How to better determine the power in non-thermal electrons from observed X-ray spectra

From RHESSI Wiki

Revision as of 23:09, 3 November 2015 by Njeffrey (Talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search


Nugget
Number:
1st Author: Eduard Kontar
2nd Author: Gordon Emslie, Natasha Jeffrey, Nic Bian
Published:
Next Nugget: [[ ]]
Previous Nugget: [[ ]]
List all
Figure 1: The model in pictures. Left: the cold plasma target with non-thermal electrons propagating downwards. Right: Warm-cold model with low energy electrons collisionally diffusing and high energy free-streaming.

Introduction

Solar flare hard X-rays provide us with the ability to diagnose the properties of the energetic particles responsible for the hard X-ray emission. However, an accurate determination of the total number of injected electrons (or, equivalently, their energy content) has challenged modelers for decades. Solar flare hard X-ray spectra in the nonthermal domain are typically power-law forms. Using a cold target model (that retains only the effect of energy loss in the dynamics of emitting electrons) requires that the injected electron flux spectra are also power-laws. Hence the total injected energy flux is dominated by the lower limit of the injected energy spectrum. As a result the concept of a “low-energy cutoff” has been used by many authors in order to keep the number and energy content integrals finite. In practice, while fitting with OSPEX, we take this cutoff to be the maximum value of the cut-off energy consistent with the hard X-ray data, thus establishing lower limits to the number/energy content in the accelerated electrons. This procedure results in an estimate of the minimum (lower bound) energy in the nonthermal electrons. However, a similar upper bound cannot be straightforwardly determined from this approach, so that the overall number/energy content remains highly uncertain.

Figure 2: Simulations of warm-cold target plasma. Top: The spatial distribution of X-rays. Bottom: The mean electron flux spectrum for thick-target (blue) and pink for our model. Figure is taken from Jeffrey et al. 2015

Warm-cold model

In an attempt to remedy this situation, Emslie (2003) included consideration of the finite temperature of the target in modifying the systematic energy loss rate of the accelerated electrons; such considerations come into play as the electron energies approach a few kT. The reduced energy losses (relative to the cold target results) at low energies make the energy content in the accelerated electrons less sensitive to the assumed low-energy cutoff, to the extent that it can formally be extended down to zero, thus providing an upper bound on the energy content. However, Emslie (2003) neglected the effects of energy diffusion on the evolution of the energy spectrum, which, as emphasized by Galloway et al. (2005), is critically important at energies of a few kT and is a necessary ingredient for describing the thermalization of the fast electrons in a warm target. Jeffrey et al. (2014) showed that the effects of diffusion in both energy and space must be included in a self-consistent analysis of electron transport in a warm target.

This nugget (following Kontar et al. 2015) highlights the role of thermalization of fast electrons in a model that includes both a warm corona and a cold chromosphere (see Figure 1). The injected/or accelerated electrons first propagate in a coronal plasma that has a temperature comparable to the electron energy, and then collisionally stop in the cold plasma below. The effects of energy loss and diffusion are markedly different in these two regions. Hence, contrary to the case of a purely cold target (in which the spatially-integrated hard X-ray yield is independent of the density profile of the target), in such a composite target the relationship between the hard X-ray flux and the accelerated electron energy content needs to take into account the spatial characteristics of the emitting region, in particular the extent of the warm target region compared to that of the overall flaring region. The resulting mean electron flux spectrum shows a pile-up of thermal electrons (see Figure 2), driven primarily by the effects of energy diffusion in the coronal target. This limits the maximum rate of electron injection and hence provides the much sought-after upper bound on the total injected power.


Summary

Instead of using a cold thick-target model, we advocate the use of the more physically complete target model, including the effect of electron thermalization. We have developed a formula that allows explicit determination of this relationship, given the temperature T and extent L of the hot coronal region. A model fit routine f_warm_thick.pro has been developed for OSPEX. This routine allows the determination of the minimum cut-off value and hence the maximum (upper bound) power in non-thermal electrons. For some flares, the low energy cut-off is constrained with an uncertainty of only a couple of keV, providing an accurate estimate of the accelerated electron number/power.

References:

Collisional Relaxation of Electrons in a Warm Plasma and Accelerated Nonthermal Electron Spectra in Solar Flares

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox