Calculation of X-ray polarization during flares

Haug, E.; Elwert, G.; Rausaria, R. R.

doi:10.1016/0273-1177(84)90180-7

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many different shapes for the electron beam have been assumed, including isoenergetic (e.g. Haug, Elwert, & Rausaria 1985;Mel'Nik et al 1999;Stepan et al 2007;this paper), sharp cut-offs (Emslie 1978;MacNeice et al 1984), and a low-energy power-law (Mariska et al 1989;Warren 2006;Reep, Bradshaw, & McAteer 2013). More exotic, i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to develop an understanding of the hydrodynamic response to specific particle energies, a number of studies have adopted an isoenergetic beam to examine the impact of accelerated electrons on the atmospheric response. In particular, Haug, Elwert, & Rausaria (1985); Bakaya & Rausaria (1997) studied the evolution of the energy and angle distributions of an initially isoenergetic electron beam in order to calculate the resultant bremsstrahlung spectra. Brown et al (1998); Karlicky et al (2000); Brown et al (2000) adopted an isoenergetic neutralized ion beam, in order to study hard X-ray production, radio bursts, and the generation of Langmuir waves, while limiting extraneous assumptions from their model.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Optimal Electron Energies for Driving Chromospheric Evaporation in Solar Flares

Reep

Bradshaw

Alexander

2015

ApJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the standard model of solar flares, energy deposition by a beam of electrons drives strong chromospheric evaporation leading to a significantly denser corona and much brighter emission across the spectrum. Chromospheric evaporation was examined in great detail by Fisher, Canfield, & McClymont (1985a,b,c), who described a distinction between two different regimes, termed explosive and gentle evaporation. In this work, we examine the importance of electron energy and stopping depths on the two regimes and on the atmospheric response.We find that with explosive evaporation, the atmospheric response does not depend strongly on electron energy. In the case of gentle evaporation, lower energy electrons are significantly more efficient at heating the atmosphere and driving up-flows sooner than higher energy electrons. We also find that the threshold between explosive and gentle evaporation is not fixed at a given beam energy flux, but also depends strongly on the electron energy and duration of heating. Further, at low electron energies, a much weaker beam flux is required to drive explosive evaporation.

show abstract