THE SUN AND SPACE WEATHER

ASTROPHYSICS AND
SPACE SCIENCE LIBRARY
VOLUME 347

EDITORIAL BOARD
Chairman
W.B. BURTON, National Radio Astronomy Observatory, Charlottesville, Virginia, U.S.A.
(bburton@[Link]); University of Leiden, The Netherlands (burton@[Link])

Executive Committee
J. M. E. KUIJPERS, University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands
E. P. J. VAN DEN HEUVEL, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
H. VAN DER LAAN, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands

MEMBERS
F. BERTOLA, University of Padua, Italy
J. P. CASSINELLI, University of Wisconsin, Madison, U.S.A.
C. J. CESARSKY, European Southern Observatory, Garching bei München, Germany
O. ENGVOLD, University of Oslo, Norway
A. Heck, Strasbourg Astronomical Observatory, France
R. McCRAY, University of Colorado, Boulder, U.S.A.
P. G. MURDIN, Institute of Astronomy, Cambridge, U.K.
F. PACINI, Istituto Astronomia Arcetri, Firenze, Italy
V. RADHAKRISHNAN, Raman Research Institute, Bangalore, India
K. SATO, School of Science, The University of Tokyo, Japan
F. H. SHU, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan.
B. V. SOMOV, Astronomical Institute, Moscow State University, Russia
R. A. SUNYAEV, Space Research Institute, Moscow, Russia
Y. TANAKA, Institute of Space & Astronautical Science, Kanagawa, Japan
S. TREMAINE, Princeton University, U.S.A.
N. O. WEISS, University of Cambridge, U.K.
THE SUN AND SPACE
WEATHER
Second Edition

by

ARNOLD HANSLMEIER
University of Graz, Institute of Physics/ IGAM, Austria
A C.I.P. Catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

ISBN-10 1-4020-5603-6 (HB)

ISBN-13 978-1-4020-5603-1 (HB)
ISBN-10 1-4020-5604-4 (e-book)
ISBN-13 978-1-4020-5604-8 (e-book)

Published by Springer,
P.O. Box 17, 3300 AA Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

[Link]

Photo cover: Solar Elipse 2006 by Prof. Dr. A. Hanslmeier

Printed on acid-free paper

All Rights Reserved

© 2007 Springer
No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording
or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception
of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered
and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.
 I want to thank my students who attended a course on space
weather I held at Graz and Innsbruck university; they critically read
the manuscript and suggested corrections. I also want to thank my
colleagues who contributed Figures and gave many hints.
Special thanks to my wife Caroline and my children Roland,
Christina and Alina; I was allowed to spend lots of nights at the PC.
Thanks for the patience of my collaborators.
Contents

Preface xiii

1 Introduction, What is Space Weather? 1

1.1 Definition of Space Weather . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 The Triggers of Space Weather . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2.1 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Who are the Users of Space Weather? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 Organization of the Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2 The Sun a Typical Star 7

2.1 The Sun and Stars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.1.1 Location of the Sun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.1.2 Properties of Stars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.1.3 Stellar Spectra, the Hertzsprung-Russell-Diagram . . . . . . 9
2.1.4 Stellar Evolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.1.5 Spectral Classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.2 The Sun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.2.1 Basic Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.2.2 Basic Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.2.3 Energy Generation in the Sun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.2.4 Convection Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.2.5 Model: Internal Structure of the Sun . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.3 Observing the Sun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.3.1 General Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.3.2 Examples of Telescopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.3.3 Some Recent Satellite Missions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.3.4 Solar Polarimetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2.3.5 Solar Radio Astronomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.4 Neutrinos-Testing the Solar Interior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.4.1 General Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.4.2 Solar Neutrinos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
2.4.3 Solar Neutrino Detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2.4.4 Testing the Standard Solar Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.4.5 Solution of the Neutrino Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

vii
viii CONTENTS

2.5 Helioseismology-Solar Oscillations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

2.5.1 Observations of Oscillations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.5.2 Modes of Oscillations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2.5.3 Theory of Solar Oscillations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
2.5.4 Helioseismology and Internal Rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

3 The Solar Atmosphere and Active Regions 47

3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
3.2 Phenomena in the Solar Photosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.2.1 Radiation Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.2.2 Granulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.2.3 Five Minutes Oscillations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
3.2.4 Sunspots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
3.2.5 Photospheric Faculae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
3.3 The Chromosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
3.3.1 Diagnostics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
3.3.2 Radiative Transfer in the Chromosphere . . . . . . . . . . . 65
3.3.3 Chromospheric Heating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
3.3.4 Chromospheric Network, Supergranulation . . . . . . . . . 70
3.4 Solar Flares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
3.4.1 General Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
3.4.2 Classification of Solar Flares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
3.4.3 Where do Flares Occur? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
3.4.4 Prominences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
3.5 The Corona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
3.5.1 Basic Facts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
3.5.2 Observational Features in the Corona . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
3.5.3 Coronal Mass Ejections, CME . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
3.5.4 Heating of the Corona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
3.6 Solar Wind and Interplanetary Magnetic field . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
3.6.1 Diagnostics of the Solar Wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
3.6.2 Solar Wind and Interplanetary Magnetic Fields . . . . . . . 87
3.6.3 High Speed Solar Wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
3.6.4 Heliospheric Current Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
3.7 Variations of the Solar Diameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
3.7.1 Relation Solar Diameter-Solar Dynamo . . . . . . . . . . . 91
3.7.2 Ground Based Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
3.7.3 Satellite Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

4 MHD and the Solar Dynamo 97

4.1 Solar Magnetohydrodynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
4.1.1 Basic Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
4.1.2 Some Important MHD Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
4.1.3 Magnetic Reconnection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
4.1.4 Fluid Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
4.1.5 Equation of State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
CONTENTS ix

4.1.6 Structured Magnetic Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

4.1.7 Potential Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
4.1.8 3 D Reconstruction of Active Regions . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
4.1.9 Charged Particles in Magnetic Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
4.1.10 MHD Waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
4.1.11 Magnetic Fields and Convection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
4.2 The Solar Dynamo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
4.2.1 The Solar Dynamo and Observational Features . . . . . . . 113
4.2.2 The α − ω Dynamo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
4.2.3 Mathematical Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
4.2.4 Solar Activity Prediction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
4.3 Stellar Activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
4.3.1 Detection and Observation of Stellar Activity . . . . . . . . 120
4.3.2 Stellar Activity Cycles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

5 The Earth’s Atmosphere

and Climate 123
5.1 The Earth’s Atmosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
5.1.1 Structure of the Atmosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
5.1.2 Composition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
5.1.3 Paleoclimatology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
5.1.4 Theory of Milankovich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
5.1.5 Greenhouseffect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
5.1.6 Ozone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
5.1.7 The Structure of the Higher Atmosphere . . . . . . . . . . . 137
5.2 Earth’s History and Origin of the Atmosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
5.2.1 History of the Earth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
5.2.2 Origin of the Atmosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140

6 Space Weather and Climate 143

6.1 The Atmosphere’s Response to Solar
Irradiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
6.1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
6.1.2 UV Radiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
6.1.3 Energetic particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
6.1.4 Thermosphere and Exosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
6.1.5 Mesosphere and Stratosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
6.1.6 Troposphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
6.2 The Faint Young Sun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
6.2.1 Evolution of the Solar Luminosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
6.2.2 Pre Main Sequence Sun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
6.2.3 Albedo Variations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
6.2.4 The CO2 Geochemical Cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
6.2.5 Effects of the Biota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
6.2.6 T Tauri and Post T Tauri Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
6.3 Solar Variability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
x CONTENTS

6.3.1 Total Solar Irradiance Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156

6.3.2 Long Term Solar Variations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
6.3.3 Solar Protons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
6.4 Cosmic Rays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
6.4.1 Origination of Cosmic Rays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
6.4.2 The Heliosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
6.4.3 Clouds, Cloud Formation Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
6.5 What Causes the Global Warming? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171

7 Space Weather and Radiation Damage 175

7.1 Radiation Damage on Living Organisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
7.1.1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
7.1.2 Radiation Damage on DNA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
7.1.3 DNA Repair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
7.1.4 Radiation Dose Limits for Astronauts . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
7.1.5 Genetic vs. Somatic Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
7.1.6 The Solar Proton Event in August 1972 . . . . . . . . . . . 180
7.2 Solar UV Radiation Damage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
7.2.1 General Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
7.2.2 UV Radiation and Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
7.2.3 Effects on the Skin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
7.2.4 Effects on the Eye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
7.2.5 Immune System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
7.2.6 UV Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
7.3 Radiation in Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
7.3.1 Space Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
7.3.2 The Extravehicular Mobility Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
7.3.3 Radiation Shielding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
7.3.4 Radiation Risks of Manned Space Missions . . . . . . . . . 189

8 Magnetosphere, Ionosphere, Space Weather 191

8.1 General Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
8.1.1 The Magnetosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
8.1.2 The Ionosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
8.2 Solar Activity and Magnetosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
8.2.1 Magnetic Storms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
8.2.2 Particles and Particle Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
8.2.3 Aurora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
8.2.4 Geomagnetic Indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
8.2.5 Solar Indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
8.2.6 Navigation Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
8.2.7 Radio Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
8.2.8 Geomagnetically Induced Currents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
8.2.9 Systems Affected by Solar or Geomagnetic Activity . . . . . 214
8.2.10 The Global Ionosphere-Thermosphere Model . . . . . . . . 215
8.3 Satellites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
CONTENTS xi

8.3.1 Solar Panels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216

8.3.2 Power Sources for Spacecraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
8.3.3 Electron Damage to Satellites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
8.3.4 Single Event Upsets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
8.3.5 Solar Activity and Satellite Lifetimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
8.3.6 Case Study: KOMPSAT1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
8.3.7 The Atmospheric Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
8.3.8 Special Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
8.4 Space Weather on Moon and Mars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
8.4.1 Spaceweather on Moon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
8.4.2 Record of Early Earth Evolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
8.4.3 Mars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231

9 Real-Time Space Weather and Forecasts 235

9.1 NOAA Space Weather Scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
9.1.1 Geomagnetic Storms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
9.1.2 Solar Radiation Storms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
9.1.3 Scale for Radio Blackouts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
9.1.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
9.2 The Main Space Weather Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
9.2.1 NOAA Environment Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
9.2.2 Solar-Terrestrial Dispatch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
9.2.3 Australian Space Forecast Centre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
9.3 Space Weather Forecasts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242

10 Asteroids, Comets, Meteroites 245

10.1 Asteroids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
10.1.1 General Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
10.1.2 Classification of Asteroids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
10.2 Impacts by Asteroids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
10.2.1 Potentially Hazardous Asteroids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
10.2.2 Torino Impact Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
10.2.3 NEOs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
10.2.4 The Cretaceous-Tertiary Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
10.3 Meteorites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252
10.3.1 General Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252
10.3.2 Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253
10.3.3 The Leonid Threat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254
10.4 Comets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
10.4.1 General Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
10.4.2 Cometary Activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
10.4.3 Oort Cloud and Kuiper Belt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
10.4.4 Comets and Meteor Showers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
xii CONTENTS

11 Space Debris 261

11.1 Number of Space Debris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261
11.1.1 Orbits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261
11.1.2 Number of Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
11.2 Detection of Space Debris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
11.2.1 Radar Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264
11.2.2 Telescopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
11.2.3 Catalogues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
11.3 Shielding and Risk Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
11.3.1 Risk Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
11.3.2 Reentry of Orbital Debris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
11.3.3 Orbital Debris Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
11.3.4 Space Debris Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
11.3.5 Shielding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272

Bibliography 275

Internet 301

List of Tables 303

Index 305
Preface

The field of solar physics and solar--terrestrial relation, now called space
weather, is evolving rapidly. As in the first edition, it is assumed that it is inevitable for
the reader to get some basic knowledge in solar physics since the Sun is the main driver
for space weather The term space weather itself has been gaining more and more
attention during the past years as our society becomes more and more dependent on
satellites, which are vulnerable to varying conditions in space. Space weather efforts
and investigations are being made all over the world and more and more is known about
the complex relations of processes on the Sun and the Earth and its space environment.
The term space climate nowadays includes the long-term variations caused mainly by
the Sun on the Earth and the interplanetary space.
As in the first edition of the book, this edition also covers these topics but new
chapters have been introduced, e.g., a chapter on real-time space weather forecasts and
some main space weather data sources. All the chapters have updated information,
taking into account the results of new satellite missions and telescopes. The book also
includes a great amount of new literature (more than 340 original citations) so that the
reader is able to go into more details, if required in the respective chapters. Thus, the
book should be helpful to scientists as well as to students interested in overview or
finding a compendium with references to go deeper into special fields.
Furthermore, at the beginning of all the chapters, introductory books are cited,
which could be recommended for the special topics addressed there. The number of
keywords in the index has also been strongly enhanced so that the reader can find
information easily. Besides all this, suggestions from readers of the first edition have
been taken into account and are greatly acknowledged.
I want to thank all my colleagues who provided me with advice and figures and
the students who attended my lectures at Graz and Innsbruck for their help. Last but not
least I thank my family – Karoline, Roland, Christina and Alina – for the patience and
understanding when I spent lots of nights at the computer.

xiii
Chapter 1

Introduction, What is Space

Weather?

In this introduction we briefly describe the term space weather and give motivation
why that interdisciplinary field gained high interest. Examples will demonstrate
the high relevance of space weather not only from the scientific point of view but
from the social and economic aspect of our modern civilization.
Since this is a very modern topic, there appeared several monographs about
that subject, e.g. a collection of space weather related topics1 .

1.1 Definition of Space Weather

Modern society becomes strongly reliant to technologically advanced systems, of-
ten located in space such as telecommunication, navigation. Therefore, the condi-
tions and variations in space where these satellites orbit the Earth are important
to study and the question arises wether there are influences on such systems or
not. We speak of geomagnetic disturbances in this connection. Systems that are
susceptible to geomagnetic disturbances are satellites and power grids on Earth.
That means that the geomagnetic environment is changed, but as we will see in
the later chapters, these disturbances are triggered by our nearest star, the Sun.
It is generally accepted that the term space weather refers to the time-variable
conditions in the space environment that may effect space-borne or ground based
technological systems.
According to the US National Space Weather Programme the definition is:
conditions on the Sun and in the solar wind, magnetosphere, ionosphere and ther-
mosphere that can influence the performance and reliability of space-borne and
ground-based technological systems and can endanger human life or health.
Thus we see that the definitions are slightly different but we want to keep the
first one because it also includes other effects apart from the Sun.
1 see
e.g. P. Song, Howard J. Singer, George L. Siscoe, Paul Song, Space Weather, 2001, Am.
Geophys. Union

1
2 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION, WHAT IS SPACE WEATHER?

Since we strongly depend on satellite systems and their availability, it is crucial

that these systems are in full operation. Moreover, in the worst case, human health
or life can also be endangered by space weather. Therefore, there are social and
economic aspects of this type of research: one tries to avoid consequences of space
weather events by system design or efficient warning and prediction. During the
last few years space weather activities have expanded world-wide. Examples for
such activities which of course are of national and international interest are:

• US Space Weather Program,

• US-NASA’s Living With a Star program,

• ESA’s space weather program,

• SWENET, Space Weather European Network,

• SIDC, Solar influences data center at the Royal observatory in Belgium,

• Lund space weather center,

• The Australian IPS Radio and Space Services , the Australian Space Weather
Agency,

• The Canadian Space weather program,

and many others (such as the Group in Oulu, Finland). Today, space weather is
monitored from a worldwide net of ground stations and from space. Both types of
observations are complementary. From space the whole electromagnetic spectrum
of the Sun can be observed including UV and X-rays.
An overview about space weather, environment and societies can be found in
the monograph by Lilenstein and Bornarel, 2005 [196].

1.2 The Triggers of Space Weather

The main cause for space weather effects is our Sun. It emits light at all wave-
lengths that reaches the Earth within about 8 minutes as well as a continuous
stream of particles which is called the solar wind. During one solar activity cycle
which has a period of about 11 years both radiation and solar wind are modulated.
The energy of the Sun drives temperature, precipitation, atmospheric circulation,
ocean currents, evaporation and cloud cover. The short wavelength radiation (UV,
X-rays) triggers many chemical reactions in the upper atmosphere of the Earth
and also the ozone level is modulated by solar activity. It was R.C. Carrington who
observed on September 1, 1859 a white light flare2 that erupted from a group of
sunspots and in the following night a great aurora was seen down to low geographic
latitudes, even from Cuba. On the same night, a great magnetic disturbance was
also recorded. For the first time it was recognized correctly, that a change on the
Sun might have directly influenced the environment around the Earth.
2 The observations were reported to the Royal Astronomical Society
1.2. THE TRIGGERS OF SPACE WEATHER 3

The NASA’s Sun-Earth Connections program aims to improve our understand-

ing of solar variability and how this transforms into interplanetary space, how e.g.
eruptive events on the Sun (like CMEs, Coronal mass ejections) impact geospace,
weather and climate. In the long term NASA plans manned missions to the Moon
and even Mars and the need of spaceweather forecasts becomes evident.
A software package called CACTUS, Computer Aided CME tracking detects
automatically CME events that could be dangerous by scanning through images
produced by the SOHO/LASCO satellite 3 .
Related to the solar activity are important effects on spacecraft such as space-
craft charging (surface charging and deep discharges) and single event upsets. The
effects on humans in space are also to be considered (radiation, particles). Space
weather effects also play a rôle on high altitude/high latitude air-flight; cosmic rays
penetrate to the lower atmosphere and pose problems to humans and electronic
components of modern aeroplanes. Other influences of space weather include radio
wave propagation, satellite-ground communications, global satellite-based naviga-
tion systems, power transmission systems etc. Changes of the solar irradiance may
be one of the causes for climatic changes on the Earth.
Materials located on the exterior of spacecraft in low Earth orbit are subjected
to a number of environmental threats, including atomic oxygen, ultraviolet radia-
tion, thermal cycling, and micrometeorid and debris impact. The number of space
debris now clearly exceeds the number of meteroids4 .
A compendium of space weather related scientific papers can be found in the
book of Scherer, Fichtner and Heber5 . A book on Solar And Space Weather
Radiophysics appeared recently6 .

1.2.1 Examples
Let us give some examples of space weather influences on satellites7

• Space Shuttle: numerous micrometeroid/debris impacts have been reported.

• Ulysses: failed during peak of Perseid meteoroid shower.

• Pioneer Venus: Several command memory anomalies related during high-

energy cosmic rays.

• GPS: photochemically deposited contamination on solar arrays.

On the Earth we know very well radio fadeouts. The HF communication

depends on the reflection of signals in the upper Earth’s atmosphere. This layers
are strongly influenced by the Sun’s shortwave radiation.
3 see [Link]
4 The term meteorite denotes the piece that was fallen to the surface of the Earth
5 see: Scherer, Fichtner and Heber (Eds.), Space Weather - The Physics behind a Slogan, Lect.

Notes in Phys., Springer, 2004

6 see: Solar And Space Weather Radiophysics: Current Status And Future Developments, D.

E. Gray and Ch. U. Keller, ASSL, 2005, Kluwer

7 see also: The Space Environment, A. C. Tribble, Princeton Univ. Press, 2003
4 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION, WHAT IS SPACE WEATHER?

How can we study the propagation of solar disturbances through the interplan-
etary medium from Earth? A common technique is to measure scintillations in the
radio wavelength. Let us consider very distant radio sources like quasars. If the
interplanetary medium is not disturbed, the signal from this object is constant in
amplitude. But similar to the twinkling of starlight in the visible, the radio signal
becomes absorbed and refracted when passing through a plasma cloud emitted
from the Sun. By measuring many point sources distributed all over the sky, one
gets a map of areas of high scintillation which shows where the plasma wave is
propagating.
There are similarities with atmospheric weather, however the most important
differences between atmospheric and space weather systems are:

• Meteorological processes are localized; it is possible to make good local

weather forecasts. Spaceweather is always global in the planetary scale.

• Space weather events occur over a wide range of time scales: the Earth’s
magnetosphere responds to solar-originated disturbances within only a few
minutes, global reconfiguration occurs within some 10 minutes. Enhanced
fluxes of energetic particles in radiation belts decay in time scales of days,
months or even longer.

• Spaceweather predictions must rely on the input of just a few isolated mea-
surements of the solar wind and the observations (both ground based and
from space) have only a global character sometimes without details.

Therefore, successful space weather activities aiming to make prediction of dan-

gerous events need to be performed on a global scale. Space-borne and ground
based observations are complementary.

1.3 Who are the Users of Space Weather?

Presently, the most important users of space weather research are spacecraft en-
gineering, spacecraft operations, RF communications. Spacecraft launchers can
make use of exact knowledge of space weather conditions and the re-entry of space-
crafts depends on the atmospheric drag conditions. When the International Space
Station, ISS, is in operation, forecasts will become even more important. Other
users are telecommunication operators, users of global positioning systems, electric
power industry etc. Commercial airlines must be careful with the radiation doses
to their crews and passengers.
In 1989 (March 13th) solar activity induced a huge geomagnetic storm causing
a saturation in the transformers and the power grid servicing Canada’s Quebec
province was completely shut down. The blackout resulted in a loss of 19 400 MW
in Quebec and 1325 MW of exports. Service restoration took over 9 hours (after
R. Thompson, IPS, Radio and Space Service).
Long term variations of space weather are also called space climate . We know
that there were periods of reduced solar activity during the past 1000 years (called
Spörer Minimum, Maunder Minimum and Dalton Minimum). Though also other
1.4. ORGANIZATION OF THE BOOK 5

influences such as the eruption of big volcanoes played a role, it is assumed that
during these phases the global climate on Earth was cooler than on the average.
Summarizing, the following branches strongly depend on space weather:

• Spacecraft & Aircraft,

• Communication Systems,

• Power Distribution Networks and Pipelines,

• Oil and mineral Prospecting,

• Risks to human health,

• Space weather influence on climate change,

• Insuring against space weather effects.

The effects of space weather on technology infrastructure were discussed in the

monograph of Daglis8 .

1.4 Organization of the Book

The book is organized as follows. First we want to give a brief review about
the main source of space weather effects, our Sun. The basic physics of the Sun
will be discussed since it is essential to understand the mechanisms that cause
solar variability. This is necessary in order to make prediction models for space
weather forecasts. Then we will speak about the influence of solar variability on
the Earth’s atmosphere. The last chapters deal about other than solar influences
on the conditions in space such as meteoroids, space debris.
The field of space weather and solar physics itself as well as dynamics of space
is rapidly evolving. In this second edition new material was included. Addition-
ally, to each chapter recommended textbook references are given. Suggestions
from readers of the first edition have been taken into account and are greatly
acknowledged.

8 see: I.A. Daglis, Effects of Space Weather on Technology Infrastructure, 2004, Kluwer
Chapter 2

The Sun a Typical Star

Our Sun is the only star which is close enough to observe details on its surface such
as sunspots, faculae, prominences, coronal holes, flares etc., which are all summa-
rized as solar activity phenomena. Therefore, the study of the Sun is important
for astrophysics in general. Theories about stellar structure and evolution can be
studied in detail on the Sun1 .
On the other hand, the Sun is the driving factor for the climate on the Earth
and the structure and shape of the Earth’s magnetosphere thus determining and
influencing the near Earth space environment. Therefore, the study of solar terres-
trial relations is of great importance for our modern telecommunication systems
both based on Earth and in space.

2.1 The Sun and Stars

2.1.1 Location of the Sun
More than 99% of the mass of the solar system, to which the Sun, 8 great planets,
dwarf planets (such as Pluto) satellites of planets, asteroids, etc. belong, is con-
centrated in the Sun. The Sun is the nearest star to us and our solar system is
located in the Milky Way Galaxy. Our galaxy contains more than 2 × 1011 solar
masses (i.e. at least as many stars). The mass of the galaxy can be inferred from
the rotation of the system. All stars rotate about the center of the galaxy which
is at a distance of about 27 000 light years (Ly) to us 2 .
At the location of the Sun in the galaxy, one period of revolution about the
galactic center is about 200 Million years. Galaxies in general contain some 1011
stars. About 50% of the stars have one or more stellar companions. Up to now
more than 150 planetary companions were detected around nearby stars, so called
1 For textbooks see e.g. Zirin, H., 1988, Astrophysics of the Sun, Cambridge University Press;

The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the Sun, K.R. Lang, 2001, Cambridge Univ. Press; A Guide to
the Sun, K.H. Phillips, 1995, Cambridge Univ. Press; The Sun, M. Stix, 2002, Springer Verlag
2 1 Ly =1013 km, the distance light travels within one year propagating through space at a

speed of 300 000 km/s

7
8 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

Figure 2.1: A typical spiral galaxy. From a distant galaxy, the Sun would be located in
one of the spiral arms. Image: A.H., private observatory.

extrasolar planets. The diameter of our galaxy is about 100 000 Ly. Galaxies are
grouped into clusters- our galaxy belongs to the so called local group of galaxies.
The small and large Magellanic cloud are two small dwarf galaxies which are
satellites of our system. The nearest large galaxy is the Andromeda galaxy which
is at a distance of more than 2 Million Ly.
Many galaxies appear as spiral galaxies. Young bright stars are found in the
spiral arms, older stars in the center and in the halo of the galaxy. An example is
given in Fig.2.1.

2.1.2 Properties of Stars

The only information we can directly obtain from a star is its radiation and po-
sition. In order to understand the physics of stellar structure, stellar birth and
evolution we have to derive quantities such as stellar radii, stellar masses, com-
position, rotation, magnetic fields etc. We will just very briefly discuss how these
parameters can be derived for stars.

• Stellar distances: a fundamental but not an intrinsic parameter. Stellar

distances can be measured by determining their parallax, that is the angle
the Earth’s orbit would have seen from a star. This defines the astrophysical
distance unit parsec. A star is at a distance of 1 parsec if the parallax is 1

.
1 pc = 3.26 Ly.

• Stellar radii: once the apparent diameter of a star is known than its real
diameter follows from its distance d. The problem is to measure apparent
stellar diameters since they are extremely small. One method is to use
interferometers, one other method is to use occultation of stars by the moon
2.1. THE SUN AND STARS 9

or mutual occultations of stars in eclipsing binary systems. All these methods

are described in ordinary textbooks about astronomy.

• Stellar masses: can be determined by using Kepler’s third law in the case we
observe a binary system. Stellar masses are very critical for stellar evolution,
however we know accurate masses only for some 100 stars.

• Once mass and radius are known, the density and the gravitational acceler-
ation follow. These parameters are important for the stellar structure.

• Stellar rotation: For simplicity we can assume that a star consists of two
halves, one half approaches to the observer and the spectral lines from that
region are blueshifted, the other half moves away and the spectral lines from
that area are redshifted. The line profile we observe in a spectrum is a
superposition of all these blue- and redshifted profiles and rotation causes a
broadening of spectral lines;

• Stellar magnetic fields: as it will be discussed in more detail when con-

sidering the Sun, magnetically sensitive spectral lines are split into several
components under the presence of strong magnetic fields.

2.1.3 Stellar Spectra, the Hertzsprung-Russell-Diagram

The analysis of stellar radiation is fundamental for the derivation of physical quan-
tities describing a star. Putting a prism or a grating inside or in front of a telescope,
we obtain a spectrum of a star. Such a spectrum contains many lines, most of them
are dark absorption lines. Each chemical element has a characteristic spectrum.
In the Hertzsprung Russell Diagram (HRD) the temperature of stars is plotted
versus brightness. The temperature of a star is related to its color: blue stars
are hotter than red stars. In the HRD the hottest stars are on the left side. The
temperature increases from right to left. Stellar brightness is given in magnitudes.
The magnitude scale of stars was chosen such that a difference of 5 magnitudes
corresponds to a factor of a 100 in brightness. The smaller the number (which
can be even negative) the brighter the star. The brightest planet Venus e.g. has
magnitude −4.m 5 and the Sun has −26.m 5. The faintest stars that are visible to
the naked eye have magnitude +6.m 0. Since the apparent magnitudes depend
on the intrinsic luminosity and the distance of a star absolute magnitudes were
invented: the absolute magnitude of a star (designated by M ) is the magnitude
a star would have at a distance of 10 pc. In the HRD we can plot absolute
magnitudes as ordinates instead of luminosities. The relation between m and M
is given by:
m − M = 5 log r − 5 (2.1)
r is the distance of the object in pc. The Sun has M = +4.M 5; seen from a
distance of 10 pc it would be among the fainter stars visible with the naked eye.
How can we determine stellar temperatures? Stars can be considered to a
very good approximation as black body radiators. A black body is a theoretical
10 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

-10
He Flash

Giants

MV

M
ai
n
se
qu
en
Present

ce
Sun

White
Dwarfs

+15

50 000 K 5 000 K T
O5 G

Figure 2.2: Sketch of the Hertzsprung-Russell-diagram with evolutionary path of the

Sun.

idealization: an object that absorbs completely all radiation at all wavelengths.

The radiation of a black body at a given temperature is given by the Planck law:

Iν = Bν = (2hν 3 /c2 )/exp(hν/kTS ) − 1 (2.2)

thus it depends only on the temperature TS of the object. Here, Iν is the intensity
of radiation at frequency ν; h, k, c are Planck’s constant, Boltzmann’s constant and
the speed of light. h = 6.62 × 10−34 Js−1 , k = 1.38 × 10−23 JK−1 . If that equation
is integrated over all frequencies (wavelengths), we obtain a formula for the total
power emitted by a black body, Boltzmann law:

∞
Bλ dλ = σT 4 , (2.3)
0

and for the luminosity of a star:

L = 4πr2 σTeff
4
(2.4)

For the Sun Teff = 5 785 K. This formula defines the effective temperature of a
star. σ = 5.67 × 10−8 W/m2 K4 is the Stefan Boltzmann constant.

What is the power emitted per unit area of the Sun’s surface? Answer: Put T =
6 000 K we find that the Sun radiates 70 MW per m2 of its surface3
3 The worldwide nuclear energy generation is about 350 GW. Thus an area of 5000 m2 on the

Sun generates this amount.

2.1. THE SUN AND STARS 11

Table 2.1: Central wavelength and bandwidth of the UBVRI filter set
Name Meaning Central λ Bandwidth [nm]
U Ultraviolet 360 66
B Blue 440 98
V Visual (green) 550 87
R Red 700 207
I Infrared 900 231

By taking the derivative with respect to λ of Planck’s Law and setting it equal
to zero, one can find the peak wavelength, where the intensity is at maximum:
T λmax = 2.9 × 10−3 m K (2.5)
This is also called Wien’s law.

At about which wavelength can planets be expected to radiate most of their energy?
Answer: Let us assume the temperature of the Earth = 300 K. Then
λmax = 2.9 × 10−3 /300 ∼ 10 µ (2.6)

The Sun has a surface temperature of about 6 000 K. At what wavelength does
the Sun’s spectrum peak? Answer:
λmax = 2.9 × 10−3 /6000 ∼ 0.5 µ = 500 nm (2.7)

From the spectrum stellar temperatures can be obtained. The temperature

derived from the peak wavelength is called Wien Temperature, the temperature
derived from the difference of intensity between two wavelengths (=color) Color
temperature etc. In order to define color, a filter system must be defined. The
most commonly used system is the UBV system which has three bands that are
located in the UV (U), blue (B) and visual (V) to measure the intensity Iν . The
luminosity of stars is given in magnitudes which are defined as follows:
Magnitude = const − 2.5 log(Intensity) (2.8)
The color of a star is measured by comparing its magnitude through one filter (e.g.
red) with its magnitude through another (e.g. blue).
E.g. mV means the magnitude measured with the V filter. Therefore, instead
of determining temperatures from the comparison of the spectrum of a star with
the Planck law, one can use e.g. color indices. If we calculate B-V, than this value
will be (see e.g. table 2.2):
• positive for the cooler star, since it is brighter in V than in B (blue). If the
cool star is brighter in V it means that its magnitude has a lower value and
therefore B-V is positive.
12 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

Table 2.2: B-V colors and effective temperatures of some stars

Star B-V Effective T
Sun +0.6 5 800 K
Vega 0.0 10 000 K
Spica -0.2 23 000 K
Antares +1.8 3 400K

• negative for the hotter star. The hotter star is brighter in B than in V,
therefore for the magnitudes in these two bands: mB < mV and B-V<0.

2.1.4 Stellar Evolution

Stars are not randomly distributed in the HRD:

• Main sequence stars: most stars are found along a diagonal from the upper
left (hot) to the lower right (cool).

• Giants, supergiants: they have the same temperature as the corresponding

main sequence stars but are much brighter and must have larger diameters
(see equation 2.4).

• White dwarfs are faint but very hot objects thus from their location at the
lower left in the HRD it follows that they must be very compact (about
1/100 the size of the Sun).

This leads to the question why most of the stars we observe lie on the Main
sequence. The answer is quite easy: because this denotes the longest phase in
stellar evolution. Let us discuss this briefly for the Sun:
The main steps in the evolution of the Sun are (compare with Fig. 2.2):

• Pre main sequence evolution: from a protostellar gas and dust cloud the Sun
was formed and before it reaches the main sequence where it spends most of
its life, the contracting Sun has passed a violent youth, the T Tauri phase.

• At the main sequence the Sun changes extremely slowly remaining there
about 1010 years. In the core H is transformed to He by nuclear fusion.

• The Sun evolves to a red giant, it will expand and the Earth will become part
of the solar atmosphere. The expansion starts when all H is transformed to
He in the core. Then a H burning shell supplies the energy. The He flash
sets in as soon as in the center He burning sets in. The Sun will evolve to a
red giant for some 108 ys. It will extend beyond the Earth’s orbit.

• Finally, the Sun becomes a white dwarf which slowly cools.

2.1. THE SUN AND STARS 13

Table 2.3: Spectral classification of stars

O ionized He, ionized metals
B neutral He, H stronger
A Balmer lines of H dominate
F H becomes weaker, neutral and singly ionized metals
G singly ionized Ca, H weaker, neutral metals
K neutral metals molecular bands appear
M TiO, neutral metals
R,N CN, CH, neutral metals
S Zirconium oxide, neutral metals

Table 2.4: Effective Temperature as a function of spectral type

Spectral Type O B0 A0 F0 G0 K0 M0 M5
Teff [K] 50 000 25 000 11 000 7 600 6 000 5 100 3 600 3 000

During its evolution, the Sun dramatically changes its radius (the subscript 
denotes the present day value):
1 R (present Sun) → ∼ 104 R (red giant), → 0.01R (white dwarf).
For space weather long term evolutionary effects are negligible. But it is in-
teresting to investigate them especially for the early Sun (see the chapter on the
faint young Sun problem).
For the main sequence stars there exists a relation between their mass and
luminosity:
L ∼ M 3.5 (2.9)
From 2.9 we see that more massive stars are very luminous and therefore they
use up their nuclear fuel much more rapidly than low massive stars like our Sun.
Massive main sequence stars that are observed today must have been formed in
very recent astronomical history4 .

2.1.5 Spectral Classes

According to their spectra, stars can be classified in the following sequence: O-
B-A-F-G-K-M. This is a sequence of temperature (see Table 2.4): O stars are
hottest, M stars coolest; the number of absorption lines increase from O to M.
Some characteristics are given in Table 2.3.
The luminosity of a star depends on a) temperature ∼ T 4 , b) surface which is
∼ R2 . Since e. g. a K star may be a dwarf main sequence star or a giant, luminosity
classes have been introduced. Class I contains the most luminous supergiants, class
II the less luminous supergiants. Class III are the normal giants, class IV the sub
giants and class V the main sequence.
4 In some large interstellar nebulae one observes stars that have an age of some 105 years
14 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

Now we understand the spectral classification of our Sun: it is a G2V star.

2.2 The Sun

2.2.1 Basic Properties
As it has been mentioned, the Sun is a G2V star in the disk of our Galaxy. The
mass of the Sun is:
M = 1.99 × 1030 kg (2.10)
An application of Kepler’s third law gives us the mass of the Sun if its distance is
known which again can be derived from Kepler’s third law:

a3 G
2
= (M1 + M2 ) (2.11)
P 4π 2
In our case a denotes the distance Earth-Sun (150 × 106 km), P the revolution
period of the Earth around the Sun (1 year), M1 the mass of the Earth and M2
the mass of the Sun. One can make the assumption that M1 << M2 and therefore
M1 + M 2 ∼ M 2 .
If we know the distance of the Sun and its angular diameter the solar radius is
obtained:

r = 6.96 × 108 m (2.12)

The measurement of the Sun’s angular diameter is not trivial; one possibility is to
define the angular distance between the inflection points of the intensity profiles
at two opposite limbs. Such profiles can be obtained photoelectrically and the
apparent semi diameter at mean solar distance is about 960 seconds of arc (

).
The orbit of the Earth is elliptical and at present, perihelion (smallest distance of
the Sun) is in January.
Knowing the mass and radius of the Sun, the mean density can be calculated:

ρ̄ = 1.4 g/cm3 (2.13)

The gravitational acceleration is given by:

g = GM/R2 = 274 m/s2 (2.14)

The solar constant is the energy crossing unit area of the Earth’s surface per-
pendicular to the direction from the Earth to the Sun in every second. In SI the
units are W m−2 . UV and IR radiation from the Sun is strongly absorbed by the
Earth’s atmosphere. Therefore, accurate measurements of the solar constant have
to be done with satellites. ACRIM on SMM and ERB on Nimbus 7 showed clearly
that the presence of several large sunspots which are cooler than their surround-
ings depress the solar luminosity by ∼ 0.1%. The Variability IRradiance Gravity
Oscillation (VIRGO) experiment on the SOHO satellite is observing total solar
and spectral irradiances at 402 nm (blue channel), 500 nm (green channel), and
2.2. THE SUN 15

862 nm (red channel) since January 1996 (for a review see e.g. Pap et al. (1999)
[243]). The solar luminosity is:

L = 3.83 × 1026 W (2.15)

And the effective temperature:

Teff = 5780 K (2.16)

2.2.2 Basic Equations

How a ball of gas and plasma, like a star remains stable against gravitational
collapse or free expansion? Let us assume a sphere of mass M and radius R. In
most cases there are only two forces:
• gravity: acts inward
• pressure: acts outward
Let us consider a shell inside a star, the lower boundary is at r from the center
and the upper at r + ∆r. ∆A is a surface element and Pouter , Pinner denote the
pressure at r and r + ∆r. The net force on such a shell is:

Fnet = Fgrav − Fp (2.17)

and Fp = (Pouter − Pinner )∆A. From the above equation:

Fp = [P (r) + (dP/dr)∆r − P (r)]∆A = (dP/dr)∆r∆A (2.18)

By dividing the net force Fnet by −∆m = −ρ(r)∆r∆A, we find the equation of
motion of the shell:

−d2 r/dt2 = g(r) + [1/ρ(r)](dP/dr) (2.19)

If the acceleration is set to zero (when there is a balance), then the hydrostatic
equilibrium becomes:
dP GM (r)ρ(r)
=− (2.20)
dr r2
Therefore, the pressure at depth h must be high enough to support the weight of
the fluid per unit area above that depth. Let us derive an estimate for the central
pressure of a star. The pressure is given by:

P = gρh (2.21)

At the center h = R; from g = GM/R2 we find the central pressure Pc :

GM ρ M
Pc = ρ= (2.22)
R 4πR3 /3
16 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

which leads to:

3 GM 2
Pc = (2.23)
4π R4
For the Sun: M = 2×1030 kg, and R = 7×108 m. This gives Pc = 3×1014 Nm−2
compared to the atmospheric pressure at sea level on Earth of 105 Nm−2 . This is
a very crude approximation, since in reality the density increases with depth and
the true central pressure of the Sun is 100 times larger than the estimate.
What happens if a star contracts (which will be the case when the hydrostatic
equilibrium condition is not established)? According to the Virial Theorem half
of the gravitational energy which is set free is radiated away and the other half
heats the star.
In most phases of stellar evolution, the structure of a star can be determined
by the solution of four first order differential equations:

• hydrostatic equilibrium
dP GM ρ
=− 2 (2.24)
dr r
• mass continuity
dM
= 4πr2 ρ (2.25)
dr
• gradient of luminosity
dL
= 4πr2 ρ (2.26)
dr
• temperature gradient
dT 3κLρ
=− (2.27)
dr 16πacr2 T 3
In these equations r is the distance from the stellar center, P, ρ, T are the
pressure, density and temperature at radius r, M is the mass contained within
r, L the energy carried by radiation across r,  the nuclear energy release. The
quantities P, , κ depend on density, temperature and composition. κ is the opacity
and measures the resistance of the material to energy transport.

2.2.3 Energy Generation in the Sun

In principle, a variety of different energy generating processes can take place in
stars. During the formation and contraction of a protostar in an interstellar cloud
no nuclear reactions take place and half of the released gravitational energy is
radiated away, the other half increases the temperature of the core (Virial Theo-
rem). As soon as the central temperature exceeds about 106 K nuclear reactions
start. Energy is generated by the fusion of two lighter particles to form a heavier
particle whose mass is smaller than the mass of its constituents, the mass defect
being transformed into energy according to E = ∆M c2 .
Let us consider the fusion of H into He. The mass of 4 H is5 :
51 AMU= 1/12 of the mass of the Carbon isotope 12 C = 1.66 × 10−27 kg = 931MeV/c2
2.2. THE SUN 17

Table 2.5: The principal reaction of the pp chain

Reaction Number Reaction Neutrino Energy
(MeV)
1 p + p → 2 H + e+ + νe 0.0 to 0.4
2 p + e− + p → 2 H + νe 1.4
3 2
H + p → 3 He + γ
4a 3
He +3 He → 4 He + 2p
4b 3
He +4 He → 7 Be + γ
5 e− + 7 Be → 7 Li + νe 0.86, 0.38
6a 7
Li + p → 4 He +4 He
6b p + 7 Be → 8 B + γ
7 8
B →8 Be + e+ + νe 0...15

4 × 1.008145 AMU (2.28)

The mass of the resulting He atom is

4.00387 AMU (2.29)

Thus the mass difference ∆M is

0.02871 AMU ∼ 4.768 × 10−29 g ∼ 4.288 × 10−12 J ∼ 26.72 MeV (2.30)

and 0,7% of the mass is converted to energy by Einstein’s relation6

E = mc2 (2.31)

If one assumes that the Sun consists of pure hydrogen which is converted into He,
then the total energy (E = 0.007mc2 ) would be 1.27 × 1045 J. The luminosity of the
Sun is L = 3.8 × 1026 J/s thus there would be energy supply for 1011 years.

The so called pp chain (Table 2.5) dominates in stars with relatively low cen-
tral temperatures (between 5 and 15×107 K, like the Sun) and the CN cycle7 is
dominant in stars with higher central temperatures.
The energy production rate, , for the pp cycle depends highly on the temper-
ature:
 ∼ ρT 5 (2.32)
61 eV=1.6 × 10−19 J
7 In the CN cycle C acts as a catalyst to convert H into He
18 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

2.2.4 Convection Zone

In the solar core nuclear fusion generates the energy which is transported outwards
by radiation. At a depth of a third of the solar radius below the solar surface
the convection zone starts, where energy is transported outwards by convective
motions. This zone occupies only 2% of the solar mass. Hydrogen and He are
practically neutral at the solar surface but they are ionized just below the surface.
In these ionization zones the ratio of the specific heat at constant pressure (cp )
to the specific heat at constant volume (cv ) is much lower than the value 5/3.
This value is appropriate either to a neutral gas or fully ionized gas. Because
cp /cv << 5/3 convection occurs. For the temperature gradient we already have
seen that:
dT 3κLrad ρ
=− (2.33)
dr 16πacr2 T 3
The total luminosity L is:
L = Lrad + Lconv (2.34)
Basically, convection can be treated as an instability; if an element of material is
displaced upwards, then it continues to rise if it is lighter than its surroundings.
By assuming that the rising element moves sufficiently slowly that it is in pressure
balance with its surroundings but that at the same time its motion is adiabatic
(no heat exchange between the element and the surroundings), then convection
occurs if:  
P dρ P dρ
< (2.35)
ρ dP ρ dP ad
If the stellar material is an ideal classical gas with constant ratio of specific heats
γ, then:

P dρ 1
< (2.36)
ρ dP γ
The theory which is usually used contains a free parameter, the so called mixing
length l:  
 dP 
l = αHp = α P  (2.37)
dr 
where HP is the pressure scale height. It is supposed that α is of order unity. As we
will discuss later, information about the depth of the convection zone comes from
a detailed study of solar oscillations. Apart from energy transport one has also to
consider that in convection zones there is a uniform chemical composition. This
prevents any attempt of heavy chemical elements to settle in the Sun’s gravitational
field.

2.2.5 Model: Internal Structure of the Sun

In this paragraph we give a table showing the variation of temperature, luminosity
and fusion rate as a function of increasing distance from the solar center. Such a
model can be calculated from the basic set of equations discussed above.
2.3. OBSERVING THE SUN 19

Table 2.6: Solar model: variation of temperature, luminosity and fusion rate throughout
the Sun
Radius fraction Radius Temperature % Luminosity Fusion rate
in R [109 ] m [106 ] K [J/kg s]
0 0.00 15.7 0 0.0175
0.09 0.06 13.8 33 0.010
0.12 0.08 12.8 55 .0068
0.14 0.10 11.3 79 .0033
0.19 0.13 10.1 91 .0016
0.22 0.15 9.0 97 0.0007
0.24 0.17 8.1 99 0.0003
0.29 0.20 7.1 100 0.00006
0.46 0.32 3.9 100 0
0.69 0.48 1.73 100 0
0.89 0.62 0.66 100 0

As it will be discussed later, the interior of the Sun can be investigated by the
propagation of waves. Solar models computed with mass loss, microscopic diffusion
of helium and heavy elements, and with updated physics have been evolved from
the pre-main sequence to present day (Morel et al., 1997 [225]); they are compared
to the observational constraints including lithium depletion and to the seismic
reference model derived by inversion. Microscopic diffusion significantly improves
the agreement with the observed solar frequencies and agree with the seismic
reference model within ±0.2% for the sound velocity and ±1% for the density,
but slightly worsens the neutrino problem. A review on the current state of solar
modeling was given by Christensen-Dalsgaard et al. (1996) [67] .

2.3 Observing the Sun

2.3.1 General Remarks
In this short chapter we want to give a few examples of modern solar telescopes.
Some remarks are also made concerning optical design and features as well as
disturbances caused by the Earth’s atmosphere.
Earth-based telescopes must contend with image distortion and scintillation
caused by atmospheric disturbances as light reaches us from outer space, stars
twinkle, images blur and dance when viewed with telescopes or binoculars. This
effect worsens as the zenith angle increases. Temperature changes and winds
create variations in atmospheric refractive indices resulting in image distortions.
This condition is called “seeing”, and is a prime consideration in selecting the
location of an observatory. Good sites for observatories are the Canary islands or
Hawaii located at heights above the inversion. Thus clouds form deeper than the
site of the telescope.
20 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

Several factors influence the image quality of solar telescopes. Sunlight can heat
up the telescope structure and the main optics causing the so called internal seeing.
Considering reflecting telescopes, in particular the main mirror absorbs up to 10%
of the collected light and its surface may heat up considerably leading to mirror
seeing. The most effective measure to prevent internal seeing is to remove the air
entirely, the telescope is evacuated. A window at the entrance and exit preserves
the vacuum. The main problem here is to have a window with high optical quality
which is thick enough to resist air pressure. Helium filling is an alternative to
evacuation. The viscosity of He and the dependence of the index of refraction from
temperature are lower than for air whereas temperature conductivity is higher. A
forced flow of He inside the telescope tube cancels inhomogeneities. The THEMIS
telescope (Télescope Héliographique pour l’étude du Magnetisme et des Instabilités
Solaires, see Arnaud et al. 1998 [12], Mein, 1997 [222]) has a He filled tube.
Other possibilities are to construct open telescopes, such as the DOT (Dutch open
telescope at La Palma, see Rutten et al., 2000 [266]). For THEMIS a joint between
the telescope tube and the dome which has an entrance window of 1 m prevents
air exchanges between outside and inside the dome.
To reduce atmospheric turbulence, systems which dynamically control the
wavefront deformations effected by the atmosphere are used (adaptive optics)8 .
Under ideal circumstances, the resolution of an optical system is limited by the
diffraction of light waves. This so-called diffraction limit is generally described by
the following angle (in radians) calculated using the light’s wavelength and optical
system’s pupil diameter d:
1.22λ
α= (2.38)
d
The turbulent atmosphere blurs images to resolution of 0.5 to 1 arcsec even at
the best sites. Adaptive optics (AO) provides a means of compensating for these
effects, leading to appreciably sharper images sometimes approaching the theo-
retical diffraction limit. One technique that has been developed for overcoming
atmospheric blurring is speckle interferometry, in which hundreds of very short ex-
posures (”specklegrams”) are processed after the observations to reconstruct the
unblurred image. However, because the specklegrams must be short exposures
and at the same time should have good signal-to-noise, speckle interferometry is
limited to imaging very bright objects. All AO systems work by determining the
shape of the distorted wavefront, and using an “adaptive” optical element – usually
a deformable mirror – to restore the uniform wavefront by applying an opposite
cancelling distortion.

2.3.2 Examples of Telescopes

Very briefly some selected examples of optical solar telescopes are given. The Big
Bear Solar Observatory (BBSO) (Fig. 2.3) is located at 2000 m elevation in the
middle of Big Bear Lake. This site reduces the image distortion which usually
occurs when the Sun heats the ground and produces convection in the air just
above ground. Turbulent motions in the air near the observatory are also reduced
8A review on high spatial resolution solar observations was given by Bonet, 1999 [43]
2.3. OBSERVING THE SUN 21

Figure 2.3: Big Bear Solar Observatory

by the smooth flow of wind across the lake instead of turbulent flow that occurs
over mountain peaks and forests. The main instrument is a 65 cm reflector and is
currently being upgraded.
In Fig. 2.4 a drawing of a solar vacuum tower telescope is given. Light enters
the vacuum tank through a coelostat system and a mirror. The vertical tank is
evacuated in order to avoid turbulence in the telescope itself. At NSO, Kitt Peak,
the telescope is a 70 cm f/52 system.
The German Vacuum Tower Telescope (VTT) at the Observatorio del Teide,
Tenerife, has two coelostat mirrors (80 cm) and the entrance window to the vacuum
tank (BK7) has a diameter of 75 cm and a thickness of 7 cm. The primary mirror
has 70 cm and the focal length of the system is 45.64 m. The total field of view is
700 arcsec and the scale is 4.52 arcsec/mm.
Other famous solar instruments for observing the Sun in high spatial resolution
mode are the Coupole at the Observatoire Pic du Midi, the Swedish La Palma
Solar Telescope (SST), THEMIS in Tenerife, the NSO R.B. Dunn Telescope at
Sacramento Peak (DST, 30 inch entrance window, 20 inch solar image) and the
McMath-Pierce Facility at Kitt Peak..
GREGOR is a cooperation between three German institutes (Kiepenheuer
Institut Freiburg, Astrophysikal. Institut Potsdam and Astrophysikal. Institut
Göttingen). An existing telescope will be upgraded to a 1.5 m telescope and will
permit high resolution solar observations. The 1.5 m mirror is a lightweight mirror
consisting of Silicon Carbide (weight only 180 kg) 9 .
The SST 10 is the Swedish Vacuum solar telescope located at the Observatorio
Roque de los Muchachos in La Palma. It is a 1 m vacuum telescope. A single lens
is used thus permitting observations of high image quality through very narrow
filters. The Advanced Technology Solar Telescope (ATST) will be a collaboration
between 22 institutes11 .
9 [Link]
10 //[Link]/NatureNov2002/telescope [Link]
11 [Link]
22 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

Flat

Coelostat

Flat Entrance window

Vacuumtank

Concave
Exit window
Solar image
Ground level
Vertical spectrograph

ing
Grat

Figure 2.4: Optical path scheme of a vacuum telescope (e.g. Kitt Peak or VTT, Tener-
ife). Below the ground level, a vertical spectrograph is located. The solar image can be
observed at the top of the optical bank that is shown as a black box in the sketch.
2.3. OBSERVING THE SUN 23

Figure 2.5: Ground-based solar observatories that operate on a routine basis. After K.
Reardorn.

Besides these instruments for high resolution studies a number of solar moni-
toring instruments are distributed over the world (see Fig. 2.5).
A review about solar instrumentation was given by v.d. Lühe (2001) [202]. In
the next section we discuss satellite based instruments.

2.3.3 Some Recent Satellite Missions

Here we give three examples of satellites for solar and solar terrestrial research.
Further examples will be discussed in the following chapters.

SOHO

The SOlar and Heliospheric Observatory is a common project being carried out
by the European Space Agency (ESA) and the US National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) in the framework of the Solar Terrestrial Science Program
(STSP) comprising other missions like CLUSTER and the International Solar
Terrestrial Physics Program (ISTP) with Geotail, WIND and Polar. SOHO was
launched on December 2, 1995.
SOHO is located at the Lagrangian point L1 about 1.5 Million km away from
Earth12 which permits an uninterrupted view of the Sun. All previous space
solar observatories have orbited the Earth, from where their observations were
periodically interrupted as our planet ‘eclipsed’ the Sun.
The scientific objectives of SOHO are the interior of the Sun, the solar at-
mosphere and the solar wind.
The main instruments are listed in Table 2.7 together with the acronyms.
Further details about SOHO and the instruments can be found e.g. in the
review given by Fleck (2001) [98].
A drawing of the spacecraft is given in Fig. 2.6.
12 This is a stable point in the Sun-Earth system
24 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

Table 2.7: Main Instruments on SOHO

Acronym Name
CDS Coronal Diagnostic Spectrometer
CELIAS Charge, Element, and Isotope Analysis System
COSTEP Comprehensive Suprathermal and Energetic Particle Analyzer
EIT Extreme ultraviolet Imaging Telescope
ERNE Energetic and Relativistic Nuclei and Electron
GOLF Global Oscillations at Low Frequencies
LASCO Large Angle and Spectrometric Coronagraph Experiment
MDI Michelson Doppler Imager
SUMER Solar Ultraviolet Measurements of Emitted Radiation
SWAN Solar Wind ANisotropies
UVCS UltraViolet Coronagraph Spectrometer
VIRGO Variability of solar IRradiance and Gravity Oscillations

Figure 2.6: Drawing of the SOHO solar observatory (ESA & NASA)
2.3. OBSERVING THE SUN 25

Figure 2.7: Drawing of the RHESSI spacecraft, Artist drawing, NASA

RHESSI

The acronym RHESSI stands for Reuven Ramaty High Energy Solar
Spectroscopic Imager and it was launched on Feb. 5, 2002. The primary mis-
sion objective is to explore the basic physics of particle acceleration and energy
release in solar flares. The satellite is located at a circular orbit at 600 km alti-
tude. Observations can be made in the 3 keV to 17 MeV range by using cooled
hyperpure germanium crystals. The angular resolution depends on the energy
range of the observations: 2 arcseconds to 100 keV 7 arcseconds to 400 keV 36
arcseconds above 1 MeV. During solar flares large amount of energy is released,
gas being heated up to several million K radiating X-rays. High energy electrons
primarily emit hard X-rays, whereas high energy protons and ions emit primarily
gamma rays. RHESSI permits to observe both types of radiation. It seems that
the mission will be operational until 2008.

STEREO

This acronym stands for Solar Terrestrial Relations Observatory. The mission
will consist on two nearly identical space-based observatories - one ahead of Earth
in its orbit, the other trailing behind - to provide the first-ever stereoscopic mea-
surements to study the Sun and the nature of its coronal mass ejections, or CMEs.
Launch of the STEREO spacecraft is planned for no earlier than September 18,
2006. The main aim will be to study the 3-D structure and extension of coronal
mass ejections (CMEs).
26 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

2.3.4 Solar Polarimetry

Magnetic fields are the key to understand solar activity phenomena and to pre-
dict them. To measure magnetic fields on the Sun, it is inevitable to deal with
polarimetry13 .
Electromagnetic radiation consists of oscillations of electric and magnetic fields
perpendicular to the direction of propagation. The electric field vector determines
the polarization of an electromagnetic wave:

• circular polarization: E rotates with its endpoint describing a circle in the

plane of polarization, right or left handed, depending on the sense of rotation;

• linear polarization: E remains in a fixed position;

• unpolarized: orientation of E changes randomly with time.

Polarization can be described mathematically by the four Stokes Parameters: I

intensity, Q the linear polarization in the direction of the position angle 00 , U the
linear polarization at 450 , V the circular polarization. For positive V , the vector
E is rotates clockwise as seen from the observer.
Usually, the polarization parameters are given relative to the intensity, i.e.
Q/I, U/I, and V /I.
The polarization parameters however cannot be measured directly. They have
to be measured by using optical devices which are polarization sensitive (linear
polarizers, retarders). In a polarimeter, the Stokes vector S = (I, Q, U, V ) is
transformed into S
= (I
, Q
, U
, V
), where the transmitted intensity I
depends
on Q, U, V .
Let us consider a simple example: The intensity I of linearly polarized light is
measured with a photodetector where the intensity of light generates an electric
current proportional to the intensity I. After introducing a linear polarizer into
the light beam with arbitrary orientation the measured intensity becomes I
< I.
The light is unpolarized if for all orientations of the polarizer the intensity is
the same. The orientation of the linear polarizer is varied and thus the intensity
of the light measured with the photodetector is modulated.
Because of seeing effects, for precise polarization measurements the modulation
frequency must lie above the frequency of the intensity fluctuations caused by
disturbances e.g. atmospheric turbulence in solar observations.
The action of linear optical systems on polarized light is described by the
Mueller matrices:
I
= MI (2.39)
The intensity of the outcoming beam is a linear combination of all four Stokes
parameters of the incoming beam. The Stokes parameters must obey the following
conditions:
I 2 − Q2 − U 2 − V 2 ≥ 0 I≥0 (2.40)
13 see e.g. K. N. Nagendra, Jan Olof Stenflo, Solar Polarization: Proceedings of an International

Workshop Held in Bangalore, India, 12-16 October, 1998, Kluwer, ASSL, 243
2.3. OBSERVING THE SUN 27

Figure 2.8: Zeeman effect: Without an external magnetic field the energy levels of an
electron in an atom a,b,c as well as d,e,f coincide. The presence of a magnetic field splits
the energy levels, however not all transitions are possible there are specific transition
rules.

When doing solar polarimetry one has to take into account for different effects such
as the Earth’s atmosphere where time fluctuations produce wavefront distortions,
instrumental polarization, spectrograph and detector polarization which all enter
as factors in the Mueller matrix.
The two basic effects that can be used for measuring magnetic fields are:

• Zeeman effect: degeneracy of the atomic eigenstates effected by the magnetic

field (see Fig. 2.8), splitting of line profiles and characteristic polarization
(Stokes V circular, Stokes Q linear). Can be used for magnetic fields >
100 Γ to compete with the microturbulent Doppler broadening of the line
profiles. The strength of the Earth’s magnetic field is about 0.5 Γ. Also: 1 Γ
corresponds to 10−4 Tesla .

• Hanle effect: useful diagnostic where the magnetic field is relatively weak
(a few to a few tens of Gauss) and where the plasma is sufficiently tenuous
that collisional excitation can be neglected in comparison to the radiative
excitation of the upper level. It introduces both a rotation of the plane of
polarization and a reduction of the net polarization of the scattered light.
28 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

Figure 2.9: Propagation of a wave throughout the outer solar atmosphere. On the
abscissa is the time, on the ordinate the frequency. Within 5 min the frequency drifts
from 80 MHz to 40 MHz indicating the propagation to the higher corona. Courtesy: H.
Aurass, Th. Mann, AIP.

2.3.5 Solar Radio Astronomy

The solar corona is an inhomogeneous, hot, dilute and fully ionized plasma. Its
spatial structure is governed by the magnetic field. Plasma processes associated
with solar activity take place on small temporal and spatial scales and reveal them-
selves by electron acceleration (up to a few MeV) which can emit radio radiation.
These are called non thermal electrons. Radio radiation from the Sun was first
detected in 1942.
From a simple derivation from electrodynamics it follows, that there exists a
plasma frequency, ωP , and that propagating waves through such a plasma are only
possible for ωwaves < ωP

4πne2
ωP = (2.41)
me
where n is the number of electrons per unit volume and ωP the plasma frequency.
Let us consider the propagation of an electromagnetic wave throughout the Sun’s
outer layers. Here, the density decreases from the chromosphere to the corona.
2.4. NEUTRINOS-TESTING THE SOLAR INTERIOR 29

Therefore, electromagnetic waves with higher frequencies originate in deeper layers

and by observing the Sun in different frequency channels one can measure the
propagation of a plasma wave through the atmosphere (see Fig. 2.9).
Possible emission mechanisms at cm- and mm-wavelengths are:
• The quiet Sun component of the radio emission is from thermal emission
from the hot ionized gas.
• At a frequency of 100 GHz (0.3 cm), the emission originates at the same
height in the photosphere than at visible wavelengths. At 1.4 GHz (21 cm)
the emission originates from the top of the chromosphere (corresponding
to a black body at 100 000 K) and at longer wavelengths (e.g. 300 cm,
corresponding to 0.1 GHz) the emission arises from the corona (1-2 Million
K blackbody). Thus, the size of the Sun varies when measured at different
wavelengths.
• The slowly varying component also has thermal origin and arises from regions
above sunspots where the electron density is higher.
The Low Frequency Array for Radio Astronomy (LOFAR) is an interferomet-
ric array of radiotelescopes located in Germany and the Netherlands permitting
observations in the 10 - 240 MHz range. The Atacama Large Millimeter Array
(ALMA) is an international collaboration between Europe and the North America
to build a synthesis radio telescope that will operate at millimeter and submil-
limeter wavelengths and it will be able to study gas dynamics around protostars.
Moreover, ALMA will be the largest solar observing facility. The instrument is
much more sensitive in the mm domain than RHESSI in X-rays. This will permit
to study the process of acceleration in flares. In general, the mm and submillimeter
emission of the quiet Sun is thermal emission from the chromosphere. Further-
more, studies between 100 and 400 km height above the solar surface can be made
and therefore the propagation of solar oscillations can be investigated.
A general introduction to solar radio astronomy can be found in the book of
Krüger14 .

2.4 Neutrinos-Testing the Solar Interior

Neutrinos are produced during several phases of the pp reaction15 . Therefore,
they provide a diagnostic tool for the occurrence of the reactions and can serve
as a test whether theoretical models of the solar interior are in accordance with
observations.

2.4.1 General Properties

The β decay lead to the detection of neutrinos. An example is a β − decay where
a neutron in an atom’s nucleus turns into a proton, p, electron e− and an antineu-
14 A. Krüger, Introduction to solar radio astronomy and radio physics (Geophysics and astro-

physics monographs), D. Reidel, 1979

15 for a general description see also: Haxton (2001) [129]
30 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

trino νe like the decay of tritium or 3 H (halflife 12.33 years) into 3 He:
3
H →3 He + e− + νe (2.42)

During β + decay, a proton in an atom’s nucleus turns into a neutron, a positron

and a neutrino.
The neutrino was first invented as an ad hoc hypothesis, in order to save the
laws of conservation of energy and momentum from falsification around 1930.
Wolfgang Pauli proposed to explain this discrepancy by postulating that an ad-
ditional, invisible particle was emitted along with the electron, carrying away the
missing energy and momentum. This “ghost particle” was named neutrino.
There exist three families of elementary particles, each family consisting of two
quarks, and two leptons.
Quarks are constituents of protons and neutrons. Lepton is the collective term
for electrons and neutrinos and their relatives in the other families. The electron
and the electron-neutrino νe make up the lepton pair of the first family. In the
other two families, the electron-equivalents are called muon µ and tau τ , each with
their neutrino partner, called mu-neutrino νµ and tau-neutrino ντ . The ντ was
discovered in 1988.

2.4.2 Solar Neutrinos

As we have seen, neutrinos are produced in the first reaction of the pp chain having
an energy between zero and 0.42 MeV. The maximum energy for the neutrinos
from the decay of 8 B is about 15 MeV. All neutrinos interact very weakly with
matter, the probability of absorption increases with their energy. The rare 8 B
neutrinos are more likely to be absorbed. The absorption cross section is the
effective area offered by a target particle to a beam of incident particles. For
neutrinos the cross section σ is:

σ ∼ 10−50 m2 (2.43)

When we compare this value to the cross sections in atomic and nuclear physics
which are about 10−20 ...10−30 m2 we see that neutrinos can penetrate the whole
Sun without being absorbed and therefore they can be used to test our models.
The distance between collisions, the mean free path l, if the target particles have
a number density n m−3 , is given by:
1
l= (2.44)
nσ
For a solid target one has n ∼ 1029 and therefore l ∼ 1021 m for neutrinos. So neu-
trinos have an extremely large mean free path. How can we detect them? There
are many neutrinos coming from the Sun passing the Earth: about 1015 m−2 s−1 .
With the cross section and the number density given above, the number of detec-
tions N would be:
N ∼ 10−6 m−3 s−1 (2.45)
That means about one neutrino per month per cubic meter of the detector.
2.4. NEUTRINOS-TESTING THE SOLAR INTERIOR 31

2.4.3 Solar Neutrino Detectors

The first experiment to detect solar neutrinos was a 37 Cl reaction with neutrinos
resulting in 37 Ar which is unstable and decays to 37 Cl. The decay of Ar can be
measured.
37
Cl + νe → 37
Ar + e−
37
Ar → 37
Cl + e+ + νe (2.46)

Only neutrinos with energies > 0.8 MeV can be detected by this reaction. This
rules out the most numerous low energy neutrinos (first reaction in the pp chain).
The 37 Cl is in a tank containing 105 gallons of C2 Cl4 perchlorethylene in the
Homestake Gold Mine in Lead, South Dakota. The experiment has to be placed
deep below the surface to avoid contaminating reactions produced by cosmic rays.
Ar is an inert gas, one can extract it from the tank and observe its decay elsewhere.
Neutrino detections are measured by the solar neutrino flux unit defined by:

1 SNU = 10−36 interactions s−1 target atom−1 (2.47)

Since the experiment contains about 230 37 Cl atoms one has to expect one detection
every 5 × 105 s.
Theoretical models of the Sun predict the following count rates:
Bahcall, Pinsonneault (1992) [22] 8.0 ± 3.0 SNU,

Turck-Chièze, Lopes (1993) [319] 6.4 ± 1.4 SNU.

However, the measured flux is:

2.28 ± 0.23 SNU (2.48)

As it has been stressed already, the chlorine experiment is (according to standard

solar model predictions) sensitive primarily to neutrinos from the rare fusion reac-
tion that involves 8 B neutrinos which are produced in only 2 of 104 terminations of
the pp cycle. In a conference held in Brookhaven, 1978, it was therefore suggested
to design new experiments that are sensitive to the low energy neutrinos from the
fundamental pp reaction.
In the Ga experiment, neutrinos with an energy ≥ 0.2332 MeV can initiate the
reaction:
νe +71 Ga → e− +71 Ge (2.49)
Therefore, many of the pp neutrinos are included. The SAGE is a Russian/Amer-
ican experiment and uses 60 tons of metallic Gallium. The GALLEX experiment
is a European experiment located underground in Italy. It uses 30 tons of Ga in a
GaCl3 HCl solution. More than half of the neutrinos that can be detected with this
experiment come from the second most important contribution of the pp chain,
from 7 Be. Again the results are inconsistent with theoretical predictions with a
discrepancy by a factor of about 2. However, they provided a first experimental
indication of the presence of pp neutrinos.
The Kamiokande experiment uses a large tank of pure water sited underground
and its aim was to study the possible decay of the proton. The half life of a p
32 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

is ∼ 1030 yr. The neutrino detector picked up a number of neutrinos from the
explosion of the supernova SN 1987A in the Large Magellanic Cloud, which is
a neighbor of our galaxy. In an updated version (Kamiokande II) 0.68 kilotons
of water were used and neutrinos from 8 B above 7.5 MeV can be detected. The
water experiment Kamiokande detects higher energy neutrinos (above 7 MeV)
by neutrino-electron scattering (ν + e → ν‘ + e
) and according to the standard
solar model the 8 B decay is the only important source of these higher-energy
neutrinos. The experiment clearly showed that the observed neutrinos come from
the sun because the electrons that are scattered by the incoming neutrinos recoil
predominantly on the direction of the sun-earth vector. The relativistic electrons
are observed by the Cerenkov radiation they produce in the water detector.
The results of the gallium experiments, GALLEX and SAGE gave an average
observed rate of 70.5±7 SNU. This is in agreement with the standard model by the
theoretical rate of 73 SNU that is calculated from the basic pp and pep neutrinos.
The 8 B neutrinos which are observed above 7.5 MeV in the Kamiokande exper-
iment, must also contribute to the gallium event rate. This contributes another
7 SNU, unless something happens to the lower energy neutrinos after they are
created in the Sun. Thus the Ga experiments are in accordance with predictions
if we exclude everything but the pp neutrinos. This is sometimes called the third
neutrino problem.
The calculated pp neutrino flux is approximately independent of solar models;
it is closely related to the total luminosity of the sun.
Summarizing the the neutrino problem we can state:

• smaller than predicted absolute event rates in the chlorine and Kamiokande
experiments.

• incompatibility of the chlorine and Kamiokande experiments,

• very low rate in the Ga experiment which implies the absence of 7 Be neutri-
nos although 8 B neutrinos are present.

Solar neutrino experiments are currently being carried out in Japan (Super
Kamiokande,Takata (1993) [309], Totsuka (1996) [313]), Canada (SNO, Sudbury,
using 1 kiloton of heavy water; Hargrove and Paterson, 1991 [127]) and in Italy
(BOREXINO, ICARUS, GNO (Gallium Neutrino Observatorium), each sensitive
to a different energy all working in Gran Sasso, Arpesella et al. (1992) [13]), in
Russia (SAGE, Caucasus) and in the United States (Homestake). The SAGE,
chlorine and GNO work radiochemical, the others electronic (recoil electrons pro-
duced by the neutrino interactions using Cherenkov effect).
The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) (see also Krastev (2002) [173]) is
located at 6800 feet under ground in a mine in Sudbury, Ontario. The neutri-
nos react with heavy water producing flashes of light (Cerenkov radiation). The
principle is as follows:
νe + d → p + p + e− (2.50)
As the neutrino approaches the deuterium nucleus d a heavy charged particle of
the weak force (called the W boson) is exchanged. This changes the neutron in
2.4. NEUTRINOS-TESTING THE SOLAR INTERIOR 33

deuterium to a proton, and the neutrino to an electron. The electron, according to

mechanics, will get most of the neutrino energy since it has the smaller mass. Due
to the large energy of the incident neutrinos, the electron will be so energetic that
it will be ejected at light speed, which is actually faster than the speed of light in
water. This causes the optical equivalent of a “sonic boom”, where a “shock wave
of light” is emitted as the electron slows down. This light flash, called Cherenkov
radiation, is detected.
The current status of solar neutrino experiments was reviewed by Suzuki (1998)
[303] and by Shibahashi (2003) [282].

2.4.4 Testing the Standard Solar Model

We will speak about helioseismology in a later chapter, however in this context it
should be noted that results from helioseismology have increased the disagreement
between observations and the predictions of solar models with standard neutrinos.
Helioseismological measurements demonstrate that the sound speeds predicted by
standard solar models agree with high precision with the sound speeds of the sun
inferred from measurements. This leads to the conclusion that standard solar
models cannot be wrong to explain the discrepancy.
The square of the sound speed is:
c2 ≈ T /µ (2.51)
where T is the temperature and µ the mean molecular weight. Sound speeds can
be determined with the aid of helioseismology to a very high accuracy (better
than 0.2% rms throughout nearly the whole sun). Thus one can estimate tiny
errors in the model values of T and µ as measurable discrepancies in the precisely
determined helioseismological sound speed:
 
δc 1 δT δµ
 − (2.52)
c 2 T µ
The quantitative agreement between standard model predictions and helioseismo-
logical observations rules out solar models with temperature or mean molecular
weight profiles that differ significantly from the standard values. This observational
agreement rules out in particular solar models in which deep mixing has occurred.
The best agreement is obtained when including the effect of particle diffusion-
selective sinking of heavier species in the sun’s gravitational field. Models without
taking into account of this effect have rms discrepancies between predicted and
measured sound speeds as large as 1% (e.g. Turck-Chièze and Lopez (1993) [319]
whereas models including this effect have rms discrepancies of 0.1% (Bahcall et
al., 1997 [23]).
The sound-speed profile in the Sun was determined by carrying out an as-
ymptotic inversion of the helioseismic data from the Low-Degree (l) Oscillation
Experiment (LOWL), the Global Oscillation Network Group (GONG), VIRGO
on SOHO, the High-l Helioseismometer (HLH), and observations made at the
South Pole (Takata and Shibahashi, 1998 [310]). Then the density, pressure, tem-
perature, and elemental composition profiles in the solar radiative interior were
34 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

deduced by solving the basic equations governing the stellar structure, with the
imposition of the determined sound-speed profile and with a constraint on the
depth of the convection zone obtained from helioseismic analysis and the ratio of
the metal abundance to the hydrogen abundance at the photosphere. Using the
resulting seismic model, neutrino fluxes were estimated and the neutrino capture
rates for the chlorine, gallium, and water Cerenkov experiments. The estimated
capture rates are still significantly larger than the observation.
Solar models with helioseismic constraints and the solar neutrino problem are
discussed in Watanabe and Shibahashi (2001) [331] and Roxburgh (1998) [263].
Is there a correlation between neutrino fluxes and solar activity? On the basis
of an analysis of the 37 Ar production rate at the Homestake station for the period
1970-1990, Basu (1992) [28] found that the solar neutrino flux varies with time
in proportion to the solar wind flux. However, Walther (1999) [330] found that
there exists no significant correlation between the Homestake neutrino data up
to run 133 and the monthly sunspot number, according to a test that is based
on certain optimality properties for this type of problem. It is argued that the
reported highly significant results for segments of the data are due to a statistical
fallacy.

2.4.5 Solution of the Neutrino Problem

Neutrino Oscillations

How to explain this discrepancy between observations and theory? One explana-
tion comes from particle theory itself. There are three conserved quantities, called
electron, muon and tauon lepton numbers and correspondingly three types of neu-
trinos. There are however indications that some modifications to this standard
model are required. These involve that the neutrinos have small masses and that
the neutrinos can transform from one type to another. The Mikheyev-Smirnov-
Wolfenstein effect (MSW) explains such neutrino oscillations and by the above
mentioned experiments we can only detect electron neutrinos. Another explana-
tion of the discrepancy is that the flux is variable during the solar cycle. This
might be explained if the neutrinos possess a magnetic moment and if interaction
with the solar magnetic field is possible.
Let us give a very simplified explanation of neutrino oscillations. An indispens-
able, but counterintuitive, concept in quantum mechanics is that of superposition.
Suppose a certain particle has a property that can have several different values;
the classic example is that of Schrödinger’s cat, but let us consider a more prac-
tical one: ordinary playing cards have the property ‘suit’, with the four possible
values ‘spades’, ‘hearts’, ‘diamonds’, and ‘clubs’. In ordinary non-quantum life,
each individual card has a well-defined suit. However a quantum card may be in
a mixed state, a superposition of, say 30% spades, 60% hearts, and 10% clubs.
When you check which suit that card belongs to, you have a 30% chance of finding
that it’s a spade, 60% chance of finding it’s a heart, and so on. Note that this
is not just a matter of your ignorance of the card’s “true” suit – the point is, it
doesn’t have a single well-defined suit until you check it.
2.4. NEUTRINOS-TESTING THE SOLAR INTERIOR 35

In particle physics, the equivalent of the suits are the three families, discussed
above. A neutrino may belong to any one of the three families, making it νe , or
a νµ , or a ντ . Or, it may be a superposition of the three family flavors, mixed in
some proportions. Now, the standard model assumes that the neutrinos emitted
from the sun are in a pure νe state, without mixing. This can be understood
with the quantum mechanical concept of eigenstates. This is well known for the
K meson. An eigenstate is a state that is recognized as pure, non-mixed, without
superposition, in a certain context. In quantum mechanics different interactions
recognize and interact each with a different set of eigenstates for the particles. Try
to apply this to a card game. In different games a heart would become a spade
etc. For most particles and interactions the different eigenstates are identical.
This is not the case for the weak interaction. The weak eigenstates of quarks
are different from their strong/electromagnetic eigenstates. The K0 mesons are
produced in strong interactions of quarks, but decay through weak interactions of
their constituent quarks. Thus, the production eigenstates are different from the
travel/decay eigenstates of the K0. As far as the weak interaction is concerned,
leptons are expected to behave in the same manner as quarks. If neutrinos do have
a tiny mass, and different neutrinos have different masses, they will behave in the
same way as K0 mesons. They will be produced in a weak-interaction eigenstate,
but travel in a mass eigenstate. The mass eigenstate may be different from the
weak eigenstate. The weak-interaction eigenstates are the three neutrino flavors
discussed earlier: νe , νµ , ντ . When they arrive and interact with our detectors,
they do not arrive as the original weak eigenstate in which they were produced,
but as a mixture of two or more flavors. This is a potential solution to the solar
neutrino problem, since the experiments measure an apparent disappearance of
electron-neutrinos, without measuring the other flavors. If the neutrinos oscillate
from the 100% νe that they are produced as in the sun, to a mixture with around
40% νe electron-neutrino and 60% some other neutrinos, we get an agreement with
experimental data.
Neutrino oscillations and the solar neutrino problem are discussed by Haxton
(2001) [129] .
The search for neutrino decays during the 1999 solar eclipse is discussed in
Cecchini et al. (2000) [60] involving the emitted visible photons, while neutrinos
travel from the Moon to the Earth.

Alternate Solar Models

Other suggestions to solve the neutrino problem are:
1. There is an additional force resisting gravity in the solar interior which re-
duces the central pressure and temperature- maybe rapid rotation, strong
internal magnetic fields. Since the pp chain is strongly dependent on tem-
perature, this might explain a different SNU.
2. The Sun contains a central black hole or neutron star. There occurs a grav-
itational release from accretion providing much of the radiated energy.
3. The surface chemical composition is not typical of the interior composition.
4. Waves or weak interacting particles contribute to the energy transport.
36 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

Today the most likely solution of the neutrino problem are the neutrino oscillations
suggesting that our solar model is quite correct. Bahcall and Davis (2000) [21] gave
a recent review about the solar neutrino problem and suggest further experiments.

2.5 Helioseismology-Solar Oscillations

2.5.1 Observations of Oscillations
In the 1960s the five minutes oscillations were detected on the solar surface. These
are vertical oscillations with a strongly varying amplitude but a period of five
minutes, maximum velocities about 0.5 km/s towards or away from the observer.
The pattern persists for about half an hour (six cycles of wave motion), then fades
away but a similar pattern emerges. It was realized that these oscillations could be
understood in terms of a superposition of many normal modes of solar oscillations.
Let us consider one analogy: For seismic waves on the Earth one usually has
only one source of agitation - an earthquake. For the Sun, there are many sources
of agitation of solar “seismic” waves; these sources of agitation causing the solar
waves are processes in the larger convective zone. Because there is no single source,
we can treat the sources as a continuum, so the ringing Sun is like a bell struck
continuously with many tiny sand grains.
How can we measure solar oscillations? Let us briefly describe the main princi-
ples of a Dopplerimager. Consider the intensity profile of an absorption line. If the
material from which this absorption line is emitted moves away from the observer,
the line will be redshifted according to the Doppler effect. We can use this effect
to produce velocity images of the solar surface. The light from the Sun is sent
through a filter that alternates between letting through light from a narrow range
of wavelengths on either side of the center of the line. The two light intensities
are measured at every point on the solar surface using an imaging camera. The
difference between the two intensities changes when the spectral line shifts, and
therefore that difference is a measure of the velocity (see Fig. 2.10).
Waves travelling from the interior of the Sun up to the surface are reflected
back again at the surface boundary. Imagine a wave normal to the surface of
the Sun and travelling towards the center. As the wave travels deeper into the
interior, the temperature increases and the wave is progressively refracted away
from the normal until it turns around and returns to the surface. At the Sun’s
surface the sharp density gradient causes subsequent reflection and the wave heads
back into the Sun. Thus the Sun is a resonant cavity, standing waves are created.
The more often a wave returns to the surface, the less deeply it penetrates before
being turned back and conversely, waves reflected only a few times from the surface
probe much deeper into the Sun.
The Global Oscillation Network Group (GONG) project is a community-based
program to conduct a detailed study of solar internal structure and dynamics
using helioseismology, by means of observations from a network of six stations
(Learmont (Australia), Mauna Loa (Hawaii), Big Bear (US, California), Cerro
Tololo (Chile), Teide Observatory (Tenerife, Spain), and Udaipur (India)) spread
around the World in order to void gaps due to sunset. To measure solar oscillations
2.5. HELIOSEISMOLOGY-SOLAR OSCILLATIONS 37

Figure 2.10: SOHO-MDI Dopplerimage; left: the rotation of the Sun is clearly seen;
right: the rotation of the Sun was eliminated and therefore only velocities due to granu-
lation and supergranulation are seen.

High l

c1
Low l

c
2

Low l modes are reflected Velocity of sound c depends on

deeper temperature T. T increases inwards,
high l modes are reflected higher therefore the wavefront will be
reflected.

Figure 2.11: Left: waves with low and high l; the low l modes are reflected deeper than
the high l modes. Right: Explanation how the waves are reflected in the solar interior.
The wavefront (normal to the propagation) is deflected since the sound velocity is higher
in deeper layers (c2 > c1 ).
38 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

one takes a sequence of images of the oscillation pattern at fixed time intervals.
The shorter these time intervals between the images, the easier it is to identify
the oscillations. A big problem in such a project is the enormous amount of data.
Each station in the network produces more than 200 megabytes of data every day.
Details about the instrument used (a Fourier Tachometer) can be found in Beckers
et al. (1978) [30].
The BiSON (Birmingham Solar Oscillations Network) project also has six ob-
servatories, most of which are automated. As it is explained above, the GONG
observatories measure the motions on the solar surface caused by the oscillations.
The BiSON observatories do so as well, but unlike the GONG network they mea-
sure an average velocity over the solar surface (the Sun is observed as a point
source, if it were a star). The measurements therefore are sensitive only to oscilla-
tion patterns with very big wavelengths: all smaller-scale patterns are suppressed
by being averaged. The two techniques for GONG and BiSON are therefore com-
plementary.

2.5.2 Modes of Oscillations

There are two different types of oscillations depending on the restoring force.

• p- modes: the restoring force is the pressure;

• g-modes: the restoring force is the gravity.

There exist also surface waves which are called f-modes. The p-modes have fre-
quencies between 1 hour and two minutes and include the five minutes oscillations
discussed above. The g-modes have much longer periods than the p-modes. It can
be shown that they are trapped in the solar interior beneath the convection zone.
The energy generated in the sun is first transported by radiation and then at a
depth of about 200 000 km by convection. In this convection zone the amplitudes
of the g-modes are damped exponentially and thus it is extremely difficult to ob-
serve them at the solar surface. Amplitudes would be expected of a few cm/s to
mm/s but the frequency of these modes would contain valuable information about
the solar core (Turck-Chièze et al., 2004 [318]. Duvall, 2004 [83], suggested a new
method (time distance helioseismology) to detect g modes.
How can we describe the solar oscillations? First we must make some sim-
plifications. We assume that the sun is strictly spherical. This will provide a
spectrum of oscillation frequencies which will be modified by a) rotation and b)
magnetic fields. A second approximation is that the oscillations are adiabatic.
This approximation is valid since the oscillation period is in general much smaller
than the relevant thermal timescale. A third approximation is that we neglect a
change of the gravitational field of the Sun during the oscillation. This is not true
for radial oscillations: in radial oscillations all matter at any solar radius moves
inward or outward in phase. However if we consider nonspherical modes at short
wavelengths in the horizontal direction this is again a good approximation.
Any oscillation can be described by introducing three quantum numbers n, l, m.
The meaning of these numbers is as follows:
2.5. HELIOSEISMOLOGY-SOLAR OSCILLATIONS 39

Figure 2.12: Examples of several modes

• n denotes the number of points in the radial direction at which the amplitude
of the oscillation vanishes.
• l, m determine the angular behavior of the oscillation over the surface of the
Sun. In addition we have the relation −l ≤ m ≤ +l.
If Plm denotes the associated Legendre function which can be given in an analytical
form, the inward or outward motion of points on the surface is related to the value
of the real part of the function

Plm (cos Θ)exp(imφ) (2.53)

where Θ, φ are spherical polar coordinates. If l, m are low, there is a relatively small
number of patches on the solar surface (which oscillate with different directions
of radial velocity). If l, m are large, there is a very large number of such patches.
We speak of a high degree model if l is large and conversely if l is small. Most
of the observable p-modes have periods between 2 and 10 minutes with 5 minutes
as a characteristic value. These p-modes are trapped near to the solar surface
and in the solar interior. For high values of l the modes are trapped close to the
surface. In general the oscillation frequency of any mode depends on the internal
properties of the Sun in the region which the mode can propagate.
The l −ν diagram (Fig. 2.13) is fundamental for helioseismology. This diagram
shows how much acoustic energy there is at each frequency for every one of the
spatial modes of oscillation. A musical instrument should be tuned to a single
frequency and a few harmonious overtones, the Sun resonates in tens of millions of
ways all at the same time. The frequency ν of each mode reveals a slightly different
part of the Sun’s interior. The spatial modes are identified from patterns on the
Dopplergrams that are made each minute. The frequencies are very low compared
40 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

Figure 2.13: l-ν diagram from MDI high-cadence full disk data shows mode frequencies
up to 10 mHz and l=1000.

to sound waves we are used to hearing. Most of the power is concentrated in a band
near 3 mHz, that’s one oscillation every 5 minutes 16 . Higher frequencies aren’t
trapped inside the Sun, so they don’t resonate. Modes with lower ν disappear in
the background noise. The spatial scale of the modes is indicated by the angular
degree l telling how many node lines there are in the pattern at the surface of
the Sun. The l=0 modes are ‘breathing’ modes where the whole surface of the
Sun moves in and out at the same time. Higher order modes divide the surface
into a pattern like a checker board, where adjacent squares move in different
directions at any given time. A mode of a particular degree, l, at the surface can
be associated with resonances having any number of nodes in the radial direction
inside the Sun. The number of radial nodes is called the order. The curved lines in
the figure are associated with different radial orders. For a given order (line) the
16 Sound waves we can hear vibrate from tens to thousands of times per second
2.5. HELIOSEISMOLOGY-SOLAR OSCILLATIONS 41

frequency decreases with increasing spatial degree. For a give degree, the frequency
increases with order. In the Fig. 2.13, the lower left corner is most closely related
to what is happening in the core of the Sun. Moving up in frequency or degree
tells more about what is happening near the surface. Because sound waves of a
particular degree can travel in different directions the lines appear relatively broad.
If the material through which any of these modes is travelling is moving, then the
measured frequency of the mode is affected. The rotation of the Sun causes the
biggest frequency shift and makes the lines shown in the figure broad (frequency
shifting). Other motions within the Sun along the path taken by the waves cause
different types of frequency changes. Analysis of these frequency changes reveals
the internal motions of the Sun.

2.5.3 Theory of Solar Oscillations

Let us briefly describe the basic theory of solar oscillations. For an overview of
this rapidly evolving topic see also Christensen-Dalsgaard, 2004 [66]. We use the
basic equations:
dv
ρ = −gradP + ρgradΦ (2.54)
dt
dρ
+ ρdivv = 0 (2.55)
dt
1 dP Γ dρ
= (2.56)
P dt ρ dt
∇2 Φ = −4πGρ (2.57)

The first equation is the equation of motion, the second the equation of continuity,
the third the adiabatic equation and the last is the Poisson equation. Φ denotes the
gravitational potential and v is the fluid velocity, Γ is an effective ratio of specific
heats (ρdP/P dρ) which reduces to γ when γ is constant. The time derivative
follows the motion of the fluid. It is related to the derivative at a fixed point by
d/dt = ∂/∂t + vgrad. In an equilibrium situation:

ρ = ρ0 (r) P = P0 (r) Φ = Φ0 (r) v =0 (2.58)

Now we consider small disturbances about this equilibrium in which the perturbed
quantities are functions of all the spatial coordinates and the time. In the equi-
librium there is no dependence on spherical polar coordinates. For any variable f
we can write:

f = f0 + f1 f1 = Re[exp(iωnl t)f¯1 (r)Ylm (Θ, Φ)] (2.59)

The spherical harmonic is given by:

Ylm (Θ, φ) = Plm (Θ)exp(imφ) (2.60)

If the star is spherical the oscillation frequency does not depend on m. For the
Sun, the departure from sphericity is small and the real oscillation modes have a
42 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

behavior close to that shown above but with different m modes having different
frequencies. The oscillation frequency ω depends on n and l. The three numbers
n, l, m are related to the numbers of times f1 vanishes in the radial-, Θ- and
φ-directions and m ≤ l.
The functions f1 (r) satisfy a system of differential equations and the boundary
conditions have to be defined. Since stars do not have sharp surfaces we may
assume to a first approximation that all waves are totally reflected at the surface
which is defined as the level where density and pressure vanish. A further sim-
plification arises when the change in the gravitational potential produced by the
oscillations is unimportant; for most perturbations this is a good approximation
because some parts of the star are moving inwards and others moving outwards.
We define a perturbation vector ξ by

v = dξ/dt (2.61)

If cs denotes the velocity of sound in the unperturbed star:


cs = ΓP0 /ρ0 (2.62)

one can write:

1/2
Ψ = c2s ρ0 divξ (2.63)
and the equation for the radial part of ψ is
  
d2 ψ 1 N2
= − ω 2
− ω 2
c − S 2
l 1 − ψ (2.64)
dr2 c2s ω2

In addition to the frequency ω three frequencies appear:

• acoustic cut-off frequency ωc

ωc2 = (c2s /4Hρ2 )(1 − 2dHρ 2dr) (2.65)

Here, Hρ = ρ(dρ/dr) denotes the density scale height,

• Lamb frequency Sl
Sl = cs [l(l + 1)]1/2 /r (2.66)

• Brunt-Väissälä frequency N
 
1 dP 1 dρ
2
N =g − (2.67)
ΓP dr ρ dr

where g = GM/r2 .

Sl is always real but ωc and N can be imaginary. It can be shown that con-
vection occurs when N 2 is negative. We can write our differential equation for ψ
as:
d2 ψ
+ Kr2 ψ = 0 (2.68)
dr2
2.5. HELIOSEISMOLOGY-SOLAR OSCILLATIONS 43

For positive Kr2 there is a sinusoidal behavior with radius.

For negative Kr2 we have an exponential dependence giving an exponentially
decaying mode which is also called evanescent mode.
In reality Kr depends on r and ω. For different values of ω there are regions in
the star where the wave propagates and others where it is evanescent. For both,
the high frequency range and the low frequency range 4Kr2 is positive: for the high
frequency range ω > Sl , ωc and pressure fluctuations are most important; these
are the p-modes. For low frequencies ω < N the g-modes, where the gravity is the
restoring force, result.
As it has been already stated, convection occurs where N becomes imaginary.
The p-modes can propagate inside the Sun in a region whose lower boundary is
determined by the Lamb frequency and whose upper boundary is given by the
acoustic cut-off frequency. The g-modes are trapped beneath the convection zone.

2.5.4 Helioseismology and Internal Rotation

The rotation of the Sun can be determined quite straightforward: on the one hand
tracers such as sunspots or other phenomena visible on the disk can be used, on the
other hand, spectroscopic measurements of the plasma can be used. It was found
that the Sun does not rotate like a solid body. It rotates faster at the equator (25
days) and slower near the poles (33 days). Moreover, the rotation rate of sunspots
at mid-latitudes is somewhat faster than that deduced from Doppler shifts of the
surface plasma.
Our Sun is a middle aged star. The surface rotation rates of young solar-type
stars are up to 50 times that of the Sun. Our Sun has lost angular momentum
through the magnetized solar wind. Therefore, the outer convection zone must
have been gradually spinning down. This also had led to the suggestion that the
Sun might still posses a rapidly rotating core, perhaps highly magnetized which
also could explain the neutrino problem.
It is extremely important to know the internal rotation of the Sun because the
interplay between turbulent motions and rotation with magnetic fields is essen-
tial for the solar dynamo which leads to the observed 22 year cycles of magnetic
activity. In a spherically symmetric star the frequencies depend upon n and l
but not on m. For each (n, l) pair, there is a (2l + 1) fold degeneracy. Rotation
breaks the spherical symmetry and lifts the degeneracy. Advection causes a wave
propagation with the Sun’s rotation to have a higher measured frequency than a
similar wave propagating against rotation. Thus the difference in frequency of a
pair of oppositely propagating modes is proportional to m times a weighted av-
erage of the rotation rate Ω(r, θ) where the modes have appreciable amplitude.
Here, Ω(r, θ) denotes rotation at radius r and latitude θ. The resulting frequency
splitting ∆νnlm is half the value of this difference.
Results on the study of the internal solar rotation rate from the SOHO/MIDI
instrument are given in Fig. 2.14.
The main results are:

• Differential rotation: occurs only in the convection zone.

44 CHAPTER 2. THE SUN A TYPICAL STAR

Figure 2.14: This diagram shows the solar rotation rate inferred from two months
of MDI Medium-l data as a function of radius at three latitudes, 0 degrees, 30
degrees, and 60 degrees.

• Radiative interior: rotates almost rigidly.

• Thin shear layer near the surface.

• The transition layer between the radiative and convection zone which is
called the tachocline is mostly located in the radiative zone and thin at the
equator but maybe wider at high latitudes.

• There is a sharp radial gradient of the angular velocity beneath the con-
vection zone and the narrow peak of the sound speed at 0.67 R is due to
rotationally turbulent mixing in the tachocline.

More details about these results can be found in Kosovichev et al. (1998) [171].
Helioseismology can be used also to give arguments in the question of solar
neutrinos. Turck - Chièze et al. (2001) [317] used sound-speed and density pro-
files inferred from SOHO/GOLF and SOHO/ MDI data including these modes,
together with recent improvements to stellar model computations, to build a spher-
ically symmetric seismically adjusted model in agreement with the observations.
Their model is in hydrostatic and thermal balance and produces the present ob-
served luminosity. Some fundamental ingredients were adjusted, well within the
commonly estimated errors, such as the p-p reaction rate (±1%) and the heavy-
element abundance (±3.5%); the sensitivity of the density profile to the nuclear
reaction rates was examined. The corresponding emitted neutrino fluxes demon-
strate that it is unlikely that the deficit of the neutrino fluxes measured on Earth
can be explained by a spherically symmetric classical model without neutrino fla-
vor transitions.
2.5. HELIOSEISMOLOGY-SOLAR OSCILLATIONS 45

New insight into the internal structure of the Sun can be obtained by using
time-distance helioseismology. Let us explain this technique by considering seis-
mology on earth. Here, the arrival time of the initial onset of a disturbance is
measured. If we know the variation of seismic velocity with depth within the
earth, then we can calculate the travel time of rays between an earthquake and
a receiver using geometrical approximations. So in principle, we can locate any
earthquake in both time and space by recording the arrival times of waves at
stations worldwide.
In time-distance helioseismology, the travel time of acoustic waves is measured
between various points on the solar surface. To some approximation the waves
can be considered to follow ray paths; these depend on a mean solar model. The
curvature of the ray paths is caused by increasing sound speed with depth below
the surface (see Fig. 2.11). The travel time is affected by various inhomogeneities
along the ray path, including flows, temperature inhomogeneities and magnetic
fields. The technique consists of a measurement of a large number of times between
different locations. Then an inversion method is used to construct 3-D maps of
the subsurface inhomogeneities. A review article on that technique was given by
Duvall et al. (1997) [84].

Inversion Techniques
As we have explained above, the observed oscillation frequencies depend on the
physical structure of the solar interior, e.g the variation of quantities such as ρ, T
with r. If we assume a spherical symmetric sun and ignore rotational splitting, then
we can deduce from our model of the solar interior the corresponding oscillations.
Alternatively one can regard T, ρ... as unknowns and use the observed frequencies
in order to obtain them. This is called the inversion method. The total number of
quantities that can be determined in such a way is equal to the number of observed
oscillations. If more frequencies can be identified, a better model of the internal
structure can be obtained.
The Seismic Structure of the Sun from GONG data is described in Gough et
al. (1996) [119].
Solar like oscillations found on other stars are discussed recently e.g. in Bedding
and Kjeldsen, 2006 [31] and Kjeldsen et al., 2005 [165] where 37 oscillation modes
on α Cen B were found with l=0-3.
Chapter 3

The Solar Atmosphere and

Active Regions

3.1 Introduction
The different layers of the Sun and its atmosphere can be defined as follows:

• Solar interior: can be further subdivided into

1. Core: about 1/3 of the solar radius; here energy production occurs.
2. Radiation zone: about 1/3 of the solar radius; the energy is transported
outward by innumerable emission and absorption processes transferring
the high energy γ photons that are produced by nuclear fusion into
longer wave photons.
3. Convection zone: starts below the surface extending about 2 × 105 km
into the interior.

• Solar atmosphere: can be subdivided into

1
1. Photosphere: starts at the surface and extends up to 500 km.
2. Chromosphere: above the photosphere; extends to about 2 Mm.
3. Transition Region: strong increase of temperature up to 106 K over a
very small spatial range (some 104 km).
4. Corona: starts above 2 Mm, high temperature > 106 K.

In Fig. 3.1 the variation of temperature and electron density is shown.

1 which can be defined as the region where light is absorbed considerably over a short distance

47
48 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

-10

-15

Figure 3.1: Variation of electron temperature and electron density in the solar at-
mosphere

3.2 Phenomena in the Solar Photosphere

3.2.1 Radiation Transport
The photosphere of the Sun (or of a star) is the layer which can be seen in the visible
portion of the continuous radiation spectrum. Here, the photons in the continuum
of the visible spectrum have their last scattering encounter before leaving the
atmosphere. Let the opacity κν be that fraction of a beam of radiation of frequency
ν and intensity Iν which is absorbed or scattered out of the beam per unit distance.
The scattering occurs by atoms, molecules or electrons of the plasma through which
it passes. Let us define for an element of plasma of thickness dz and opacity κν (z)
the optical thickness dτν (the subscript ν denotes that this quantity depends on
the frequency)2 by:
dτν = −κν (z)dz (3.1)
and hence
z
τν (z) = − κν (z)dz (3.2)
0

The transfer of radiation through the atmosphere of a star is governed by the

equation of radiative transfer. If θ denotes the angle between the direction of the
beam of radiation and the outward normal, and µ = cos θ, then under the assump-
tions that a) the atmosphere is plane - parallel and b) is locally in thermodynamic
equilibrium (LTE), the transport equation becomes:

∂Iν (τν , µ)
µ = Bν (T ) − Iν (τν , µ) (3.3)
∂τν
2 Very often the solar surface is defined as the layer where τ500 nm = 1
3.2. PHENOMENA IN THE SOLAR PHOTOSPHERE 49

where Bν (T ) is the Planck function at temperature T :

2hν 3 hν/kT −1
Bν (T ) = e −1 (3.4)
c2
An elementary solution yields for the intensity of radiation emerging in direction
µ:
∞
τν dτ
Bν (T )e− µ
ν
Iν (µ) = (3.5)
0 µ
The Planck function must increase with depth, since the temperature increases
with depth (see Fig. 3.1). Eddington made the following Ansatz assuming a linear
increase of the function Bν with depth:

Bν = C + Dτν (3.6)

If we put this into 3.5, we arrive at

Iν = C + Dµ (3.7)

The physical depth z corresponding to τν = 1 is said to be the origin of the

emergent radiation of frequency ν. Thus, by observing the photosphere at different
frequencies, we sample it at different heights. Since τν is related to the absorption
coefficient, the variation of κν defines how deep we look into the atmosphere at a
given frequency ν.
For the Sun and solar like stars, the continuum absorption coefficient is formed
by the negative H ion H− .
The deepest penetration is obtained at IR wavelengths (about 1.6 µm); higher
layers may be sampled by observing at the centers of absorption lines. The greater
the optical depth at a given wavelength the less radiation reaches the observer from
that layer.
If we look at the solar disk we immediately see that the central regions are
brighter than the limb. The function Iν (µ)/Iν (1) is called the limb darkening
(center to limb variation). This may be written as:

∞
Iν (µ) Bν (T ) −τν /µ dτν
= e (3.8)
Iν (1) 0 Iν (1) µ

If one does an inversion of this equation information about the physical struc-
ture (temperature distribution) of the solar atmosphere is obtained. Stellar limb
functions can not be measured accurately so this method is only applicable to the
Sun.

3.2.2 Granulation
Under very good seeing conditions the Sun shows a cellular like pattern which is
called granulation. The mean diameter of the cells is about 1000 km which corre-
sponds roughly to 1 arcsec (as seen from the Earth). In the bright granules matter
is streaming upwards, in the darker intergranular lanes streaming downwards. Up
50 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

to now the best granulation images have been taken from the ground since no large
solar telescopes have been launched. In 2006 SOLAR B will be launched. This
will be the first large optical telescope flown in space. Its aperture is 50 cm and
angular resolution achieved will be 0.25 arcsec.
In order to minimize the effect of the turbulence of the Earth’s atmosphere
(seeing), the exposure times must be shorter than 1/10 s. Usually, one makes
a burst of several images and then selects the best image for further analysis.
Spectrograms show a high degree of correlation between intensities and velocities
proving the convective character of the phenomenon. Under a spatial resolution
better than 0.5 arcsec, the situation becomes more complex. Regular granules seem
to have a maximum for the upflow near their center, so called exploding granules
have a maximum upflow between the center and the edge. Measuring the width
of spectral lines one gets a hint for turbulence. Enhanced line widths indicate
enhanced turbulence. It was found that turbulence is located in the downdrafts
which is also predicted by 3 D models. The turbulence may be generated by the
shear between upflows and downflows at granular borders and on transonic flows.
A review about solar granulation was given by Muller (1999) [227] where further
references can be found.
A problem to investigate the granulation is how can we identify a granulum?
One possibility is to identify them by an isophote contour at a level close to the
average intensity of the photosphere. The images must be filtered in order to
remove the intensity fluctuations at low frequency, originating in instrumental
brightness inhomogeneities and in solar large scale fluctuations (which arise from
the supergranulation, mesogranulation and oscillations). Finally, high frequency
noise must be eliminated. In the Fourier domain such a filter has the form:

F (k) = (1 − e−Ca1 k )eCa2 k

2 2 2 2
(3.9)

The parameters are chosen, so that the maximum filter transmission stays in
between spatial scales 0.5 and 1 arcsec. Such a filter is partially restoring as it
enhances the contrast of the smallest granules which can then be identified more
clearly. Another method is to find the inflection points of the intensity distribution
in the image using a Laplacian operator.
How do granules evolve? The most common process is that of fragmentation: a
granule grows and then splits into several fragments (3-4). About 60% of granules
appear or die by this process. Some granules appear spontaneously in intergranular
spaces and grow, others result from merging of two adjacent granules. The most
spectacular evolution is observed for exploding granules. The granule lifetime
can be determined by their visual identification on successive images or by cross
correlating these images. There is a large discrepancy of the results: granular
lifetimes range from 6 to 16 min.
From the physical point of view, there exists a limitation for the horizontal
expansion because of mass conservation and radiative loss. Matter is streaming
upward in a granulum, expands and horizontal flows are driven by pressure gradi-
ents; thus the central upflow is decelerated which then cannot supply the horizontal
expansion and the radiative loss. The central part cools and the granule splits into
several fragments, after a downdraft developed. On the other hand, intergranu-
3.2. PHENOMENA IN THE SOLAR PHOTOSPHERE 51

Figure 3.2: Spectroscopic observation of solar granulation. The entrance of a spectro-

graph slit covers different granular/intergranular areas. Line profiles emanating from
granules are blueshifted because matter moves upwards and profiles from intergranular
areas are redshifted because matter moves away from the observer. This is valid for solar
granulation observed near the disk center.

lar lanes are interconnected without interruption. They contain some dark holes
which exist over 45 min and may correspond to the fingers of downflowing material
predicted by 3 D models.
Using time series with the 50 cm refractor at the turret dome of the Pic du
Midi observatory Roudier et al. (1997) [262] showed the existence of singularities in
the intergranular lanes what they called intergranular holes which have diameters
between 0.24 arcsec and 0.45 arcsec and are visible for more than 45 min. These
holes appear to be systematically distributed at the periphery of mesogranular and
supergranular cells.
Spectroscopic observations of the solar granulation with high resolution yield
information about velocities e.g. when observed near solar disk center, granular
profiles are blueshifted because matter rises and moves in direction to the observer
(see Fig. 3.2).
Concerning the structural properties of granules, we have to mention that their
number N increases monotonically with decreasing size. Granules of size 1.4 arcsec
are the main contributors to the total granule area. When the area A is plotted
versus their perimeter in a log-log scale, the dispersion of points (each of them
marks a granule) is small and their shape can be characterized by the relation:

P ∼ AD/2 (3.10)

where D is the fractal dimension. It seems that there are two ranges with different
fractal dimensions:
52 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

• D ∼ 1.25 for granules smaller than about 1.35 arcsec.

• D ∼ 2.00 for granules that are larger than 1.35 arcsec.

The physical interpretation is as follows: In hydrodynamics, the fractal dimension

is often used to get some information about the dynamical state. In the theory
of Kolmogorov (he treated isotropic, homogeneous turbulence in three dimensions
and obtained a 5/3 power law for the energy spectrum) a value of D = 5/3 is
predicted for isotherms and 4/3 for isobars. A fractal dimension of 2 or even
larger means that the shape is complex which is confirmed by observations since
many of them are in the process of fragmentation.
Granules above 1.4 arcsec have nearly the same brightness, the intergranular
brightness is nearly constant, with an average value of 0.92 (when the averaged
continuum is at 1.0). The rms intensity fluctuations of the best image is 10-11%
at λ 465, nm (50 cm refractor at La Palma) and 8-9% at λ 570 nm (50 cm refractor
at the Pic du Midi). Restored values lie between 10 and 22%. From the granular
contrast we can infer the temperature variations (assuming Planck’s law) which
correspond to ∼ 200 K.

Theoretical Approaches
The simplest model of convection is the classical Rayleigh problem: suppose a
fluid (either gaseous or liquid), confined between two horizontal plates separated
by a distance h and maintained at temperature T1 (upper) and T2 (lower) with
T2 > T1 . If the fluid has a positive coefficient of thermal expansion α as it will be
the case for a gas and for a normal fluid, the fluid near the lower plate will tend
to rise. However, this will be opposed by two effects: a) viscous dissipation, b)
thermal diffusion in the fluid. Convection will occur when the imposed temper-
ature gradient (T2 − T1 )/h is sufficiently large or, for a given gradient, when the
coefficients of the kinematic viscosity ν and of thermal diffusion κ are sufficiently
small. Rayleigh’s theoretical analysis of the problem in 1916 inspired Bénard to
investigate this 40 years later. It was found that convective instability occurs when
the Rayleigh number R exceeds a critical value:

gαβh4
R > Rcrit R= (3.11)
κν
where β is the temperature gradient. For Rcrit Rayleigh found the value 657.5.
This value depends on the boundary conditions. Later Chandrasekhar has shown
that e.g. a Coriolis force (as an effect of rotation) inhibits the onset of instability
to an extend which depends on the value of a non dimensional parameter (called
Taylor number):
4h4 Ω2
C= (3.12)
ν2
here, Ω is the vertical component of the angular velocity vector. For details see
e.g. Chandrasekhar (1961) [62].
For the solar convection zone R is extremely high, R ∼ 1010...11 .
3.2. PHENOMENA IN THE SOLAR PHOTOSPHERE 53

Important information about the origin of the solar granulation can be in-
ferred from power spectra. From spectrograms we can obtain 1-D power spectra
of intensity and velocity fluctuations, from white light images, one gets 2-D power
spectra for the intensity fluctuations. The theoretical power spectrum of the ve-
locity fluctuations decreases as k −5/3 down to the scale of molecular diffusion. The
temperature power spectrum however decreases as k −5/3 only to a scale kc . At
smaller scales the spectrum decreases as k −17/3 (Espagnet et al., 1995 [90]). Thus
kc separates the inertial convective range, where heat advection dominates from
the inertial conductive range, where diffusion dominates. The former is the range
of large granules, the latter the range of small granules.
The basic set of hydrodynamic equations to describe solar convection is de-
scribed in detail in Nordlund, 1982 [234].

Interaction between Granulation and Magnetic Elements

In this section we consider magnetic regions which occur as Plages or faculae (in
active regions) and in the photospheric network (in the quiet Sun) in the form of
small bright points. Sunspots will be discussed in the next paragraph. Magnetic
elements (observed in high resolution magnetograms) and bright points (observed
in high resolution filtergrams) coincide. Bright points are visible in white light near
the limb (e.g. as faculae) but also at the disk center because they have a brightness
comparable to granules. It is very easy to observe them with a G Band filter (see
e.g. Kiselman et al. 2001 [164]). Fraunhofer (1817) denoted a roughly 1 nm
wide band with CH lines around λ = 430.5nm by G in his initial inventory of the
visible solar spectrum. This region is a principal diagnostic to study photospheric
magnetism at the highest achievable angular resolution (Muller et al., 1989 [228]).
The dynamics of the granules forces these small bright points to appear and
stay in the intergranulum when the surrounding granules converge. Thus there
seems to be a continuous interaction between granules and magnetic elements.
Small magnetic flux tubes are the channels along which the energy is carried
in upper layers by different kinds of waves. In that context Choudhuri et al.
(1993) [65] discussed the generation of magnetic kink waves by rapid footpoint
motions of the magnetic flux tubes. They found that these pulses are most efficient.
Kalkofen (1997) [152] discussed the impulsive generation of transverse magneto-
acoustic waves in the photosphere, propagating upward with exponential growth
of amplitude. Such waves are observed as intensity oscillations in the H and K
lines of Ca II in network bright points.

Granulation-Mesogranulation
Idealized numerical experiments on turbulent convection were made by Catta-
neo et al. (2001) [58]. The authors found two distinct cellular patterns at the
surface. Energy-transporting convection cells (corresponding to granules in the
solar photosphere) have diameters comparable to the layer depth, while macro-
cells (corresponding to mesogranules) are several times larger. The motion acts
as a small-scale turbulent dynamo, generating a disordered magnetic field that is
concentrated at macrocellular corners and, to a lesser extent, in the lanes that
54 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

Figure 3.3: Solar granulation and small network bright points

join them. These results imply that mesogranules owe their origin to collective
interactions between the granules.

3.2.3 Five Minutes Oscillations

In 1962 Leighton, Noyes and Simon [192] identified a strong oscillatory component
which they called five minutes oscillations because of its characteristic period.
Later, these were interpreted as standing acoustic waves trapped in resonant cav-
ities below the photosphere.
The spatial relation between the 5-min oscillations and the granulation pattern
has been largely debated in the literature. Of course such a discussion is impor-
tant to understand the excitation mechanism of these oscillations and, hence, the
internal properties of the Sun. Theoretical studies suggest that acoustic waves
which comprise the 5-min oscillations are stochastically generated by turbulent
convection just beneath the photosphere (Goldreich et al., 1994 [115]). Espagnet
et al. (1996) [91] studied the relation between oscillation and granulation and
found that the most energetic oscillations are concentrated in downflow regions in
expanding intergranular spaces. This was later confirmed by Goode et al. (1998)
[116].
Strous et al. ((2000) [302]) found a roughly linear relation between the peak
seismic flux and the peak downward convective velocity associated with each seis-
mic event.
3.2. PHENOMENA IN THE SOLAR PHOTOSPHERE 55

Other authors like e.g. Hoekzema et al., 1998 [135], who analyzed G band
images found that photospheric 5 min oscillations are global and rather insensitive
to local fine structure.
Using a 30-min time series of CCD spectrographs, Khomenko, Kostik and
Shchukina, 2001 [160], found different amplitudes, phases and periods of the 5-min
oscillations above granules and intergranular lanes. The most energetic intensity
oscillations occurred above intergranular lanes, the most energetic velocity oscil-
lations above granules and lanes with maximum contrast that are cospatial with
regions with maximum convective velocities.

3.2.4 Sunspots
Discovery of Sunspots
When the Sun is very low just above the horizon one can make a short glimpse on it
with the unprotected naked eye. Chinese astronomers were the first who reported
on dark spots visible on the Sun. In the year 1611 sunspots were observed for
the first time through a telescope by four men: J. Goldsmid (Holland), G. Galilei
(Italy), Ch. Scheiner (Germany) and Th. Harriot (England). The first publication
on that topic appeared from Goldsmid (he is better known by his Latin name
Fabricius). He even argued that the Sun must rotate since the sunspots move
across the disk. Since he was a Jesuit he first suspected some defect in his telescope
when he observed the spots. Then he failed to persuade his ecclesiastical superiors
who refused to allow him to publish his discovery. However, Scheiner announced his
discovery in three anonymous letters to a friend of Galileo and Galileo responded in
three letters in 1612 (the sunspot letters) that he had discovered the sunspots. Of
course Scheiner and Galileo became enemies. Scheiner later reported his discoveries
in his work Rosa Ursinae sive Sol in 1630. Both scientists noted that the spots
appear only within zones of low latitudes at either side of the equator. There are
never spots near the poles.
After the initial interest and the publication of Scheiner’s major work the
interest in sunspots vanished. In 1977 Eddy showed that this must be seen in
connection with the fact that during 1640-1705 there was a great reduction in
the number of sunspots seen on the Sun which is now known as the Maunder
Minimum.
The next significant discovery was made by Schwabe who was a German
apothecary and bought a telescope in 1826 in order to search for a planet in-
side the orbit of Mercury. He recorded the occurrence of sunspots over 43 years
and reported on a periodicity of their occurrence of about 10 years. In 1851 ap-
peared his publication on the 11 year periodicity of the annually averaged sunspot
numbers. Several years later Carrington showed from his observations that the
Sun rotates differentially; a point at the equator rotates more rapidly than one at
higher latitudes. He defined an arbitrary reference point on latitude 100 as longi-
tude zero and a rotation completed by this point is known as Carrington rotation
(CR)3 . The sideral Carrington rotation is 25.38 days, the synodic value varies a
3 For example on March 14 2006 Carrington Rotation 2041 started at 14.43 UT and ended on

April 10, at 21.47 UT

56 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

little during the year because of the eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit (its mean
value is 27.2753 days).
Carrington was also the first to see a white light flare on the Sun in the morning
of Sep. 1, 1859, during sketching sunspot projections with a friend. Suddenly
two crescent-shaped patches broke out, brightened, moved a distance twice their
length, then faded away as two dots within five minutes. Carrington reported
to the Royal Astronomical Society that at 4 hours after midnight the magnetic
instruments indicated a great magnetic storm. So he was in fact the first who
noticed that there exists a connection between solar phenomena and disturbances
on Earth.
R. Wolf (1816-1893) studied all available records and derived a more accurate
estimate for the sunspot cycle. In 1848 he introduced the relative (Zurich) sunspot
number RZ as a measure for solar activity. Sunspot often appear as groups. If g
denotes the number of sunspot groups and f the number of individual spots, then

RZ = k(10g + f ) (3.13)

k... personal reduction factor. Today more than 30 observatories contribute to

determine this value.

The Physics of Sunspots

Sunspots consist of dark central regions, called umbra and a surrounding less dark
filamentary region called penumbra. The umbral diameter is about 10 000 km but
for the largest spots may exceed 20 000 km. Penumbral diameters are in the range
of 10 000 -15 000 km. Sunspots evolve and some of them are visible over more
than 1 rotation period. The observations of sunspots showed that the rotation of
the Sun is not like that of a solid body.
Another interesting phenomenon is the Wilson depression. In 1769 Wilson
observed a very large spot nearing the west limb and noted that the penumbra on
the further side from the limb gradually contracted and finally disappeared. When
the spot reappeared at the east limb some two weeks later, the same behavior was
displayed by the penumbra on the opposite site of the spot. The surface of a
sunspot is depressed below the surface of the surrounding plasma.
The temperature of the umbra is about 4 000 K whereas the temperature of
the solar surface is about 6 000 K. According to Stefan’s law the total energy
emitted per unit area by a black body at temperature T is proportional to T 4 ; the
above mentioned temperature difference between umbra and photosphere means
that the energy flux through a given area of the umbra is ∼ 20% of that through
an equivalent area of the photosphere. The penumbra has a temperature between
umbra and solar surface. In the penumbra we observe also a radial outflow of
matter with the velocity increasing outwards with a characteristic speed of 1 to 2
kms/s (Evershed effect ).
In 1908 Hale discovered that the spectral lines are split in the sunspots. This
is caused by the Zeeman effect in the presence of strong magnetic fields. In the
absence of magnetic fields several quantum mechanical state may possess the same
energy but the magnetic fields destroy this symmetry resulting in a splitting of
3.2. PHENOMENA IN THE SOLAR PHOTOSPHERE 57

Figure 3.4: Large sunspot showing the dark central umbra and the filamentary penum-
bra. Outside the penumbra the granulation pattern is clearly seen. Courtesy: M.
Sobotka, A.H., SST, La Palma, 2003

the energy levels. The displacement of the lines due to the Zeeman effect is given
by:
∆λ = 4.7 × 10−8 g ∗ λ2 B (3.14)
The wavelength λ is given in nm, the Landéfactor g ∗ depends on the spin and
orbital momentum of the levels and B denotes the magnetic induction given in
Tesla.

1 Tesla = 104 Gauss = Vs/m2 (3.15)

The strength of the magnetic field is in the order of 3 000 Gauss.
Small dark spots with diameters < 2 500 km lacking penumbrae are called
pores. They exist within groups or appear also as isolated structures. Their
lifetimes are in the range of a few hours to several days.
Sunspot groups tend to emerge either sequentially at the same or similar Car-
rington longitudes, which are designated as active longitudes, or to overlap in
clusters. The distribution of sunspots is non-axisymmetric and spot group forma-
o
tion implies the existence of two persistent active longitudes separated by 180
Usoskin, Berdyugina, Poutanen, 2005 [322].

High Spatial Observations of Spots

High spatial resolution observations of sunspots show that there appear a lot of
different morphological phenomena: multiple umbrae, bright umbral dots, light
58 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

bridges, dark nuclei in the umbra etc. One problem in the study of sunspots and
their fine structure is observational stray light.
An important photometric parameter of umbral cores is the minimum intensity
(intensity of the darkest point) Imin which is usually in the range of 0.05-0.3 of the
mean photospheric intensity at λ ∼ 540 nm. There seems to be a relation between
the size of the umbrae and the temperature. Umbrae with a diameter DU < 7


have higher temperatures than the large ones. Moreover, regions with higher
magnetic field strength are darker and cooler than those with lower strength. The
darkest regions in umbral cores are dark nuclei. These are the areas with the
strongest magnetic fields and the orientation of the field is perpendicular to the
surface of the Sun. They are not necessarily centered in the umbral cores, some of
them are observed close to the edge of the penumbra. They cover 10-20% of the
total umbral core area and their size is about 1.5 arcsec4 . The penumbra shows
elongated structures which is a consequence of the strongly inclined magnetic
field. Bright penumbral filaments consist of penumbral grains. They seem to have
cometary like shapes with “heads” pointing towards the umbra and have a mean
width of only 0.36

and a length of 0.5...2

. The observed brightness approaches
the photospheric one and the lifetimes are between 40 minutes and 4 hours. They
are separated by narrow dark fibrils. The magnetic field seems to be stronger and
more horizontal in dark fibrils and weaker and more vertical in penumbral grains.
It is also interesting to note that nearly all penumbral fine structures are in
motion. The penumbral grains move towards the umbra with an average speed of
0.3-0.5 km/s. On the other hand, dark cloud like features which arise from the
dark fibrils move rapidly outwards (up to 3.5 km/s) towards the outer penumbral
border.
The last fine structure which is important to study are the light bridges . They
cross the umbra or penetrate deeply into it and can be observed for several days
although they change their shape substantially on the scale of hours. They can be
classified into faint (located inside umbral cores) and strong (separating umbral
cores). Strong light bridges separate umbral cores of equal magnetic polarities
and a subclass of them opposite polarities. The analysis of 2-D power spectra of
intensity fluctuations inside strong light bridges showed that the “granules” that
can be seen there are smaller (1.2 arcsec, normal granulation: 1.5 arcsec) and the
slopes of power spectra indicated the presence of a Kolmogorov turbulent cascade.
The magnetic field strength in strong light bridges is substantially lower than in
adjacent umbra.
A recent review about the fine structure of sunspots was given by Sobotka
(1999) [290] where other references can be found. A review on empirical modelling
and thermal structure of sunspots was given by Solanki (1997) [292].

Sunspots and Magnetic Fields

Observations demonstrated, that spots often occur in bipolar magnetic groups.
The magnetic polarity of the leading spot in the pairs (in terms of solar rotation)
changes from one 11 year cycle to the next- this is known as Hale’s law. There is a
4 1

=1 arcsec corresponds to about 750 km on the solar surface
3.2. PHENOMENA IN THE SOLAR PHOTOSPHERE 59

22 year magnetic cycle. Spots appear as a magnetic flux tube rises (see magnetic
buoyancy) and intersects with the photosphere. The magnitude of the magnetic
induction is 0.3 T in the umbra and 0.15 T in the penumbra. In the umbra the field
is approximately vertical, and the inclination increases through the penumbra.
Hale’s observations also suggested that the Sun has an overall dipolar mag-
netic field (10−4 T). This very weak dipolar field is reversed over the magnetic
cycle. Almost all of the photospheric field outside sunspots is concentrated in
small magnetic elements with a magnetic induction between 0.1 and 0.15 T.
Only the surface properties of the flux tube that defines a spot can be observed.
The question is, how the field structure changes with depth. The simplest model is
a monolithic column of flux. Let us assume that the pressure inside the flux tube
is negligible compared to the magnetic pressure. We also assume that the grav-
itational force is unimportant in obtaining an approximate idea of the magnetic
field structure, the magnetic field in cylindrical polar coordinates can be taken to
be current free:  
1 dψ ∂ψ
B= − , 0, (3.16)
ω dz ∂ω
Thus curlB = 0. Since divB = 0,
∂2ψ 1 ∂ψ ∂ 2 ψ
− + =0 (3.17)
∂ω ω ∂ω ∂z 2
The neighboring photosphere, in which the flux tube is embedded has a known
pressure variation with height Pe (z). The boundary of the flux tube is at ω =
ω0 (z), where
B 2 /2µ0 = Pe (z) (3.18)
We see that as z → ∞ the field becomes nearly horizontal and Bω ∼ F/2πω02 and
as z → −∞, the field becomes vertical and Bω ∼ F/πω02 .
There is one problem with this monolithic model: the difference in the energy
radiated by the spot and by an equivalent area of the normal photosphere is only
about a factor of 4. This is less than would be expected if convection in the spot
were completely suppressed. Therefore, it is believed that some form of convective
energy transport must occur and the field must be more complex e.g. coherent
flux tubes or a tight cluster. Reviews about these topics were given by Bogdan
(2000) [40] and Hurlburt (1999) [144].
Using the 1 m Swedish Solar Telescope a high resolution study of the inclina-
tion of magnetic fields within sunspots was performed by Langhans et al., 2005
[187]. Within sunspots, dark penumbral cores, and their extensions into the outer
penumbra, are prominent features associated with the more horizontal component
of the magnetic field from about 400 in the inner penumbra to nearly horizontal
in the middle penumbra. Bright flux component is associated with a more vertical
field component.

Sunspot Group Classification

The 3 component McIntosh classification (McIntosh, 1990) [218] is based on the
general form ‘Zpc’, where ‘Z’ is the modified Zurich Class, ‘p’ describes the penum-
60 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

bra of the principal spot, and ‘c’ describes the distribution of spots in the interior
of the group. This classification scheme substituted the older scheme that was
introduced by Waldmeier (1938).

1. Z-values: (Modified Zurich Sunspot Classification).

A - A small single unipolar sunspot. Representing either the formative or
final stage of evolution.
B - Bipolar sunspot group with no penumbra on any of the spots.
C - A bipolar sunspot group. One sunspot must have penumbra.
D - A bipolar sunspot group with penumbra on both ends of the group.
Longitudinal extent does not exceed 10 deg.
E - A bipolar sunspot group with penumbra on both ends. Longitudinal
extent exceeds 10 deg but not 15 deg.
F - An elongated bipolar sunspot group with penumbra on both ends. Lon-
gitudinal extent of penumbra exceeds 15 deg.
H - A unipolar sunspot group with penumbra.

2. p-values:
x - no penumbra (group class is A or B)
r - rudimentary penumbra partially surrounds the largest spot. This penum-
bra is incomplete, granular rather than filamentary, brighter than mature
penumbra, and extends < 3 arcsec from the spot umbra. Rudimentary
penumbra may be either in a stage of formation or dissolution.
s - small, symmetric (like Zurich class J). Largest spot has mature, dark,
filamentary penumbra of circular or elliptical shape with little irregularity
to the border. The north-south diameter across the penumbra is ≤ 2.5
degrees.
a - small, asymmetric. Penumbra of the largest spot is irregular in outline
and the multiple umbra within it are separated. The north-south diameter
across the penumbra is ≤ than 2.5 degrees.
h - large, symmetric (like Zurich class H). Same structure as type ‘s’, but
north-south diameter of penumbra is more than 2.5 degrees. Area, therefore,
must be larger or equal than 250 millionths solar hemisphere.
k - large, asymmetric. Same structure as type ‘a’, but north-south diameter
of penumbra is more than 2.5 degrees. Area, therefore, must be larger or
equal than 250 millionths solar hemisphere.

3. c-values:
x - undefined for unipolar groups (class A and H)
o - open. Few, if any, spots between leader and follower. Interior spots of
very small size. Class E and F groups of ‘open’ category are equivalent to
Zurich class G.
i - intermediate. Numerous spots lie between the leading and following por-
tions of the group, but none of them possesses mature penumbra.
c - compact. The area between the leading and the following ends of the
3.2. PHENOMENA IN THE SOLAR PHOTOSPHERE 61

spot group is populated with many strong spots; at least one interior spot
shows a mature penumbra. The extreme case of compact distribution has
the entire spot group enveloped in one continuous penumbral area.
There exists also the Mount Wilson classification scheme:
α: Denotes a unipolar sunspot group.
β: A sunspot group having both positive and negative magnetic polarities, with a
simple and distinct division between the polarities.
β − γ: A sunspot group that is bipolar but in which no continuous line can be
drawn separating spots of opposite polarities.
δ: A complex magnetic configuration of a solar sunspot group consisting of oppo-
site polarity umbrae within the same penumbra.
γ: A complex active region in which the positive and negative polarities are so
irregularly distributed as to prevent classification as a bipolar group.

Sunspots and the Solar Cycle

The number of sunspots changes with a 11 years period which is called the solar
activity cycle. Today we know that all solar activity phenomena are related to
sunspots and thus to magnetic activity. To measure the solar activity the sunspot
numbers were introduced and in order to smear out effects of solar rotation, R
is given as a monthly averaged number and called the sunspot relative number.
Today there exist better methods to quantify the solar activity however sunspot
numbers are available for nearly 400 years and thus this number is still used.
The Royal Greenwich Observatory (RGO) compiled sunspot observations from
a small network of observatories to produce a data set of daily observations start-
ing in May of 1874. The observatory concluded this data set in 1976 after the
US Air Force (USAF) started compiling data from its own Solar Optical Observ-
ing Network (SOON). This work was continued with the help of the US National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) with much of the same infor-
mation being compiled through to the present.
Since 1981, the Royal Observatory of Belgium harbors the Sunspot Index Data
center (SIDC), the World data center for the Sunspot Index. Recently, the Space
Weather forecast center of Paris-Meudon was transferred and added to the ac-
tivities of the SIDC. Moreover, a complete archive of all images of the SOHO
instrument EIT has become available at the SIDC.
Let us briefly summarize the behavior of sunspots during the activity cycle:
• The leader spots (i.e. by convention it is defined that the Sun rotates from
east to west; the largest spot of a group tends to be found on the western
side and is called the leader, while the second largest in a group is called
the follower) in each hemisphere are generally all of one polarity, while the
follower spots are of the opposite polarity.
• If the leaders and followers are regarded as magnetic bipoles, the orientation
of these bipoles is opposite on opposite hemispheres.
• The magnetic axes of the bipoles are inclined slightly towards the equator,
the leader spot being closer. This inclination is about 120 .
62 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

300

SUNSPOT NUMBER
200

100

0
1750 1760 1770 1780 1790 1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850
DATE

300
SUNSPOT NUMBER

200

100

0
1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950
DATE

300
SUNSPOT NUMBER

200

100

0
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
DATE

NASA/MSFC/HATHAWAY [Link] 11/2001

Figure 3.5: Relative Sunspot number. Two cycles can bee seen, the normal cycle with
about 11 years and the so called Gleissberg cycle with a period of about 80 years.

• Towards the end of a cycle spot groups appear at high latitudes with reversed
polarity, they belong to the new cycle whereas those with normal polarity for
the old cycle occur close to the equator. This is illustrated in the so called
butterfly diagram (see Fig. 3.6).

In Table 3.1 some parameters for the energetics of large sunspots are given, i.e.
spots with a diameter ≥ 3.5 × 104 km. Penumbral waves are horizontal outwards
waves (in Hα ) with velocities between 10 and 20 km/s.

3.2.5 Photospheric Faculae

Near the solar limb, regions brighter than the surrounding photosphere can be
found and are known as photospheric faculae. These structures are hotter than
their surroundings. At the disk center they are not visible. In the neighborhood of
3.2. PHENOMENA IN THE SOLAR PHOTOSPHERE 63

30N

90N
90S

30S

EQ
0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5
[Link]

AVERAGE DAILY SUNSPOT AREA (% OF VISIBLE HEMISPHERE)

SUNSPOT AREA IN EQUAL AREA LATITUDE STRIPS (% OF STRIP AREA)

1880

1880

DAILY SUNSPOT AREA AVERAGED OVER INDIVIDUAL SOLAR ROTATIONS

12
1890

1890
13
1900

1900
14
1910

1910
15
1920

1920
16
1930

1930
DATE

DATE
17
1940

1940
18
1950

1950
1960

1960
19
1970

1970
20

> 0.0%
1980

1980
21
NASA/MSFC/HATHAWAY 11/2001

> 0.1%
1990

1990
22

> 1.0%
2000

2000

Figure 3.6: Butterflydiagram illustrating the equatorward motion of spots during the
activity cycle.

sunspots they tend to overlap and can be identified further from the limb. They
appear in increased numbers in a region prior to the emergence of sunspots and
remain for a rotation or more after the spots have decayed. As it will be shown later
they are important for the energy balance between sunspots and the photosphere.
Faculae can be observed on the whole disk using filtergrams . In that case they
are often called plage and attributed to the chromosphere. Photospheric faculae
are manifestations of concentrated azimuthal magnetic fields. One possibility to
study sunspots and faculae at photospheric levels is to use the Ca II K line 0.05
nm off the center with a 0.015 nm passband.
Polar faculae appear as pointlike, bright photospheric spots near the solar limb
at latitudes of 55 degrees or more (average of 65 degrees). Polar faculae tend to
occur at lower latitudes (as low as 45 degrees) during the years in which there
are only few observable. They can be distinguished from main zone faculae by
64 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

Table 3.1: Sunspot energy values (from [17])

erg cm−2 s−1 Total erg s−1
missing flux, umbra 4.7 × 1010 7 × 1028
missing flux, penumbra 1.2 × 1010 1 × 1029
Alfvén waves (umbra) 1011 1 × 1029
running penumbral waves 3 × 108 3 × 1027

their essentially pointlike and solitary appearance, in contrast to the more area-
and grouplike appearance of the main zone faculae (55 degrees or lower). Their
lifetime is shorter (minutes to hours) than that for ordinary faculae. The brightest
can last for a couple of days, and can be traced farther from the solar limb too.
In connection with the activity cycle it is interesting to note that polar faculae
are most numerous at times of minimum solar activity, which in turn might be an
additional hint for their relation with the upcoming new solar cycle.

3.3 The Chromosphere

3.3.1 Diagnostics
The chromosphere 5 lies between the corona and the photosphere and can be
observed during short phases of solar eclipses. The spectrum obtained at these
rare occasions is called a flash spectrum. Above the photosphere the temperature
passes through a minimum of 4 000 K and then rises to several 104 K in the
chromosphere and much more rapidly in the transition region until the coronal
temperature (∼ 106 K) is reached. Two very prominent spectral lines formed in
the chromosphere are the so called H and K lines of singly ionized Ca (called Ca
II). These lines are in absorption in the spectrum of the photosphere but appear
as emission lines in the hotter chromosphere. Their strength varies through the
sunspot cycle, the lines are stronger at maximum 6 . Important chromospheric lines
are listed in Table 3.2, the physics of the formation of these lines is complicated
since the assumption of LTE is not valid.
The temperature variation throughout the chromosphere can be described as
follows:

• Temperature minimum: near 500 km; here the UV continuum near 160 nm,
the far IR continuum and the minima in the wings of Ca II and Mg II lines
are formed,

• moderately fast temperature increase from Tmin to approx. 6 000 K. In the

first plateau there are the emission peaks of Ca II and Mg II, the center of
5 A classical textbook about the chromosphere is: The Solar Chromosphere and Corona, R.G.

Athay, 1976, Reidel

6 The observations of the variation of the strength of stellar H and K lines provide thus

information about stellar activity cycles.

3.3. THE CHROMOSPHERE 65

Table 3.2: Prominent chromospheric emission lines

Line Wavelength
Lyα 121.6 nm
Lyβ 102.6 nm
C I continua ≤ 110.0 nm, ≤ 123.9 nm
Mg II h 280.3 nm
Mg II k 279.6 nm
Ca II H 396.8 nm
Ca II K 393.4 nm
He I 447.1 nm, 587.6 nm
Ca II IR 849.8, 854.2, 866.2 nm
Mg I b,1,23 b2 517.3 nm
Na D1,2 589.6, 589.0 nm
Hα 656.3 nm
Hβ 486.1 nm
CO 4.6µ

Hα, the mm continuum and the wing of Lyα.

• temperature plateau near 6 000 - 7 000 K

• sharp temperature rise beginning near 8 000 K and terminating in a thin

plateau near 22 000K. From the second plateau the central portion of Lyα
and the 3 cm continuum is emitted

Thus by observing in different lines or even in different depths of a particular line,

one can probe the chromosphere at different height levels. As it is indicated above,
it is possible to observe the chromosphere in radio waves at mm to cm wavelengths.
The emission processes here are free free transitions of electrons with a Maxwellian
distribution.
When analyzing the H and K lines bright grains are detected. These bright
grains are produced by shocks near 1 Mm (106 m) height in the chromosphere.

3.3.2 Radiative Transfer in the Chromosphere

Above the temperature minimum, the spectral lines are formed under non local
thermodynamic equilibrium conditions (NLTE).
Let us start with the change of the specific intensity Iν along a short distance
ds: there will occur absorption and emission, both of which are described by the
coefficients:

• κν absorption coefficient

• ην emission coefficient
66 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

For simplicity we consider a homogeneous, plane-parallel atmosphere stratified by

gravity. Then, the properties depend only on the height z. The surface of the
atmosphere in a strict mathematical sense is where no interactions take place, i.e.
the particle densities are extremely low. The optical depth is defined by:

z
dτν = −κν dz, τν = − κν dz
(3.19)
∞

The source function is the ratio between the two coefficients:

Sν = ην /κν (3.20)

In local thermodynamic equilibrium (LTE) we have the relation:

Sν = Bν (T ) (3.21)

which is called Kirchhoff’s law, Bν (T ) being the Planck function. We can progress
to solve the transport equation:

∞
Iν (τν = 0, µ) = Sν (τν ‘)e−τν ‘/µ dτν ‘/µ (3.22)
0

In this equation µ = cos θ, θ being the angle between the normal to the disk center
and the point where observations are done.
From a Taylor series expansion of Sν about a not specified τν∗ one gets

Iν ∼ Sν (τν ) = µ (3.23)

where τν∗ was specified to µ. That means, one observes under the angle θ to z
approximately the source function at optical depth τν = µ.
Let us consider two energy levels in an atom which have the quantum numbers
l (lower level) and u (upper level). The number of atoms per cm3 in the lower level
is Nl and in the upper level Nu . Of course a transition from l to u corresponds
to an absorption process, where a photon of energy hνl,u = χu − χl is absorbed.
Thus the number of transitions per cm3 is given by:

n(l → u) = Nl Jν(l,u) B(l, u) (3.24)

B(l, u) is the transition probability for the transition l → u. On the other hand let
us consider the number of spontaneous transitions from u → l which is independent
on the intensity J:
n(u → l) = Nu A(u, l) (3.25)
A(u, l) is the transition probability for spontaneous transitions. Generally, we do
not know the average intensity Jν(l,u) . However, in thermodynamic equilibrium it
is equal to the Planck function. In thermodynamic equilibrium there is a direct
balancing between the number of transitions u → l and l → u and the ratio of the
occupation numbers is governed by the Boltzmann formula:
Nu gu −(χu −χl )/kT
= e (3.26)
Nl gl
3.3. THE CHROMOSPHERE 67

and
n(l → u) = n(u → l) (3.27)
3
2hν 1
Nl B(l, u) = Nu A(u, l) (3.28)
c2 ehν/kT − 1
where we have put the Planck function. Let us also substitute the Boltzmann
formula:
2hν 3 1 gu −(χu −χl )/kT A(u, l)
= e (3.29)
2
c e hν/kT −1 gl B(l, u)
gu −hνu,l /kT A(u, l)
= e (3.30)
gl B(l, u)
where gu , gl are the statistical weights of the states u, l. This was first found by
Einstein. Besides absorption and spontaneous emission also the induced emission,
transitions from u → l depending on the intensity J, has to be considered. The
number of induced emissions is written as:
n
(u → l) = Nu B(u, l)Jν(u,l) (3.31)
In an induced emission process, the photons emitted have the same directions and
phases as the inducing photons. Thus a detailed balancing in thermodynamic
equilibrium reads as:
Nl Jν(u,l) B(l, u) − Nu Jν(u,l) B(u, l) = Nu A(u, l) (3.32)
and using Jν(u,l) = Bν and the Boltzmann formula:
 
2hν 3 1 gl hνu,l /kT
B(l, u) e − B(u, l) = A(u, l) (3.33)
c2 ehν/kT − 1 gu
B(u, l)gu = B(l, u)gl (3.34)
3 3
gl 2hνu,l 2hνu,l
A(u, l) = B(l, u) = B(u, l) (3.35)
gu c2 c2
These relations are called Einstein transition probabilities.
B(u, l), B(l, u), A(u, l) are atomic constants. Though these relations were de-
rived from thermodynamic equilibrium, they must always hold. Therefore, they
can be used to get information for excitation conditions and the source function
in case we do not have thermodynamic equilibrium.
By these calculations one can understand the typical profile of the Ca II H and
K lines (see Fig. 3.7). There are two intensity minima on the blue and red side
of the line center (called K1v , K1r ), towards the line center two maxima (called
K2v , K2r ) and then at the line center there is a minimum (K3 ). This indicates
that the temperature increases in the chromosphere. While the source function
decouples from the Planck function it reaches a minimum K1 , exhibits a small
maximum K2 and finally drops towards the line center. The profile of the well
known Hα line is simpler, there is just a pure absorption. That can be explained
with the structure of the H atom.
A review about the diagnostics and dynamics of the solar chromosphere can
be found in Kneer and Uexküll (1999) [168].
68 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

Figure 3.7: Profile of the CaII line

3.3.3 Chromospheric Heating

The temperature increases throughout the chromosphere from the temperature
minimum at its base (T∼ 5000 K) to several 104 K. The question is how does this
heating mechanism work. In the reviews of Ulmschneider et al. (1991) [320] and
Narain and Ulmschneider (1990) [229] mechanisms which have been proposed for
the heating of stellar chromospheres and coronae are discussed. These consist of
heating by acoustic waves, by slow and fast MHD waves, by body and surface
Alfvén waves, by current or magnetic field dissipation, by microflare heating and
by heating due to bulk flows and magnetic flux emergence.
Following to Kalkofen (1990) [151] the quiet solar chromosphere shows three
distinct regions. Ordered according to the strength of the emission from the low
and middle chromosphere they are

• the magnetic elements on the boundary of supergranulation cells,

• the bright points in the cell interior, and

• the truly quiet chromosphere, also in the cell interior.

The magnetic elements on the cell boundary are associated with intense mag-
netic fields and are heated by waves with very long periods, ranging from six
to twelve minutes; the bright points are associated with magnetic elements of low
field strength and are heated by (long-period) waves with periods near the acoustic
cutoff period of three minutes; and the quiet cell interior, which is free of mag-
netic field, may be heated by short-period acoustic waves, with periods below one
minute. This paper reviews mainly the heating of the bright points and concludes
that the large-amplitude, long-period waves heating the bright points dissipate
enough energy to account for their chromospheric temperature structure.
Skartlien et al. (2000) [287] studied the excitation of acoustic waves using
three dimensional numerical simulations of the nonmagnetic solar atmosphere and
3.3. THE CHROMOSPHERE 69

the upper convection zone. They found that transient acoustic waves in the at-
mosphere are excited at the top of the convective zone (the cooling layer) and
immediately above in the convective overshoot zone, by small granules that un-
dergo a rapid collapse, in the sense that upflow reverses to downflow, on a timescale
shorter than the atmospheric acoustic cutoff period (3 minutes). The location of
these collapsing granules is above downflows at the boundaries of mesogranules
where the upward enthalpy flux is smaller than average. An extended downdraft
between larger cells is formed at the site of the collapse. The waves produced
are long wavelength, gravity modified acoustic waves with periods close to the 3
minute cutoff period of the solar atmosphere. The oscillation is initially horizon-
tally localized with a size of about 1 Mm. The wave amplitude decays in time as
energy is transported horizontally and vertically away from the site of the event.
They also made a prediction of how to observe these “acoustic events”: a darken-
ing of intergranular lanes, which could be explained by this purely hydrodynamical
process. Furthermore, the observed “internetwork bright grains” in the Ca II H
and K line cores and associated shock waves in the chromosphere may also be
linked to such wave transients.
The coronal heating problem can be also studied by an energy release that is
associated with chromospheric magnetic reconnection. A one-dimensional circu-
larly symmetric supergranulation reconnection model was investigated by Roald et
al. (2000) [261] with typical quiet-Sun values. In this model, the assumed source
rate of elements determines heating, because all emerged elements eventually an-
nihilate.
As an example for observational evidence we cite the paper of Ryutova and
Tarbell(2000) [267]. They analyzed spectra of CII and OVI lines corresponding to
chromosphere and transition region temperatures; these showed significant broad-
ening and complex line profiles in regions overlying the sites of small scale magnetic
elements in the photospheric network. Doppler shifted multiple peaks in CII line
were always seen soon after the reconnection of magnetic flux tubes occurs and
usually consist of supersonic and subsonic components caused by shocks propagat-
ing upward. Multiple peaks in OVI line have more diverse features: they are not
as persistent as those seen in CII line, and may have the configuration of maximum
intensity peaks corresponding either to forward or reflected shocks.
Ca II H2V grains can also be used as indicators for shocks. Therefore spatio-
temporal correlations between enhanced magnetic fields in the quiet solar inter-
network photosphere and the occurrence of Ca II H2V grains in the overlying
chromosphere were investigated by Lites et al. (1999) [197].
Cauzzi et al. (2000) [59] analyzed the temporal behavior of Network Bright
Points (NBPs) using a set of data acquired during coordinated observations be-
tween ground-based observatories (mainly at the NSO/Sacramento Peak) and the
Michelson Doppler Interferometer onboard SOHO. The NBP’s were observed in
the NaD2 line and were found to be cospatial with the locations of enhanced mag-
netic field. The “excess” of NaD2 intensity in NBPs, i.e. the emission over the
average value of quiet regions, is directly related to the magnetic flux density.
Thus in analogy with the Ca II K line, the NaD2 line center emission can be used
as a proxy for magnetic structures.
70 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

In a paper by Fossum and Carlsson it was shown that acoustic heating of the
chromosphere is a factor of 10 too low to balance radiative losses (Fossum and
Carlsson, 2005 [99]).
Simultaneous CaII K-line spectroheliograms and magnetic area scans were used
to search for spatial correlation between the CaII K2V bright points in the interior
of the network and corresponding magnetic elements and 60% of the bright points
spatially coincided with magnetic elements of flux density > 4 Mxcm−2 (Sivaraman
et al. 2000 [286].

3.3.4 Chromospheric Network, Supergranulation

On a full disk photograph taken in Ca II K a bright network surrounding darker is-
land structures becomes visible. This pattern is known as chromospheric network.
It looks like a photographic negative of the photospheric granulation pattern, how-
ever the scale is larger, typical sizes are between 20 000 and 30 000 km. This is the
size of the so called supergranulation first observed by Leighton et al. (1962) [192].
The bright network is cospatial with the magnetic network. The supergranulation
is also visible on 30 min averaged MDI Dopplergrams. Fig. 2.10 was constructed
out of a full series of 7.4 hours. The frame shown is the result of averaging 30 full
disk velocity maps and subtracting the contribution from the Sun’s rotation. The
color scale is such that dark is motion towards the observer and bright is motion
away from the observer. The signature of the waves is nearly cancelled in this
image since the wave periods are mostly about 5 minutes. The resulting image
clearly shows the supergranulation pattern. The “smooth” area in the center is
where the supergranules do not contribute to the signal since what observers see
are horizontal motions and MDI measures only the component of motion directed
towards or away from SOHO.
Close inspection shows that the supergranules flow outwards from their centers
so that the edges towards the center are dark (motion toward SOHO) and the
edges towards the Sun’s limb are bright (motion away from SOHO). These flows
are about 400 m/s. The typical lifetime of a supergranular cell is about half a day.
Recent investigations claim a connection between boundaries of coronal holes and
supergranular structures.
Random fluid motions associated with solar supergranulation may influence the
interplanetary magnetic field. Magnetic footpoints anchored in the photosphere
execute a random walk and the resulting magnetic variations are carried away by
the expanding solar wind. The solar satellite mission Ulysses has observed the
resulting large-scale magnetic-field fluctuations in the solar wind.
By spatio-temporal averaging of two-dimensional velocity measurements ob-
tained in the MgI 5173 line November et al. (1981) [236] found the “mesogran-
ulation”, in order to indicate the supposed convective character of the phenomenon
with a typical scale of 5 - 10 Mm and a lifetime of approximately 2 h.
The convective nature of the mesogranulation as well as the supergranulation
is not sure. E.g. Rieutord et al. (2000) [259] assign mesogranular flows with both
highly energetic granules, which give birth to strong positive divergences (SPDs)
among which we find exploders, and averaging effects of data processing. A similar
3.4. SOLAR FLARES 71

explanation is suggested for the supergranulation.

Hathaway et al. (2000) [128] analyzed power spectra from MDI observations.
The spectra show distinct peaks representing granules and supergranules but no
distinct features at wavenumbers representative of mesogranules or giant cells.
The observed cellular patterns and spectra are well represented by a model that
includes two distinct modes - granules and supergranules.
Up to now we know that there exist three different scales of motion in the
photosphere:

• Granulation: size about 1 000 km, lifetime 0.2 hr, vertical flow ∼ 1 kms−1 .

• Mesogranulation: diameter 5 000 km, lifetime 3 hr, vertical flow ∼ 60 ms−1 .

• Supergranulation: diameter about 32 000 km, horizontal flow ∼ 400 ms−1 ,

lifetime 20 hr.

The scales of granulation, mesogranulation and supergranulation are discussed by

Rast, 2003 [251]. It is discussed there that the downflow plume mainly describes
the granular scale and that from collective advective interaction of many small
scaled and short lived granular plumes the larger spatial and temporal scales of
mesogranulation and supergranulation naturally arise.

3.4 Solar Flares

The first recorded observation of a flare was a local brightening in the visible light
but most solar flares can be observed in the Hα line. The typical energy release
is of the order of 1025 J within half an hour. A recent review on solar flares was
given by Vrsnak, 2005 [327].

3.4.1 General Properties

Flares produce effects throughout the whole electromagnetic spectrum. They pro-
duce X rays and UV radiation which is an evidence for very high temperatures
during a flare outburst. The radio waves indicate that a small fraction of the
particles are accelerated to high energies. Most of the radiation is synchrotron ra-
diation produced by electrons moving in helical paths around magnetic field lines.
The flux of high energy particles and cosmic rays is also increased at the Earth as
a result of an intense flare. Magnetic storms on Earth often occur with a delay of
about 36 h after the flaring event was observed on the Sun. This is basically inter-
preted as an enhancement in the solar wind which compresses the magnetosphere
and increases the magnetic field near the surface of the Earth. Flares occur in
regions where there is a rapid change in the direction of the local magnetic field.
The favored mechanism to explain the sudden energy release in flares is magnetic
reconnection.
Let us describe the basic processes of a flare (see Vrsnak, 2005 [327]).
As shown in Fig. 3.8 two oppositely magnetic field lines interact due to a
compression - reconnection occurs - and the resulting flaring loop is shown by
72 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

Figure 3.8: Summary of basic processes of most solar flares and their emission regions.
Courtesy: B. Vrsnjak.

bold arrow-lines (grey). Electron beams are given by thin arrows (and marked
by e− ). Chromospheric evaporation from the flare kernels is indicated by thick
dotted arrows. As it is seen in the sketch, the primary energy release takes place
in the corona at heights between 104 and 105 km. DCIM indicates fast drifting
bursts in the 200-2000 MHz range. HXR (Hard X-ray) emission is related to radio
features. HXR emission at successively lower energies indicates delays of slower
electrons relative to faster ones. The power of flares is related to the height of
the energy release site. Flares are more powerful and impulsive when the energy
release site is located at low heights. This can be explained by the weakening of
the magnetic field with height. As is also seen in the Fig. 3.8, electron beams that
are produced at the primary energy release site can escape outwards exciting type
III bursts. Electrons attached to the closed field lines become trapped between the
two magnetic mirrors located near the footpoints and they excite type IV bursts.
In very strong fields also µwave emission occurs (mm-cm range). Electrons
with small pitch angles penetrate through the magnetic mirrors. They hit the
dense transition region and chromosphere and excite line emission of atoms and
ions and hard X ray emission (HXR). This process is also called thick target
Bremsstrahlung. The chromospheric plasma is heated and starts to expand. This
is the evaporation process which continues until a new hydrostatic equilibrium is
reached. This is a source of soft X-ray emission (SXR), the plasma has a density of
∼ 10−3 cm−3 and a temperature of ∼ 107 K. The evaporation and SXR emission
is a cumulative effect of precipitating electrons- the cooling is relatively slow. The
SXR curve behaves as a time integral of the HXR curve. Or it can also be stated
that the HXR curve looks like the time derivative of the SXR curve. This is called
3.4. SOLAR FLARES 73

Table 3.3: Optical classification scheme of solar flares

Importance class Area A at disk 10−6 sol. hemisphere Energy (erg)
S A<100 1028
1 100 ≤ A < 250 1029
2 250 ≤ A < 600 1030
3 600 ≤ A < 1200 1031
4 A ≥ 1200 1032

Table 3.4: Soft x-ray classification scheme of solar flares

Soft x-ray class Peak in power of 10
in the 0.1-0.8nm flux W m−2
A -8
B -7
C -6
M -5
X -4

the Neupert effect (see also Neupert, 1968 [231] and Veronig et al., 2002 [326]).

3.4.2 Classification of Solar Flares

There are different classification schemes of solar flares:

• Optical classification: in this scheme importance classes S, 1, 2, 3, 4 are used,

according to the area of the flaring region at disk center (given in millionths
of a solar hemisphere, see Table 3.3). The values for the total energy released
are given from [17].
In this scheme the letter S stands for subflares.

• Soft x-ray classification: since 1970 flares are also classified based on soft
x-ray observations of the Sun in the 0.1-0.8 nm band by Earth orbiting
satellites. The size of the flare is given by the peak intensity (on a logarithmic
scale) of the emission (see Table 3.4).
According to Table 3.4 a B5 flare has a peak flux of 5 × 10−7 Wm−2 . Flares
smaller than C1 can only be detected during a solar minimum phase when
the general x-ray background is low. Occasionally, flares exceed class X9 in
intensity and are referred simply to as X10, X11...

• Classification into impulsive and gradual: in fully developed flares an im-

pulsive phase is always followed by a gradual main phase. The classification
according to the time scales is indicative of the magnetic topology.
74 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

Table 3.5: Radio classification scheme of solar flares

Type Confined Eruptive
Radio bursts III/V II/IV
Soft x-ray duration < 1h > 1h
CME - Yes
Interplanetary shock . Yes
Events/year ∼ 1000 ∼ 10

Long duration flares are linked to coronal mass ejections (CMEs) but recent
observations also showed that some short duration flares may have ejecta. Coronal
mass ejections (CMEs) leave the Sun at speeds up to 2000 km/s and can have
angular spans over several active regions whereas flares imply events that are
localized within a single active region. In CMEs the magnetic field lines are opened
in eruptive events. There occurs a closing down or reconnection within several
hours providing a prolonged energy release that is typical for gradual or eruptive
flares. The intersection of the newly formed flare loops with the solar surface can
be observed: two parallel ribbons in Hα. Therefore, in the older literature we find
the designation double ribbon flares for eruptive flares.
Eruptive flares are very important because of their complexity and association
with geomagnetic storms.
Confined or impulsive events may also result from loop top magnetic recon-
nection. An impulsive flare of say 1024 J is typically spread over an area of several
1014 m2 in Hα. Therefore, the main difference between eruptive and impulsive
flares may be the order of intensity.
Radio bursts and flares: solar flares are associated with radio bursts which
are observed at wavelengths ranging from mm to km. The radio classification
scheme was developed during the 1950s by Australian and French solar radio
astronomers. The different types can be easily recognized in the so called dynamic
spectrum: in such a diagram on the x-axis the time is plotted and on the vertical
axis the frequency. Since the frequency varies with height, one can easily study the
evolution with height of this phenomenon that means the propagation throughout
the solar corona.
The Wind spacecraft7 observes radio bursts in the frequency range 1-14 MHz.
Standard patrols of bursts are made above 25 MHz. With the Bruny Island Radio
Spectrometer, this gap is filled and it is studied whether radio bursts can be used in
diagnosing energetic particle generation and propagation in the inner heliosphere
(Cane, Erickson, 2006 [54]).
Bursts of type III and type V are characteristic phenomena of impulsive flares
(or the impulsive or initial phase of fully developed eruptive flares). Type III bursts
and their associated type V continua are attributed to flare-accelerated electrons
moving along open field lines into the corona. Type II and type IV bursts are most
commonly identified with eruptive flares. Type IV emission is related to magnetic
reconnection in CME.
7 was launched in 1994, part of the ISTP project
3.4. SOLAR FLARES 75

Type II radio bursts result from plasma radiation associated with a MHD
shock propagating through the corona (∼500 km/s). This can be observed by a
slow drift emission. More than 90% of type II bursts have an associated flare.
They accompany 30% of flares with an Hα importance class 2 and 3. 70% of all
type II bursts are associated with a CME.

3.4.3 Where do Flares Occur?

Like all signs of solar activity, flares are associated with magnetic fields and re-
structuring of these fields. As a general rule, flares occur above the places in the
photosphere with largest ∇ × B. These are the locations where the electric current
has a maximum. Preferred are regions in sunspots or groups of sunspots where
new and oppositely directed magnetic flux emerges from below. Large gradual
flares often occur above the neutral lines in the photosphere which separates re-
gions with opposite magnetic polarity. Neutral lines are bridged by arcades of
loops and in Hα one sees two bright ribbons formed by the footpoints on each
side of the neutral line. Flares then occur above the part of the neutral line which
has experienced most shear by different surface motions on both sides. In quiet
regions, the most powerful microflares occur at the boundary of supergranular
cells. The frozen-in magnetic field lines are swept to the down-draft region near
the supergranular boundary forming the magnetic network. At time scales of a few
tens of minutes these magnetic elements can be observed to appear and disappear.
Current helicity: substantial changes of current helicity distribution in an area
or in its vicinity probably lead to flare eruptions. The total current helicity is
defined by
Hc = B.∇ × B (3.36)
A measure for the z component can be obtained from
 
1 ∂By ∂Bx
hc = µ0 Bz Jz Jz = − (3.37)
µ0 ∂x ∂y

Gaizauskas (1989) [106] made a categorization of flare precursors. According

to him, a precursor is a transient event preceding the impulsive phase. We give a
short list here:

• Homologous flares: these are earlier flares in the same location with similar
emission patterns. They occur most often in periods of frequent flare activity.
The rate of repetition ranges from a few per hour to several days.

• Sympathetic flares: these group consists of earlier flares in different locations

but erupting in near synchronism. From soft x-ray images of the solar corona
it is evident that there exist links between even remote active regions. Studies
have shown that one flare can trigger another.

• Soft x-ray precursors: these are transient enhancements in soft x-rays lasting
for several minutes; they occur in loops or unresolved kernels or close to flare
sites. Weak soft x-ray bursts are often observed at the time of the onset of a
76 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

CME. Sometimes several tens of minutes prior to the impulsive phase. The
location is at one foot of a large coronal arch which already exists. The
process can be interpreted by a small magnetic structure which interacts
with the large coronal arch at one of its footpoints. The whole structure
becomes then destabilized.

• Radio precursors: often tens of minutes before the onset of a flare, changes in
intensity and polarity in microwaves are observed. However the correlation
with flares is not very strict.

• UV precursors: small scale transient brightenings above active regions, some

bright UV kernels coincide with the later flares, others do not.

• surging arches: a surging arch is a transient absorbing feature visible at

wavelengths displaced from the central core of Hα. Simultaneous red- and
blueshifted components are also visible. The arch is initially straight, ex-
pands and unravels in multiple strands by the time the associated flare
erupts. However the link to flares is not very strong.

• Prominence eruptions: very often they precede two ribbon flares. The time
delay between the onset of the prominence eruption and the impulsive phase
is of the order of minutes. Enhanced mass motion, a slow rise of the promi-
nence and untwisting can precede the main flare by hours.

Of course in all the cases joint observations covering the whole electromagnetic
spectrum are important. In the review given by Aschwanden et al. (2001) [14] the
authors focussed on new observational capabilities (Yohkoh, SoHO, TRACE).
The formation of a radio-emitting shock wave and its precursor above a flaring
active region was investigated in Klassen et al. (2003)[166]. They used imaging
and spectral observations of radio bursts with Yohkoh soft hard and X-ray imaging
observations and identified type II precursor as a signature of the reconnection
process above the expanding soft X-ray loops.
Characteristics of flare producing sunspot groups were discussed by Ishii et al.
(2000) [146]. A review about reconnection theory and MHD of solar flares is given
by Priest (2000) [249].

