Understanding solar/stellar magnetic activity: SOLar STellar ICE connection R. Simoniello 1, S. Turck-Chièze 1, F.Inceoglu 2,3, C.Karoff 2, M.Fardschou 3, J.Olsen 3 1 CEA, IRFU, SAp, Centre de Saclay, F-91191, Gif-sur-Yvette, France 2 Aarhus University, Astronomy and Physics Department, Denmark 3 Aarhus Unversity, Geoscience Department, Denmark Paris, October 8, 214
Synergies between solar/stellar/ice data Stellar magnetic activity as seen from different perspectives
Synergies between solar/stellar/ice data Stellar magnetic activity as seen from different perspectives
The Helioseismic Sun Synergies between solar/stellar/ice data Sound waves and solar inner structure (a) Sound waves (b) The helioseismic Sun and the Solar model
The Helioseismic Sun Synergies between solar/stellar/ice data The solar magnetism (c) The high frequency (d) The low frequency
Synergies between solar/stellar/ice data Stellar magnetic activity and its variability with star aging (Baliunas et al. 1996)
Synergies between solar/stellar/ice data Stellar magnetic activity and its variability with star aging Rotation rate and Age 1 Multiple cycles (Baliunas et al. 1996)
Synergies between solar/stellar/ice data Stellar magnetic activity and its variability with star aging Rotation rate and Age 1 Multiple cycles 2 Single cycle (Baliunas et al. 1996)
Synergies between solar/stellar/ice data Stellar magnetic activity and its variability with star aging Rotation rate and Age 1 Multiple cycles 2 Single cycle 3 Flat behavior (Baliunas et al. 1996)
Solar (Knudsen Metrology al. needs, 29, and GRL, methods 36, 1671) Solar/Stellar variability Radionuclide data Synergies between solar/stellar/ice data Long term variability as seen in the solar modulation potential (Φ) extracted from 14 C and 1 Be data 15 Φ 14 C Φ 1 Be Sol. Mod. Φ (MeV) 1 5 Standardized Sol. Mod. Φ (MeV) 3 2 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 3 Time (yrs) 4 5 6 1 1 2 3 Time (yrs) 4 5 6
Helioseismic observations Cosmogenic radionuclide data Frequency shift dependence analysis in the subsurface layers as function of latitude ( Simoniello et al. 213)
Dynamical non linearities Helioseismic observations Cosmogenic radionuclide data Backreaction on large-scale flows 1 Amplitude modulation as result of energy exchanged between a dynamo mode(dipole or quadrupole) of fixed parity and the velocity flow (Tobias et al. 1995).
Dynamical non linearities Helioseismic observations Cosmogenic radionuclide data Backreaction on large-scale flows 1 Amplitude modulation as result of energy exchanged between a dynamo mode(dipole or quadrupole) of fixed parity and the velocity flow (Tobias et al. 1995). 2 Magnetic field generated by a dynamo will produce a Lorentz Force that will oppose to the driving fluid motions.. damped oscillator
Dynamical non linearities Helioseismic observations Cosmogenic radionuclide data Backreaction on large-scale flows 1 Amplitude modulation as result of energy exchanged between a dynamo mode(dipole or quadrupole) of fixed parity and the velocity flow (Tobias et al. 1995). 2 Magnetic field generated by a dynamo will produce a Lorentz Force that will oppose to the driving fluid motions.. damped oscillator 3 After a period of strong activity this mechanism pushes solar dynamics towards a minimum state Grand Maxima are likely to be followed by Grand Minima
Grand Minima/Maxima Helioseismic observations Cosmogenic radionuclide data 14 C and 1 Be data set covering the whole Holocene period almost 1 years 15 Φ 14 C Φ 1 Be Sol. Mod. Φ (MeV) 1 5 Standardized Sol. Mod. Φ (MeV) 3 2 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 3 Time (yrs) 4 5 6 1 1 2 3 Time (yrs) 4 5 6 (Knudsen et al. 29, GRL, 36, 1671)
Grand Minima/Maxima Helioseismic observations Cosmogenic radionuclide data Criteria: 1 All events below/above ±σ of the mean; 2 At least two solar cycles below/above the threshold Defining Grand Minima/Maxima.35.35 1.42.3.3.92 1.35.67.25.25 Probability Density.2.15 Probability Density.2.15.1.1.5.5 4 2 2 4 4 2 2 4 Sol. Mod. Φ ( 14 C) Sol. Mod. Φ ( 1 Be) (Inceoglu, F., Simoniello, R. et al. 214, A&A, accepted)
