Paper detail

Thermodynamic fluctuations in solar photospheric three-dimensional convection simulations and observations

Numerical 3D radiative (M)HD simulations of solar convection are used to understand the physical properties of the solar photosphere. To validate this approach, it is important to check that no excessive thermodynamic fluctuations arise as a consequence of the partially incomplete treatment of radiative transfer. We investigate the realism of 3D convection simulations carried out with the Stagger code. We compared the characteristic properties of several spectral lines in solar disc centre observations with spectra synthesized from the simulations. We degraded the synthetic spectra to the spatial resolution of the observations using the continuum intensity distribution. We estimated the necessary spectral degradation by comparing atlas spectra with averaged observed spectra. In addition to deriving a set of line parameters directly, we used the SIR code to invert the spectra. Most of the line parameters from the observational data are matched well by the degraded simulation spectra. The inversions predict a macroturbulent velocity below 10 m/s for the simulation at full spatial resolution, whereas they yield ~< 1000 m/s at a spatial resolution of 0.3". The temperature fluctuations in the inversion of the degraded simulation do not exceed those from the observational data (of the order of 100-200 K rms for -2<log tau<-0.5). The comparison of line parameters in spatially averaged profiles with the averaged values of line parameters in spatially resolved profiles indicates a significant change of (average) line properties at a spatial scale between 0.13" and 0.3". Up to a spatial resolution of 0.3", we find no indications of the presence of excessive thermodynamic fluctuations in the 3D HD simulation. To definitely confirm that simulations without spatial degradation contain fully realistic thermodynamic fluctuations requires observations at even better spatial resolution.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 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.