3.4.4 Prominences
Prominences are great areas of luminous material extending outwards from the so-
lar atmosphere and were first observed during eclipses. They can also be observed
in the light of Hα. Over the photosphere they appear as dark filaments, at the
limb as bright structures.
The prominence plasma contains 90% of hydrogen which is partially ionized in
the central coolest parts of prominences where the temperatures are between 6000
and 8500 K or maybe even lower. At the boundary of prominences the temperature
rapidly increases to coronal values (more than 1 million K). The plasma density
in the central cool parts is about two orders of magnitude larger than that in the
corona.
3.4. SOLAR FLARES 77

These facts imply that the magnetic field is crucial for the prominence support
and stability. The intensity of the field ranges up to a few tens of Γ.
Some prominences are short lived eruptive events (variations within minutes
to hours), others can be quiescent and survive many rotational periods of the
Sun. The upper parts are often located in the hot corona. Quiescent prominences
appear as huge arches of dense cool material embedded in the hot corona. The
length of the arch is typically several 100 000 km and the height up to 105 km.
A quiescent prominence may change into an eruptive prominence. The typical
thickness of the loop is 104 km. At the end of its life, a prominence disperses
and breaks up quietly or it becomes eruptive or matter falls back down the field
lines to the photosphere. The particle densities range from 1016...17 m−3 which is
a hundred times greater than coronal values.
Prominences are mostly located along the so-called neutral lines where the
vertical photospheric magnetic field changes its sign. Along the neutral line, the
vertical component of that field is zero.
A possible mechanism to understand cool prominence material (temperature
about 104 K) is thermal instability. The equilibrium of the corona requires:

heating = cooling (3.38)

Suppose now that this equilibrium is disturbed locally. The density of the corona
increases in such a disturbed region and it will become cooler than its surroundings.
If we assume that thermal conduction from the hotter surroundings cannot restore
equality of temperature, the dense region will continue to cool until it reaches a new
equilibrium in which its heat input balances its heat output. When a magnetic field
is present, particles can only move along the field lines, this means that thermal
conductivity parallel to the field lines is very much greater than κ⊥ . As a result,
the longest dimension of any cool material is likely to be along the field. The
equation of equilibrium of a magnetized fluid acted on by a gravitational field, g,
in the z-direction is:

0 = −gradP − ρgz̄ − grad(B2 /2µ0 ) + B.∇B/µ0 (3.39)

The perfect gas law:

P = ρT /µ (3.40)

where is the gas constant and µ the molecular weight. In a simple model
Kippenhahn and Schlüter (1957) [163] assumed that the temperature T and the
horizontal magnetic field components Bx , By were constant and that P, ρ and Bz
were functions of x alone. The prominence is represented as a plane sheet.
Tripathi et al., 2004 [316] studied an erupting prominence with EIT and then
with LASCO when it developed into a CME.
A recent review about prominences was given by Heinzel and Anzer, 2005 [131].
78 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

Table 3.6: Tomography of the solar corona by observations at different radio frequencies
ν MHz λ cm F T
10−22 Wm−2 Hz−1
30 1000 0.17 5.1×105
300 100 14.9 7.0×105
3000 10 69 31 000
30 000 1.0 1862 10000
300 000 0.1 113 200 5900

3.5 The Corona

3.5.1 Basic Facts
During a total solar eclipse, when the moon occults the Sun for a few minutes
we can observe the outer atmospheric layers of the Sun, the chromosphere and
the corona the latter extending far out. There are possibilities to observe the
corona when there is no total eclipse. With a coronagraph the light from the
photosphere is occulted and blocked out by a disk placed inside the telescope.
Space observations allow a continuous monitoring of the corona in the UV and
EUV. The shape of the corona which extends to several solar radii depends on the
sunspot cycle being more spherical around the Sun at solar maximum.
The corona includes open streamers and closed loops. These phenomena are
associated with magnetic field lines. Those which return to the surface of the Sun
provide closed loops, the open streamers are related to field lines which extend
to a large distance from the Sun carrying the solar wind, which is a continuous
mass loss of the Sun. The light from the solar corona was very puzzling since
many strong spectral lines could no be identified when discovered (such as Helium
or Coronium; therefore their names). Later it was clarified that many of these
lines are forbidden lines arising from a transition in which an electron can spend
an unusually long time in an excited state before it returns to the ground level.
Under normal laboratory conditions the atom will undergo many collisions and the
electron will either move to the ground state without emission or move to a higher
level. Therefore, no forbidden lines will be observed. In the corona the density of
matter is extremely low, collisions are infrequent and forbidden transitions can be
observed8 .
Moreover, the coronal spectrum contains lines from highly ionized atoms in-
dicating kinetic temperatures of several 106 K which was a big surprise when
discovered. Typical lines are Ca XII... Ca XV, Fe XI...Fe XV etc. Here the roman
numeral is one more than the number of electrons removed from the atom. E.g.
Ni XVI has lost 15 of its 28 electrons.
In Table 3.6 it is demonstrated that the corona can be observed by radio
emission in different wavelengths. The lower the wavelength, the deeper the zone
8 This is also well known for gaseous nebulae in astrophysics
3.5. THE CORONA 79

where the emission occurs, thus also the deeper the temperature. The values are
given for the quiet Sun (Landolt, 1981 [17]).

3.5.2 Observational Features in the Corona

The most important features seen in the corona are:

• Coronal loops are found around sunspots and in active regions in the corona.
These structures are associated with the closed magnetic field lines that
connect magnetic regions on the solar surface. As it is shown in the chapter
on MHD, in the corona the magnetic field dominates the motion of the
plasma, and therefore the plasma is aligned in magnetic loops. These loops
last for days or weeks. Some loops, however, are associated with solar flares
and are visible for much shorter periods. These loops contain denser material
than their surroundings. The three-dimensional structure and the dynamics
of these loops is investigated for that reason.

• Helmet streamers are large cap-like coronal structures with long pointed
peaks. They are found usually over sunspots and active regions. Often a
prominence or filament lying at the base of these structures can be seen.
Helmet streamers are formed by a network of magnetic loops that connect
the sunspots in active regions and help suspend the prominence material
above the solar surface. The closed magnetic field lines trap the electrically
charged coronal gases to form these relatively dense structures. The pointed
peaks are formed by the action of the solar wind blowing away from the Sun
in the spaces between the streamers.

• Polar plumes are long thin streamers that project outward from the Sun’s
north and south poles. At the footpoints of these features there are bright
areas that are associated with small magnetic regions on the solar surface.
These structures are associated with the “open” magnetic field lines at the
Sun’s poles. The plumes are formed by the action of the solar wind in much
the same way as the peaks on the helmet streamers.

• Coronal Holes: From X-ray observations it was seen that the temperature of
the corona is not uniform. The lower temperature regions are called coronal
holes. They are particularly prominent near sunspot minimum and near the
solar poles. Coronal holes tend to form near the centers of large unipolar
magnetic regions; a comparison of the X-ray images with those of magnetic
field lines calculated on the assumption that the observed photospheric field
line structures extend into the corona as potential fields, indicates that they
are regions of open (diverging) magnetic fields. Coronal holes can also be
observed in spectroheliograms taken in the 1083.0 nm line of Helium. They
tend to rotate more slowly than sunspots or supergranular patterns and not
differentially.
The fast-speed solar wind originates form the coronal holes (e.g., Krieger et
al., 1973) [175], and accordingly they are considered the main reason for the
80 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

Figure 3.9: Coronal hole seen by the solar satellite YOHKOH

“recurrent” type of geomagnetic activity. They may form at any latitude.

For the solar cycle of greatest importance are the unipolar coronal fields.
When the polar fields are strongest during sunspot minimum polar coronal
holes are well defined. They disappear during the polar field reversals near
sunspot maximum.

3.5.3 Coronal Mass Ejections, CME

Coronal mass ejections, CMEs are the most energetic events in the solar system.
Coronal material of mass up to 1016 g is expelled at speeds of several 102 to 103
kms−1 from the Sun. CME like structures have been seen in historical eclipse
drawings. But it was recognized from space born coronograph observations like
OSO-7 and Skylab, that these are features that are expelled from the corona.
First they were called coronal transients. In 1976 the term Coronal Mass Ejection
appeared. Gosling et al. 1976 [117] observed 66 such events during the Skylab
mission (May 1973-Jan 1974). They also noticed that the speeds of these events
(they found values between 100 and 1000 km/s) seem to be somehow correlated
with the activity in Hα and statistics indicate that the fastest mass-ejection events
tend to produce type II-IV burst pairs, while single type II or type IV bursts tend
to be associated with events of intermediate speed. They also report on clouds
observed at a distance of 1 AU9 which seem to be related to CMEs.
91 AU = 1 Astronomical Unit, mean distance Earth-Sun, 150×106 km
3.5. THE CORONA 81

Figure 3.10: Progress of a Coronal Mass Ejection (CME) observed over an eight hour
period on 5-6 August 1999 by LASCO C3. The dark disk blocks the Sun so that the
LASCO instrument can observe the structures of the corona in visible light. The white
circle represents the size and position of the Sun. Courtesy: SOHO/LASCO. SOHO is
an ESA/NASA mission.

CMEs very often appear in a three part structure:

• bright frontal part,

• darker cavity or void,

• the core, frequently the brightest structure.

Such a structuring is seen best when CMEs erupt close to the solar limb- then they
are seen from the side. Earth- (or oppositely) directed CMEs show an outflow and
expanding brightness around the Sun- these are called halo CMEs (see also Jackson
et al., 2002 [147], where it is discussed whether Halo CMEs will hit or miss the
Earth). Therefore, Halo CMEs are of special interest for space weather.
CMEs can be observed in white light10 . In white light we see photospheric
light scattered on coronal free electrons (Thomson scattering). The brighter the
structure, the more massive. Brightness does not mean temperature. They can
also be observed in other wavelengths, where near surface structures are observed
(Hα, He 1083 nm, EUV, X-rays, microwaves to radio).
How often do CMEs occur? SOHO observations11 yield the following frequen-
cies of CME occurrences:

• solar activity minimum: ∼0.5 day−1

• solar activity maximum: ∼ 4.5 day−1 .

10 Note that the photospheric light is 106 times brighter than the corona
11 see also the SOHO/LASCO catalogue: [Link] list/
82 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

The CME mass shows no cycle dependence, whereas the cycle influences their lati-
tudinal distribution: during minimum CMEs are concentrated around the equator,
during maximum they originate from a wide range of latitudes.
There exist two types of CMEs:

1. flare related CMEs

2. CMEs associated with filament eruption.

Flare associated CMEs are, on average, faster (median speed 760 km/s) than the
ones associated with filament eruption without flare (median speed 510 km/s).
The temperature is about 8000 K in the core and more than 2 million K in the
front part and in the cavity.
SOHO/LASCO data from 1996 to 2001 were collected by Yeh et al., 2005 [343]
and they showed that the observed CMEs reveal a similar power-law behavior as
flares, and the power-law indices for both phenomena are almost identical. This
finding strongly supports the viewpoint that solar flares and CMEs are different
manifestations of the same physical process.
CMEs are an important factor in coronal and interplanetary dynamics by in-
jecting large amounts of mass and magnetic fields into the heliosphere causing
geomagnetic and interplanetary shocks which is a source of solar energetic parti-
cles.
The geoeffectiveness of CMEs is reviewed in the paper by Webb, 2002 [332]
and Kim et al., 2005 [162]. They considered more than 7000 CMEs observed by
SOHO/LASCA and also 300 frontside halo CMEs between 1997 and 2003. The
geomagnetic storm that is associated with the CME was measured by the Dst
index (see next chapter). They found that the probability of front side CME
geoeffectiveness is 40%. For speeds >400 km/s and L < 500 the probability
of detection is high (80%) but also the false alarm rate is high (60%). The most
probable areas (or coverage combinations) whose geoeffectiveness fraction is larger
than the mean probability (about 40%), are 00 < L < +300 for slower speed CMEs
(≤ 800 km/s), and −300 < L < +600 for faster CMEs (>800 km/s). Manchester
et al., 2004 [205] gave a study of a numerical simulation of a CME propagating
form the Sun to 1 AU. They found that CME is very effective in generating strong
geomagnetic activity on Earth through a strong sustained southward Bz and by
a pressure increase associated with the CME driven shock that compresses the
magnetosphere.
A recent review about CMEs can be found in van Driel-Gesztelyi, 2005 [324].

3.5.4 Heating of the Corona

As it has been described already, the temperature increases from the solar surface
(photosphere 6000 K) to the corona (several 106 K). Therefore, there must be
some heating process responsible for that.
Two basic facts of the corona thus have to be taken into account if we want to
explain its heating:
3.5. THE CORONA 83

• hot temperature
• low density (only about 10−12 that of the photosphere).
The original idea for the heating of the corona was entirely non-magnetic. From
laboratory experiments we know that if a fluid is set into violent motion, it emits
sound with the amount of sound rising as a high power of the average velocity of
the fluids. As we have seen, in the photosphere convective motions occur. If these
convective motions produce sound waves, they must propagate outwards from the
surface of the Sun. The wave motion has an energy density of
1 2
Ewave = ρv (3.41)
2
This energy is conserved. If the wave moves into a region of lower density,
then the wave amplitude must increase. The wave turns into a shock wave and
there is a strong dissipation of energy. This is converted into heat and the local
temperature increases.
However, it turned out that a purely acoustic heating of the corona is not suffi-
cient to explain the high temperatures there. Acoustic heating may be important
in the outer layers of some stars.
Today12 we assume that the following two processes are the main reason for
the hot corona:
• MHD waves: as it has been outlined, when a magnetic field is present there
are two characteristic speeds of wave propagation, the sound speed cs and
the Alfvén speed cH . If cs >> cH magnetic effects are negligible but this is
not the case for the outer solar atmosphere. The heating process by MHD
waves is analogous to the above mentioned acoustic heating. But it has to
be stressed that MHD waves have an anisotropic propagation.
• Magnetic reconnection: The footpoints of magnetic fields often are seen to
be anchored in the photosphere. In this region they are being continually
moved around by convective motions. Thus magnetic reconnection occurs
and electric currents flow which are dissipated.
There seems to be two problems with that interpretation. MHD waves cannot
carry enough energy through the chromosphere to the corona and Alfvén waves
dissipate their energy very fast when entering the corona. Bogdan et al., 2003 [41]
have shown that Alfvén waves can transmute into other wave modes at the base
of the corona.
The first observational evidence of the presence of waves in the corona was
made by SOHO EUV observations. Waves with a frequency of 1 mHz were found
but they could only contribute to about 10% of the needed energy. The photo-
sphere is covered by small magnetic elements (size below 1000 km). These small
elements are constantly perturbed by granulation motions. The magnetic field in
the corona that is anchored at these elements therefore constantly is perturbed
12 see also the book: Mechanisms of Chromospheric and Cornal Heating, P. Ulmschneider, E.

Priest, R. Rosner, 1991, Springer

84 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

and reconnection occurs due to the motion of the magnetic carpet. Maybe a series
of mircoflares occurs (see e.g. Benz, 2003 [33]).
RHESSI studied gamma and X-ray emission from flares and mircoflares. Mi-
croflares emit hard X-ray and it turned out that mircoflares are quite similar to
normal flares. The type III radio bursts seem to be in relation with series of
microflares- the radio signals decrease in frequency like the whistle from a depart-
ing train. In type III bursts electrons are accelerated in open magnetic field lines
and the particles escape from the Sun. RHESSI observations of microflares were
found to be coincident with TRACE observations ( showing jets in the EUV) (see
Liu et al. 2004 [198]).

3.6 Solar Wind and Interplanetary Magnetic field

3.6.1 Diagnostics of the Solar Wind
The Sun loses continuously mass and this mass loss is called solar wind13 . The
existence of the solar wind was first suggested to understand magnetic storms on
the Earth. During magnetic storms, the properties of the Earth’s ionosphere are
modified and radio communication can seriously become disrupted for some time
(about 36 hours) after the observation of some violent activity on the Sun (flare).
Such a perturbation cannot be caused by electromagnetic radiation from the Sun
because it takes 8 minutes to reach the Earth. Therefore, it was suggested that
the Sun was emitting particles which caused magnetic storms when they reach the
neighborhood of the Earth.
In that context it is interesting to remark that it was Carrington who discov-
ered in September 1859 a white light flare and then 4 hours after midnight there
commenced a great magnetic storm on the magnetic instruments14 .
Another hint for the existence of a solar wind arose from observations of comet
tails (this was first studied by Biermann in the 1950). These are produced when
comets are close enough to the Sun and the tails always point away from the Sun.
Originally, it was believed that radiation pressure produces the tails. If small
particles in the comet absorb radiation from the Sun they take up energy and
momentum. If they subsequently emit radiation, this emission is isotropic into all
directions and this will carry off no momentum- the matter will be pushed away
from the Sun and thus the dust tails are produced. But observations showed that
there is also a plasma tail consisting of ionized gas. If the Sun emits a continuous
stream of plasma, the ionized solar gas would collide with atoms - momentum
is transferred and charge exchange reaction occur: an electron will be exchanged
between an incoming charged particles and a neutral cometary particle which
produced the plasma tail. Since the charged particles move around magnetic field
lines, the plasma tail is aligned with the local interplanetary field.

13 see e.g. the classical textbook: A. J. Hundhausen, Coronal Expansion and Solar Wind, 1972,

Springer
14 He reported this observation to the Royal Astronomical Society
3.6. SOLAR WIND AND INTERPLANETARY MAGNETIC FIELD 85

Ion tail

Dust tail

Hale Bopp

Figure 3.11: Comet Hale Bopp (1997); the fainter ion tail is clearly seen.

Satellite Measurements
The first in situ measurement of the solar wind was made in 1962 by Mariner 215
First we want to mention that besides SOHO two satellite missions measure
the solar wind: Ulysses and ACE. Ulysses was launched from the space shuttle
Discovery in 1990. The spacecraft made a journey to Jupiter where the giant
planet’s gravity pulled the spacecraft into a trajectory that carried it over the
Sun’s south pole in the fall of 1994 and its north pole in the summer of 1995. The
next passes over the Sun’s south pole occurred during 2000 and over the north
pole during 2001. These two orbital passes provide views of the solar wind at
times near the minimum of solar activity and the maximum of solar activity. It
was found that in 2000 the south magnetic pole almost completely vanished at
the time of solar maximum. In November 2006 Ulysses will continue with a third
south polar pass and beginning of December 2007 with its third north polar pass.
The solar wind speed, magnetic field strength and direction and composition
were measured.
The Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) satellite was launched in August
of 1997 and placed into an orbit about the Lagrangian L1 point between the Earth
and the Sun16 . ACE has a number of instruments that monitor the solar wind.
The SOHO/SWAN experiment (Solar Wind ANisotropies) measures the Lα
radiation that is scattered by hydrogen atoms, which flow into the solar system.
This scattered radiation is called interplanetary Lyman alpha radiation and SWAN
observes interplanetary Lyman alpha radiation from all directions of the sky. These
Hydrogen atoms collide with solar wind protons and get ionized. This yields to
an ionization cavity around the Sun. But the form and shape of this cavity is
dependent on the solar wind. Therefore the measurement of the interplanetary
15 Mariner 2 also detected the slow retrograde rotation rate of Venus, its surface temperatures

and high surface pressures

16 The L point is one of several points in space where the gravitational attraction of the Sun
1
and Earth are equal and opposite located about 1.5 million km from the Earth in the direction
of the Sun
86 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

UV Lα glow permits to determine the solar wind latitudinal distribution. If the

solar wind were isotropic, the hydrogen distribution and the Lyman alpha emission
pattern would be axisymmetric around the direction where the interplanetary
hydrogen flows into the solar system. However, this is not true.
The chemical composition of the solar wind is interesting to investigate since
it gives us hints about its origin, i.e. the sources. The most important fact is that
the solar wind composition is different from the composition of the solar surface
and shows variations that are associated with solar activity and solar features
(Bochsler, 2001 [39]).
Also magnetic clouds have been observed in the solar wind. These are produced
when solar eruptions (flares and coronal mass ejections) carry material off of the
Sun along with embedded magnetic fields. These magnetic clouds can be detected
in the solar wind through observations of the solar wind characteristics - wind
speed, density, and magnetic field strength and direction.
References on magnetic clouds can be found in Burlaga et al. (1981) [49].
About one half of all magnetic clouds have (and usually drive) upstream inter-
planetary shocks, or steep pressure pulses, that in most cases possess large energy-
and dynamic pressure-increases across their ramps in a stationary frame of ref-
erence. When such a sharp upstream pressure increase encounters the Earth’s
magnetosphere it pushes it in causing a major reconfiguration of its boundary cur-
rent system measured on the ground usually some (5-10) hours before the start of
the main phase of a magnetic storm (Lepping, 2001 [194]).

Planetary Magnetospheres

The Earth’s magnetosphere will be described in detail in subsequent chapter.

Here we briefly outline measurements of the magnetic fields of other planets
which are useful as diagnostics of the solar wind17 . The magnetic field of Mercury
and the structure and dynamics of Mercury’s magnetosphere are strongly influ-
enced by the interaction of the solar wind with Mercury. In order to understand
the internal magnetic field, it will be necessary to correct the observations of the
external field for the distortions produced by the solar wind. The satellites Helios
1 and 2 made a number of passes in the region traversed by the orbit of Mercury;
thus it was possible to investigate the solar wind environment of Mercury. The
variables that govern the structure and dynamics of the magnetospheres of Mer-
cury and Earth are approximately 5-10 times larger at Mercury than at Earth.
Thus, the solar wind interaction with Mercury will be much stronger than the
interaction with Earth (Burlaga, 2001 [50]). The solar wind is not constant and
since Mercury is closer to the origin of it, the solar wind at Mercury is probably
more variable than that at Earth.
Mercury, Earth, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Ganymede (satellite
of Jupiter), have presently-active internal dynamos while Venus, Mars, at least
two of the Galilean moons, the Earth’s moon, comets and asteroids do not. These
active dynamos produce magnetic fields that have sufficient strength to stand off
17 See also e.g.: Solar Wind- Magnetospheric Coupling, Y. Kamide, 1986, Kluwer
3.6. SOLAR WIND AND INTERPLANETARY MAGNETIC FIELD 87

the pressure of the exterior plasma environment and on the other hand interest-
ing interactions with the solar wind can be studied. Moreover, e.g. the jovian
magnetosphere includes a strong time-varying energy source that adds to the dy-
namics of its magnetosphere and produces a quite different circulation pattern than
that found at Earth and, presumably, Mercury. Also the non magnetized planets
Venus, Mars and even comets have induced magnetospheres associated with the
solar wind interaction with their atmospheres. Cometary magnetospheres, parts
of which can be remotely sensed, exhibit spectacular disruptions called tail discon-
nections. Even the atmosphereless bodies with weak magnetic fields can interact
with the solar wind. Small magnetic anomalies on the moon and possibly asteroids
cause weak deflections of the solar wind. This is discussed in the paper of Russell
(2001) [265].
Krymskii et al. (2000) [176] investigate the interaction of the interplanetary
magnetic field and the solar wind with Mars. Data from the Mars Global Surveyor
mission have shown that localized crustal paleomagnetic anomalies are a common
feature of the Southern Hemisphere of Mars. The magnetometer measured small-
scale magnetic fields associated with many individual magnetic anomalies (mag-
nitudes ranging from hundreds to thousands nT at altitude above 120 km). Thus
Mars is globally different from both Venus and Earth. The data collected by Lunar
Prospector near the Moon were interpreted as evidence that above regions of in-
ferred strong surface magnetic fields on the Moon the solar wind flow is deflected,
and a small-scale mini-magnetosphere exists under some circumstances. With a
factor of 100 stronger magnetic fields at Mars and a lower solar wind dynamic pres-
sure (because of the greater distance), those conditions offer the opportunity for a
larger size of small ‘magnetospheres’ which can be formed by the crustal magnetic
fields. The Martian ionosphere is controlled both by solar wind interaction and
by the crustal magnetic field. Therefore, the nature of the Martian ionosphere is
probably different from any other planetary ionospheres, and is likely to be most
complicated among the planetary ionospheres (Shinagawa, 2000 [283]).

3.6.2 Solar Wind and Interplanetary Magnetic Fields

The global solar wind structure from solar minimum to solar maximum is reviewed
by Gibson (2001) [109].
E.N. Parker predicted the existence of a solar wind from theoretical arguments
showing that a hot corona would imply a continuous stream of plasma.
There are several types of solar wind (see Table 3.7)
The solar wind varies in strength through the solar activity cycle. It has an
average speed at the Earth of about 400 km/s. The total mass loss is a few
10−14 M /yr. This is about 1 million tons of solar material flung out into space
every second. If the solar wind was the same in the past then today the total mass
loss of the Sun over that period would be in the order of 10−4 M 18 .
The solar wind flows along the open (the term open magnetic field lines does
not imply magnetic monopoles but means that they are closed very far from the
Sun in the interplanetary space) magnetic field lines which pass through coronal
18 This mass loss rate is comparable with that due to nuclear reactions
88 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

Table 3.7: Several types of solar wind.

Component velocity density He remarks
km/s 10−6 m−3 %
fast 400-800 3 3-4 coronal holes quiet Sun
slow
minimum 250-400 11 <2 often at sector boundary
maximum 250-400 11 ∼4 turbulent, shock waves
CMEs 400-2000 He++ up to 30 shock waves

holes. Additionally to the solar wind, the Sun also looses mass by coronal mass
ejections (CME’s). Some of them but not all are accompanied by solar flares.
Low speed winds come from the regions above helmet streamers we have discussed
above while high speed winds come from coronal holes. However, if a slow moving
stream is followed by a fast moving stream the faster moving material will interact
with it. This interaction produces shock waves that can accelerate particles to
very high speeds.
As the Sun rotates these various streams rotate as well (co-rotation) and pro-
duce a pattern in the solar wind much like that of a rotating lawn sprinkler. At
the orbit of the Earth, one astronomical unit (AU) or about 1.5 × 108 km from the
Sun, the interplanetary magnetic field makes an angle of about 45 degrees to the
radial direction. Further out19 the field is nearly transverse (i.e. about 90 degrees)
to the radial direction.
The Sun’s magnetic field, that is carried out into interplanetary space is called
the interplanetary magnetic field, IMF. The interplanetary field lines are frozen in
the plasma. Because of the Sun’s rotation, the IMF like the solar wind travels out
in a spiral pattern. This can be compared to the pattern of water sprayed from
a rotating lawn sprinkler. The winding up of the magnetic field is named Parker
spiral after the scientist who first described this (see Fig.3.12). Furthermore,
sectors (typically four) with alternating inward and outward directed magnetic
fields can be identified.
As the solar wind expands, its density decreases as the inverse of the square of
its distance from the Sun. At some large enough distance from the Sun (in a region
known as the heliopause), the solar wind can no longer “push back” the fields and
particles of the local interstellar medium and the solar wind slows down from
400 km/s to perhaps 20 km/s. The location of this transition region (called the
heliospheric termination shock) is unknown at the present time, but from direct
spacecraft measurements must be at more than 50 AU. In 1993 observations of 3
kHz radiation from Voyagers 1 and 2 have been interpreted as coming from a radio
burst at the termination shock. This burst is thought to have been triggered by
an event in the solar wind observed by Voyager 2. From the time delay between
this triggering event and the observation of the 3 kHz radiation, the distance of
the termination shock has been put between 130 and 170 AU.
19 at the orbit of Saturn
3.6. SOLAR WIND AND INTERPLANETARY MAGNETIC FIELD 89

As it has been stated already, the particle density of the solar wind varies.
From May 10-12, 1999, the solar wind dropped to 2% of its normal density and
to half of its normal speed. This severe change in the solar wind also changed the
shape of Earth’s magnetic field and produced an unusual auroral display at the
North Pole.
Let us give some theoretical arguments of the solar wind and describe its prop-
erties in more detail. Suppose the hot corona sits in static equilibrium on the top
of the solar atmosphere. In such a case the pressure gradient in the corona must
be balanced by the gravitational attraction of the Sun:
dP GM
=− 2 (3.42)
dr r
In this equation we have replaced the variable M by M since the mass of the
corona is negligible to the total mass of the Sun. We also can write:

P = nkTkin ρ = nm (3.43)

n is the number of particles per unit volume and m is the average particle mass.
Please also note that Tkin is the kinetic temperature of the corona which is far
from thermodynamic equilibrium.
In the corona, conduction is important for energy transport and if κ is the
coefficient of heat conduction, then
5/2
κ = κ0 Tkin (3.44)

where κ0 is constant. If there is no inertial release of heat in the corona, the

outward flow of heat Lcond must be constant:
5/2
Lcond = −4πr2 κ0 Tkin dTkin /dr = const (3.45)

This equation can be integrated:

Tkin /Tc = (rc /r)2/7 (3.46)

where rc , Tc are radius and temperature at some point in the corona. Combining
all four above equations one gets P and n as a function of r. When expanding this
to the Earth one gets a kinetic temperature of 5 × 105 K and a particle density of
4 × 108 m−3 . Parker pointed out that a solution of such a system to the edge of the
solar system gives nonsense. At large values of r the value of P becomes constant,
so that ρ ∼ r2/7 . This is higher than the pressure of the interstellar medium and
thus a static model of the corona does not make sense.
If the material of the corona moves outward with a velocity vr in the radial
direction, then equation 3.42 together with 3.43 becomes
dvr d GnmM
nmvr = (nkTkin ) − (3.47)
dr dr r2
Mass conservation requires:
nr2 vr = const (3.48)
90 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

Figure 3.12: The Parker spiral. Courtesy: J. Jokipii, University of Arizona

3.6.3 High Speed Solar Wind

The high speed solar wind emanating from large coronal holes requires additional
energy. It has been shown that Alfvén waves from the Sun can accelerate the
solar wind to these high speeds. The Alfvén speed in the corona is quite large and
therefore Alfvén waves can carry a significant energy flux even for a small wave
energy density. These waves can therefore propagate through the corona and inner
solar wind. The wave velocity amplitude in the inner corona must be 20-30 km/s.
In the corona and inner solar wind region, the flow speed is much smaller than
the Alfvén speed and the solar wind flow and the wave energy transport are along
the magnetic field lines. In this region, the wave energy flux F in a magnetic flux
tube is approximately constant:

F = ρ∆v 2 vA A (3.49)
√
ρ... mass density, ∆v 2 wave velocity amplitude, vA Alfvén speed and A is the
cross section of the flow tube. The magnetic flux Φ = BA is constant, so that the
wave velocity amplitude changes with density as

∆v 2 = ∆v02 ρ/ρ0 (3.50)

The subscript 0 indicates a reference level in the inner corona.

3.6.4 Heliospheric Current Sheet

Along the plane of the Sun’s magnetic equator, the oppositely directed open field
lines run parallel to each other and are separated by a thin current sheet known as
the “interplanetary current sheet” or “heliospheric current sheet” (see Fig. 3.13).
The rotational axis and the magnetic axis of the Sun do not coincide. Therefore
the current sheet becomes tilted and shows a wavy (”ballerina skirt”)-like structure
as it extends into interplanetary space. Therefore, the Earth is located sometimes
below and sometimes above that rotating current sheet and it experiences periodic
changes in the polarity of the IMF. These periods of alternating positive and
negative polarity are known as magnetic sectors.
3.7. VARIATIONS OF THE SOLAR DIAMETER 91

Figure 3.13: The interplanetary current sheet (above) and the heliospheric current sheet
(below). Courtesy: [Link]

The IMF is a vector. The two components Bx , By are oriented parallel to

the ecliptic. The component Bz is perpendicular to the ecliptic. It is created by
disturbances (e.g. waves,...) in the solar wind. When the IMF field lines and the
geomagnetic field lines are oriented antiparallel to each other, they can reconnect.
By this process energy, mass and momentum can be transferred from the IMF,
solar wind, to the geomagnetic field, the strongest coupling occurs when Bz is
oriented southward.
Generally, the strength of the IMF near Earth is between 1-37 nT and the
average is ∼ 6 nT.

3.7 Variations of the Solar Diameter

3.7.1 Relation Solar Diameter-Solar Dynamo
When measuring the solar diameter one has to take into account that the Sun
is a gaseous sphere and its diameter is in principle a matter of definition. When
looking at the solar limb, the decrease of the tangential optical depth from unity
to essentially zero occurs over only a few hundred km which is small compared to
the total solar radius. A major decrease occurs within 0.2 arcsec of both sides of
the point of inflection when regarding a scan. Therefore, one can define a solar
diameter this way.
Why is it important to study solar radius variations? The radiated energy of
the sun comes from the nuclear energy generation (Fusion of H to He) in the deep
solar interior. In the solar core at a temperature of more than 10 Million K the
energy is generated by the fusion of H to He and high energetic γ ray photons are
92 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

Figure 3.14: The spiral nature of the IMF. Courtesy: NASA

emitted. These energetic photons are absorbed and re-emitted in the solar interior
(mean free path between the absorption processes is only 1 cm) and therefore for
a photon generated by such nuclear reaction, it takes more than 1 million years to
diffuse out of the core region. Thus one can argue that the emergent luminosity at
the core outer boundary is effectively constant on solar cycle timescales. If there
is any luminosity variability at the surface there must be an intermediate energy
reservoir between the core and the photosphere. There are several mechanisms for
storing energy during a solar activity cycle, such as magnetic fields or gravitational
energy. Each of them leads to distinct perturbations in the equilibrium structure
of the sun. Therefore, one can argue that a sensitive determination of the solar
radius fluctuations can help to understand the solar cycle and it is clear that the
magnitude of the radius fluctuations compared to the luminosity change contains
information on where and how energy is stored.
Sofia and Endal (1979) [291] introduced the parameter W by:

δr δL
W = / (3.51)
r L
The models predict a wide range for W :

• 2 × 10−4 Spruit, 1982 [298];

• 8 × 10−4 Gilliland, 1980 [110];

• 5 × 10−3 Dearborn and Blake, 1980 [72];

• 7.5 × 10−2 Sofia and Endal, 1979 [291];

• W could be positive or negative, Lydon and Sofia (1995) [204].

In the following we discuss briefly some measurement methods and give the
results.
3.7. VARIATIONS OF THE SOLAR DIAMETER 93

3.7.2 Ground Based Measurements

Ground based measurements of the solar diameter exist over more than 300 years.
Because of the small variations the results are controversial and inconsistent. The
first determination of the solar diameter was made by Aristarchus 270 BC. He
obtained a value of 900 arcsec. The first accurate measurements were performed
by Mouton in the year 1970 at Lyon during the period of 1959-1961 and he obtained
a value of 960.6 arcsec for the solar semidiameter. From historical data it may be
deduced that the solar radius may have been larger during the Maunder Minimum.
As we have seen this minimum of solar activity coincided with extremely cold
periods in Europe and the Atlantic regions (Ribes et al. 1991). Also Laclare et
al. (1996) [182] found a larger solar radius during solar minimum. However other
groups (Ulrich and Bertello, 1995 [321], Noel, 1997 [232] and Basu 1998 [29])
found a positive correlation: the solar diameter increases with enhanced solar
activity. Besides a possible variation of the solar radius with the solar cycle there
are also hints that the solar radius changes over timescales of 1 000 days to 80 years
(Gilliland, 1980 [110]). Thus we see that there is a wide range of measurements
and the results are ambiguous. From helioseismic measurements Dziembowski et
al. (2000) [86] deduced solar radius fluctuations and they found a change of 10
mas 20 between 1996 and 1998.
Laclare et al. (1996) [182] published results of solar diameter measurements
obtained with the Danjon astrolabe at the Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur; this
program was initiated in 1975 and the instrument consists of a set of 11 reflector
prisms which enables the measurement of the diameter up to 22 times a day at
different zenith distances (from 30 to 70 degrees). Observing a transit requires the
recording of the time when both images of the Sun’s edge, i.e. the direct one and
its reflection on a mercury surface become tangent to each other. At this instant
the Sun’s edge crosses the parallel of altitude (almucantar) which is defined in the
instrument by the angle of the reflector prism and also by the refraction and other
terms.
Of course this technique requires a true stability of the almucantar during
observation and Zerodur types of ceramic reflector prims (which are practically
unaffected by dilation) and a mercury mirror establishing the horizontal plane are
used.
Furthermore, the observations were cleared of personal bias by using an acqui-
sition system equipped with a CCD camera at the focal plane of the instrument.
The limb was defined as the point where the intensity distribution on a CCD line
has its inflection point (zero of the second derivative of the solar limb function).
For each frame then the limb was reconstructed by a least-square adjustment of a
parabola through the inflection points.
The mean value of the semi diameter was obtained by visual measurements
and by the above described data acquisition system:

• 5 000 visual measurements, same observer; 1975-1994: 959.46±0.01 arcsec.,

broad band (200 nm) filter was used centered on 540 nm.
20 1 mas = 1 milli arcsec
94 CHAPTER 3. THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE AND ACTIVE REGIONS

• CCD acquisition program: 981 CCD measurements in the period 1989-1994;

mean value= 959.40±0.01 arcsec.

• Correlations with solar activity: nearly opposing trend; high activity means
smaller diameter.

It is important to notice that all ground based observations must take into
account the quasi biennial oscillation in the Earth’s atmosphere.
Other astrolabe measurements were done by Sanchez et al. (1995) [268] at the
San Fernando Observatory (Cadiz), Noel (1995) [233] at Santiago and Leister et
al. at Sao Paulo Observatory (1990) [193]. Ribes et al. (1991) [256] report on
photoelectric measurements made at HAO in Boulder from 1986-1990; Wittmann
et al. (1993 [340]) report on measurements using drift timing in Izana and Locarno.
Other authors measured the solar diameter from eclipse data (e.g. Kubo, 1993)
[177].

3.7.3 Satellite Measurements

The fact that these measurements are controversial is related to the problem that
the fluctuations are quite small and Earth bound observations are always limited
by seeing. Thus one wants to reduce this effect by using balloon borne instruments
(Sofia et al. 1994) or satellite data (Michelson Doppler Imager, MDI on board of
SOHO). These data are free of atmospheric disturbances and promise very accurate
determinations of the solar radius.
Emilio et al. (2000) [89] used SOHO MDI measurements to derive possible
variations of the solar diameter. They used 1 minute cadence images, and these
were low pass filtered in order to remove solar 5 minute p mode intensity oscil-
lations. The limb pixels (2 arcsec/pixel) were downlinked every 12 minutes. The
data set used was between 1996 April 19 and 1998, June 24. They did not use data
obtained after the recovery of SOHO in November 1998 because of the frequent
instrument mode interruptions and focal length calibration difficulties. They find
annual radius variations at an amplitude of 0.1 arcsec and a secular increase of
about the same amplitude over the period between 1996 and 1998. The systematic
variation is caused by the changing thermal environment of the MDI front window
which yields small but measurable changes in the telescope focal length. A tem-
perature gradient of a few degrees from the center of the window to the aluminium
cell at the filter edge can produce a weak lens effect; that corresponds to a focal
length of a few km and changes the telescope focal length by a few parts in 104 .
The secular change is also influenced by the degradation of the front window and
increased absorptivity.
Thus the MDI data yield lower values of opposite sign. Since Sofia et al. (1979)
[291] claimed that W ∼ 0.075, solar cycle changes which affect the convective
efficiency near the photosphere will have a large effect on the solar radius; the
MDI measurements rule out this high value of W and suggest that solar cycle
luminosity changes are not caused by superficial fluctuations in the outer layers of
the Sun.
3.7. VARIATIONS OF THE SOLAR DIAMETER 95

Table 3.8: Solar Diameter Measurements

Author Period Value Corr. coeff.
Wittmann 1972-1991 +0.25 arcsec 0.9
Laclare 1978-1994 +0.09 0.4
Leister 1980-1993 +0.09 0.2
Kubo 1970-1991 +0.05 0.8
Bode 1976 1994 0.00 0.1
Neckel 1981-1990 0.00 0.1

The French CNES plans to operate the satellite mission PICARD which is
supposed to operate in 2008 and the satellite will be launched with a Russian
Dnepr rocket. One of the experiments of this low mass mission is SODISM (Solar
Diameter Imager and Surface Mapper).
Chapter 4

MHD and the Solar Dynamo

In this chapter we will explain the basic MHD equations which are needed to
understand solar active phenomena such as spots, prominences, flares etc. The
solar dynamo is needed to maintain the solar activity cycle1 .
We sometimes mix the unit system. This was done by intention because in
some cases it is easier and more intuitive to deviate from the SI system.
Let us give a simple example. The Coulomb law is defined as2 :
q1 q 2
F =k (4.1)
r2
In the SI system k = 1/4πe ; 0 = 8.854 × 10−12 C2 N−1 m−2 . In the cgs system
k=1.

4.1 Solar Magnetohydrodynamics

4.1.1 Basic Equations
To understand the surface activity of the Sun and the solar cycle it is necessary
to briefly outline the principles of MHD. The properties of electromagnetic fields
are described by Maxwell’s equations:
∂D
∇×H = j+ (4.2)
∂t
∂B
∇×E = − (4.3)
∂t
divB = 0 (4.4)
divD = ρE (4.5)

Here H, B, D, E, j, ρE are the magnetic field, magnetic induction, electric displace-

ment, electric field, electric current density and electric charge density.
1 See also e.g. Advances in Solar System Magnetohydrodynamics, E.R. Priest, A. W. Hood,

Cambridge, 1991
2 it defines the force acting between two charges q , q
1 2

97
98 CHAPTER 4. MHD AND THE SOLAR DYNAMO

Figure 4.1: Looped magnetic field lines in the solar chromosphere and corona. Photo:
TRACE mission, NASA

Equation 4.2 is the Ampere law which states that a spatially varying magnetic
field (given by ∇ × H) produces currents- in MHD often the variation of the E
fields is neglected, thus the term ∂D∂t → 0. We can also state that a current j
induces a magnetic field that is in a direction opposite to it.
Equation 4.3 is the Faraday law and states that a time varying magnetic field
produces an electric field.
If µ0 , 0 are the permeability and permittivity of free space, then for most
gaseous media in the universe:

B = µ0 H D = 0 E (4.6)

The following equation relates the electric current density to the fields producing
it (generalized Ohm’s law):
j = σ(E + u × B) (4.7)

σ is the electrical conductivity and u is the bulk velocity of the matter. The final
equations depend on the state of matter; if it consists of electrons and one type of
ion:
j = ni Zi eui − ne eue ρE = ni Zi e − ne e (4.8)

ni , ui , ne , ue are the number density and velocity of the ions and electrons respec-
tively and Zi e, −e are the charges on the ion and the electron.
In astrophysics two simplifications are applied:
4.1. SOLAR MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS 99

• magnetic fields are treated as permanent,

• electric fields are regarded as transient.

The third Maxwell equation (4.4) states that there are no magnetic monopoles3 .
Electric fields can be produced by separating positive and negative charges through
the fourth Maxwell equation (4.5) however the attraction between these charges is
so strong that charge separation is usually cancelled out very quickly. Through the
second Maxwell equation electric fields can be produced by time varying magnetic
fields. Such fields are only significant, if there are rapid changes by time varying
magnetic fields. Magnetic fields produced by the displacement current ∂D/∂t are
usually insignificant in astrophysical problems because electric fields are unimpor-
tant; however they can be produced by a conduction current j, if the electrical
conductivity is high enough. Such magnetic fields may be slowly variable in time
and space.
We therefore neglect ∂D/∂t, combine the equations

∇×H=j ∇ × E = −∂B/∂t B =µ0 H j = σE, (4.9)

obtaining
∂B 1
+ ∇×∇×B=0 (4.10)
∂t µo σ
and using ∇ × ∇ × B = grad divB − ∇2 B and divB = 0:

∂B 1
= ∇2 B (4.11)
∂t µ0 σ
This is also called the induction equation- for the static case. In cartesian
coordinates this equation for the x coordinate is:
 2 
∂Bx 1 ∂ Bx ∂ 2 By ∂ 2 Bz
= + + (4.12)
∂t µ0 σ ∂x2 ∂y 2 ∂z 2

The solution of these equations shows that magnetic fields decay together with
the current producing them. We can derive an approximate decay time: let us
assume that currents vary significantly in distance L, then from (4.11) the decay
time becomes
τD = µ0 σL2 (4.13)
If at time t = 0 there exists a sinusoidal field

Bx = B0 exp(iky) (4.14)

the solution at a later time t is:

Bx = B0 exp(iky)exp(−k 2 t/µ0 σ) (4.15)

3 This is a common experience: a division of a permanent magnet into two does not separate

north and south poles.

100 CHAPTER 4. MHD AND THE SOLAR DYNAMO

The wavelength λ of the spatial variation of the field is 2πk, the original field
decays by a factor e in the time µ0 σλ2 /4π 2 .
Let us consider typical fields of stars: the dimension of the star L and the
electrical conductivity are both high (if the gas is fully ionized). Therefore, the
lifetime of a magnetic field could exceed the main sequence lifetime, such a field
is called a fossil field.
The same is not true for the Earth. Its field is produced by currents in a liquid
conducting core and continuously regenerated by a dynamo mechanism.
The electrical conductivity of an ionized gas is ∼ T 3/2 . That means that the
characteristic time for decay of currents in the outer layers of the Sun is much
less than the solar lifetime, whereas the decay near the center exceeds the lifetime
(since the temperature near the surface is about 6 000 K and near the center about
1.5 ×107 K). If the field in the solar interior were a fossil field extending throughout
the Sun, the field in the outer layers would now be current free - similar to the
field of a dipole. However we don’t observe this. The surface field is very complex
and therefore it must be also regenerated by a dynamo. It is conceivable that a
fossil field of the Sun was destroyed at the very early evolution of the Sun, when
it was fully convective before reaching the main sequence. Also helioseismology
argues against a strong field.

4.1.2 Some Important MHD Effects

A magnetic field in a conducting fluid exerts a force per unit volume which is

Fmag = j × B = (curlB × B)/µ0 = −grad(B 2 /2µ0 ) + B.∇B/µ0 (4.16)

This can be interpreted as:

• grad(B 2 /2µ0 ) isotropic pressure,
• B.∇B/µ0 tension along the lines of magnetic induction.
The isotropic pressure must be added to the gas pressure: let us assume we have a
tube of magnetic flux, and Pout denotes the pressure outside and Pin the pressure
inside the tube, then for equilibrium:

Pout = Pin + B 2 /2µ0 (4.17)

The gas pressure can be written as ρT /µ, where is the gas constant and µ the
mean molecular weight. With Tin = Tout we must have:

ρin < ρout (4.18)

A tube of magnetic flux is lighter than its surroundings and will start to rise which
is called magnetic buoyancy.
To a good approximation, the fluid is tied to the magnetic field. For the Sun
two extremes occur:
• photosphere: the fluid motions drag the magnetic field lines around (the
magnetic field is frozen in);
4.1. SOLAR MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS 101

• corona: the magnetic force is so strong that it constrains the motion of the
fluid.

The tying of the fluid to the magnetic field lines also permits the propagation
of MHD waves which have some similarity to sound waves but a characteristic
speed (Alfvén speed):

cH = B 2 /µ0 ρ (4.19)
The sound speed is given by 
cs = γP/ρ (4.20)
This can also be seen from the induction equation. Let us consider again the
Maxwell equations. From j = σE + u × B we can extract E:

j
E= −u×B (4.21)
σ
This is substituted into the Maxwell equation (4.3) yielding:
 
j ∂B
∇× −u×B =− (4.22)
σ ∂t

We have already argued that the displacement current can be neglected in the first
Maxwell equation and therefore ∇ × B = µj, from which j = 1/µ∇ × B and
 
1 ∂B
∇× ∇×B−u×B =− (4.23)
µσ ∂t

using the formula

∇ × (∇ × A) = ∇(∇A) − ∇2 A (4.24)
from vectoranalysis, we get:
 
1 1
∇× ∇×B = ∇(∇B) − ∇2 B
µσ µσ

This gives us the final form of the so called induction equation:

∂B
= ∇ × (u × B) + η∇2 B (4.25)
∂t
Here η = 1/µσ is the magnetic diffusivity. The case where the plasma is stationary
was already discussed above (u = 0), the field decays in the ohmic decay time
τ = L2 /η. Let us discuss the case when η = 0. Then, the field B is completely
determined by the plasma motions u and the induction equation is the equivalent
to the vorticity equation for an inviscid fluid. The magnetic flux Φ through a
material surface S which is a surface that moves with the field, is:


Φ= [Link] (4.26)
S
102 CHAPTER 4. MHD AND THE SOLAR DYNAMO

If G is the material closed curve bounding S, the total rate of change of Φ is (see
also eq. 4.34):


DΦ ∂B
= .dS + B.(u × dl) (4.27)
Dt S ∂t

G
∂B
= .dS + (B × u).dl (4.28)
S ∂t

 G

∂B
= − ∇ × (u × B) .dS (4.29)
S ∂t

In the last equation we have used the Stokes Theorem:

(A)Cdl = (∇ × C)dA
(4.30)
L A

If η = 0 the total flux across any arbitrary surface moving with the fluid remains
constant, the magnetic field lines are said to be frozen in to the flow.
If v0 , l0 are typical velocity and length-scale values for our system, then the
ratio of the two terms on the right hand side of the induction equation gives the
Magnetic Reynolds Number
Rm = l0 v0 /η0 (4.31)
In an active solar surface region one has η0 = 1 m−2 s−1 , l0 = 700 km ∼ 1 arcsec
and v0 = 104 m/s we find Rm = 7 × 109 >> 1. Thus the field is frozen to the
plasma and the electric field does not drive the plasma but is simply E = −u × B.
However, if the length-scales of the system are reduced the diffusion term η∇2 B
becomes important. Then the field lines are allowed to diffuse through the plasma
and this yields to magnetic braking and changing the global topology of the field
(magnetic reconnection).

4.1.3 Magnetic Reconnection

Magnetic reconnection is the process by which lines of magnetic force break and
rejoin in a lower energy state. The excess energy appears as kinetic energy of
the plasma at the point of reconnection. In Fig. 4.2 single arrow lines denote
magnetic field and double line arrows the magnetofluid velocity. As it can be
seen, the merging of two magnetofluids with oppositely oriented magnetic fields
causes the field to annihilate. The excess energy accelerates the plasma out of
the reconnection region in the direction of the full double line arrows. Note the
characteristic X-point, where the topology changes for the field lines.
The plasma, where the field is annihilated is accelerated outwards to Alfvén
speed vA : 
vA = B0 / 4πM nB (4.32)
nB ... density inside the current sheet, M the plasma average molecular weight.
A similar process occurs in coronal loops that were observed in hard and soft x-
rays by Yohkoh and SOHO instruments. Such a coronal loop (see right drawing in
Fig. 4.2) is stretched out by pressure which is provided by buoyancy. A magnetic
4.1. SOLAR MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS 103

Figure 4.2: Principle of magnetic reconnection.

structure is buoyant because the particle density is lower there since it contains
larger magnetic energy density (see magnetic buoyancy). Thus the external pres-
sure is balanced by a lower gas pressure in conjunction with a magnetic pressure.
The top of the loop distends and reconnection occurs. Particles in the reconnec-
tion region accelerate towards the surface of the sun and out away. Those particles
that are accelerated towards the sun are confined within the loop’s magnetic field
lines and follow these lines to the footpoint of the loop where they collide with
other particles and lose their energy through x-ray emissions. Such processes are
the cause of solar flares and will be discussed in the next chapter.
Magnetic reconnection also provides a mechanism for energy to be transported
into the solar corona.
A similar process occurs in the earth’s magnetotail. The solar wind distends
the Earth’s dipole field so that the field extends far behind the Earth. Earthward
flowing plasma streams with flow velocities up to 1000 km/s (which is close to the
local Alfvén speed) have been observed (Birn et al. 1981 [37]).
A recent review on solar MHD was given by Walsh (2001) [329].

4.1.4 Fluid Equations

The continuity or mass equation for a fluid is:

Dρ
+ ρ∇.u = 0 (4.33)
Dt
and the total derivative means here:
D ∂
= + u.∇ (4.34)
Dt ∂t
(See any textbook on fluid dynamics for a derivation of this formula). Now let
us consider the equation of motion in a plasma with velocity u: the momentum
equation includes the Lorentz force term j × B and other forces F, such as gravity
and viscous forces:
Du
ρ = −∇p + j × B + F (4.35)
Dt
104 CHAPTER 4. MHD AND THE SOLAR DYNAMO

Here p is the plasma pressure. Let us assume a Newtonian fluid with isotropic
viscosity, then F may be written as:
r
F = −ρg(r) + ρν∇2 u (4.36)
r

g(r) is the local gravity acting in the radial direction and ν the kinematic viscosity.
Let us make thinks more complicated: Consider a frame of reference with angular
velocity Ω at a displacement r from the rotation axis:
 
Du dΩ 1 2
ρ = −∇p + j × B + F + ρ 2u × Ω + r × + ∇|Ω × r| (4.37)
Dt dt 2

The three terms in [ ] denote: Coriolis force, change of rotation and centrifugal
force. Stars rotate more rapidly when they are young. Under most circumstances
the latter two terms are small compared with the Coriolis term u × Ω.

4.1.5 Equation of State

The perfect gas law
kρT
p= = nkT (4.38)
m
determines the constitution of stars, k = 1.38 × 10−23 J/K being the Boltzmann
constant, m is the mean particle mass and n the number of particles per unit
volume. If s denotes the entropy per unit mass of the plasma, then the flux of
energy (heat) through a star becomes:

Ds
ρT = −L (4.39)
Dt
L is the energy loss function. This function describes the net effect of all the sinks
and sources of energy. For MHD applications this becomes:
 
ργ D p j2
= −∇.q + κr ∇2 T + +H (4.40)
γ − 1 Dt ργ σ

In this equation we have:

• q: heat flux due to conduction

• κr : coefficient of radiative conductivity

• T temperature

• j 2 /σ ohmic dissipation (Joule heating)

• H represents all other sources.

4.1. SOLAR MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS 105

4.1.6 Structured Magnetic Fields


If the plasma
 velocity is small compared with the sound speed ( γp/ρ), the Alfvén
√
speed ( B/µρ) and the gravitational free fall speed ( 2gl), the inertial and vis-
cous terms in equation 4.35 may be neglected yielding:

0 = −∇p + j × B + F (4.41)

This equation must then be solved with ∇ × B = ..., ∇.B = 0 and the ideal gas
law as well as a simplified form of the energy equation.
Let us introduce the concept of scale height. Let

dp
0=− − ρg (4.42)
dz
Substitute in the above equation ρ = pm/kT (ideal gas) and integrate:

z 
dz
p = p0 exp − (4.43)
0 Hp (z)

(p0 is the pressure at z = 0). This defines the local pressure scale height Hp :

HP = kT /mg = p/ρg (4.44)

At solar photospheric temperatures (T ∼ 5000 K) we find Hp = 0.150 Mm, whereas

at coronal temperatures T ∼ 106 K we find Hp ∼ 30 Mm.
That concept can also be applied to MHD in the case of magnetostatic balance
discussed above. Assume that gravity acts along the negative z direction and s
measures the distance along the field lines inclined at angle θ to this direction,
then the component of eq. (4.41) in the z-direction becomes:

dp
0=− − ρg cos θ dz = ds cos θ (4.45)
ds
Therefore, the pressure along a given field line decreases with height, the rate of
decrease depends on the temperature structure (given by the energy equation).
If the height of a structure is much less than the pressure scale height, gravity
may be neglected. The ratio β is given by gas pressure p0 to magnetic pressure
B02 /2µ. If β << 1, any pressure gradient is dominated by the Lorentz force and
(4.41) reduces to:
j×B=0 (4.46)
In this case the magnetic field is said to be force free. In order to satisfy (4.46)
either the current must be parallel to B (Beltrami fields) or j = ∇ × B = 0. In
the latter case the field is a current free or potential field.
If β is not negligible and the field is strictly vertical of the form B = B(x)k,
then (4.41) becomes:  
∂ B2
0= p+ (4.47)
∂x 2µ
106 CHAPTER 4. MHD AND THE SOLAR DYNAMO

4.1.7 Potential Fields

Potential fields result when B vanishes. We can write B = ∇A so that ∇ × B = 0;
with ∇.B = 0 one obtains Laplace’s equation:

∇2 A = 0 (4.48)

If the normal field component Bn is imposed on the boundary S of a volume V ,

then the solution within V is unique. Also if Bn is imposed on the boundary S,
then the potential field is the one with the minimum magnetic energy.
These two statements have many implications for the dynamics of the solar
atmosphere. During a solar flare e.g. the normal field component through the
photosphere remains unchanged. However, since enormous amounts of energy are
released during the eruptive phase, the magnetic configuration cannot be potential.
The excess magnetic energy could arise from a sheared force-free field.
Let us consider an example of a potential field in two dimensions: Consider
the solutions A(x, z) = X(x)Z(z) such that ∇2 A = 0 gives:

1 d2 X 1 d2 Z
2
=− = −n2 (4.49)
X dx Z z2
where n = const. A solution to (4.49) would be:
 
B0
A= sin(nx)e−nz (4.50)
n
this gives for the field components:
∂A
Bx = = B0 cos(nx)e−nz (4.51)
∂x
∂A
Bz = = −B0 sin(nx)e−nz (4.52)
∂z
The result is a two dimensional model of a potential arcade.

4.1.8 3 D Reconstruction of Active Regions

If we look at an active region on the solar disk center we have no information about
the 3 D structure of it, especially about the 3 D magnetic field configuration which
is important for modelling such regions. Information about the height dependence
of active regions can only be obtained when observing such features near the solar
limb. Let us consider some simple model to reconstruct these features.
∂A ∂A
Bx = , By (x, z), Bz = − (4.53)
∂z ∂x
We see immediately that ∇.B = 0 Let us assume that the footpoints of the field
are anchored down into the photosphere (z=0). Projecting the resulting field onto
the xz plane gives:
∂A ∂A
dx + dz = 0 (4.54)
∂x ∂z
4.1. SOLAR MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS 107

Therefore dA = 0, A = const. From ∇ × B = µj calculate the components of the

current density:
1 ∂By
jx = − (4.55)
µ ∂z
 
1 ∂By ∂By
jy = − (4.56)
µ ∂z ∂x
1 ∂By
jz = (4.57)
µ ∂x
And then the components of the Lorentz force (j × B):
∂A ∂By
∇2 A + By =0 (4.58)
∂x ∂x
∂By ∂A ∂A ∂By
− =0 (4.59)
∂x ∂z ∂x ∂z
∂A ∂By
∇2 A + By =0 (4.60)
∂z ∂z

4.1.9 Charged Particles in Magnetic Fields

In this chapter we consider first the motion of a single charged particle in a given
electromagnetic field. The particle has charge q and the equation of motion is:
du
m = q(E + u × B) (4.61)
dt
Let us write:

B0 = B0 b
E0 = E b + E⊥
v = v b + v ⊥

where b is a unit vector and v ×B0 = B0 (v⊥ ×b) is perpendicular to b. Equation

4.61 splits into a parallel and a perpendicular component (e.g. parallel means
parallel to the magnetic field lines):
dv
m = qE (4.62)
dt
dv⊥
m = q[E⊥ + B0 (v⊥ × b)] (4.63)
dt
Equation 4.62 has the solution

v = (qE /m)t + v0 (4.64)

Here v0 is the velocity component at t = 0 in the direction of the magnetic field
line. We see that particles of opposite sign of charge q move in opposite directions,
they move along an electric field parallel to a magnetic field which destroys E .
108 CHAPTER 4. MHD AND THE SOLAR DYNAMO

Now let us solve equation 4.63 by writing:

v⊥ = v
⊥ + E⊥ × b/B0 (4.65)
and equation 4.63 becomes:
dv
⊥

m = qB0 (v⊥ × b) (4.66)
dt
Summarizing we arrive at:
• Motion in which acceleration is ⊥ to the velocity,
• const. acceleration to the velocity.
This is a motion in a circle around the direction of b and the motion has frequency
|q|B0 /m, the magnitude of the velocity is v⊥0 ; the radius of the orbit, the gyration
radius rg is
rg = mv⊥0 /|q|B (4.67)
For an electron the gyration frequency is 1.8×1011 (B/Tesla)Hz. The corresponding
gyration radius is 6 × 10−9 (v⊥0 / km/s)(B/Tesla)m.

The difference in mass between electrons and protons is about 1800. What follows
for the radius and frequency of gyration?

The gyration follows also from the simple statement, that in the absence of
other forces, the Lorentz force balances the centripetal force of the particle’s motion
around the field line. Let α be the pitch angle, which is the angle between the
direction of motion and the local field line. Then for the gyro radius (Larmor
radius :  
cp⊥  mcv × B 
RL = =  (4.68)
qB qB 2 
The Larmor radius for a 100 keV electron (which is typical for electrons in the
inner radiation belt of the Earth) is about 100 m.
Let us assume, that the magnetic flux through a particle’s orbit is constant-
this is certainly the case when changes of the magnetic field are small over the gyro
radius and one gyro period. From the condition that dΦB /dt = 0 the so called
first adiabatic invariant follows:
p2⊥
µB = (4.69)
2mB
or in terms of the particle’s energy:
E sin2 α
µB = (4.70)
B
From the conservation of the first adiabatic invariant it follows, that the pitch
angle increases, when the particle moves to larger field strength, until α = 900 at
the mirror point.
Summarizing the motion of a particle:
4.1. SOLAR MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS 109

Figure 4.3: Left: Gyration of a charged particle around magnetic field lines, the sense
depends on the + or - charge; right: charged particles are deflected by magnetic fields,
depending on their charge. Here the magnetic fieldlines point vertically inwards, denoted
by

• accelerated motion along the field lines,

• circular motion around the field,
• drift velocity E⊥ × b/B0 perpendicular to both electric and magnetic fields,
• the sense of the accelerated and the circular motions depends on the sign of
the electric charge.
• the drift velocity is the same for all particles,
• in the absence of electric fields, a particle moves with a constant velocity in
the direction of the magnetic field and with a velocity of constant magnitude
around the field, thus it moves along a helical path.
• In all this discussion we have neglected one important effect. Accelerated
charged particles radiate, for non relativistically moving particles this radi-
ation is known as cyclotron radiation and for relativistic particles as syn-
chrotron radiation.
Finally, if there is a constant non magnetic force F perpendicular to B, there
is a drift velocity:
cF × B
vDF = (4.71)
qB 2
Please note that again vDF is charge dependent.
Let us give some examples for drift motions:

• Gradient B drift: the field strength in planetary magnetospheres decreases

with increasing distance from the planet and the gradient in the field strength
induces a force which can be written as:

F = −µB ∇B (4.72)
110 CHAPTER 4. MHD AND THE SOLAR DYNAMO

and the drift velocity:

µB cB × ∇B
vB = (4.73)
qB 2
→ Particles move perpendicular to the lines of force and perpendicular to the
magnetic gradient. Protons and electrons drift in opposite direction. In the
Earth’s magnetic field, electrons drift in the eastward direction. This drift
motion causes a current system known as ring current. The ring current
strengthens the field on its outside, helping expand the size of the magne-
tosphere but weakens the magnetic field in its interior. The ring current
plasma population is enhanced in a magnetic storm. A southward oriented
IMF (Bz negative) leads to reconnection at the side of the magnetosphere to
the sun and the magnetopause is pushed closer to the Earth. Also injection
of particles from the tail occurs. This enhances the number of particles. For
a typical 100 keV electron or proton it takes about 5-6 hours to complete
one orbit drift.
• field line curvature drift: particles move along curved field lines. The guiding
center follows the curved field line and the resulting centripetal force is equal
to:
mv2
Fc = n (4.74)
Rc
where n is a unit vector outwards. The drift motion is perpendicular to the
field line’s radius of curvature and the field line itself.
• gravitational field drift. Let us assume that F is the gravitational force
F = mg, then
vDF = mg × B/qB 2 (4.75)
Thus the drift velocity depends on the mass/charge ratio, the ion drift is
much larger than the electron drift; the particles drift in opposite directions,
a current is produced.
• electric field drift: here the force is

F = qE (4.76)

And the drift velocity

cE × B
vE = (4.77)
B2
Thus, charged particles move in a direction perpendicular to a) E and b) B.
Protons and electrons move in the same direction.

We stress here, that the ∇B and E × B drift and curvature forces dominate
the drift motions of particles in a magnetosphere.
Let us consider a large assembly of particles; these particles interact which
is called collision. If τc is the characteristic time between collisions the collision
frequency is νc = 1/τc . If νc is large, the particle motions will be disordered
and decoupled from the magnetic field, the fluid will not be tied to the field. If
4.1. SOLAR MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS 111

collisions are relatively rare, not only individual particles but the whole fluid will
be tied to the field. The collisions provide the electrical resistivity of matter; in a
fully ionized gas a good approximation to the value of the electrical conductivity
is:
σ = ne e2 τc /me (4.78)
and τc ∼ T 3/2 .

4.1.10 MHD Waves

The equation that describes the connections between the force exerted by the
magnetic field and the fluid motions is
dv
= −gradP + j × B + ρgradφ
ρ (4.79)
dt
The forces on the gas are the gas pressure P , the gravitational potential φ and
the magnetic force j × B. For a full description of the system we write down two
additional equations:
a) equation of continuity (conservation of mass)4
dρ
+ ρdivv = 0 (4.80)
dt
b) The relation between P and ρ e.g. in the adiabatic form
1 dP γ dρ
= (4.81)
P dt ρ dt
Consider the simplest case: a medium with uniform density ρ0 , pressure P0 ,
containing a uniform magnetic field B0 . We ignore the influence of the gravita-
tional field and assume that σ is so large that E + v × B = 0. Now let us assume
a perturbation for any variable in the form of:
f1 ∼ expi(k.r − ωt) = expi(kx x + ky y + kz z − ωt) (4.82)
k is the wave vector, ω the wave frequency. The dispersion relation between ω
and k when in the absence of a magnetic field is:
ω 2 = k 2 c2s (4.83)
Therefore, in that case only one type of waves can propagate – sound waves. The
wave propagates through the fluid at the wave speed cs = ω/k, k = |k|, which is
called the phase velocity of the wave.
If there is a magnetic field, the force j × B couples to the equation and also the
Maxwell equations must be taken into account. It is very important to note that
the magnetic field introduces a preferred direction into the system. In a uniform
medium, sound waves travel equally strongly in all directions from its source, this
is not true for MHD waves. If we write the magnetic field again in the form
B0 = B0 b, then we find three types of MHD waves:
4 Note that d/dt is the rate of change with time following a fluid element moving with velocity
d ∂
v: dt
= ∂t
+ [Link]
112 CHAPTER 4. MHD AND THE SOLAR DYNAMO

• Alfvén waves : the dispersion relation is given by

ω 2 = (k.b)2 c2H (4.84)

• fast and slow magnetosonic waves; their dispersion relation is given by:

ω 4 − ω 2 k 2 (c2s + c2H ) + k 2 (k.b)2 c2s c2H = 0 (4.85)

Let us consider two special cases: if the waves propagate along the field k.b = k,
there are two waves with ω 2 = k 2 c2H and the sound wave ω 2 = k 2 c2s unaffected by
the field. For wave propagation perpendicular to the field only one wave survives
with ω 2 = k 2 (c2s + c2H ). When waves propagate anisotropically, it is necessary
to introduce another wave velocity in addition to the phase velocity, the group
velocity, given by ∂ω/∂k with which the wave carries energy or information. The
group velocity for Alfvén waves is always cH b. What does that mean? Regardless
of the direction in which it propagates, energy always travels along the field lines
with speed cH .

4.1.11 Magnetic Fields and Convection

Let L be the length of a box, v a typical velocity. The magnetic diffusivity is
1/µ0 σ, the eddy turnover time L/v. The resistive decay time is then µ0 σL2 and the
resistive decay time/eddy turnover time is denoted as magnetic Reynolds number
for the flow.
Rm = Lvµ0 σ (4.86)
If the magnetic Reynolds number Rm is very low, the field is unaffected by the
motions, if it is high, it is wound up many times before dissipation occurs. For
an intermediate value of Rm the magnetic field is carried from the center of the
eddy becoming concentrated in flux ropes at the edge. This buoyant flux ropes
rise towards the surface and this leads to the appearance of sunspots. However
we must also take into account that convection involves different length scales.
Large eddies affect the overall structure of the magnetic field as it has been just
described. Others may be influenced e.g. granulation. Granulation is suppressed
in a sunspot. As it was shown earlier, in the absence of magnetic field convection
occurs in a gas, if the ratio of the temperature gradient to the pressure gradient
satisfies the relation:
P dT γ−1
> (4.87)
T dP γ
If a vertical magnetic field of strength B threads the fluid, then this has to be
modified to:
P dT γ−1 B2
> + 2 (4.88)
T dP γ B + γP
Thus a strong magnetic field can prevent convection and a weaker field can interfere
with convection. Note also that the magnetic field cannot prevent motions which
are oscillatory up and down the field lines but these are likely to be less efficient
at carrying energy.
4.2. THE SOLAR DYNAMO 113

4.2 The Solar Dynamo

So far we have discussed the different aspects of solar activity. In the section on
MHD it was shown that due to dissipation, such recurrent phenomena on the solar
surface and atmosphere cannot be explained by just assuming a fossil magnetic
field of the Sun. Therefore, many attempts had been made in order to explain the
recurrent solar activity phenomena such as sunspots, their migration toward the
equator in the course of an activity cycle etc. In the first section of this paragraph
we will give a general description of the basic dynamo mechanism, in the following
chapter some formulas are given.

4.2.1 The Solar Dynamo and Observational Features

Let us briefly recall what are the observational facts that a successful model for
the solar dynamo must explain:

• 11 year period of the sunspot cycle; not only the number of sunspots varies
over that period but also other phenomena such as the occurrence of flares,
prominences,.... etc.

• the equator-ward drift of active latitudes which is known as Spörers law and
can be best seen in the butterfly diagram. At the beginning of a cycle active
regions appear at high latitudes and toward the end they occur near the
equator.

• Hale’s law: as we have mentioned the leader and the follower spot have
opposite polarities. This reverses after 11 years for each hemisphere so that
the magnetic cycle is in fact 22 years.

• Sunspot groups have a tilt towards the equator (this is sometimes also called
Joy’s law).

• Reversal of the polar magnetic fields near the time of the cycle maximum.

As we know from fundamental physics, magnetic fields are produced by electric

currents. How are these currents generated in the Sun? The solar plasma is ionized
and it is not at rest. There are flows on the solar surface as well as in the solar
interior producing magnetic fields which contribute to the solar dynamo.

4.2.2 The α − ω Dynamo

The ω Effect
Let us consider magnetic fields inside the Sun. There the conditions require that
the field lines are driven by the motion of the plasma. Therefore, magnetic fields
within the Sun are stretched out and wound around the Sun by differential rotation
(the Sun rotates faster at the equator than near the poles). Let us consider a north-
south orientated magnetic field line. Such a field line will be wrapped once around
the Sun in about 8 months because of the Sun’s differential rotation (Fig. 4.4).
114 CHAPTER 4. MHD AND THE SOLAR DYNAMO

Figure 4.4: Illustration of the ω effect. The field lines are wrapped around because of
the differential rotation of the Sun

The α Effect
However, the field lines are not only wrapped around the Sun but also twisted by
the Sun’s rotation. This effect is caused by the coriolis force. Because the field
lines become twisted loops, this effect was called α effect. Early models of the
dynamo assumed that the twisting is produced by the effects of the Sun’s rotation
on very large convective flows that transport heat to the Sun’s surface. The main
problem of that assumption was, that the expected twisting is too much and would
produce magnetic cycles of only a couple of years. More recent dynamo models
assume that the twisting is due to the effect of the Sun’s rotation on rising flux
tubes. These flux tubes are produced deep within the Sun.

The Interface between Radiation Zone and Convection Zone

If dynamo activity occurs throughout the entire convection zone the magnetic fields
within that zone would rapidly rise to the surface and would not have enough time
to experience either the alpha or the omega effect. This can be explained as follows:
a magnetic field exerts a pressure on its surroundings (∼ B 2 , proportional to its
strength). Therefore, regions of magnetic fields will push aside the surrounding
gas. This produces a bubble that rises continuously to the surface. However such
a buoyancy is not produced in the radiation zone below the convection zone. Here,
the magnetic bubble would rise only a short distance before it would find itself
as dense as its surroundings. Consequently, it is assumed that magnetic fields are
produced at this interface layer between the radiation zone and the convection
zone.
Helioseismology has established the existence of a layer of strong gradients
of angular velocity at the base of the solar convection zone. This layer, having a
thickness of about 0.019 R , the tachocline, separates the convection zone exhibit-
ing a strong latitudinal differential rotation from the radiative interior that rotates
almost rigidly. Turbulence generated in the tachocline is likely to mix material in
4.2. THE SOLAR DYNAMO 115

Figure 4.5: The MHD relation between flows and magnetic fields

the upper radiative zone resulting in the observed deficit of Li and Be. Gilman,
2005 [112] wrote a summary about the tachoclyne stressing its importance for in
situ generation of poloidal fields as well as creating magnetic patterns that are
seen on the surface.

The Meridional Flow

The solar meridional flow is a flow of material along meridional lines from the
equator toward the poles at the surface and from the poles to the equator deep
inside. At the surface this flow is in the order of 20 m/s, but the return flow
toward the equator deep inside the Sun must be much slower since the density is
much higher there- maybe between 1 and 2 m/s. This slow plasma flow carries
material from the polar region to the equator in about 20 years.
Thus the energy that drives the solar dynamo comes from a) rotational ki-
netic energy, b) another part in the form of small-scale, turbulent fluid motions,
pervading the outer 30% in radius of the solar interior (the convection zone).

4.2.3 Mathematical Description

Let us discuss some basic mathematics. In the magnetohydrodynamic limit the
dynamo process is described by the induction equation:

∂B
= ∇ × (u × B) − ∇ × (ηe ∇ × B) (4.89)
∂t
116 CHAPTER 4. MHD AND THE SOLAR DYNAMO

The flow u is a turbulent flow. In the mean-field electrodynamics one makes the
following assumptions: magnetic and flow fields are expressed in terms of a large-
scale mean component and a small scale fluctuating (turbulent) component. If we
average over a suitably chosen scale we obtain an equation that governs the evolu-
tion of the mean field. This is identical to the original induction equation but there
appears a mean electromotive force term associated with the (averaged) correla-
tion between the fluctuation velocity and magnetic field components. The basic
principles of mean field electrodynamics were given by Krause and Rädler(1980)
[174]. The velocity and the field are expressed as:

u =< u > +u
B =< B > +B
(4.90)

< u >, < B > represent slowly varying mean components and u
, B
non axisym-
metric fluctuating components. The turbulent motion u
is assumed to have a
correlation time τ and a correlation length λ which are small compared to the
scale time t0 and scale length l0 of the variations of < u > and < B >. In
other words, τ is a mean time after which the correlation between u
(t = τ ) and
u
(t = 0) is zero and λ is comparable to the mean eddy size. We assume that
< u
>, < B
>= 0.
This is substituted into the induction equation and subtracted from the com-
plete equation:

∂B

= ∇ × (< u > ×B
+ u
× < B > +G) − ∇ × (η∇ × B
) (4.91)
∂t
where
E =< u
× B
> G = u
× B
− < u
× B
> (4.92)
E is a mean electric field that arises from the interaction of the turbulent motion
and the magnetic field. This field must be determined by solving the equation for
B
and here several assumptions are made. First of all we stressed that < v
>= 0.
This may be a good assumption when considering a fully turbulent velocity field.
However in the Sun we are dealing with a sufficiently ordered convective field
where the Coriolis force plays an important role. The other approximation is a
first order smoothing: G ∼ 0. That is valid only if B
<< < B >. Then our
equation reduces to:

∂B

+ ∇ × (η∇ × B
) = ∇ × (u
× < B >) (4.93)
∂t
We want to determine E. Thus only B

the component of B
which is correlated
with u
must be considered. By definition τ, B(t + τ ) is not correlated with B(t)
for any t. B

(t) may be determined by integration of the above equation from
t − τ to t. Note also, that the order of the convective turn over time τ ∼ λ/v
and thus both u
and < B > may be regarded as independent of t. Thus the
integration yields:
∂ < Bj >
Ei = αij < Bij > +βijk (4.94)
∂xk
4.2. THE SOLAR DYNAMO 117

where αij , βijk depend on the local structure of the velocity field and on τ . If the
turbulent field is isotropic, then αij = αδij , βij = βijk , and
E = α < B > −β∇× < B > (4.95)
If τ is small compared to the decay time λ2 /η, the diffusive term may be neglected
and from 4.93 we get
1 1 2
α = − τ < u
.∇ × u
>, β= τv (4.96)
3 3
And finally:
∂B
= ∇ × (αB + u × B) − ∇ × [(η + β)∇ × B] (4.97)
∂t
Compared to the normal induction equation, this contains the term αB and the
eddy-diffusivity coefficient β. In the mean field dynamo, the magnetic diffusivity
η is replaced by a total diffusivity η‘ = η + β and the equation becomes:
∂B
= ∇ × (αB + u × B) + η‘∇2 B (4.98)
∂t
Please note that most often the prime is dropped on η; however, in the presence of α
it is implied to use the turbulent diffusivity. It is assumed that B is axisymmetric.
Then it can be represented by its poloidal and toroidal components A(x, z, t) and
B(x, z, t) and u = u(x, z, t)j. Neglecting the advection terms:
 
∂
− η∇2 B = [∇u × ∇A].j − α∇2 A (4.99)
∂t
 
∂
− η∇2 A = αB (4.100)
∂t
Note that the dynamo action is possible because we have a regeneration of both
toroidal and poloidal fields. Let us consider the source term in the first of the two
above equations. ∇u describes a non uniform rotation. It can be argued that this
term is larger than the next term involving α. This set of equations then describes
the so called α − ω-dynamo. The equations describe:
• ω effect: the poloidal field is sheared by non uniform rotation to generate
the toroidal field.
• α effect: this is the essential feedback. The helicity vc .∇ × vc of the non
axisymmetric cyclonic convection generates an azimuthal electromotive force
E which is proportional to the helicity and to Bφ .
Let us define a characteristic length scale l0 , a decay time t0 = l02 /η and u =
s0 ω, where s0 is of the order of the local radius of rotation and ω the local angular
velocity. We may rewrite the above equations in terms of the non dimensional
variables t
= t/t0 and r
= r/l0 . By an elimination of B and neglecting the α2
terms we arrive at
 2
∂
2 αl2 s0


− ∇ A = 02 [∇‘ω × ∇‘A].j (4.101)
∂t η
118 CHAPTER 4. MHD AND THE SOLAR DYNAMO

If α0 and ω0 are scale factors giving the orders of magnitudes of α and |∇‘ω| then
 2  
∂ α ∇
ω
− ∇
2 A=D × ∇
A .j (4.102)
∂t
α0 ω0

In that equation the non dimensional dynamo number D is

αω0 l02 s0
D= (4.103)
2η 2

It is extremely important to note that the onset of a dynamo action depends on

D. If D for a given system exceeds some critical value than there will be dynamo
action. Examining our set of equations we may also note that dynamo action
is possible when ∇u is negligible compared to α. Such dynamos are called α2
dynamos. If both terms of the source term are comparable then we speak of an
α2 ω dynamo.
Solar like stars have well developed and structured convection zones. Thus,
the α − ω dynamo is the most likely dynamo mode.
Reviews on the solar dynamo and the emergence of magnetic flux at the surface
can be found in Ossendrijver, 2003 [239], Fisher et al. (2000) [97] and Moreno-
Insertis (1994) [226].
So far we have discussed large dynamos which are invoked to explain the origin
of the solar cycle and of the large scale component of the solar magnetic field.
We should add here that the origin of small scale magnetic fields can also be
understood in terms of dynamo processes. Recent advances in the theory of dy-
namo operating in fluids with high electrical conductivity – fast dynamos, indicate
that most sufficiently complicated chaotic flows should act as dynamos (Cattaneo,
1999 [57]). The existence of a large scale dynamo is related to the breaking of
symmetries in the underlying field of turbulence (Cattaneo, 1997 [56]).
Steiner and Ferriz-Mas, 2005 [300], showed how solar radiance variability might
be connected to a deeply seated flux-tube dynamo.

