Researcher profile

I. Ugarte-Urra

I. Ugarte-Urra contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Solar physics in the 2020s: DKIST, parker solar probe, and solar orbiter as a multi-messenger constellation

The National Science Foundation (NSF) Daniel K. Inouye Solar Telescope (DKIST) is about to start operations at the summit of Haleakala (Hawaii). DKIST will join the early science phases of the NASA and ESA Parker Solar Probe and Solar Orbiter encounter missions. By combining in-situ measurements of the near-sun plasma environment and detail remote observations of multiple layers of the Sun, the three observatories form an unprecedented multi-messenger constellation to study the magnetic connectivity inside the solar system. This white paper outlines the synergistic science that this multi-messenger suite enables.

preprint2010arXiv

Science Objectives for an X-Ray Microcalorimeter Observing the Sun

We present the science case for a broadband X-ray imager with high-resolution spectroscopy, including simulations of X-ray spectral diagnostics of both active regions and solar flares. This is part of a trilogy of white papers discussing science, instrument (Bandler et al. 2010), and missions (Bookbinder et al. 2010) to exploit major advances recently made in transition-edge sensor (TES) detector technology that enable resolution better than 2 eV in an array that can handle high count rates. Combined with a modest X-ray mirror, this instrument would combine arcsecondscale imaging with high-resolution spectra over a field of view sufficiently large for the study of active regions and flares, enabling a wide range of studies such as the detection of microheating in active regions, ion-resolved velocity flows, and the presence of non-thermal electrons in hot plasmas. It would also enable more direct comparisons between solar and stellar soft X-ray spectra, a waveband in which (unusually) we currently have much better stellar data than we do of the Sun.

preprint2007arXiv

The Magnetic Topology of Coronal Mass Ejection sources

In an attempt to test current initiation models of coronal mass ejections (CMEs), with an emphasis on the magnetic breakout model, we inspect the magnetic topology of the sources of 26 CME events in the context of their chromospheric and coronal response in an interval of approximately nine hours around the eruption onset. First, we perform current-free (potential) extrapolations of photospheric magnetograms to retrieve the key topological ingredients, such as coronal magnetic null points. Then we compare the reconnection signatures observed in the high cadence and high spatial resolution of the Transition Region And Coronal Explorer (TRACE) images with the location of the relevant topological features. The comparison reveals that only seven events can be interpreted in terms of the breakout model, which requires a multi-polar topology with pre-eruption reconnection at a coronal null. We find, however, that a larger number of events (twelve) can not be interpreted in those terms. No magnetic null is found in six of them. Seven other cases remain difficult to interpret. We also show that there are no systematic differences between the CME speed and flare energies of events under different interpretations.