Paper detail

The power spectrum of solar convection flows from high-resolution observations and 3D simulations

We compare Fourier spectra of photospheric velocity fields from very high resolution IMaX observations to those from recent 3D numerical magnetoconvection models. We carry out a proper comparison by synthesizing spectral lines from the numerical models and then applying to them the adequate residual instrumental degradation that affects the observational data. Also, the validity of the usual observational proxies is tested by obtaining synthetic observations from the numerical boxes and comparing the velocity proxies to the actual velocity values from the numerical grid. For the observations, data from the SUNRISE/IMaX instrument with about 120 km spatial resolution are used, thus allowing the calculation of observational Fourier spectra well into the subgranular range. For the simulations, we use four series of runs obtained with the STAGGER code and synthesize the IMaX spectral line (FeI 5250.2 A) from them. Proxies for the velocity field are obtained via Dopplergrams (vertical component) and local correlation tracking (horizontal component). A very good match between observational and simulated Fourier power spectra is obtained for the vertical velocity data for scales between 200 km and 6 Mm. Instead, a clear vertical shift is obtained when the synthetic observations are not degraded. The match for the horizontal velocity data is much less impressive because of the inaccuracies of the LCT procedure. Concerning the internal comparison of the direct velocity values of the numerical boxes with those from the synthetic observations, a high correlation (0.96) is obtained for the vertical component when using the velocity values on the log($tau_{500}$) = -1 surface in the box. The corresponding Fourier spectra are near each other. A lower maximum correlation (0.5) is reached (at $tau_{500}$ = 1) for the horizontal velocities as a result of the coarseness of the LCT procedure.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.