Observations form SOHO

Near the base of the convection zone the analysis of solar oscillations (data from
the SOHO/MDI) has shown that there exist variations in the rotation rate of the
Sun. A successive acceleration and deceleration with a strange period of 1.3 years
was found near the equator and 1.0 years at high latitudes. The largest temporal
changes were found both above and below the ‘tachocline’, a layer of intense rota-
tional shear at the interface between the convection zone and the radiation zone
(see Spiegel and Zahn, 1992 [297]). The variations near the equator are strikingly
out of phase above and below the tachocline, and involve changes in rotation rate
of about 6 nHz, which is a substantial fraction of the 30 nHz difference in angular
velocity with radius across the tachocline. The solar magnetic dynamo is thought
to operate within the tachocline, with the differential rotation there having a cru-
cial role in generating the strong magnetic fields involved in the cycles of solar
activity. This is illustrated in Fig. 4.6.
4.2. THE SOLAR DYNAMO 119

Figure 4.6: a) Cutaway images of solar rotation showing a peak and a trough of the
0.72R variation, with black indicating slow rotation, grey intermediate, and white fast.
b) Variations with time of the difference of the rotation rate from the temporal mean at
two radii deep within the Sun, with the site at 0.72 R located above the tachocline and
that at 0.63 R below it, both sampling speeding up and slowing down in the equatorial
region. Results obtained from GONG data for two different inversions are shown with
black symbols, those from MDI with red symbols. (Image courtesy NSF’s National Solar
Observatory)

4.2.4 Solar Activity Prediction

Generally, prediction of solar activity is related to the problem of prediction of a
given time series since solar activity parameters such as sunspot numbers are given
as a function of time. Therefore, the problem can be examined on the basis of
recent nonlinear dynamics theories. The solar cycle is very difficult to predict due
to the intrinsic complexity of the related time behavior and to the lack of a success-
ful quantitative theoretical model of the Sun’s magnetic cycle. Sello (2001) [278]
checked the reliability and accuracy of a forecasting model based on concepts of
nonlinear dynamical systems applied to experimental time series, such as embed-
ding phase space, Lyapunov spectrum, chaotic behavior. The model is based on a
local hypothesis of the behavior on embedding space, utilizing an optimal number
of neighbor vectors to predict the future evolution. The main task is to set up
and to compare a promising numerical nonlinear prediction technique, essentially
based on an inverse problem, with the most accurate prediction methods, like the
so-called “precursor methods” which appear now reasonably accurate in predicting
“long-term” Sun activity, with particular reference to “solar” and “geomagnetic”
precursor methods based on a solar dynamo theory.
Snodgrass (2001) [289] studied azimuthal wind bands known as the torsional
oscillations . These have been revealed primarily by studying the longitudinally
averaged solar rotation over a period spanning several full solar rotations. This
averaging yields what look like broad but slow, oppositely-moving ( ∼5 m/s ) bands
lying to either side of the centroid of the sunspot butterfly, making the activity
band appear to be a zone of weakly enhanced shear. The torsional pattern tells
us something about the cycle, and since it precedes the onset of activity, it might
be useful as a predictor of the level of activity to come. For cycle 23, the torsional
pattern did not emerge until just before solar minimum, whereas for cycles 21 and
22 it appeared several years earlier. This would have suggested by 1996 the cycle
23 would be weaker than the previous two.
120 CHAPTER 4. MHD AND THE SOLAR DYNAMO

Calvo et al. (1995) [53] used the neural network technique to analyze the time
series of solar activity (given by the Wolf number).
Hernandez (1993) [132] also used neural nets to construct nonlinear models to
forecast the AL index (auroral electrojet index) given solar wind and interplanetary
magnetic field (IMF) data.
Gleisner and Lundstedt (2001) [113] used a neural network-based model for
prediction of local geomagnetic disturbances. Boberg et al. (2000) [38] made real
time Kp predictions from solar wind data using neural networks.

4.3 Stellar Activity

4.3.1 Detection and Observation of Stellar Activity
The Sun is the only star that permits a two-dimensional study of its activity5 .
However, it is only a single set of stellar parameters, since its mass, composition
and evolutionary status are fixed6 . Stars are one-dimensional objects when ob-
served from the Earth but they cover a wide range of physical parameters. Thus
the solar-stellar connection is essential for a better understanding of solar phe-
nomena as well as for stellar phenomena. In the 40s e.g. the solar chromosphere
was thought to be unique.
Spectral line indicators for stellar activity are:
• EUV lines,
• Hα, He λ1083.0 nm,
• H and K lines of Ca II,
• Mg II.
The first detection of stellar activity phenomena was made by the observation
of magnetic fields. Field strengths in the range of 1-2 kGauss can only be measured
by a comparison of magnetically sensitive lines with magnetically insensitive lines.
It was surprising that these stars seem to be covered by such strong fields about
20-80% of the total surface (the Sun is only covered ≤1%). The problem is, that by
these methods coverages lower than 20% cannot be detected. That means that the
Sun’s magnetic field would not have been detected if it were at the distance of these
stars. More than 100 years ago Pickering suggested that luminosity fluctuations
in stars of the order of 20% over periods of days or a few weeks might indicate
that they are spotted. In the 1970 extensive investigations were performed to
explain luminosity variations of e.g. the RSCVn stars or BY Draconis stars (having
luminosities < 1/2 L ). The observed lightcurves required circular spots. The
RSCVn stars occur in binary stars were tidal interactions play an important role,
5 A good textbook is C. Schrijver, Solar and Stellar Magnetic Activity Cambridge Astro-

physics, 2000
6 See also the new edition of Solar and Stellar Activity Cycles, P. R. Wilson, A. King, Cam-

bridge 2004
4.3. STELLAR ACTIVITY 121

therefore their starspots are quite different from the sunspots. BY Dra stars are
rapidly rotating young low massive stars characterized by intense chromospheric
emission. Large spots on the Sun cause a variation of the integrated flux < 1%,
whereas up to 30 % for RSCVn and BY Dra stars.
The size and extent of chromospheric active regions varies dramatically over
the course of the activity cycle. Thus by measuring the H and K lines of other
stars we can infer on stellar activity cycles.
How can we measure stellar parameters like differential rotation that play a
key role in the onset of stellar dynamos? Let us assume we have a rapidly ro-
tating spotted cool star and that it is observed one week apart. By comparing
brightness/magnetic images of that star over such time intervals one can measure
the rotation rates of starspots at different latitudes over several rotation cycles
(Barnes et al. 2001) [26].
Also flares were detected on stars. Here it is extremely important to have
observations in the EUV/X ray window. Generally pre main sequence stars show
high levels of magnetic activity and strong flares. FU Orionis stars may be in a
phase between T Tauri and post T Tauri stars. More details about that topic can
be found in the review of Haisch et al. (1991) [124]. So far we have considered
only stars which have an activity level by orders of magnitude larger than the Sun.

4.3.2 Stellar Activity Cycles

One of the programs that is being carried out since a long time is the HK project
where the H and K activity of a large sample of stars is recorded. Almost 100 stars
have been observed continuously since 1966; at present the project is monitoring
long-term changes in chromospheric activity for approximately 400 dwarf and giant
stars. In order to compare the data with the Sun, observations of reflected sunlight
from the Moon are done at Mt. Wilson and at Sac Peak and Kitt Peak National
Observatory. The sampling of the stars occurs rapidly: usually less than 10 min
per star. The accuracy of the instrument is between 1% and 2%. When plotting
the HK index against the B − V color index (which is a measure for temperature
as explained in chapter 1) then a clear trend can be seen. The HK index increases
as the stellar temperature decreases. At this point one must be careful with the
interpretation. It is not meant an absolute increase but a relative increase because
in cooler stars also the continuum decreases.
In 1972 Skumanich [288] stated the t−1/2 law for the time of stellar rotation
and stellar chromospheric decay; the rotational velocity and the strength of the
CaII emission of a late type star vary inversely with the square root of the star’s
age - Skumanich law. However later it was found that except massive T Tauri
stars the majority of low mass stars rotates slowly.
It was also found that there exists a granulation boundary in the HRD at F5
III. Stars of later spectral type begin to develop a convective envelope that grows
for the rest of their evolution. At the boundary these envelopes are extremely thin
(only 3% of the star’s radius). Stars on the right hand side in the HRD of the
granulation border have smaller rotation rates.
122 CHAPTER 4. MHD AND THE SOLAR DYNAMO

In hydrodynamics, by definition, the Rossby Number is a ratio of inertial forces

to the Coriolis Force for a rotating fluid. In astrophysics it is the ratio of the
rotation period to the turnover time of the largest convective eddy. In stars with
low Rossby numbers the rotation rate dominates the convective turnover time.
The low Rossby number correlates well with the strong MgII 1940 emission. A
low value of the Rossby number indicates a greater influence of the Coriolis forces.
That means that the α effect becomes more important.
Stars can only be observed as point sources since we have no spatial resolution.
Some stars show two simultaneous cycle periods. Other stars either have variable
activity, or long trends in activity - longer than our 30-year baseline, or appear
to be very inactive. For further details on that topics the book of Schrijver and
Zwaan (2000) [274] is recommended where you find further references.
Dravins et al. (1993a) [79] made a detailed comparison of the current Sun (G2
V) with the very old solar-type star Beta Hyi (G2 IV) in order to study the post
main-sequence evolution of stellar activity and of non thermal processes in solar-
type atmospheres. This star has an age of 9.5 +/- 0.8 Gyr. The relatively high
lithium abundance may be a signature of the early sub giant stage, when lithium
that once diffused to beneath the main-sequence convection zone is dredged up to
the surface as the convection zone deepens. Numerical simulations of the 3D pho-
tospheric hydrodynamics show typical granules to be significantly larger (a factor
of about 5) than solar ones. The emission of the Ca H and K profiles was found
to be weaker than that of the Sun. The observations suggest continuous changes
in the chromospheric structure, rather than the sudden emergence of growth of
active regions (Dravins et al., 1993b [80])
Since several extrasolar planets have been found one should rise the question
whether some of them might be suitable for life. Climatic constraints on planetary
habitability were investigated by Kasting (1997) [153]. They found such zones
around main sequence stars with spectral types in the early F to the mid K-range.
The large amount of UV radiation emitted by early type stars poses a problem
for evolving life in their vicinity. But there is also a problem with late-type stars;
they emit less radiation at wavelengths < 200 nm which is required to split O2
and initiate ozone formation. The authors show that Earth-like planets orbiting
F and K stars may well receive less harmful UV radiation at their surfaces than
does the Earth itself.
Chapter 5

The Earth’s Atmosphere

and Climate

In this chapter we give an overview of the Earth’s atmosphere1 and climate. We

describe the possible evolution of the atmosphere and the variation of climate in
the past (paleoclimatology). The influence of the Sun and its variation will be
described in the next chapter.

5.1 The Earth’s Atmosphere

5.1.1 Structure of the Atmosphere
The Earth’s atmosphere is essential to life. It insulates the inhabitants of Earth
from the extreme temperatures of space, filters out most radiation dangerous to
life etc. It also provides the pressure that is necessary for liquid water at moderate
temperatures on the surface. Considering the average temperature profile for the
Earth’s atmosphere, we can define the following regions:

• Troposphere: characterized by convective motions; warmer air is compara-

tively light and tends to rise, colder air is dense and tends to sink; the tem-
perature decreases down to 200 K at it’s upper boundary, the tropopause,
at a height of 17 km. Most of the clouds and weather systems are located in
the troposphere.

• Stratosphere: here the temperature slightly increases up to the stratopause

at a height of about 50 km. In this layer there are no vertical motions,
only horizontal motions occur. If a blub of air tends to rise it immediately
becomes colder and thus denser and the buoyancy stops such motions. The
temperature in this region increases gradually to −30 Celsius, due to the
absorption of ultraviolet radiation by the ozone layer. 99% of “air” can be
1A good recent textbook is The Atmosphere, Frederick K. Lutgens, Edward J. Tarbuck,
Dennis Tasa, Prentice Hall, 2003

123
124 CHAPTER 5. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE AND CLIMATE

Table 5.1: Composition of the Earth’s atmosphere

Gas Molecular weight fraction by volume [10−6 ]
N2 28.02 780900
O2 32.00 209500
Ar 39.94 9300
CO2 44.10 300
CO 28.01 0.1
CH4 16.05 1.52
N2 O 44.02 0.5
H2 O 18.02 104 ...103

found in the troposphere and stratosphere. The stratopause separates the

stratosphere from the next layer.
• Mesosphere: the temperature decreases to -930 Celsius up to the mesopause
(height 80 km). The mesopause is the coldest region in the atmosphere.
• Thermosphere (also called ionosphere): the temperature rises up to 1 000 K
at a height of 250 km. In this region, thermal conduction becomes important.
The extension is up to 600 km. The structure of the ionosphere is strongly
influenced by the charged particle wind from the Sun (solar wind), which
is in turn governed by the level of solar activity. A measurement of the
structure of free electron density is an indicator for the degree of ionization.
Tropopause and troposphere are known as the lower atmosphere, stratosphere,
stratopause, mesosphere and mesopause are called middle atmosphere and the
thermosphere is called the upper atmosphere.
Incoming solar radiation with wavelength larger than 300 nm (in the visible
part of the spectrum) penetrates down to the bottom. Radiation with 200 nm <
λ < 300 nm is absorbed in the stratosphere (ozone layer) and solar radiation below
100 nm at higher layers.
Up to a height of about 100 km the composition is more or less constant. This is
because of the high frequency of collisions between the molecules. These collisions
become less efficient at heights above 100 km. The molecules experience a force of
gravity that is proportional to their mass. Heavy gases are bound more closely to
the Earth and lighter gases flout freely. Hence the lighter atomic oxygen is more
abundant at heights above 160 km than the heavier nitrogen N2 . The region below
100 km is called homosphere, the region above 100 km the heterosphere.
Sunlight is absorbed in the atmosphere and this process is mainly responsible
for its thermal structure. More than 50% of the energy incident from the Sun is
absorbed by the surface. 30% is reflected back into space (20% from the clouds,
6% by air and 4% by the surface itself). The atmosphere absorbs only 16% of the
incident solar energy. Most of this absorbed energy is captured by dust particles
in the troposphere. If we want to construct a model of the atmosphere we have
to take into account that it is exposed to two different radiation fields: a) from
5.1. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE 125

Table 5.2: Energy received from the Sun at 1 AU

Wavelength range Energy [ergcm−2 s−1 at 1 AU]
Solar constant 1.4×106
Solar wind 1
magnetic field 10−2
4µm to ∞ 700
300 nm to 4 µm 98% of total
120 nm to 300 nm 1.6×104
Lyman α 3-6
30 to 120 nm 2
3 to 30 nm 1
1 to 3 nm 0.01
0.01 to 1 nm 10−3 ...10−5
0 to 0.01 nm 0..10−6

the Sun (covering all wavelengths from far UV to IR), and b) from IR radiation
reflected at the surface of the Earth.
In Table 5.2 we give the energy received from the Sun at a distance of 1 AU
in different wavelength regions. It is clearly seen, that 98% of the radiation from
the Sun is in visible to the near IR.
The overall heat budget of the atmosphere is as follows: the surface receives
17% of its heat directly from the Sun, 15% from solar radiation scattered by clouds
and 68 % from absorption of infrared radiation emitted by the atmosphere. What
happens to the energy that is absorbed by the surface? The greater part (79%) is
returned to the atmosphere in the form of radiation. The remainder part (21%) is
transmitted to the atmosphere by conduction and as by product by the exchange
of water H2 O. The surface cools when water evaporates and heat is transmitted
to the air as vapor which recondenses to form clouds. Such phase transitions of
H2 O play a major role in the energy budget of the lower atmosphere.

5.1.2 Composition
The composition of the Earth’s atmosphere is given in Table 5.1.
Of course there are gases that can vary considerably both in space and time like
nitric oxide, carbon monoxide and ozone. We can also consider the atmosphere as
an extension of the biosphere, especially for gases like O2 , CO2 , CH4 , H2 . Oxygen
is produced by photosynthesis:

hν + CO2 + H2 O −→ CH2 O + O2 (5.1)

In this formula CH2 O denotes any variety of organic compounds. Aerobic respi-
ration and decay occur in the reverse reaction:

CH2 O + O2 −→ CO2 + H2 O + energy (5.2)

126 CHAPTER 5. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE AND CLIMATE

Volcanic gases

Figure 5.1: Major elements of the climate system

In the absence of this reaction, carbon would accumulate in organic form and the
fuel for photosynthesis (atmospheric CO2 ) would be depleted. If the supply of O2
is limited such as in the sediments of organic rich swamps and in the stomachs of
ruminants, we get as a product methane CH4 .
In Table 5.3 the change of the greenhouse gas and other gas concentrations of
the Earth’s atmosphere is given.
In Table 5.3 the present tropospheric concentration estimates are calculated
as annual arithmetic averages; ppm = parts per million (106 ), ppb = parts per
billion (109 ), ppt = parts per trillion (1012 ).
The Global Warming Potential (GWP) is generally used to contrast different
greenhouse gases relative to CO2 . The GWP provides a simple measure of the rel-
ative radiative effects of the emissions of various greenhouse gases and is calculated
using the formula: n
ai ci dt
GW P =  n 0 (5.3)
a
0 CO2 CO2
c dt
where ai is the instantaneous radiative forcing due to a unit increase in the con-
centration of trace gas, i, ci is concentration of the trace gas, i, remaining at
time, t, after its release and n is the number of years over which the calculation
is performed. This formula is taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) (Houghton et al., 1990 [138]).
How was the concentration of greenhouse gases in the past? Ice cores, cylinders
of ice drilled out of glaciers and polar ice sheets, have played an important role
in to answer such questions. The drilling for The Greenland Ice Sheet Project
5.1. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE 127

Table 5.3: Current Greenhouse Gas Concentrations and Other Components

Gas Pre-industrial Present GWP Atm.
conc. tropospheric 100 yr lifetime
(1860) conc. time horizon (yr)
CO2 (ppm) 288 369.41 1 120
CH4 (ppb) 8482 18393 / 17264 23 12
N2 O (ppb) 2855 3153 / 3144 296 114
CCl3 F (ppt) zero 2633 / 2604 3800 50
CF2 Cl2 (ppt) zero 5443 / 5374 8100 102
C2 F3 Cl3 (ppt) zero 823 / 825 4800 85
surface ozone (ppb) 2517 2418/ 2919 20 hours

The measurements are from: 1 in situ air samples collected at Mauna Loa Observatory,
Hawaii (Bacastow et al.1985 [19]). 2 Etheridge, D. M.; Pearman, G. I.; Fraser, P. J. ,
Tellus, Series B - Chemical and Physical Meteorology, 44B, no. 4, 282. These authors
used an ice core from the antarctic called DE08. The extracted ice-core air is analyzed for
methane using gas chromatography with flame-ionization detection. The mean air-age
was 35 yr younger than the host ice. 3 Values from Macehead, Ireland. 4 Cape Grim,
Tasmania 4 data from Law Dome BHD ice core, Etheridge et al., 1988 [92]

Two began in 1989, more than 3000 m deep. In 1992 there were data available to
reconstruct the climate over the past 200 000 years.
The CO2 data are from an ice core analyzed by Neftel et al. (1985) [230]. An
example of their measurements is given in Table 5.4.
These measurements of the CO2 gas concentration enclosed in an ice core from
Siple Station, Antarctica, indicate that atmospheric CO2 concentration around
1750 was 280 ± 5 ppmv (parts per million per volume) and has increased since,
essentially because of human factors, by 22.5 percent to 360 ppmv around 2000.
The anthropogenic emission of CO2 is about 7 Gt/yr. The natural and anthro-
pogenic changes in atmospheric CO2 over the last 1000 years from air in Antarctic
ice and firn was described in Etheridge et al. (1996) [93].

5.1.3 Paleoclimatology
First of all let us give a definition of climate: Climate is the weather we expect
over the period of a month, a season, a decade, or a century. More technically,
climate is defined as the weather conditions resulting from the mean state of the
atmosphere-ocean-land system, often described in terms of “climate normals” or
average weather conditions. Climate Change is a departure from the expected
average weather or climate normals.
A better knowledge about the climate and its variations in the past will enable
us to better understand what forces climate and its variations in the future. Since
there exists only a 140 years instrumental record, we have to use proxies to re-
construct climate in the past. Some widely used proxy climate data are (see 5.2):
128 CHAPTER 5. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE AND CLIMATE

Table 5.4: Historical CO2 record from the Siple Station Ice Core
Depth [m] Samples Date of ice Date of Air CO2 conc. (ppmv)
measured enclosed in extracted air
187.0-187.3 10 1663 1734-1756 279
177.0-177.3 10 1683 1754-1776 279
162.0-162.3 9 1723 1794-1819 280
147.0-147.2 10 1743 1814-1836 284
128.0-129.0 47 1782 1842-1864 288
111.0-112.0 26 1812 1883-1905 297
102.0-103.0 26 1832 1903-1925 300
92.0-93.0 25 1850 1921-1943 306
82.0-83.0 28 1867 1938-1960 311
76.2-76.6 11 1876 1947-1969 312
72.4-72.7 11 1883 1954-1976 318

• Historical data: Historical documents contain a wealth of information about

past climates (diaries, records...).
• Corals: Corals build their hard skeletons from calcium carbonate, a mineral
extracted from sea water. The carbonate contains oxygen and the isotopes
of oxygen, as well as trace metals, that can be used to determine the tem-
perature of the water in which the coral grew. These temperature recordings
can then be used to reconstruct climate during that period of time when the
coral lived. Increased sea surface temperature has negative effects on the
health of coral. The most visible symptom of declining coral health is coral
bleaching.
• Fossil pollen: Each species and genus of plants produces pollen grains which
have a distinct shape. These shapes can be used to identify the type of plant
from which they came. Pollen grains are well preserved in the sediment
layers that form in the bottom of a pond, lake or ocean; an analysis of the
pollen grains in each layer tells us what kinds of plants were growing at the
time the sediment was deposited. Inferences can then be made about the
climate based on the types of plants found in each layer.
• Tree rings: Since tree growth is influenced by climatic conditions, patterns
in tree-ring widths, density, and isotopic composition reflect variations in
climate. In temperate regions where there is a distinct growing season, trees
generally produce one ring a year, and thus record the climatic conditions of
each year. Trees can grow to be hundreds to thousands of years old and can
contain annually-resolved records of climate for centuries to millennia.
• Ice cores: Located high in mountains and deep in polar ice caps, ice has
accumulated from snowfall over many centuries. These cores contain dust, air
5.1. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE 129

Paleoclimate reconstruction

Ocean sediments,
cave deposits

Ice cores from polar

regions

Lake levels,
mountain glaciers

Varved sediments,
lake sediments

Written records, tree

rings

100 1000 10000 100000 1000000

Years before present, BP

Figure 5.2: Timelines for various paleoclimate reconstruction methods.

bubbles, or isotopes of oxygen, that can be used to interpret the past climate
of that area2 . Let us briefly discuss one example of isotope measurements: Of
the temperature dependent markers the most important is the ratio of 18 O
to 16 O. This can be explained by the fact that water molecules composed of
H18
2 O evaporate less rapidly and condense more readily than water molecules
composed of H16 2 O. Thus, in the ice cores one obtains annual layers starting
with 18 O rich, becoming 18 O poor, and ending up 18 O rich.
• Volcanic eruption: After the eruption of volcanoes, the volcanic ash and
chemicals are washed out of the atmosphere by precipitation and these erup-
tions leave a distinct marker within the snow which washed the atmosphere.
We can then use recorded volcanic eruptions to calibrate the age of the ice-
core (here the deuterium to hydrogen ratio is an important proxy).
Ice cores from Vostok, Antarctica, were the first to cover a full glacial-
interglacial cycle.
• Ocean and lake sediments: Between 6 and 11 billion tons of sediment (tiny
fossils and chemicals) accumulate in the ocean and lake basins each year.
How can we infer e.g. from ice cores past climate? The accumulation which is
governed by saturation water pressure was lower during colder periods and vice
versa. Accumulation rates inferred in this way are supported by measurements of
the cosmogenic isotope Beryllium 10 (10 Be), an isotope produced by the interaction
2 see also the textbook of R.B. Alley, The Two-Mile Time Machine, Princeton Univ. Press,

2002
130 CHAPTER 5. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE AND CLIMATE

of cosmic rays and the upper atmosphere, can be used to determine past snow
accumulation in Vostok ice. Deposition of 10 Be is assumed to be constant. The
other two elements which are important are 18 O and deuterium. In Antarctica,
a cooling of 10 C results in a decrease of 9 per mil deuterium. The last ice age
is characterized by three minima separated by slightly warmer episodes called
interstadials.
Air initially enclosed in Vostok ice provides our only record of variations in the
atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and CH4 over a complete glacial-interglacial
cycle. For both greenhouse gases, concentrations were higher during interglacial
periods than during full glacial periods.
Crowley (2000) [70] discussed the causes of climate change over the past 1000
years. His main conclusion is that as 41-64% of pre-anthropogenic (pre-1850)
decadal-scale temperature variations were due to changes in solar irradiance and
volcanism.
Several periods of warmth (listed below) have been hypothesized to have oc-
curred in the past. However, upon close examination of these warm periods, it
becomes apparent that these periods of warmth are not similar to 20th century
warming for two specific reasons: a) the periods of hypothesized past warming do
not appear to be global in extent, or b) the periods of warmth can be explained by
known natural climatic forcing conditions that are uniquely different than those
of the last 100 years.
Examples of periods of warmth:
• Medieval: ∼ 9th to 14th centuries; this seems to be in doubt now because
the temperature anomaly at that time was very small; however the Little Ice
Age for the northern hemisphere from 15th to 19th centuries is clearly seen
(Fig. 5.3).
• mid-Holocene warm Period (approx. 6 000 years ago); this seems to be in
connection with changes of the Earth’s orbit (Theory of Milankovich).
• Penultimate interglacial period (approx. 125 000 years ago). It appears
that temperatures (at least summer temperatures) were slightly warmer than
today (by about 1 to 20 C), caused again by the changes in the Earth’s orbit
(Hughes and Diaz, 1994 [142]).
• Mid-Cretaceous Period (approx. 120-90 million years ago): Breadfruit trees
apparently grew as far north as Greenland (55◦ N), and in the oceans, warm
water corals grew farther away from the equator in both hemispheres. The
mid-Cretaceous was characterized by geography and an ocean circulation
that was vastly different from today, as well as higher carbon dioxide levels
(at least 2 to 4 times higher than today).

5.1.4 Theory of Milankovich

Seasons on Earth are caused by the tilt of the Earth’s rotation axis relative to
its plane of revolution around the Sun3 . In summer, one hemisphere is pointing
3 which is called the ecliptic
5.1. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE 131

Figure 5.3: Temperature anomaly clearly showing the Little Ice Age. The Maunder
minimum is marked. (redrawn from Lamb, 1977 [185])

toward the Sun, at the same time the opposite hemisphere is in winter. If the
Earth’s axis were not inclined every point on the earth would receive the same
amount of sunlight each day of the year. Changes in this tilt can change the
severity of the seasons. More tilt means more severe seasons, i.e. warmer summers
and colder winters. The tilt of the Earth’s axis changes between 22 and 25 degrees
on a cycle of about 41 000 years. If the summers are cool snow and ice last
from year to year in high latitudes building up massive ice sheets. Now positive
feedbacks in the climate system start to work. Snow reflects more of the sun’s
energy into space causing additional cooling. Also the amount of the greenhouse
gas CO2 in the atmosphere falls as ice sheets grow and thus adding to the cooling.
Another astronomical effect on climate is that the orbit of the earth is not
circular. Presently, perihelion (closest approach to the Sun) occurs in January, thus
on the northern hemisphere winters are slightly milder. The perihelion changes in
a cycle of 22 000 years. Therefore, 11 000 years ago perihelion occurred in July
making seasons more severe than today. The eccentricity of the earth’s orbit varies
on cycles of 100 000 and 400 000 years. It is the combined effect of the 41 000
year tilt cycle and the 22 000 year perihelion cycle plus the small effect from the
eccentricity that influences the climate. These variations of the Earth’s orbit were
first investigated by Milankovich.
To study the effect of these astronomical variations on climate one must take
into account, that orbital changes occur over thousands of years and the climate
system also takes thousand of years to respond. The primary driver of ice ages
seems to be the total summer radiation received in northern latitude zones near
650 north (65N) (this is where the major ice sheets formed in the past) and past ice
ages correlate with the 65N summer insolation. Astronomical calculations show
that the 65N summer insulation should increase gradually over the next 25 000
years. No decline of the 65N summer insolation that is sufficient to cause an ice
age is expected within the next 100 000 years.
132 CHAPTER 5. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE AND CLIMATE

Figure 5.4: Cretaceous climate and land/sea distribution. During the Late Creta-
ceous the global climate was warmer than today’s climate. No ice existed at the
Poles. Dinosaurs migrated between the Warm Temperate and Cool Temperate Zones
as the seasons changed. The sea level was about 100 m higher than today. Courtesy:
http : //[Link]/timespace/

Warm interstadials have always been accompanied by an increase of the at-

mospheric concentration of the three principal greenhouse gases. This increase
has been, at least for CO2 , vital for the ending of glacial epochs. A highly simpli-
fied course of events for the past four transitions would then be as follows:

• changing orbital parameters initiated the end of the glacial epoch,

• an increase in greenhouse gases then amplified the weak orbital signal,

• in the second half of the transition, warming was further amplified by de-
creasing albedo, caused by melting of the large ice sheets in the Northern
Hemisphere going parallel with a change of the ocean circulation.
5.1. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE 133

Figure 5.5: Upper curve: average insolation of 65 degrees northern latitude (Watts per
one square meter of a horizontal atmosphere) in mid-July. As seen, it varies from some
390 to 490 W/m2 . Middle curve: Global temperature (Vostok ice core). Lower Curve:
Greenland, GRIP core. Image courtesy: Jan Hollan

The isotopic records of Greenland ice cores show evidence for fast and drastic
climatic changes during the last glacial epoch. Possible causes and mechanisms
of such changes and their significance as global climatic events are discussed by
Stauffer (2000) [299]. Ice core results also enable the reaction of the environment
to past global changes to be investigated. The deglaciation of the northern hemi-
sphere is described in Alley and Clark (1999 [5]). A carbon cycle model was used to
reconstruct the global mean surface temperature during the last 150 Million years
showing that during this period the tectonic forcing such as decrease in volcanic
activity and the formation and uplift of the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau
dominated the control of the climate (Tajika, 2001) [308].

5.1.5 Greenhouseffect
Trace constituents of the atmosphere such as H2 O, CO2 , O3 absorb energy at longer
wavelengths and thus trap heat radiated by the surface. The effect is very similar
to that of a glass pane in a greenhouse. The atmosphere is transparent to solar
radiation but it is opaque to longer wavelengths. The infrared absorbing gases
return heat to the ground and account for about 70% of the net input of energy to
134 CHAPTER 5. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE AND CLIMATE

Figure 5.6: Vostok Ice core. Different depth can be attributed to different age

the surface. If our atmosphere would contain no water vapor and carbondioxide,
the surface temperature would be about 40 K colder than today. This would imply
that large portions of the planet would be covered with ice.
Since the 1980s there is a growing concern that the increase in the abundance of
carbondioxide caused by combustion of fossil fuels could lead to a general warming
of the global climate (see Fig. 5.8). Similar greenhouse effects arise from the
gases methane, nitrous oxide and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). All these gases are
referred to as greenhouse gases due to their ability to trap heat.
The variation of greenhouse gases was described before.

5.1.6 Ozone
The ozone is measured in Dobson units. 1 Dobson Unit (DU) is defined to be
0.01 mm thickness at STP (standard temperature and pressure) as the physical
thickness would be if compressed in the Earth’s atmosphere. The ozone layer is
very thin a normal range is 300 to 500 Dobson units.
We can make the simplification that throughout the stratosphere all of the
radiative energy from the sun that is absorbed by O3 is converted locally to heat.
The heating rate depends on the distribution of Ozone with height and on the
incoming solar energy.
The absorption of shortwave solar radiation in altitudes above the troposphere
is responsible for the temperature increase in these layers. Ozone absorbs most of
the UV portion of sunlight (200 < λ < 300 nm). The absorption process results in
the dissociation of O3 .
5.1. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE 135

400

CO2 [ppmv]
300
200
100
0
0 50 100 150 200
Years BP

Methane

800
CH4 [ppbv]

600
400

200

0
0 50 100 150 200
Years BP

Temperature

0 50 100 150 200

Temperature
deviation

Years BP

Figure 5.7: Variation CO2 and CH4 in parallel with temperature from Vostok climate
records. Years BP are given in units of 1000. Credits: National Ice Core Laboratory.

The Chapman reactions describe the formation of ozone. First the following
reaction leads to a photodissociation of oxygen:
O2 + hν → O + O λ < 175 nm (5.4)
Then a recombination of oxygen occurs:
1. by direct two body reaction (reaction very rare!)
O + O → O2 + hν (5.5)

2. recombination by a three body process:

O + O + M → O2 + M (5.6)
136 CHAPTER 5. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE AND CLIMATE

World Carbon Dioxide Emission by Region

40000
Emission in Mill. tons

35000
30000
Industr. countries
25000
Eastern Europe, FSU
20000
Devel. countries
15000
Total
10000
5000
0
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
Year

Figure 5.8: World Carbon Dioxide Emissions. It is seen that the CO2 emission from the
Eastern European Countries and the former Soviet Union (FSU) declines, e.g. further
restructuring of the coal mining industries in Poland and the Czech Republic (US Dept.
of Energy)

O + O2 + M → O3 + M (5.7)

The destruction of ozone occurs by the reactions: a) photodissociation

O3 + hν → O2 + O λ < 310 nm (5.8)

and b) by the reaction:

O + O3 → O2 + O2 (5.9)
Ozone peaks in number density at altitudes about 30 km.
It is now well known that ozone can be easily destroyed by several reactions.
We just give a few examples:
Destruction of ozone by free hydrogen atoms

H + O3 → OH + O2 (5.10)

Free atomic H is produced from H2 O, CH4 .

Nitrogen oxides, chlorine and halomethanes act also as catalysts to destruct
ozone. The problem here is, that they react with ozone, destroying it but remain
unchanged. One example:

NO + O3 → NO2 + O2 (5.11)

Natural events such as volcanic eruptions can strongly influence the amount of
Ozone in the atmosphere. However, man-made chemicals such as CFCs or chlo-
rofluorocarbons are now known to have a very dramatic influence on Ozone levels
too. CFCs were once widely used in aerosol propellants, refrigerants, foams, and
5.1. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE 137

industrial processes. Changes in the ozone layer caused by release of CFC’s in the
atmosphere have the potential of producing biological damage through increased
UVB radiation4 . While cloud cover provides protection on the ground against solar
radiation in the visible and near UV wavelengths, biologically damaging radiation
near 300 nm is controlled primarily by the total ozone content.
So far we have discussed ozone in the stratosphere. In the Earth’s lower at-
mosphere, near ground level, ozone is formed when pollutants emitted by cars,
power plants, industrial boilers, refineries, chemical plants, and other sources re-
act chemically in the presence of sunlight. Ozone at ground level is a harmful
pollutant. Ozone pollution is a concern during the summer months, when the
weather conditions needed to form it, lots of sun, hot temperatures, normally oc-
cur. Tropospheric ozone is either produced by oxidation of hydrocarbons and CO
or by downward transportation of stratospheric ozone. Some examples of reactions
are given below.

CO + OH → CO2 + H
H + O2 + M → HO2 + M
HO2 + M → OH + NO2
hν + NO2 → NO + O
O + O2 + M → O3 + M
CO + 2O2 → CO2 + O3

5.1.7 The Structure of the Higher Atmosphere

Temperature Inversion in the Thermosphere
There is a wide range of textbooks covering that topic5 . Above 80 km there is an
inversion of the temperature that is caused by the absorption of solar radiation
below 200 nm. Let us briefly discuss the most important processes:

• 100 nm < λ < 200 nm: absorption of solar radiation leads to a dissociation
of O2 :
hν + O2 → O + O (5.12)

• shorter wavelengths: ionization of O, O2 , N2 :

hν + O → O+ + e
hν + O2 → O+
2 +e
hν + N2 → +
N2 + e

4 UV radiation is divided by wavelength into UVA (320-400nm), UVB (290-320nm) and UVC
(100-290nm).
5 Chemistry of the Upper and Lower Atmosphere, Barbara J. Finlayson-Pitts, James N. Pitts,

Academic Press, 1999

138 CHAPTER 5. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE AND CLIMATE

The electrons that are emitted by these reactions loose energy by collision,
elastic and inelastic. This can cause further ionization and contribute to the
production of excited states and the associated emission of airglow.
Electrons can be removed by dissociative recombination:

e + O+
2 → O+O
e + NO+ → N+O

There is of course a balance between dissociation of O2 and recombination.

• Reformation of molecular oxygen:

O + O2 → O3 + M
H + O3 → OH + O2
O + OH → O2 + H

The recombination of oxygen is catalyzed by the presence of hydrogen. Such

catalytic reactions play an important role in the chemistry of the atmosphere
below 80 km. The density in the thermosphere is low, therefore O diffuses
downward. The recombination requires higher densities and is confined to
regions below 100 km. The dissociation of O2 can occur at any level.

Hydrogen Loss

Any particle in the atmosphere is bound to the Earth by the force of gravity. If
we move such a particle a vertical distance ∆z then the work mg∆z is done. m
denotes the mass of the particle, g the gravitational acceleration =9.81 m/s2 . The
work that must be done to escape the gravitational field is mgR, where R is the
radius of the Earth ∼ 6 400 km. All atoms or molecules have a range of speeds that
is described by the Maxwell–Boltzmann distribution. The average kinetic energy
is given by:
3
Ekin = kT (5.13)
2
where k is the Boltzmann constant (1.38 × 10−16 erg K−1 ). Thus an atom can
escape the gravitational field if its thermal kinetic energy ∼ kT is much larger
than mgR. Of course we must also consider collisions (except at the highest level
in the atmosphere). At the high temperatures in the thermosphere (700...2 000 K),
significant numbers of hydrogen atoms have velocities above the escape velocity
vesc ∼ 11.2 km/s. Therefore, hydrogen is lost at a rate of 108 atoms per cm2 per
second. These escaping hydrogen atoms are derived mainly from the oceans and
over the past 4.5×109 years of the Earth’s history, the sea level has declined by two
meters globally. Of course during this reaction also O2 is set into the atmosphere
which was crucial for the evolution of life.
There is also a significant loss of helium.
5.2. EARTH’S HISTORY AND ORIGIN OF THE ATMOSPHERE 139

5.2 Earth’s History and Origin of the Atmosphere

In this section we discuss the main steps in the evolution of the Earth and life on
the Earth. Also the problem of the formation of the atmosphere will be shortly
addressed.

5.2.1 History of the Earth

The history of Earth is recorded in the igneous, sedimentary and metamorphic
rocks of the outer crust called the outer lithosphere as is sketched in Fig. 5.9.
The formation of mountain ranges like Andes, Alps, Himalayas, and Rocky Moun-
tains took place in the Cretaceous. During the Permian there was a widespread
glaciation, mountains rising and the atmospheric CO2 and O was reduced. In
the Cambrian atmospheric oxygen reaches the first critical level, in the Silurian
it reaches the second critical level. Stromatolithes are interpreted as calcareous
algaes, which lived in the Precambrian and Paleozoic and to some degree up to
the Triassic. They grew on beaches in layers, one upon the other, producing
cauliflower-like forms.
The bluegreen algaes, nowadays also called cyanobacteria6 were the “inventors”
of the photosynthesis, they cannot be discriminated as animals or plants. They
lived perhaps without rivalry on empty beaches, and the atmosphere contained
only 0.2 % oxygen contrary to 20 % nowadays. With their production of O2
they are the beginning of the rise of the oxygen-contents of the atmosphere. The
prokaryotic7 Cyanobacteria are both photosynthetic and aquatic living in water
and producing their own food (autotrophic). They are unicellular bacteria but
exist in great colonies and are the oldest known fossils (up 3.5×109 years old) but
still they constitute one of the largest and most important group of bacteria on
Earth. The oxygen atmosphere that we depend on was generated by numerous
cyanobacteria during the Archaean and Proterozoic Eras. Before that time, the
atmosphere had a very different chemistry. The other great contribution of the
cyanobacteria is the origin of plants. The chloroplast with which plants make food
for themselves is actually a cyanobacterium living within the plant’s cells.
The plants first appeared in the Ordovician, but did not begin to resemble
modern plants until the Late Silurian. By the close of the Devonian, about 360
million years ago, there was a wide variety of shapes and sizes of plants around,
including tiny creeping plants and tall forest trees.
The most striking, and important, feature of plants is their green color, the
result of a pigment called chlorophyll. Plants use chlorophyll to capture light en-
ergy, which fuels the manufacture of food–sugar, starch, and other carbohydrates.
Without these food sources, most life on earth would be impossible.
The paleozoic era was the times of supercontinents. In the Cambrian there was
a breakup of the global continent Rodinia, and at the end of the Paleozoic the
formation of Pangea started as the Earth’s continents came together once again.
6 theGreek cyanos means blue
7 Prokaryotesare single celled organisms that do not have a nucleus, mitochondria or any
other membrane bound organelles.
140 CHAPTER 5. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE AND CLIMATE

History of the Earth

Praecambrian 570 Mill. BP One celled organisms, prokaryotes
Paleozoic 570-240 Mill. BP
570-500 Cambrian Multicellular life
500-435 Ordovician Primitive life on land, vertebrates in ocean
435-410 Silurian First plants, insects on land
410-360 Devonian Spiders, mites, amphibians
360-290 Carboniferous First true reptiles, coals begin to form
290-240 Permian Mysterious mass extinction of life; 90 % of all
organisms die out; reptiles inherit Earth
Mesozoic 240-65 Mill. BP
240-205 Triassic Small dinosaurs, ichtyosaurs, first true
mammals
205-138 Jurassic Huge dinosaurs, flying pterosaurs, oldest
known birds
138-65 Cretaceous Global warming, spread of dinosaurs. At the
end sudden mass extinction (asteroid impact),
70 % of all organisms died
Cenozoic 65 Mill. BP - present
65-1.6 Tertiary
65-55 Paleocene Mammals inherit Earth
55-38 Eocene Ancestral forms of horses,
rhinoceros, camel and others like
bats, primates. Mammals adapt
to marine life.
38-24 Oligocene Elephants, cats, dogs, monkeys
24-5 Miocene Global climate cools;
establishment of the Antarctic
ice sheet; large apes in Africa
and southern Europe
5-1.6 Pliocene Climate becomes cooler and
drier. Mammals dominant life
form; ancestors of modern
humans.
1.6- Quaternaray
present
1.6 Mill-10000 Pleistocene Most recent global ice age;
y glacier ice spreads out over more
than 25 % of Earth’s land
surface; modern humans arise
10000 y- Holocene Global climate moderates; ice
present sheet retreat from Europe and
North America; rise of sea levels

Figure 5.9: The history of the Earth. BP means before present

5.2.2 Origin of the Atmosphere

Let us start with the remark that the origin of our earth’s atmosphere is still
subject to much speculation. However the most probable history of its evolution
was as follows8 .
Our Earth was formed some 4.5 billion years ago. At that time it was probably
too hot to retain any primordial atmosphere. This first atmosphere most probably
consisted of helium, hydrogen, ammonia and methane. At that time the Earth was
8 see also: The Chemical Evolution of the Atmosphere and Oceans (Princeton Series in Geo-

chemistry) by Heinrich D. Holland, Princeton Univ. Press, 1984 or Earth : Evolution of a

Habitable World by Jonathan I. Lunine, Cynthia J. Lunine, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1998
5.2. EARTH’S HISTORY AND ORIGIN OF THE ATMOSPHERE 141

a very active planet from the geologic point of view. Volcanism was widespread
and if we assume that volcanoes five billion years ago emitted the same gases as
they do today, the earth’s second atmosphere probably consisted of water vapor,
carbon dioxide, and nitrogen. These gases were expelled from the earth’s interior
by a process known as outgassing.
It is also possible that the impact of comets brought significant amounts of
water and other volatile gases to the Earth. The vast amounts of water vapor
expelled by the volcanic earth resulted in the formation of clouds which, in turn,
produced rain. Over a period of thousands of years, the rain accumulated as
rivers, lakes and ocean basins. This process was extremely important for the
carbon dioxide CO2 . The water reservoirs acted as sinks for that gas and through
chemical and later biological processes it became locked up in sedimentary rocks
as limestone .
On the other hand nitrogen, which is not very chemically active, continued to
accumulate in the atmosphere.
What about the most important gas oxygen we need to live? The first oxidized
rocks found in geological strata date back only 1.2 billion years. 600 million years
ago oxygen constituted only 1% of the atmosphere (currently 21%). Therefore,
Oxygen was only a trace gas in the air when life first appeared on the planet. That
was one of the reasons that life first evolved in the oceans. Single-celled bacterium
dwelling in the oceans did not need oxygen to live. Oxygen first appeared in the
environment when early bacteria developed the ability to split water molecules
apart using the energy of sunlight - a key part of photosynthesis. Photosynthesizing
organisms produced the oxygen that accumulated over geologic time.
These processes acting sequentially and simultaneously appear to have pro-
duced the delicate balance of 78% nitrogen (N2 ) and 21% oxygen (O2 ) we observe
today. By the way, oxygen is the third most abundant element in the universe and
makes up nearly half of the mass of the Earth’s crust, two thirds of the mass of
the human body and nine tenths of the mass of water.
The Earth cannot sustain more than ∼ 20% O2 in the atmosphere. Otherwise
spontaneous fires would occur that would deplete the oxygen.
The enrichment of oxygen in the atmosphere might be seen in context with
the methane content. Microbes who utilize photosynthesis existed on Earth half
a billion years or more before oxygen became prevalent, without substantially
affecting the composition of the atmosphere. The transition to an atmosphere
with noticeable oxygen content occurred about 2.4 billion years ago. According
to Catling et al. (2001) [55] after photosynthesis separated the oxygen from the
hydrogen, the authors argue, the two components followed separate paths. The
free oxygen remained in the Earth’s crust, while the hydrogen went on to combine
with carbon in a process known as “methanogenesis,” producing methane. When
methane travelled to the upper atmosphere, ultraviolet radiation from the Sun
dissolved it into its components. The light hydrogen drifted away into space and
was lost forever to the Earth’s atmosphere.
Because the hydrogen was lost while the oxygen stayed on Earth, an excess
of oxygen gradually accumulated. When the Earth’s crust was saturated, the
oxygen spilled out and flooded the ancient atmosphere, creating the oxygen rich
142 CHAPTER 5. THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE AND CLIMATE

environment we know today. This can also solve the faint young Sun problem (see
next chapter).
This problem was also recently discussed by Kasting, 2004 [154], where further
references can be found. He argues that the climate on Earth prior to 2.5 Gigayears
seems to have been even warmer than today, despite the fact, that the luminosity of
the Sun was 25-30% less luminous than today (see also next chapter on the faint
young Sun problem). Thus a warming of the atmosphere additional to present
day greenhouse gases was required and it is argued that this could have been
done by methanogens since Ammonia is unstable in low O2 atmospheres. CH4
photolyzes only at wavelengths shorter than 145 nm and it is relatively longlived
in the absence of O2 , O3 . It is produced by anaerobic bacteria that have evolved
early in the Earth’s history, the required flux was 500 Tg CH4 /yr. Now there is
a positive feedback: this flux should have increased once oxygenic photosynthesis
evolved because of increased production and recycling of organic matter. Even if
the CH4 flux would have been the same as at present and the CO2 at the same
level, this would have led to a warming of 30 degrees. However, siderite-coated
stream pebbles imply that also the CO2 concentration was 7 times the present
value. A rise in either atmospheric O2 or oceanic sulfate near the end of the
Proterozoic could have caused CH4 concentrations to decrease a second time and
may have triggered the “Snowball Earth” glaciations.
Omori et al., 2004 [238] discuss the role of plate tectonics and the amount of
carbon had carried into the mantle via the Archean subduction zone. They found
out that plate tectonics can be dated back as early as 3.8 Gigayears.
The role of the changing Sun and its evolution on the Earth’s atmosphere was
also discussed by Guinan and Ribas, 2002 [121].
The early evolution of the Earth and its atmosphere at the time when the
Earth was still growing by planetesimal impacts was studied by Abe and Matsui
(1986 [1]). They considered a magma ocean covering the Earth when the accretion
time was less than 5 × 107 y. Zahnle et al. (1988 [344]) discussed the evolution
of an impact generated steam atmosphere. Abe and Matsui (1988 [2]) reported
on the evolution of an impact-generated H2 O–CO2 atmosphere and formation of
a hot proto-ocean on Earth.
Chapter 6

Space Weather and Climate

The term Space Weather denotes variations of the Earth’s environment on short
terms. In analogy to meteorology, where the distinction between weather and
climate is made, space climate denotes long term variations of the Earth’s climate
mainly caused by solar variations.

6.1 The Atmosphere’s Response to Solar

Irradiation
6.1.1 Introduction
The penetration of solar radiation strongly depends on its wavelength, the larger
the wavelength the deeper the penetration (see Fig. 6.1).
The principal effects of solar radiation on the middle and upper atmosphere
are summarized in table 6.1. In the second and the third column of that table the
variation due to the solar activity cycle is given. From that table it follows that the
amount of variation depends on the wavelength of the solar radiation becoming
smaller at longer wavelengths. Above 300 nm it is very difficult to detect and can
be measured only with satellite radiometric detectors.
In addition to radiation, the Sun also emits the solar wind which consists
of particles that interact with the geomagnetic field to form the Earth’s magne-
tosphere. We observe a large input of electrons and protons (causing the aurora)
and ionospheric currents are produced causing joule heating. In principle these
phenomena are concentrated at high geomagnetic latitudes; heating effects can
spread equatorward by convection and conduction.
The typical structure of the Earth’s atmosphere was already shortly described.
The boundaries of the various layers (Troposphere, Stratosphere, Mesosphere,
Ionosphere) are called pauses (e.g. the Tropopause) and are defined by minima
or maxima of the temperature profile. At 100 km the density is 10−6 of its sur-
face value. The temperature in the thermosphere is strongly dependent on solar
activity. The major sources for heating at this layer are:

143
144 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

Figure 6.1: Penetration of different solar light waves resp. their induced particles in the
atmosphere

Table 6.1: Effects of Solar Radiation at different wavelengths on the Middle and Upper
Atmosphere.
Wavelength Variab. Variab. Effect Height
[nm] middle Atm. upper Atm. [km]
1-10, SXR sporadic Ion. all 70-100
10-100, XUV 2ppm 2x Ion. N2 , O, O2
100-120, EUV 6 ppm 30% Ion. NO 80-100
120-200, VUV 150 ppm 10% Diss. O2 40-130
200-240, UV 0.12% 5% Diss. O2 , O3 20-40
240-300, UV 1.0% <1% Diss. O3 20-40

• solar ionizing photons,

• magnetospheric processes.

The principal part of the ionosphere is produced by XUV which is strongly ab-
sorbed there. Ionization and recombination occurs and this contributes to the
heating of the thermosphere. By comparing with table 6.1 we see that the energy
involved is small; dissociation of O2 is strong, above 120 km oxygen occurs as
atoms. Through vertical mixing the ratio O2 : N2 is constant near 0.1 throughout
the lower thermosphere. Oxygen atoms are produced down to 30 km and most of
them combine with O2 to form ozone. This attains a peak ratio of 10−5 near 30
km. Photons around 300 nm can reach the surface. They produce electronically
excited oxygen and surface ozone which drives a large fraction of urban pollution
chemistry.
6.1. THE ATMOSPHERE’S RESPONSE TO SOLAR IRRADIATION 145

Figure 6.2: Thermospheric temperature changes, a) low solar activity, F10.7 = 80, Ap =
0, b) high solar activity, F10.7 = 200, Ap = 80 (dashed line). F10.7 denotes the 2800 MHz
solar flux which is a measure for solar activity, the Ap index is a measure of the general
level of geomagnetic activity over the globe. Up to the top of the troposphere the two
curves are nearly identical. At a height of about 100 km the difference is already of the
order of several 10 K.

6.1.2 UV Radiation
Solar radiation shortward 320 nm represents only 2% of the total solar irradiance;
0.01% of the incident flux is absorbed in the thermosphere at about 80 km and
0.2% in the stratosphere above 50 km. This radiation is extremely important
since the thermal structure and photochemical processes above the troposphere
are controlled by it. The stratosphere is controlled by absorption and dissociation
of O2 in the 175 to 240 nm range. The 205 to 295 nm range is predominantly
absorbed by ozone O3 . If there is a stratosphere- troposphere coupling, this could
affect also the climate. The short term variation of UV radiation is ascribed to
the evolution and rotation of plage regions on the solar disk. The XUV induced
thermospheric temperature changes is shown for low and high solar activity in Fig.
6.2. Solar activity is measured in terms of the 10.7 cm radio flux and of the plage
area Ap .

6.1.3 Energetic Particles

There are three main contributions:
• electrons: they reach the high latitude thermosphere after interaction with
the geomagnetic field and acceleration;
• high energy solar protons: their flux is enhanced during periods of large
flares;
146 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

Table 6.2: Exospheric temperature at solar maximum and minimum

Temperature of exosphere
solar minimum 700 K
solar maximum 1200-1500 K

• galactic cosmic rays: they originate from outside the heliosphere but their
input on Earth is partly controlled by solar activity.

During large flares, intense fluxes of energetic protons (10...104 MeV) penetrate
the Earth’s polar cap regions. They produce ionization between 100 and 20 km.
Such an event can last for a few hours to a few days. Large numbers of NOx
molecules are produced leading to a subsequent ozone depletion.
Relativistic electron precipitation are possible sources for ionization and odd
nitrogen production at altitudes above 80 km, thus well above the ozone layer.

6.1.4 Thermosphere and Exosphere

The thermosphere starts at a height of about 90 km and ends at about 250 km at
the so called exobase. In the thermosphere the temperature gradient is positive, in
the exosphere collisions become negligible, particles execute ballistic orbits. The
most important heat source is solar XUV radiation creating the ionosphere. The
resulting heating is conducted down to the mesopause where it can be radiated.
The exosphere is approximately isothermal because it lies above the level where
most of the energy is deposited. Also the thermal time constant is very short
because of the low density there.
The variations can be divided into diurnal variations and longer term varia-
tions.

• The diurnal variations show a day/night ratio of 1.28 over the equator with
the peak occurring about 2 p.m. During the night, heat is conducted down
from the top of the thermosphere to its base, the mesopause, where it is
radiated.
The effect of the sun can be expressed and measured by the 10.7 cm radio flux
which is given in the units 10−22 Wm−2 Hz−1 . If this quantity is multiplied
by a factor of 1.8 deg per unit of flux, we obtain the temperature.

• The other variation comes from the solar activity cycle (see Table 6.2).

The thermospheric temperature changes are illustrated in Fig. 6.2. Similarly

the peak electron density varies by a factor of 2 which is very important for short-
wave radio communication. The temperature changes are obtained from the 10.7
index with a multiplier of 3.6. This value is twice than that for the 27 day variation
which is due to solar rotation. The difference may result from the fact that in
the case of activity cycle variations not only the variation of XUV but also a
6.1. THE ATMOSPHERE’S RESPONSE TO SOLAR IRRADIATION 147

contribution from auroral heating- which is triggered by the solar wind- must be
taken into account.
Finally we have to stress that both UV and particle precipitation have chemical
effects and the most important is the production of N, NO and NO2 (which is
collectively called NOx ). The following reactions define the NOx production in
the thermosphere:

O+ + N2 → NO+ + N (6.1)
N+2 +O → +
NO + N (6.2)
N2 + e−
+
→ N+N (6.3)
−
+
NO + e → N+O (6.4)

6.1.5 Mesosphere and Stratosphere

This region extends from the tropopause to the mesopause, at approximately 90
km. It is in local radiative equilibrium except from heat flowing in from the ther-
mosphere. The radiative heating is by absorption of planetary radiation mainly
by:

• CO2 at 15 µm,

• O3 at 6.3 µm

• absorption of solar UV by O3 .

The CO2 band is the principal radiator. The O3 /CO2 ratio decreases upwards;
thus the heating to cooling also decreases and the temperature gradient is negative.
In the stratosphere ozone begins to be more and more attenuated, a temperature
maximum at 50 km occurs, the stratopause.
The solar UV flux is not variable at large scales thus the temperature changes
to be expected from a variation of that flux should also be small. Most effects
therefore come from ionization and a changing chemistry. The changes of the
UV flux from the sun have only a modest effect on ozone amounts because both
production (by a photolysis of O3 ) and destruction are affected in the same way.
Another effect is the penetration of solar protons or relativistic electrons into
the middle atmosphere. By that penetration considerable amounts of NOx are
produced; these enhancements of NOx increase the destruction of ozone at high
altitudes. This could explain the inverse correlation of ozone amounts with solar
activity found by Ruderman and Chamberlain (1975 [264]). Chakrabarty, 1982
[61] studied how Ozone is affected by solar proton events. During such events NO
is produced that destroys ozone.
To test these predictions it is important to have data at the time scale of the
solar cycle; however we must also take into account the instrumental drifts as
well as the typical lifetime of the instruments which normally are below 5 yr. In
the stratosphere, the ozone response is caused primarily by changes in production
from O2 and has a maximum value of 0.5 % for a 1 % change in the UV at 205
nm. The study of the response of the temperature has been made by Hood (1986
148 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

Figure 6.3: Relation between global ozone, solar activity (measured by 10.7 cm radi-
ation) and volcanic eruptions (El Chichon, 1982, Mt. Pinatubo, 1991). Large volcanic
eruptions decrease solar transmission and the particles enhance ozone depletion. Adapted
from [Link] http : //[Link]/ozone/science/[Link]

[136], 1987 [137]) and Keating et al. (1987 [157]) between 30 and 0.2 mbar (24 to
60 km) and later by Clancy and Rusch (1989 [68]) up to 90 km. They establish
the already mentioned 0.5 % response. The very small temperature response lags
the UV by 4 to 14 days.
The response of the stratospheric ozone concentration to solar activity was
examined in different studies. A study by Angell and Korshover (1976 [11]) es-
tablished a correlation of the ozone column with solar activity with a peak to
peak variation up to 10 % at 700 latitude and only 4 % at 470 . In the upper
stratosphere there is an increasing trend of ozone with increasing solar activity.
Enhanced photolysis of NO however reduces the ozone destruction during solar
activity maximum. An ozone variation of 3% seems to correspond to a 20% solar
UV variability at 180 nm (Keating, 1981 [156]). In general the stratospheric ozone
content varies with the solar activity cycle whereas the tropospheric ozone does
not. The stratospheric ozone decreases 2.72% - 3.79%, and total ozone 2,71 % -
4.36% when solar activity decreases; when solar activity increases the stratospheric
ozone increases 2.41% - 3.06% and total ozone increases 2.1% - 5.56% (see Asiati
et al., 2004 [15]).
There seems to be no correlation of polar stratospheric temperatures and solar
activity (Labitzke (1987 [179]), Labitzke, Van Loon (1988 [180]), Kerr (1988 [159]).
There exists a stratospheric biennial oscillation which is more or less periodic and
reversal of winds in the lower equatorial stratosphere with an average period of 27
months.
6.2. THE FAINT YOUNG SUN 149

6.1.6 Troposphere
As we have seen above, only wavelengths > 300 nm penetrate to the troposphere
and surface. We have already stressed that this part of the solar spectrum is only
slightly variable with a peak to peak variation of about 1 part in 1400. Thus the
troposphere which contains 90 % of the total mass of the Earth’s atmosphere is
subject to a nearly constant driving solar energy.
However, there have been innumerable attempts to find correlations between
solar activity and various meteorological phenomena and other variables. If the
troposphere is to be significantly influenced by the tiny changes of solar irradiation,
there should exist a very strong mechanism of amplification (trigger mechanism).
Such mechanisms were discussed:

• magnetospheric effects by electric field - including also effects of thunder-

storms (Mc Cormac and Seliga, 1979 [215]).

• Hines (1974 [134]) suggested a change of the transmissivity of the

stratosphere to upwardly propagating atmospheric waves (Callis et al. 1985
[52] showed from models that this is possibly not the case).

• The effect found by Labitzke (1987 [179]): temperatures in the polar winter
are jointly influenced by the solar cycle and the quasi biennial oscillation and
the effect on the troposphere is discussed in Van Loon and Labitzke (1988
[180]).

• Eddy (1976 [87], 1988 [88]) discussed the absence of sunspot activity during
the 17th century which is known as the Maunder minimum and an earlier
event, called the Spörer minimum. Both periods seem to coincide with pe-
riods of reduced global temperatures the more recent is called the Little Ice
Age. Eddy (1988 [88]) showed that the required solar input reduction would
have to be much greater than the tiny amplitudes detected on the time scale
of a solar cycle. Maybe also amplifying factors have to be considered.

6.2 The Faint Young Sun

6.2.1 Evolution of the Solar Luminosity
According to theories of stellar evolution, the solar constant1 is not a constant
but has been increasing continuously throughout the main sequence lifetime of
the Sun. The increase in luminosity can be explained by the process of energy
generation inside the Sun, the nuclear fusion of hydrogen into helium; by this
energy generation the mean atomic weight and density of the Sun is increased.
Since the gas pressure is given by

P ≈ kT /µ (6.5)
1 The amount of energy from the Sun received per unit area at the Earth
150 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

an increase of the molecular weight µ implies a higher temperature T in order to

sustain the gravity and to keep hydrostatic equilibrium. An increase in T means
an increase in the energy production and thus luminosity L.
A very rough formula for the luminosity change of the Sun during its main
sequence evolution was given by Gough (1981) [118]:

L(t) = [1 + 0.4(1 − t/t0 )]−1 L0 (6.6)

In this formula L0 is the present solar luminosity and t0 the present age of the
Sun (4.6 Gyr). Other explanations of a possible different solar luminosity at the
early evolution of the Sun are:
• Revisions in the standard solar model in order to solve the neutrino problem.
• Strong mass loss during the early phase (Willson et al. 1987 [335]).
Sagan and Mullen (1972) first pointed out the implications of this change of
solar luminosity for the Earth’s climate2 . Using a very simple model of the green-
house effect they showed that lower solar luminosity would have resulted in Ts
below the freezing point of water for roughly the first 2 Gyr of the Earth’s evo-
lution. However this cannot be correct. Already Sagan and Mullen pointed out
the presence of pillow lavas, mud cracks and ripple marks in 3.2 Gyr old rocks
suggesting strongly the presence of liquid water on the Earth’s surface at that
time. We also know that sedimentary rocks have been deposited about 3.8 Gyrs
ago and these must have formed in liquid water.
We should also stress here, that the faint young Sun was more active and
variable than today, especially in the short wavelengths (X, UV).

6.2.2 Pre Main Sequence Sun

All calculations show that during the early life of the Sun, the UV flux was much
higher than today. The Sun had a behavior similar to a T Tauri star. Zahnle and
Walker (1982 [344]) calculated that the flux decreases as

∼ t−s 0.5 < s < 1 (6.7)

The exponent in this formula depends on the wavelength considered. Similar

results were obtained by Canuto et al. (1982).

6.2.3 Albedo Variations

Let us consider the Earth to radiate like a blackbody, S is the solar constant (at
present 1360 W/m2 ), σ the Stefan-Boltzmann constant , A the planetary Albedo
(∼ 0.3), Te the effective radiating temperature can be obtained by:

Te = [S(1 − A)/4σ]1/4 (6.8)

2 see also e.g. The Role of the Sun in Climate Change by Douglas V. Hoyt, Kenneth H.

Schatten, Kenneth H. Schatten, Oxford Univ. Press, 1997

6.2. THE FAINT YOUNG SUN 151

Figure 6.4: Effective radiating temperature of the Earth as a function of planetary

Albedo A for three different values of the solar constant, a) 982, b) 1088 (dotted),
c) present value 1360 (dashed).

The relevant albedo to use here is the Bond Albedo, which is the percentage
of the total incident solar radiation over radiation reflected back into space. The
present effective radiating temperature of the Earth is ∼ 255 K. If we combine 6.6
and 6.8 then the increase of Te was about 20 deg over geologic time if the albedo
of the Earth is assumed to remain constant. We must also take into account the
Earth’s mean surface temperature Ts and

T s > Te (6.9)

Because of the greenhouse effect the difference between Ts and Te is about 33

K. The greenhouse effect is caused by the difference in opacity in the visible and
infrared regions of the electromagnetic spectrum. The Earth’s atmosphere is rela-
tively transparent to incoming solar radiation, but absorbs a large fraction of the
outgoing IR. Most of the absorption is caused by the vibration-rotation bands of
H2 O and CO2 and to the pure rotation band of H2 O.
In Figure 6.4 the effective radiating temperature of the earth Te as a function
of planetary albedo is given for three different values of the solar constant, a) at
present b) reduced by 20 % and c) reduced by 30 %.
We clearly see that Te strongly depends on the solar constant and on the
Albedo. A larger value of the albedo leads to a lower value of the effective radiating
temperature, the Earth becomes cooler. The albedo can increase because of:
• increased glaciation of the Earth,
• increased fraction of clouds.
Some typical values for A are given in Table 6.3.
152 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

Table 6.3: Typical values for the albedo.

Albedo
Tropical forest 0.13
Woodland 0.14
Grassland 0.20
Stony desert 0.24
Sandy desert 0.37
Sea ice 0.25-0.60
Snowy ice 0.80
Cool water <0.08
Warm water < 0.10

One possible explanation might be that the Earth’s albedo was significantly
lower in the past or that the greenhouse effect of its atmosphere was larger. How-
ever, as Sagan and Mullen pointed out a large change in the Earth’s albedo was
unlikely; any decrease in cloudiness that might result from lower surface tempera-
tures would likely be compensated by an increase in snow and ice cover. However
if the Earth’s surface was mostly water covered this argument does not work.
From climate research we know that there was no glaciation on Earth prior
to about 2.7 Gyr ago (e.g. oxygen isotopes imply warm surface temperatures
throughout the Precambrian (Kasting and Toon, 1989 [155])).

6.2.4 The CO2 Geochemical Cycle

Let us start with some numbers: the total surface reservoir of carbon is about
1023 g. This is enough to produce a CO2 partial pressure of about 60 bar were
all of it present as gaseous (Holland, 1978). Most of the carbon is contained
in carbonate rocks on the continents. A much smaller amount is present in the
oceans as carbonate and bicarbonate ions (4 × 1019 g). Presently about 7 × 1017 g
are present in the atmosphere (this number is growing). There is an equilibrium
between the ocean and the atmosphere at timescales of about 1000 y:
CO2 is removed from the atmosphere/ocean by weathering of silicate rocks
on the continents and 20 % of atmospheric CO2 is removed by photosynthesis
followed by burial of organic carbon. If one represents silicate rocks by CaSiO3
(wollastonite) then the CO2 loss process can be described by the following three
reactions:

CaSiO3 + 2CO2 + H2 O → Ca++ + 2HCO3 + SiO2 (6.10)

Ca++ + 2HCO3 → CaCO3 + CO2 + H2 O (6.11)
(6.12)

Thus:
CaSiO3 + CO2 → CaCO3 + SiO2 (6.13)
6.2. THE FAINT YOUNG SUN 153

When old sea floor is subducted and carbonate sediments are subjected to higher
temperatures and pressures CO2 is returned to the atmosphere/ocean. Then re-
action 6.13 goes in the opposite direction, calcium silicate is reformed and gaseous
CO2 is released. Much of this CO2 escapes through volcanoes. That process is
termed carbonate metamorphism and on the young Earth the rate of carbonate
metamorphism could have been augmented by faster rates of tectonic cycling and
by impact processing of carbonate rich sediments.
It is important to note that the rates of the weathering reactions are strongly
dependent on temperature. The reaction rates increase with temperature and
weathering requires liquid water. The temperature dependence of the silicate
weathering process rate leads to a negative feedback between atmospheric CO2
and surface temperature: if the surface temperature were to decrease (because of
a faint young Sun), the weathering rate would also decrease and carbon dioxide
would begin to accumulate in the atmosphere. This increase of CO2 causes an
increase in the greenhouse effect and thus the temperature increases. The reverse
would happen if the climate became warmer: the weathering rate would increase,
pCO2 would decrease and the greenhouse effect would become smaller (Walker et
al. 1981 [328]). This mechanism can explain why the temperature on Earth was
high enough for liquid water even when the solar luminosity was smaller.
The modern rate of CO2 release from volcanoes would create a 1-bar CO2
atmosphere in only 20 Myr if carbonates were not forming. This shows that the
response time of the system is quite fast in geologic terms.

6.2.5 Effects of the Biota

Presently the CO2 geochemical cycle is modulated by the biota. Calcium car-
bonate formation can be largely attributed to the secretion of shells by plankton
and other marine organisms. Land plants enhance silicate weathering rates by
pumping up the carbon dioxide partial pressure in soils by a factor of 10 to 40
over the atmospheric value; photosynthesis on land and in the oceans creates or-
ganic carbon which is then buried in sediments. Thus the atmospheric CO2 level
is reduced. Therefore, the Earth today is probably cooler than it would be in the
absence of life. Lovelock (1988 [201]) created therefore the Gaia Hypothesis, which
means that the Earth’s climate is controlled by biota and would have become un-
stable where it not for the homeostatic modulation of climate by organisms. Let
us assume biological control of the Earth’s climate in more detail. According to
Berner et al. [35], the dependence of the silicate weathering rate fw on surface
temperature T can be written as:
fw = 1 + 0.087(T − T0 ) + 0.0019(T − T0 )2 (6.14)
Here, T0 is the present mean surface temperature (288 K) and fw = 1. The CO2
greenhouse effect is parameterized in the BLAG model as:
T − T0 = 2.88 ln(P/P0 ) (6.15)
where P indicates atmospheric pCO2 and P0 the present CO2 partial pressure.
From laboratory studies we know that the weathering rate of silicate minerals
154 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

varies approximately as
pCO0.3
2 (6.16)
for CO2 partial pressures of 2 to 20 bar and temperatures of 100 to 2000 C. These
data were derived by Lagache (1976 [183]) and Walker et al. (1981 [328]). Let
us assume that we can apply this relation to the Earth’s surface conditions. To
study the maximum effect let us further assume that removing land plants from
the system would reduce surface soil pCO2 by a factor of 40. Then the equation
for the silicate weathering process can be written as:

fw = [1 + 0.087(T − T0 ) + 0.0019(T − T0 )2 ]
= [PS /40P0 )]0.3 (6.17)

Here PS is the partial CO2 pressure in the soil and today we have PS = 40P0 and
obtain fw =1. On a vegetation free Earth PS ∼ P0 , and fw would be reduced by a
factor of 40−0.3 ∼ 1/3. The carbon cycle is only balanced when fw = 1. Therefore,
without vegetation, the atmospheric pCO2 and surface temperature would have
to increase to bring back the silicate weathering rate to its present value. We
substitute equation 6.15 into equation 6.17 and solve for P/P0 and obtain:

P/P0 = 9 T − T0 ∼ 6.3 K (6.18)

This shows that under the assumption that land plants pump up soil CO2 by
a factor of 40, the effect of eliminating them would be to increase the Earth’s
temperature by only 6 deg. The net cooling effect of the biota should be somewhat
larger because of the influence of the organic carbon cycle; today 20% of the carbon
is organic carbon rather than carbonate. One can estimate that if life suddenly
were eliminated in total the temperature would increase by 8 deg. Thus even a
lifeless Earth would apparently be no warmer than the real Earth was during the
Cretaceous, when the dinosaurs flourished.
The studies of Schwartzmann and Volk (1981) [275] showed that biota may
accelerate chemical weathering by stabilizing soil (silicate minerals stay in contact
with carbonated water), generating organic acids. This could lead to enhanced
weathering rates of up to 1000 instead of 3. Therefore, the CO2 partial pressure
on a lifeless Earth might be as high as a few tenths of a bar and the surface
temperature may be up to 60 K warmer!

6.2.6 T Tauri and Post T Tauri Phase

T Tauri stars are a group of stars which are solar like and often associated with
molecular clouds. They are very early stars that means that they have not yet
reached the main sequence and they are still contracting (see the introduction
about stellar evolution). Their masses and temperatures are quite similar to the
Sun but they are brighter. Their rotation rate is in the range of a few days (for
the Sun it is about 1 month). They are active variable stars. The first ones were
found about 1945 by their optical variability and chromospheric lines. Later on
some evidence for large starspots on their surfaces were found. The X ray emission
6.3. SOLAR VARIABILITY 155

which is about 1 000 times that of the present Sun and radio flux is not constant.
Some of them also show molecular outflow and strong stellar winds. By their IR
and sub mm excess radiation it was found that about half of them are surrounded
by circumstellar disks.
Contrary to normal main sequence stars like the Sun their energy is not pro-
duced by nuclear fusion near the core but by a slow gravitational contraction. T
Tauri stars belong to the group of so called YSO (young stellar objects) of type II.
Type I YSO are very young protostellar objects at the age of just a few 100 000
years. An example is HR 4796. At a wavelength of 12 µm the object appears as a
point source, at a wavelength of 21 µm it is much larger and diffuse indicating a
circumstellar disk of dust. Such objects can be observed preferentially in the IR.
At an age of about 40 Million years our Sun became a zero age main sequence
star. That means that it reached the main sequence and nuclear fusion of H to
He started. At that time the Sun had about 70% of the total flux that is emitted
presently. But in the UV and X-rays the flux was higher by a factor of about
100 than now. This of course has important consequences for the formation of the
planets, their atmospheres etc. In its T Tauri and post T Tauri evolution the Sun’s
short wavelength emission was considerably higher than it is now. At that time
the terrestrial planets were formed already, the protoplanetary disk evaporated,
comets ejected out into the Oort cloud and the big bombardment period from
the remaining rocky planetesimals and comets began; this caused probably several
evaporations of the Earth’s oceans.
How can we find indications for this T Tauri and Post T Tauri Phase of the
Sun? Measurements of the 15 N to 14 N ratio in the atmosphere of the satellite Titan
(which is Saturn’s largest satellite) have shown that the bulk N is enhanced in the
heavier 15 N isotope by about 4.5 times relative to the Earth’s value. A 15 N/14 N
anomaly on Mars of about 1.6 times the terrestrial value has also been found.
These measurements can only be explained by the above mentioned T Tauri and
post T Tauri phase of the early Sun (Lammer et al. 2000 [186]). Atmospheric
sputtering and pick-up caused by a high solar wind particle outflow during a Post
T-Tauri phase could be responsible for the observed nitrogen anomaly.

6.3 Solar Variability

Solar variability can be divided into three components according to their influence
on the structure and composition of the atmosphere:

• variation of the solar constant

• XUV and UV variation

• energetic particle variation

So far we have only discussed the long term solar variability- summarized as
the faint young Sun problem and the influence of the changing parameters of the
Earth’s orbit on climate (Berger, 1980 [34]).
156 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

Table 6.4: Satellite measurements of the solar constant

NIMBUS-7 16 Nov 78-13 Dec 93
SMM (ACRIM I) 16 Feb 80-01 Jun 89
ERBS 25 Oct 84-
NOAA-9 23 Jan 85-20 Dec 89
NOAA-10 22 Oct 86-01 Apr 87
UARS (ACRIM II) 5 Oct 91-
SOHO/VIRGO 18 Jan 96-

The solar input can be represented by the already mentioned solar constant
S. In this context we give two interesting facts: First suppose that the Sun
has no nuclear sources then the present luminosity could be maintained by a
gravitational contraction of only 10−4 arcsec/year. Such a change would have
been imperceptible over historical times. The other fact is that, as we have seen
convection is a stochastic process and it is transport energy to the surface. The
efficiency of convection is given by

l/H (6.19)

where l is the mixing length and H the pressure scale height. Dearborn and
Newman (1978) [73] show that a variation of l/H by 0.02 causes a variation of
∆S/S by 1%. Such a variation is assumed to change the global temperature on
Earth by 2 K.
We now address to the question whether there exists also a variability of the
solar input on shorter timescales.

