SOHO and radio observations of a CME shock wave

Raymond, J. C.; Thompson, B. J.; Cyr, O. C. St.; Gopalswamy, Ν.; Kahler, S. W.; Kaiser, M. L.; Lara, A.; Ciaravella, A.; Romoli, M.; O'Neal, Ray H.

doi:10.1029/1999gl003669

Cited by 103 publications

(96 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These features have been identified as density enhancements caused by a CME-driven fast-mode shock (e.g., Vourlidas et al, 2003;Rouillard et al, 2011). This has been verified by UV spectroscopy with SOHO/UVCS (e.g., Raymond et al, 2000;Mancuso et al, 2002;Ciaravella et al, 2005;Bemporad et al, 2014), which also allows to determine the shock parameters. WL shocks have been observed both at the nose and at the flanks of an erupting CME, which poses the question whether these shocks represent the same perturbation that is causing coronal waves (e.g., Tripathi and Raouafi, 2007).…”

Section: White Lightmentioning

confidence: 99%

Large-scale Globally Propagating Coronal Waves

Warmuth

2015

Living Rev. Sol. Phys.

164

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large-scale, globally propagating wave-like disturbances have been observed in the solar chromosphere and by inference in the corona since the 1960s. However, detailed analysis of these phenomena has only been conducted since the late 1990s. This was prompted by the availability of high-cadence coronal imaging data from numerous spaced-based instruments, which routinely show spectacular globally propagating bright fronts. Coronal waves, as these perturbations are usually referred to, have now been observed in a wide range of spectral channels, yielding a wealth of information. Many findings have supported the "classical" interpretation of the disturbances: fast-mode MHD waves or shocks that are propagating in the solar corona. However, observations that seemed inconsistent with this picture have stimulated the development of alternative models in which "pseudo waves" are generated by magnetic reconfiguration in the framework of an expanding coronal mass ejection. This has resulted in a vigorous debate on the physical nature of these disturbances. This review focuses on demonstrating how the numerous observational findings of the last one and a half decades can be used to constrain our models of large-scale coronal waves, and how a coherent physical understanding of these disturbances is finally emerging. Article RevisionsLiving Reviews supports two ways of keeping its articles up-to-date:Fast-track revision. A fast-track revision provides the author with the opportunity to add short notices of current research results, trends and developments, or important publications to the article. A fast-track revision is refereed by the responsible subject editor. If an article has undergone a fast-track revision, a summary of changes will be listed here.Major update. A major update will include substantial changes and additions and is subject to full external refereeing. It is published with a new publication number.For detailed documentation of an article's evolution, please refer to the history document of the article's online version at http://dx

show abstract

Section: White Lightmentioning

confidence: 99%

Large-scale Globally Propagating Coronal Waves

Warmuth

2015

Living Rev. Sol. Phys.

164

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gergely et al 1984) or CMEs (e.g. Raymond et al 2000). This view maintains that multiple type II bursts are caused by a single shock travelling through different coronal structure since there are no multiple disturbances.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between multiple type II solar radio bursts and CME observed by STEREO/SECCHI

Cho

Bong

Moon

et al. 2011

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims. Two or more type II bursts are occasionally observed in close time sequence during solar eruptions, which are known as multiple type II bursts. The origin of the successive burst has been interpreted in terms of coronal mass ejections (CMEs) and/or flares. Detailed investigations of the relationship between CMEs and the bursts enable us to understand the nature of the multiple type II bursts. In this study, we examine multiple type II bursts and compare their kinematics with those of a CME occurring near the time of the bursts. Methods. To do this, we selected multiple type II bursts observed by the Culgoora radiospectrographs and a limb CME detected in the low corona field of view (1.4−4 R s ) of a STEREO/SECCHI instrument on December 31, 2007. To determine the 3D kinematics of the CME, we applied the stereoscopic technique to the STEREO/SECCHI data. Results. Our main results are as follows: (1) the multiple type II bursts occurred successively at ten minute intervals and displayed various emission structures and frequency drifting rates; (2) near the time of the bursts, the CME was observed by STEREO and SOHO simultaneously, but no evidence of other CMEs was detected; (3) inspection of the 3D kinematics of the CME using the stereoscopic observation by STEREO/SECCHI revealed that the CME propagated along the eastward radial direction as viewed from the Earth; (4) very close time and height associations were found between the CME nose and the first type II burst, and between CME-streamer interaction and the second type II burst. Conclusions. On the basis of these results, we suggest that a single shock in the leading edge of the CME could be the source of the multiple type II bursts and support the notion that the CME nose and the CME-streamer interaction are the two main mechanisms able to generate the bursts.

show abstract

“…In some cases, UV spectra show emission from higher ionization states that can be interpreted as emission from collisionless shock waves detected in connection with the CME eruption (Raymond et al 2000;Mancuso et al 2002) or related to reconnection current sheets (Ciaravella et al 2005). The UVCS observational sequence started at 15:58 UT and ended at 20:12 UT, which covers adequately the time evolution of the CME event.…”

Section: Uvcs Observations: Evidence For a Cme-driven Shock Wavementioning

confidence: 99%

“…So far there have been just a few reports of coronal shock waves observed by UVCS, namely events observed on 11 Jun. 1998 (Raymond et al 2000);3 Mar. 2002(Mancuso et al 2002; 27 Jun.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the relationship between coronal waves associated with a CME on 5 March 2000

Tripathi¹,

Raouafi²

2007

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims. To study the relationship between coronal mass ejection (CME) associated waves. Methods. Analysis of CME eruption observations on 5 Mar. 2000 recorded by the Large Angle Spectrometric Coronagraph (LASCO), the Ultraviolet Coronagraph Spectrometer (UVCS), and the Extreme-ultraviolet Imaging Telescope (EIT) on board the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO). Results. Images recorded by the LASCO/C2 show a clear deflection and kink in a streamer located eastward of the CME. The kink in the streamer propagated outwards along with the associated CME. No CME material was seen between the bright front of the CME and the streamer. UVCS spectra show large spectral line broadening, Doppler shifts and intensity changes in the O vi (λ1032 & 1037) lines. Moreover, intensity enhancements in lines such as Si xii λ 520 and Mg x λ 625 forming at very high temperatures (>2 MK; not often observed in the corona) were also observed. EIT images show the propagation of a wave from the CME source region. The speed of the wave was about 55 km s −1 and it propagated predominantly in the North-East direction from the source region. Furthermore, it does not propagate through active regions and coronal holes. The deflection in the streamer recorded in the LASCO/C2 was in the same direction as that of the EIT wave. Conclusions. Spatial and temporal correlations show that the deflection and the propagation of the kink in the streamer (based on the LASCO data), and plasma heating and spectral line broadening (based on the UVCS data), are basically due to a CME-driven shock wave. The spatial and temporal correlations between the EIT wave and the shock wave provide strong evidence in favor of the interpretation that the EIT waves are indeed the counterpart of CME-driven shock waves in the lower corona. Although, we cannot rule out the possibility that the EIT waves are just a manifestation of the stretching of the field lines due to the outward propagation of the CMEs.

show abstract

SOHO and radio observations of a CME shock wave

Cited by 103 publications

References 10 publications

Large-scale Globally Propagating Coronal Waves

Large-scale Globally Propagating Coronal Waves

Relationship between multiple type II solar radio bursts and CME observed by STEREO/SECCHI

On the relationship between coronal waves associated with a CME on 5 March 2000

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About