Paper detail

How gas-dynamic flare models powered by Petschek reconnection differ from those with ad hoc energy sources

Aspects of solar flare dynamics, such as chromospheric evaporation and flare light-curves, have long been studied using one-dimensional models of plasma dynamics inside a static flare loop, subjected to some energy input. While extremely successful at explaining the observed characteristics of flares, all such models so far have specified energy input ad hoc, rather than deriving it self-consistently. There is broad consensus that flares are powered by magnetic energy released through reconnection. Recent work has generalized Petschek's basic reconnection scenario, topological change followed by field line retraction and shock heating, to permit its inclusion into a one-dimensional flare loop model. Here we compare the gas dynamics driven by retraction and shocking to those from more conventional static loop models energized by ad hoc source terms. We find significant differences during the first minute, when retraction leads to larger kinetic energies and produces higher densities at the loop top, while ad hoc heating tends to rarify the loop top. The loop-top density concentration is related to the slow magnetosonic shock, characteristic of Petschek's model, but persists beyond the retraction phase occurring in the outflow jet. This offers an explanation for observed loop-top sources of X-ray and EUV emission, with advantages over that provided by ad hoc heating scenarios. The cooling phases of the two models are, however, notably similar to one another, suggesting observations at that stage will yield little information on the nature of energy input.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.