6.3.1 Total Solar Irradiance Measurements

The total solar irradiance describes the radiant energy emitted by the sun over all
wavelengths that falls vertically each second on 1 square meter outside the earth’s
atmosphere. This is the definition of the solar constant. Because of the influences
of the Earth’s atmosphere this constant is extremely difficult to measure on the
surface and the most reliable measurements can only be done from space. In Table
6.4 the satellite measurements and the respective time spans of the measurements
are summarized.
The VIRGO Experiment on the ESA/NASA SOHO Mission has two types
of radiometers to measure total solar irradiance (TSI): DIARAD and PMO6V.
A description of the instrument can be found in Fröhlich et al. (1995) [105].
Let us shortly describe the DIARAD measurement facility which is a part of
SOHO/VIRGO: DIARAD is a Differential Absolute Radiometer. It is composed
of two cylindrical cavities coated inside with diffuse black and mounted next to
each other on the same heat sink. The flat bottom of the cavities are in fact heat
flux transducers on which heating elements have been mounted. Both cavities
see the same thermal environment through accurately known circular apertures.
 6.3. SOLAR VARIABILITY
Total Solar Irradiance Data (referred to SARR via ACRIM−II)
Days (Epoch Jan 0, 1980)
0 2000 4000 6000

1369

ACRIM II
ACRIM I

ACRIM I

VIRGO
HF

HF

HF
1368
Solar Irradiance (Wm−2)

1367

1366

1365

0.1%
1364

1363
19781979 1980 198119821983 1984 198519861987 1988 1989 19901991 1992 1993 199419951996 1997 199819992000
Year
from: C. Fröhlich, Space Science Reviews, in preparation, and the VIRGO Team (Dec 03, 2000)

Figure 6.5: Solar irradiance measurements from satellites

157
158 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

A comparison of the power generated inside the cavities is done. For instance a
constant electrical power is generated in one of the channels and the difference
between the two heatflux sensors is automatically brought back to zero by an
ad hoc accurate servosystem that provides electrical power to the other channel
called “active channel”. This one is regularly irradiated by the Sun or closed.
The difference of the electrical power fed to the active channel when its shutter
is open (exposed to the Sun) and when it is closed is proportional to the incident
solar irradiance. From time to time, the roles of the left channel and the right
channel are reversed for half an hour with the purpose of monitoring the aging of
the continuously exposed left channel. The sampling rate of the PMO6 instrument
is 1 solar total irradiance / 2 minutes, for DIARAD 1 solar total irradiance / 3
minutes.
The ACRIM contains four cylindrical bays. Three of the bays house inde-
pendent heat detectors, called pyrheliometers, which are independently shuttered,
self calibrating, automatically controlled, and which are uniformly sensitive from
the extreme UV to the far infrared. Each pyrheliometer consists of two cavities,
and temperature differences between the two are used to determine the total so-
lar flux. One cavity is maintained at a constant reference temperature, while the
other is heated 0.5 K higher than the reference cavity and is exposed to the Sun
periodically. When the shutter covering the second cavity is open, sunlight enters,
creating an even greater difference in cavity temperatures. The power supplied to
the second cavity by the ACRIM electronics decreases automatically to maintain
the 0.5 K temperature difference between the two cavities. This decrease in the
amount of electricity is proportional to the solar irradiance entering the cavity.
Exposing the sensors to the space environment and the Solar UV radiation causes
some small changes on the surface of the cavities which may affect the measure-
ments. The ACRIM instrument monitors this type of problem by carrying three
similar sensors, two of which are normally covered. At times these are opened for
comparison purposes. Further details can be found in Willson (1981 [336], 1984
[337]).
Measuring the solar constant one finds:
• Part of the energy is blocked by dark sunspots and subsequently released in
faculae. The screening effect by sunspots is overcompensated by the energy
storage and release. This is demonstrated in Fig. 6.6.
• There are variations of the solar constant with the solar cycle.
First measurements with the ACRIM 1 (Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance
Monitor) experiment on board the Solar Maximum Mission and the ERB exper-
iment on the Nimbus-7 satellite showed a positive correlation between the solar
cycle activity, measured by the sunspot index, and the total solar irradiance. The
peak to peak variation of about 1 W/m2 (out of about 1367) between solar max-
imum and minimum was reported by Fröhlich (1987) [104], Willson and Hudson
(1988) [338] and Foukal and Lean (1988) [100]. Somewhat larger fluctuation up to
0.2% occur over timescales of days and weeks.
Given that the total variation between the peaks of solar cycles 21 and 22
was about 0.1%, how much is the effect to be expected for a change of the cor-
6.3. SOLAR VARIABILITY 159

Figure 6.6: Three-dimensional rendering of the angular distribution of the excess irra-
diance emitted at 500 nm by the active region studied at two stages of its development,
together with the magnetogram. A more uniform brightening of the facular region at the
later stage is apparent (after Vicente Domingo).

responding global temperature on Earth? It is expected that this change of the

solar irradiation produces a corresponding variation of about 0.20 C in globally
averaged equilibrium surface temperature (Hansen and Lacis, 1990 [125]). But
there is some considerable delay in the response. Because of the thermal inertia of
the oceans, the time needed to approach equilibrium is much longer than 11 years
(e.g., Reid, 1991 [254]), so that the actual temperature response to the observed
variation during a solar cycle is likely to be considerably smaller, and probably
insignificant from a climatic point of view.
The climate sensitivity of solar variability was studied by Scafetta and West,
2004 [271]. They estimated a solar net forcing between 10-30% of the global
temperature trend between 1980 and 2002.
The complex interaction of solar variation on the atmosphere was modelled
(Knipp et al. 2004 [169]) by using three input data:

• The solar extreme UV (XUV) power

• Joule power

• Particle kinetic power

From such a model both influences a) radiation, b) particles from the sun to the
Earth can be taken into account. During 1975 and 2003 the contributions were
found to be: particles 36 GW, Joule 95 GW and 464 GW for the rest. Solar wind-
driven geomagnetic power provided 22% of the total global upper atmospheric
energy. An interesting trend is that with increasing activity (here by the term
activity short time scaled events are meant) the Joule power becomes more and
more important. In the top 15 power events, geomagnetic activity contributed to
2/3 of the total power budget.
160 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

Figure 6.7: Reconstructed precipitation in northern New Mexico. Courtesy: Henri D

Grissino-Mayer

6.3.2 Long Term Solar Variations

In order to study a long term variation of the solar output, there is no direct
observational support. It is therefore necessary to use proxy data or solar activity
indicators. Sunspot index measurements exist over a time span of roughly 350
years and they suggest the presence of a 76-80 yr cycle, the Gleissberg cycle,
modulating the 11 yr cycle (Sonett, 1982 [294], Berry, 1987 [36]). Foukal and Lean
(1990 [101]) gave an empirical model of total solar irradiance variation between
1874 and 1988.
The presence of the solar cycle has been claimed in various sets of proxies:

• auroral activity,

• isotopic composition of ice cores (Johnsen et al. 1970 [149]),

• tree growth, dendroclimatic investigations (Svenonius and Olausson, 1979

[304]). For annual rings to form, trees must “shut down” growth at some
point to form a distinct ring boundary. This occurs in the dormant sea-
son, usually in the fall and winter. In the tropics, the seasons are not as
distinct, so that trees can grow year-round. One fundamental principle of
dendrochronology is “the present is the key to the past,” originally stated by
James Hutton in 1785. However, dendrochronology adds a new “twist” to
this principle: “the past is the key to the future.” In other words, by know-
ing environmental conditions that operated in the past (by analyzing such
conditions in tree rings), we can better predict and/or manage such environ-
mental conditions in the future. Hence, by knowing what the climate-tree
growth relationship is in the 20th century, we can reconstruct climate from
tree rings well before weather records were ever kept! Let us give one example
from Grissino-Mayer: Fig 6.7 shows a long-term precipitation reconstruction
for northern New Mexico based on tree rings. How this reconstruction was
made? The reconstruction was developed by calibrating the widths of tree
rings from the 1900s with rainfall records from the 1900s. Because we as-
sume that conditions must have been similar in the past, we can then use
the widths of tree rings as a proxy (or substitute) for actual rainfall amounts
prior to the historical record.
6.3. SOLAR VARIABILITY 161

Individual tree-growth series can be “decomposed” into an aggregate of en-

vironmental factors:

Rt = At + Ct + ∆D1t + ∆D2t + Et (6.20)

Rt is the tree ring growth as a function of t. At age related growth trend

due to normal physiological aging processes, the climate (C) that occurred
during that year the occurrence of disturbance factors within the forest stand
(for example, a blow down of trees), indicated by D1, the occurrence of
disturbance factors from outside the forest stand (for example, an insect
outbreak that defoliates the trees, causing growth reduction), indicated by
D2, and random (error) processes E not accounted for.
A study of tree rings and application to reconstruct climate was given by
Cook et al. (1997). Sampling 300-to-500-year-old Siberian pine trees in
the Tarvagatay Mountains of western central Mongolia, D’Arrigo et al.(1993
[71]) analyzed annual growth rings, which generally grow wider during warm
periods and narrower in colder times in trees at the timber line. They devel-
oped a tree-ring record reflecting annual temperatures in the region dating
back to 1550. The Mongolian tree rings show temperature changes that are
strikingly similar to records from tree rings in North America, Europe and
western Russia. The general trends reflected in the tree-ring record include
cooler conditions in the early 1700s, followed by warming that started mid-
century. An abrupt cooling occurred in the late 1700s and continued for
much of the 1800s. The coldest period was between 1830s and 1870s, af-
ter which a steadily increasing warming trend began. An example of this
analysis is given in Fig 6.8.

• Solar radius variations (Gilliland, 1981 [111]) ,

• sedimentary rocks (Sonett and Williams, 1985 [295])

• sea surface temperatures (Gerard, 1990 [107]). The mechanism how this
could be related to solar irradiance variations works as follows:

1. absorption of solar energy by the tropical oceans in a deep surface layer,

2. transport of that energy by ocean currents,
3. transfer of that energy by evaporation into atmospheric moisture and
pressure systems leading to more precipitation (Perry, 1994 [244]).

Lewis et al. (1990 [195]) showed that solar radiation in visible frequencies, usually
assumed to be absorbed at the sea surface, penetrates to a significant depth below
the upper mixed layer of the ocean that interacts directly with the atmosphere. In
clear water, the blue wavelengths, where the greatest amount of energy is available,
penetrate the deepest, to nearly 100 m. Energy injected into the ocean at this
depth can be stored for a substantial period of time.
As it has been stated above the transparency of the tropical oceans is dependent
upon the amount of biogenic material, phytoplankton pigments, and degradation
162 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

Figure 6.8: Temperatures derived from tree rings. Here the Maunder minimum is not
very prominent whereas a cold period between 1830 to 1870)

products that are present. In the Pacific Ocean, transparency increases from east
to west, with the greatest penetration of solar energy occurring in the western
tropical Pacific. Due to ocean currents, the North Pacific Ocean takes approxi-
mately 4 years to move temperature anomalies from the western tropical Pacific
to near North America (Favorite and McLain, 1973 [96]).
During the prolonged period between 1500 and 1850, average temperatures in
Northern Europe were much colder than they are today, this is known as the little
Ice Age. The coldest part of this period coincides with a conspicuous absence of
sunspots and other signs of solar activity, called the Maunder Minimum.
For example Gilliland reported a 76 year cycle in the solar radius, inferred
from a 258 year record of transits of the planet Mercury, solar eclipse records and
meridian transit measurements. Ribes et al. (1987 [257]) also reported as Gilliland
that the solar radius is slightly increased in times of low solar activity during the
Maunder minimum.
A review book on the role of the Sun in climate change was written by Hoyt
and Schatten (1997 [141]) where other references can be found.
Indicators of solar activity such as 14 C concentration measurements and of
climate (e.g. glaciers) show a clear correlation over the last 7 000 years. This
was shown by Eddy in 1977. Considering a time series since 1860 the solar cycle
length shows an excellent correlation with northern hemisphere land temperatures
(Friis-Christensen and Lassen, 1991 [103]). For recent data however, these two
parameters diverge. If there exists a global climate contribution of solar irradiance
variations then there are three possible interactions or couplings between these
variations and the Earth’s climate:
6.3. SOLAR VARIABILITY 163

• Variations of the total solar irradiance.

• Variations of the Sun’s spectral irradiance; this denotes changes in the lumi-
nosity of the Sun in a given wavelength range. As we have discussed above,
UV radiation influences atmospheric chemistry (production or destruction
of ozone, see also Haigh 1994 [122], 1996 [123]).

• Variations in the heliospheric magnetic field which are coupled to changes in

the solar wind and influences the number and energy spectrum of cosmic ray
particles. This was investigated by Potgieter, 1998 [247] and Simpson, 1998
[285]. The variation of cosmic ray particles seems to be related to global
cloud cover (see Svensmark and Friis-Christensen (1997 [306]) or Svensmark
(1998 [305]) or Marsch and Svensmark (2000 [211]).

As we have mentioned above, the total solar irradiance varies by 0.1% and
these measurements have been made very accurately since 1978 (a review about
that was given by Fröhlich, 2000 [102]) The cycles covered by these measurements
are 21, 22 and 23. Of course from these time series it is impossible to extrapolate
to earlier time series when the Sun was more active (e.g. cycle 19) or less active.
One further problem of the time series available is that with the exception of
SOHO/VIRGO they are restricted to the UV.
Irradiance variations of the past solar cycles can be determined from the surface
distribution of the magnetic field if records of the field distribution or of proxies
are available. The following proxies can be used:

• relative sunspot number (since 1700),

• group sunspot number (since 1610),

• sunspot and facular areas (As , Af , since 1874,)

• Ca II plage areas (Ap , since 1915).

Using these data, one can reconstruct the cyclic component of the irradiance back
to the Maunder minimum.
As a large sunspot group passes across the solar surface, there is a dip in the
total solar irradiance. The variation is in the range of 0.02%.
Lockwood et al. (1999 [200]) reconstructed the aa-index of geomagnetic activity
and found that the interplanetary magnetic flux at minimum of solar activity (that
can be be reconstructed using the aa-index) has roughly doubled since 1900. This
is in good agreement with 10 Be concentration in Greenland ice (Beer, 2000 [32]).
10
Be is produced by the interaction of cosmic rays with constituents of the Earth’s
atmosphere. The cosmic ray flux is modulated by the heliospheric magnetic field.
Lean et al. (1995 [191]) assumed that the background irradiance is proportional
to the amplitude of the solar cycle; Hoyt and Schatten (1993 [140]) propose a trend
corresponding to cycle length and Baliunas and Soon (1995 [25]) demonstrated that
the amplitudes of stellar cycles (observed in Ca II H and K) scale with the length
of the stellar cycle.
164 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

A short overview of long term chances in solar irradiance was given by Solanki
and Fligge (2000 [293]).
The question whether the Earth’s climate is influenced by solar activity has
a central position in the present debate about the global warming. Greenhouse
gas concentrations have a continuous increase and do not follow the observed
decrease in the 1900’s and in 1940-1970 example. These variations might be better
explained when solar activity is taken into account. During a normal sunspot cycle
the irradiance changes by 0.1% but could be greater (e.g. during the Maunder
Minimum 0.3%, Lean (1997 [189])).

6.3.3 Solar Protons

Solar protons when hitting the atmosphere, break up molecules of N2 and H2 O
vapor. When nitrogen gas molecules split apart, they can create molecules, called
nitrogen oxides NO, which can last several weeks to months depending on where
they end up in the atmosphere. Once formed, the nitrogen oxides react quickly
with ozone and reduce its amounts. When atmospheric winds blow them down
into the middle stratosphere, they can stay there for months, and continue to keep
ozone at a reduced level.
Similarly water vapor molecules are affected by solar protons, breaking them
up into radicals where they react with ozone. However, these molecules, called
hydrogen oxides, only last during the time period of the solar proton event. These
short-term effects of hydrogen oxides can destroy up to 70 percent of the ozone
in the middle mesosphere. At the same time, longer-term ozone loss caused by
nitrogen oxides destroys a maximum of about nine percent of the ozone in the
upper stratosphere. Only a few percent of total ozone is in the mesosphere and
upper stratosphere with over 80 percent in the middle and lower stratosphere.
The impacts on humans are minimal. NASA’s HALOE was launched on the
UARS spacecraft September 15, 1991 as part of the Earth Science Enterprise
Program. Its mission includes improvement of understanding stratospheric ozone
depletion by measuring vertical profiles of ozone, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen
fluoride, methane, water vapor, nitric oxide, nitrogen dioxide, aerosols, and tem-
perature. The SBUV/2 instrument was launched aboard the NOAA-14 satellite
on December 30, 1994 and its mission is to observe the ozone layer.

6.4 Cosmic Rays

6.4.1 Origination of Cosmic Rays
Victor Hess discovered in 1912 during a balloon flight to an altitude of more
than 5000 m that the ionization rate increased. This fact he explained by the
assumption that a radiation of very great energy penetrating power enters from
above the atmosphere.3 Energetic particles originating beyond the Earth that
impinge on our atmosphere are called cosmic rays. The particles span energies
3 Hess received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1936
6.4. COSMIC RAYS 165

over a wide range and more than 80% are protons more than 12% He nuclei (α
particles), the rest electrons, gamma rays and neutrinos. Because the particles
are charged we have to take into account the interaction with magnetic fields,
mainly with the heliosphere and the Earth’s magnetic field. The particles are high
energetic, thus they produce showers of particles when they collide with particles
in our atmosphere (pions, kaons, mesons, muons).
There exist three components of cosmic rays:
• Galactic cosmic rays, GCR
• Anomalous cosmic rays, ACR
• Solar Energetic particles, SEP

Galactic Cosmic Rays

Since the particles are charged, they are deflected by the magnetic field of our
Galaxy and the heliosphere as well as the Earth’s magnetic field. Thus we can no
longer point back to their sources in the Galaxy. A map of the sky with cosmic
ray intensities would be completely uniform. The composition of the GCR’s could
tells us something about the origin. One finds all natural elements in roughly the
same proportion as they occur in the solar system. Two properties of the particles
can be measured:
• Determine which element; this is very easy since the different charges of each
nucleus give different signatures.
• Isotopic composition; to determine the isotopic composition which in some
cases gives better insights in the origin of the particles, the atomic nuclei
have to be weighted which is much more difficult.
Most GCR are accelerated in the blast waves of supernova remnants. Rem-
nants of supernova explosions are very active, we observe expanding clouds of gas,
magnetic field activities etc. which can accelerate particles. Such processes in
supernova remnants can last for several 103 yrs. The particles are accelerated in
the magnetic field until they have enough energy to escape and become cosmic
rays. Thus they can only be accelerated up to a certain maximum energy which
depends upon the size of the acceleration region and the magnetic field strength.
The problem we face is that cosmic rays have been observed at much higher
energies than those supernova remnants can generate. Possible explanations for
such extreme high energetic particles are:
• their nature is extragalactic: from galaxies with very active galactic nuclei,
• they are related to the gamma ray bursts (energies up to 800 GeV are mea-
sured, they produce fast electrons and positrons in the Earth’s atmosphere;
in vacuum no particle can move faster than light. Air has a refractive index,
therefore the speed of light is slowed down and fast enough electrons travel
faster than light. Then, like the sonic shock ahead of a plane moving with
supersonic speed they emit a shock front of light – Cherenkov radiation4 .
4 You can see this radiation as the glow coming from a research reactor
166 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

Flashes of Cherenkov light from air showers have been studied for many
years.

• they are related to exotic particles which are predicted by several physical
theories concerning the origin of the universe; superstrings, exotic matter,
strongly interacting neutrinos,

• they are topological defects in the very structure of the universe.

As we have stated above, cosmic rays include a number of radioactive nuclei whose
numbers decrease through the radioactive decay. Measurements of these nuclei can
be used therefore (as in the C14 method) to determine how long it has been since
cosmic ray material was synthesized in the galactic magnetic field.
The origin of GCRs was discussed by Axford, 1994 [18].
One example of modern cosmic ray detectors is the Pierre Auger observatory
installed in Argentina in 2005. 1600 water tanks, each containing 3000 gallons
of water and separated by 1,5 km from each of its neighbors. The tanks are
completely dark inside. Therefore we can measure the Cherenkov radiation of
particles travelling faster than light. Slight differences in the detection times at
different tank positions help scientists determine the trajectory of the incoming
cosmic ray. The charged particles in an air shower also interact with atmospheric
nitrogen, causing it to emit ultraviolet light via a process called fluorescence. The
observatory’s second detection method uses these detectors to observe the trail of
nitrogen fluorescence.

Anomalous Cosmic Rays, ACR

The second component of cosmic ray particles originates from interaction with the
heliosphere with neutral interstellar gas. Interstellar neutral gas flows through the
solar system, since uncharged particles are not influenced by magnetic fields. The
speed is approximately 25 km/s. When approaching the Sun, these neutral atoms
become ionized by two processes:

• photo-ionization: an electron of the neutral atom is knocked off by a solar

high energy photon (e.g. a UV photon);

• charge exchange: an electron is exchanged to an ionized atom of solar wind

particle.

As soon as these particles are charged the Sun’s magnetic field carries them out-
ward to the solar wind termination shock region. The ions repeatedly collide with
the termination shock, gaining energy during each collision. This continues until
they escape from the shock region and diffuse back toward the inner heliosphere.
Such particles are called anomalous cosmic rays (ACRs). ACRs are thought to
originate from the very local interstellar medium and are not related to the above
mentioned violent processes as the GCRs. They can easily be discerned from
GCRs because they have lower speed and energy. They include large quantities of
He, O, Ne and other elements which have in common high ionization potentials.
6.4. COSMIC RAYS 167

Figure 6.9: A collision between a high-energy cosmic ray particle and an atom in a
photographic emulsion (viewed through a microscope). Below: filling of a water tank of
the Auger observatory.

Solar Energetic Particles, SEP

The third component of cosmic ray particles are Solar energetic particles (SEP).
They move away from the Sun due to plasma heating, acceleration and other
processes. Flares e.g. inject large amounts of energetic nuclei into space, the
composition varies from flare to flare. On the scale of cosmic radiation, SEPs have
relatively low energies.

6.4.2 The Heliosphere

The heliosphere as already stated, is the magnetic shield caused by the Sun which
protects us against energetic cosmic ray particles. The solar wind which is a
continuous stream of plasma expands out through the solar system until it changes
from supersonic to subsonic speed what is called a termination shock. The distance
of that region is assumed to be about 90 AU and the space within is called the
Heliosphere which encloses the whole solar system (e.g. Pluto’s mean distance is
only 39 AU). The termination shock was crossed by the spacecraft Voyager 1 on
December 16, 2004 (see Stone et al., 2005 [301]). The distance of the shock was
at 84.01 AU from the Sun. It was found that this shock is a steady source of low
energy protons. The intensity of anomalous cosmic ray helium did not peak at the
shock, indicating that the ACR source is not in the shock region local to Voyager
1. The observations showed that the physics might be more complicated there.
Voyager 2 is expected to cross the termination shock in 2008.
168 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

Because of the magnetic fields, only some of the GCR particles penetrate to
the inner part of the solar system. Thus the magnetic field of the heliosphere
works as a shield. The magnetic activity of the Sun changes however with the
solar cycle (every 11 year the Sun’s magnetic field reverses, the true cycle is thus
22 years). This causes a variation of the GCR flux. When the Sun is more active,
the magnetic field is stronger, and as a result, fewer GCR arrive in the vicinity of
the Earth. We can also say that the higher the energy the particles have, the less
they are modulated by the solar cycle.
For our study here, it is important to note that by measuring cosmic rays one
can derive a proxy for solar activity very long back in time. This is possible since
isotopes in the atmosphere are produced by cosmic rays. From such recordings a
good qualitative agreement between cold and warm climatic periods and low and
high solar activity during the last 10 000 years was found. When we consider 14 C
variations during the last millennium, one can deduce, that from 1000-1300 AC
solar activity was very high which coincided with the warm medieval period. We
know from history that e.g. during that period the Vikings settled in Greenland.
The solar activity - if it is well represented by the 14 C variation- decreased and a
long period followed which is now called the little ice age (in this period falls also
the so called Maunder Minimum, 1645-1715, during which practically no sunspots
were observed). This period lasted until the middle of the 19th century. From
then on, solar activity has increased and is the highest in the last 600 years.
Thus we may assume the following connections:

low solar activity → weak magnetic field → more GCRs → more 14 C (6.21)

If that assumption is true, there is a mechanism, how the Earth’s climate can
be influenced by the Sun.
The correlation between cosmic rays and solar activity and temperatures on
Earth was studied by Usoskin et al., 2005 [322]. Comparison of the Sun-related
data sets with various reconstructions of terrestrial Northern Hemisphere mean
surface temperatures reveals consistently positive correlation coefficients for the
sunspot numbers and consistently negative correlation coefficients for the cosmic
rays. The significance levels reach up to 99% but vary strongly for the different
data sets.
Predictions of Galactic Cosmic Ray Intensity Deduced from that of Sunspot
Number were made by Lantos, 2005 [188].
The relationship between cosmic ray variability and enhanced geomagnetic
activity was summarized by Kudela and Storini, 2006 [178].

6.4.3 Clouds, Cloud Formation Processes

Clouds are created by condensation or deposition of water above the Earth’s sur-
face when the air mass becomes saturated (relative humidity 100 %). Saturation
can occur when the temperature of an air mass goes to its dew point or frost point.
There are different mechanisms to achieve this:
6.4. COSMIC RAYS 169

Orographic precipitation: this occurs when air is forced to rise because of the
physical presence of elevation (land). As such a parcel of air rises it cools due to
the adiabatic expansion at a rate of approximately 10 degrees per 1 000 m. The
rise of the parcel is stopped if saturation is reached. An example of this mechanism
is the west coast of Canada with large precipitation.
Convectional precipitation: this is associated with heating of the air at the
Earth’s surface. When there is enough heating, the air becomes lighter than the
surrounding masses, begins to rise (cf. a hot air balloon begins to rise), expands
and cools as above. When sufficient cooling takes place, saturation is reached
again forming precipitation. This mechanism is active in the interior of continents
and near the equator forming cumulus clouds and thunderstorms.
Convergence or frontal precipitation: this mechanism takes place when two
masses of air come together. One is usually moist and warm and the other is
cold and dry. The leading edge of the cold front acts as an inclined wall or front
causing the moist warm air to be lifted. Then the above described processes start
again: rise, cooling and saturation. This type of precipitation is common in the
mid latitudes.
Finally we have to mention the radiative cooling: this occurs when the Sun is
no longer supplying the ground and overlying air with energy due to insolation
during nighttime. The surface of the Earth begins to lose energy in the form of
longwave radiation. This causes the ground and the air above it to cool. The
precipitation that results from this kind of mechanism takes the form of dew, frost
or fog.
Of course these mechanisms may act as a combination: convection and oro-
graphic uplift can cause summer afternoon showers in the mountains.
Let us compare the levels of cloud cover for summer and winter (northern
hemisphere). For summer in the northern hemisphere, highest levels of cloud
cover occur over the mid-latitude cyclone storm tracks of both hemispheres, In-
tertropical Convergence Zone over land surfaces, and the Indian Monsoon region
(orographic lifting). Lowest values occur over the subtropical deserts, the sub-
sidence regions of the subtropical oceans, and the polar regions. For winter in
the northern hemisphere highest levels of cloud cover occur over the mid-latitude
cyclone storm tracks of both hemispheres and the Intertropical Convergence Zone
over land surfaces. Lowest values occur over the subtropical deserts, the subsidence
regions of the subtropical oceans, and over the South Pole.
Clouds influence vertically integrated radiative properties of the atmosphere.
They cause a cooling through reflection of incoming shortwave radiation (sun -
light) and heating by absorption and trapping of outgoing long wave radiation
(thermal radiation). Let us consider the net radiative impact of a cloud: this
mainly depends on two parameters, on its height above the surface and its optical
thickness. High optically thin clouds tend to heat while low optically thick clouds
tend to cool. The net forcing of the global cloud cover is in the range between
17 − 35 W/m2 , as it is derived from climate models. Thus a significant influence
on the global cloud cover can be potentially very important for Earth’s climate
(see also Table 6.5).
It has been found that the Earth’s cloud cover follows the variation in GCR.
170 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

Table 6.5: Various influences on the climate

S, solar constant (at 1 AU) 1360 W/m2

S/4, top of atmosphere 340 W/m2
S/4(1-a), a=0.3 Earth’s albedo 235 W/m2
1 % change in the albedo 1 W/m2
estimated rad. effect due to CO2 increase since 1750 1.5 W/m2
doubling of CO2 4 W/m2
radiative effect of clouds (cooling) 17-35 W/m2

It seems to be that the ionization in the atmosphere produced by GCR is the

essential link. One can estimate that a variation in cloud cover of 3 % during an
average 11-year solar cycle could have an effect of 0.8-1.7 W/m2 . This is a very
significant amount.
The idea that cosmic rays can influence cloud formation was first pointed out
by Svensmark et al. (1997 [306]). They showed that there was a significant
correlation between total cloud cover over the Earth and the influx of cosmic rays.
The rays ionize particles in the low troposphere which then seed the growth of
cloud water droplets. During the past century the shielding from cosmic rays
has increased since solar activity has increased. This decreases the formation and
cooling influence of low clouds and may thus provide a possible contribution to
the global warming of the past 100 years (Marsh, Svensmark, 2000 [212]).
Let us consider and summarize the changes in the magnetic field in the solar
atmosphere. Shorter solar cycles facilitate a rise in the coronal source flux, longer
cycles allow it to decay. The accumulation of the coronal source flux strongly
depends on the rate of flux emergence in active regions. In general the peak and
cycle averaged sunspot numbers are larger when cycles are shorter. Therefore,
shorter cycles are associated with larger flux emergence rates, there is less time
for the open flux to decay. We can state:
shorter activity cycle → increased coronal flux
The coronal source surface is where the magnetic field becomes approximately
radial. This occurs at r = 2.5R . This surface can also be regarded as the
boundary that separates the solar corona from the heliosphere. The magnetic flux
threading the corona source surface is called Fs or open solar flux. If there is a
rise of the flux Fs than the cosmic ray flux incident on the Earth will decrease.
Lockwood and Foster (2000 [199]) estimated that the cosmic ray flux > 3 GeV was
15% larger around 1900 than it is now. As it was shown above, cosmic rays generate
air ions in the sub ionospheric gap which allows current to flow in the global electric
current. This connects thunderclouds with the ground via lightening.
An analysis of ISCCP D2 cloud data showed a correspondence between low
cloud cover and cosmic ray flux (Palle and Butler, 2000 [242]). The authors also
mentioned that the effect of increased global sea temperatures, increased aerosols
and aircraft traffic on cloud formation processes should be taken into account.
6.5. WHAT CAUSES THE GLOBAL WARMING? 171

Table 6.6: Causes of Global Warming of about 0.5 C, 1880-1997

Climate Forcing Factor Est. forcing ◦ C , 1880-1997
Solar luminosity increase +0.251
Decrease
in volcanic stratospheric aerosols +0.152
Increased
anthropogenic sulfate aerosols Up to -0.1 C
Increased
anthropogenic carbon aerosols Up to + 0.1 C (offsets sulfate aerosols)
Carbon dioxide warming +0.05 to +0.10 C
Decrease
in stratospheric ozone -0.05 C3
Increase
in cirrus contrails from airplanes + 0.05 C
Urban heat island effects +0.01 to +0.104
Changing skyline effects possibly as large as + 0.25 C
Sum total of all
above forcing factor +0.51 to 0.60 C
1
See “The Role of the Sun in Climate Change”; also see Lean et al., 1995 [191].
2
Wu et al., 1999 [341]
3
Schwartz and Andreae 1996
4
Balling, 1992

6.5 What Causes the Global Warming?

This is a very strong debate. In the extreme case the warming is not caused by
a substantial greenhouse effect since as is shown in Table 6.6 other factors can
contribute to the observed increase in temperature. However, all these estimates
are estimates and should be taken with caution.
In Fig 6.10 a graph from the summary for policymakers of the report of WG 1
of the intergovernmental panel on climate change illustrates the estimated global
mean radiative forcing of the climate system for the year 2000 relative to 1750.
The main forcing due to CFC’s is easily recognized, the influence of the Sun and
its variation is marked as bad known but as more important as e.g. black carbon
from fossil fuel burning.
Generally, the effect of cosmic rays seems to be important but cannot explain
the whole climate warming observed during the past 100 years. The climate re-
sponse to changes of cosmic ray flux was investigated by Shaviv, 2005[281]. The
result can be summarized as:
• there is certainly a link between the cosmic ray flux (CRF) and solar lumi-
nosity
• the increased solar luminosity during the last 100 years lead to a decreased
CRF
172 CHAPTER 6. SPACE WEATHER AND CLIMATE

Figure 6.10: Global radiative cooling and warming of the climate system (from IPCC
report).

• CRF/climate link therefore implies that the increased solar luminosity and
reduced CRF over the previous century should have contributed a warming
of 0.47 ± 0.19 K,

• the rest should be mainly attributed to anthropogenic causes.

• Without any effect of cosmic rays, the increase in solar luminosity would
correspond to an increased temperature of 0.16 ± 0.04 K

Meteorite data on the galactic cosmic rays, the solar activity, and temperature
variations in the earth’s atmosphere lead to the conclusion that the solar activity
may be important factor exerting the influence upon the climate of the Earth
(see e.g. Alexeev, Ustinova, 2005[4]). Estimations on the long term cosmic ray
variation and possible climate on planets were made by Dorman, 2005 [78].
A summary of the effects is illustrated in Fig. 6.11. The data shown in that
Fig are i) Reconstructed NH temperature series from 1610-1980, updated with raw
data from 1981-1995 ii) Greenhouse gases (GHG) represented by atmospheric CO2
measurements (iii) Reconstructed solar irradiance (see Lean et al., 1995 [191]) (iv)
Weighted volcanic dust veil index (DVI) (v) Evolving multivariate correlation of
6.5. WHAT CAUSES THE GLOBAL WARMING? 173

Figure 6.11: Relationship of Northern hemisphere mean (NH) temperature reconstruc-

tion to estimates of three candidate forcings between 1610 and 1995.

NH series with the 3 forcings (i) (ii) and (iii). The data are from Mann et al.
(1999 [206], and further references therein). These authors conclude that while
the natural (solar and volcanic) forcings appear to be important factors governing
the natural variations of temperatures in past centuries, only human greenhouse
gas forcing alone, can statistically explain the unusual warmth of the past few
decades.
Chapter 7

Space Weather and

Radiation Damage

In this chapter we discuss the influences of radiation damage both to humans in

space as well as to electronics and solar panels of satellites. A general overview
on the radiation environment in the interplanetary space was given by Townsend
and Wilson, 1996 [315].

7.1 Radiation Damage on Living Organisms

7.1.1 Definitions
Radiation is energy in the form of waves or particles. X rays and gamma rays
are electromagnetic waves of radiation, as is visible light. Particulate radiation
includes alpha and beta radiation. The energy associated with any radiation can
be transferred to matter. This transfer of energy can remove electrons from the
atoms leading to the formation of ions. The types of radiation capable of producing
ions in matter are collectively referred to as ionizing radiation.
Alpha particles are composed of two protons and two neutrons. Alpha particles
do not travel very far from their radioactive source. They cannot pass through a
piece of paper, clothes, or even the layer of dead cells which normally protects the
skin. Because alpha particles cannot penetrate human skin they are not considered
an external exposure hazard (this means that if the alpha particles stay outside the
human body they cannot harm it). However, alpha particle sources located within
the body may pose an “internal” health hazard if they are present in great enough
quantities. The risk from indoor radon is due to inhaled alpha particle sources
which irradiate lung tissue.
Beta particles are electrons not bound to any atom. Beta particles cannot
travel very far from their radioactive source. For example, they can travel only
about one cm in human tissue, and they may travel a m in air. They are not
capable of penetrating something as thin as a book or a pad of paper.

175
176 CHAPTER 7. SPACE WEATHER AND RADIATION DAMAGE

Table 7.1: Radiation related units

Unit Measures Definition
Roengten (R) exposure 1 R=2.56 × 10−4 C/s is deposited in
dry air kg−1 ; only for X rays
Radiation absorbed dose 1 rad = absorption
absorbed dose of 100 ergs per g material
(rad) used for any type of radiation
no description of biol. effects
Roengten equivalent dose rem=rad × Q
equivalent man Q... quality factor (type of radiation)
REM relates absorbed dose to effective
biological damage
Gray, Gy absorbed dose 1 Gy= 1J of energy deposed in
1 kg of material
Sievert Sv equivalent dose Sv = Gy × Q, Q...quality factor
1 Sv = 100 rem
Becquerel Bq radioactivity 1Bq=1 transformation/sec
1 Cu=3.7×1010 Bq

Gamma rays are an example of electromagnetic radiation, as is visible light.

Gamma rays originate from the nucleus of an atom by nuclear transitions. They
are capable of travelling long distances through air and most other materials.
Gamma rays require more “shielding” material, such as lead or steel, to reduce
their numbers than is required for alpha and beta particles.
In Table 7.1 we give some definitions used in radiation physics.
The effect of radiation on any material is determined by the dose of radiation
that material receives. Radiation dose is simply the quantity of radiation energy
deposited in a material. There are several terms used in radiation protection to
precisely describe the various aspects associated with the concept of dose and how
radiation energy deposited in tissue affects humans.
Some terms related to radiation dose:

• Chronic dose: A chronic dose means a person received a radiation dose over
a long period of time.

• Acute dose: An acute dose means a person received a radiation dose over a
short period of time.

• Somatic effects are effects from some agent, like radiation that are seen in
the individual who receives the agent.

• Genetic effects: Genetic effects are effects from some agent, that are seen in
the offspring of the individual who received the agent. The agent must be
encountered pre-conception.
7.1. RADIATION DAMAGE ON LIVING ORGANISMS 177

DNA
damage

Mutations
Cancer
Replication errors
Replication
Persistent DNA
DNA damage
Repair Aging
Genomic instability

Figure 7.1: DNA damage caused by radiation

• Teratogenic effects: Teratogenic effects are effects from some agent, that are
seen in the offspring of the individual who received the agent. The agent
must be encountered during the gestation period.

7.1.2 Radiation Damage on DNA

The basic unit of any living organism is a cell. It is a small, watery compart-
ment filled with chemicals and a complete copy of the organism’s genome. The
term genome denotes all the DNA in the cell (chromosomes and other). Different
organisms have different numbers of chromosomes (e.g. humans have 23 pairs of
chromosomes, 44 autosomes and 2 pairs of sex chromosomes). Each parent con-
tributes one chromosome to each pair and so children get half of their chromosomes
form their mother and half from their father.
The structural arrangement of DNA looks like a long ladder twisted into a
helix. The sides of the ladder are formed by a backbone of sugar and phosphate
molecules. The rungs consist of nucleotide bases joined weakly in the middle by
hydrogen bounds. There are two major ways that radiation injures the DNA inside
the cells of an organism:
• Water in the body tends to absorb a large fraction of radiation and becomes
ionized. When water is ionized it forms highly reactive molecules which are
called free radicals. Those react with and damage the DNA molecules.
• Radiation can also collide directly with the DNA molecules ionizing and
damaging it directly.
The typical symptoms of radiation sickness are: severe burns that are slow to heal,
sterilization, cancer. High doses are rapidly fatal (within days or weeks). Yang
et al. (1996 [342]) discussed DNA damage and repair in oncogenic transformation
178 CHAPTER 7. SPACE WEATHER AND RADIATION DAMAGE

Figure 7.2: Passage of ionizing radiation can result in direct effect on DNA leading to
single strand breaks (SSB), double strand breaks (DSB), associated base damage (BD),
or clusters of these damage types. Source: NASA

by heavy ion radiation. The most important late effect of energetic heavy ions in
cosmic rays and solar particle events is risk assessment in carcinogenesis.

7.1.3 DNA Repair

Wether or not a cell can repair depends on the damage to the DNA.

• single strand break in the DNA: this can be usually repaired and normal cell
function is restored.

• breaks in both DNA strands: usually the damage is too severe to repair and
the cell dies.

• chemical change or mutation: cannot be repaired; cancer or a mutation

offspring results if this occurs in a sperm or egg cell.

7.1.4 Radiation Dose Limits for Astronauts

These limits were set by the US National Council on Radiation Protection and
Measurements for all space missions in order to protect the astronauts. But there
is an exception for exploratory missions and circumstances in space (e.g. mission
to Mars). In Table 7.2 the relevant data are given.
The radiation dose limits for ordinary citizens are much lower (see Table 7.3).
The annual dose is about 50 mSv, the lifetime dose is age [years] x 10 mSv. In the
US the total average annual dose is about 3.6 mSv.
The single dose effects are described in Table 7.4
Riklis et al. (1996 [260]) discussed biochemical radioprotection using antioxi-
dants and DNA repair enhancement and found that the right combination proves
7.1. RADIATION DAMAGE ON LIVING ORGANISMS 179

Table 7.2: Radiation dose limits in mSv for astronauts

Time period blood forming organs eyes skin

30 days 250 1000 1500
annual 500 2000 3000
career for males 2000 mSv+75(age[years]-30) 4000 6000
career for females 2000 mSv+75(age[years]-38) 4000 6000

Table 7.3: Total average annual radiation does in the US

radon in the air 2 mSv (56%)

rocks, building material 0.28 mSv (8%)
cosmic rays 0.28 mSv (8%)
natural radioactive material in body 0.39mSv (11%)
medical and dental rays 0.39 mSv (11%)
nuclear medicine tests 0.14 mSv (4%)

Table 7.4: Single dose effects

0.001 mSv dental x rays

0.002 mSv 5 hr transcontinental flight
0.02 mSv chest X-ray
1.000 mSv radiation sickness
2500 mSv sterility in females
3500 mSv sterility in males
4000 mSv average lethal dose (without any treatment)

effective in providing protection from a wide range of radiation exposures over a

long period of time.

7.1.5 Genetic vs. Somatic Effects

Somatic effects of radiation damage appear on the exposed person. Prompt so-
matic effects appear after an acute dose. One example of a prompt effect is tem-
porary hair loss. Delayed somatic effects may occur years after radiation doses
are received. Typical effects are the development of cancer and cataracts. Let us
briefly mention the most important syndromes.

• Blood forming organ (bone marrow) syndrome: damage to the cells which
divide at the most rapid pace; bone marrow, spleen and limphathic tissue.
Symptoms include internal bleeding, fatigue, bacterial infections and fever.
180 CHAPTER 7. SPACE WEATHER AND RADIATION DAMAGE

• Gastrointestinal tract syndrome (>1000 rad): damage to cells which divide

less rapidly; lining to the stomach and intestines. Symptoms are nausea,
vomitting, diarrhoea, dehydration, loss of digestion ability, bleeding ulcers.

• Central nervous system syndrome (> 5000 rad): damage to cells which do
not reproduce such as nerve cells. Symptoms include loss of coordination,
confusion, coma, shock.

It seems now that death is not caused by radiation damage on the nervous system
but by internal bleeding and fluid and pressure build-up on the brain.
The genetic or heritable effect appears in the future generation of the exposed
person as a result of radiation damage to the reproductive cells.
We have seen that satellite systems are vulnerable to Space Weather through
its influence on energetic charged particle and plasma populations and that aircraft
electronics and air crew are subjected to atmospheric secondary radiation produced
by cosmic rays and solar particle events. This is discussed by Dyer (2001 [85]).
The Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) continuously monitors the solar wind
and produces warnings by monitoring the high-energy particles that can produce
radiation damage in satellite systems (Zwickl et al., 1998 [347]).
3.9-2.5 Billion years ago the Earth was dominated by an oceanic lithosphere.
Cockell, 2000, [69] calculated that the DNA damage rates might have been ap-
proximately three orders of magnitude higher in the surface layer of the Archean
oceans than on present-day oceans. However, at 30 m depth, damage might have
been similar to the surface of present-day oceans. On the other hand, risk of
being transported to the surface water in the mixed layer was quite high. Thus
the mixed layer may have been inhabited by a low diversity UV-resistant biota.
Repair capabilities similar to Deinococcus radiodurans would have been sufficient
to survive in the mixed layer. During the early Proterozoic ozone concentrations
increased and the UV stress would have been reduced and a greater diversity of
organisms could have inhabited the mixed layer.
In STS Shuttle/Mir mission experiment, recovery of bacterial cells from ra-
diation damage and the effects of microgravity were examined for Deinococcus
radiodurans (Kobayashi et al., 2000 [170]).
Lean (2000 [190]) discusses societal impacts of solar electromagnetic radiation.
Climate change and ozone depletion has significant economic and political impacts
on an international level.
The Yohkoh satellite was launched in 1991. Song and Cao (1999 [296]) discuss
CCD radiation damage. Evans et al. (1999 [94]) discuss charged-particle induced
radiation damage of a HPGe gamma-ray detector during spaceflight.

7.1.6 The Solar Proton Event in August 1972

Between the manned Apollo 16 and 17 missions one of the largest solar proton
events ever recorded occurred. As a matter of luck no astronauts were in space
during that time. Computer simulations were done later to reconstruct the influ-
ence on astronauts during that time. The main result of these simulations was
that even inside of a spacecraft the astronauts would have absorbed a lethal dose
7.2. SOLAR UV RADIATION DAMAGE 181

Figure 7.3: Correlation of the occurrence of solar proton events with solar activity cycle
(indicated by the sunspot number)

of radiation within 10 hrs after the start of the event. At 6:20 UT an optical flare
was observed on the Sun. At 13:00 UT the astronauts’ allowable 30- day radia-
tion exposure to skin and eyes was exceeded. At 14:00 the astronauts’ allowable
30-day radiation exposure for blood forming organs and yearly limit for eyes was
exceeded. The yearly limit for skin was exceeded at 15:00 UT. At 16:00 UT the
yearly limit for blood forming organs and the career limit for eyes was exceeded.
At 17:00 UT the career limit for skin was exceeded.
This event dramatically shows the need for space weather forecasting. The
correlation of solar proton events with activity cycle is evident (Fig. 7.1.6).
Heckman (1988 [130]) discussed proton event predictions.

7.2 Solar UV Radiation Damage

7.2.1 General Remarks
Most UV radiation from the Sun is absorbed by the ozone layer or reflected back
into space so only a small amount reaches the surface of the Earth. Sunlight is
received as direct rays and as diffuse light, i.e. skylight which has been scattered
by the atmosphere. The sky is blue because air molecules scatter the shorter
wavelength (blue light) more than the red light, the index of scattering depends
on the wavelength. UV light is scattered even more than blue light.
Due to diffuse UV light, being shaded from direct Sunlight provides only a
partial protection. Typical window glasses transmit less than 10% of ultraviolet
light, and sunblock creams work by absorbing or reflecting UV rays. The SPF
rating of sunscreens gives an indication of their effectiveness as UV blockers. For
example, an SPF of 15 means that it should take 15 times as long to before skin
182 CHAPTER 7. SPACE WEATHER AND RADIATION DAMAGE

damage occurs (i.e., the cream should block about 93% of the radiation that causes
skin damage). UV radiation is subdivided into three wavelength bands:

• UVA (315-400 nm), produces photochemical smog; damages plastic, paints

and fabrics. UVA rays are not as energetic as UVB and, as a consequence,
cause little sunburn or skin reddening. On the other hand, UVA rays pen-
etrate deeper into the skin. The damage they cause is on a cellular level,
occurring slowly and accumulating over a period of time. UVA radiation
induces the formation of free radicals that, in turn, attack the lipids in the
skin. The resulting damage gives rise to the visible signs of aging such as
wrinkles and thickened skin. The skin’s natural defenses against these free
radicals are ascorbic acid (vitamin C) and alpha-tocopherol (vitamin E).
These two vitamins are potent anti-oxidants that intercept the free radicals
before they can do much damage. Vitamin C protects significantly better
against UVA phototoxicity than vitamin E. Vitamin E, on the other hand,
is more efficient against UVB.

• UVB (290-315 nm); 1% of solar radiation energy is in this band, most of it

absorbed by ozone. Can damage DNA; smaller changes in ozone can lead to
large changes in UVB radiation at the surface. Other effects are: Production
of vitamin D in humans, skin cancer and damage to eye tissue. Plants and
aquatic organisms suffer reduced growth, and many materials such as plastics
degrade more rapidly in response to increased UVB radiation.

• UVC (220-290 nm); totally blocked by ozone and other gases, does not reach
the Earth’s surface.

A person’s potential to develop skin cancer is related to their exposure UVB

radiation (sunburn). In New Zealand, about one person in three will develop a skin
cancer during their lifetime. About half the number killed on the roads die of skin
cancer in New Zealand. New Zealand and Australia have a very high melanoma
incidence compared with other countries.
How can this be explained?

• New Zealanders have an outdoor lifestyle,

• wear fewer clothes now than in the past,

• the ancestors of most white-skinned New Zealanders migrated from the UK,
which is at much higher latitude, and has much lower levels of UV radiation.
These people are therefore poorly adapted to the relatively high levels of UV
naturally present in New Zealand;

• calculations suggest that locations in the Southern Hemisphere should re-

ceive approximately 15% more UV than locations at a similar latitude north
of the Equator (Basher, 1981 [27]). This is caused by differences in ozone be-
tween the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, and also because the Earth is
slightly closer to the Sun during the Southern Hemisphere summer (McKen-
zie and Elwood, 1990 [220]);
7.2. SOLAR UV RADIATION DAMAGE 183

• measurements show much larger differences, with biologically-damaging UV

being 50-80% more in the Southern Hemisphere than at comparable North-
ern latitudes in Europe. The differences are caused by the buildup of tro-
pospheric pollution (tropospheric ozone and aerosols) in the North (Seck-
meyer and McKenzie, 1992 [277]);

• Much higher levels of UV are experienced in countries, such as Australia,

which are closer to the equator.

The amount of UVB radiation at ground level is determined by three factors: a)

solar elevation, b) the amount of ozone in the atmosphere and c) the cloudiness of
the sky. Please note that during local noon the amount of background radiation is
the same as direct radiation three hours before and afterwards. At NZ’s latitude,
approximately 40% of the daily sunburn radiation occurs during the two hour
period centered on solar noon.
Since the late 1970s an ozone hole has formed over Antarctica during early
spring. The amount of ozone over New Zealand varies seasonally with a maxi-
mum in spring and a minimum in early autumn. Evidence of ozone destruction
has also been observed over the Arctic. The ozone hole is caused by the special
meteorological conditions of the cold atmosphere above polar regions which am-
plify the destructive ability of CFCs. The Antarctic ozone hole cannot shift over
New Zealand. However, ozone losses over Antarctica may contribute to changes
in ozone over the whole globe. After emission, halogen source gases are either
removed from the atmosphere or undergo chemical conversion. The time to re-
move about 2/3 of a gas is called the atmospheric lifetime. Thus the amount of a
halogen source gas in the atmosphere depends on a) lifetime b) amount emitted to
the atmosphere. The atmospheric lifetime of CFC-12 and CFC-113 is about 100
years.
In Fig. 7.4 clear sky UV indices for different stations in NZ are given. Seasonal
variations are higher at low latitudes as well as the absolute values.

7.2.2 UV Radiation and Materials

Synthetic polymers such as plastics are widespread and used all over the world.
Wood wich can be considered as naturally occurring polymer. Both are used in
building construction and other outdoor applications. The UV-B content affects
adversely the mechanical properties of these materials. Therefore, photostabilizers
in the case of plastics and protective surface coatings in the case of wood have to be
used. Increased UV radiation and increased temperature contribute to a reduction
of service life of these materials. It is estimated that especially the developing
countries will suffer from UV radiation damage. The ozone-layer depletion is
occurs mainly at higher latitudes. But at these latitudes the temperatures are
moderate and the degradation reactions of the above cited polymers is low. The
change in the ozone column at low latitudes is small, but the ambient temperatures
are high as well as a high solar UV-B radiation. Therefore the service life of plastics
will be reduced. A well known effect of degradation is yellowing discoloration
184 CHAPTER 7. SPACE WEATHER AND RADIATION DAMAGE

Figure 7.4: Typical clear-sky UV indices over New Zealand and its surrounding region.
Seasonal variations are larger at low latitudes (denoted by numbers).

(e.g. wood, PVC) and loss of mechanical integrity (see also Andrady et al. 1998
[10]).

7.2.3 Effects on the Skin

Generally, excessive UV exposure results in a number of chronic skin changes.
These include:
• various skin cancers of which melanoma is the most life-threatening;
• an increased number of moles (benign abnormalities of melanocytes),
• a range of other alterations arising from UV damage to keratinocytes and
blood vessels;
• UV damage to fibrous tissue is often described as “photoageing”. Photoage-
ing makes people look older because their skin loses its tightness and so sags
or wrinkles.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has estimated that more
than 2 million non melanoma skin cancers and 200 000 malignant melanomas occur
globally each year. Let us assume that there is a 10% decrease of stratospheric
ozone; then it is estimated that an additional 300 000 nonmelanoma and 4 500
melanoma skin cancers would result worldwide.
The relationship between stratospheric ozone depletion and skin cancer was
studied by many authors (see e.g. Amron and Moy, 1991 [8]). The impact of skin
cancer related to climate change on the British population was reviewed by Diffey,
2004 [75].
7.2. SOLAR UV RADIATION DAMAGE 185

Caucasians have a higher risk of skin cancer because of the relative lack of
skin pigmentation. The worldwide incidence of malignant melanoma continues
to increase, and is strongly related to frequency of recreational exposure to the
sun and to history of sunburn. There is evidence that risk of melanoma is also
related to intermittent exposure to UV, especially in childhood, and to exposure
to sunlamps. However, the latter results are still preliminary.

7.2.4 Effects on the Eye

The acute effects of UV on the eye include the development of photokeratitis and
photoconjunctivitis, which are like sunburn of the delicate skin-like tissue on the
surface of the eyeball (cornea) and eyelids. While painful, they are reversible,
easily prevented by protective eyewear and have not been associated with any
long-term damage.
Chronic effects however include the possible development of pterygium (a white
or cream colored opaque growth attached to the cornea), squamous cell cancer of
the conjunctiva (scaly or plate-like malignancy) and cataracts. Some 20 million
people worldwide are currently blind as a result of cataracts. Of these, WHO
estimates that as many as 20% may be due to UV exposure. Experts believe that
each 1% sustained decrease in stratospheric ozone would result in an increase of
0.5% in the number of cataracts caused by solar UV. Direct viewing of the sun
and other extremely bright objects can also seriously damage the very sensitive
part of the retina called the yellow spot, fovea or macula leutea. When cells of
the fovea are destroyed, people can no longer view fine detail. For those people it
becomes impossible to read, sew, watch TV, recognize faces, drive a vehicle etc.

7.2.5 Immune System

UV also appears to alter immune response by changing the activity and distrib-
ution of the cells responsible for triggering these responses. A number of studies
indicate that UV exposures at environmental levels suppress immune responses
in both rodents and humans. In rodents, this immune suppression results in en-
hanced susceptibility to certain infectious diseases with skin involvement, and some
systemic infections. Mechanisms associated with UV-induced immunosuppression
and host defence that protect against infectious agents are similar in rodents and
humans. It is therefore reasonable to assume that UV exposure may enhance the
risk of infection and decrease the effectiveness of vaccines in humans. Additional
research is necessary to substantiate this.

7.2.6 UV Index
The Global Solar UV Index was developed through the WHO. It provides an
estimate of the maximum solar UV exposure at the Earth’s surface. The intensity
of UV reaches a maximum around mid-day (when there is no cloud cover) at solar
noon.
186 CHAPTER 7. SPACE WEATHER AND RADIATION DAMAGE

Table 7.5: The environment in space

Source Energy Hazard
Cosmic rays GeV SEU, Latchup
Solar flare particles MeV to GeV Interference
Radiation belt particles MeV Rad. damage, degradation
Energetic plasma keV to MeV Charging
Low energy plasma eV to keV leakage, sputtering
Neutral O atoms Erosion
Debris Puncture

It is generally presented as a forecast of the maximum amount of skin-damaging

UV expected to reach the Earth’s surface at solar noon. The values of the Index
range from zero upward; the higher the Index number, the greater the likelihood
of skin and eye damaging exposure to UV, and the less time it takes for damage
to occur.
Close to the equator, summer-time values reach 20. During a European summer
a value of 8 can be reached. We speak of:

• low UV exposure: Index 1...2

• moderate UV exposure: Index 3...4

• high UV exposure: Index 5...6

• very high UV exposure: Index 7...8

• extreme UV exposure: Index > 9

7.3 Radiation in Space

7.3.1 Space Environment
Outer space is extremely hostile and without a spacesuit :

• you would become unconscious within 15 s because there is no O,

• blood and other body fluids start to boil and then freeze because there is no
air pressure,

• tissues (skin, heart...) expand because of the boiling fluids,

• extreme temperature changes: sunlight 1200 C, shade -1000 C.

• exposure to radiation and micrometeoroids.

7.3. RADIATION IN SPACE 187

In Table 7.5 we summarize the different environmental effects in space.

The space environment is extremely hostile and protection must be provided.
The ISS station is at a height of about 400 km. There is some protection from
the Earth’s magnetosphere concerning charged particles. The Astronauts that
travelled to the moon absorbed higher doses, up to 3 times.
For the planned manned mission to Mars for which a duration of 1000 days
is proposed it is estimated that under the very best protection the risk for the
Astronauts dying from cancer could be doubled.

7.3.2 The Extravehicular Mobility Unit

Some facts: Weight = 127 kg on Earth, Thickness = 0.48 cm, 13 layers, at-
mosphere = 0.29 atm of pure oxygen, Volume = 0.125 to 0.153 m3 , without as-
tronaut cost = 12 million USD.
While early spacesuits were made entirely of soft fabrics, the EMU has a combi-
nation of soft and hard components to provide support, mobility and comfort. The
suit itself has 13 layers of material, including an inner cooling garment (two lay-
ers), pressure garment (two layers), thermal micrometeorid garment (eight layers)
and outer cover (one layer). The materials used include: Nylon tricot Spandex,
Urethane-coated Nylon, Dacron, Neoprene-coated Nylon, Mylar, Gortex, Kevlar
(material in bullet-proof vests), Nomex. All of the layers are sewn and cemented
together to form the suit. In contrast to early spacesuits, which were individually
tailored for each astronaut, the EMU has component pieces of varying sizes that
can be put together to fit any given astronaut. The EMU consists of the following
parts:

• Maximum Absorption Garment (MAG) - collects urine produced by the as-

tronaut. Liquid Cooling and Ventilation Garment (LCVG) - removes excess
body heat produced by the astronaut during spacewalks EMU.

• Electrical Harness (EEH) - provides connections for communications and

bio-instruments.

• Communications Carrier Assembly (CCA) - contains microphones and ear-

phones for communications.

• Lower Torso Assembly (LTA) - lower half of the EMU including pants, knee
and ankle joints, boots and lower waist Hard Upper Torso (HUT) - hard
fiberglass shell that supports several structures including the arms, torso,
helmet, life-support backpack and control module Arms Gloves - outer and
inner gloves Helmet.

• Extravehicular Visor Assembly (EVA) - protects the astronaut from bright

sunlight

• In-suit Drink Bag (IDB) - provides drinking water for the astronaut during
the spacewalk.
188 CHAPTER 7. SPACE WEATHER AND RADIATION DAMAGE

• Primary Life Support Subsystem (PLSS) - provides oxygen, power, carbon

dioxide removal, cooling water, radio equipment and warning system.
• Secondary Oxygen Pack (SOP) - provides emergency oxygen supply.
• Display and Control Module (DCM) - displays and controls to run the PLSS

7.3.3 Radiation Shielding

Since the 1950s it is known that radiation in space poses a problem to human
space travel. In 1952 Wernher von Braun and other space visionaries suggested
using lunar soil to protect manned expedition from space radiation and meteors.
Low energy radiation can be stopped by a spacecraft wall. At higher energies
the wall itself produces showers of secondary radiation and even more shielding
is needed to absorb that. Using light weight materials like hydrogen, boron and
lithium, nuclei of heavy elements in cosmic rays can be shattered by lightweight
atoms without producing additional hazardous recoil products like neutrons. Thus,
composites and other materials using low mass atoms might provide good shield-
ing. At NASA’s Langley Research Center simulated Martian soil will be tested for
shielding.
The International Space Station (ISS) at 51.60 inclination and 220 mile of al-
titude is being constructed during a period of high solar activity with about 1000
hours of required extra vehicular activity (EVA). The Astronauts are exposed to
trapped protons and electrons and galactic cosmic rays. Especially during tran-
sits through the South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA) EVA astronauts may experience
enhanced doses. Dose enhancements are also expected from solar particle events
(SPE). There are two different types of suits for astronauts: EMU and Orlan.
The skin responses to radiation include erythema, epilation, desquamation.
Different anatomical skin sites vary in sensitivity with decreased order of respon-
siveness as follows:
• anterior aspect of neck,
• anterior surfaces of extremities, chest, abdomen,
• face
• back, posterior surfaces,
• nape of neck,
• scalp, palms, soles.
Literature: For more details on the problem see e.g. Kiefer (2001 [161]) or the
Space Studies Board of the National Research Council (2000) or Thomson (1999
[312]), Badhwar (1997 [20]). Radiation measurements on Russian spacecraft Mir
are presented by MacKay et al. (1993 [219]).
The effectiveness of any shielding depends on the energy distribution of the
incident radiation. Some examples for common shielding materials are listed in
Table 7.6.
7.3. RADIATION IN SPACE 189

Table 7.6: Common shielding materials

lead 11.35 g/cm3
aluminium 2.7
water 1.0
lithium hydride 0.82
liquid hydrogen 0.07

Radiation with energy less than 1 MeV/nm can not penetrate a space suit
of 1 mm thickness. Al shielding reduces the low boundary to 40 MeV. When
a high-energy ion strikes an atom in metal shielding it can produce secondary
radiation and there are cases where a small amount of shielding is worse than
none at all. Bremsstrahlung can be created (X-rays) by electrons as they interact
with spacecraft shielding.
Radiation damage of electronic components in space environment was studied
by Boscherine et al. 2003[44].
The radiation-induced degradation of polymeric spacecraft materials under
protective oxide coatings was studied by Lachance et al. 2001[181].
Polyethylene (Cn Hn ) is a relatively inexpensive, stable, and, with a low atomic
number, an effective shielding material that has been certified for use aboard the
ISS. Several designs for placement of slabs or walls of polyethylene have been eval-
uated for radiation exposure reduction- and it is shown that 20% or mor reduction
in dose in the crew quarters is achievable (see Shavers et al. 2004, [280]).

7.3.4 Radiation Risks of Manned Space Missions

Activity of men in space considerably increased since the last 50 years and this
trend will continue. Therefore, a careful analysis of possible risks due to radiation
is essential especially for long duration missions such as ISS stays of serval months,
mission to Mars (estimated duration 1000 days) and lunar missions.
The aim of space radiation programs is to obtain a 95% confidence level that
a three 180-day missions at the ISS can be accomplished without exceeding career
radiation risk limits. The uncertainty in risk prediction of a Mars mission currently
is too high and should also be brought to that level. For this purpose Galactic
Cosmic Rays and Solar Energetic Particles Events are simulated using high energy
heavy ion beams at the NASA Space Research Laboratory (NSRL) in Brookhaven
National Laboratory (BNL) (Schimmerling and Cucinotta, 2004 [273]). NASA
Space Research Laboratory became operational in 2003. It is estimated that for
each year that astronauts spend in space, about one-third of their DNA will be
hit directly by heavy ions.
Chapter 8

Magnetosphere, Ionosphere,
Space Weather

1, 2
A good introduction to the space environment was given in the books .

8.1 General Properties

8.1.1 The Magnetosphere
The Earth’s magnetosphere can be defined by the area of space around the Earth
that is controlled by the Earth’s magnetic field.
To a very crude approximation the Earth’s magnetic field is a dipole field.
Such fields are well known from bar magnets. How is the magnetic field gener-
ated? The internal field is generated by a dynamo process, there is a circulation
of liquid metal in the deep Earth and this causes the dipole field (bar magnet)
with an inclination of 100 to the rotation axis of the Earth. The magnetic poles
however do not correspond exactly to the geographic poles and moreover, they are
reversed, magnetic north is near the geographic south pole. Note that the geo-
graphic location of the poles varies, the magnetic poles wander as much as 15 km
every year. The earth’s magnetic field strength was measured by Carl Friedrich
Gauss in 1835. An exponential decay with a half-life of about 1400 years can be
clearly seen in the measurements. From Lava flow studies we can deduce that
there have been field reversals in the past- the last reversal has occurred 800 000
ago.
88% of the total field can be deduced from a dipole and the magnetic induction
BD can be derived from dipole potential ΦD :
µ0 M.r
BD = −µ0 ∇ΦD = −∇ (8.1)
4πr3
1 Tascione T F, “Introduction to the Space Environment”, Krieger (Florida, 1994)
2 Bergmann-Schaefer, Lehrbuch d. Experimentalphysik, Erde und Planeten. Chapters written
by S.F. Bauer and H.O. Rucker

191
192 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

There are the three components of the magnetic induction

µ0 M 2 cos θ
BD,r = − (8.2)
4π r3
µ0 M sin θ
BD,θ = − (8.3)
4π r3
BD,Φ = 0 (8.4)

Here, M denotes the magnetic moment of the dipole, for the Earth ME ∼ 8 ×
1022 Am−2 . θ is the angle between the dipole moment and the radiusvector r.
From the above equations we can derive the magnitude of the magnetic induc-
tion at r:

B(r, θ) = Br2 + Bθ2 (8.5)
µo M 
B(r, θ) = 1 + 3 cos2 θ (8.6)
4πr3
Note that the dipole strength decreases by r−3 . In the plane of the equator θ = 0
and:
µ0 M rE 3
Beq = 3
= B0 (8.7)
4πr r
The induction on the geomagnetic equator is B0 ∼ 31000 nT and rE = 6378 km
the radius of the Earth.
The space enclosed by the magnetosphere is not empty but filled with trapped
particles, namely ions and electrons. The magnetic forces are much stronger than
gravity.
The real shape of the boundary of the magnetosphere, the magnetopause, is
strongly modified by the solar wind. The distance of the magnetopause is

• on the side facing the Sun: 10-12 rE 3 .

• over the poles: 15 rE

• on the night side the tail reaches past several 100 rE .

There exists also a neutral gas envelope of the Earth, the Geocorona that extends
to 4-5 rE .
At the side facing the Sun there must be an equilibrium between two pressures:

• pressure of solar wind, this depends on the number of particles n, α which

is the angle between velocity of the particles and the normal to the magne-
topause and f which denotes the momentum transfer factor. The number
of particles per time and area is nv cos α and the change of momentum
f mv cos α. f = 2 means total reflection.

• the magnetic pressure at the magnetopause is B 2 /2µ0 .

3 all distances are given in units of the Earth’s radius and measured from the Earth’s center
8.1. GENERAL PROPERTIES 193

Thus the equilibrium conditions becomes:

B2
f nmv 2 cos2 α = (8.8)
2µ0

A further condition is that the normal component of the magnetic field is zero:

Bn = 0 (8.9)

From 8.8 and the typical values for the solar wind particles: n = 10−7 m−3 ,
v = vSW = 300 kms−1 , and r = 10rE (subsolar point),we get:
 1/6
B2
r = rE 2 (8.10)
2µ0 f nmvrmSW

And we find that B ∼ 87 nT are required in order to produce the magnetic

pressure needed. If we compute the field from 8.7 the value is BD = 31 nT. Thus
an amplification is needed. This amplification of the Earth’s field is provided
by the Chapman-Ferraro currents. Incoming charged particles cannot penetrate
the field lines and are deflected which causes currents and these currents produce
magnetic fields. Maxwell has shown that when a perfectly conducting flat plane
approached a dipole, its externally induced field was the same as the field of an
equal image dipole.
A simple drawing illustrates the main components of the magnetosphere (Figs.
8.1, 8.2 and 8.3)
The different parts of a magnetosphere are:

1. bow shock: in this front region solar wind particles hit the magnetosphere.
The solar wind particles have Mach numbers > 1 that means they are su-
`

personic. This is valid for both the Alfven and the sound velocity:

B cp p
vA = √ vS = (8.11)
µ0 ρ cv ρ

and the corresponding Mach numbers are MS = vSW /vs ; MA = vSW /vA ∼
10.

2. The region between the bow shock and the magnetopause is called magne-
tosheath. Here the particles become thermalized- kinetic energy is converted
to thermal energy and the plasma is highly turbulent there.

3. The solar wind stretches the dipole field, compressing it on the side towards
the sun and stretching it into a long tail region. The field lines close at very
large distances (∼ 3000 RE ).

4. plasmasheet: this is a sheet of plasma in the tail region dividing the two lobes
of the Earth’s magnetic field. For both electrons and protons the particle
density is 0.5 cm−3 .
194 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

5. lobes: they are in the magnetotail have opposite direction and are separated
by the plasmasheet -otherwise they would cancel.
6. plasmasphere: a torus shaped region, surrounding the Earth. It was detected
in 1963 and has a very sharp edge at the plasmapause extending to 4-6 Earth
radii. It can be also regarded as an extension of the ionosphere. Inside the
plasmapause geomagnetic field lines rotate with the Earth. Outside the
plasmasphere, magnetic field lines are unable to corotate, the solar wind
influence is too large. The plasmasphere is mainly composed of hydrogen.
7. Van Allen radiation belts: in 1958 Van Allen discovered the radiation belts;
like the plasmasphere they are toroidally shaped. The inner radiation belt
extends from 400 to 12000 km above the Earth, the outer belt from 12000
to 60000 km.
In order to understand the dynamics of the current system, we recapitulate the
motions of charged particles in a magnetic field:
1. spiral motion: circling about magnetic field lines; Charged particles cannot
easily move across magnetic field lines but are forced to spiral around them.
Electrons encircle the field line in one direction, ions in the other direction.
2. Bounce motion: the particles move along the field lines from pole to pole.
Near the poles they become reflected (since the magnetic field line density
is large).
3. drift motion: Curvature of the magnetic field lines and the non-uniform
strength of the magnetic field force particles to drift around the earth, ions
in one direction, electrons in the other. For the Earth as seen from Europe:
Ions go west, electrons east.
In a magnetic field particles are being transported and this causes currents. Due
to the currents magnetic fields are generated. In a magnetosphere there are three
distinct current systems:
1. Chapman Ferraro currents: they enclose and confine the magnetosphere and
are found in the vicinity of the magnetopause.
2. cross tail currents: pass through the center of the magnetotail causing the
current sheet.
3. Field aligned currents: transient currents, short circuit through a planet’s
ionosphere and cause aurorae.
How is the magnetosphere influenced by the solar wind?
• The interaction of enhanced solar wind pressure on the dayside cause a strong
reduction of the magnetopause even below the geostationary orbit (6.6 rE ).
The observed variations of the distance of the dayside magnetopause are in
the range 4.5 to 20 rE .
• The magnetic moment of the interplanetary magnetic field (magnitude and
orientation) determines the size and extension of the magnetosphere.
8.1. GENERAL PROPERTIES 195

Figure 8.1: The Earth’s magnetosphere (above) and the plasmasphere (below). NASA
196 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

Figure 8.2: The inner and outer Van Allen radiation belt. NASA

Lobe
s .
B toward Earth

Earth
Ring current B away from Earth
x
Lobe
s

Figure 8.3: The global structure of the Earth’s magnetic field. In the two lobes the
field is opposite and the lobes are separated by a plasmasheet. For the southern half of
the magnetosphere the current is clockwise, for the northern part it is counterclockwise.
In the middle both systems add to form a neutral sheet. The right drawing is a cross
section of the left at a distance of 20 rE .
8.1. GENERAL PROPERTIES 197

8.1.2 The Ionosphere

The ionosphere contains only a small fraction of the Earth’s atmosphere (less than
1 % of the mass of the atmosphere). However, this layer is extremely important
for modern telecommunication systems since it influences the passage of radio
waves. There are many textbooks describing the complex wave processes, chemical
processes, energy deposition and transfer rates in this layer. 4 Because of its name
we can expect that the atoms are ionized there. On the sunlit side of the Earth
the shorter wavelengths of solar radiation (extreme UV and X rays) are energetic
enough to produce ionization of the atoms. Therefore, this layer becomes an
electrical conductor supporting electric currents and radio wave propagation.
Historically, it has been divided into regions with specific ionizations.

• lowest D region: between 50 and 90 km.

• E region: between 90 and 150 km,

• F region: contains the F1 and F2 layers.

Ionograms are recorded tracings of reflected high frequency radio pulses generated
by an ionosonde. There exist relationships between the sounding frequency and
the ionization densities which can reflect it. As the sounder sweeps from lower
to higher frequencies, the signal rises above the noise of commercial radio sources
and records the return signal reflected from the different layers of the ionosphere.
The top of the ionosphere is at about 1000 km, however there exists no definite
boundary between plasma in the ionosphere and the outer reaches of the Earth’s
magnetic field. In the E region the most important ions are O+ +
2 , NO , in the F
+
region it is O . In the F2 layer (at about 400 km) the electron concentration
reaches its highest values which is important for the telecommunication systems.
At high latitudes there is another source of ionization of the ionosphere– the aurora
(see next chapter).
The so called transition height starts at the height of the maximum density of
the F2 layer of the Ionosphere and extends upward with decreasing density to a
transition height where O+ ions become less numerous than H+ and He+ . The
transition height depends on day and night:

• daytime: ∼ 800 km

• nighttime ∼ 500 km.

Above the transition height, the weak ionization has little influence on radio sig-
nals.
Some ionospheric parameters are listed in Table 8.1 where the values Ne and
Te denote electron density and electron temperature. For comparison, the values
of the solar corona are also given.
4 e.g. see Ionospheres : Physics, Plasma Physics, and Chemistry by Robert W. Schunk,

Andrew F. Nagy, Alexander J. Dessler (Editor), John T. Houghton (Editor), Michael J. Rycroft
(Editor), Cambridge Univ. Press, 2004
198 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

Table 8.1: Some parameters of the ionosphere.

Layer Ne cm−3 Tc K H (Gauss)
Ionosphere
D 103 200 ∼ 3 × 10−1
E 5 3
10 day, 10 night 2-3×10 2
∼ 3 × 10−1
F1 5
10 day, absent night 1000 ∼ 3 × 10−1
F2 6 5
10 day, 10 night 1-3×10 3
∼ 3 × 10−1
∼ 6
Solar Corona 4
10 ...10 8
10 10−5 ...1

At low latitudes the largest electron densities are found in peaks on either side
of the magnetic equator, which is called the equatorial anomaly. Normally one
would expect that the peak concentration will occur at the equator because of the
maximum in solar ionizing radiation. This peculiarity can be explained by the
special geometry of the magnetic field and the presence of electric fields. The elec-
tric fields transport plasma and are caused by a polarizing effect of thermospheric
winds.
The ionosphere varies because of two reasons:

• two varying sources of ionization (aurora, Sun)

• changes in the neutral part of the thermosphere, which responds to solar

EUV radiation.

Thus the ionospheric variation mainly occurs at a 24 h period (daytime-nighttime)

and over the 11 year cycle of solar activity. We observe considerable changes in the
F-region maximum density (Nmax ) of the electrons which influences the plasma
frequency that is proportional to it. On shorter time scales solar X-ray radiation
changes dramatically during a solar flare eruption. This effect increases the D
and E ionization. During a geomagnetic storm the auroral source of ionization
becomes more intense. In extreme cases aurorae can be seen at moderate latitudes
(Italy, Mexico). Another source of variability in the ionosphere comes from the
interaction of charged particles with the neutral atmosphere in the thermosphere.
Thermospheric winds can push the ionosphere along the inclined magnetic field
line to a different altitude. Moreover the composition of the thermosphere affects
the rate that ions and electrons recombine. During a geomagnetic storm energy
input at high latitudes produces waves and changes in the thermospheric winds
and composition. The electron concentration can increase (positive phases) and
decrease (negative phases). The ionospheric variability is given in Table 8.2.
HF communication depends on radio waves that are reflected in the ionosphere.
This is characterized by the maximum usable frequency (MUF) and the lowest
usable frequency (LUF). The MUF depends on the peak electron density in the F
region and the angle of incidence of the emitted radio wave. As we have seen, this
changes during the day, over the solar cycle and during geomagnetic disturbances.
The LUF is controlled by the amount of absorption of the radiowave in the lower
D and E layers. This is severely affected by solar flares. All single frequency GPS
8.2. SOLAR ACTIVITY AND MAGNETOSPHERE 199

Table 8.2: Variation of the ionosphere

Ionospheric Variation Variation
parameter Diurnal (Mid-Latitude) Solar Cycle (daytime)
Nmax 1 × 105 ...1 × 106 e− /cm3 4 × 106 ....2 × 106 e− /cm3
Factor of 10 Factor of 5
Max. Usable Freq. 12...46 MHz 21 ...42 MHz
MUF
Factor of 3 Factor of 2
Total Electron Content 5...50 × 1016 e− /m2 10...50 × 1016 e− /m2
TEC
Factor of 10 Factor of 5

receivers must correct the delay of the GPS signal as it propagates through the
ionosphere to the GPS satellite (at 22 000km altitude).
The maximum usable frequency depends on the angle of the wave relative to
the horizon.
The ionosphere may become highly turbulent, mainly in the high latitude and
low latitude F region and at special times (often after sunset). In this context
turbulence is defined as small scaled structures (scale length cm to m) which are
irregular and embedded in the large scale ambient ionosphere (tens of kilometers).
In the equatorial region plasma irregularities are generated just after sunset and
may last for several hours. At high latitudes these irregularities may be generated
during day and night. Both effects occur most frequently during the solar cycle
maximum. Radio signals become disrupted by these perturbations and the effect
is known as ionospheric scintillation. The bigger the amplitude of the scintillated
signal the greater the impact on communication and navigation systems.

8.2 Solar Activity and Magnetosphere

C.F. Gauss (1777-1855) measured variations of the terrestrial magnetic field. By
the end of the 19th century it was recognized that some disturbances of the Earth’s
magnetic field could be traced to the Sun. Some were found to be related to solar
flares, others showed a 27 day recurrence interval which also points to a solar
origin. In 1930 Sidney Chapman and Vincent Ferraro proposed that the Sun sent
out huge clouds of electrically neutral plasma, and that magnetic storms arose
when those clouds enveloped the Earth. The strong field of the Earth would hold
off the cloud, carving a cavity in the cloud in which the Earth and its magnetic
field would be confined (see drawing from their 1931 article Fig. 8.5). They also
speculated that a ring current would then be set up, though they had no clear
idea of the way it happened.
Today we know that the flow of plasma from the Sun is not confined to isolated
clouds, but goes on all the time, in the form of the solar wind. Denser and faster
clouds arising from coronal mass ejections (see corona) were later identified as the
real cause of sudden commencements.
200 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

1000 km

600 km
Altitude

F2

F Region
F1

150 km
E Region
90 km
D Region
10 4 10 5 10 6
Electron density

Figure 8.4: The Earth’s ionosphere

Figure 8.5: Original drawing of Chapman and Ferraro showing the interaction of plasma
from the Sun and the Earth’s magnetic field.

Generally the solar wind arriving at the Earth’s magnetopause has the following
pressure components:

Dynamic → ρv 2 (8.12)
Static → nkT (8.13)
Magnetic → B 2 /2µ0 (8.14)
8.2. SOLAR ACTIVITY AND MAGNETOSPHERE 201

Figure 8.6: An interplanetary coronal mass ejections interacts with the Earth magnetic
field (from [Link]

The pressure applied by the solar wind to the magnetopause varies with the angle
of the normal to the solar wind flow. The pressure is dominated by the dynamic
pressure. At the magnetopause the dynamic pressure is zero and the static pressure
dominates. Inside the magnetosphere the pressure is dominated by the magnetic
pressure.
The so called standoff distance i.e. the distance of the magnetopause is given
by:

2
Lmp = 107.4(nSW vSW )−1/6 (8.15)

The interaction between the interplanetary magnetic field and the Earth’s mag-
netic field depends on the orientation of the former with respect to the Earth’s
field. This was studied first by Dungey (1961 [82]) and is called Dungey’s model.
The pressure of the solar wind rises and falls. The reacting of the magnetopause
is a shrinking or expansion. When the boundary is hit by a fast flow from a CME,
the shrinking can go beyond the geosynchronous orbit of satellites (at 6.6 RE ). As
it is seen from the drawing (Fig. 8.7), a southward oriented IMF is recognized as
the most important factor promoting storms and substorms in the magnetosphere
(Fairfield and Cahill, 1966 [95]).
When the interplanetary magnetic field is oriented southward, then a flow of
plasma is predicted to the dayside of the magnetosphere after reconnection in the
tail.
202 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

Figure 8.7: Interaction of a southward oriented IMF with the magnetosphere. Possible
reconnection points are denoted by N1 , N2 , N3 . Also the formation of a disconnected
plasmoid is indicated. From “A Brief History of Magnetospheric Physics during the
Space Age” by D.P. Stern

8.2.1 Magnetic Storms

The Sun heats the Earth’s atmosphere. Also the degree of ionization in the
ionosphere increases at the dayside and this causes convection in the ionosphere.
By this convection charged particles are transported into the magnetosphere and
by dynamo action ionospheric electric currents above the equator up to mid lat-
itudes are generated. These currents produce a magnetic field which moves with
the subsolar point. So there is a 12 h variation for a given observing site in the
measurements of the field strength.
The Sun emits particles and the solar wind compresses the magnetosphere as
it has been mentioned before. High speed particles further compress the magne-
tosphere, and a magnetic storm begins with a SSC (storm sudden commencement).
The number of charged particles trapped within regions of the magnetosphere (ra-
diation belts) is increased. These particles drift around the Earth creating a ring
current that produces a depression of the horizontal magnetic field, seen at lower
latitudes around the world as a magnetic storm. This is followed by the recovery
phase, lasting one day or more, during which the ring current subsides and the
magnetic field returns to normal. Charged particles are guided down the field
lines into the upper atmosphere. This produces auroral electrojets (large horizon-
tal currents that flow in the D and E regions of the auroral ionosphere) which are
intense east-west currents. Associated with these currents are intense magnetic
fields causing magnetic disturbances observed there.
8.2. SOLAR ACTIVITY AND MAGNETOSPHERE 203

8.2.2 Particles and Particle Motion

The solar wind sweeps toward Earth at super sonic speeds ranging from 300 to
1000 km/s. It distorts the Earth’s magnetic field which forms out a comet shaped
magnetosphere.
There are two Van Allen belts of particle concentration : a) small inner belt
between 1 and 2 Earth radii where protons of energy 50 MeV (see also Table 8.3)
and electrons with energies > 30 MeV reside and b) outer larger belt from 3 to 4
Earth radii where less energetic protons and electrons are concentrated. The inner
belt is relatively stable, the outer belt varies in its number of particles by as much
as a factor of 100.
Charged particles trapped in the belts spiral along the field lines while bouncing
between the northern and southern mirror points. Particles in the inner belt may
interact with the upper atmosphere causing the auroral oval which is an annulus
centered over the magnetic poles and around 3000 km in diameter during quiet
times. The location of the auroral oval is usually found between 60 and 70 degrees
of magnetic latitude (north and south).
When charged particles follow magnetic field lines a current flows, this is called
a Birkeland current 5 . Today, often the term auroral electrojets is used. Auroral
Birkeland currents can reach about 106 A and heat up the upper atmosphere which
results in increased drag on low-altitude satellites.

