Estimating the chromospheric absorption of transition region moss emission
1 / 23

Estimating the Chromospheric Absorption of Transition Region Moss Emission - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Estimating the Chromospheric Absorption of Transition Region Moss Emission. Bart De Pontieu, Viggo H. Hansteen, Scott W. McIntosh, Spiros Patsourakos. What is Moss?. Reticulated EUV emission seen in TRACE 171 Å

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Estimating the Chromospheric Absorption of Transition Region Moss Emission' - shelby

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Estimating the chromospheric absorption of transition region moss emission

Estimating the Chromospheric Absorption of Transition Region Moss Emission

Bart De Pontieu, Viggo H. Hansteen, Scott W. McIntosh, Spiros Patsourakos

What is moss
What is Moss? Moss Emission

  • Reticulated EUV emission seen in TRACE 171 Å

  • TR footpoints of hot (3-10 MK) coronal loops (Berger et. al. 1999b, Martens et. al. 2000)

From Martens, Kankelborg,

& Berger 2000

What s the problem
What’s the problem? Moss Emission

  • Moss is observed to have similar EUV brightness as loops

  • Coronal loop models predict moss emission should be much greater than loop emission (e.g., Schrijver et. al. 2004)

  • Some folks (Winebarger et. al. 2008) have used filling factors to explain this discrepancy, but…

Absorption in the tr
Absorption in the TR Moss Emission

  • TR is known (Berger et. al. 1999b) to contain mixture of hot EUV emitting plasma, and cool chromospheric plasma (H, HeI, HeII)

  • Could faint moss EUV emission be explained by absorption due to cool neutral material?

Absorption in the tr1
Absorption in the TR Moss Emission

  • Hydrogen-like Rydberg Equation:

  • Lymancontinuum: n1 = 1, n2 = ∞

H:  < 912 Å

HeI:  < 504 Å

HeII:  < 228 Å

Absorption in the tr2
Absorption in the TR Moss Emission

  • Known EUV absorption in TR must be accounted for to constrain loop models (e.g., constrain filling factors)

  • Measure emission at  > 912 Å (no absorption), and at  < 228 Å (most absorption), compare with radiative transfer model (e.g., CHIANTI)

Details Moss Emission

  • We don’t know how much stuff is emitting, but we can get densities with line ratios.

  • With known density, we can use CHIANTI to predict ratio of long wavelength to short wavelength emission, in absence of absorption.

  • We need observations of 3 spectral lines from one ion - one long wavelength, and a density sensitive line pair which experience similar absorption.

Observations Moss Emission

  • Weak active region observed November 14, 2007

  • Hinode/EIS raster containing Fe XII 186.88 Å and 195.1 Å spectral lines

  • SOHO/SUMER raster containing 1242 Å spectral lines

  • AR also observed by Hinode/XRT, TRACE and STEREO A and B

Hinode eis observations
Hinode Moss Emission/EIS Observations

  • W-E raster, 256 positions, 1” spatial cadence, taken from 16:44 UTC to 17:50 UTC

  • Data reduced with, and continuum subtracted

  • Processed data is summed over spectral line (with exclusion of contaminants, e.g., Ni Xi 186.98 Å) to obtain spectroheliograms in Fe XII 186.88 Å and 195.1 Å

Soho sumer observations
SOHO Moss Emission/SUMER Observations

  • E-W raster, 1.125” spatial cadence, taken from 17:12 UTC to 20:35 UTC

  • Data reduction given by McIntosh et. al. 2007

  • Spectroheliogram created as with EIS data?

Alignment issues
Alignment issues Moss Emission

  • Observations are not co-temporal

  • Appreciable changes occur in AR over long SUMER raster

  • Authors feel best co-alignment is achieved in the eastern half of the rasters.

