxiv: D Silva, S., & Choudhuri, A. R. 1993, A&A, 272, 621 Käpylä, P. J., Brandenburg, A., Kleeorin, N., Mantere, M. J., & Rogachevskii, I. 2012, MNRAS, 422, 2465 Kemel, K., Brandenburg, A., Kleeorin, N., & Rogachevskii, I. 2012a, Astron. Nachr., 333, 95 Kemel, K., Brandenburg, A., Kleeorin, N., Mitra, D., & Rogachevskii, I. 2012b, Solar Phys., 280, 321 Kemel, K., Brandenburg, A., Kleeorin, N., Mitra, D., & Rogachevskii, I. 2012c, Solar Phys., arxiv: , DOI: /s Kitiashvili, I. N., Kosovichev, A. G., Wray, A. A., & Mansour, N. N. 2010, ApJ, 719, 307 Kleeorin, N., & Rogachevskii, I. 1994, Phys. Rev. E, 50, 2716 Kleeorin, N., Mond, M., Rogachevskii, I. 1993, Phys. Fluids B, 5, 4128 Kleeorin, N., Mond, M., Rogachevskii, I. 1996, A&A, 307, 293 Kleeorin, N.I., Rogachevskii, I.V., & Ruzmaikin, A.A. 1989, Sov. Astron. Lett., 15, 274 Kleeorin, N.I., Rogachevskii, I.V., & Ruzmaikin, A.A. 1990, Sov. Phys. JETP, 70, 878 Krause, F., & Rädler, K.-H. 1980, Mean-field Magnetohydrodynamics and Dynamo Theory (Oxford: Pergamon Press) Losada, I. R., Brandenburg, A., Kleeorin, N., Mitra, D., & Rogachevskii, I. 2012, A&A, 548, A49 Losada, I. R., Brandenburg, A., Kleeorin, N., & Rogachevskii, I. 2013, A&A, in press, arxiv: Newcomb, W. A. 1961, Phys. Fluids, 4, 391 Parker, E.N. 1955, ApJ, 121, 491 Parker, E.N. 1966, ApJ, 145, 811 Parker, E. N. 1975, ApJ, 198, 205 Plastino, A. R., & Plastino, A. 1993, Phys. Lett. A, 174, 384 Rempel, M. 2011, ApJ, 740, 15 Rogachevskii, I., & Kleeorin, N. 2007, Phys. Rev. E, 76, Spiegel, E. A., & Weiss, N. O. 1980, Nature, 287, 616 Spruit, H.C. 1981, A&A, 98, 155 Schüssler, M., Caligari P., Ferriz-Mas A., & Moreno-Insertis F. 1994, A&A, 281, L69 Stein, R. F., & Nordlund, Å. 2012, ApJ, 753, L13 Sur, S., Brandenburg, A., & Subramanian, K. 2008, MNRAS, 385, L15 Tsallis, C. 1988, J. Stat. Phys., 52, 479 Vitense, E. 1953, Z. Astrophys., 32, 135 Yamano, T. 2002, Stat. Mech. Appl., 305,