Table 8.3: Typical Particle Energies

0.03 eV Molecule of oxygen or nitrogen in the air
0.5 Atom or molecule T , surface
0.67 eV Proton or neutron escape the Earth’s gravity
1000 - 15,000 eV Electron in the polar aurora
1.4 MeV Energy of electrons from radioactive potassium
major source of the Earth’s heat
10-100 MeV Proton energies in the inner radiation belt
10-15,000 MeV Range of energies in solar flares
1-100,000,000,000 GeV Cosmic ray ions; as their energy goes up,
their intensity goes down

The interaction of plasma of the solar wind with the Earth’s magnetosphere
causes currents as shown in Fig. 8.8:
• flow eastwards down the morning side around the polar regions
• flow spacewards in the evening side.
Interplanetary field lines are swept back around the Earth’s magnetic field by the
solar wind. There is an electric field according to

E = vSW × BSW /c (8.16)

5 Birkeland, 1903
204 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

This equation follows from Ohm’s law (j ∼ σ(E + v × B) and in the case of a
large conductivity σ >> 1 the term j/σ → 0. This field is from dawn to dusk,
there is a field aligned current and particles move from dawn to dusk. Because
this circulation is analogous to thermal convection cells, this phenomenon is also
called convection electric field.
Finally, one also has to take into account the corotational electric field. This
is cause by the rotation of a planet’s magnetic field which induces an electric field
in the radial direction. The magnetic field moves at

v = ωrot × r (8.17)

and an electric field is induced by Ohm’s law (again we consider large conductivity):

v×B (ωrot × r) × B0
Ecor = − =− (8.18)
c cr3
The motion of charged particles in the magnetosphere is thus caused by a
• drift: due to gradient in the field strength, field curvature
• acceleration due to electric fields along the field lines, field aligned currents
Where do the particles come from? Interplanetary particles can enter the
magnetosphere via different processes:
1. spiral down into the polar cusp- there are open magnetospheric field lines
there. Atmospheric ionization is enhanced there during enhanced solar ac-
tivity → aurora.
2. reconnection is an important process. It occurs when the interplanetary field
has a component antiparallel to the planetary field. Reconnection leads to
neutral points and solar wind particles can enter there. The locations of
reconnection are the day side magnetopause and the magnetotail.
3. Kelvin-Helmholtz instability . The fast solar wind flows past the magn-
teosphere inducing ripples in the magnetospheric boundary. These ripples
induce a filed perpendicular to the solar wind flow and thus particles diffuse
into the planetary magnetosphere.
Particles are lost because of different processes, such as losses due to the mirror
points. For particles with a certain pitch angle, the mirror points lie within the
atmosphere and the particle gets lost. Another process is charge exchange of
magnetospheric ions.

8.2.3 Aurora
There are many shapes and features of aurorae. They generally start at 100
km above the surface and extend upward along the magnetic field for hundreds
of km. Auroral arcs can nearly stand still and then suddenly move (dancing,
turning). After midnight one often sees a patchy appearance of aurorae, and the
8.2. SOLAR ACTIVITY AND MAGNETOSPHERE 205

Solar
wind

Sun

Earth

Figure 8.8: Birkeland currents. The currents flow downwards on the morning side and
spacewards on the evening side.

patches blink on and off every 10 s or so. Most of aurorae are greenish yellow and
sometimes the tall rays turn red at their top and along their lower edge. On rare
occasions sunlight hits on the top creating a faint blue color.
The different colors depend on the specific atmospheric gas, its electrical state
and on the energy of the particle that hits the atmospheric gas. Atomic oxygen is
responsible for the two main colors of green (557.7 nm, at a height below 400 km)
and red (630.0 nm, about 400 km or higher). Excited nitrogen also emits light
(600-700 nm; below 200 km). Auroral displays are intensified if the interplanetary
magnetic field is in the opposite direction to the Earth’s magnetic field. The geo-
magnetic storms produce brightness changes and motion in the aurorae and these
are called auroral substorms. Recent models of aurorae explain the phenomenon
by a process of release of energy from the magnetotail, called magnetic reconnec-
tion. Regions of opposite magnetic fields come together and the magnetic field
lines can break and reconnect in new combinations. The point of reconnection in
the magnetotail lies usually at 100 Earth radii (see 8.7). When the solar wind
adds sufficient magnetic energy to the magnetosphere, the field lines there over-
stretch and a new reconnection takes place at 15 Earth radii, the field collapses
and electrons are injected into the atmosphere.
Reconnection stores large amounts of energy in the Earth’s magnetic field until
it is released explosively. The cycle of energy storage and release is called substorm.
Multiple substorms lead to magnetic storms and acceleration of particles to very
high energies. These particles damage satellites.
The geomagnetic field is measured by magnetometers and the data are often
given as 3-hourly indices that yield a quantitative measure of the level of geomag-
netic activity. The K-index is given from 0 to 9 and depends on the observing
206 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

Table 8.4: Corrected magnetic latitudes of some cities

Atlanta 44.5 Athens 31.3 Adelaide 45.9
Boston 51.7 Berlin 48.3 Buenos Aires 23.3
Chicago 52.2 Copenhagen 51.9 Capetown 41.5
Dallas 42.7 Edinburgh 53.0 Christchurch 49.9
Denver 48.3 London 47.5 Comodoro Rivadavia 32.1
Great Falls, MT 54.9 Madrid 33.3 Concepcion, Chile 23.2
Havana 34.1 Moscow 51.8 Dunedin 53.0
Los Angeles 39.8 Paris 44.2 Durban 38.8
Mexico City 29.1 Perm 53.8 East London 41.1
Minneapolis 55.1 Prague 45.5 Hobart 53.6
New York 50.6 Rome 35.5 Melbourne 48.4
Quebec City 56.2 St. Petersburg 56.1 Perth 43.9
San Francisco 42.5 Warsaw 46.7 Punta Arenas, Chile 38.6
Seattle 52.7 Beijing 34.1 Sydney 43.5
St. Louis 49.2 Irkutsk 47.0 Toronto 53.9
Seoul 31.0 Washington, DC 49.1 Tokyo 29.0
Winnipeg 59.5 Vladivostok 36.5 Vienna 43.0

Table 8.5: Extension of the auroral zone. The first values given is the magnetic latitude
(Lat), the second the Kp index.
Lat Kp Lat Kp Lat Kp Lat Kp Lat Kp
66.5 0 64.5 1 62.4 2 60.4 3 58.3 4
56.3 5 54.2 6 42.2 7 50.1 8 48.1 9

station. The globally averaged Kp index is a measure for the global auroral activ-
ity.
When geomagnetic activity is low, the aurora typically is located at about 67
degrees magnetic latitude, in the hours around midnight. As activity increases,
the region of aurora expands towards the equator. When geomagnetic activity is
very high, the aurora may be seen at mid and low latitude locations (see Table
8.4) around the earth that would otherwise rarely experience the polar lights. In
Table 8.5 auroral boundaries are given as a function of the Kp index.
The magnetic activity produced by enhanced ionospheric currents flowing be-
low and within the auroral oval is measured by the Auroral Electrojet Index AE.
The definition of this index is as follows: at a certain time the total range of
deviation from quiet day values of the horizontal magnetic field (h) around the
auroral oval. Defined and developed by Davis and Sugiura in 1966, AE has been
usefully employed both qualitatively and quantitatively as a correlative index in
studies of substorm morphology, the behavior of communication satellites, radio
propagation, radio scintillation, and the coupling between the interplanetary mag-
8.2. SOLAR ACTIVITY AND MAGNETOSPHERE 207

netic field and the Earth’s magnetosphere. For these varied topics, AE possesses
advantages over other geomagnetic indices or at least shares their advantageous
properties.

8.2.4 Geomagnetic Indices

Daily regular magnetic field variations arise from current systems caused by regular
solar radiation changes. Other irregular current systems produce magnetic field
changes caused by
1. the interaction of the solar wind with the magnetosphere,
2. by the magnetosphere itself,
3. by the interactions between the magnetosphere and ionosphere,
4. and by the ionosphere itself.
Therefore, magnetic activity indices were designed to describe variation in the
geomagnetic field caused by these irregular current systems.
Let us give a brief description of other geomagnetic indices which are interesting
for the solar-terrestrial relations.

DST Index
DST stands for Disturbance Storm Time. The DST is an index of magnetic activity
derived from a network of near-equatorial geomagnetic observatories that measures
the intensity of the globally symmetrical equatorial electrojet (the “ring current”).
Thus DST monitors the variations of the globally symmetrical ring current, which
encircles the Earth close to the magnetic equator in the Van Allen (or radiation)
belt of the magnetosphere. During large magnetic storms the signature of the ring
current can be seen in ground magnetic field recordings worldwide as so-called
main phase depression. The ring current energization which results in typical
depression of 100 nT is related to magnetic reconnection processes at the neutral
sheet.

Kp, Ap and C Index

The K-Index was first introduced by J. Bartels in 1938. It is a quasi-logarithmic
local index of the 3-hourly range in magnetic activity relative to an assumed quiet-
day curve for a single geomagnetic observatory site. The values consist of a single-
digit 0...9 for each 3-hour interval of the universal time day (UT).
The planetary 3-hour-range index Kp is the mean standardized K-index from 13
geomagnetic observatories between 44 degrees and 60 degrees northern or southern
geomagnetic latitude. The scale is 0...9 expressed in thirds of a unit, e.g. 5- is
4 2/3, 5 is 5 and 5+ is 5 1/3. This planetary index is designed to measure solar
particle radiation by its magnetic effects. The 3-hourly Ap (equivalent range)
index is derived from the Kp index (see Table 8.6). This table is made in such a
way that at a station at about magnetic latitude 50 degrees, Ap may be regarded
208 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

Table 8.6: Transformation between the Kp and the Ap index

Kp = 0o 0+ 1- 1o 1+ 2- 2o 2+ 3- 3o 3+ 4- 4o 4+
Ap = 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 12 15 18 22 27 32
Kp = 5- 5o 5+ 6- 6o 6+ 7- 7o 7+ 8- 8o 8+ 9- 9o
Ap = 39 48 56 67 80 94 111 132 154 179 207 236 300 400

Table 8.7: Transformation between the Ap and the Cp index

Cp 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Ap 2 4 5 6 8 9 11 12 14 16 19
Cp 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0
Ap 22 26 31 37 44 52 63 80 110 160

as the range of the most disturbed of the three field components, expressed in the
unit of 2 g. A daily index Ap is obtained by averaging the eight values of Ap for
each day. The Cp index, the daily planetary character figure, is defined on the
basis of Ap according to Table 8.7
Another index devised to express geomagnetic activity on the basis of the Cp
index is the C9 index which has the range between 0 and 9. The conversion table
from the Cp index to the C9 index is given by 8.8

AE and Other Indices

These indices describe the disturbance level recorded by auroral zone magnetome-
ters.
In order to determine these indices, horizontal magnetic component recordings
from a set of globe-encircling stations are plotted to the same time and amplitude
scales relative to their quiet-time levels. They are then graphically superposed.
The upper and lower envelopes of this superposition define the AU (amplitude
upper), the AL (amplitude lower) indices and the difference between the two en-
velopes determine the AE (Auroral Electrojet) index, i.e., AE = AU - AL. AO is
defined as the average value of AU and AL.
A summary of the indices as well as a few other indices can be found in Table
8.9

Table 8.8: Transformation between the Cp and the C9 index

Cp 0.0-0.1 0.2-0.3 0.4-0.5 0.6-0.7 0.8-0.9
C9 0 1 2 3 4
Cp 1.0-1.1 1.2-1.4 1.5-1.8 1.9 2.0-2.5
C9 5 6 7 8 9
8.2. SOLAR ACTIVITY AND MAGNETOSPHERE 209

Table 8.9: Summary of geomagnetic indices

aa 3-hour range index, derived from two antipodal stations
AE, AU, AL 1- , 2.5-minute, or hourly auroral electrojet indices
am, an, as 3-hour range (mondial, northern, southern) indices
Ap 3-hour range planetary index derived from Kp
C, Ci, C9 Daily local (C) or international (Ci) magnetic character;
C9 was first derived from Ci, then from Cp
Cp Daily magnetic character derived from Kp
Dst Hourly index mainly related to the ring current
K 3-hour local quasi-logarithmic index
Km 3-hour mean index derived from an average of K indices
(not to be confused with the Km of the next item)
Km, Kn, Ks 3-hour quasi-logarithmic
(mondial, northern, southern) indices derived from am, an, as
Kp, Ks 3-hour quasi-logarithmic planetary index
and the intermediate standardized indices from which Kp
is derived (not to be confused with the Ks of the preceding item)
Kw, Kr 3-hour quasi-logarithmic worldwide index and
the intermediate from which Kw is derived
Q Quarter hourly index
R 1-hour range index
RX, RY, RZ Daily ranges in the field components
sn, ss 3-hour indices associated with an and as
U, u Daily and monthly indices mainly related to the ring current
W Monthly wave radiation index

8.2.5 Solar Indices

10.7 cm Radio Flux
The sun emits radio energy with slowly varying intensity. This radio flux, which
originates from atmospheric layers high in the sun’s chromosphere and low in its
corona, changes gradually from day to day in response to the number of spot
groups on the disk. Solar flux from the entire solar disk at a frequency of 2800
MHz has been recorded routinely by a radio telescope near Ottawa since February
1947. The observed values have to be adjusted for the changing Sun-Earth distance
and for uncertainties in antenna gain (absolute values). Fluxes are given in units
of 10−22 Js−1 m−2 Hz−1 .

Sunspot Numbers
The sunspot number index is also often called Wolf number in reference to the
Swiss astronomer J. R. Wolf who introduced this index in 1848; details about how
to obtain that number can be found in the chapter about sunspots and the solar
cycle.
210 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

Table 8.10: Navigation systems

System Frequency
Omega VLF, kHz about 104 Hz
Loran-C LHF about 105 Hz
GPS UHF, GHz about 109 Hz

8.2.6 Navigation Systems

Modern travel requires exact latitude, longitude and altitude information in real
time. Therefore terrestrial based radio wave systems such as the Loran-C and
the Omega-system were developed. They use large transmitter antennas to send
low-frequency (LF) and very-low-frequency (VLF) radio signals along the ground
and off the reflective layer provided by the ionosphere. Thus, vast distances over
land and sea can be reached. More recently, space-based systems have become the
tools for navigation, among others the GPS system (Global Positioning System).
The advantage of space-based systems is that the satellites can easily cover the
globe. A user can obtain an accurate three dimensional position (his location and
altitude) as soon as at least four satellites are in view.
However both navigational systems, space-systems as well as systems on the
surface suffer from the transmission through the ionosphere. The Omega system
requires it, the Loran system tries to avoid it and the GPS system depends on
radio signals that pass through it. Flares produce X rays and we have already
discussed the influence of this shortwave radiation on the D and E region in the
ionosphere. Navigation with Loran-C and Omega systems thus is influenced by
these events and during the maximum phase of the solar cycle daylight users of
Loran-C and Omega systems have more difficulties. The GPS system is not influ-
enced by this perturbation. The GPS operations are affected by the total electron
content of the ionosphere along the path to the satellite and are thus influenced by
geomagnetic storms. Whereas solar X-rays impact only the sunlit hemisphere of
Earth, geomagnetic storms are ubiquitous. The ionospheric response to the storms
also depends on the latitude. The conditions nearer to the equator or nearer to the
poles vary for the user. It must also be stressed that a quiet undisturbed geomag-
netic field does not necessarily dictate an undisturbed equatorial ionosphere. The
influence of TEC variation (Total Electron Content) on GPS receivers is smaller
for dual band receivers which actually measure the effect of the ionosphere on the
GPS signals and correct the resulting positions for these. Unpredictable density
enhancements can occur in the evening hours and cause scintillations which affect
both dual- and single-frequency GPS receivers.
We summarize the effect of the space environment on the navigation systems:
• Loran-C: Phase and amplitude shifts due to skywave interference at the
limits of coverage area.
• GPS: Carrier loss-of-lock due to ionospheric density fluctuations with solar
or geomagnetic activity.
8.2. SOLAR ACTIVITY AND MAGNETOSPHERE 211

• Omega: Phase anomalies due to varying ionospheric reflection height; caused

by solar or geomagnetic activity.

Example of a Case Study

We want to give an example of combined observations of the Sun-Earth system.
This is extracted from the work of Hanuise et al. 2006 [126]. Flares and CMEs
(especially halo CMEs) were observed in solar active region AR 10365. On May 27
and 28 three halo CMEs were observed. On May 29 the disturbance propagated to
L1 and was measured as two shocks and pulses by the spacecraft ACE. The mag-
netosphere became strongly compressed and the sub-solar magnetopause moved
inside five Earth radii. This causes a geomagnetic storm with several impacts:
• expansion of the auroral oval, and aurorae seen at mid latitudes
• significant modification of the total electron content in the sunlight high-
latitude ionosphere,
• perturbation of radio-wave propagation → HF blackouts and increased GPS
signal scintillation,
• heating of the thermosphere → increased satellite drag.

8.2.7 Radio Communication

The ionosphere affects the propagation of radio signals in different ways depending
on their frequencies. Frequencies below ∼50 MHz are reflected in the ionosphere;
this allows radio communication to distances of many thousands of kilometers. Ra-
dio signals at frequencies above 50 MHz penetrate the ionosphere and are useful
for ground-to-space communications. Frequencies between 2 and 30 MHz are af-
fected by increased absorption, higher frequencies by different reflection properties
in the ionosphere (see Fig. 8.9).
Reflection in the ionosphere allows short wave radio reception to occur beyond
the limits of line of sight. It is utilized by amateur radio enthusiasts, shortwave
broadcast stations (such as BBC and Voice of America) and others and AM sta-
tions (Mittelwelle).
Three frequencies are important for the propagation of radiowaves in the
ionosphere:
• The limiting frequency at or below which a radio wave is reflected by an
ionospheric layer at vertical incidence if given by:

fcrit = 9 × 10−3 Ne (8.19)

Ne is the electron density cm−3 and the frequency fcrit is in MHz.

• From this frequency we can deduce the maximum usable frequency MUF by:
fcrit
fMUF = (8.20)
sin α
where α is the angle of the wave relative to the horizon.
212 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

Figure 8.9: Different layers in the ionosphere. Reflection of radio waves occur in the
E-layer at 110 km and also the F layers (170 km, 250 km) reflect waves. In the D-layer
an absorption occurs. Within the auroral oval the nighttime E layer plasma densities can
be much higher.

• The cutoff frequency is the frequency below which a radio waves fails to
penetrate the ionosphere.
TV and FM radio stations (on VHF) are affected little by solar activity. HF
ground to air, ship to shore, amateur radio etc. are affected strongly. Also the
Faraday rotation of the plane of polarization has to be taken into account (for
satellite which employ linear polarization up to 1 GHz).
During a solar flare event a sudden increase of X-ray emission causes a large
increase in ionization in the lower regions of the ionosphere on the sunlit side of
the Earth. Very often one observes a sudden ionospheric disturbance (SID). This
affects very low frequencies (OMEGA) as a sudden phase anomaly (SPA) or a
sudden enhancement of the signal (SES). At HF and sometimes also at VHF an
SID may appear as a short wave fade (SWF). Depending on the magnitude of the
solar flare such a disturbance may last from minutes to hours. At VHF the radio
noise created by solar flares interferes with the signal. The occurrence of solar
flare is modulated by the solar activity.
Flares may also emit energetic particles. The PCA (polar cap absorption) is
caused by high energetic particles that ionize the polar ionosphere. A PCA may
last from days to weeks depending on the size of the flare and the interaction of
the high energetic particles emitted by the flare and the Earth’s magnetosphere.
During these events polar HF communication becomes impossible. A coronal mass
ejection may be a consequence of a large solar flare or a disappearing filament and
is an ejection of a large plasma cloud into the interplanetary space. Such a coronal
mass ejection (CME) travels through the solar wind and may also reach the Earth.
This results in a global disturbance of the Earth’s magnetic field and is known as
a geomagnetic storm. High speed solar wind streams originating in coronal holes
on the Sun’s corona hits the Earth’s magnetosphere and also causes ionospheric
disturbances.
8.2. SOLAR ACTIVITY AND MAGNETOSPHERE 213

Figure 8.10: Principle of electromagnetic induction. When moving a bar magnet a

current is induced and can be measured.

Dudeneye et al.,1986 [81] discussed criteria for the development of ionosphere

electron concentration vertical profile. The ways in which the ionosphere influences
the properties of a radio signal are reviewed in Bradley, 1984 [47].

8.2.8 Geomagnetically Induced Currents

The coupling between the magnetosphere and the ionosphere leads to ionospheric
electric fields. At low latitudes the ionospheric plasma is co-rotating with the
Earth. At large latitudes convection occurs (Harang discontinuity).
Ground effects of space weather are generally known as GIC (geomagnetically
induced currents). A real time GIC simulator is available at
[Link] simulator [Link].
The changing magnetic field induces currents in the Earth itself- the induced
currents produce magnetic fields that again disturb the magnetic field at the
Earth’s surface. The magnitude of the induced currents and electrical fields de-
pends on electrical conductivities of the different layers within the Earth. Magnetic
variations with lower frequencies penetrate deeper.
These currents are driven by the geoelectric field associated with a magnetic
disturbance in electric power transmission grids, pipelines, communication cables
and railway equipment. GIC are dc currents. They may cause several effects
because they increase existing current and this may cause saturation:

• Increase of harmonics,

• unnecessary relay trippings,

• increase in reactive power loss,

• voltage drops,

• permanent damage to transformers,

• black out of the whole system.

When flowing from the pipeline into the soil, GIC may increase corrosion of
the pipeline, and the voltages associated with GIC disturb the cathodic protection
system and standard control surveys of the pipeline.
214 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

On March 13, 1989, the most famous GIC failure occurred in the Canadian
Hydro-Quebec system during a great magnetic storm. The system suffered from
a nine-hour black-out.
A theoretical calculation of GIC in a given network (power grid, pipeline etc.)
can be divided into two steps:

• Calculate the geoelectric field created primarily by ionospheric-magneto-

spheric currents and affected secondarily by the earth’s conductivity dis-
tribution. This is also called the geophysical step.

• Calculate the currents produced by the geoelectric field in the circuit system
constituted by the network and its earthings.

The first step is generally more difficult, partly because the space and geophysical
input parameters are not well known.
The effects of geomagnetic disturbances on electrical systems at the earth’s
surface were studied e.g. by Boteler et al. (1998 [45]). A prediction of Geomag-
netically Induced Currents in Power Transmission Systems was given by Pirjola et
al. (2000 [246]).
A short description of the vulnerable Swedish power system (because being
close to the auroral oval) and pipeline system together with a historical description
of the effects that occurred at times of geomagnetically induced currents (GICs),
up to the Halloween events in 2003 and event in November 2004 was done by
Lundstedt, 2006 [203].
On 30 October 2003 50 000 customers in Southern Sweden had no electricity
due to a power failure caused by a GIC (see Pulkkinen et al., 2005 [250]). Research
on historical geomagnetic storms can help to create a good data base for intense
and super-intense magnetic storms. For the event on March 13, 1989 the Dst=-640
nT. Lakhina et al. 2005 [184] claimed to have found evidence for a superstorm
that occurred on Sep 1-2 1859 with a Dst=-1760.

8.2.9 Systems Affected by Solar or Geomagnetic Activity

In this paragraph we give a summary of the influence of solar and geomagnetic
activity (driven by solar events) on various systems.

• HF Communications

– Increased absorption
– Depressed MUF
– Increases LUF
– Increases fading and flutter

• Surveillance Systems

– Radar energy scatter (auroral interference)

– Range errors
8.2. SOLAR ACTIVITY AND MAGNETOSPHERE 215

Penetration

Absorption Scattering

Reflection

Earth

Figure 8.11: Radio signal propagation in the ionosphere.

– Elevation angle errors

– Azimuth angle errors

• Satellite Systems

– Faraday rotation
– Scintillation
– Loss of phase lock
– Radio Frequency Interferences (RFI)

• Navigation Systems

– Position errors

8.2.10 The Global Ionosphere-Thermosphere Model

In this section we shortly outline the Global Ionosphere-Thermosphere Model,
GITM. The model is described in Ridley, Deng and Toth, 2006 [258]. A three
dimensional spherical grid is used that can be stretched both in latitude and
altitude. The resolution is fixed in longitude. GITM is flexible and different
models of high-latitude electric fields, auroral particle precipitation, solar EUV
inputs, and particle energy deposition can be used. The magnetic field can be
represented by an ideal dipole magnetic field or a more realistic complex magnetic
field. Many of the source terms can be controlled (switched on and off, or values
set).
The coupling between the ionosphere-thermosphere is extremely important for
space weather applications, such as to study the drag on satellites due to heating
of the atmosphere, GPS degradation analysis and examine the interaction of these
layers with the lower atmosphere and thus the impact on climate. Concerning the
216 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

solar EUV heating the GITM calculates an altitude dependent heating efficiency.
The heating efficiency starts with a value of 0.25 at a height of 100 km, reaches
a maximum of 0.6 at a height of 150 km and declines down to 0.25 at a height of
250 km.

8.3 Satellites
For a general introduction to space technology several textbooks are available6 .

8.3.1 Solar Panels

A solar panel is a collection of solar cells that convert solar light into electricity
(photovoltaics). Lots of small solar cells spread over a large area can work together
to provide enough power for satellites or space stations. The more light that hits
a cell, the more electricity it produces, so spacecrafts are usually equipped with
solar panels that can always be pointed at the Sun even as the rest of the body of
the spacecraft moves around.
On Earth, the largest photovoltaic plant is a 10 MW peak power station at
Pocking, Germany consisting of 57 912 solar modules delivering 11500 MWh per
year. Outside the Earth’s atmosphere 1366 W/m2 are received from the Sun
(normal incidence). The atmosphere reflects 6% and absorbs 16% of incoming
radiation. The peak power at sea level (1020 W/m2 ) may be further reduced by
clouds (on the average 20% due to reflection) and absorbtion (16%). Satellite
measurements shows that For example, in North America the average power of
the solar radiation lies somewhere between 125 and 375 W/m2 (i.e. between 3 and
9 kWh/m2 /day). Currently photovoltaic panels have an efficiency of about 15%,
a solar panel delivers 19 to 56 W/m2 or 0.45-1.35 kWh/m2 /day (annual day and
night average).
The most efficient solar panels are the DS1 solar panels which convert about
22 % of the available energy into electrical power. It is also important to note
that solar panels lose about 1-2 % of their effectiveness per year. This means after
a five year mission, the solar panels will still be making more than 90 % of what
they made at the beginning of the mission. Of course this also depends on their
distance to the Sun.
There are two major dangers to solar panels in space besides regular wear-and-
tear:

• Solar flares that can damage the electronics inside the panels.

• Micrometeorites, which are tiny, gravel-sized bits of rock and other space
junk floating in space can scratch or crack solar panels.

Some protection can be made by the use of a thick layer of glass. Of course,
if a satellite’s mission path takes it away from the Sun (further out into the solar
system) solar panels will become less and less efficient.
6 Gatland K, “Space Technology”, Salamander Books (London, 1981)
8.3. SATELLITES 217

Figure 8.12: Solar power systems installed in the areas defined by the dark disks could
provide a little more than the world’s current total primary energy demand (assum-
ing a conversion efficiency of 8%). That is, all energy currently consumed, including
heat, electricity, fossil fuels, etc., would be produced in the form of electricity by so-
lar cells. The colors in the map show the local solar irradiance averaged over three
years from 1991 to 1993 (24 hours a day) taking into account the cloud coverage avail-
able from weather satellites. The average electric output would be 18 TW. After:
http : //[Link]/ml/solar land area/

Another kind of protection to the above mentioned damaging effects can be

made by the use of Fresnel lenses which collect a large area of sunlight and direct it
towards a specific spot by bending the rays of light and focussing them- the same
principle when people use a magnifying lens to focus the Sunlight on a piece of
paper which starts a small fire. Fresnel lenses have been invented in 1822 by Jean
Fresnel. Theaters use them for spotlights. They are shaped like a dart board with
concentric rings around a lens that is a magnifying glass. Solar concentrators put
one of these lenses on top of every solar cell. The solar cells can then be spaced
farther apart since the light is focused on each cell. Fewer cells need to be placed
and the panels cost less to construct. Thick glass or plastic cover over the solar
panel are used to protect them from micrometeorites.
DS1’s photovoltaics are made out of gallium arsenide (GaAs). GaAs is made
into a cylinder that is then sliced into cells. These solar cells are then connected
to the rest of the power network. Solar concentrators, made of clear plastic, are
placed above them to focus the Sun’s rays.
As a summary we give some literature, further references can be found therein.
Markvart et al. (1982 [208]) studied the photon and electron degradation of boron-
doped FZ silicon solar cells. Radiation-resistant silicon solar cell were investigated
218 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

by Markvart et al. (1987 [210]). Defect interactions in silicon solar cells were
analyzed by Markvart et al. (1989 [209]). A study of radiation-induced defects
in silicon solar cells showing improved radiation resistance was made by Peters et
al. (1992 [245]). General information about solar cells can be found in Tada et al.
(1982 [307]).
A review on radiation damage in solar cells was given by Markvart (1990 [207]).
An analytical study has been carried out on an impact feature within a solar
cell from the Hubble Space telescope Solar array. The feature was investigated
optically, and the damage was seen as the result of a partially penetrating impact
and therefore some impact particles must have been responsible for that. The
residue in the impact was found to contain elements such as Fe, Ti, K, Ca, Si,
Mg and Na. The elements Mg, Fe and Ti are usually foreign to a solar cell and
this suggests that the impact residue may be of natural or man made origin.
Subsequent detailed analysis showed Fe and Mg in concentrations of about 10%
and Ti in only limited amounts. That implies that the residue is of natural origin.
A more detailed description can be found in Graham et al. (1997 [120])

8.3.2 Power Sources for Spacecraft

Every power source available for a satellite or other spacecrafts has different
strengths and weaknesses. By combining different power sources one can reach
an optimum in power generation.

• Batteries: a reliable, well understood technology. However, power demands

for satellites tend to be very high and a battery that would be strong enough
to power a satellite for the length of a mission would be larger than the
satellite itself. Thus, batteries are used as a temporary storage for power
from another source.
A battery can convert chemical energy to electricity by putting certain chem-
icals in contact with each other in a specific way. Electrons will travel from
one kind of chemical to another creating an electric current.
Batteries come in several styles and NASA spacecraft usually use recharge-
able nickel-cadmium or nickel-hydride batteries like those found in laptop
computers or cellular phones (DS1 uses nickel-hydrogen batteries).
Batteries tend to expend their charge fairly quickly. DS1 can last from half
an hour to three hours running purely on battery power before the batteries
need to be recharged from the solar panels. These batteries are recharged
thousands of times during the life of the spacecraft.

• Solar panels: they provide abundant power for nearly all a satellite’s needs
and are safe and clean to launch. However:

– solar panels are large and fragile constructions that are vulnerable to
damage from external forces or even mechanical failures;
– they are rather expensive to build and put into space;
8.3. SATELLITES 219

Table 8.11: Fuels for RTG’s

Element Half life (years) Watts/g (thermal) Watt (thermal)
210
Po 0.378 141 570
238
Pu 86.8 0.55 3000
144
Cs 0.781 25 15
190
Sr 28.0 0.93 250
242
Cm 0.445 120 495

– they always need to be pointed at the Sun (not being blocked by planets
or other objects);
– the farther the satellite gets from the Sun, the less effective solar panels
work. As a rule of thumb we can state that solar powered missions
cannot travel further than the orbit of Mars.
• Radioisotope thermoelectric generators: They are also reliable but tend to
be expensive to build and of course there is a risk that radioactive material
is set into the environment during a launch failure.
A radioisotope thermoelectric generator, or RTG, uses the fact that radioac-
tive materials (such as plutonium) generate heat as they decay. The heat
is converted into electricity by an array of thermocouples which then power
the spacecraft.
A thermocouple is a device which converts thermal energy directly into elec-
trical energy. Basically, it is made of two kinds of metal that can both
conduct electricity. They are connected to each other in a closed loop. If
the two metals are at different temperatures, an electric potential will exist
between them. When an electric potential occurs, electrons will start to flow,
making electric current.
Another process which belongs to this group of energy generation is nuclear
fission where unstable radioactive materials are split into smaller parts. Very
large amounts of heat are generated but the whole process is more complex
and not as reliable as using the heat produced by radioactive decay. An
RTG is steadier.
Plutonium is a very toxic heavy metal. If it is powdered and inhaled, it is a
cancer causing agent. It is sealed inside a hard, radiation proof shell. The
shell is designed to survive all conceivable accidents, so even in the unlikely
event of a launch failure, none of the radioactive particles should escape.
• Fuel cells: they are similar like batteries but they have a longer lifespan and
can be refuelled. They are already in use in the Space Shuttle. However
they run hot (400-8000 C) and the waste heat is often hard to manage.
When atoms of the two gases oxygen and hydrogen are put next to another,
they spontaneously combine to form water. This results in the release of a
220 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

lot of energy. In a fuel cell the H and O are separated by a membrane. The
refuelling means just to provide more H and O and the waste is pure water.
With an external source such as a solar panel, one can split the waste water
back into its component parts and use it again as fuel. Fuel cells were first
used by the Apollo missions since they last longer than traditional batteries
and didn’t have expensive radioactive parts.

It is extremely important to control the heat on and around a space ship. The
operating temperature is usually given between two numbers like −10◦ C to 60◦ C.
The parts of the spacecraft have been tested and will work if the temperature in the
spacecraft is between these two numbers. Why does a spacecraft have an operating
temperature? For example the rocket thruster can use hydrazine as rocket fuel.
Therefore the tanks, plumbing and pumps must be kept at a certain temperature:
Hydrazine freezes at 2◦ C and boils at 113◦ C. Most electronic components will
work only within a narrow range of temperatures, usually −50◦ C to +150◦ C,
components will stop working and make the spacecraft useless if the spacecraft
temperatures become too extreme.
Heat tends to expand material parts and the opposite happens when a part
is cooled. This problem occurs when one part of the spacecraft is pointed at the
Sun and the other one is pointed at empty space. The Sun then heats up only one
part and this uneven heating causes the spacecraft to be warped or even break or
instruments can be distorted. Another source of heating is caused by electronic
components. Heat also makes the electrical system less efficient. Electricity is
caused by the flow of electrons and the resistance grows with temperature.
Heat sources can be external (from outside the spacecraft) or internal (from
inside the spacecraft). External heat sources include:

• the Sun,

• reflected sunlight from planets and moons,

• heating by friction when travelling through an atmosphere or gas clouds,

• released heat from planets.

Internal heat is generated by the craft’s propulsion or electrical system.

8.3.3 Electron Damage to Satellites

Explosive Solar Particle events (SPE) are usually associated with solar flares and
coronal mass ejections. Protons and electrons are emitted at high velocities which
can cause problems in orbiting satellites. In January 1994 three geostationary
satellites suffered failures of their momentum wheel control circuity. One of these
satellites never fully recovered. During that period however, no SPE was observed.
One explanation for this failure is done by assuming a long duration of high energy
electron fluxes that occur during times of high speed solar wind streams. It is
important to note that these occur during times of sunspot minimum. Thus not
only the electron intensity but the total integrated electron flux is important. The
8.3. SATELLITES 221

USAF uses empirically defined values to issue warnings for satellite operators.
Damaging conditions are assumed when the daily electron flux (which is given by
the number of high energy electrons (> 2MeV) per cm2 per sterad per day meets
either of the following conditions7

• greater than 3 × 108 per day for 3 consecutive days; or

• greater than 109 for a single day.

Such conditions often occur about 2 days after the onset of a large geomagnetic
storm.
How can we determine the probability that surface charging may occur. This
can be done by the K-index which, as we have shown in the previous chapter, is a
measure for geomagnetic storms. The values of K (3 hourly measure) range from
0-9.

• K=0: quiet

• K≥ 4 surface charges effects could begin,

• K≥ 6 surface charging is probable.

Whereas surface charging usually does not cause big problems, particles with
≥1 MeV cause Deep Dielectric Charging. When there occurs a high-speed solar
wind stream these particles are concentrated in the Van Allen belts. High energy
electrons penetrate the spacecraft’s outer surface; they penetrate the dielectric
materials such as circuit boards and the insulation in coaxial cables. This gives
rise to intense electric fields; as soon as they exceed the breakdown potential of
the material they produce sudden discharges (similar to a stroke). This discharge
damages the system: components may start to burn, semiconductors may be de-
stroyed. These dielectric charging can be avoided by a special construction of
the relevant parts however this leads to additional weight and complexity of the
system.
Again, high fluxes of these electrons vary with the 11 year solar cycle and are
most prevalent late in the cycle and at solar minimum. The GOES GEO spacecraft
measures electron fluxes in the range of 0.6 - 2 MeV (see Fig. 8.13).

8.3.4 Single Event Upsets

Single-event upsets (SEUs) are random errors in semiconductor memory that occur
at a much higher rate in space than on the ground. They are non-destructive, but
can cause a loss of data if left uncorrected. SEUs are often associated with heavy
ions from the galactic cosmic radiation.
What is the cause of SEUs? Energetic charged particles pass through sensitive
regions of a chip. Depending on their energy and angle of impact, individual
particles can cause a large current impulse sufficient to change the state of a
bistable circuit element.
7 see also http : //[Link]/Educational/1/3/7 :
222 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

Figure 8.13: Flux measurements by the GOES satellite in different energy channels.
http : //[Link]/rt plots/elec [Link]

Heavy Ion SEUs occur directly when a heavy ion passes through a semicon-
ductor memory element. The standard models take into account the size, shape,
and charge sensitivity of the memory element and the energy, angle, and impact
parameter of the incident particle.
For satellites around the Earth, the offset and tilt of the geomagnetic axis with
respect to the Earth’s rotation axis produces a corresponding miss-alignment of
the radiation belts. The result is the South Atlantic Anomaly. The Earth’s surface
magnetic field is weakest there. Particles drifting around the Earth travel much
closer to the Earth than at other latitudes and longitudes.
This higher particle concentration causes a maximum of the distribution of
errors in the Atlantic ocean east of the southern part of South America. There
occurs also a significant number of errors at high latitudes due to cosmic rays
(see Fig. 8.14). These data are from UoSAT-2 which measured from September
1988 to May 1992; UoSAT-2 monitored almost 9000 Single Event Upsets (SEU),
and the majority of these (75%) occurred in the South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA)
region.
Single event upsets pose also problems to space missions: As a result of vol-
canic action on Io, the innermost of the large Galilean moons of Jupiter, particles
(actually heavy ions) of sulphur and oxygen are present in the space surrounding
the planet. These particles form a part of the Jovian magnetosphere. Although
8.3. SATELLITES 223

Figure 8.14: Single event upsets; spatial distribution of errors from the UoSAT-3 space-
craft in polar orbit; please note the South Atlantic Anomaly. Adapted from C. Dyer and
D. Rodgers, 1998, Space Dep. DERA

the origin of these particles is the moon Io, the volcanoes provide enough velocity
for them to escape from the gravitational field of the moon and to become elements
of the magnetosphere around Jupiter.
The heavy ions diffuse both inward and outward from the planet. Many of the
particles diffuse outward to 20 to 50 times the radius of Jupiter (RJ , measured
from the planet’s center), where they are accelerated by an interaction with the
massive Jovian magnetic field.
The most critical phase of mission operations for to study the Galilean satellites
of Jupiter occurs at the time of the spacecraft’s closest approach to Jupiter (4 RJ ).
Heavy ions are capable of penetrating the delicate electronics in the spacecraft and
causing a stored computer bit to change its value from a “0” to a “1” or vice-versa,
a Single Event Upset results (SEU). A single bit flip in one of Galileo’s computer
memories could trigger a chain reaction of erroneous commands with disastrous
results.
Modern microelectronic devices can suffer from single event effects caused by
cosmic radiation neutrons in the atmosphere. The phenomenon has been observed
both on ground and at aircraft altitudes. The neutron flux at aircraft altitudes
(<15 km) is large enough to make the neutron single event effects a problem to
aircraft electronics. The most studied device type is static random access memo-
ries (SRAM) since those devices have a very high density of transistors, making
them sensitive to particle radiation. The cosmic ray neutrons are produced by
the charged primary cosmic radiation in the earth’s atmosphere. Thereby the at-
mospheric neutron flux is certainly influenced by solar activity and space weather
224 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

(see e.g. Dyer, 2001 [85])

Normand (1996 [235]) studied the effect of SEU in avionics. Ziegler and Lanford
(1979 [346]) studied the effect of cosmic rays on computer memories. SEU in
implantable cardioverter defibrillators were studied by Bradley and Normand (1998
[48]). They found some correlation with the expected geographical variation of the
secondary cosmic ray flux.
Reedy (1997 [253]) discusses the natural sources of energetic particles in space.
The main radiation threats are the galactic cosmic rays (GCRs), solar energetic
particles (SEPs) and trapped radiation around planets. Especially outside the
Earth’s strong magnetosphere, the SEPs are very serious sources of radiation.
Over a short period of time (few days) the effects of a huge solar particle event
(SPE) ca be greater than any other source of radiation. This causes high doses to
humans, microelectronics and solar panels.
Prediction of times with increased risk of internal charging on spacecraft are
given by Andersson et al. (1999 [9]) and Wu et al. (1999 [341]).

8.3.5 Solar Activity and Satellite Lifetimes

Satellites in low Earth orbit, with perigee altitudes below 2000 km, are subject to
atmospheric drag. This force very slowly circularizes the orbits and the altitude is
reduced too. The rate of decay of these orbits becomes extremely rapid at altitudes
less than 200 km. As soon as the satellite is down to 180 km it will only have a few
hours to live and after several revolutions around the Earth it will re-entry down
to Earth. At that phase the temperature is very high and most of the satellite will
vaporize. Only large satellites become not fully vaporized and component pieces
of them may reach the ground.
The essential parameter for this deceleration is the air density. This varies
along the satellite’s orbit and is a function of latitude, longitude, time of day, solar
activity etc. At a fixed point in space the density can be expressed in terms of the
two space environmental parameters:

• 10 cm solar radio flux (F10),

• geomagnetic index Ap .

It is extremely difficult to predict exactly when a satellite will re-enter the at-
mosphere8 . The reason for that is that the space environment is not exactly
predictable and there are also unresolved variations in atmospheric density. The
accuracy of the prediction is in the order of 10 %. That means that one day before
re-entry the uncertainty is at least 2 hours. Within that time however, the satellite
will have circled the globe and thus it is difficult to predict the location of re-entry
with a reasonable warning.
The decay of a satellite’s orbit also depends on the cross section of the object
itself. In Fig. 8.15 a rough estimate of the lifetime of a satellite with effective mass
8 see also: Tobiska W K, R D Culp and C A Barth, “Predicted Solar Cycle Twenty-Two 10.7

cm Flux and Satellite Orbit Decay”, Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, 1987, pp419-433, vol
35
8.3. SATELLITES 225

Figure 8.15: Satellite lifetimes

to cross section ratio 100 kg /m2 in a circular orbit below 300 km is given for two
cases: a) for solar minimum conditions, b) for solar maximum conditions. The
geomagnetic field is assumed to be quiet during this period. The lifetime values
may be varied for satellites of differing mass to area ratios.
The uncertainty in the predictions is shown by a NORAD prediction in April
1979 for the expected re-entry of the SKYLAB space station between 11 June and
1 July of that year. The actual re-entry occurred on July 11, outside the stated
interval, a prediction error from mid-interval of around 15%.

8.3.6 Case Study: KOMPSAT1

Here we present a case study: atmospheric drag effects on KOMPSAT1 during ge-
omagnetic superstorms that occurred in Oct 29-30 and Nov. 20, 2003. A satellite
travelling through upper atmosphere suffers drag that acts opposite to its orbital
motion. This effects low Earth orbiting satellites, LEOs. The atmospheric drag
force depends on the satellite’s velocity V , the satellite’s cross sectional area per-
pendicular to the direction of motion A, the atmospheric total mass density ρ and
the dimensionless drag coefficient Cd :
1
Fd = Cd AV 2 ρ (8.21)
2
The atmospheric density ρ depends on two factors:

• solar EUV radiation, this leads to a heating of the upper atmosphere

226 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

• Joule heating: during strong geomagnetic disturbances the contributions to

atmospheric heating could reach up to 136% in response to an increase of
the K index (Knipp et al. 2004 [169]).

The heating of the upper atmosphere can be attributed to different effects.

When averaging over longer periods comprising solar maxima and minima the
following picture is obtained:

• particles: 36 GW

• Joule heating: 95 GW

• solar: 464 GW (EUV radiation)

These values were obtained for the period 1975 to 2003 (see Knipp et al, 2004
[169]). Thus solar wind driven geomagnetic power is about 1/5 of the total budget
but becomes dominant when solar activity rises.
The Korean satellite KOMPSAT1 has an altitude of 685 km and was observed
for its daily drag acceleration which was found to correlated strongly with geo-
magnetic disturbances9 . The results are shown in Fig. 8.14.

8.3.7 The Atmospheric Model

Let us briefly discuss an atmospheric model10 that is confined to satellites with
orbits totally below 500 km altitude. This is an extraction from the decay calcu-
lations given at
http : //[Link]/Category/Educational/Space/ .
The reason for that is a simplification: the orbit must then be essentially
circular and in place of the orbital radius we can use just the semimajor axis. The
atmospheric density ρ is defined by an exponential with variable scale height H.
For a fixed exospheric temperature T , H varies with altitude h trough the use of
an effective molecular mass m. m includes the actual variation in molecular mass
with height and a compensation term for the variation in temperature over the
considered range from 180 to 500 km. The variation in density due to the space
environment is introduced through T , where T = T (F10.7 cm, Ap ). Generally,
the solar X-ray output incident upon the Earth is absorbed at the base of the
thermosphere (120 km) and gives rise to a heating which propagates upward from
this level. We use the solar F10.7 cm flux which can vary from 65 to 300 SFU
(Solar Flux Units, 1 SFU= 10−22 W/m2 /Hz) as a proxy for X-rays. The other
quantity to take into account is the precipitation of particles- most of them coming
from the Sun (CMEs). These are well correlated with the large variations in the
geomagnetic field measured at the ground level and quantified by the geomagnetic
indices (we use the Ap index here). The Ap is computed every 24 hours and during
quiet periods just above zero but may rise up to 400.
9 Kim, K.H., Moon, Y.J., Cho, K.S., Kim, H.D., Park, J.Y., Earth, Planets, Space, 58, e25-
e28,2006
10 see also: King-Hele D, “Satellite Orbits in an Atmosphere - Theory and Applications”,

Blackie, Glasgow (1987)

8.3. SATELLITES 227

Figure 8.16: Solar wind speed and density from the ACE spacecraft
(a), Ap and F10.7 indices (b), provisional Dst index (c), daily aver-
aged Dst (d) and daily KOMPSAT1 acceleration (e). Adapted from
[Link]

Then we can write the following set of equations:

T = 900 + 2.5(F 10.7 − 70) + 1.5Ap [Kelvin] (8.22)
m = 27 − 0.012(h − 200) 180 < h[km] < 500 (8.23)
H = T /m [km] (8.24)
−10 −3
ρ = 6 × 10 exp(−(h − 175)/H) [kgm ] (8.25)
The output of this simple model is the density. The intermediate values are only
used to derive this density and may not correspond to true atmospheric values at
any height within the considered range. The temperature e.g. may be regarded
as the mean asymptotic value for the exosphere at large altitudes. The mean
molecular weight might be regarded as an integrated mean value from the base of
the thermosphere up to the specified height.
The solar 10.7 cm radio flux is used in averaged form (average over the last 90
days). A small correction may be made to weight the current flux more strongly.
228 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

Now let us consider the satellite drag. When a spacecraft travels through an
atmosphere it experiences a drag force opposite to the direction of its motion. This
is given by:
1
D = ρv 2 ACd (8.26)
2
D... drag force, ρ atmospheric density, v... speed of the satellite, A... cross
sectional area perpendicular to the direction of motion, Cd ... drag coefficients.
The latter can vary; at altitudes at which satellites orbit Cd ∼ 2. We introduce
the effective cross sectional area Ae = ACd .
For a circular orbit we have the following relation:

P 2 GMe = 4π 2 a3 (8.27)

G... gravitational constant, Me ... mass of the Earth. The reduction in the period
due to atmospheric drag is given by:
dP Ae
= −3πaρ (8.28)
dt m
Re-entry is assumed when the satellite has descended to an altitude of 180 km.
The space environmental parameters are given by the solar 10.7 cm radio flux and
the geomagnetic activity index. Furthermore one has to provide an estimate for
the satellite mass to area ratio. In the absence of any further information this
value can be taken as 100 kg /cm2 . This is an average value for many satellites.
If the program underestimates the actual decay of the orbit, you must de-
crease the mass to area ration, in the case of an overestimation the ratio must be
increased.
Also the situation becomes more complicated when considering satellites with
very elliptical orbits. Here, a part of the orbit is outside the current atmospheric
model. They are also subject to other perturbations (Sun, Moon). If the eccen-
tricity is not too large, one can introduce an effective height in that model:

heff = q + 900 × exp0.6 (8.29)

q... is the perigee (lowest height) of the orbit and e the eccentricity. For example,
the lifetime of a satellite in an elliptical orbit with e = 0.01 and q = 400 km is the
same as the lifetime of a satellite in a circular orbit of height:

400 + 900(0.01)0.6 (8.30)

Since that formula is only a rough approximation it should only be used for orbits
with e < 0.1. The solar activity should be constant during the orbit decay. Most
satellites reaching the end of their lives will have orbits with very low eccentric-
ities (i.e. nearly circular). The reason for this is that atmospheric drag acts to
circularize orbits. The apogee height is decreased whilst the perigee height is little
affected until the orbit becomes close to circular.
Satellites are perturbed to the first order by the Earth’s oblateness and at-
mospheric drag is important since it acts as energy dissipation. Space weather
influences on
8.3. SATELLITES 229

Figure 8.17: Forces acting on a satellite in a low circular orbit. From IPS Radio and
Space Services, Satellite Orbital Decay Calculations.

• local air densities

• projected cross section

• local and exospheric temperature

• atmospheric composition

These effects result to varying densities in the atmosphere causing drag effects
discussed above. The drivers are the varying solar UV radiation and coronal mass
ejections that cause geomagnetic storms. A recent review was given by Doornbos
and Klinkrad (2006, [77]).

8.3.8 Special Events

The coupling between geoeffective features in the solar wind and the magneto-
sphere-ionosphere-thermosphere system is extremely complex. Space weather fore-
casting requires fast simulations. A complete end-to-end simulation of the October
2003 CMEs leading to one of the most intense solar storms was done by Toth et
al., 2005. On October 28, 2003, an X17 flare was observed as well as a full halo
coronal mass ejection event. Only 19 hours later, on Oct. 29, 0613 UT, the shock
has reached the Earth causing a major geomagnetic storm. The geomagnetic K
indices at mid and high latitudes rose up to 9. In Australia11 HF communica-
tion problems were reported, as well as HF communications used by aircraft were
disrupted. Aurorae could be seen as far south as Texas. The Japanese satel-
lite Kodama was shut down and damaged. Power grids in the northern US and
Canada limited the amount of electricity they produced in order to avoid damage
by induced currents. In Malmö, Sweden, a power outage affected 20 000 homes- it
is highly possible that this was caused by the event. The crew in the international
11 see: http : //[Link]/Category/Educational/Space, vers. june 2006
230 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

space station had to move to the aft end of the service module where a higher
protection from enhanced radiation was expected.

8.4 Space Weather on Moon and Mars

8.4.1 Spaceweather on Moon
Our Moon is different from the Earth in many ways: it has no atmosphere and no
magnetic field. Therefore, the lunar surface is exposed directly to solar radiation
and particles. These have eroded the surface layer.
Regolith is a layer of loose, heterogeneous material covering solid rock. On the
Moon, regolith has been formed by the action of micro-meteorites breaking down
surface rocks into a powder. This powder is more reflective than the basalt that
makes up the lunar maria, and therefore looks brighter when viewed from Earth12 .
Meteoroids strike the Moon every day. Lunar escape velocity averages 2.38
km/s. Any rock on the lunar surface that is accelerated by the impact of a me-
teoroid to lunar escape velocity or greater will leave the Moon’s gravitational
influence. Some ejected material becomes captured by the Earth’s gravitational
field and lands on Earth within a few hundred thousands of years or shorter.
The moon does not possess an atmosphere. Meteoroids are not decelerated by
such an atmosphere like in the Earth. Lunar regolith is composed in part of rock
and mineral fragments that were broken apart from underlying bedrock by the
impact of meteorites. A rock composed of bits and pieces of older rocks is called
a breccia.
In lunar regolith two types of rocks (called Lithologies) occur:

Agglutinates : Small glassy breccias formed when a micrometeorite strikes the

lunar regolith. Micrometeorites have the size of less than 1 mm. When a
micrometeorite strikes the lunar surface, some of the impacted regolith melts
and some doesn’t, so the product is a glass with mineral and rock fragments
entrained. The glass often shows flow features. Agglutinates are typically
tens of micrometers to a few millimeters in size. All agglutinates contain
holes called vesicles. The vesicles all formed from gas bubbles in the glass.
Ions from the solar wind (mostly H and He) hit the unprotected surface, not
penetrating very deep into the rock (a few 10−2 mikrons, thus they are on
the surface of the regolith particles). When a micrometeorite strikes fine-
grained material at the surface, some of the material gets hot enough to melt
and form the glass of an agglutinate. It also gets hot enough to liberate the
solar-wind-implanted hydrogen and helium, causing bubbles in the glass.

Glass spherules : These may be formed in two ways. A meteorite impact melts
material, the melt is ejected from the crater and small globs of the melt
solidify. They are spherical ranging from mm to cm. The other origin is
12 There were even concerns before the landing of Apollo 11 that the regolith would not be

supportive enough to cope with the weight of the lunar module and that the module would begin
to sink beneath the surface.
8.4. SPACE WEATHER ON MOON AND MARS 231

pyroclastic glass, molten rock cools and solidifies above the Moon’s surface,
leading to glassy spherules.

The regolith contains much information on present and past solar corpuscular
radiation. Especially solar wind Ar seems to be well retained in the minerals that
were investigated by Wieler et al., 1980 [334] and Wieler et al. 1995 [333].
Therefore, the effects of “space weathering” (see also Keller et al., 1999 [158]) on
the formation of lunar soils provides the ground-truth requisite to understanding
regolith development on all atmosphereless bodies in the solar system, e.g. like
asteroids or satellites like Phobos or Deimos. Exposure to the solar wind and
solar cosmic rays for long periods of time may cause substantial alterations in the
geochemistry of the target material. Experimental results already made in 1967
(see Zeller and Ronca, 1967 [345]) indicate that hydration of oxygen-rich materials
can be expected in any surfaces which are exposed to solar protons.

8.4.2 Record of Early Earth Evolution

At this point it is interesting to point out that in lunar even terrestrial components
can be found (see also Ozima et al., 2005 [241]. As we have seen in the previ-
ous chapters, at present the interaction between the solar wind and the earth’s
ionosphere is very low because of the shielding of the geomagnetic field. However,
if the geomagnetic field is absent, solar wind particles directly can interact with
the ionosphere.
Light elements such as N and noble gases in lunar soils are surface correlated
and must have been implanted from outside. Most of the N and some of the other
volatile elements in lunar soils are actually from the Earth’s atmosphere rather
than the solar wind (Ozima, 2005 [240]). The existence of terrestrial compounds in
some lunar soils suggests that at the time when these components were implanted
in Lunar soil, the geomagnetic field was very weak. For example N and 26 Ar
components can be attributed to this so called earth wind. Moreover one has to
take into account that, as was also shown previously, the early Sun was much more
active than at present.

8.4.3 Mars
Because Mars will be a target of future manned space missions we briefly discuss
space weather influences there.
Mars is a dry like a desert, cold as the Earth’s Antarctic and possibly lifeless
and future human colonists will be exposed to extreme sets of weather conditions.
The Earth is protected by the magnetosphere. Mars does not possess a global
magnetic field to shield the surface from SEPs and cosmic rays. The solar wind
gradually eroded the martian atmosphere and at present the surface pressure is
1-9 millibars, depending on altitude; the average is 7 mb.
In astrobiology it is believed that protection by an atmosphere and magnetic
field are essential factors for life on a [Link] that mean that because Mars
has no global magnetic field and a very thin atmosphere the planet is lifeless?
232 CHAPTER 8. MAGNETOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, SPACE WEATHER

It can be assumed that certain life forms could be radiation resistant like the
terrestrial microbe Deinococcus radiodurans. D. radiodurans has a feature that is
considered all-important in aerospace: redundancy. Its genetic code repeats itself
many times so that damage in one area can be recognized and repaired quickly. It
withstands attacks from acid baths, high and low temperatures, and even radiation
doses, e.g. the microbe can withstand without loss of viability a dosage that is
3 000 times greater than what would kill a human.
Tiny Martians might also live in rocks or soil, substances that provide nat-
ural protection against radiation. In March 2004, small quantities of methane
(about 10 parts in a thousand million) were detected in the Martian atmosphere
by researchers operating the Planetary Fourier Spectrometer (FPS) experiment
on the orbiting Mars Express spacecraft and also by astronomers using the Keck
Telescopes and the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope on Earth (see e.g. Krasnopol-
sky, 2006 [172]). Normally, under conditions in the Martian atmosphere Methane
should be destroyed by UV solar radiation within a few hundred years. Its presence
can be explained either by volcanic outgassing or by the action of methanogens
(bacteria that produce methane).
As we have seen in the previous chapter, particulate radiation poses the greater
threat to humans. Particles from solar flares (protons) are of greater concern -
here particles with relatively low energies (around 70 MeV) are produced. Such
protons lose energy in tissue. Cosmic ray nuclei have energies between 300 and
500 MeV and they penetrate the human body in a short time so that there is
not enough time to transfer their energy to the surrounding tissue. Solar protons
when passing through humans ionize molecules along their track- the ionization
creates free radicals causing modification or even break of the DNA strands and
if the cell survives it can become cancerous.
Therefore, human settlers on Mars must be protected from these energetic
protons. The air density at the surface of Mars is equivalent to that of the Earth’s
atmosphere at 20 km altitude. Astronauts must be protected by shelter walls.
Another problem on Mars which is not directly related to space weather is
martian dust. Mars is red because its surface is largely composed of iron oxide
(rust) and oxides of other minerals. Some scientists suspect that the dusty soil
on Mars may be such a strong oxidizer that it burns any organic compound such
as plastics, rubber or human skin as viciously as undiluted lye or laundry bleach.
Data from the Pathfinder mission showed that Martian dust may also contain
trace amounts of toxic metals, including arsenic and hexavalent chromium.
Since Mars has no global magnetic field the surface is eroded by the solar wind
as well as by the planet’s atmosphere. Currently Mars looses approximately 2 kg/s
of its atmosphere. In 1998 magnetometers discovered a network of magnetic loops
arrayed across Mars’s southern hemisphere (see Fig 8.18). Locally, the magnetic
fields arch over the surface like umbrellas, hundreds of km high. In such an area
you would measure a field about as strong as the Earth’s (a few tenths of a gauss).
Elsewhere the field is extremely weak. The martian ionosphere traces the distrib-
ution of the surface magnetic field, and there seems to be a 1-to-1 correspondence:
places where magnetic umbrellas deflect the solar wind are also spots where the
ionosphere is retained high above the surface of the planet.
8.4. SPACE WEATHER ON MOON AND MARS 233

Figure 8.18: Artistic illustration of Earth magnetic field and Mars magnetic field (not
influenced by the solar wind). Credit: NASA

The Earth’s global magnetic field is caused and maintained from an active
dynamo – that is, circulating currents at the planet’s liquid metallic core. A
similar dynamo once churned inside Mars, but for reasons unknown it stopped
working four billion years ago. The patchwork fields mentioned above, we see
now are remnants of that original magnetic field. Hellas and Argyre, two large
impact basins on Mars are about four billion years old and are demagnetized.
If the dynamo was still operating when those impact features formed, the crust
would have re-magnetized as they cooled. Hence, the dynamo must have stopped
before then. The strongest magnetic anomalies were found in Terra Sirenum which
might therefore be the most suitable landing site for manned missions (Alves and
Baptista, 2004[7]).
The Mars Odysssey spacecraft (2001) has onboard the Martian radiation en-
vironment experiment (MARIE) which measures the background radiation due
to galactic cosmic rays and solar protons. Good agreement between models and
measurements were found (Atwell et al. 2004,[16]).
Space Radiation Hazards on Human Missions to the Moon and Mars are de-
scribed in Townsend, 2004 [314].
Crewmembers of the ISS will be exposed to ionizing radiation (the inclination of
ISS to the Earth orbit is 51 degrees, it is in low Earth orbit, LEO). The concept is as
low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) radiation exposure and cheap Poylethylene,
Cn Hn with low atomic number can be used for shielding ( Shavers et al., 2004
[280]). Models like HZETRN allow computer simulations of radiation hazards (
Wilson et al., 2004 [339]).
The complex reactions that are caused by solar radiation and particles in dif-
ferent planetary atmospheres are discussed (mainly for the UV radiation) in the
book of Vazquez and Hanslmeier, 2006 [325].
Chapter 9

Real-Time Space Weather

and Forecasts

In this chapter we will give an overview over existing real-time space weather
centers and the data available there. First we will discuss a very useful classification
scheme.

9.1 NOAA Space Weather Scales

As we have seen fast and efficient communication of space weather effects to the
public is very important. For that reason the US NOAA (National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration) has introduced the space weather scales. A summary
of the different influences triggered by the Sun is shown in Fig. 9.1.
The NOAA space weather scales can be grouped into three different parts:

• Geomagnetic storms

• Solar radiation storms

• Radio blackouts

In the following we will briefly review these scales.

9.1.1 Geomagnetic Storms

The geomagnetic storms are divided into 5 categories, G1...G5 where the last have
the most severe effects.

G1
classified as minor; the influence on power systems is weak, some grid fluctuations
can occur. Also the influence on spacecraft is negligible. It seems however that

235
236 CHAPTER 9. REAL-TIME SPACE WEATHER AND FORECASTS

Figure 9.1: After a flare or coronal mass ejection erupts from the Sun’s surface, major
disturbances arrive with a range of time delays and a storm begins to build in the space
surrounding the Earth.

migratory animals are affected even at this low level; the aurora is commonly
visible at high latitudes.
As an average about 1700 events per cycle ( corresponding to about 900 days
per cycle) are to be expected. The Kp value is about 5.

G2
moderate; at this activity some damage may occur in power systems: high-latitude
power systems may experience voltage alarms, long-duration storms may cause
transformer damage.
Concerning spacecraft operations corrective actions to orientation may be re-
quired by ground control; possible changes in drag affect orbit predictions. This
imposes problems to fully automated satellites.
Concerning terrestrial telecommunication the HF radio propagation can fade
at higher latitudes, and aurora has been seen as low as New York and Idaho (down
to 55 geomagnetic latitude). The Kp value is about 6 and on the average one can
expect 600 events per cycle (corresponding to about 360 days per cycle).

G3
strong; on power systems voltage corrections may be required; furthermore false
alarms can be triggered on some protection devices.
On satellite components surface charging may occur. Due to the extension of
the terrestrial atmosphere during these events drag may increase on low-Earth-
orbit satellites, and corrections may be needed for orientation problems.
It is also very important to note that intermittent satellite navigation and low-
frequency radio navigation problems may occur, HF radio may be intermittent,
and aurora has been seen as low as down to 50◦ geomagnetic lat. The Kp value
9.1. NOAA SPACE WEATHER SCALES 237

is about 7 and on the average one can expect 200 events per cycle (corresponding
to 130 days per cycle).

G4
severe; widespread voltage control problems may occur in power systems and some
protective systems will mistakenly trip out key assets from the grid.
The problems of surface charging and tracking of satellites increase consider-
ably.
On surface pipelines, induced currents affect preventive measures; the satellite
navigation can degrade for hours and low frequency navigation can be disrupted.
Aurora has been seen down to 450 geomagnetic latitude. The Kp index is at 8
and on the average one has to count with 100 events per cycle (corresponding to
60 days per cycle).

G5
extreme; widespread voltage control problems and protective system problems can
occur; transformers may experience damages and some grid systems may experi-
ence complete collapse or blackouts.
The spacecraft operations are affected by extensive surface charging, problems
with orientation, uplink/downlink and tracking satellites.
At this activity pipeline currents can reach hundreds of amperes, HF radio
propagation may be impossible in many areas for one to two days, satellite navi-
gation may be degraded for days, low-frequency radio navigation can be blocked
for hours. The aurora has been seen down to 400 geomagnetic latitude (Italy,
southern Texas). At this level Kp = 9 and on the average one has to expect 4
events per cycle (corresponding to about 4 days per cycle).

9.1.2 Solar Radiation Storms

Again this is a classification from 1 to 5 (S1...S5). This activity can be quantita-
tively measured by the flux of ions ≥ 10 MeV as five minute averages in the units
s−1 ster−1 cm−2 .

S1
minor; there are no effects on biological systems and satellite operations; no danger
for astronauts (especially for EVAs (extravehicular activities)). There may be some
minor impacts on HF radio in the polar regions. The ion flux is about 10 (see above
units). There are about 50 events per solar cycle.

S2
moderate; there are no biological influences; for satellite operations it is important
to know that infrequent single-event upsets are possible.
238 CHAPTER 9. REAL-TIME SPACE WEATHER AND FORECASTS

Small effects occur on HF propagation through the polar regions and navigation
at polar cap locations is possibly affected.
The ion flux is about 100 and can expect about 25 events per cycle.

S3
strong; at this level radiation hazard avoidance is recommended for astronauts
on EVA; passengers and crew in commercial jets at high latitudes may receive
low-level radiation exposure (equivalent to approximately 1 chest x-ray).
The effects on satellite operations become important: lots of single-event up-
sets, noise in imaging systems, and slight reduction of efficiency in solar panels are
likely.
On Earth, degraded HF radio propagation through the polar regions and nav-
igation position errors are likely. The ion flux is about 103 and about 10 such
events per cycle may occur.

S4
severe; unavoidable radiation hazard to astronauts on EVA thus it is necessary to
alarm astronauts; moreover, elevated radiation exposure to passengers and crew
in commercial jets at high latitudes (equivalent to approximately 10 chest x-rays)
is possible.
Satellites may experience memory device problems and noise on imaging sys-
tems; star-tracker problems may cause orientation problems, and solar panel effi-
ciency can be degraded.
On the surface blackout of HF radio communications through the polar regions
and increased navigation errors over several days are likely.
The ion flux is about 104 . There are about 3 such events per cycle.

S5
extreme; unavoidable high radiation hazard to astronauts on EVA; high radiation
exposure to passengers and crew in commercial jets at high latitudes (equivalent
to approximately 100 chest x-rays) is possible.
Satellites may be put out of operation, memory impacts can cause loss of
control, may cause serious noise in image data, star-trackers may be unable to
locate sources; permanent damage to solar panels is possible.
At the surface complete blackout of HF communications is possible through the
polar regions, and position errors make navigation operations extremely difficult.
The ion flux is at 105 ; fortunately, these events occur on a rate fewer than 1
per cycle.

9.1.3 Scale for Radio Blackouts

Classified as R1...R5; measured as GOES X-ray peak brightness by class, measured
in the 0.1-0.8 nm range, in Wm−2 .
9.1. NOAA SPACE WEATHER SCALES 239

R1
minor; we have to take into account a weak or minor degradation of HF radio
communication on the sunlit side, as well as occasional loss of radio contact.
Concerning navigation we have to consider that low-frequency navigation sig-
nals may be degraded for brief intervals. The flare classification is M1 and (10−5 ).
On the average 2000 such perturbances per cycle occur (on 950 days per cycle).

R2
moderate; limited blackout of HF radio communication on sunlit side occur, loss
of radio contact for tens of minutes.
Navigation: a degradation of low-frequency navigation signals for tens of
minutes is likely. The classification of the relevant solar event goes M5 and the
flux to 5 × 10−5 .
On the average one has 350 events per cycle (300 days per cycle).

R3
strong; a wide area blackout of HF radio communication, as well as a loss of radio
contact for about an hour on the sunlit side of Earth is likely.
Since low-frequency navigation signals are being degraded for about an hour
this also has serious consequences for navigation.
The classification is X1, the flux 10−4 and 175 events per cycle (140 days per
cycle) are probable.

R4
severe; HF radio communication blackout occurs mostly on the sunlit side of Earth
for one to two hours and a HF radio contact loss during this time has to be
expected.
Outages of low-frequency navigation signals cause increased error in position-
ing of navigational systems for one to two hours. Minor disruptions of satellite
navigation are likely on the sunlit side of Earth.
The classification is X10, the flux 10−3 and 8 events per cycle (8 days per cycle)
can be expected.

R5
extreme; a complete HF (high frequency) radio blackout on the entire sunlit side
of the Earth lasting for a number of hours may occur. This results in no HF radio
contact with mariners and en route aviators in this sector.
Navigation: Low-frequency navigation signals used by maritime and general
aviation systems experience outages on the sunlit side of the Earth for many hours,
causing loss in positioning. Satellite navigation errors in positioning increase for
several hours on the sunlit side of Earth, which may spread into the night side.
The classification is X20, the flux 2 × 10−3 and there are less than 1 events per
cycle.
240 CHAPTER 9. REAL-TIME SPACE WEATHER AND FORECASTS

Figure 9.2: Summary of space weather effect in the Earth’s environment

9.1.4 Summary
The classification scheme given above enables very easily to estimate the effect of
geomagnetic storms and solar radiation storms on satellites and telecommunica-
tion systems. This is also extremely important for manned space mission (ISS,
international space station). On the other hand, the solar activity has declined
after heaving reached its maximum in 2000, the new cycle will start in 2006. One
can estimate that there will be about 25 EVA/year necessary for the construction
of the space station. For that reason, it is extremely important to alert astronauts
for S4 and S5 storms. The predicted sales figures for GPS systems rise from 5000
Million USD for 1998 and more than 9000 Million USD for 2000. This means that
more and more systems are equipped with these navigation systems but on the
other hand we must take into account that small degradations may even occur at
R1 levels. The frequency of such events is however more than 2000 per cycle.
Also the number of satellites will increase.
We have seen before that some military detection or early-warning systems are
also affected by solar activity. The Over-the-Horizon Radar bounces signals off
the ionosphere in order to monitor the launch of aircraft and missiles from long
distances. During geomagnetic storms, this system can be severely hampered by
radio clutter. That can occur at even low activity (R1 perturbances).

9.2 The Main Space Weather Sources

Currently the three major sources are:
• NOAA Space Environment Center (Boulder, CO, USA)
9.2. THE MAIN SPACE WEATHER SOURCES 241

• Solar-Terrestrial Dispatch (University of Lethbridge, Stirling, Alberta,

Canada)
• Australian Space Forecast Centre (Haymarket, NSW, Australia).

In addition to these sources many other observatories contribute to space

weather related data. A list of these institutions and observatories can be found
on the homepage of the Swedish Lund Space Weather center
http : //[Link]/
and at the website
http : //[Link]/HeliosHome/spwf [Link]

9.2.1 NOAA Environment Center

The SEC provides regular bulletins and forecasts as well as solar images and
scientific data. Via WWW you can get the latest Geophysical alert message text
like:

:Product: Geophysical Alert Message [Link] :Issued: 2006 Aug 23 0911 UTC
Prepared by the US Dept. of Commerce, NOAA, Space Environment Center
Geophysical Alert Message
Solar-terrestrial indices for 22 August follow. Solar flux 81 and mid-latitude A-index
21. The mid-latitude K-index at 0900 UTC on 23 August was 3 (31 nT).
No space weather storms were observed for the past 24 hours.
No space weather storms are expected for the next 24 hours.

Furthermore, you can get a Report of Solar and Geomagnetic Activity –issued
daily at 2200Z. This summarizes solar and geomagnetic conditions for the past 24
hours and provides forecasts for the next three days and moreover contains that
day’s Solar Flux value and A-index, plus forecasts for the next three.
Another valuable information is the D-region Absorption Prediction –updated
once a minute; this color-coded world map graphic depicts the current position of
the sun and how a solar flare might have caused an HF fade.
In Today’s Space Weather more information including full-disk H-Alpha solar
images etc can be found.

9.2.2 Solar-Terrestrial Dispatch

STD focuses great emphasis upon HF communications. Current solar flux value
(updated every 30 minutes), Boulder and planetary K-indices (computed each 3
hours) for the current UTC day, running estimated 24-hour planetary A-index,
plus K- and A-indices for the previous UTC day can be found there as well as the
10.7 cm solar radio flux.
Another feature are MUF maps. The map shows the radio auroral zones as
green bands near the northern and southern poles. The area within the green bands
is known as the auroral zone. Radio signals passing through these auroral zones
will experience increased signal degradation in the form of fading, multipathing
and absorption.
242 CHAPTER 9. REAL-TIME SPACE WEATHER AND FORECASTS

The radio auroral zones are typically displaced equatorward from the optical
auroral zones (or the regions where visible auroral activity can be seen with the
eye).
A world map showing the highest vertically directed frequency being returned
from the ionosphere are the critical F2-layer maps.

9.2.3 Australian Space Forecast Centre

Besides current solar, HF, ionospheric, and geomagnetic conditions e.g. a recent X-
ray flare list is available where you get almost instantaneous data on flare activity
in the recent past. The data are given as:

Approximate Flare Start : 06-07-2006 0823 UT

Approximate Flare Maximum: 06-07-2006 0837 UT at Flux M 2.5
Approximate Flare End : 06-07-2006 0859 UT
LOCATION OF HF FADEOUT: Middle East

There are also online prediction tools to predict HF propagation paths. Also
frequencies and times for HF communication paths between two user-entered
points anywhere in the world is provided by GRAFEX. On a world map, you
click your location, enter up to ten operating frequencies, the desired UTC hour,
and then use the mouse to drag out a target region. Now you choose either real-
time or forecast ionospheric conditions and receive a color-coded coverage map for
all frequencies plus individual maps for each chosen frequency.

9.3 Space Weather Forecasts

As we have seen in the previous sections, phenomena on the Sun as flares, coronal
mass ejections, solar wind, are coupled to the Earth’s magnetosphere/atmosphere
system. High energetic events on the Sun can lead to a destruction of satellites
and therefore it becomes more and more desirable to predict solar activity. We
summarize some recent attempts.
In the section about helioseismology we described, how the interior of the Sun
can be investigated by analyzing solar eigenmodes. This enabled us to study the
structure around and below visible active regions such as flows and temperatures.
For local area helioseismology data from SOHO and GONG are extremely impor-
tant and will hopefully help to improve predictions about solar active phenomena.
Physics-based neural network to investigate how the flow fields can be used to pre-
dict flares and space weather and to incorporate these data into the space weather
forecast models was done by Jensen et al. 2004 [148].
A software tool that automatically detects Coronal Mass Ejections as observed
by the LASCO C2 instrument on board the SOHO spacecraft was developed by
Olmedo et al. 2006 [237]. The automatic method gives a true positive rate of
approximately 75% using a manual catalog as a benchmark and is part of software
tools in the Solar Eruptive Event Detection System (SEEDS).
9.3. SPACE WEATHER FORECASTS 243

During the declining phase of solar cycle 23 four epochs of extremely high flare
activity occurred. This was not observed in the previous cycles 21 and 22 (only 1
event) but similar to cycle 20 (Bai, 2006 [24]).
The Solar Mass Ejection Imager (SMEI) has been tracking coronal mass ejec-
tions (CMEs) from the Sun to the Earth and beyond since February 2003. A
prediction of the arrival time at ACE within 2 hours of its actual arrival for three
events, and within 10 hours for eight events was possible. Of these eight events,
seven were detected by SMEI more than 1 day before the transient’s arrival at the
Earth (Howard et al. 2006 [139]).
The solar cycle 24, that started in 2006 could have a 30-50% higher peak than
cycle 23. This prediction is based on a flux transport dynamo model that gave
good predictions for the peaks of cycles 16-23 (Dikpati et al., 2006 [76]). This is in
contradiction with the prediction given by Schatten, 2005 [272] using the polar field
precursor method of solar activity forecasting. In that paper, the peak amplitude
of the next solar cycle 24 is estimated at 124 ± 30 in terms of smoothed F10.7
Radio Flux and 80 ± 30 in terms of smoothed international or Zurich Sunspot
number. That would mean ‘fair space weather’.
Burov, 2006 [51] wrote a paper on the possibility of getting economically sound
forecasts of rare space weather events where he mentioned the need for precise
forecasting of major events.
Space weather prediction by cosmic rays was investigated by Mavromichalaki et
al., 2006 [213] using real-time data from a neutron monitor network. The system
collects data in real-time mode from about 15 real-time cosmic ray stations by
using the internet. The main server in Athens station collects 5-min and hourly
cosmic ray data and produces forecasting.
Medium range (1– 3 days) geomagnetic forecasting using data of slow/high
speed solar wind stream interfaces were described by Gleisner and Watermann,
2006 [114].
An approach to space weather via analysis, prediction, modeling, and classifica-
tion supported by Genetic Programming was made by Jorgensen and Karimabadi
(2005 [150]). Genetic programming can search spaces of algorithms or mathemat-
ical functions. A population of candidate solutions is allowed to evolve. Then a
natural selection and survival of the fittest starts.
Chapter 10

Asteroids, Comets,
Meteroites

10.1 Asteroids

10.1.1 General Properties

On the first day of January 1801, Giuseppe Piazzi discovered an object which he
first thought was a new comet. But after its orbit was better determined it was
clear that it was not a comet but more like a small planet and it was therefore
named asteroid. The proper name of the first asteroid detected is Ceres1 . Three
other small bodies were discovered in the next few years (Pallas, Vesta, and Juno).
By the end of the 19th century several hundred asteroids were known.
Several thousand asteroids have been discovered and given provisional desig-
nations so far. Thousands more are discovered each year. There are 26 known
asteroids larger than 200 km in diameter. About 99 % of all objects > 100 km are
known however of the total number of asteroids with diameters between 10 and
100 km we know only 50%. It is difficult to estimate the total number of asteroids,
perhaps as many as a million 1 km sized asteroids may exist most of them being
too small to be seen from the Earth.
Since most of the asteroids have orbits between Jupiter and Mars, it was first
assumed that they are remnants of a larger planet that broke up. However, the
total mass of all the asteroids is less than that of the Moon2 .
Ceres has a diameter of 933 km, the next largest are Pallas, Vesta and Hygiea
which are between 400 and 525 km in diameter. All other known asteroids are less
than 340 km.

