CMEs in the Heliosphere: I. A Statistical Analysis of the Observational Properties of CMEs Detected in the Heliosphere from 2007 to 2017 by STEREO/HI-1

Harrison, R. A.; Davies, J. A.; Barnes, David; Byrne, Jason P.; Perry, C. H.; Bothmer, V.; Eastwood, J. P.; Gallagher, Peter T.; Kilpua, Emilia; Möstl, Christian; Rodriguez, L.; Rouillard, A. P.; Odstrčil, D.

doi:10.1007/s11207-018-1297-2

Cited by 49 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 56 publications

(93 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From their Fig. 9 one can see that, in compliance with Harrison et al (2018), there are source locations reaching high latitudes, but the majority of source locations occurs at low-and mid-latitudes. However, young and active stars, which typically have short rotation periods, show a trend towards dominant polar spots and less dominant mid-latitude spots (Strassmeier 2009).…”

Section: Cmesmentioning

confidence: 68%

A census of coronal mass ejections on solar-like stars

Leitzinger

Odert

Greimel

et al. 2020

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coronal Mass Ejections (CMEs) may have major importance for planetary and stellar evolution. Stellar CME parameters, such as mass and velocity, have yet not been determined statistically. So far only a handful of stellar CMEs has been detected mainly on dMe stars using spectroscopic observations. We therefore aim for a statistical determination of CMEs of solar-like stars by using spectroscopic data from the ESO phase 3 and Polarbase archives. To identify stellar CMEs we use the Doppler signal in optical spectral lines being a signature of erupting filaments which are closely correlated to CMEs. We investigate more than 3700 hours of on-source time of in total 425 dF-dK stars. We find no signatures of CMEs and only few flares. To explain this low level of activity we derive upper limits for the non detections of CMEs and compare those with empirically modelled CME rates. To explain the low number of detected flares we adapt a flare power law derived from EUV data to the Hα regime, yielding more realistic results for Hα observations. In addition we examine the detectability of flares from the stars by extracting Sun-as-a-star Hα light curves. The extrapolated maximum numbers of observable CMEs are below the observationally determined upper limits, which indicates that the on-source times were mostly too short to detect stellar CMEs in Hα. We conclude that these non detections are related to observational biases in conjunction with a low level of activity of the investigated dF-dK stars.

show abstract

Section: Cmesmentioning

confidence: 68%

A census of coronal mass ejections on solar-like stars

Leitzinger

Odert

Greimel

et al. 2020

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Following OSO-7, a series of spacecraft (Skylab, Helios, P78-1 Solwind, SOHO, Coriolis, and STEREO etc.) have observed thousands of CMEs leading to a vast literature (Munro et al 1979;Howard et al 1985;Gosling 1993;Hundhausen 1999;Gopalswamy et al 2000;Schwenn 2006;Vourlidas et al 2010;Chen 2011;Wang et al 2011;Webb & Howard 2012;Mishra & Srivastava 2013;Mishra et al 2017;Harrison et al 2018). CMEs have been observed to occur often having spatial and temporal relation with solar flares, eruptive prominences (Munro et al 1979;Webb & Hundhausen 1987;Zhang et al 2001;Gopalswamy et al 2003) and with helmet streamer disruptions (Dryer 1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mass loss via solar wind and coronal mass ejections during solar cycles 23 and 24

Mishra

Srivastava

Wang

et al. 2019

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Similar to the Sun, other stars shed mass and magnetic flux via ubiquitous quasi-steady wind and episodic stellar coronal mass ejections (CMEs). We investigate the mass loss rate via solar wind and CMEs as a function of solar magnetic variability represented in terms of sunspot number and solar X-ray background luminosity. We estimate the contribution of CMEs to the total solar wind mass flux in the ecliptic and beyond, and its variation over different phases of the solar activity cycles. The study exploits the number of sunspots observed, coronagraphic observations of CMEs near the Sun by SOHO/LASCO, in situ observations of the solar wind at 1 AU by WIND, and GOES X-ray flux during solar cycle 23 and 24. We note that the X-ray background luminosity, occurrence rate of CMEs and ICMEs, solar wind mass flux, and associated mass loss rates from the Sun do not decrease as strongly as the sunspot number from the maximum of solar cycle 23 to the next maximum. Our study confirms a true physical increase in CME activity relative to the sunspot number in cycle 24. We show that the CME occurrence rate and associated mass loss rate can be better predicted by X-ray background luminosity than the sunspot number. The solar wind mass loss rate which is an order of magnitude more than the CME mass loss rate shows no obvious dependency on cyclic variation in sunspot number and solar X-ray background luminosity. These results have implications to the study of solar-type stars.

show abstract

“…When observed in interplanetary space, CMEs are commonly referred to as interplanetary CMEs (ICMEs; e.g., Kilpua et al, ) based on characteristic plasma, magnetic field, and compositional signatures measured by in situ instruments. The connection between CMEs and ICMEs has now been unambiguously established with the observations from STEREO heliospheric imagers (Harrison et al, , ) starting from the Sun up to 1 AU (Davis et al, ; Möstl et al, , ).…”

Section: Coronal Mass Ejections Close To the Sun And In Interplanetarmentioning

confidence: 75%

Forecasting the Structure and Orientation of Earthbound Coronal Mass Ejections

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coronal Mass Ejections (CMEs) are the key drivers of strong to extreme space weather storms at the Earth that can have drastic consequences for technological systems in space and on ground. The ability of a CME to drive geomagnetic disturbances depends crucially on the magnetic structure of the embedded flux rope, which is thus essential to predict. The current capabilities in forecasting in advance (at least half a day before) the geoeffectiveness of a given CME is however severely hampered by the lack of remote-sensing measurements of the magnetic field in the corona and adequate tools to predict how CMEs deform, rotate, and deflect during their travel through the coronal and interplanetary space as they interact with the ambient solar wind and other CMEs. These problems can lead not only to overestimation or underestimation of the severity of a storm, but also to forecasting "misses" and "false alarms" that are particularly difficult for the end-users. In this paper, we discuss the current status and future challenges and prospects related to forecasting of the magnetic structure and orientation of CMEs. We focus both on observational-and modeling-based (first principle and semiempirical) approaches and discuss the space-and ground-based observations that would be the most optimal for making accurate space weather predictions. We also cover the gaps in our current understanding related to the formation and eruption of the CME flux rope and physical processes that govern its evolution in the variable ambient solar wind background that complicate the forecasting.

show abstract

CMEs in the Heliosphere: I. A Statistical Analysis of the Observational Properties of CMEs Detected in the Heliosphere from 2007 to 2017 by STEREO/HI-1

Cited by 49 publications

References 56 publications

A census of coronal mass ejections on solar-like stars

A census of coronal mass ejections on solar-like stars

Mass loss via solar wind and coronal mass ejections during solar cycles 23 and 24

Forecasting the Structure and Orientation of Earthbound Coronal Mass Ejections

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About