) ) ) Solar/Stellar variability Helioseismic observations Cosmogenic radionuclide data The solar dynamics during the Holocene 5 (a) Φ (MeV) Φ (MeV) Φ (MeV) Φ (MeV) -5-2 2 4 6 Year (AD) 5-5 -5-49 -48-47 -46-45 Year (BC) 5 (c) -5-43 -425-42 -415-41 -45-4 Year (BC) 5 (d) (b) CCDF PD 1-3 ) 1.8.6.4.2 2 15 1 5 (a) (c) CCDF 95% CI 5 15 25 35 45 Waiting Times between Maxima and following Minima (yrs).33.53.13 4 7 1 13 16 19 Durations of Maxima followed by Minima (yrs) PD 1-3 ) PD 1-3 ) 8 6 4 2 2 15 1 5 (b) (d).33.2.2.7.13.7 5 1 15 2 25 3 35 4 45 Waiting Times between Maxima and following Minima (yrs).47.2.2.7.7 4 7 1 13 16 19 Durations of Minima following Maxima (yrs) (Inceoglu, F., Simoniello, R. et al. 214) -5-57 -56-55 -54-53 -52 Year (BC)
The current solar dynamics Helioseismic observations Cosmogenic radionuclide data Solar Modulation Φ (MeV) 1 8 6 4 2-2 Inc14 Musch7 Uso11 Min/Max -4 Solar Cycle 14-6 8 1 12 14 16 18 2 Year (A.D.) Green line based on IntCal13 14C, Muscheler et al. (27) red line, based on SHCal 14C, IntCal4 14C from 1 to 151 AD and annual 14C data from 1511 to 195 AD and by Usoskin et al. (211) blue line, based on neutron monitor data. Dashed lines show the threshold values for grand minima and maxima periods. Shaded areas indicate the %68 confidence interval calculated based on each dataset, separatey (Inceoglu, F., Simoniello, R. et al. 214)
The dipole and quadrupole magnetic field The magnetic field topology at the surface The dipole field 25 2 Axial Dipole Energy (erg) 15 1 5 1975 198 1985 199 1995 2 25 21 215 Time (year) 25 Equatorial Dipole Energy (erg) 2 15 1 5 1975 198 1985 199 1995 2 25 21 215 Time (year)
The dipole and quadrupole magnetic field The magnetic field topology at the surface The dipole field The axial dipole field at minimum 25 1 2 Axial Dipole Energy (erg) 2 15 1 5 Axial Dipole Energy (erg) 1 1-2 1-4 1975 198 1985 199 1995 2 25 21 215 Time (year) 25 1-6 1975 198 1985 199 1995 2 25 21 215 Time (year) 1 2 Equatorial Dipole Energy (erg) 2 15 1 5 Axial Dipole Energy (erg) 1 1-2 1-4 t1=.23 yrs t2=.98 yrs t3=1.12 yrs t4=.9 yrs 1975 198 1985 199 1995 2 25 21 215 Time (year) 1-6 1975 198 1985 199 1995 2 25 21 215 Time (year) Simoniello,R. and Inceoglu, F. et al. 214, in preparation
Interpreting solar dynamics Non linearities 1 Solar cycle 25 could be even weaker than solar cycle 24 the Sun is in a Grand Minimum State
Interpreting solar dynamics Non linearities 1 Solar cycle 25 could be even weaker than solar cycle 24 the Sun is in a Grand Minimum State 2 Cosmogenic radionuclide data and magnetic field observation pointing to a Sun behaving like a damped oscillator on long.
Interpreting solar dynamics Non linearities 1 Solar cycle 25 could be even weaker than solar cycle 24 the Sun is in a Grand Minimum State 2 Cosmogenic radionuclide data and magnetic field observation pointing to a Sun behaving like a damped oscillator on long. 3 Indirect evidences that amplitude modulation of the basic cycle are induced by the nonlinearity of the Lorentz force
Interpreting solar dynamics Non linearities 1 Solar cycle 25 could be even weaker than solar cycle 24 the Sun is in a Grand Minimum State 2 Cosmogenic radionuclide data and magnetic field observation pointing to a Sun behaving like a damped oscillator on long. 3 Indirect evidences that amplitude modulation of the basic cycle are induced by the nonlinearity of the Lorentz force
Interpreting solar dynamics Non linearities 1 Solar cycle 25 could be even weaker than solar cycle 24 the Sun is in a Grand Minimum State 2 Cosmogenic radionuclide data and magnetic field observation pointing to a Sun behaving like a damped oscillator on long. 3 Indirect evidences that amplitude modulation of the basic cycle are induced by the nonlinearity of the Lorentz force 4 Nonlinearity of the Lorentz force can induce periodic modulation of the 11 yr cycle. Is Is then the 2 yr cycle a result of a non linear effect - cascade effect -?What does set the period of the modulation?
Thank you and see you next time (maybe) in a snowy Paris!!