1 According to the new definition of the international Astr. Union adopted in 2006, Ceres and

Pluto are classified as dwarf planet

2 The mass of the moon is only 1/81 Earth masses

245
246 CHAPTER 10. ASTEROIDS, COMETS, METEROITES

10.1.2 Classification of Asteroids

Asteroids are classified into:
• C-type: extremely dark (albedo 0.03), similar to carbonaceous chondrite
meteorites; 75% of known asteroids belong to this class.
• S-type: 17% of asteroids; bright (albedo 0.1-0.2); metallic Ni, Fe and Mg
silicates.
• M-type: bright (albedo 0.1-0.2), pure NiFe.
• rare types
One should however take into account biases in the observations- e.g. dark C-types
are more difficult to detect.
According to their position in the solar system, asteroids can also be categorized
into:
• Main belt: located between Mars and Jupiter, 2-4 AU from the Sun.
• Near Earth Asteroids (NEAs): they closely approach the Earth and will be
treated separately.
• Trojans: located near Jupiter’s Lagrange points (60 degrees ahead and be-
hind Jupiter in its orbit); several 100 are known.
• Between the main concentration in the Main Belt are relatively empty regions
known as Kirkwood gaps. These are regions were an object’s orbital period
would be a simple fraction of that of Jupiter (resonance).
• Centaurs: asteroids in the outer solar system; e.g. Chiron (his orbit lies
between Saturn and Uranus).

10.2 Impacts by Asteroids

10.2.1 Potentially Hazardous Asteroids
Potentially Hazardous Asteroids (PHAs) are currently defined based on parameters
that measure the asteroid’s potential to make threatening close approaches to the
Earth.
To be classified as PHA, the following parameters must be fulfilled:
• an Earth Minimum Orbit Intersection Distance (MOID) of 0.05 AU or less,
• absolute magnitudes (H) of 22.0 or less are considered.
An asteroid’s absolute magnitude H is the visual magnitude an observer would
record if the asteroid were placed 1 Astronomical Unit (AU) away, and 1 AU from
the Sun and at a zero phase angle. The diameter of an asteroid can estimated
from its absolute magnitude (H). The lower the H value, the larger the size of the
10.2. IMPACTS BY ASTEROIDS 247

object. However, this also requires that the asteroid’s albedo be known as well.
Since the albedo for most asteroids is not known, an albedo range between 0.25 to
0.05 is usually assumed. This results in a range for the diameter of the asteroid.
The table 10.2 shows the diameter ranges for an asteroid based on its absolute
magnitude, assuming an albedo ranging from 0.25 to 0.05.
In other words, asteroids that can’t get any closer to the Earth (i.e. MOID)
than 0.05 AU (roughly 7,480,000 km) or are smaller than about 150 m in diameter
(i.e. H = 22.0 with assumed albedo of 13%) are not considered PHAs. The current
list of PHAs is obtained from the Minor Planet Center on a daily basis. Asteroids
with a small MOID to Earth should be carefully followed because they can become
Earth colliders3 .
Because of long-range planetary gravitational perturbations and, particularly,
close planetary approaches, asteroid orbits change with time. Consequently, MOID
also changes. As a rule of thumb, MOID can change by up to 0.02 AU per century,
except for approaches within 1 AU of massive Jupiter, where the change can be
larger. Thus, an asteroid that has a small MOID with any planet should be
monitored. Currently there are about 350 known PHA’s.

10.2.2 Torino Impact Scale

This was established (analogous to the space weather scale) to characterize differ-
ent objects.

Events Having No Likely Consequences (White Zone)

0 The likelihood of a collision is zero, or well below the chance that a random
object of the same size will strike the Earth within the next few decades. This
designation also applies to any small object that, in the event of a collision, is
unlikely to reach the Earth’s surface intact.

Events Meriting Careful Monitoring (Green Zone)

1 The chance of collision is extremely unlikely, about the same as a random object
of the same size striking the Earth within the next few decades.

Events Meriting Concern (Yellow Zone)

2 A somewhat close, but not unusual encounter. Collision is very unlikely.

3 A close encounter, with 1% or greater chance of a collision capable of causing
localized destruction.
4 A close encounter, with 1% or greater chance of a collision capable of causing
regional devastation.
3 see also: Impacts on Earth, by D. Benest, Springer, 1998
248 CHAPTER 10. ASTEROIDS, COMETS, METEROITES

Threatening Events (Orange Zone)

5 A close encounter, with a significant threat of a collision capable of causing
regional devastation.
6 A close encounter, with a significant threat of a collision capable of causing a
global catastrophe. 7 A close encounter, with an extremely significant threat of a
collision capable of causing a global catastrophe.

Certain Collisions (Red Zone)

8 A collision capable of causing localized destruction. Such events occur some-
where on Earth between once per 50 years and once per 1 000 years.
9 A collision capable of causing regional devastation. Such events occur between
once per 1 000 years and once per 100 000 years.
10 A collision capable of causing a global climatic catastrophe. Such events occur
once per 100 000 years, or less often.

10.2.3 NEOs
Near-Earth Objects (NEOs) are comets and asteroids that have been nudged by
the gravitational attraction of nearby planets into orbits that allow them to enter
the Earth’s neighborhood. Composed mostly of water ice with embedded dust
particles, comets originally formed in the cold outer planetary system while most
of the rocky asteroids formed in the warmer inner solar system between the orbits
of Mars and Jupiter. The scientific interest in comets and asteroids is due largely
to their status as the relatively unchanged remnant debris from the solar system
formation process some 4.6 billion years ago. The giant outer planets (Jupiter,
Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune) formed from an agglomeration of billions of comets
and the left over bits and pieces from this formation process are the comets we see
today. Likewise, today’s asteroids are the bits and pieces left over from the initial
agglomeration of the inner planets that include Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars.
As the primitive, leftover building blocks of the solar system formation process,
comets and asteroids offer clues to the chemical mixture from which the planets
formed some 4.6 billion years ago. If we wish to know the composition of the
primordial mixture from which the planets formed, then we must determine the
chemical constituents of the leftover debris from this formation process - the comets
and asteroids.
In terms of orbital elements, NEOs are asteroids and comets with perihelion
distance q less than 1.3 AU. Near-Earth Comets (NECs) are further restricted to
include only short-period comets (i.e orbital period P less than 200 years). The
vast majority of NEOs are asteroids, referred to as Near-Earth Asteroids (NEAs).
NEAs are divided into groups (Aten, Apollo, Amor) according to their perihelion
distance (q), aphelion distance (Q) and their semi-major axes (a).
Possible NEO missions that require spacecraft with the capability to ren-
dezvous at great distances (1 AU) from the Earth within a releatively short amount
of time (on the order of a year) are discussed by Sforza and Remo (1997 [279]) and
10.2. IMPACTS BY ASTEROIDS 249

Table 10.1: Groups of Asteroids near Earth orbit

Group Description Definition
NECs Near-Earth Comets q<1.3 AU, P<200 years
NEAs Near-Earth Asteroids q< 1.3 AU
Atens Earth-crossing NEAs a<1.0 AU,Q>0.983 AU
Apollos Earth-crossing NEAs a>1.0 AU, q<1.017 AU
Amors Earth-appr. NEAs with
orbits betw. Earth and Mars a>1.0 AU, 1.017<q<1.3 AU
PHAs NEAs MOID≤0.05 AU, H≤22.0

Table 10.2: Absolute magnitude and diameter of asteroids

absolute Magn. Diameter absolute Magn. Diameter
3.0 670 km - 1490 km 3.5 530 km - 1190 km
4.0 420 km - 940 km 4.5 330 km - 750 km
5.0 270 km - 590 km 5.5 210 km - 470 km
6.0 170 km - 380 km 6.5 130 km - 300 km
7.0 110 km - 240 km 7.5 85 km - 190 km
8.0 65 km - 150 km 8.5 50 km - 120 km
9.0 40 km - 90 km 9.5 35 km - 75 km
10.0 25 km - 60 km 10.5 20 km - 50 km
11.0 15 km - 40 km 11.5 13 km - 30 km
12.0 11 km - 24 km 12.5 8 km - 19 km
13.0 7 km - 15 km 13.5 5 km - 12 km
14.0 4 km - 9 km 14.5 3 km - 7 km
15.0 3 km - 6 km 15.5 2 km - 5 km
16.0 2 km - 4 km 16.5 1 km - 3 km
17.0 1 km - 2 km 17.5 1 km - 2 km
18.0 670 m - 1500 m 18.5 530 m - 1200 m
19.0 420 m - 940 m 19.5 n330 m - 750 m
20.0 270 m - 590 m 20.5 210 m - 470 m
21.0 170 m - 380 m 21.5 130 m - 300 m
22.0 110 m - 240 m 22.5 85 m - 190 m
23.0 65 m - 150 m 23.5 50 m - 120 m
24.0 40 m - 95 m 24.5 35 m - 75 m
25.0 25 m - 60 m 25.5 20 m - 50 m
26.0 17 m - 37 m 26.5 13 m - 30 m
27.0 11 m - 24 m 27.5 8 m - 19 m
28.0 7 m - 15 m 28.5 5 m - 12 m
250 CHAPTER 10. ASTEROIDS, COMETS, METEROITES

Powell et al. (1997 [248]). NEOs as near Earth resources for mining are discussed
by Gertsch et al. (1997 [108]).

10.2.4 The Cretaceous-Tertiary Impact

65 million years ago at the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary (K/T) an impact oc-
curred. Mass extinctions of a broad spectrum of lifeforms (Raup and Sepkoski,
1988 [252]), a worldwide clay layer containing geochemical (Alvarez et al., 1980
[6]), mineralogical (Bohor, 1990 [42]) and isotopic anomalies (McDougall, 1988
[217]) and tsunami deposits (Bourgeois et al., 1988 [46]) point to a major event at
that time.
The buried Chicxulub basin is the source crater about 300 km in diameter.
It is believed that the Chicxulub crater would most likely be formed by a long-
period comet composed primarily of nonsilicate materials (ice, hydrocarbons etc.)
and subordinate amounts primitive chondritic material. The collision would have
raised the energy equivalent to between 4 × 108 and 4 × 109 megatons of TNT.
Studies of terrestrial impact rates suggest that such an event would have a mean
production rate of ∼ 1.25 × 10−9 yr−1 . This rate is considerably lower than that
of the major mass extinctions over the last 250 million years (∼ 5 × 10−7 yr−1 ).
However, there is substantial evidence establishing the cause-link between the
Chicxulub basin forming event and the K/T biological extinctions. The crater
showed several rings (similar to the rings of the Mare Orientale on the Moon).
Let us consider the impact of a small asteroid. It fragments in the atmosphere
thus the cross section for aerodynamic braking is greatly enhanced. Ground impact
damage such as
• craters,
• earthquakes,
• tsunami
from a stoney asteroid is negligible if it is less than 200 m in diameter. Small and
relatively frequent impactors such as Tunguska produce only air blast damage and
leave no long term scars. Objects 2.5 times larger which hit every few thousand
years cause coherent destruction over many thousand km of coast. Let us assume
an asteroid > 200 m hits an ocean. A water wave generated by such an impactor
has a long range because it is two-dimensional; its height falls off inversely with
distance from the impact. When the wave strikes a continental shelf, its speed
decreases and its height increases to produce tsunamis. Tsunamis produce most
of the damage from asteroids between 200 m and 1 km. An impact anywhere in
the Atlantic by an asteroid 400 m in diameter would devastate the coasts on both
sides of the ocean by tsunamis over 100 m high. An asteroid 5 km in diameter
hitting the mid Atlantic would produce tsunami that would inundate the entire
East coast of the US to the Appalachian mountains (see the paper of Hills and
Mader, 1997 [133]).
In Fig.10.1 the estimated frequency of impacts as a function of asteroid diam-
eter is shown.
10.2. IMPACTS BY ASTEROIDS 251

Asteroid diameter
3m 10 30 100 300 1km 10km
Month

Typical impact interval

1000 yrs Tunguska

6
10 yrs

10
8
yrs K/T Impact

4
0.01 1 100 10 106 10 8

Megatons TNT equivalent

Figure 10.1: Estimated frequency of impacts on the Earth from the present population
of comets and asteroids and impact craters.

An asteroid or comet ≥ 10 km in diameter (which releases ≥ 1024 J or 108 Mt

TNT) would cause a global catastrophe:

• production of dense clouds of ejecta,

• smoke clouds,

• large amounts of nitric oxides are created → acid rain;

• the NOx in the stratosphere destroys the ozone layer.

• in an ocean impact: enhanced greenhouse effect from water vapor injected

into the atmosphere,

• CO2 released by impact into carbonate rocks...

Some more details about such scenarios can be found e.g. in Chapman and Mor-
rison (1994 [63]) or Melosh et al. (1990 [223]).
During the last 500 Million years there occurred several extinctions of marine
species: in Table 10.3 we give the formal end of stage in Myr.
From the data we can deduce that the Earth should be hit by several asteroids
and comets larger than a few km (∼ 1023 J energy release) and perhaps one ≤10 km
in a period of ∼ 100 Myr. Thus for the last 500 Myr years 5 events of extinctions
are to be expected and 20 minor events which is in agreement with astronomical
predictions.
From normal meteoroid ablation an iridium anomaly is observed and is one
of the most significant signatures for impact. The search for iridium has resulted
in reports of elevated iridium levels (≤ 10 times background values) at or near a
252 CHAPTER 10. ASTEROIDS, COMETS, METEROITES

Table 10.3: Extinction of marine species. The end of the stage is given in Myr.
Name End Name End
Pliocene 2.3 Mid Miocene 11.2
Upper Eocene 34 Maastrichtian 65
Cenomanian 93.5 Aptian 112
Tithonian 144 Callovian 159
Pliensbachian 190 Norian 206
Carnian 221 Tatarian 248
Guadelupian 250 Stephanian 290
Serpukhovian 322 Famennian 363
Frasnian 367 Eifelian 380
Ludlovian 411 Ashgillian 439
Llanvirnian 469 Tremadocian 493
Trempeleauean 505 Franconian 508
Botomian 520 Proterozoic/Cambrian 540

number of extinction boundaries. The Ir levels are generally significantly weaker

than the K/T anomaly.
The conversion from projectile mass to crater size was given by Shoemaker et
al. (1990 [284]):
D = 0.074Cf (ge /g)1/6 (W ρa /ρt )1/3.4 (10.1)

D...crater diameter, cf ...crater collapse factor (1.3 for craters larger than 4 km on
Earth), ge ...gravitational acceleration at the surface of the Earth, g... acceleration
at the surface of the body on which the crater is formed (in this case Earth),
W... the kinetic energy of the impacting body in kilotons TNT, ρa ...density of the
impactor (1.8 g/cm3 for a comet...7.3 g/cm3 for an iron body) and ρt ...density of
the target rock (e.g. 2.7 g/cm3 ). From this equation we see, that a carbonaceous
chondrite would produce a crater ∼ 94 km in diameter whereas an impactor of
cometary composition ∼ 150 km.

10.3 Meteorites
10.3.1 General Properties
The term meteor comes from the Greek meteoron, meaning phenomenon in the
sky. Meteors are small solid particles that enter the Earth’s atmosphere from
interplanetary space. They move at high speeds and the friction they encounter
in the air vaporizes them (typically at heights between 80 and 110 km above the
surface). The light caused by the luminous vapors formed in such an encounter
appears like a star moving rapidly across the sky, fading within a few seconds. To
be visible, a meteor must be within 200 km of the observer. The total number of
meteors bright enough to be visible is estimated to be about 25 million per day.
10.3. METEORITES 253

A meteoroid is matter revolving around the sun or any object in interplanetary

space that is too small to be called an asteroid or a comet. Even smaller particles
are called micrometeoroids or cosmic dust grains, which includes any interstellar
material that should happen to enter our solar system. A meteorite is a meteoroid
that reaches the surface of the Earth without being completely vaporized.
One of the primary goals of studying meteorites is to determine the history
and origin of their parent bodies. Several achondrites sampled from Antarctica
since 1981 have conclusively been shown to have originated from the moon based
on compositional matches of lunar rocks obtained by the Apollo missions of 1969-
1972. Sources of other specific metorites remain unproven, although another set of
eight achondrites are suspected to have come from Mars. These meteorites contain
atmospheric gases trapped in shock melted minerals which match the composition
of the Martian atmosphere as measured by the Viking landers in 1976. All other
groups are presumed to have originated on asteroids or comets; the majority of
meteorites are believed to be fragments of asteroids.
A typical bright meteor is produced by a particle with a mass less than 1 g.
A particle the size of a golf ball produces a bright fireball. The total mass of
meteoritic material entering the Earth’s atmosphere is estimated to be about 100
tons per day.

10.3.2 Classification
Meteorites can be classified into stony, stony iron and iron. The most common
meteorites are chondrites which are stony. Radiometric dating indicate an age of
about 4.5×109 years. Achondrites are also stony but they are considered differen-
tiated or reprocessed matter. They are formed by melting and recristallization on
or within meteorite parent bodies. Pallasites are stony iron meteorites composed
of olivine enclosed in metal.
The motion of meteoroids can be severely perturbed by the gravitational fields
of major planets. Jupiter’s gravitational influence is capable of reshaping an as-
teroid’s orbit from the main belt so that it dives into the inner solar system and
crosses the orbit of Earth. This is apparently the case of the Apollo and Vesta
asteroid fragments.
Particles found in highly correlated orbits are called stream components and
those found in random orbits are called sporadic components. It is thought that
most meteor streams are formed by the decay of a comet nucleus and consequently
are spread around the original orbit of the comet. When Earth’s orbit intersects
a meteor stream, the meteor rate is increased and a meteor shower results. Typ-
ically, a meteor shower will be active for several days. A particularly intense
meteor shower is called a meteor storm. Sporadic meteors are believed to have
had a gradual loss of orbital coherence with a meteor shower due to collisions and
radiative effects, further enhanced by gravitational influences. There is still some
debate concerning sporadic meteors and their relationship with showers. A well
known meteor shower are the Perseids (named after the radiant that is the name
of the constellation where the meteorites are seem to be coming from) which has
its maximum on August 11.
254 CHAPTER 10. ASTEROIDS, COMETS, METEROITES

40

Height at half energy dissipation [km]

V=30 km/s

30

10 v=11km/s

0
0.1. 1 10 100
Initial meteor radius [m]

Figure 10.2: Height in the atmosphere at which half the kinetic energy of a stony
meteoroid is dissipated. Note that asteroids with > 100 m hit the ground with most of
their original kinetic energy.

10.3.3 The Leonid Threat

On Nov. 18th the Earth glides into a dust cloud shed by the comet Tempel-Tuttle
in 1766. Around this date lots of meteors can be seen. The Leonid meteor shower is
seen to emanate from a point in the western part of Leo which is called the radiant.
When Leonids rain down on the airless moon, they will not cause the shooting
stars because there is no atmosphere; they just hit the ground. In 1999 while the
Moon passed through the Leonid debris, impact flashes were recorded. When such
a meteoroid hits the Moon it vaporizes some dust and rock. Some of those vapors
contain sodium (constituent of lunar rocks) which scatters sunlight. The Moon is
also surrounded by a gaseous halo called the lunar exosphere (∼ 100 atoms per
cm3 ). The solar wind blows it into a long tail (much like a comet tail). This
tail points away from the Sun and extends several 105 km and the Earth passes
through it once a month around the time of New Moon. Using extraordinary
sensitive cameras, sunlight scattered can be detected. After the Leonid fireball
shower of 1998 the density of the Moon’s sodium trail tripled.
There is also a risk to satellites. The damage can be:
• mechanical: direct impact through spalling or chipping as larger particles
hit the spacecraft and break up;
• electrical: electrostatic discharges (ESDs), electromagnetic pulse (EMP).
Mechanical damage consists predominantly of sandblasting which all space-
craft experience during the Leonids. This causes surface degradations. This is
in general not a serious problem. Impacts and spall result from larger particles
hitting a satellite. These can punch holes in a solar panel or wall. Spall produced
by secondary particles can affect the internal mechanisms of the spacecraft more
seriously than the original impact.
10.4. COMETS 255

EMPs are created from the direct vaporization of impacting particles into
plasma and ESDs by a buildup of charging over the satellite surface. Both can
cause electrical and communication problems, erroneous signals in telemetry and
short circuits.
How can such problems be minimized? One simple manoeuvre is to minimize
the cross-sectional area of the satellite that is exposed to the meteor shower; e.g.
the solar panels point edge on into the meteor stream by reorienting the spacecraft.
Another technique is to turn off equipment that is particularly sensitive to ESDs.
Meteoroid impacts on spacecrafts and penetration damage are studied by
McBride and McDonnell (1999 [214]). Meteoroid morphology and density (e.g.
using NASA’s LDEF satellite results) were investigated by McDonnell and Gard-
ner (1998 [216]). The Leonid Meteor Shower and the Lunar Sodium Atmosphere
are treated in Hunten al., 1998 [143]. Charge production, impact probability, the
impact penetration depth, the amount of ionization generated upon impact on
spacecraft due to the strong Leonid shower in 1999 and 2000 are calculated by
McNeil et al., 1998 [221]

10.4 Comets
10.4.1 General Properties
Bright comets may be easily seen with the naked eye4 . Comets consist of different
parts:

• nucleus: diameter between 1 and 50 km

• Coma: size in the range of 104 – 105 km.

• Hydrogen coma: not seen with naked eye, surrounds the visible gas/dust
coma, several million km.

• Tail: there are two different types of tails:

1. yellowish dust tail with an extension 106 –107 km

2. bluish plasma tail, or ion tail, extension 107 –108 km

Comets are named after their discoverers and are also given a number, the
year of discovery (or recovery) and a letter. In this designation 2006c denotes
the third comet discovered in 2006. There is another designation where comets
are distinguished by their perihelion passage: 2006X is the 10th comet in 2006
according to perihelion passage. Periodic comets are by a P/ and comets which
have collided with other bodies by D/.
4 see also: Comets and the Origin and Evolution of Life, by P. J. Thomas, Springer, 2006
256 CHAPTER 10. ASTEROIDS, COMETS, METEROITES

10.4.2 Cometary Activity

Cometary activity is triggered by the Sun. At large heliocentric distances comets
cannot be discerned from asteroids. The cometary nucleus is covered with ice which
sublimates5 and dust is dragged on. Thus the coma is formed. The heliocentric
distance where this process occurs varies from comet to comet. Many comets start
to become active when passing the orbit of Jupiter, some comets were observed
with a coma at a distance beyond Uranus. As a rule of thumb, most comets
become bright when getting closer than 3 AU. The brightness of a comet obeys
the law:
1
m∼ ζ (10.2)
2
r r∆
In this equation r∆ is the distance to the observer and r the heliocentric distance.
ζ
Note, that the dependence is ∼ 1/r with ζ > 2. This takes into account, that
the gas production increases strongly with decreasing distance from the sun.
Cometary tails point in the direction opposite to the Sun. Radiation pressure
from the Sun acts on molecules via absorption and re emission of solar photons.
The dust particles orbit independently around the Sun, the attraction to the Sun is
diminished by the radiation pressure. Therefore, dust tails are broad and curved.
The ion tail of comets is caused by the solar wind. By solar UV photons,
neutral atoms are ionized e.g.

CO + hν → CO+ (10.3)

Since magnetic fields are carried by the solar wind, these ions are susceptible to
the magnetic force. Because the most common ion CO+ scatters blue light better
than red, the ion tail appears bluish. The solar wind sweeps past comets at 500
km/s

10.4.3 Oort Cloud and Kuiper Belt

Oort proposed in 1950, that comets reside in a vast cloud at the outer reaches of
the solar system. This has come to be known as the Oort Cloud. This hypothesis
is based on several observational facts: a) no comet has been observed with a
hyperbolic orbit (which would indicate interstellar origin), b) aphelia of long period
comets lie at a distance of about 50 000 AU, c) there is no preferential direction
from which comets come. The Oort cloud may contain up to 1012 comets (in total
about the mass of Jupiter). The dynamical lifetime of an object in this cloud to
ejection by passing stars can be estimated to be half of the age of the solar system.
For such estimation also encounters with molecular clouds have to be considered.
The objects in the Oort cloud need to be replenished either by capture from the
interstellar medium or by a vast inner cloud. It is assumed that encounters with
dense interstellar clouds could cause perturbations of the inner cloud and replenish
the outer cloud. During such perturbations “showers” of comets penetrate to the
inner solar system. This could happen every 108 years.
5 sublimation means direct evaporation from the solid state
10.4. COMETS 257

Figure 10.3: Impact of comet Shoemaker-Levy fragment on Jupiter. NASA/HST

Comets from the Oort cloud may pass up to 400 times the inner solar system
before the object becomes perturbed by the inner planets and is changed into a
short period comet.
From the observed short period comets the total mass of bodies in the Kuiper
belt is estimated to be 0.0026 Earth masses which corresponds to 109 to 1010
objects. The Kuiper Belt is a disk-shaped region past the orbit of Neptune roughly
30 to 100 AU from the Sun containing many small icy bodies.

10.4.4 Comets and Meteor Showers

Comets dissolve leaving a cloud of debris behind their orbit. When the Earth
crosses cometary orbits, meteor showers occur. The most famous is the Perseid
shower. The shower begins, in mid-July when Earth enters the outskirts of a cloud
of debris from Comet Swift-Tuttle. Dust-sized meteoroids hitting the atmosphere
will streak across the night sky, at first only a few each night, but the rate will
build. By August 12th when the shower peaks, sky watchers can expect to see
dozens, sometimes even hundreds, of meteors per hour. The idea that comets
and asteroids might threaten our planet was not widely accepted until the 1980s.
Comet Swift-Tuttle is big, about the same size as the asteroid that wiped out
dinosaurs 65 million years ago, and as recently as 1992 it seemed that Swift-Tuttle
might strike Earth in the year 2126. New data and calculations show otherwise,
though. There’s no danger of a collision for at least a millennium and probably
much longer. In 1994, July 16-22, over 20 fragments of the comet Shoemaker-Levy
collided with Jupiter. This was observed worldwide (see Fig. 10.3).
The solar heliospheric observatory SOHO satellite observed many collisions of
comets with the Sun (Fig. 10.4).
258 CHAPTER 10. ASTEROIDS, COMETS, METEROITES

Figure 10.4: Comet observed by SOHO colliding with the Sun. SOHO/ESA, NASA

Figure 10.5: Destruction energies required for different bodies

10.4. COMETS 259

Sazonov and Yakovlev (2006 [270]) discuss comets on dangerous orbits and
how to change their orbits by explosive and sublimation methods. It is clear that
for large bodies the required charge power to destroy the dangerous bodies is too
large, and therefore, by means of an explosive impulse, such bodies can be moved
to a safe trajectory. The required destruction energy depends on

• diameter of the object

• compositions of the object. One can calculate this for different objects such
as stony, iron and cometary ice composition.

The energies are plotted in Fig. 10.5. For comparison: the energy of the Hiroshima
bombe was 15 kt. A cometary composition body of 100 m diameter requires 0.075
Mt for destruction. 1 kt TNT is the equivalent to 4,184×1012 J. The sum of
all bombs during the second world war can be estimated to 2 Mt. The biggest
H-bomb had 50 Mt.
Chapter 11

Space Debris

On Dec 3, 2001 BBC reports, that space debris lit up the sky. The spectacular
nighttime light show seen over parts of southern England is now believed to have
been caused by burning Russian space debris. Observers said the fragments, which
could be seen over parts of Essex and Sussex, were very bright and traced across
the sky for up to four minutes.
Orbital debris is defined as any man-made object in orbit around the Earth
which no longer serves as a useful purpose.
We will discuss estimations on the number of debris elements as well as models
that calculate their orbits and shielding mechanisms for spacecraft1 .

11.1 Number of Space Debris

11.1.1 Orbits
There are several types of satellite orbits serving different purposes. The inclina-
tion of an orbit is defined as: 0 degrees means an equatorial orbit, 90 degrees a
polar orbit.
Polar orbits: these orbits allow the satellite to observe nearly every part on
the Earth. The Earth rotates under the satellite. The inclination of the satellite
is nearly 90 degrees. One orbit around the Earth is completed in approximately
90 minutes.
Sun synchronous orbits: a satellite will pass over a section of the Earth at
the same time a day at a height between 700 and 800 km. Due to the revolution
of the Earth around the Sun, the satellite has to shift its orbit approximately 1
degree per day- additional gravitational forces due to the bulge of the Earth at
the equator are used for that acceleration.
Geosynchronous orbits: at a distance of 35790 km above Earth the satellites
circle the Earth at the same rate as the Earth spins (23 hours, 56 minutes, and
4.09 seconds). These satellites observe almost a full hemisphere of the Earth,
1 see e.g. the book: Space Debris Models and Risk Analysis, by H. Klinkrad, Springer 2006.

261
262 CHAPTER 11. SPACE DEBRIS

Figure 11.1: Orbits of GPS satellites. The satellites orbit the earth with a speed of
3.9 km/s. One revolution takes 12 h sidereal time, corresponding to 11 h 58 min earth
time. This means that the same satellite reaches a certain position about 4 minutes
earlier each day. The mean distance from the middle of the earth is 26560 km. The
system consists of at least 24 satellites, the first one started in 1978. The European
GALILEO will be operational in 2010, consisting of 30 satellites (27 working, 3 in reserve).
http : //[Link]/en/gps/[Link]

are used to study large scale phenomena such as hurricanes, or cyclones and for
communication satellites. The disadvantage of this type of orbit is that the Earth
can be observed from there with low resolution.
On the other hand, satellites in Low Earth Orbit, LEO, can only cover a small
area with high resolution and therefore often constellations are used, such as the
GPS, IRIDIUM (66 active communication satellites, first launched in 1998). The
current positions over 900 satellites can be followed using an online tool of NASA2 .

11.1.2 Number of Objects

In 1957 Sputnik 1 was launched as the first man made spacecraft. In the years
of space activities some 3 750 launches led to more than 23 000 observable space
objects (larger than 10 cm) of which currently 7 500 are still in orbit. Only 6% of
the catalogued orbit population comprise operational spacecraft, while 50% can be
attributed to decommissioned satellites, spent upper stages, and mission related
objects (launch adapters, lens covers, etc.). The remainder of 44% is originating
from 129 on-orbit fragmentation which have been recorded since 1961. These
events, all but 1 or 2 of them explosions of spacecraft and upper stages, are assumed
to have generated a population of objects larger than 1 cm on the order of 70 000
to 120 000. Only in the range of 0.1 mm size the sporadic flux from meteoroids
prevails over man-made debris. From a statistical point of view we have to note
2 http : //[Link]/Realtime/jtrack/3d/JT [Link]
11.2. DETECTION OF SPACE DEBRIS 263

Figure 11.2: GEO and LEO objects as a source of space debris. GEO denotes geosta-
tionary orbit.

that most orbital debris reside within 2 000 km of the Earth’s surface. Within
this volume, the amount of debris varies significantly with altitude and regions of
debris concentration are found near 800 km, 1 000 km and 1 500 km.
From the above considerations it is clear that spacecrafts have to be protected
from collisions with space debris. Let us mention two examples: the US space com-
mand examines the trajectories of the Space Shuttle in order to identify possible
close encounters with space debris. If a dangerous object is believed to approach
a few tens of kilometers to the Space Shuttle, it will be maneuvered away from
the object (although in such a case the chances of a collision are only approxi-
mately 1:100 000). Such an operation is necessary about once every year or two
(at present).
Space debris is an inherently international problem and its solution requires
international co-operation. The Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Commit-
tee (IADC) whose members are ESA, NASDA (Japan), NASA, and the Russian
Space Agency RKA and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) provides a forum for
discussion and coordination of technical space debris issues.

11.2 Detection of Space Debris

Remote sensing of space debris from ground-based measurements falls into two
categories:

• Radar measurements: these have been used for space debris in low Earth
orbit (LEO).

• Optical measurements: these have been used for high Earth orbit (HEO). For
passive optical measurements the intensity of the signal from space debris is
inversely proportional to the square of its distance or altitude:

Ioptical ∼ 1/r2 (11.1)

264 CHAPTER 11. SPACE DEBRIS

Figure 11.3: Spatial density of space debris by altitude according to ESA MASTER-
2001.

The incident illumination from the Sun is essentially independent of altitude.

For radar measurements:
Iradar ∼ 1/r4 (11.2)
since radars must provide their own illumination.

Therefore, optical telescopes of modest size are more suitable than most radars for
detection of debris at high altitudes. On the other hand, radars are better suited
to detect objects in LEO.

11.2.1 Radar Measurements

Ground-based radars are well suited to observe space objects because

• all weather,

• all day-and-night

performance. There are two types for space object measurements:

1. Radars with mechanically controlled beam direction using parabolic reflector

antennas; here, only objects in the field of view (which is given by the me-
chanical direction of the parabolic reflector antenna) can be observed; used
for tracking or imaging satellites.

2. Radars with electronically controlled beam direction using phased array an-
tennas. In that case multiple objects at different directions can be detected
and measured simultaneously; used for tracking and search tasks.
11.2. DETECTION OF SPACE DEBRIS 265

In the tracking mode the radar follows an object for a few minutes gaining data
on angular direction, range, range rate, amplitude and phase of the radar echoes.
From these parameters the orbital elements can be derived In the beam-park mode,
the antenna is kept fixed in a given direction and echoes are received from objects
passing within its field of view. This yields statistical information on the number
and size of detected objects; the determination of the orbit is less precise. There
is also a mixed mode. From the radar measurements the following parameters can
be derived:

1. orbital elements; thus the motion of the object’s center of mass around Earth
is defined.

2. Attitude; describes the motion of the object around its center of mass.

3. Size and Shape of the object.

4. Ballistic coefficient; this describes the rate at which the orbital semi-major
axis decays.

5. Object mass,

6. material properties.

The main source of data for space debris in the size range of 1-30 cm is the
NASA Haystake radar facility operated by MIT Lincoln Laboratory. Under an
agreement with the US Air Force since 1990 data are collected. The data indicate
that there are about 100 000 fragments in orbits with sizes down to 1 cm.
When space debris (man made or meteoroids) enter the atmosphere an ion-
ization trail is created. Molecules in the upper atmosphere are ionized by the
passage of the meteor. Such ionization trails can last up to 45 minutes. Such an
ion trail will act as a mirror for radio waves. Radar measurements operating at
50 MHz permit to estimate the reentry of space debris, the ionization trail behind
reentering bodies can be detected. With such facilities one can detect meteors as
small as 100 microns.
Radar measurements of space debris have been done at Haystack (US) and
Goldstone radars (US), Russia and by Germany using the Research Establishment
for Applied Science (FGAN) radar and the Effelsberg radio telescope. Haystack
and Goldstone radars have provided a statistical picture of LEO debris at sizes
down to 0.5 cm which was confirmed by FGAN. These measurements have proven
that the debris population exceeds the natural meteoroid population for all sizes
(except between 30 and 500 m).
Radar measurements and the usage of the Sardinian Radio Telescope for space
debris detection are described e.g. in the article of Di Martino et al., 2006 [74].
The international radar space debris research was reviewed by Molotov et al.
(2005 [224]) where further literature is cited.
266 CHAPTER 11. SPACE DEBRIS

11.2.2 Telescopes
Space debris can be categorized into objects that reflect radar well but sunlight
poorly. The other group reflects sunlight well but radar poorly. Thus, radar
and optical telescopes see somewhat different debris populations. With the use
of optical telescopes, debris at very high altitudes (e.g. in geosynchronous orbits,
GEO) can be detected.
The US Space Command employs aperture telescopes of 1 m to track HEO
objects. With these telescopes objects of 1 m at geosynchronous altitudes, corre-
sponding to a limiting stellar magnitude of 16 can be detected. A limiting stellar
magnitude of 17 or greater is needed to detect debris smaller than 1 m near GEO.
Most objects in GEO are intact; in 1978 a Russian Ekran satellite in GEO was
observed to explode.
NASA is using two optical telescopes for measuring orbital debris3 : a 3 m
diameter liquid mirror telescope which is referred to as the LMT, and a charged
coupled device-equipped 0.3 m Schmidt camera, which is commonly referred to
as the CCD Debris Telescope or CDT. The LMT consists of a 3 m diameter
parabolic dish that holds 14 l of liquid mercury. The dish is spun up to a rate
of 10 revolutions per minute. Centrifugal force and gravity cause the mercury to
spread out in a thin layer over the dish creating a reflective parabolic surface that
is as good as many polished glass mirrors.

11.2.3 Catalogues
There are two catalogues of space objects that are frequently updated:
• United States Space Command catalogue,
• Space Object catalogue of the Russian Federation.
Based on those two catalogues data are also archived in the Database and Infor-
mation System Characterizing Objects in Space (DISCOS) of ESA. The National
Space Development Agency (NASDA) of Japan is studying a debris database.
Current catalogues contain information on satellites and debris as small as 10-30
cm in diameter. Some recent activities are aimed to provide detection of 5 cm
objects at altitudes below 600 km. For smaller sizes modelers must use statistical
measurements.

11.3 Shielding and Risk Assessments

11.3.1 Risk Assessments
Risk assessments are utilized in the design of manned and unmanned spacecraft.
They aid in the placement and protective shielding design. This is of course only
feasible for critical subsystems and components. It becomes extremely important
in the system design of large communication satellite constellations. In Table 11.1
a summary of the studies made so far is given.
3 NASA Orbital Debris Observatory (NODO)
11.3. SHIELDING AND RISK ASSESSMENTS 267

Table 11.1: Mean time between impacts on a satellite with a cross-section area of 10 m2
Height of Objects Objects Objects
circular orbit 0.1-1.0 cm 1-10 cm >10 cm
500 km 10-100 yrs 3 500-7 000 yrs 150 000 yrs
1 000 km 3-30 yrs 700 - 1 400 yrs 20 000 yrs
1 500 km 7-70 yrs 1 000-2 000 yrs 30 000 yrs

For GEO the situation is more complicated. The number of space debris of less
than 1 m in diameter is not well known. Moreover, there is no natural removal
mechanism for satellites in GEO. One can estimate an annual collision probability
for an average operational satellite with other catalogued objects at 10−5 .
Another problem concerns the re-entry. Since the last 40 years 16 000 re-
entries of catalogued space objects are recorded. No significant damage or injury
occurred which can be attributed to the large expanse of ocean surface and sparse
population density in many land regions. During the past years, approximately
once each week an object with a cross section of 1 m2 or more entered the Earth’s
atmosphere. The risk of re-entry comes from:

• Mechanical impact,

• chemical contamination,

• radiological contamination.

Since about 12% of the present catalogued space debris population consists
of objects discarded during normal satellite deployment (fasteners, yaw, weights,
nozzle covers, lens caps, tethers,...) one should take mitigation measures against
these objects. 85% of all space debris larger than 5 cm result from fragmentation
of upper stages. In 1996 the French CERISE spacecraft was struck and partially
disabled by an impact fragment which most probably came from an exploded
Ariane upper stage.
A family of space debris objects was found at a height of 900 km. The density
peak found there is caused by a large number of sodium-potassium liquid metals
droplets- they have been used as a coolant for the on board nuclear reactor, leaked
from the Russian ocean surveillance satellites. The estimation is about 70000 drops
with diameters between 0.5 mm and 5.5 and the detection was mainly made with
the Haystack radar. Using the Goldstone radar the so called West Ford Needles at
an altitude of 2900 km were detected. They are copper dipoles, 1.77 cm long, and
remnants that were released in 1961 and 1963 by the US MIDAS 3 and MIDAS
6 satellites for telecommunication experiments. It was first expected that they
should reenter the Earth’s atmosphere within 5 years but now a population of
40000 objects were found between 2400 and 3100 km.
In total it is estimated that more than 350000 objects larger than 1 mm crowd
the space around Earth and a particle around 5 mm is able to directly penetrate
the shuttle cabin. For more details see Valsecchi et al., 2006 [323].
268 CHAPTER 11. SPACE DEBRIS

Collision risk assessment for a spacecraft in space debris environment was stud-
ied e.g. by Tang et al., 2005 [311]

11.3.2 Reentry of Orbital Debris

How long will orbital debris remain in Earth orbit? As a rule of thumb one can say
that the higher the altitude, the longer the debris will typically remain in Earth
orbit.

• Debris left in orbits below 600 km: normally falls back to Earth within a few
years.

• Debris left in orbits at altitudes of 800 km: the time for orbital decay is
several decades.

• Debris left in orbits at altitudes above 1 000 km: will normally continue
circling the Earth for a century or more.

Up to now no serious injury or property damage has been confirmed caused by

reentering debris. Most of the space debris does not survive the severe heating
which occurs during reentry. During the past 40 years, on the average one cata-
loged piece of debris fell back to earth each day.
On 12 June 1979 Skylab (70 t) came crashing to Earth, scattering chunks of
metal over the West Australian desert. US officials were unable to control it’s
final descent. Pieces of the Russian space station Mir could be observed racing
across the sky above Fiji as Mir made its descent into the earth’s atmosphere on
March 23, 2001. Mir plunged to earth after Russian Mission Control fired engines
to nudge it out of the orbit it had kept for 15 years. The entrance velocity was
6 400 km/h and the final burst of rockets was made at a height of only 170 km
over Africa. The weight of the space station was about 135 tons.
A very spectacular event was the crashing of the Russian satellite KOSMOS
954, an active radar satellite for ocean surveillance. The high power consumption
of the active radar required a nuclear reactor as power source. The reactor of
KOSMOS 954 reentered over a desert area in Northern Canada and an area of 124
000 m2 was contaminated.
The Soviet Mars 96 satellite that had 270 g of the poisonous plutonium on
board crashed in march 1996 at a distance of 1300 km west of South America into
the Pacific.
A survey of some events is given in Table 11.2.
The crashes of EUVE and Compton were controlled by NASA.

11.3.3 Orbital Debris Protection

Many efforts are made to develop protection:

• hypervelocity impact measurements: in such experiments projectiles are pro-

duced at speeds more than seven times faster than the fastest bullet; this is
done with so called two stage light gas guns. The impact event lasts only
11.3. SHIELDING AND RISK ASSESSMENTS 269

Table 11.2: Spectacular satellite crashes on Earth.

Name Crash in Location of Crash Reported damage
KOSMOS 954 1978 North Canada radioactive
Skylab 1979 Australia Cow was killed
Chinese Satellite 1996 Atlantic
Mars 96 1996 Pacific Plutonium
Mir 2001 Pacific
Chinese Satellite 2004 China house damaged
Compton γ Ray Obs. 2000 Pacific 15 t
EUVE 2002 South Pacific 3t

a few microseconds. The velocity of the bullet is measured by using two

laser curtains positioned a short distance uprange of the target. The dis-
tance between the curtains is known and the time elapsed between the two
disruptions is measured, thus the projectile velocity can be measured.

• Shield development.

• Simulations: sophisticated computer programs simulating hypervelocity

events are run on supercomputers. This approach to developing spacecraft
shield solutions is becoming more and more prevalent.

• Developing new materials

• Impacts on spacecraft: all spacecraft collide with very small orbital debris
particles and meteoroids. The Long Duration Exposure Facility (LDEF) was
a bus sized spacecraft. It was returned after 5.7 years in low Earth orbit.
The LDEF was placed in low Earth orbit (LEO) by the space shuttle Chal-
lenger in April 1984 and retrieved by the space shuttle Columbia in January
1990. On the LDEF over 30 000 impacts were found (these craters were
visible to the naked eye and larger than 0.5 mm). Form that sample about
1000 were chemically analyzed in order to investigate the origin of the pro-
jectiles. The largest crater found on LDEF had a diameter of 5 mm and
was probably caused by a particle of 1 mm. Some impacts were clustered in
time. On the European Retrievable Carrier (EURECA), the largest impact
crater diameter was 6.4 mm. The returned solar array of the HST (Hubble
Space Telescope, NASA/ESA) had been the one with the highest orbit al-
titude. It was found that the impact flux for HST was considerably higher
(factor 2-8) than for EURECA. The infra-red astronomical satellite (IRAS),
launched in 1983 to perform a sky survey at wavelengths ranging from 8 to
120 µm was operational during 10 months near altitude of 900 km. 200 000
potential debris sightings are stored in a database. About 10 000 sightings
are attributed to real objects. A plot of debris flux in low Earth orbit as a
function of object size (cm) is given in Fig. 11.4 where the coordinates are
logarithmic.
270 CHAPTER 11. SPACE DEBRIS

10 4
SMM
EURECA

Cross sectional flux (N/m 2 yr)

HST
0
10

-4
10

-8
10
-2
10 -4 10 1
Diameter [cm]

Figure 11.4: Approximate measured debris flux in low Earth orbit by object size (sketch)

Table 11.3: Some examples of retrieved spacecraft and surfaces

Name Orbit In orbit Exposed area

Salyut 4,6 350 km 1974-1979 ∼ 7 m2
STS-7 Window (NASA) 295-320 km June 1983 ∼ 2.5 m2
SMM (NASA) 500-570 km 1980-1994 2.3 m2
LDEF (NASA) 340-470 km 1984-1990 151 m2
EURECA (ESA) 520 km 1992-1993 35 m2
HST (solar array) 610 km 1990-1993 62 m2
Mir 390 km 1986-1998 ∼ 15 m2

• analysis of returned spacecraft surface; Critical surfaces, such as the win-

dows, on the Space Shuttle are examined after every flight.
Donald H. Humes and William H. Kinard from NASA Langley Research
Center examined the WF/PC-I radiator with a microscope to measure the
damage done by meteoroids and man-made orbital debris during its 3.6 years
in orbit. They measured about 100 possible impact sites and rated them by
size on an arbitrary scale of 1 to 10 (10 being the largest). They found 14
impact craters with a diameter greater than 450 microns.
At NASA a hypervelocity impact technology facility is under operation (HITF).
Of course the International Space Station (ISS) will be the most heavily
shielded spacecraft ever flown. Critical components (e.g., habitable compartments
and high press tanks) will normally be able to withstand the impact of debris as
large as 1 cm in diameter. ISS will also have manoeuvering capability to avoid
hazardous objects.
11.3. SHIELDING AND RISK ASSESSMENTS 271

11.3.4 Space Debris Models

To assess the risk potential of collisions of man-made or natural particulates with
operational spacecraft, one must refer to statistical models of the particle popu-
lation for all size regimes except for man-made debris above 10 cm. In the latter
case, collision events or near-miss events can be predicted on the basis of orbital
data from operational surveillance networks of. In the former case, collision fluxes
can only be estimated statistically. Currently, space debris between 1 cm and 10
cm are neither observable, nor are they shieldable with available on-orbit tech-
nology. Hyper-Velocity Impact (HVI) tests are used to experimentally verify and
improve shields for on-orbit use, with the aim to increase the shieldable impactor
size beyond 1 cm. The Mission Analysis Section of ESOC is coordinating all Space
Debris Research Activities within ESA. SOC’s Meteoroid and Space Debris Ter-
restrial Environment Reference (MASTER) model can be used to assess the debris
or meteoroid flux imparted on a spacecraft on an arbitrary earth orbit.
At NASA, a new modelling technique called Smooth Particle Hydrodynamics
(SPH) is under development ( Hyde and Christiansen, 2002 [145]). Their approach
models the distribution of debris fragments from a collision without using the
normal computational mesh that is often subject to tangling. SPH eliminates
many difficulties of previous calculation techniques.
The four main activities of ESA-ESOC space debris task group are:

• development of a meteoroid and debris reference model;

• radar measurements of mid-size debris; these are necessary since current

models in low earth orbit suffer from significant uncertainties about objects
smaller than about 50 cm. This is essential for spacecraft which require
protection; it is currently technically not feasible to shield against objects
larger than 1 cm. The feasibility of detecting and tracking medium-size
debris (1 to 50 cm)with a high power radar at the Forschungsgesellschaft für
Angewandte Naturwissenschaften (FGAN)in Germany was investigated.

• Optical measurements; these are suited for objects in high altitude orbits.
The detectors use CCD and a 1 m telescope will be operated by ESA at the
Teide observatory in Tenerife.

• Analysis of spacecraft surfaces returned from space

The main aim of the mathematical model is a description of the debris and me-
teoroid environment at altitudes between low Earth orbit (LEO) and the geosta-
tionary orbit (GEO). The minimum size of an object is 0.1 mm. The model is
based on the catalogued population and on known break-ups of spacecraft and
rocket upper-stages in orbit. The initial distribution of fragments is described in
terms of their position, velocity, mass. The objects are then propagated forward in
time taking into account the relevant perturbations. The description of MASTER
(Meteoroid and Space Debris Terrestrial Reference Model) is given in Sdunnus et
al. 2001 [276].
272 CHAPTER 11. SPACE DEBRIS

Cataloged in-orbit Earth satellite

population

Anomalous debris
1%

Fragmentation
31% Payloads
debris 38%

12% 18%
Operational debris Rocket bodies

Figure 11.5: Segments of the cataloged in-orbit Earth satellite population.

11.3.5 Shielding
Protection against particles 0.1-1 cm size can be achieved by shielding spacecraft
structures. Objects 1-10 cm in size cannot be shielded nor can they be rou-
tinely tracked by surveillance networks. Protection against these particles can be
achieved through special features in the design (e.g. redundant systems, frangible
structures...). Physical protection against particles larger 10 cm is not technically
feasible. In front of the spacecraft wall single sheet Whipple bumbers or complex
layers of metal and ceramic/polymer fabrics can be used for shieldings. They break
up the impacting particle and absorb the energy of the resulting ejecta. Bumper
shields should be positioned at a sufficient distance from the shielded object.
The penetration depth (damage potential) of an impacting object depends on:

• mass,

• velocity,

• shape of the object; and of course

• material properties of the shield.

For manned spacecraft shield designs offer protection against objects smaller
than 1 cm. The PNP (probability of penetration) is an important criterion for
shield design. One can also install automatic detection systems to locate damage.
For EVA (extravehicular activities) current spacesuits have many features with
inherent shielding qualities to offer protection from objects of sizes up to 0.1 mm.
By properly orientating their spacecraft, astronauts may also be able to use their
vehicles against the majority of space debris or direct meteoroid streams. The
United States Space Surveillance Network (SSN) and the Russian Space Surveil-
lance System(SSS) monitor the LEO environment to warn crewed spacecraft if an
object is projected to approach within a few km. If an object is predicted to pass
through a box of 5 × 225 × 5 km oriented along the flight path of the United States
11.3. SHIELDING AND RISK ASSESSMENTS 273

Space Shuttle, the SSN sensor intensifies its tracking of the potential risk object. If
the improved fly-by prediction indicates a conjunction within a box of 2 × 5 × 2 km
an avoidance manoeuvre is performed. During 1986-1997 4 such evasive manoeu-
vres were executed. Collision avoidance manoeuvres were performed by the ESA
satellite ERS-1 in June 1997 and March 1998 and by the CNES satellite SPOT-2
in July 1997.
Calculations made prior to the launch of spacecrafts permit the establishment
of safe launch windows.
For unmanned spacecraft, lower PNPs are tolerable.
The necessity for collision avoidance manoeuvres was already pointed out by
Rex et al., 1991 [255].
An overview of fragmentation of LEO Upper Stages was given by Chernyavskiy
et al. (1994 [64]).
A technical report on space debris was given from the Scientific and Tech-
nical Subcommittee of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful uses of
Outer Space (1999). The European initiatives and space mitigation standard are
reviewed by Alby et al. 2004 [3].
Of course the International Space Station (ISS) will be the most heavily
shielded spacecraft ever flown. Critical components (e.g., habitable compartments
and high press tanks) will normally be able to withstand the impact of debris as
large as 1 cm in diameter. ISS will also have manoeuvering capability to avoid
hazardous objects.
The necessity of debris mitigation is illustrated in the ESA Space Debris Miti-
gation Handbook 2002 ( Klinkrad et al., 2004 [167]). Algorithms for the derivation
of appropriate collision avoidance strategies are presented by Sánchez-Ortiz et al.
(2004 [269]).
Bibliography

[1] Y. Abe and T. Matsui. Early evolution of the earth: Accretion, atmosphere
formation, and thermal history. Journal of Geophys. Research, 91:291, Sep-
tember 1986.
[2] Y. Abe and T. Matsui. Evolution of an Impact-Generated H2 O-CO2 At-
mosphere and Formation of a Hot Proto-Ocean on Earth. Journal of At-
mospheric Sciences, 45:3081–3101, November 1988.
[3] F. Alby, D. Alwes, L. Anselmo, H. Baccini, C. Bonnal, R. Crowther,
W. Flury, R. Jehn, H. Klinkrad, C. Portelli, and R. Tremayne-Smith. The
European Space Debris Safety and Mitigation Standard. Advances in Space
Research, 34:1260–1263, 2004.
[4] V. A. Alexeev and G. K. Ustinova. Meteorite Data on the Solar Modulation
of Galactic Cosmic Rays and an Inference on the Solar Activity Influence
on Climate of the Earth. In S. Mackwell and E. Stansbery, editors, 36th
Annual Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, page 1012, March 2005.
[5] R. B. Alley and P. U. Clark. The Deglaciation of the Northern Hemisphere:
A Global Perspective. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences,
27:149–182, 1999.
[6] L. W. Alvarez, W. Alvarez, F. Asaro, and H. V. Michel. Extraterrestrial
Cause for the Cretaceous Tertiary Extinction. Science, 208:1095, 1980.
[7] E. I. Alves and A. R. Baptista. Rock Magnetic Fields Shield the Surface of
Mars from Harmful Radiation. In S. Mackwell and E. Stansbery, editors,
Lunar and Planetary Institute Conference Abstracts, page 1540, March 2004.
[8] D. M. Amron and R. L. Moy. Stratospheric ozone depletion and its re-
lationship to skin cancer. Journal of Dermatoligic Surgery and Oncology,
17:370–372, 1991.
[9] L. Andersson, L. Eliassson, and P. Wintoft. In Proccedings of the Workshop
on Space Weather, 11-13 November 1998, ESTEC, Noordwijk WP-155, 1999.
[10] A. L. Andrady, S. H. Hamid, X. Hu, and A. Torikai. Effects of increased
solar ultraviolet radiation on materials. Journal of Photochemistry and Pho-
tobiology B, 1998.

275
276 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[11] J. K. Angell and J. Korshover. Month Weather Rev., 1976.

[12] J. Arnaud, C. Briand, and G. Ceppatelli. First observational campaign at
the THEMIS: image quality and seeing. New Astronomy Review, 42:499–501,
November 1998.
[13] C. Arpesella. In BOREXINO Prop., 1992.
[14] M. J. Aschwanden, A. I. Poland, and D. M. Rabin. The New Solar Corona.
Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 39:175–210, 2001.
[15] S. Asiati, W. Sinambela, and R. Hidayati. Stratospheric, Tropospheric and
Total Ozone Variation Correlated with Solar Activity. In 35th COSPAR
Scientific Assembly, page 966, 2004.
[16] W. Atwell, P. Saganti, F. A. Cucinotta, and C. J. Zeitlin. A space radiation
shielding model of the Martian radiation environment experiment (MARIE).
Advances in Space Research, 33:2219–2221, 2004.
[17] Behr A. Bruzek A. Durrant C. J. Enslin H. Fechtig H. Fricke W. Gondolatsch
F. Gruen H. Hachenberg O. Ip W. H. Jessberger E. K. Kristen T. Leinert Ch.
Lembke D. Palme H. Philipp W. Rahe J. Schmahl G. Scholer M. Schubart J.
Solf J. Staubert R. Suess H. E. Truemper J. Weigelt G. West R. M. Wolf R.
Zeh D. Axford, W. I. Landolt-Börnstein, Numerical Data and Fundamental
Relationships in Science and Technology, Vol 2a. Springer, 1981.
[18] W. I. Axford. The origins of high-energy cosmic rays. Astrophysical Journal
Supplement, 90:937–944, February 1994.
[19] R. B. Bacastow, C. D. Keeling, and T. P. Whorf. Seasonal amplitude in-
crease in atmospheric CO2 concentration at Mauna Loa, Hawaii, 1959-1982.
Journal of Geophys. Research, 90:10529, October 1985.
[20] D. Badhwar, G. Radiat. Res., 148, 1997.
[21] J. N. Bahcall and R. J. Davis. The Evolution of Neutrino Astronomy. Publ.
Astr. Soc. of the Pacific, 112:429–433, April 2000.
[22] J. N. Bahcall and M. H. Pinsonneault. Standard solar models, with and
without helium diffusion, and the solar neutrino problem. Reviews of Modern
Physics, 64:885–926, 1992.
[23] J. N. Bahcall, M. H. Pinsonneault, S. Basu, and J. Christensen-Dalsgaard.
Are Standard Solar Models Reliable? Physical Review Letters, 78:171–174,
January 1997.
[24] T. Bai. High Flare Activity in the Late Declining Phase of Cycle 23. Solar
Physics, 234:409–419, April 2006.
[25] S. Baliunas and W. Soon. Are Variations in the Length of the Activity
Cycle Related to Changes in Brightness in Solar-Type Stars? Astrophysical
Journal, 450:896, September 1995.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 277

[26] J. R. Barnes and A. Collier Cameron. Starspot patterns on the M dwarfs

HK Aqr and RE 1816 +541. Monthly Notices, 326:950–958, September 2001.

[27] R. E. Basher. Basic science of solar radiation and its ultraviolet components.
In Proceedings of the seminar on solar ultraviolet radiation, R. Basher (Ed),
NZMS,, 1981.

[28] D. Basu. Solar neutrino in relation to solar activity. Solar Physics, 142:205–
208, November 1992.

[29] D. Basu. Radius of the Sun in relation to solar activity. Solar Physics,
183:291–294, December 1998.

[30] J. M. Beckers and T. M. Brown. Oss. Mem. d. Oss. Astrofis. d. Arcetri,

106:189, 1978.

[31] T. R. Bedding and H. Kjeldsen. Observing solar-like oscillations: recent

results. Memorie della Societa Astronomica Italiana, 77:384, 2006.

[32] J. Beer. Long-term indirect indices of solar variability. Space Science Re-
views, 94:53–66, November 2000.

[33] A. O. Benz. Coronal Heating and Microflares in Solar Active and Quiet
Regions. Astronomische Nachrichten Supplement, 324:8, July 2003.

[34] A. Berger. The Milankovitch astronomical theory of paleoclimates: A mod-

ern review. Vistas in Astronomy, 24:103–122, 1980.

[35] R. A. Berner, A. C. Lasaga, and R. M Garrels. Amer. J. Sci., 283:641–683,

1983.

[36] P. A. M. Berry. Periodicities in the sunspot cycle. Vistas in Astronomy,

30:97–108, 1987.

[37] J. Birn, T. G. Forbes, E. W. Hones, Jr., S. J. Bame, and G. Paschmann.

On the velocity distribution of ion jets during substorm recovery. Journal
of Geophys. Research, 86:9001–9006, October 1981.

[38] P. R. Boberg and A. J. Tylka. Variation in Solar Energetic Particle Elemental

Composition Observedby ACE and Wind. In AIP Conf. Proc. 528: Accel-
eration and Transport of Energetic Particles Observed in the Heliosphere,
page 115, 2000.

[39] P. Bochsler. Solar Wind Composition at Solar Maximum. Space Science

Reviews, 97:113–121, 2001.

[40] T. J. Bogdan. Sunspot Oscillations: A Review - (Invited Review). Solar

Physics, 192:373–394, March 2000.
278 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[41] T. J. Bogdan, M. Carlsson, V. H. Hansteen, A. McMurry, C. S. Rosenthal,

M. Johnson, S. Petty-Powell, E. J. Zita, R. F. Stein, S. W. McIntosh, and
Å. Nordlund. Waves in the Magnetized Solar Atmosphere. II. Waves from
Localized Sources in Magnetic Flux Concentrations. Astrophysical Journal,
599:626–660, December 2003.

[42] B. F. Bohor. In Global catastrophes in Earth history, V.L. Sharpton, 1990.

[43] J. A. Bonet. High Spatial Resolution Imaging in Solar Physics. In ASSL

Vol. 239: Motions in the Solar Atmosphere, pages 1–12, 1999.

[44] M. Boscherini, O. Adriani, M. Bongi, L. Bonechi, G. Castellini,

R. D’Alessandro, A. Gabbanini, M. Grandi, W. Menn, P. Papini, S. B.
Ricciarini, M. Simon, P. Spillantini, S. Straulino, F. Taccetti, M. Tesi, and
E. Vannuccini. Radiation damage of electronic components in space environ-
ment. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A, 514:112–116,
November 2003.

[45] D. H. Boteler, R. J. Pirjola, and H. Nevanlinna. The effects of geomagnetic

disturbances on electrical systems at the earth’s surface. Advances in Space
Research, 22:17–27, 1998.

[46] J. Bourgeois, P. L. Wiberg, and T. A. Hansen. Sedimentological Effects of

Tsunamis, with Particular Reference to Impact-Generated and Volcanogenic
Waves. LPI Contributions, 673:21, 1988.

[47] P. A. Bradley. The ionosphere and radio communications. In ICC ’84

- Links for the future: Science, systems and services for communica-
tions; Proceedings of the International Conference on Communications,
Amsterdam, Netherlands, May 14-17, 1984. Volume 1 (A85-36626 16-32).
New York/Amsterdam, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
Inc./North-Holland, 1984, p. 171-174., pages 171–174, 1984.

[48] P. D. Bradley and E. Normand. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., 45:6, 1998.

[49] L. Burlaga, E. Sittler, F. Mariani, and R. Schwenn. Magnetic loop behind

an interplanetary shock - Voyager, Helios, and IMP 8 observations. Journal
of Geophys. Research, 86:6673–6684, August 1981.

[50] L. F. Burlaga. Magnetic fields and plasmas in the inner heliosphere: Helios
results. Planetary and Space Science, 49:1619–1627, December 2001.

[51] V. A. Burov. On the possibility of getting economically sound forecasts of

rare space weather events. Advances in Space Research, 37:1247–1250, 2006.

[52] L. B. Callis, J. C. Alpert, and M. A. Geller. An assessment of thermal,

wind, and planetary wave changes in the middle and lower atmosphere due
to 11-year UV flux variations. Journal of Geophys. Research, 90:2273–2282,
February 1985.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 279

[53] R. A. Calvo, H. A. Ceccato, and R. D. Piacentini. Neural network prediction

of solar activity. Astrophysical Journal, 444:916–921, May 1995.
[54] H. V. Cane and W. C. Erickson. Studies of Space Weather Using Solar
Radio Bursts. In N. Kassim, M. Perez, W. Junor, and P. Henning, editors,
Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, page 133, January
2006.
[55] D. C. Catling, K. J. Zahnle, and C. P. McKay. Biogenic Methane, Hydrogen
Escape, and the Irreversible Oxidation of Early Earth. Science, 293:839–843,
August 2001.
[56] F. Cattaneo. The Solar Dynamo Problem. In ASSL Vol. 225: SCORe’96:
Solar Convection and Oscillations and their Relationship, pages 201–222,
December 1997.
[57] F. Cattaneo. Dynamo Theory and the Origin of Small Scale Magnetic Fields.
In ASSL Vol. 239: Motions in the Solar Atmosphere, pages 119–137, 1999.
[58] F. Cattaneo, D. Lenz, and N. Weiss. On the Origin of the Solar Mesogran-
ulation. Astrophysical Journal Letters, 563:L91–L94, December 2001.
[59] G. Cauzzi, A. Falchi, and R. Falciani. Network and internetwork: a compared
multiwavelength analysis. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 357:1093–1104, May
2000.
[60] S. Cecchini, G. Giacomelli, D. Haşegan, G. Mandrioli, O. Mariş, L. Patrizii,
A. Plaian, V. Popa, L. Ştefanov, and V. Văleanu. Search for neutrino decay
during the 1999 solar eclipse. Astrophysics and Space Science, 273:35–41,
September 2000.
[61] D. K. Chakrabarty and P. Chakrabarty. The evolution of ozone with chang-
ing solar activity. Geophysical Research Letter, 9:76–78, January 1982.
[62] S. Chandrasekhar. A Theorem on Rotating Polytropes. Astrophysical Jour-
nal, 134:662–664, September 1961.
[63] C. R. Chapman and D. Morrison. Impacts on the Earth by asteroids and
comets: assessing the hazard. Nature, 367:33–40, January 1994.
[64] Morozov N. Johnson N. McKnight D. Maclay Chernyavskiy, G. IAA-94-
IAA6.5.696, 1994.
[65] A. R. Choudhuri, H. Auffret, and E. R. Priest. Implications of rapid foot-
point motions of photospheric flux tubes for coronal heating. Solar Physics,
143:49–68, January 1993.
[66] J. Christensen-Dalsgaard. An Introduction to Solar Oscillations and Helio-
seismology. In V. Celebonovic, D. Gough, and W. Däppen, editors, AIP
Conf. Proc. 731: Equation-of-State and Phase-Transition in Models of Or-
dinary Astrophysical Matter, pages 18–46, November 2004.
280 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[67] J. Christensen-Dalsgaard, W. Dappen, S. V. Ajukov, E. R. Anderson, H. M.

Antia, S. Basu, V. A. Baturin, G. Berthomieu, B. Chaboyer, S. M. Chitre,
A. N. Cox, P. Demarque, J. Donatowicz, W. A. Dziembowski, M. Gabriel,
D. O. Gough, D. B. Guenther, J. A. Guzik, J. W. Harvey, F. Hill, G. Houdek,
C. A. Iglesias, A. G. Kosovichev, J. W. Leibacher, P. Morel, C. R. Proffitt,
J. Provost, J. Reiter, E. J. Rhodes, F. J. Rogers, I. W. Roxburgh, M. J.
Thompson, and R. K. Ulrich. The Current State of Solar Modeling. Science,
272:1286, 1996.
[68] R. T. Clancy and D. W. Rusch. Climatology and trends of mesospheric
(58-90) temperatures based upon 1982-1986 SME limb scattering profiles.
Journal of Geophys. Research, 94:3377–3393, March 1989.
[69] C. S. Cockell. Ultraviolet Radiation and the Photobiology of Earth’s Early
Oceans. Origins of Life and Evolution of the Biosphere, 30:467–500, October
2000.
[70] T. J. Crowley. Causes of Climate Change Over the Past 1000 Years. Science,
289:270–277, July 2000.
[71] R. D. D’Arrigo and B. C. Jacoby. Climatic Change, 1993.
[72] D. S. P. Dearborn and J. B. Blake. Magnetic Fields and the Solar Constant.
Nature, 287:365, September 1980.
[73] D. S. P. Dearborn and M. J. Newman. Efficiency of convection and time
variation of the solar constant. Science, 201:150, July 1978.
[74] M. Di Martino, M. Delbò, L. Saba, A. Cellino, V. Zappalà, S. Montebugnoli,
S. Righini, L. Zoni, R. Orosei, and F. Tosi. The SRT as radar for asteroid
and space debris studies. Memorie della Societa Astronomica Italiana Sup-
plement, 10:180, 2006.
[75] B. Diffey. TOPICAL REVIEW: Climate change, ozone depletion and the
impact on ultraviolet exposure of human skin. Physics in Medicine and
Biology, 49:1, January 2004.
[76] M. Dikpati, G. de Toma, and P. A. Gilman. Predicting the strength of solar
cycle 24 using a flux-transport dynamo-based tool. Geophysical Research
Letter, 33:5102, March 2006.
[77] E. Doornbos and H. Klinkrad. Modelling of space weather effects on satellite
drag. Advances in Space Research, 37:1229–1239, 2006.
[78] L. I. Dorman. Estimation of long-term cosmic ray intensity variation in near
future and prediction of their contribution in expected global climate change.
Advances in Space Research, 35:496–503, 2005.
[79] D. Dravins, L. Lindegren, A. Nordlund, and D. A. Vandenberg. The dis-
tant future of solar activity: A case study of Beta Hydri. I - Stellar evolu-
tion, lithium abundance, and photospheric structure. Astrophysical Journal,
403:385–395, January 1993.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 281

[80] D. Dravins, L. Lindegren, A. Nordlund, and D. A. Vandenberg. The dis-

tant future of solar activity: A case study of Beta Hydri. I - Stellar evolu-
tion, lithium abundance, and photospheric structure. Astrophysical Journal,
403:385–395, January 1993.
[81] J. R. Dudeney and R. I. Kressman. Empirical models of the electron concen-
tration of the ionosphere and their value for radio communications purposes.
Radio Science, 21:319–330, June 1986.
[82] J. W. Dungey. Interplanetary Magnetic Field and the Auroral Zones. Phys-
ical Review Letters, 6:47–48, January 1961.
[83] T. L. Duvall. a New Method to Search for Solar Gravity Mode Oscillations.
In D. Danesy, editor, ESA SP-559: SOHO 14 Helio- and Asteroseismology:
Towards a Golden Future, page 412, October 2004.
[84] T. L. Duvall, A. G. Kosovichev, P. H. Scherrer, R. S. Bogart, R. I. Bush,
C. de Forest, J. T. Hoeksema, J. Schou, J. L. R. Saba, T. D. Tarbell, A. M.
Title, C. J. Wolfson, and P. N. Milford. Time-Distance Helioseismology with
the MDI Instrument: Initial Results. Solar Physics, 170:63–73, 1997.
[85] C. Dyer. In SOLSPA 2001, ESA SP Ser 477, 2001.
[86] W. A. Dziembowski, P. R. Goode, A. G. Kosovichev, and J. Schou. Signa-
tures of the Rise of Cycle 23. Astrophysical Journal, 537:1026–1038, July
2000.
[87] J. A. Eddy. The Maunder Minimum. Science, 192:1189–1202, June 1976.
[88] J. A. Eddy. The Langley Years. Bulletin of the American Astronomical
Society, 20:949, September 1988.
[89] M. Emilio, J. R. Kuhn, R. I. Bush, and P. Scherrer. On the Constancy of
the Solar Diameter. Astrophysical Journal, 543:1007–1010, November 2000.
[90] O. Espagnet, R. Muller, T. Roudier, N. Mein, and P. Mein. Penetration of
the solar granulation into the photosphere: height dependence of intensity
and velocity fluctuations. Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement, 109:79–
108, January 1995.
[91] O. Espagnet, R. Muller, T. Roudier, P. Mein, N. Mein, and J. M. Malherbe.
Spatial relation between the 5-minute oscillations and granulation patterns.
Astronomy and Astrophysics, 313:297–305, September 1996.
[92] D. M. Etheridge, G. I. Pearman, and F. de Silva. Atmospheric trace-gas vari-
ations as revealed by air trapped in an ice core from Law Dome, Antarctica.
Annals of Glaciology, vol.10, pp.28-33, 10:28–33, 1988.
[93] D. M. Etheridge, L. P. Steele, R. J. Langenfelds, R. [Link] Francey, J.-
M. Barnola, and V. I. Morgan. Natural and anthropogenic changes in at-
mospheric CO2 over the last 1000 years from air in Antarctic ice and firn.
Journal of Geophys. Research, 101:4115–4128, 1996.
282 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[94] Starr R. Brückner J. Boynton W. V. Bailey S. H. Tromka J. L. Evans, L. G.

Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Sec. A., 422:586,
1999.

[95] D. H. Fairfield and L. J. Cahill, Jr. Transition Region Magnetic Field and
Polar Magnetic Disturbances. Journal of Geophys. Research, 71:155–+, Jan-
uary 1966.

[96] McLain D. R. Favorite, F. Nature, 244:139, 1973.

[97] G. H. Fisher, Y. Fan, D. W. Longcope, M. G. Linton, and A. A. Pevtsov.

The Solar Dynamo and Emerging Flux - (Invited Review). Solar Physics,
192:119–139, March 2000.

[98] B. Fleck. Highlights from SOHO and Future Space Missions. In The Dy-
namic Sun, Proceedings of the Summerschool and Workshop held at the Solar
Observatory, page 1, May 2001.

[99] A. Fossum and M. Carlsson. High-frequency acoustic waves are not sufficient
to heat the solar chromosphere. Nature, 435:919–921, June 2005.

[100] P. Foukal and J. Lean. Magnetic modulation of solar luminosity by photo-

spheric activity. Astrophysical Journal, 328:347–357, May 1988.

[101] P. Foukal and J. Lean. An empirical model of total solar irradiance variation
between 1874 and 1988. Science, 247:556–558, February 1990.

[102] C. Fröhlich. Observations of Irradiance Variations. Space Science Reviews,

94:15–24, November 2000.

[103] E. Friis-Christensen and K. Lassen. Length of the solar cycle: an indica-

tor of solar activity closely associated with climate. Science, 254:698–700,
November 1991.

[104] C. Froehlich. Variability of the solar ’constant’ on time scales of minutes to

years. Journal of Geophys. Research, 92:796–800, January 1987.

[105] C. Frohlich, J. Romero, H. Roth, C. Wehrli, B. N. Andersen, T. Appour-

chaux, V. Domingo, U. Telljohann, G. Berthomieu, P. Delache, J. Provost,
T. Toutain, D. A. Crommelynck, A. Chevalier, A. Fichot, W. Dappen,
D. Gough, T. Hoeksema, A. Jimenez, M. F. Gomez, J. M. Herreros, T. R.
Cortes, A. R. Jones, J. M. Pap, and R. C. Willson. VIRGO: Experiment for
Helioseismology and Solar Irradiance Monitoring. Solar Physics, 162:101–
128, 1995.

[106] V. Gaizauskas. Preflare activity. Solar Physics, 121:135–152, 1989.

[107] J.-C. Gerard. Modelling the Climatic Response to Solar Variability. Royal
Society of London Philosophical Transactions Series A, 330:561–573, April
1990.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 283

[108] R. Gertsch, L. S. Gertsch, and J. L. Remo. Mining Near-Earth Resources.

In Near-Earth Objects, page 511, January 1997.

[109] S. E. Gibson. Global Solar Wind Structure from Solar Minimum to Solar
Maximum: Sources and Evolution. Space Science Reviews, 97:69–79, 2001.

[110] R. L. Gilliland. Solar Luminosity Variations - Models of Solar Convection

Zone. Nature, 286:838, August 1980.

[111] R. L. Gilliland. Solar radius variations over the past 265 years. Astrophysical
Journal, 248:1144–1155, September 1981.

[112] P. A. Gilman. The tachocline and the solar dynamo. Astronomische

Nachrichten, 326:208–217, 2005.

[113] H. Gleisner and H. Lundstedt. A neural network-based local model for

prediction of geomagnetic disturbances. Journal of Geophys. Research, pages
8425–8434, May 2001.

[114] H. Gleisner and J. Watermann. Concepts of medium-range (1 3 days) geo-

magnetic forecasting. Advances in Space Research, 37:1116–1123, 2006.

[115] P. Goldreich, N. Murray, and P. Kumar. Excitation of solar p-modes. As-

trophysical Journal, 424:466–479, March 1994.

[116] P. R. Goode, L. H. Strous, T. R. Rimmele, and R. T. Stebbins. On the Origin

of Solar Oscillations. Astrophysical Journal Letters, 495:L27+, March 1998.

[117] J. T. Gosling, E. Hildner, R. M. MacQueen, R. H. Munro, A. I. Poland,

and C. L. Ross. The speeds of coronal mass ejection events. Solar Physics,
48:389–397, June 1976.

[118] D. O. Gough. Solar interior structure and luminosity variations. Solar

Physics, 74:21–34, November 1981.

[119] D. O. Gough, A. G. Kosovichev, J. Toomre, E. Anderson, H. M. Antia,

S. Basu, B. Chaboyer, S. M. Chitre, J. Christensen-Dalsgaard, W. A. Dziem-
bowski, A. Eff-Darwich, J. R. Elliott, P. M. Giles, P. R. Goode, J. A. Guzik,
J. W. Harvey, F. Hill, J. W. Leibacher, M. J. P. F. G. Monteiro, O. Richard,
T. Sekii, H. Shibahashi, M. Takata, M. J. Thompson, S. Vauclair, and S. V.
Vorontsov. The Seismic Structure of the Sun. Science, 272:1296, 1996.

[120] G. A. Graham, A. Sexton, M. M. Grady, and I. P. Wright. Further attempts

to constrain the nature of the impact residues in the HST solar array panels.
Advances in Space Research, 20:1461–1465, 1997.

[121] E. F. Guinan and I. Ribas. Our Changing Sun: The Role of Solar Nu-
clear Evolution and Magnetic Activity on Earth’s Atmosphere and Climate.
In ASP Conf. Ser. 269: The Evolving Sun and its Influence on Planetary
Environments, page 85, 2002.
284 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[122] J. D. Haigh. The Role of Stratospheric Ozone in Modulating the Solar

Radiative Forcing of Climate. Nature, 370:544, August 1994.
[123] J. D. Haigh. Science, 272:981, 1996.
[124] B. Haisch, K. T. Strong, and M. Rodono. Flares on the sun and other stars.
Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 29:275–324, 1991.
[125] J. E. Hansen and A. A. Lacis. Sun and Dust Versus Greenhouse Gases -
an Assessment of Their Relative Roles in Global Climate Change. Nature,
346:713, August 1990.
[126] C. Hanuise, J. C. Cerisier, F. Auchère, K. Bocchialini, S. Bruinsma,
N. Cornilleau-Wehrlin, N. Jakowski, C. Lathuillère, M. Menvielle, J.-J.
Valette, N. Vilmer, J. Watermann, and P. Yaya. From the Sun to the Earth:
impact of the 27-28 May 2003 solar events on the magnetosphere, ionosphere
and thermosphere. Annales Geophysicae, 24:129–151, January 2006.
[127] C. K. Hargrove and D. J. Paterson. Solar-neutrino neutral-current detec-
tion methods in the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory. Canadian Journal of
Physics, 69:1309–1316, November 1991.
[128] D. H. Hathaway, J. G. Beck, R. S. Bogart, K. T. Bachmann, G. Khatri, J. M.
Petitto, S. Han, and J. Raymond. The Photospheric Convection Spectrum.
Solar Physics, 193:299–312, April 2000.
[129] W. C. Haxton. Neutrino oscillations and the solar neutrino problem, page 65.
Current aspects of neutrino physics, 2001.
[130] G. R. Heckman. Solar proton event forecasts. In Interplanetary Particle
Environment, pages 91–100, April 1988.
[131] P. Heinzel and U. Anzer. Physics of solar prominences. In Solar Magnetic
Phenomena, Proceedings of the 3rd Summerschool and Workshop held at the
Solar Observatory Kanzelhöhe, Kärnten, Austria, August 25 – September 5,
2003. Edited by A. Hanslmeier, A. Veronig, and M. Messerotti. Astronomy
and Astrophysics Space Science Library, vol. 320, Springer, Dordrecht, The
Netherlands, 2005., p.115-138, pages 115–138, 2005.
[132] J. V. Hernandez, T. Tajima, and W. Horton. Neural net forecasting for
geomagnetic activity. Geophysical Research Letter, 20:2707–2710, December
1993.
[133] J. G. Hills and Ch. L. Mader. Ann. New York Acad. of Sciences, 822:381,
1997.
[134] C. O. Hines. A Possible Mechanism for the Production of Sun-Weather
Correlations. Journal of Atmospheric Sciences, 31:589–591, March 1974.
[135] N. M. Hoekzema, R. J. Rutten, P. N. Brandt, and R. A. Shine. Small-scale
topology of solar atmosphere dynamics. I. Wave sources and wave diffraction.
Astronomy and Astrophysics, 329:276–290, January 1998.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 285

[136] L. L. Hood. Coupled stratospheric ozone and temperature responses to short-

term changes in solar ultraviolet flux - An analysis of Nimbus 7 SBUV and
SAMS data. Journal of Geophys. Research, 91:5264–5276, April 1986.