Analysis Moss Emission

  • Fe XII density derived from CHIANTI and density sensitive EIS line pair

  • Derived density used to calculate expected 195/1242 ratio, using CHIANTI and Keenan et. al. 1990

Analysis Moss Emission

  • Derived 195/1242 ratio compared to observation

  • Authors feel CHIANTI gives better results

  • Quantify results by making histograms of observed and calculated 195/1242 ratio in moss MA and loops A and F…

Results Moss Emission

  • Moss shows 195/1242 ratio systematically reduced by ~ 2. This is taken to be absorption of 195 Å emission in TR

  • Loop ratio shows good agreement with CHIANTI prediction. Long tail in observed ratio is explained by changing AR structure in western FOV.

Observed (solid) and predicted

(dashed, CHIANTI) 195/1242 line

ratio in loops (A & F) and moss (MA).

Other considerations
Other Considerations Moss Emission

  • Other factors might contribute to the mismatch between observed and calculated 195/1242 ratio in moss:

  • Temperature dependence of 195/1242 ratio

  • Contaminant lines in spectroheliograms

  • Image noise

Temperature dependence of 195 1242 ratio
Temperature dependence of 195/1242 ratio Moss Emission

  • Is is possible that the moss is cooler than expected, and therefore the calculated 195/1242 ratio smaller than previously estimated?

  • If this were true, the overlying loops would also be cooler, and would be expected to be very bright in the EIS spectra. This is not observed.

Contaminant lines in spectroheliograms
Contaminant lines in spectroheliograms Moss Emission

  • Care was taken when extracting the 186.88 Å line from the EIS spectra to not include close contaminants such as Ni XI 186.98 Å. Likewise for close contaminants of the 195 Å lines. Other weak contaminants are felt by the authors to be too small to impat their result.

Image noise
Image noise Moss Emission

  • The authors investigated noise in the EIS spectra, and found it to be dominated by photon shot noise. Such pixel-to-pixel uncorrelated noise cannot account for the systematic shift seen in the moss, and not in the loops.

Stereo observations
STEREO Moss EmissionObservations

  • Center-to-limb variation of moss EUV emission measured with STEREO A (disk center) and B (LOS 40° from local vertical)

  • Observed between 16 and 18 UTC on November 14, 2007 in Fe XII 195 Å

  • Data reduced with STEREO ssw and corrected for distance from the sun.

Stereo analysis
STEREO Moss Emissionanalysis

  • STEREO results quantified with histograms of EUV intensities of two patches of moss (A and B) and one loop.

  • Loop shows same average intensity in both A and B spacecraft.

  • Moss intensity is reduced when viewed near the limb (reduction ~ cos?)

Moss A Intensity: 340±130(A), 240±93(B)

Moss B Intensity: 310±100(A), 260±60(B)

Mhd simulation
MHD Simulation Moss Emission

  • 3D MHD model spanning volume from convection zone to corona.

  • Includes convection, nongray, non-LTE radiative losses, and conduction along the magnetic field.

  • Evolution of an initially potential field, stressed by convective motion, results in a simulated atmospheric structure.

  • The model TR is very rough, as in observations, and shows a mix of plasma at temperatures of 5000 K to 1 MK.

Mhd simulation1
MHD Simulation Moss Emission

  • Contribution function

    dI = Aelne2g(T)e-dy

    is integrated along y

  • Optical depth  is due to cool plasma:

     = HINHI+ HeINHeI+ HeIINHeII

  • 195 Å emission shows significant extinction at model TR heights.

Y-integrated Fe XII 1242 Å (top)

and 195 Å (bottom) emission from


Summary Moss Emission

  • Authors have shown absorption by cool chromospheric material as a plausible mechanism for reducing observed moss EUV intensity.

  • Center-to-limb variation was measured with STEREO. Observed dimming of moss near the limb is due to increased absorption by viewing a greater cross section of chromospheric material.

  • Expected extinction of EUV in the TR is seen in 3D MHD simulations.

  • Taking TR absorption into account does not fully resolve the observed discrepancy between moss and loop EUV emission, but it is a significant effect, and quantifying this absorption will help to constrain coronal loop models.