Paper detail

Departure of high temperature iron lines from the equilibrium state in flaring solar plasmas

The aim of this study is to clarify if the assumption of ionization equilibrium and a Maxwellian electron energy distribution is valid in flaring solar plasmas. We analyze the 2014 December 20 X1.8 flare, in which the \ion{Fe}{xxi} 187~Å, \ion{Fe}{xxii} 253~Å, \ion{Fe}{xxiii} 263~Å and \ion{Fe}{xxiv} 255~Å emission lines were simultaneously observed by the EUV Imaging Spectrometer onboard the Hinode satellite. Intensity ratios among these high temperature Fe lines are compared and departures from isothermal conditions and ionization equilibrium examined. Temperatures derived from intensity ratios involving these four lines show significant discrepancies at the flare footpoints in the impulsive phase, and at the looptop in the gradual phase. Among these, the temperature derived from the \ion{Fe}{xxii}/\ion{Fe}{xxiv} intensity ratio is the lowest, which cannot be explained if we assume a Maxwellian electron distribution and ionization equilibrium, even in the case of a multi-thermal structure. This result suggests that the assumption of ionization equilibrium and/or a Maxwellian electron energy distribution can be violated in evaporating solar plasma around 10~MK.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.