[137] L. L. Hood. Solar ultraviolet radiation induced variations in the stratosphere

and mesosphere. Journal of Geophys. Research, 92:876–888, January 1987.

[138] Jenkins G. J. Houghton, J. T. and J. J. Ephraums. Climate Change: The

Ipcc Scientific Assessment. Cambridge University Press, 1990, 1990.

[139] T. A. Howard, D. F. Webb, S. J. Tappin, D. R. Mizuno, and J. C. John-

ston. Tracking halo coronal mass ejections from 0-1 AU and space weather
forecasting using the Solar Mass Ejection Imager (SMEI). Journal of Geo-
physical Research (Space Physics), 111:4105, April 2006.

[140] D. V. Hoyt and K. H. Schatten. A discussion of plausible solar irradiance

variations, 1700-1992. Journal of Geophys. Research, 98:18895, November
1993.

[141] D. V. Hoyt and K. H. Schatten. The role of the sun in climate change. The
role of the sun in climate change / Douglas V. Hoyt, Kenneth H. Schat-
ten. New York : Oxford University Press, 1997. QC883.2.S6 H69 1997,
1997.

[142] M. K. Hughes and H. F. Diaz, editors. The medieval warm period, 1994.

[143] D. M. Hunten, G. Cremonese, A. L. Sprague, R. E. Hill, S. Verani, and

R. W. H. Kozlowski. The Leonid Meteor Shower and the Lunar Sodium
Atmosphere. Icarus, 136:298–303, December 1998.

[144] N. E. Hurlburt. Solar Magnetoconvection. In SOHO-9 Workshop on Helio-

seismic Diagnostics of Solar Convection and Activity, 1999.

[145] J. Hyde and E. Christiansen. Space Shuttle Meteoroid and Orbital Debris
Threat Assessment Procedure. In COSPAR, Plenary Meeting, 2002.

[146] T. T. Ishii, H. Kurokawa, and T. T. Takeuchi. Characteristics of Flare-

productive Sunspot Groups. The Sun and Space Weather, 24th meeting of
the IAU, Joint Discussion 7, August 2000, Manchester, England., 7, 2000.

[147] B. V. Jackson, P. P. Hick, and A. Buffington. Halo CME’s - Will They Hit
or Miss Earth? AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, pages A474+, December 2002.

[148] J. M. Jensen, H. Lundstedt, M. J. Thompson, F. P. Pijpers, and S. P.

Rajaguru. Application of local-area helioseismic methods as predictors of
spaceweather. In 35th COSPAR Scientific Assembly, page 2195, 2004.

[149] S. J. Johnson, W. Dalsgaard, H. B. Clausen, and C. C. Langway. Nature,

227:482–483, 1970.
286 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[150] A. M. Jorgensen and H. Karimabadi. Understanding space weather via

analysis, prediction, modeling, and classification supported by Genetic Pro-
gramming. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, pages A311+, December 2005.

[151] W. Kalkofen. The heating of the quiet solar chromosphere. In IAU Symp.
142: Basic Plasma Processes on the Sun, pages 197–204, 1990.

[152] W. Kalkofen. Oscillations in Chromospheric Network Bright Points. Astro-

physical Journal Letters, 486:L145+, September 1997.

[153] J. F. Kasting. Habitable Zones around Low Mass Stars and the Search
For Extraterrestrial Life. Origins of Life and Evolution of the Biosphere,
27:291–3107, 1997.

[154] J. F. Kasting. Evolution of Earth’s Atmosphere and Climate. AGU Fall

Meeting Abstracts, December 2004.

[155] J. F. Kasting and O. B. Toon. Climate evolution on the terrestrial planets,

pages 423–449. Origin and Evolution of Planetary and Satellite Atmospheres,
1989.

[156] G. M. Keating. The response of ozone to solar activity variations - A review.

Solar Physics, 74:321–347, 1981.

[157] G. M. Keating, M. C. Pitts, G. Brasseur, and A. de Rudder. Response of

middle atmosphere to short-term solar ultraviolet variations. I - Observa-
tions. II - Theory. Journal of Geophys. Research, 92:889–914, January 1987.

[158] L. P. Keller, S. J. Wentworth, J. Gezo, D. S. McKay, L. A. Taylor, C. Pieters,

and R. V. Morris. Space Weathering Alteration of Lunar Soil Grains. In
Lunar and Planetary Institute Conference Abstracts, page 1820, March 1999.

[159] R. A. Kerr. Sunspot Weather Link Holding UP. Science, 242:1124, November
1988.

[160] E. V. Khomenko, R. I. Kostik, and N. G. Shchukina. Five-minute oscilla-

tions above granules and intergranular lanes. Astronomy and Astrophysics,
369:660–671, April 2001.

[161] J. Kiefer. Phys. Med. Suppl, 17:1, 2001.

[162] R.-S. Kim, K.-S. Cho, Y.-J. Moon, Y.-H. Kim, Y. Yi, M. Dryer, S.-C. Bong,
and Y.-D. Park. Forecast evaluation of the coronal mass ejection (CME)
geoeffectiveness using halo CMEs from 1997 to 2003. Journal of Geophysical
Research (Space Physics), 110:11104, November 2005.

[163] R. Kippenhahn and A. Schlüter. Eine Theorie der solaren Filamente. Mit 7
Textabbildungen. Zeitschrift fur Astrophysics, 43:36, 1957.

[164] D. Kiselman, R. J. Rutten, and B. Plez. The formation of G-band bright

points I: Standard LTE modelling. In IAU Symposium, page 287, 2001.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 287

[165] H. Kjeldsen, T. R. Bedding, R. P. Butler, J. Christensen-Dalsgaard, L. L.

Kiss, C. McCarthy, G. W. Marcy, C. G. Tinney, and J. T. Wright. Solar-
like Oscillations in α Centauri B. Astrophysical Journal, 635:1281–1290,
December 2005.
[166] A. Klassen, S. Pohjolainen, and K.-L. Klein. Type II radio precursor and
X-ray flare emission. Solar Physics, 218:197–210, December 2003.
[167] H. Klinkrad, P. Beltrami, S. Hauptmann, C. Martin, H. Sdunnus, H. Stokes,
R. Walker, and J. Wilkinson. The ESA Space Debris Mitigation Handbook
2002. Advances in Space Research, 34:1251–1259, 2004.
[168] F. Kneer and M. von Uexküll. Diagnostics and Dynamics of the Solar Chro-
mosphere. In ASSL Vol. 239: Motions in the Solar Atmosphere, pages 99–
118, 1999.
[169] D. J. Knipp, W. K. Tobiska, and B. A. Emery. Direct and Indirect Ther-
mospheric Heating Sources for Solar Cycles 21 23. Solar Physics, 224:495–
505, October 2004.
[170] Y. Kobayashi, H. Watanabe, M. Kikuchi, and I. Narumi. Effect of the Space
Environment on the Induction of DNA-repair Related Proteins and Recovery
from Radiation Damage. Advances in Space Research, 25:2103–2106, 2000.
[171] A. G. Kosovichev, J. Schou, P. H. Scherrer, P. H. Goode, W. A. Dziem-
bowski, E. J. Rhodes, and The SOI Structure Inversion Team. Spherical
and aspherical structure of the sun: First year of SOHO/MDI observations.
In IAU Symp. 185: New Eyes to See Inside the Sun and Stars, page 157,
1998.
[172] V. A. Krasnopolsky. Some problems related to the origin of methane on
Mars. Icarus, 180:359–367, February 2006.
[173] P. I. Krastev and A. Y. Smirnov. Global analysis with SNO: Toward the
solution of the solar neutrino problem. Physical Review D, 65(7):073022,
April 2002.
[174] F. Krause and K. H. Raedler. Mean-field magnetohydrodynamics and dy-
namo theory. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1980, 1980.
[175] A. S. Krieger, A. F. Timothy, and E. C. Roelof. A Coronal Hole and Its
Identification as the Source of a High Velocity Solar Wind Stream. Solar
Physics, 29:505, 1973.
[176] A. M. Krymskii, T. K. Breus, N. F. Ness, and M. H. AcuÑa. The IMF
pile-up regions near the Earth and Venus: lessons for the solar wind - Mars
interaction. Space Science Reviews, 92:535–564, May 2000.
[177] Y. Kubo. Position and radius of the Sun determined by solar eclipses in com-
bination with lunar occultations. Publications of the Astronomical Society
of Japan, 45:819–829, December 1993.
288 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[178] K. Kudela and M. Storini. Possible tools for space weather issues from cosmic
ray continuous records. Advances in Space Research, 37:1443–1449, 2006.

[179] K. Labitzke. Sunspots, the QBO, and the stratospheric temperature in the
north polar region. Geophysical Research Letter, 14:535–537, 1987.

[180] K. Labitzke and H. van Loon. Some Aspects of a Probable Association

Between Atmospheric Variability and the 11-year Solar Cycle. In Solar Ra-
diative Output Variation, page 57, 1988.

[181] J. Lachance, C. Coı̈a, A. C. Fozza, G. Czeremuszkin, A. Houdayer, and

M. R. Wertheimer. Radiation-induced degradation of polymeric spacecraft
materials under protective oxide coatings. Nuclear Instruments and Methods
in Physics Research B, 185:328–335, December 2001.

[182] F. Laclare, C. Delmas, J. P. Coin, and A. Irbah. Measurements and Varia-

tions of the Solar Diameter. Solar Physics, 166:211–229, July 1996.

[183] M. Lagache. New data on the kinetics of the dissolution of alkali feldspars at
200 C in CO 2 charged water. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 40:157–
161, February 1976.

[184] G. S. Lakhina, S. Alex, B. T. Tsurutani, and W. D. Gonzalez. Research

on Historical Records of Geomagnetic Storms. In K. Dere, J. Wang, and
Y. Yan, editors, IAU Symposium, pages 3–15, 2005.

[185] H. H. Lamb. Climate Present, Past and Future, Vol. 2 Climatic history and
future. Methuen, London, 1977.

[186] H. Lammer, W. Stumptner, G. J. Molina-Cuberos, S. J. Bauer, and T. Owen.

Nitrogen isotope fractionation and its consequence for Titan’s atmospheric
evolution. Planetary and Space Science, 48:529–543, May 2000.

[187] K. Langhans, G. B. Scharmer, D. Kiselman, M. G. Löfdahl, and T. E. Berger.

Inclination of magnetic fields and flows in sunspot penumbrae. Astronomy
and Astrophysics, 436:1087–1101, June 2005.

[188] P. Lantos. Predictions of Galactic Cosmic Ray Intensity Deduced from that
of Sunspot Number. Solar Physics, 229:373–386, July 2005.

[189] J. Lean. The Sun’s Variable Radiation and Its Relevance For Earth. Annual
Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 35:33–67, 1997.

[190] J. L. Lean. Societal Impacts of Solar Electromagnetic Radiation. Bulletin

of the American Astronomical Society, 32:840, May 2000.

[191] J. L. Lean, J. T. Mariska, K. T. Strong, H. S. Hudson, L. W. Acton, G. J.

Rottman, T. N. Woods, and R. C. Willson. Correlated brightness variations
in solar radiative output from the photosphere to the corona. Geophysical
Research Letter, 22:655–658, March 1995.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 289

[192] R. B. Leighton, R. W. Noyes, and G. W. Simon. Velocity Fields in the Solar

Atmosphere. I. Preliminary Report. Astrophysical Journal, 135:474, March
1962.

[193] N. V. Leister and P. Benevides-Soares. Solar diameter variations. Academie

des Sciences Paris Comptes Rendus Serie Sciences Mathematiques, 311:399–
404, August 1990.

[194] R. P. Lepping and D. B. Berdichevsky. Magnetic Clouds as Intermediary

Agents between their Solar Sources and the Magnetosphere. AGU Spring
Meeting Abstracts, page 61, May 2001.

[195] M. R. Lewis, M. Carr, G. C. Feldman, W. Esaias, and C. McClain. Nature,

347:543, 1990.

[196] J. Lilensten and J. Bornarel. Space Weather, Environment and Societies.

Space Weather, Environment and Societies. By Jean Lilensten, Researcher
(CNRS), Planetary Laboratory of the Grenoble University, Université Joseph
Fourier), France; Jean Bornarel, Professor Grenoble University (Université
Joseph Fourier), Physics Spectrometry Laboratory, France, Springer Dor-
drecht, December 2005.

[197] B. W. Lites, R. J. Rutten, and T. E. Berger. Dynamics of the Solar Chro-

mosphere. II. Ca II H 2V and K 2V Grains versus Internetwork Fields. As-
trophysical Journal, 517:1013–1033, June 1999.

[198] C. Liu, J. Qiu, D. E. Gary, S. Krucker, and H. Wang. Studies of Microflares

in RHESSI Hard X-Ray, Big Bear Solar Observatory Hα, and Michelson
Doppler Imager Magnetograms. Astrophysical Journal, 604:442–448, March
2004.

[199] M. Lockwood and S. Foster. Long-Term Variations in the Magnetic Fields of

the Sun and Possible Implications for Terrestrial Climate. In ESA SP-463:
The Solar Cycle and Terrestrial Climate, Solar and Space weather, page 85,
2000.

[200] M. Lockwood, R. Stamper, and M. N. Wild. A doubling of the sun’s coronal

magnetic field during the past 100 years. Nature, 399:437–439, May 1999.

[201] J. E. Lovelock. The Ages of Gaia. Norton, New York, 1988.

[202] O.v.d. Lühe. In The Dynamic Sun, Proceedings of the Summerschool and
Workshop held at the Solar Observatory, pages 43–68, May 2001.

[203] H. Lundstedt. The sun, space weather and GIC effects in Sweden. Advances
in Space Research, 37:1182–1191, 2006.

[204] T. J. Lydon and S. Sofia. A Method for Incorporating the Effects of Large-
Scale Magnetic Fields in the Study of Stellar Structure and Variability. As-
trophysical Journal Supplement, 101:357, December 1995.
290 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[205] W. B. Manchester, T. I. Gombosi, I. Roussev, A. Ridley, D. L. De Zeeuw,

I. V. Sokolov, K. G. Powell, and G. Tóth. Modeling a space weather event
from the Sun to the Earth: CME generation and interplanetary propagation.
Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 109:2107, February 2004.
[206] M. E. Mann, R. S. Bradley, and M. K. Hughes. Northern hemisphere temper-
atures during the past millennium: Inferences, uncertainties, and limitations.
Geophysical Research Letter, 26:759–762, 1999.
[207] T. Markvart. Radiation Damage in Solar Cells: a review . Materials in
Electronics, 1990.
[208] T. Markvart, T. J. Cumberbatch, A. A. Dollery, and M. Walkden. Photon
and electron degradation of boron-doped FZ silicon solar cells . In Proc.
Third European Symposium on Photovoltaic Generators in Space, 1982.
[209] T. Markvart, A. F. W. Willoughby, and A. A. Goodbody, G. [Link] Dollery.
Defect interactions in silicon solar cells. In Second Workshop on
Radiation-Induced and/or Process-Related Electrically Active Defects in
Semiconductors-Insulator Systems, North Carolina, 1989.
[210] T. Markvart, A. F. W. Willoughby, G. C. Goodbody, and A. A. Dollery.
Radiation-resistant silicon solar cell . In Proc. 19th IEEE Photovoltaic Spe-
cialists Conference, 1987.
[211] N. Marsh and H. Svensmark. Cosmic Rays, Clouds, and Climate. Space
Science Reviews, 94:215–230, November 2000.
[212] N. D. Marsh and H. Svensmark. Low Cloud Properties Influenced by Cosmic
Rays. Physical Review Letters, 85:5004–5007, December 2000.
[213] H. Mavromichalaki, G. Souvatzoglou, C. Sarlanis, G. Mariatos, C. Plainaki,
M. Gerontidou, A. Belov, E. Eroshenko, and V. Yanke. Space weather pre-
diction by cosmic rays. Advances in Space Research, 37:1141–1147, 2006.
[214] N. McBride and J. a. m. McDonnell. Meteoroid impacts on space-
craft:sporadics, streams, and the 1999 Leonids. Planetary and Space Science,
47:1005–1013, August 1999.
[215] B. M. McCormac and T. A. Seliga, editors. Solar-terrestrial influences on
weather and climate, 1979.
[216] J. A. M. McDonnell and D. J. Gardner. Meteoroid Morphology and Densi-
ties: Decoding Satellite Impact Data. Icarus, 133:25–35, May 1998.
[217] J. D. McDougall. Science, 239:485, 1988.
[218] P. S. McIntosh. The classification of sunspot groups. Solar Physics, 125:251–
267, February 1990.
[219] G. F. McKay, J. Dubeau, and I. Thomson. In Proceedings of Spacebound 93
Conference, Canadian Space Agency, Ottawa, 1993.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 291

[220] R. L. McKenzie and J. M. Elwood. Intensity of solar ultraviolet radiation

and its implications for skin cancer . NZ Medical Journal, 103:152, 1990.
[221] W. J. McNeil, S. T. Lai, and E. Murad. Charge Production due to Leonid
Meteor Shower Impact on Spacecraft Surfaces. In 6th Spacecraft Charging
Technology, pages 187–191, November 1998.
[222] P. Mein. New Ground-Based Solar Instrumentation. LNP Vol. 489: Euro-
pean Meeting on Solar Physics, page 241, 1997.
[223] H. J. Melosh, N. M. Schneider, K. J. Zahnle, and D. Latham. Ignition of
global wildfires at the Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary. Nature, 343:251–254,
January 1990.
[224] I. Molotov, A. Konovalenko, G. Tuccari, V. Agapov, A. Antipenko, Y. Gor-
shenkov, A. Volvach, X. Liu, L. Litvinenko, I. Falkovich, O. Fedorov, S. Za-
sukha, V. Abrosimov, A. Pushkarev, M. Nechaeva, A. Dementiev, N. Dugin,
V. Titenko, I. Shmeld, V. Jazykov, S. Buttaccio, C. Nicotra, A. Tsyukh,
V. Nesteruk, and I. Puchinin. International Radar Space Debris Research.
In D. Danesy, editor, ESA SP-589: 4th European Conference on Space De-
bris, page 83, August 2005.
[225] P. Morel, J. Provost, and G. Berthomieu. Updated solar models. Astronomy
and Astrophysics, 327:349–360, November 1997.
[226] F. Moreno-Insertis. The magnetic field in the convection zone as a link
between the active regions on the surface and the field in the solar interior.
In Solar Magnetic Fields, pages 117–135, 1994.
[227] R. Muller. The Solar Granulation. In ASSL Vol. 239: Motions in the Solar
Atmosphere, pages 35–70, 1999.
[228] R. Muller, J. C. Hulot, and T. Roudier. Perturbation of the granular pattern
by the presence of magnetic flux tubes. Solar Physics, 119:229–243, 1989.
[229] U. Narain and P. Ulmschneider. Chromospheric and coronal heating mech-
anisms. Space Science Reviews, 54:377–445, December 1990.
[230] A. Neftel, E. Moor, H. Oeschger, and B. Stauffer. Evidence from polar ice
cores for the increase in atmospheric CO2 in the past two centuries. Nature,
315:45–47, May 1985.
[231] W. M. Neupert. Comparison of Solar X-Ray Line Emission with Microwave
Emission during Flares. Astrophysical Journal Letters, 153:L59+, July 1968.
[232] F. Noeel. Variations of the apparent solar semidiameter observed with the
astrolabe of Santiago. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 325:825–827, September
1997.
[233] F. Noel. Observations of the Sun during 1994 with the astrolabe of Santiago.
Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement, 113:131, October 1995.
292 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[234] A. Nordlund. Numerical simulations of the solar granulation. I - Basic equa-

tions and methods. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 107:1–10, March 1982.

[235] E. Normand. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., 1996.

[236] L. J. November, J. Toomre, K. B. Gebbie, and G. W. Simon. The detection of

mesogranulation on the sun. Astrophysical Journal Letters, 245:L123–L126,
May 1981.

[237] O. A. Olmedo, Jr., J. Zhang, H. Wechsler, K. Borne, and A. Poland.

The Development of an Automatic Solar Eruptive Event Detection System
(SEEDS). AAS/Solar Physics Division Meeting, 37:08.17, June 2006.

[238] S. Omori, K. Kitajima, and S. Maruyama. Subduction of the Carbonated

Archean Oceanic-Crust and its Implication to Evolution of Earth’s Early
Atmosphere. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, pages B1043+, December 2003.

[239] M. Ossendrijver. The solar dynamo. The Astronomy and Astrophysics Re-
view, 11:287–367, 2003.

[240] M. Ozima. Moon as a Recorder of Early Earth Evolution; A new Perspective.

AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, December 2005.

[241] M. Ozima, K. Seki, N. Terada, Y. N. Miura, F. A. Podosek, and H. Shina-

gawa. Terrestrial Atmospheric Components in Lunar Soils: Record of Early
Earth Evolution. In 36th Annual Lunar and Planetary Science Conference,
page 1118, March 2005.

[242] B. E. Palle and C. J. Butler. . In ESA SP-463, 2000.

[243] J. Pap, M. Anklin, C. Fröhlich, C. Wehrli, F. Varadi, and L. Floyd. Vari-

ations in total solar and spectral irradiance as measured by the VIRGO
experiment on SOHO. Advances in Space Research, 24:215–224, 1999.

[244] C. A Perry. Int. J. of Climatology, 14:969, 1994.

[245] J. W. Peters, T. Markvart, and A. F. W. Willoughby. A study of radiation-

induced defects in silicon solar cells showing improved radiation resistance .
Materials Science Forum, 1992.

[246] R. Pirjola, A. Viljanen, A. Pulkkinen, and O. Amm. Space weather risk

in power systems and pipelines. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth C,
25:333–337, March 2000.

[247] M. S. Potgieter. The Modulation of Galactic Cosmic Rays in the Heliosphere:

Theory and Models. Space Science Reviews, 83:147–158, January 1998.

[248] J. Powell, G. Maise, H. Ludewig, and M. Todosow. High-Performance Ultra-

light Nuclear Rockets for Near-Earth Objects Interaction Missions. In Near-
Earth Objects, page 447, January 1997.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 293

[249] E. R. Priest. Solar Flare Theory and the Status of Flare Understanding. In
ASP Conf. Ser. 206: High Energy Solar Physics Workshop - Anticipating
Hess!, page 13, 2000.
[250] A. Pulkkinen, S. Lindahl, A. Viljanen, and R. Pirjola. Geomagnetic storm
of 29-31 October 2003: Geomagnetically induced currents and their relation
to problems in the Swedish high-voltage power transmission system. Space
Weather, 3:8, August 2005.
[251] M. P. Rast. The Scales of Granulation, Mesogranulation, and Supergranu-
lation. Astrophysical Journal, 597:1200–1210, November 2003.
[252] D. M. Raup and J. J. Sepkoski. Testing for Periodicity of Extinction. Science,
241:94–96, July 1988.
[253] R. C. Reedy. Gamma Rays from Mercury Made by Solar Energetic Particles.
Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, 29:987, July 1997.
[254] G. C. Reid. Solar total irradiance variations and the global sea surface
temperature record. Journal of Geophys. Research, 96:2835–2844, 1991.
[255] D. Rex, J. Bendisch, P. Eichler, and J. Zhang. Protecting and manoeuvring
of spacecraft in space debris environment. Advances in Space Research,
11:53–62, 1991.
[256] E. Ribes, B. Beardsley, T. M. Brown, P. Delache, F. Laclare, J. R. Kuhn,
and N. V. Leister. The variability of the solar diameter, pages 59–97. The
Sun in Time, 1991.
[257] E. Ribes, J. C. Ribes, and R. Barthalot. Evidence for a larger sun with a
slower rotation during the seventeenth century. Nature, 326:52–55, March
1987.
[258] A. J. Ridley, Y. Deng, and G. Tóth. The global ionosphere–thermosphere
model. Journal of Atmospheric and Terrestrial Physics, 68:839–864, May
2006.
[259] M. Rieutord, T. Roudier, J. M. Malherbe, and F. Rincon. On mesogranula-
tion, network formation and supergranulation. Astronomy and Astrophysics,
357:1063–1072, May 2000.
[260] E. Riklis, I. Emerit, and R. B. Setlow. New approaches to biochemical
radioprotection: antioxidants and DNA repair enhancement. Advances in
Space Research, 18:51–54, 1996.
[261] C. B. Roald, P. A. Sturrock, and R. Wolfson. Coronal Heating: Energy Re-
lease Associated with Chromospheric Magnetic Reconnection. Astrophysical
Journal, 538:960–967, August 2000.
[262] T. Roudier, J. M. Malherbe, L. November, J. Vigneau, G. Coupinot, M. La-
fon, and R. Muller. Intergranular plumes and formation of network bright
points. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 320:605–611, April 1997.
294 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[263] I. W. Roxburgh. Helioseismic Constraints on Solar Structure and the Solar

Neutrino Problem. Astrophysics and Space Science, 261:57–58, 1998.

[264] M. A. Ruderman and J. W. Chamberlain. Origin of the sunspot modulation

of ozone: Its implications for stratospheric NO injection. Planetary and
Space Science, 23:247–268, February 1975.

[265] C. T. Russell. The dynamics of planetary magnetospheres. Planetary and

Space Science, 49:1005–1030, August 2001.

[266] R. J. Rutten, R. H. Hammerschlag, F. M. Bettonvil, and P. Suetterlin. Dutch

Open Telescope: Status and Prospects. Bulletin of the American Astronom-
ical Society, 32:1290, October 2000.

[267] M. P. Ryutova and T. D. Tarbell. Observation of Shocks in the Chro-

mosphere and Transition Region. Bulletin of the American Astronomical
Society, 32:808, May 2000.

[268] M. Sanchez, F. Parra, M. Soler, and R. Soto. L’astrolabe DU ROA. Obser-

vations DU Soleil EN 1992. Observations of the Sun at the ROA astrolabe
in 1992. Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement, 110:351, April 1995.

[269] N. Sánchez-Ortiz, M. Belló-Mora, and H. Klinkrad. Collision Avoidance Ma-

noeuvres during Spacecraft Mission Lifetime: Risk Reduction and Required
DV. In 35th COSPAR Scientific Assembly, page 2491, 2004.

[270] V. S. Sazonov and M. V. Yakovlev. On the explosive prevention of collisions

of asteroidal and cometary bodies with the earth at their late detection.
Solar System Research, 40:68–78, January 2006.

[271] N. Scafetta and B. J. West. Climate sensitivity to solar activity: The con-
tribution of solar cycles 21-23 to global mean surface warming. AGU Fall
Meeting Abstracts, December 2004.

[272] K. Schatten. Fair space weather for solar cycle 24. Geophysical Research
Letter, 32:21106, November 2005.

[273] W. Schimmerling and F. A. Cucinotta. Critical radiation research for the

Moon and Mars. In 35th COSPAR Scientific Assembly, page 4325, 2004.

[274] C. J. Schrijver and C. Zwaan. Solar and stellar magnetic activity. Solar and
stellar magnetic activity / Carolus J. Schrijver, Cornelius Zwaan. New York:
Cambridge University Press, 2000. (Cambridge astrophysics series ; 34),
2000.

[275] D. W. Schwartzmann and T. Volk. Nature, 340:457–460, 1981.

[276] H. Sdunnus, J. Bendisch, and H. Klinkrad. The ESA MASTER’99 Space

Debris and Meteoroid Reference Model. In H. Sawaya-Lacoste, editor, ESA
SP-473: Space Debris, pages 299–307, October 2001.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 295

[277] G. Seckmeyer and R. L. McKenzie. Nature, 359:135, 1992.

[278] S. Sello. Solar cycle forecasting: A nonlinear dynamics approach. Astronomy

and Astrophysics, 377:312–320, October 2001.

[279] P. M. Sforza and J. L. Remo. NEO Mission Dynamics and Advanced Space
Propulsion. In Near-Earth Objects, page 432, January 1997.

[280] M. R. Shavers, N. Zapp, R. E. Barber, J. W. Wilson, G. Qualls, L. Toupes,

S. Ramsey, V. Vinci, G. Smith, and F. A. Cucinotta. Implementation of
ALARA radiation protection on the ISS through polyethylene shielding aug-
mentation of the Service Module Crew Quarters. Advances in Space Re-
search, 34:1333–1337, 2004.

[281] N. J. Shaviv. On climate response to changes in the cosmic ray flux and
radiative budget. Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 110:8105,
August 2005.

[282] H. Shibahashi. Solar structure and the neutrino problem, pages 231–246.
Stellar astrophysical fluid dynamics. Edited by Michael J. Thompson, Jørgen
Christensen-Dalsgaard. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press, ISBN
0-521-81809-5, 2003, p. 231 - 246, 2003.

[283] H. Shinagawa. Our Current Understanding of the Ionosphere of Mars. Ad-

vances in Space Research, 26:1599–1608, 2000.

[284] E. M. Shoemaker and C. S. Shoemaker. The Collision of Solid Bodies, page

259. The New Solar System, 1990.

[285] J. A. Simpson. A Brief History of Recurrent Solar Modulation of the Galactic

Cosmic Rays (1937-1990). Space Science Reviews, 83:169–176, January 1998.

[286] K. R. Sivaraman, S. S. Gupta, W. C. Livingston, L. Damé, W. Kalkofen,

C. U. Keller, R. Smartt, and S. S. Hasan. Results from a revisit to the K2V
bright points. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 363:279–288, November 2000.

[287] R. Skartlien, R. F. Stein, and Å. Nordlund. Excitation of Chromospheric

Wave Transients by Collapsing Granules. Astrophysical Journal, 541:468–
488, September 2000.

[288] A. Skumanich. Time Scales for CA II Emission Decay, Rotational Braking,

and Lithium Depletion. Astrophysical Journal, 171:565, February 1972.

[289] H. B. Snodgrass. Torsional Oscillations: Vorticity; Solar Cycle Predictions.

Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, 33:893, May 2001.

[290] M. Sobotka. Fine Structures in Sunspots. In ASSL Vol. 239: Motions in the
Solar Atmosphere, pages 71–97, 1999.

[291] S. Sofia and A. S. Endal. Nature of the climatically significant changes of

the solar constant. LPI Contributions, 390:96, 1979.
296 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[292] S. K. Solanki. Empirical Modelling and Thermal Structure of Sunspots. In

ASP Conf. Ser. 118: 1st Advances in Solar Physics Euroconference. Ad-
vances in Physics of Sunspots, page 178, 1997.

[293] S. K. Solanki and M. Fligge. Reconstruction of Past Solar Irradiance. Space

Science Reviews, 94:127–138, November 2000.

[294] C. P. Sonett. Sunspot time series - Spectrum from square law modulation of
the Hale cycle. Geophysical Research Letter, 9:1313–1316, December 1982.

[295] C. P. Sonett and G. E. Williams. Solar periodicities expressed in varves

from glacial Skilak Lake, southern Alaska. Journal of Geophys. Research,
90:12019, December 1985.

[296] Q. Song and W. Cao. In Astrophys. in Asia and its Future, Ed. P.S. Chen,
Yunan Obs. Chin. Acadm. Sc., page 139, 1999.

[297] E. A. Spiegel and J.-P. Zahn. The solar tachocline. Astronomy and Astro-
physics, 265:106–114, November 1992.

[298] H. C. Spruit. Effect of spots on a star’s radius and luminosity. Astronomy

and Astrophysics, 108:348–355, April 1982.

[299] B. Stauffer. Long Term Climate Records from Polar Ice. Space Science
Reviews, 94:321–336, November 2000.

[300] O. Steiner and A. Ferriz-Mas. Connecting solar radiance variability to the

solar dynamo with the virial theorem. Astronomische Nachrichten, 326:190–
193, 2005.

[301] E. C. Stone, A. C. Cummings, F. B. McDonald, B. C. Heikkila, N. Lal, and

W. R. Webber. Voyager 1 Explores the Termination Shock Region and the
Heliosheath Beyond. Science, 309:2017–2020, September 2005.

[302] L. H. Strous, P. R. Goode, and T. R. Rimmele. The Dynamics of the Ex-

citation of Solar Oscillations. Astrophysical Journal, 535:1000–1013, June
2000.

[303] Y. Suzuki. Solar Neutrinos. Space Science Reviews, 85:91–104, August 1998.

[304] B. Svenonius and E. Olausson. Paleogeol. Paleoclimate, 26:87–97, 1979.

[305] H. Svensmark. Influence of Cosmic Rays on Earth’s Climate. Physical Review

Letters, 81:5027–5030, November 1998.

[306] H. Svensmark and E. Friis-Christensen. Variation of cosmic ray flux and

global cloud coverage-a missing link in solar-climate relationships. Journal
of Atmospheric and Terrestrial Physics, 59:1225–1232, July 1997.

[307] H. Y. Tada, J. R. Carter, Jr., B. E. Anspaugh, and R. G. Downing. In The

Solar Cell Radiation Handbook, 3rd Edition, NASA/JPL Publ., 1982.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 297

[308] E. Tajika. Physical and Geochemical Conditions Required for the Initiation
of Snowball Earth. In Lunar and Planetary Institute Conference Abstracts,
page 1573, March 2001.
[309] M. Takata. In Frontier of Neutrino Astrophysics, 1993.
[310] M. Takata and H. Shibahashi. Solar Models Based on Helioseismology and
the Solar Neutrino Problem. Astrophysical Journal, 504:1035, September
1998.
[311] Q. Tang, B. J. Pang, and W. Zhang. Collision Risk Assessment for a Space-
craft in the Space Debris Environment. In D. Danesy, editor, ESA SP-589:
4th European Conference on Space Debris, page 721, August 2005.
[312] I. Thomson. Mutat. Res., 430, 1999.
[313] Y. Totsuka. KAMIOKANDE and Super-Kainiokande. In The Sun and Be-
yond, page 221, 1996.
[314] L. Townsend. Space Radiation Hazards on Human Missions to the Moon
and Mars. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, pages C1+, December 2004.
[315] L. W. Townsend and J. W. Wilson. The Interplanetary Radiation Environ-
ment and Methods to Shield from it. In C. R. Stoker and C. Emmart, editors,
Strategies for Mars: A Guide to Human Exploration, page 283, 1996.
[316] D. Tripathi, V. Bothmer, S. K. Solanki, R. Schwenn, M. Mierla, and G. Sten-
borg. Plasma dynamics of a prominence associated coronal mass ejection.
In IAU Symposium, pages 401–402, November 2004.
[317] S. Turck-Chièze, S. Couvidat, A. G. Kosovichev, A. H. Gabriel,
G. Berthomieu, A. S. Brun, J. Christensen-Dalsgaard, R. A. Garcı́a, D. O.
Gough, J. Provost, T. Roca-Cortes, I. W. Roxburgh, and R. K. Ulrich. Solar
Neutrino Emission Deduced from a Seismic Model. Astrophysical Journal
Letters, 555:L69–L73, July 2001.
[318] S. Turck-Chièze, R. A. Garcı́a, S. Couvidat, R. K. Ulrich, L. Bertello,
F. Varadi, A. G. Kosovichev, A. H. Gabriel, G. Berthomieu, A. S. Brun,
I. Lopes, P. Pallé, J. Provost, J. M. Robillot, and T. Roca Cortés. Look-
ing for Gravity-Mode Multiplets with the GOLF Experiment aboard SOHO.
Astrophysical Journal, 604:455–468, March 2004.
[319] S. Turck-Chieze and I. Lopes. Toward a unified classical model of the sun
- On the sensitivity of neutrinos and helioseismology to the microscopic
physics. Astrophysical Journal, 408:347–367, May 1993.
[320] P. Ulmschneider, E. R. Priest, and R. Rosner, editors. Mechanisms of Chro-
mospheric and Coronal Heating, 1991.
[321] R. K. Ulrich and L. Bertello. Solar-Cycle Dependence of the Sun’s Appar-
ent Radius in the Neutral Iron Spectral Line at 525-NM. Nature, 377:214,
September 1995.
298 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[322] I. G. Usoskin, S. V. Berdyugina, and J. Poutanen. Preferred sunspot lon-

gitudes: non-axisymmetry and differential rotation. Astronomy and Astro-
physics, 441:347–352, October 2005.
[323] G. B. Valsecchi, A. Milani, A. Rossi, and G. Tommei. The SRT, Near-
Earth objects, and space debris. Memorie della Societa Astronomica Italiana
Supplement, 10:186, 2006.
[324] L. van Driel-Gesztelyi. CMEs and Magnetic Helicity. In Solar Magnetic
Phenomena, Proceedings of the 3rd Summerschool and Workshop held at the
Solar Observatory Kanzelhöhe, Kärnten, Austria, August 25 – September 5,
2003. Edited by A. Hanslmeier, A. Veronig, and M. Messerotti. Astronomy
and Astrophysics Space Science Library, vol. 320, Springer, Dordrecht, The
Netherlands, 2005., p.115-138, pages 57–85, 2005.
[325] M. Vazquez and A. Hanslmeier. Ultraviolet radiation in the solar
system. Ultraviolet radiation in the solar system, by M. Vazquez
and A. Hanslmeier. Astrophysics and space science library (ASSL),
vol. 331. Dordrecht: Springer, 2006., 2006.
[326] A. Veronig, B. Vršnak, B. R. Dennis, M. Temmer, A. Hanslmeier, and
J. Magdalenić. Investigation of the Neupert effect in solar flares. I. Sta-
tistical properties and the evaporation model. Astronomy and Astrophysics,
392:699–712, September 2002.
[327] B. Vršnak. Solar flares - observations and theory. In Solar Magnetic Phe-
nomena, Proceedings of the 3rd Summerschool and Workshop held at the
Solar Observatory Kanzelhöhe, Kärnten, Austria, August 25 – September 5,
2003. Edited by A. Hanslmeier, A. Veronig, and M. Messerotti. Astronomy
and Astrophysics Space Science Library, vol. 320, Springer, Dordrecht, The
Netherlands, 2005., p.27-56, pages 27–56, 2005.
[328] J. C. G. Walker, P. B. Hays, and J. F. Kasting. A negative feedback mech-
anism for the long-term stabilization of the earth’s surface temperature.
Journal of Geophys. Research, 86:9776–9782, October 1981.
[329] R. W. Walsh. Solar Magnetohydrodynamics. In The Dynamic Sun, Pro-
ceedings of the Summerschool and Workshop held at the Solar Observatory,
page 129, May 2001.
[330] G. Walther. On the Solar-Cycle Modulation of the Homestake Solar Neutrino
Capture Rate and the Shuffle Test. Astrophysical Journal, 513:990–996,
March 1999.
[331] S. Watanabe and H. Shibahashi. Solar Models with Helioseismic Constraints
and the Solar Neutrino Problem. Publications of the Astronomical Society
of Japan, 53:565–575, June 2001.
[332] D. F. Webb. CMEs and the solar cycle variation in their geoeffectiveness.
In ESA SP-508: From Solar Min to Max: Half a Solar Cycle with SOHO,
pages 409–419, June 2002.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 299

[333] R. Wieler and H. Baur. Fractionation of Xe, Kr, and AR in the Solar
Corpuscular Radiation Deduced by Closed System Etching of Lunar Soils.
Astrophysical Journal, 453:987, November 1995.

[334] R. Wieler, P. Etique, P. Signer, and G. Poupeau. Record of the solar cor-
puscular radiation in minerals from lunar soils - A comparative study of
noble gases and tracks. In Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, pages
1369–1393, 1980.

[335] L. A. Willson, G. H. Bowen, and C. Struck-Marcell. Mass loss on the main

sequence. Comments on Astrophysics, 12:17–34, April 1987.

[336] R. C. Willson. Solar total irradiance observations by active cavity radiome-

ters. Solar Physics, 74:217–229, November 1981.

[337] R. C. Willson. Measurements of solar total irradiance and its variability.

Space Science Reviews, 38:203–242, August 1984.

[338] R. C. Willson and H. S. Hudson. Solar luminosity variations in solar cycle

21. Nature, 332:810–812, April 1988.

[339] J. W. Wilson, R. K. Tripathi, G. D. Qualls, F. A. Cucinotta, R. E. Prael,

J. W. Norbury, J. H. Heinbockel, and J. Tweed. A space radiation transport
method development. Advances in Space Research, 34:1319–1327, 2004.

[340] A. D. Wittmann, E. Alge, and M. Bianda. Detection of a significant change

in the solar diameter. Solar Physics, 145:205, May 1993.

[341] J.-G. Wu, L. Eliasson, H. Lundstedt, A. Hilgers, L. Andersson, and O. Nor-

berg. Space Environment Effects on Geostationary Spacecraft: Analysis and
Prediction. Advances in Space Research, 26:31–36, 2000.

[342] T. C. Yang, M. Mei, K. A. George, and L. M. Craise. DNA damage and

repair in oncogenic transformation by heavy ion radiation. Advances in Space
Research, 18:149–158, 1996.

[343] C.-T. Yeh, M. D. Ding, and P. F. Chen. Waiting time distribution of CMEs.
In Solar Magnetic Phenomena, Proceedings of the 3rd Summerschool and
Workshop held at the Solar Observatory Kanzelhöhe, Kärnten, Austria, Au-
gust 25 – September 5, 2003. Edited by A. Hanslmeier, A. Veronig, and M.
Messerotti. Astronomy and Astrophysics Space Science Library, vol. 320,
Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2005., p.171-174, pages 171–174,
2005.

[344] K. J. Zahnle and J. C. G. Walker. The evolution of solar ultraviolet lumi-

nosity. Reviews of Geophysics and Space Physics, 20:280–292, May 1982.

[345] E. J. Zeller and L. B. Ronca. Space Weathering of Lunar and Asteroidal

Surfaces. Icarus, 7:372–379, 1967.
300 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[346] J. F. Ziegler and W. A. Lanford. Effect of Cosmic Rays on Computer Mem-

ories. Science, 206:776–788, November 1979.
[347] R. D. Zwickl, K. A. Doggett, S. Sahm, W. P. Barrett, R. N. Grubb, T. R.
Detman, V. J. Raben, C. W. Smith, P. Riley, R. E. Gold, R. A. Mewaldt, and
T. Maruyama. The NOAA Real-Time Solar-Wind (RTSW) System using
ACE Data. Space Science Reviews, 86:633–648, 1998.
Internet

Today’s space weather can be found under:

[Link] and [Link]

spaceweather/

NASA’s space environment center (SEC):

[Link]

The web site of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:

[Link]

ESA Space Weather Site:

[Link]

NASA Space weather resources:

[Link] weather/Space Weather at [Link]

Space Science Institute/ NASA and NSF site:

[Link]
Lund Space Weather Center

[Link]

Australian Space Weather

[Link]

Further references can be found in these sites.

301
List of Tables

2.1 Central wavelength and bandwidth of the UBVRI filter set . . . . . . . 11

2.2 B-V colors and effective temperatures of some stars . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3 Spectral classification of stars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.4 Effective Temperature as a function of spectral type . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.5 The principal reaction of the pp chain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.6 Solar model: variation of temperature, luminosity and fusion rate
throughout the Sun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.7 Main Instruments on SOHO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

3.1 Sunspot energy values (from [17]) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

3.2 Prominent chromospheric emission lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
3.3 Optical classification scheme of solar flares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
3.4 Soft x-ray classification scheme of solar flares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
3.5 Radio classification scheme of solar flares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
3.6 Tomography of the solar corona by observations at different radio fre-
quencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
3.7 Several types of solar wind. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
3.8 Solar Diameter Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

5.1 Composition of the Earth’s atmosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124

5.2 Energy received from the Sun at 1 AU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
5.3 Current Greenhouse Gas Concentrations and Other Components . . . . 127
5.4 Historical CO2 record from the Siple Station Ice Core . . . . . . . . . . 128

6.1 Effects of Solar Radiation at different wavelengths on the Middle and

Upper Atmosphere. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
6.2 Exospheric temperature at solar maximum and minimum . . . . . . . . 146
6.3 Typical values for the albedo. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
6.4 Satellite measurements of the solar constant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
6.5 Various influences on the climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
6.6 Causes of Global Warming of about 0.5 C, 1880-1997 . . . . . . . . . . 171

7.1 Radiation related units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176

7.2 Radiation dose limits in mSv for astronauts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
7.3 Total average annual radiation does in the US . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179

303
304 LIST OF TABLES

7.4 Single dose effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179

7.5 The environment in space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
7.6 Common shielding materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189

8.1 Some parameters of the ionosphere. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198

8.2 Variation of the ionosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
8.3 Typical Particle Energies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
8.4 Corrected magnetic latitudes of some cities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
8.5 Extension of the auroral zone. The first values given is the magnetic
latitude (Lat), the second the Kp index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
8.6 Transformation between the Kp and the Ap index . . . . . . . . . . . 208
8.7 Transformation between the Ap and the Cp index . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
8.8 Transformation between the Cp and the C9 index . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
8.9 Summary of geomagnetic indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
8.10 Navigation systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
8.11 Fuels for RTG’s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

10.1 Groups of Asteroids near Earth orbit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249

10.2 Absolute magnitude and diameter of asteroids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
10.3 Extinction of marine species. The end of the stage is given in Myr. . . . 252

11.1 Mean time between impacts on a satellite with a cross-section area of 10 m2 267
11.2 Spectacular satellite crashes on Earth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
11.3 Some examples of retrieved spacecraft and surfaces . . . . . . . . . . . 270
Index

α effect, 114 Ar, 231

αCen B, 45 Aristarchus, 93
α − ω-dynamo, 117 Asteroids
ω effect, 113 absolute magnitude, 246
14
C, 168 classification, 246
15
N/14 N anomaly, 155 main belt, 246
10
Be, 129, 163 asteroids, 245
14
C, 162 Astronauts
18
O to 16 O ratio, 129 radiation dose limits, 178
10.7 cm radio flux, 146, 208 atmosphere
5 min oscillations, 36 cloud formation, 168
composition, 124, 125
aa-index, 163 heat budget, 125
ACE, 85, 180 Joule heating, 143
achondrites, 253 origin, 139, 141
acoustic waves, 69 radiation penetration, 143
ACRIM, 14, 158 response, 146
ACRs, 166 solar radiation, 143
acute dose, 176 atmospheric drag, 224
adaptive optics, 20 atmospheric lifetime, 183
adiabatic invariant, 108 ATST, 21
AE-Index, 206, 208 aurora, 236
air flight, 3 aurorae, 198, 203
aircraft electronics, 223 auroral electrojets, 203
airglow, 138 auroral oval, 203
AL index, 120 auroral zone, 206
albedo, 151 Australia, 182
Alfvén speed, 101, 105 Australien Space Forecast Center, 242
Alfvén velocity, 193
Alfvén waves, 112 ballerina skirt, 90
ALMA, 29 battery, 218
alpha particles, 175 BBSO, 20
alternate solar models, 35 Becquerel, 176
Andromeda Galaxy, 8 Beltrami fields, 105
antioxidants, 179 beta decay, 30
AO, 20 Beta Hyi, 122
Ap Index, 207 beta particles, 175

305
306 INDEX

biota, 153 Chicxulub basin, 250

Birkeland current, 203 Chiron, 246
BISON, 38 chromosomes, 177
blackbody radiation, 10 Chromosphere
blood forming organ syndrome, 179 heating, 68
Boltzmann formula, 66 radiative transfer, 65
Bond Albedo, 151 reconnection, 69
bone marrow syndrome, 179 spectral lines, 64
BOREXINO, 32 spectrum, 64
bounce motion, 194 temperature variation, 64
bow shock, 193 chromospheric evaporation, 72
Bq, 176 chromospheric heating, 68
Bremsstrahlung, 72 chromospheric network, 70
Brunt-Väissälä frequency, 42 chronic dose, 176
butterflydiagram, 62 climate
BY Draconis stars, 120 astronomical variations on, 131
Bz, 91, 110 definition, 127
influences on, 169
C9 Index, 208 proxy data, 128
Ca II, 64 volcanic activity, 133
Ca II line profile, 67 clouds, 168
CACTUS, 3 CLUSTER, 23
cancer, 177 CME, 25, 74, 80, 88, 212, 226
carbonate metamorphism, 153 geoeffectiveness, 82
Carbondioxide power law, 82
sinks, 141 CN cycle, 17
carcinogenesis, 178 CO2 geochemical cylce, 152
Carrington, 2, 55, 84 coelostat, 21
Carrington longitude, 57 comet tails, 84
Carrington rotation, 56 convection, 18
cataracts, 185 efficiency, 156
CCD radiation damage, 180 convection electric field, 204
CDS, 23 convection zone, 18
CELIAS, 23 corals, 128
cell, 177 Coriolis term, 104
cell repair, 178 Corona
Centaurs, 246 heating, 82
Central nervous system syndrome, 180 observational features, 79
Ceres, 245 radio emission, 78
CERISE, 267 corona, 28, 78, 101
CFC, 136, 183 corona source surface, 170
Chapman reactions, 135 coronagraph, 78
Chapman, S., 199 coronal holes, 79, 90
Chapman-Ferraro currents, 193 coronal loop, 102
charge separation, 99 coronal loops, 79
Cherenkov radiation, 32, 165 coronal mass ejection CME, 74
INDEX 307

coronal mass ejection, CME, 80 Earth, 86

corotational electric field, 204 albedo variations, 150
Cosmic rays, 164 atmosphere, 123
anomalous, 166 eccenctricity, 131
galactic, 165 geologic history, 139
cosmic rays, 164 magnetic dipole, 192
cloud cover, 170 magnetosphere, 110, 191
cosmic rays and solar activity, 168 perihelion, 131
cosmogenic isotopes, 129 tilt of axis, 131
COSTEP, 23 Earth colliders, 247
Coulomb law, 97 Earth orbit
Cp Index, 208 eccentricity, 131
current helicity, 75 eclipsing binary systems, 9
Cyanobacteria, 139 Eddington, 49
cyclotron radiation, 109 effective temperature, 10
eigenstates, 35
D region, 197 Einstein coefficients, 67
decay time, 99 EIT, 23
deep dielectric charging, 221 electron damage, 221
Deimos, 231 EMP, 254
Deinococcus radiodurans, 180, 232 EMU, 187
dendrochronology, 160 energy production rate, 17
DIARAD, 156 equation of state, 104
diffraction limit, 20 equatorial anomaly, 198
DISCOS, 266 ERB, 14
dispersion relation, 111 ERNE, 23
displacement current, 101 ESD, 254
DNA, 177 EURECA, 269
damage, 178 EVA, 188, 237, 238, 272
Dobson, 134 Evershed effect, 56
Dopplerimager, 36 exobase, 146
dose, 176 exploding granules, 50
DOT, 20 extrasolar planets, 8, 122
double ribbon flares, 74 extravehicular mobility unit, 187
drad B drift, 109
drift motion, 194 F region, 197
drift velocity, 109, 110 f-modes, 38
DST, 21 faculae, 53, 62
DST Index, 207 faint young Sun problem, 149
dynamic spectrum, 74 Faraday rotation, 212
dynamo mechanism, 100 fast speed solar wind, 79
dynamo number, 118 Ferraro, V., 199
filtergrams, 63
E region, 197 fireball, 253
Early Earth five minutes oscillations, 54
DNA damage, 180 flare, 236
308 INDEX

flares, 103 geomagnetic indices, 207

classificiation, 73 geomagnetic storms, 84, 205, 235
HXR emission, 72 giants, 12
importance, 73 GIC, 213
magnetic reconnection, 71 GITM, 215
microwave emission, 72 Gleissberg cycle, 62, 160
ocurrence, 75 global cloud cover, 169
precursors, 75 Global warming, 170
radio classification, 74 global warming, 171
synchrotron radiation, 71 global warming potential, 126
type III bursts, 72 GNO, 32
X-ray classification, 73 Goldsmid, 55
flash spectrum, 64 GOLF, 23
fluid equations, 103 GONG, 33, 36
forbidden transitions, 78 GPS, 3, 199, 210, 262
force free, 105 gradual flares, 73
fossil field, 100 GRAFEX, 242
fossil pollen, 128 Granulation
fovea, 185 temperature variations, 52
fractal dimension, 51 granulation, 49
free radicals, 177 granulation border, 121
Fresnel lens, 217 Gray, 176
frozen field, 102 greenhouse effect, 151
FU Orionis stars, 121 greenhouse gas, 126
fuel cells, 219 concentration, 127
greenhouse gases, 126
G-band, 53 Greenhouseffect, 133
Ga experiment, 31 Greenland, 168
Gaia Hypothesis, 153 GREGOR, 21
Galaxy, 7 Gy, 176
Galilei, 55 gyration frequency, 108
GALILEO, 262 gyration radius, 108
GALLEX, 31
gamma rays, 176 H and K lines, 64
Ganymede, 86 Hα line, 64
Gastrointestinal tract syndrome, 180 H− , 49
GCR, 165, 169 Hale, 56
GCRs, 166 Hale’s law, 58, 113
genetic effects, 176 Halo CME, 81
genetic programming, 243 HALOE, 164
genome, 177 Hanle effect, 27
GEO, 263, 266, 271 Harang discontinuity, 213
geocorona, 192 Harriot, 55
geoelectric field, 213 Haystake, 265
geomagnetic activity, 206 heliopause, 88
geomagnetic disturbances, 1 helioseismology, 33, 39, 100, 242
INDEX 309

heliosphere, 166, 167 Joule heating, 104

helmet streamers, 79 Jovian magnetosphere, 222
HEO, 263 Jupiter, 86
Hertzsprung Russell Diagram, 9
Hess, V., 164 K Index, 206
heterosphere, 124 K/T impact, 250
HF communication, 198 K0 mesons, 35
HF radio propagation, 236 Kamiokande, 31
HF radio communication, 238 Kelvin-Helmholtz instability, 204
HK project, 121 Kepler third law, 14
Homestake, 31 Kepler’s law, 9
homologous flares, 75 Kirchhoff’s law, 66
homosphere, 124 Kirkwood gaps, 246
HRD, 9 Kolmogorov
HST, 269 turbulent cascade, 58
HVI tests, 271 Kolmogorov theory, 52
HXR emission, 72 Kp Index, 206, 207
hydrogen loss, 138 Kuiper Belt, 257
hydrostatic equilibrium, 15
Lagrangian Point, 23
IADC, 263 lamb frequency, 42
ICARUS, 32 Landéfactor, 57
ice ages, 131 Larmor radius, 108
ice cores, 126–128 LASCO, 3, 23
IMF, 88, 91 LDEF, 269
implantable card. def., 224 Legendre function, 39
impulsive flares, 73 LEO, 262, 271
induction equation, 99, 101 Leonids, 254
intergranular lanes, 51 satellite damage, 254
international space station, ISS, 240 leptons, 30
interplanetary magnetic field, 88 Li abundance, 122
Inversion technique, 45 light bridges, 58
Io, 222 lightyear, 7
ionization trail, 265 limb darkening, 49
ionogram, 197 limestone, 141
ionosonde, 197 lithosphere, 139
ionosphere, 124, 191, 197 Little Ice Age, 130
limiting frequency, 211 LMT, 266
variation, 198 lobes, 194
ionospheric currents, 143 local group, 8
ionospheric scintillation, 199 LOFAR, 29
IPS, 2 Loran system, 210
irradiance variations Lorentz force, 103, 105
Earth’climate, 162 LOWL, 33
ISS, 4, 187, 188, 240, 270, 273 LUF, 198
ISTP, 23 lunar soil shielding, 188
310 INDEX

lung tissue, 175 Martian soil shielding, 188

Lyapunov, 119 mass defect, 16
Lyman α, 86 MASTER, 263
Lyman Alpha radiation, 85 Maunder Minimum, 55, 149, 168
Maxwell equations, 97
Mach number, 193 Maxwell–Boltzmann distribution, 138
macula leutea, 185 McIntosh classification, 59
magnetic mirror, 108 McMath-Pierce Facility, 21
magnetic buoyancy, 100, 103 MDI, 23
magnetic clouds, 86 mean field electrodynamics, 116
magnetic cycle, 59 Mercury, 86
magnetic diffusivity, 101 meridional flow, 115
magnetic field mesogranulation, 53, 70
corona, 101 mesopause, 146
frozen in, 100 mesosphere, 124, 147
photosphere, 100 meteor stream, 253
magnetic fields meteorites, 252
reconnection, 102 from Mars, 253
magnetic fileds meteorological phenomena
particle motions, 194 solar activity, 149
magnetic flux freezing, 100 methane, 126
magnetic latitude, 206 methanogenesis, 141
magnetic reconnection, 83, 205 methanogens, 232
magnetic Reynolds number, 102, 112 MHD waves, 83, 101, 111
magnetic sectors, 90 microflares, 68, 75, 83
magneto-acoustic waves, 53 micrometeorites, 216, 217
magnetopause, 192 micrometeoroid impact, 3
magnetosheath, 193 micrometeoroids, 253
magnetosonic waves, 112 microscopic diffusion, 19
magnetosphere, 203 Mid-Cretaceous period, 130
current systems, 194 Mikheyev-Smirnov- Wolfenstein effect,
parts, 193 34
ring current, 110 Milankovich, 130
tail region, 193 Milankovich Theory, 130
magnetotail, 103, 194, 205 Milky Way Galaxy, 7
magnitude Mir, 268
absolute, 9 mirror point, 108
apparent, 9 mixing length, 18, 156
MARIE, 233 MOID, 246, 247
Mars, 86, 187 Moon, 86
Ionosphere, 87 Exosphere, 254
magnetic fields, 232 moon
methane, 232 spaceweather, 230
paleomagnetic anomalies, 87 Mount Wilson classification, 61
space weather, 231 Mueller matrix, 26
Mars Global Surveyor, 87 MUF, 198, 211
INDEX 311

MUF maps, 241 solar activity, 148

ozone hole, 183
NASA, 3
navigation systems, 210 paleoclimatology, 123, 127
NBP, 69 Pallas, 245
NEAs, 246 Pallasites, 253
NEOs, 248 Pangea, 139
Neptune, 86 parallax, 8
Neupert effect, 73 Parker, 87
neural network, 120 Parker spiral, 88
neutral lines, 77 parsec, 8
neutrino detectors, 31 Pauli, 30
neutrino oscillations, 34 PCA, 212
neutrinos, 29 penumbra, 56
New Zealand, 182 penumbral waves, 62
NLTE, 65 perfect gas law, 104
NO, 164 Perihelion, 14
NO production, 147 periods of warmth, 130
NOAA, 61 Perseids, 253
NOAA Space weather scales, 235 PHA, 247
NODO, 266 PHAs, 246
non magnetized planets, 87 Phobos, 231
NSRL, 189 photoageing, 184
nuclear fission, 219 photochemical smog, 182
photoconjunctivitis, 185
Observatorio del Teide, 21 photokeratitis, 185
oceans photosynthesis, 126
transparency, 162 photovoltaics, 216, 217
Ohm’s law, 98 Piazzi, 245
Omega System, 210 Pic du Midi, 21
Oort cloud, 155, 256 PICARD, 95
opacity, 16 Pierre Auger Observatory, 166
open magnetic field lines, 87 Pioneer Venus, 3
open solar flux, 170 pipeline, 213
optical thickness, 48 pipeline currents, 237
orbital decay, 228 plages, 53
oscillations Planck function, 49
g-modes, 38 Planck’s law, 10
p-modes, 38 planetary magnetic fields, 86
theory, 41 planetary magnetospheres, 86
Oxygen plasma frequency, 28, 198
formation, 141 plasma wave propagation, 4
Ozone plasmapause, 194
tropospheric, 137 plasmasheet, 193
ozone, 134 plasmasphere, 194
destruction, 147, 164 plasmoid, 202
312 INDEX

plate tectonics, 142 Rayleigh number, 52

Plutonium, 219 Rayleigh problem, 52
PNP, 272 reconnection, 102
polar faculae, 63 red giant, 12
polar plumes, 79 regolith, 230
polarimeter, 26 REM, 176
polarization, 26 RGO, 61
circular, 26 RHESSI, 25
linear, 26 ring current, 110
polymers, 183 Rodinia, 139
pores, 57 Roentgen, 176
post T Tauri phase, 155 Rosa Ursinae, 55
potential field, 105, 106 Rossby number, 122
power spectra, 53 RSCVn stars, 120
power transmission grids, 213 RTG, 219
pp-chain, 17
precipitation, 169 SAA, 188
predictor, 119 SAGE, 32
pressure scale height, 18 satellite lifetime, 224
prominences, 76 satellite navigation, 237
pyrheliometer, 158 Saturn, 86
scale height, 105
quarks, 30 Scheiner, 55
quasibiennial oscillation, 149 Schwabe, 55
Quebec blackout, 4 scintillations, 210
sea surface temperatures, 161
R.B. Dunn Telescope, 21 SEC, 241
rad, 176 sedimentary rocks, 150, 161
radiation SEEDS, 242
skin responses, 188 SES, 212
radiation damage, 175, 177 SEU, 221
genetec effect, 180 shielding materials, 188
somatic effect, 179 shock wave, 83
radiation dose limits, 178 short wave fade, SWF, 212
radiation hazard, 238 SID, 212
radiation pressure, 84 SIDC, 2, 61
radiation shielding, 188 Sievert, 176
radiation sickness, 177 single event upsets, 221
radiation transport, 48 single events upsets, 237
radiative transfer equation, 49 Siple Station, 127
radio blackouts, 238 skin cancer, 184
radio bursts, 74 Skumanich law, 121
radio communication, 211 Skylab, 268
radio scintillations, 4 small-scale dynamo, 53
radio wave propagation, 197 SMEI, 243
Radioisotope th. generator, 219 SNO, 32
INDEX 313

SNU, 31 sound wave, 111

SODISM, 95 South Atlantic Anomaly, 222, 223
SOHO, 3, 23, 102 Spörer Minimum, 149
solar activity Spörer’s law, 113
proxies, 160 SPA, 212
solar activity prediction, 119 Space climate, 4
SOLAR B, 50 space debris, 261
solar cells, 216 space shuttle, 3
solar constant, 14 space weather, 1
solar cycle length, 162 space weather users, 4
solar diameter space weathering, 231
variation, 91 spacecraft
solar dynamo, 113 power sources, 218
solar eclipse, 78 spacesuit, 186
solar energetic particles, SEP, 167 SPE, 188, 220
solar flares, 71 specklegram, 20
solar indices, 208 SPF, 181
solar luminosity SPH, 271
change in time, 150 spiral motion, 194
solar magnetohydrodynamics, 97 Sputnik 1, 262
solar neutrinos, 30 sputtering, 155
solar oscillations, 36 SRAM, 223
solar panels, 218 SSC, 202
solar particle event, 220 SSN, 272
solar polarimetry, 26 SSS, 272
solar power systems, 217 SST, 21
solar proton event, 180 standard solar model, 33
solar protons, 164 Stars
solar radiation storms, 237 magnitudes, 9
solar radio astronomy, 28 properties, 8
solar radius variations, 161 spectral classes, 13
solar variability structure, 16
climate, 159 temperatures, 10
Solar Wind stars
chemical composition, 86 colors, 11
drop, 89 distances, 8
fast speed, 80 magnetic fields, 9
high speed, 90 masses, 9
magnetic fields, 87 radius, 9
radio communication, 84 rotation, 9
types, 87 starspots, 121
solar wind, 78, 84, 103, 124 STD, 241
somatic effects, 176 Stefan Boltzmann law, 10
SOON, 61 stellar activity, 120
sound speed, 33, 101 H and K line, 121
sound velocity, 193 indicators, 120
314 INDEX

stellar activity cycles, 122 SVT, 21

STEREO, 25 SWAN, 23, 85, 86
sterilization, 177 sympathetic flares, 75
Stokes vector, 26 synchrotron radiation, 109
stratopause, 123
stratosphere, 123 T Tauri phase, 12
Stromatolithes, 139 T Tauri stars, 121, 154
STSP, 23 tachocline, 44, 115, 118
subflares, 73 Taylor number, 52
substorm, 205 TEC, 210
Sudbury, 32 Tempel-Tuttle, 254
SUMER, 23 temperature markers, 129
Sun temperature minimum, 64
atmopshere, 47 teratogenic effects, 177
termination shock, 167
differential rotation, 55
THEMIS, 20, 21
distance, 14
thermal instability, 77
energy generation, 16
thermalized particles, 193
evolution, 12
thermocouples, 219
gravitational acceleration, 14
thermosphere, 124
interior, 47
heating, 143
internal rotation, 43
thermospheric temperature changes,
internal structure, 18
145
layers, 47
thermospheric winds, 198
luminosity, 15
thick target, 72
mass, 14
Thomson scattering, 81
mass loss rate, 87
thunderstorms, 149
pre main sequence, 150
time-distance helioseismology, 45
pre main sequence evolution, 12
Titan, 155
radius, 14
Torino impact scale, 247
Red giant, 12
torsional oscillations, 119
temperature, 15
transformer damage, 236
sunlight
transition height, 197
absorption, 125 transport equation, 48
penetration, 124 tree rings, 128, 161
sunspot number, 56 Trojans, 246
Sunspots tropopause, 123
classification, 59 troposphere, 123, 149
energy values, 62 tropospheric ozone, 137
fine structures, 58 tsunami, 250
magnetic fields, 59 Tunguska, 250
physics, 56 turbulence, 50
sunspots, 55 type II bursts, 75
observations, 55 type III bursts, 74
supergranulation, 68, 70 type IV bursts, 74
surface charging, 236
Sv, 176 UBV system, 11
INDEX 315

Ulysses, 3, 85 virial theorem, 16

umbra, 56 vitamin C, 182
UNEP, 184 vitamin E, 182
Uranus, 86 volcanic eruption, 129
UV von Braun, Werner, 188
wavelenght bands, 182 Vostok, 129
UV exposure Voyager 1, 167
effects on the Eye, 185 VTT, 21
effects on the skin, 184
immune system, 185 Whipple bumper, 272
UV radiation, 122, 137 white dwarfs, 12
materials, 183 white light flare, 56
UV radiation damage, 181 Wien law, 11
UV-B Wilson depression, 56
polymers, 183 Wind, 74
UV-index, 185 Wolf, 56
UVA, 137, 182 Wolf number, 209
UVB, 137, 182
UVC, 137, 182 X-point, 102
UVCS, 23 x-ray precursors, 75

vacuum solar telescope, 20 yellow spot, 185

vacuum telescope, 20 YOHKOH, 102
Van Allen belts, 194 Yohkoh, 180
Venus, 86 YSO, 155
Vesta, 245
Zeeman effect, 27, 56
VIRGO, 14, 23, 156
Zurich Classification, 60
 Astrophysics and Space Science Library

Volume 347: The Sun and Space Weather, by [Link].

Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-5603-6, February 2007

Volume 346: Exploring the Secrets of the Aurora, by S.-I. Akasofu.

Hardbound ISBN 0-387-45094-7, April 2007

Volume 345: Canonical Perturbation Theories: Degenerate Systems and

Resonance, by S. Ferraz-Mello.
Hardbound ISBN 0-387-38900-8, December 2006

Volume 344: Space Weather: Research towards Applications in Europe,

edited by J. Lilensten.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-5445-9, January 2007

Volume 343: Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy: Volume 7,

edited by A. Heck.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-5300-2, December 2006

Volume 342: The Astrophysics of Emission Line Stars, by T. Kogure and

K.-C. Leung.
Hardbound ISBN 0-387-34500-0, February 2007

Volume 341: Plasma Astrophysics, Part II: Reconnection and Flares, by

B.V. Somov.
Hardbound ISBN 0-387-34948-0, November 2006

Volume 340: Plasma Astrophysics, Part I: Fundamentals and Practice, by

B.V. Somov.
Hardbound ISBN 0-387-34916-2, 2006

Volume 339: Cosmic Ray Interactions, Propagation, and Acceleration in Space

Plasmas, edited by L. Dorman.
Hardbound ISBN 978-1-4020-5100-5, September 2006

Volume 338: Solar Journey: The Significance of Our Galactic Environment for the
Heliospere and Earth, edited by P. Frisch.
Hardbound ISBN 978-1-4020-4397-0, September 2006

Volume 337: Astrophysical Disks, edited by A. M. Fridman, M. Y. Marov,

I.G. Kovalenko.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-4347-3, June 2006
Volume 336: Scientific Detectors for Astronomy 2005, edited by J.E. Beletic,
J.W. Beletic, P. Amico.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-4329-5, December 2005

Volume 335: Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy 6, edited by A. Heck.

Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-4055-5, November 2005

Volume 334: The New Astronomy: Opening the Electromagnetic Window and
Expanding our View of Planet Earth, edited by W. Orchiston.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-3723-6, October 2005

Volume 333: Planet Mercury, by P. Clark and S. McKenna-Lawlor.

Hardbound ISBN 0-387-26358-6, November 2005

Volume 332: White Dwarfs: Cosmological and Galactic Probes, edited by

E.M. Sion, S. Vennes, H.L. Shipman.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-3693-0, September 2005

Volume 331: Ultraviolet Radiation in the Solar System, by M. Vázquez and A.

Hanslmeier.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-3726-0, November 2005

Volume 330: The Multinational History of Strasbourg Astronomical Observatory,

edited by A. Heck.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-3643-4, June 2005

Volume 329: Starbursts – From 30 Doradus to Lyman Break Galaxies, edited by

R. de Grijs, R.M. González Delgado.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-3538-1, May 2005

Volume 328: Comets, by J.A. Fernández.

Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-3490-3, July 2005

Volume 327: The Initial Mass Function 50 Years Later, edited by E. Corbelli,
F. Palla, H. Zinnecker.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-3406-7, June 2005

Volume 325: Kristian Birkeland – The First Space Scientist, by A. Egeland,

W.J. Burke.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-3293-5, April 2005
Volume 324: Cores to Clusters – Star Formation with next Generation
Telescopes, edited by M.S. Nanda Kumar, M. Tafalla, P. Caselli.
Hardbound ISBN 0-387-26322-5, October 2005

Volume 323: Recollections of Tucson Operations, by M.A. Gordon.

Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-3235-8, December 2004

Volume 322: Light Pollution Handbook, by K. Narisada, D. Schreuder

Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2665-X, November 2004

Volume 321: Nonequilibrium Phenomena in Plasmas, edited by A.S. Shrama,

P.K. Kaw.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-3108-4, December 2004

Volume 320: Solar Magnetic Phenomena, edited by A. Hanslmeier, A. Veronig, M.

Messerotti.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2961-6, December 2004

Volume 319: Penetrating Bars through Masks of Cosmic Dust, edited by

D.L. Block, I. Puerari, K.C. Freeman, R. Groess, E.K. Block.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2861-X, December 2004

Volume 318: Transfer of Polarized light in Planetary Atmospheres, by

J.W. Hovenier, C. van der Mee, J.W. Domke.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2855-5.
Softcover ISBN 1-4020-2889-X, November 2004

Volume 317: The Sun and the Heliosphere as an Integrated System, edited by
G. Poletto, S.T. Suess.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2830-X, November 2004

Volume 316: Civic Astronomy - Albany's Dudley Observatory, 1852-2002,

by G. Wise.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2677-3, October 2004

Volume 315: How does the Galaxy Work - A Galactic Tertulia with Don Cox and
Ron Reynolds, edited by E. J. Alfaro, E. Pérez, J. Franco
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2619-6, September 2004

Volume 314: Solar and Space Weather Radiophysics- Current Status and Future
Developments, edited by D.E. Gary and C.U. Keller
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2813-X, August 2004
Volume 313: Adventures in Order and Chaos, by G. Contopoulos.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-3039-8, January 2005

Volume 312: High-Velocity Clouds, edited by H. van Woerden, U. Schwarz,

B. Wakker.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2813-X, September 2004

Volume 311: The New ROSETTA Targets- Observations, Simulations and

Instrument Performances, edited by L. Colangeli, E. Mazzotta Epifani,
P. Palumbo.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2572-6, September 2004

Volume 310: Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy 5, edited by A. Heck

Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2570-X, September 2004

Volume 309: Soft X-ray Emission from Clusters of Galaxies and Related
Phenomena, edited by R. Lieu and J. Mittaz
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2563-7, September 2004

Volume 308: Supermassive Black Holes in the Distant Universe, edited by

A.J. Barger.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2470-3, August 2004

Volume 307: Polarization in Spectral Lines, by E. Landi Degl’Innocenti and

M. Landolfi.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2414-2, August 2004

Volume 306: Polytropes – Applications in Astrophysics and Related Fields, by

G.P. Horedt.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2350-2, September 2004

Volume 305: Astrobiology: Future Perspectives, edited by P. Ehrenfreund,

W.M. Irvine, T. Owen, L. Becker, J. Blank, J.R. Brucato, L. Colangeli,
S. Derenne, A. Dutrey, D. Despois, A. Lazcano, F. Robert
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2304-9, July 2004
Paperback ISBN 1-4020-2587-4, July 2004

Volume 304: Cosmic Gammy-ray Sources, edited by K.S. Cheng and G.E. Romero
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2255-7, September 2004

Volume 303: Cosmic rays in the Earth’s Atmosphere and Underground, by

L.I, Dorman.
Hardbound ISBN 1-4020-2071-6, August 2004
Volume 302:Stellar Collapse, edited by Chris L. Fryer
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1992-0, April 2004

Volume 301: Multiwavelength Cosmology, edited by Manolis Plionis

Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1971-8, March 2004

Volume 300:Scientific Detectors for Astronomy, edited by Paola Amico,

James W. Beletic, Jenna E. Beletic
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1788-X, February 2004

Volume 299: Open Issues in Local Star Fomation, edited by Jacques Lépine,
Jane Gregorio-Hetem.
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1755-3, December 2003

Volume 298: Stellar Astrophysics - A Tribute to Helmut A. Abt, edited by

K.S. Cheng, Kam Ching Leung, T.P. Li.
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1683-2, November 2003

Volume 297: Radiation Hazard in Space, by Leonty I. Miroshnichenko

Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1538-0, September 2003

Volume 296: Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy, volume 4, edited by

André Heck.
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1526-7, October 2003

Volume 295: Integrable Problems of Celestial Mechanics in Spaces of Constant

Curvature, by T.G. Vozmischeva.
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1521-6, October 2003

Volume 294: An Introduction to Plasma Astrophysics and

Magnetohydrodynamics, by Marcel Goossens
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1429-5, August 2003
Paperback, ISBN 1-4020-1433-3, August 2003

Volume 293: Physics of the Solar System, by Bruno Bertotti, Paolo Farinella,
David Vokrouhlický
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1428-7, August 2003
Paperback, ISBN 1-4020-1509-7, August 2003

Volume 292: Whatever Shines Should Be Observed, by

Susan M.P. McKenna-Lawlor.
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1424-4, September 2003
Volume 291: Dynamical Systems and Cosmology, by Alan Coley
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1403-1, November 2003

Volume 290: Astronomy Communication, edited by André Heck, Claus Madsen

Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1345-0, July 2003

Volume 287/8/9: The Future of Small Telescopes in the New Millennium, edited
by Terry D. Oswalt.
Hardbound Set only of 3 volumes, ISBN 1-4020-0951-8, July 2003

Volume 286: Searching the Heavens and the Earth: The History of Jesuit
Observatories, by Agustín Udías
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1189-X, October 2003

Volume 285: Information Handling in Astronomy - Historical Vistas, edited by

André Heck
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1178-4, March 2003

Volume 284: Light Pollution: The Global View, edited by Hugo E. Schwarz
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1174-1, April 2003

Volume 283: Mass-Losing Pulsating Stars and Their Circumstellar Matter,

edited by Y. Nakada, M. Honma, M. Seki
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1162-8, March 2003

Volume 282: Radio Recombination Lines, by M.A. Gordon, R.L. Sorochenko

Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1016-8, November 2002

Volume 281: The IGM/Galaxy Connection, edited by Jessica L. Rosenberg,

Mary E. Putman
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-1289-6, April 2003

Volume 280: Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy III, edited by André

Heck
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0812-0, September 2002

Volume 279: Plasma Astrophysics , Second Edition, by Arnold O. Benz

Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0695-0, July 2002

Volume 278: Exploring the Secrets of the Aurora, by Syun-Ichi Akasofu

Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0685-3, August 2002
Volume 277: The Sun and Space Weather, by Arnold Hanslmeier
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0684-5, July 2002

Volume 276: Modern Theoretical and Observational Cosmology, edited by

Manolis Plionis, Spiros Cotsakis
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0808-2, September 2002

Volume 275: History of Oriental Astronomy, edited by S.M. Razaullah Ansari

Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0657-8, December 2002

Volume 274: New Quests in Stellar Astrophysics: The Link Between Stars and
Cosmology, edited by Miguel Chávez, Alessandro Bressan, Alberto
Buzzoni,Divakara Mayya
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0644-6, June 2002

Volume 273: Lunar Gravimetry, by Rune Floberghagen

Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0544-X, May 2002

Volume 272:Merging Processes in Galaxy Clusters, edited by L. Feretti,

I.M. Gioia, G. Giovannini
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0531-8, May 2002

Volume 271: Astronomy-inspired Atomic and Molecular Physics, by A.R.P. Rau

Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0467-2, March 2002

Volume 270: Dayside and Polar Cap Aurora, by Per Even Sandholt,
Herbert C. Carlson, Alv Egeland
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0447-8, July 2002

Volume 269: Mechanics of Turbulence of Multicomponent Gases,

by Mikhail Ya. Marov, Aleksander V. Kolesnichenko
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0103-7, December 2001

Volume 268: Multielement System Design in Astronomy and Radio Science, by

Lazarus E. Kopilovich, Leonid G. Sodin
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0069-3, November 2001

Volume 267: The Nature of Unidentified Galactic High-Energy Gamma-Ray

Sources, edited by Alberto Carramiñana, Olaf Reimer, David J. Thompson
Hardbound, ISBN 1-4020-0010-3, October 2001
Volume 266: Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy II,
edited by André Heck
Hardbound, ISBN 0-7923-7172-0, October 2001

Volume 265: Post-AGB Objects as a Phase of Stellar Evolution,

edited by R. Szczerba, S.K. Górny
Hardbound, ISBN 0-7923-7145-3, July 2001

Volume 264: The Influence of Binaries on Stellar Population Studies,

edited by Dany Vanbeveren
Hardbound, ISBN 0-7923-7104-6, July 2001

Volume 262: Whistler Phenomena - Short Impulse Propagation,

by Csaba Ferencz, Orsolya E. Ferencz, Dániel Hamar, János Lichtenberger
Hardbound, ISBN 0-7923-6995-5, June 2001

Volume 261: Collisional Processes in the Solar System,

edited by Mikhail Ya. Marov, Hans Rickman
Hardbound, ISBN 0-7923-6946-7, May 2001

Volume 260: Solar Cosmic Rays, by Leonty I. Miroshnichenko

Hardbound, ISBN 0-7923-6928-9, May 2001

For further information about this book series we refer you to the following web site:
[Link]

To contact the Publishing Editor for new book proposals:

Dr. Harry (J.J.) Blom: [Link]@[Link]
Sonja Japenga: [Link]@[Link]