Filename
stringlengths 22
64
| Paragraph
stringlengths 8
5.57k
|
|---|---|
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Modeling the turnover and higher-frequency parts of the radio spectrum ob- served near the flare peak using Ramaty code (Ramaty, 1969; Ramaty et al., 1994), provides a satisfactory fit (red in Figure 11b) with radio sources assumed to correspond to the observed HXR sources, B ≈ 1600 G in the strongest-field region [(−2700 G, > 3100 G) at the photosphere], δ ≈ 2.5 − 3.5, and the relative number of accelerated electrons of n(E>10 keV)/n0 ≈ 10−3 − 10−2. The lower- frequency microwaves were probably emitted by larger regions, as the spectra in Figure 11 imply. The major conclusion is that the observed long-millimeter emissions could originate only in very strong magnetic fields just above sunspot umbrae, in accordance with other data. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Figure 10. (a – f) NoRP total flux time profiles at 2 – 80 GHz, Stokes I. The vertical axes are in units of 103 sfu. Dotted lines show the hard X-ray emission at 300 – 800 keV according to RHESSI. (g) The turnover frequency of the microwave total flux spectrum according to NoRP data. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Figure 11. Total flux radio spectra computed from NoRP data (Stokes I, 103 sfu) before (a), during (b), and after the flare peak (c). Red: spectrum modeled with Ramaty code. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | structure of the CME, one estimates its sky-plane speed V ≈ 2000 km s−1. From similar considerations Gopalswamy et al. (2005) and Simnett (2006) obtained the speeds of 2100 and 2500 km s−1. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Another evaluation of Gopalswamy et al. (2005), that gave a record speed of 3242 km s−1, seems to be greatly overestimated. Combining the EIT data point at 06:36 with the LASCO one in a second-order fit implies a constant CME acceleration, although the acceleration is know to initially increase sharply, from zero to a very high value, and then to decline to zero (see, e.g., the review by D´emoulin and Vial, 1992; Uralov, Grechnev, and Hudson, 2005). The CME may even decelerate. Moreover, as Zhang and Dere (2006) found, the greater the acceleration is, the shorter the time it acts over. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | The identification of structures seen in LASCO and EIT images might be incorrect, especially the EIT loop and LASCO front. Frontal structures are rarely observed in EIT images as faint features indiscernible in non-subtracted frames (e.g., Dere et al., 1997; Uralov, Grechnev, and Hudson, 2005), whereas this expanding loop is distinct in raw EIT images. Frontal structures outrun all the other observable parts of the CME; thus, combining the LASCO and EIT data points one can greatly overestimate the CME speed. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | However, the CME speed can be independently estimated from the conspic- uous resemblance of halo CMEs in four homologous major events of 15 – 20 January. Each of them consisted of a bright structure rapidly expanding in a NW direction and a fainter, slower SE component. The speed ratios of CMEs on 15, 17, and 19 January were close, ≈ 3 − 4. NW and SE components were also present in the 20 January CME (Figure 12), and their shapes were similar to those of preceding CMEs. As discussed below, the speeds of the SE components of the 19-th (360 km s−1) and 20-th (485 km s−1) January CMEs were of the same order. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Figure 12. Homologous two-fold eruptions on 19 (top) and 20 (bottom) January shown by EIT 195 ˚A and LASCO/C2 & C3 difference images. Small orange disks denote AR 10720. Straight lines mark central position angles of the CMEs. Dashed circles in EIT images and thin white circles in LASCO images mark the limb. Larger gray circles denote the occulting disks. LASCO images of 20 January were heavily processed to reveal the CME. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | a,e,b,f looks impressive. Also very similar are disturbed regions eastward and southward of AR 10720, bright chains between NE bases of loops L1, L2 (L1 ′, L2 ′), and dimmings above the NW limb. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Figure 13. Height-time plots for NW and SE parts of the 19 (a) and 20 (b) January CMEs. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | the solar disk before crossing the SE limb; therefore, using a speed estimated by Simnett (2006), it began at 06:39. This is very close to the eruption in AR 10720, while no other activity was registered anywhere on the Sun between 06:30 and 07:15. Consequently, this was the opposite side of the same CME. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Then, assuming the same ratio of the speeds of the NW and SE parts in the analogous CMEs of 19 and 20 January, and neglecting a small displacement of the eruption center, one obtains a speed for the NW component on 20 January of ≈ 2075 km s−1, or 2585 km s−1 using the estimate of Simnett (2006). |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | The height-time plot for the NW component on 20 January in Figure 13b, for a speed of 2075 km s−1, has been drawn across the only measured point of ≈ 4.4R⊙ at 06:54 (LASCO/C2). Our way of estimating the CME speed is based on the linear fit of sparse data at large heights, which engenders large uncertainties in the initial parts, where acceleration occurs. Nevertheless, EIT data points should be briefly addressed. As noted, they likely correspond to some inner structures of CMEs; thus, they are expected to be beneath the height-time plots of the frontal structures. Since the initial acceleration is large, the initial parts of the height-time plots for the frontal structures must be curved upward, as Gopalswamy et al. (2005) showed in their Figure 5 (right). The proximity of EIT points to the linear-fit plots in Figure 13 for both 19 and 20 January CMEs therefore supports our estimates of CME speeds. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | The NW parts of both CMEs apparently moved faster in the sky plane and rapidly became faint in their expansion. This is one more point of similarity between them and explains why the NW component in the 20 January CME was not detectable in the strongly contaminated LASCO/C3 images. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Note that shock speeds estimated from drift rates of type II bursts observed by a few observatories8 in the analogous events of 15-th (1151 – 1900 km s−1), 17-th (1069 – 1578 km s−1), 19-th (1093 – 1368 km s−1), and 20-th (666 – 1300 km s−1) January systematically decrease, on average, in accordance with the CME speeds measured from LASCO images (see Table 1). Such estimates are strongly dependent on the coronal density model used and are therefore highly uncertain. Nevertheless, the shock speeds estimated for the three preceding CMEs are related to the measured speeds of the NW components by a factor of 0.4 – 0.6 (on average over observatories). This suggests a systematic factor to displace the estimated shock speeds with respect to the real ones. Thus, one might expect the CME speed on 20 January to be even slightly lower than that of the 19 January CME. In this case, our evaluation of the CME speed does not appear to be underestimated. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Our estimations are supported by data on the subsequent motion of the ICME. Measurements from the Solar Mass Ejection Imager data9 indicate a moderately high ICME speed of ≈ 1280 km s−1 at elongations of 30 – 60◦. This also corresponds to an average ICME speed between the Sun and Earth of ≈ 1200 km s−1, if a geomagnetic storm, which started at about 17 UT on 21 January, was due to its arrival at Earth. By extrapolating the “CME vs. ICME speed” curve shown by Owens and Cargill (2004, Fig. 3) plotted for the model with aero- dynamic drag (Vrˇsnak and Gopalswamy, 2002), one obtains an ICME speed of 1300 km s−1 corresponding to a CME speed of 2200 km s−1, while other existing models of ICME transit between the Sun and Earth provide lesser CME speeds. Pohjolainen et al. (2007) also addressed these issues and estimated a CME speed of 2500 km s−1 at 50R⊙, admitting that it may have reached about 3000 km s−1 in the interval of (3 − 50)R⊙ and acknowledging significant uncertainties. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | The CME speed on 20 January was high, but not extreme, and ranged between 2000 and 2600 km s−1 in the sky plane. According to all estimations, at 06:43, when hard emissions started, the CME frontal structure had reached > 1R⊙ above the solar surface, and the shock was even farther away. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | During 15 – 19 January, when AR 10720 was already in the western hemisphere, three other similar major events occurred in this active region. They included X class flares, strong microwave bursts, fast CMEs, and significant SEP fluxes. A comparison of all of these events holds the promise of identifying the origin of the SEPs. Table 1 lists their parameters as given in Solar Geophysical Data10 and the SOHO LASCO CME Catalog. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | The sky-plane CME speeds on 15 and 17 January were even higher than on 20 January, although AR 10720 was not far from the solar disk center (thus, their real speeds could well exceed the projected ones). However, the SEP fluxes from these events were less than the 20 January event, contrary to the idea that CME speed is a major factor in determining the SEP productivity of CME-driven shocks. On the other hand, the SEP fluxes in Table 1 roughly correlate with flare emissions, in particular, at 15.4 GHz. One might ascribe the fact that proton fluxes were weaker on 15 and 17 January to suboptimal (although western) position of the flare. However, for the 19 January CME erupting from W51, the longitude could not appreciably reduce the proton flux, while its speed was also high. The speeds of all these CMEs greatly exceeded the Alfv´en speed at > 1R⊙ above the solar surface (P. Riley, 2006, private communication), suggesting that the CME-driven shocks were strong enough to effectively accelerate particles. Seed populations from previous CMEs do not appear to be drastically different for 17 – 20 January events. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | The magnetic connection between the Sun and Earth probably played a sig- nificant role, but proton fluxes and microwaves appear to be closely related. The strongest fluxes of hard-spectrum protons near Earth were observed after the 20 January event, when the flare microwave emission was especially strong and hard. Note also that the proton flux was rather strong and hard in the 17 January event, when the microwave peak frequency exceeded 15.4 GHz, as well as in the 20 January event, unlike all others. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Our comparison also shows that the most distinctive feature of the 20 January event was not a large flux of medium-energy protons, but an extremely hard proton spectrum (see Table 1), which was a reason for the extreme GLE – at least, its large initial part. Flare emissions from the chromosphere and the lower corona are important indicators of the flare-acceleration of large quantities of energetic particles. The magnetic field strength and the parameters of flare emission appear sufficient to determine extreme nature of the 20 January 2005 proton event, the CME speed is not a determining factor. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Figure 14. The impulsive, leading parts of gamma-ray time profiles and GLE. a) SONG gamma-ray time profile of Eγ > 60 MeV emission smoothed over 60 points and the 2.22 MeV line emission recorded with the SONG pulse-height analyzer (gray). The hatched interval corresponds to the latest possible escape times of 1 – 7 GeV protons responsible for the GLE onset. b) GLE measured at the South Pole NM station in the linear (solid) and logarithmic (dotted) scales. Shading marks the arrival interval of the largest proton flux estimated from the maximum of the gamma-ray burst. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | As noted, the earliest onset and the largest effect of the 20 January 2005 GLE was recorded with the neutron monitor (NM) at the South Pole (Figure 14b). The first protons arrived at Earth at 06:48:30 UT±30 s (above 5σ level, see the logarithmic scale). They were unusually fast compared to most GLEs, sug- gesting a perfect magnetic connection. To determine the origin of high-energy (> 300 MeV) protons responsible for the GLE, we start with a comparison of GLE onset time at the South Pole with the temporal characteristics of the π0- decay emission (see Kuznetsov et al., 2005a, 2006a,b; Simnett, 2006; Share et al., 2006). As Figure 7 shows, the Eγ > 60 MeV gamma-rays are dominated by the π0-decay emission. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | To estimate the latest possible escape time of protons from/near the Sun, we consider their straight radial flight between the Sun and Earth by neglecting any delays, curvatures of their trajectory, and scattering, i.e., conditions extremely favorable for their prompt transport. The Sun – Earth distance was 0.984 AU on 20 January that gives the solar time scale, ST = UT − 489 s11. Plainaki et al. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | If the energy of the first particles recorded with the South Pole NM was much less, ≈ 1 GeV (v = 0.875c and a flight time 559 seconds), then their latest possible escape time was 06:39:11+30 s ST. Thus, allowing for all the uncertainties, the latest escape time of the first GLE particles was between 06:39:11−30 s ST for 1 GeV and 06:40:18+30 s ST for 7 GeV (a hatched box in Figure 14a). Even this latest-limit time interval is close to the sharp π0-decay burst which peaked at 06:46 – 06:47 UT, i.e., at 06:37:50 – 06:38:50 ST. This is the physical limit of the escape time of the first particles into interplanetary space. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | This conclusion of a common origin for the protons responsible for the π0- decay emission and for the leading GLE spike is reinforced by comparing their time profiles. These curves resemble each other; each contains an impulsive, leading part followed by a long, smoother tail. Their leading parts are much alike in their rise times, durations, and fast decays; despite broadening of the GLE due to transport effects. These facts imply that the processes, which accelerated the particles responsible for the π0-decay emission on one hand, and those re- sponsible for the leading GLE spike on the other hand, had proximate inceptions and comparable increments, acted over almost the same period, and then shifted from the impulsive mode to another, prolonged one, in a similar fashion. The time differences between these processes did not exceed the uncertainties, and several reasons exist to account for this difference. An assumption that these mechanisms were different, independent, distant, and operated with different populations of particles, seems to be physically improbable. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | The flux of particles at the South Pole reached its maximum while neutron monitors sensitive to the opposite direction of incident particles had not yet recorded the GLE. Thus, it had a 100% anisotropy, which indicates the direct arrival of particles from the Sun. The time profile recorded at the South Pole is therefore well connected with the injection function of solar cosmic rays influ- enced by transport effects. On the other hand, the π0-decay emission supplies an approximate representation of the injection function. The rising phase of the GLE is affected by dispersion due to differences in path lengths and velocities, while the fast decay phase is extended due to scattering and the arrival of parti- cles with large pitch angles. The time profiles of the π0-decay emission and the GLE at the South Pole (Figure 14b) show that transport effects broadened the GLE, but did not significantly change its shape with respect to the gamma-ray burst. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | If the first 7 GeV GLE protons were accelerated and promptly escaped during the first π0-decay sub-burst (06:43:40 UT or 06:35:31 ST) or the main burst (06:45:30 UT or 06:37:21 ST), then their real effective path length was between 1.30 and 1.65 of the Sun – Earth distance. This effective path length includes all transport effects, e.g., spiraling due to non-zero pitch-angles, diffusion time, etc. The π0-decay emission maximum (06:38 – 06:39 ST) corresponds to the largest number of high-energy protons in the solar atmosphere. The maximum of the GLE (≈ 06:53:00) corresponds to the arrival of most of the 1 – 15 GeV protons. Therefore, the arrival times of protons emitted from the Sun near the π0-decay emission maximum, with our estimated range of path lengths, should encompass the time of the GLE maximum. For protons of these energies with our estimated path lengths, arrival times range from 06:48:36 until 06:54:21 UT (shading in Figure 14b). Thus, the π0-decay emission and GLE closely correspond to each other in time, and our estimate of the path length of high-energy protons is reasonable. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | All these facts, considerations, and estimations demonstrate that the high- energy particles responsible for π0-decay gamma-rays on the Sun, and the ma- jority of those responsible for the leading GLE spike, belonged to the same pop- ulation, and they acquired a significant part of their energy from the same accel- eration process. No other realistic possibility appears to be consistent with all the facts. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | As shown in Section 2, the great event of 20 January was primed by the history of the active region, i.e., the convergence of opposite-polarity domains and large shear motions. These are known to be precursors of big flares, which indeed occurred on 15 – 20 January. A distinctive feature of the biggest flare on 20 January was its occurrence just above sunspot umbrae where the magnetic fields were extremely strong, ∼>3000 G at the photosphere. This also ensured a high CME speed (cf. ˇSvestka, 2001). Strong magnetic fields with a large stored non- potential component were most likely responsible for the outstanding features of this eruptive flare. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | With the flare onset, opposite-polarity magnetic fluxes started to interact. The magnetic flux in the southern sunspot of N-polarity was larger. In the course of this interaction (probably via magnetic reconnection) its lesser counterparts in the northern sunspot became exhausted, and the process involved counterparts from the remaining area of the S-polarity domain. This manifested in an apparent motion of the brightest emission away from the northern sunspot, whereas the emissions in the southern sunspot persisted. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | heating and HXR and gamma-ray continua as well as Hα and 1600 ˚A emissions. Heavier particles produced gamma-rays, in particular, in discrete lines (cf. Ryan 2000; Somov 1992, 2006). The heated chromospheric plasmas evaporated and filled closed configurations, forming the hot SXR-emitting loop-like structure and a cooler arcade later on. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | RHESSI shows the 2.22 MeV line source to be located on, and confined to, the northern ribbon where the coronal configuration was closed. This source was due to the precipitation of accelerated heavy particles with an energy of at least a few MeV, that had no direct access into a closed structure from outside. The hypothetical transport of external particles into the closed configuration could hardly proceed without other manifestations. Hence, these heavy particles could be accelerated only within the magnetic field of the active region, but not outside it. The absence of a detectable 2.22 MeV line from the southern source could be due to the suppression of ion precipitation in the sunspot umbra by mirroring because of much stronger field there than at the 2.22 MeV line centroid and nearby. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | The above items constitute a self-consistent picture of the flare that en- compasses observed phenomena and explains their particularities. This picture corresponds with many other observations and well-known concepts. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | The CME on 20 January was not distinctive to the other CMEs of 15 – 19 January from the same active region, and its speed, 2000 – 2600 km s−1, was not higher than some others. This is consistent with a conclusion of Reinard and Andrews (2006) that the only difference between SEP-related and non-SEP- related CMEs is their 1.36 higher average speed. Both slow and fast CMEs were present in both groups. On the other hand, comparison with other events from AR 10720 demonstrates that the parameters of the flare alone determine the extreme nature of the 20 January proton event. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Both the qualitative and quantitative features of the electromagnetic emissions of the 20 January 2005 flare are indicative of its proton productivity. West flares with strong non-impulsive radio bursts at frequencies ∼> 30 GHz are known to be followed by SEP events; the strongest ones produce GLEs (Croom, 1970; Cliver, 2006). On the other hand, intense SEP events usually occur if the microwave burst is strong. Therefore, the association of the largest GLE with the flare producing the highest-energy particle flux is not surprising. The huge radio burst on 20 January exceeds all the criteria for flare proton productivity established in 1970 – 1980s, including the well-known “U-like spectrum” (see Croom, 1971; Castelli et al., 1977; Akinyan, Fomichev, and Chertok, 1980a,b, 1981). |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | of the microwave burst, 30 GHz (Chertok, 1990), which provides a similar proton index. iii) From the parameters of the U-like spectrum (Bakshi and Barron, 1979) it is 1.185/ log10 (νpeak/νmin) ≈ 0.8. All three estimates are close to the observed integral spectral index of protons. With a strong estimated proton flux and very hard spectrum at several tens of MeV, microwave diagnostics point to a major proton flux at higher energies, i.e., an intense GLE. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | A glance at lists of radio bursts (e.g., the NoRP Event List13) and proton events confirms that strong microwave/millimeter emissions e.g., with a flux density of > 104 sfu at 35 GHz, and high turnover frequency are typical of most major SEP/GLE events, including some extreme proton events of recent years. However, there are exceptions, e.g., when strong proton fluxes near Earth were associated with rather weak bursts. At the same time, the magnetic connectivity between the Sun and Earth is certainly important. The relationship between strong microwave bursts and proton events (see also Cliver et al., 1989) needs further detailed analysis, which is currently in progress. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Advocating SEP acceleration by coronal shocks, Kahler (1982) ascribed the correlation between SEP fluxes and the parameters of microwave bursts to the “Big Flare Syndrome”, the general association between a flare’s energy release and the magnitude of its manifestations (also cf. ˇSvestka, 2001). This tendency is certainly present, but it could hardly ensure the correspondence between the spectra of protons near Earth and microwave bursts (Bakshi and Barron, 1979; Chertok, 1982, 1990). If the role of coronal shocks in the acceleration of particles is even more significant, then, as our results demonstrate, energy release in the source regions of eruptive events, manifesting in flare emissions, is an important factor in determining the eventual SEP outcome. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Powerful microwave/millimeter emissions with high turnover frequency, radi- ated by numerous electrons with a hard spectrum in strong magnetic fields, are typical of major proton flares, but not of all proton events. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Both observations and estimations do not obviously rule out the acceleration of particles in either the flare or the CME-driven shock. Indeed, if the CME started around 06:36, accelerated in ≈ 5 minutes (5 – 10 km s−2) up to a speed of 2000 – 2600 km s−1 (well in excess of the Alfv´en speed), and the piston-driven wave steepened into a shock in a similar time frame, then the appearance of the shock is roughly co-temporal with the π0-decay burst. At that time, the CME was at ≈ (2 − 3)R⊙, consistent with shock-acceleration. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | closely matched each other. Thus, all these emissions were generated within a compact closed structure above the active region, and the particles responsible for them were accelerated there also. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Cliver, Kahler, and Vestrand (1993) proposed that particles accelerated by a CME-driven shock could then precipitate back in dense layers of the solar atmo- sphere and produce gamma-rays. In this scenario, the 2.22 MeV line gamma-ray sources would be widespread (cf. Hurford et al., 2006a), dominating the “twin” dimmings near the ends of a post-eruptive arcade (cf. Figure 8b), because such dimmings are considered to be bases of an expanding flux rope, the body of a CME (Hudson and Webb, 1997; Zarro et al., 1999; Webb et al., 2000). However, the 2.22 MeV line source was compact, with its centroid located at a flare ribbon, far from the dimmings (see Figure 8a). The CME was located > 1R⊙ from the active region and so could not control the detailed course of the flare, nor could the even more distant shock front. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | The observed manifestations of accelerated electrons and protons match the standard picture of a flare. In this picture, particles accelerated in the corona stream down along magnetic field lines. They then precipitate in dense layers and heat them. This causes emissions from flare ribbons. It also causes chro- mospheric evaporation to fill closed coronal structures and produce soft X-rays (e.g., Somov, 1992; 2006). Our analysis does not address the escape of particles into interplanetary space, which could be due to drifts (e.g., in electric fields) of particles accelerated in the flare region to open magnetic field lines, which are known to be always present in active regions (e.g., Fisk and Zurbuchen, 2006). As Cane, Erickson, and Prestage (2002) showed, open magnetic fields between the low corona and the Earth do exist, ensuring the transport of electrons and protons of various energies. Note also the favorable longitude and proximity to the ecliptic plane (≈ 9◦) of the active region on 20 January. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | In Section 3 we established that the high-energy particles responsible for the π0-decay gamma-rays and the majority of those responsible for the leading spike of the GLE belonged to the same population and were accelerated by the same mechanism. As shown in Section 2.2.1, the time profiles of the π0-decay emis- sion and lower-energy emissions (in particular, electron bremsstrahlung) were close in time and roughly similar, but still different. These dissimilarities might mean that these emissions were generated by either (i) two different particle components (G.H. Share et al., 2007, private communication) or (ii) the same population with variable parameters. In the former case, a reason could be (a) an extra process, which started to operate in the flare region slightly later and accelerated heavy particles up to > 300 MeV, and (b) another source located at a distance, including a CME-driven shock. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | around 06:46, as did the microwave burst. At that time, the flare was located in the strongest magnetic fields (Sections 2.2.3, 2.4), and the energy, and number, of accelerated particles reached their maxima. Thus, the peak time of the π0- decay burst is consistent with a flare origin, where it would be expected to start later than the lower-energy emissions, i.e., when the energy release rate became high enough. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Correspondence between the parameters of the (flare originating) microwave/ millimeter burst with those of the protons responsible for the initial, impulsive part of the SEP/GLE, including such a delicate characteristic as a hard energy spectrum of protons (Section 4.2), supports flare-related acceleration for this part of the SEP/GLE. Only the flare, not the CME, had extreme characteristics comparable with those of the 20 January 2005 proton event. Note that from a similar analysis of a few other events, Li et al. (2007a,b) also concluded that the particles responsible for the impulsive, initial component of GLEs were accelerated in flare current sheets. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Our results favor acceleration of protons just in the flare. On the other hand, the available data do not permit us to determine if the GLE-productive particles acquired energy up to ∼> 7 GeV in the flare, or by an additional acceleration mechanism, e.g., by a CME-driven shock (see Desai et al., 2006). A posterior extra shock-acceleration is favored if the particles constituting a seed population (see Tylka et al., 2005) collide with its convex front from outside with a small angle. However, this mechanism does not appear to be efficient, if particles collide with it from inside, which was most likely the case during the main flare phase of the 20 January 2005 event. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | the electron charge and mass; τcoll ≈ λi/v0. With a density in the SXR-emitting loop-like structure of ≈ 1011 cm−3, τ ≈ 80 minutes for 300 MeV protons and τ ≈ 4 minutes for 30 MeV protons are close to the observed parameters. On the other hand, with n < 109 cm−3 expected in the corona at heights > 1R⊙, the collision time for 300 MeV protons is very long, τ > 120 hours. Thus, the observed decay times of gamma-ray emissions appear to be consistent with the trapping of protons in the observed flare loop. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | The major conclusion drawn from analyses of the SEP composition, based on observations during this SEP event15, is its correspondence to “gradual events”, which are believed to be due to acceleration in CME-driven shocks (Reames, 1995), rather than in a flare. However, Labrador et al. (2005) inferred an accel- eration time of < 90 s, which appears to be consistent with the time profiles of gamma-ray emissions. R.A. Mewaldt (2007, private communication) found that the measured variations of the Fe/O ratio might be indicative of an impulsive flare-related component along with a longer gradual one, as suggested by Cane et al. (2003, 2006). However, as Ng, Reames, and Tylka (2003) showed, initial enhancements of the Fe/O ratio can be due to transport effects. Distinguishing all these effects does not seem to be a simple task. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Thus, the situation with the SEP composition is not obvious. Analyses of the corresponding data (especially on such short timescales as the leading SEP/GLE spike), as well as related issues, probably require the consideration of several com- plex factors. A simplified glance at these data might lead to mistaken conclusions about the origin of SEPs. Furthermore, as Somov and Chertok (1996)16 pointed out, the observed properties of SEPs might be dependent on plasma parameters at the acceleration site. In particular, if the acceleration of ions occurs in a low- density region above the flare site, relatively high in the corona, then the number of Coulomb collisions might be too small to ensure their Maxwellian distribution, which is inherent in the temperature of the acceleration site. As a result, these SEPs could retain properties typical of background coronal conditions. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | To determine if the probable contribution from the CME-driven shock to the acceleration of heavier ions was as significant as the contribution from the flare-accelerated protons to the leading spike of the GLE, a comparison should be made with other events, especially with those from the same active region. In this comparison, not only the SEP composition, but also total fluxes are important. Otherwise, there is no apparent reason to relate the outstanding properties of the 20 January 2005 event with the parameters of the CME only. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | In considering the extreme proton event of 20 January 2005, we first carried out a comprehensive analysis of the flare, based on multi-spectral observations, and second, investigated the origin of the energetic protons corresponding to the leading SEP/GLE spike. Our conclusions regarding the flare are as follows. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Regarding the SEP/GLE aspect of this event, we first note that there is no clear observational evidence to state with certainty if it was due to the flare or the CME-driven shock. However, our analysis favors the flare region as the probable site of acceleration of the particles responsible for the leading SEP/GLE spike, rather than the shock ahead of the CME, as supported by the following arguments. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | The 20 January 2005 event represents a distinct class of extreme solar flares. They amount to a small percentage of all flares, but probably constitute the majority of events which can be proton-rich under favorable Sun – Earth con- nections. The expected features of these flares are: occurrence near or above sunspot umbrae in strong magnetic fields; powerful bursts in microwaves; and at long millimeter wavelengths. These events are very dangerous due to a high probability of strong proton fluxes with hard spectra. This fact highlights the importance of measuring strong magnetic fields in solar active regions, as well as patrol observations of the total radio flux at long millimeter wavelengths, for the forecast and diagnosis of major proton events. Currently, only NoRP observations at 35 and 80 GHz are available from ≈ 22 till ≈ 08 UT. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Acknowledgements We appreciate discussions and assistance of A.J. Tylka, G.H. Share, G.J. Hurford, M.A. Livshits, G.V. Rudenko, I.I. Myshyakov, S.A. Bogachev, A.B. Struminsky, S.M. White, B.R. Dennis, and A.K. Tolbert. We are grateful to G.H. Share and G.J. Hurford for supplying us with preliminary RHESSI data. We thank the anonymous reviewers for useful remarks. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | The CME catalog is generated and maintained at the CDAW Data Center by NASA and The Catholic University of America in cooperation with the Naval Research Laboratory. We thank the teams of EIT, LASCO, MDI on SOHO (ESA & NASA); the USAF RSTN Network, and the GOES satellites. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | The study is supported by the Russian Foundation of Basic Research (05- 02-17487, 06-02-16106, 06-02-16239, 06-02-16295, and 07-02-00101), the Federal Ministry of Education and Science (8499.2006.2, 4573.2008.2, and UR.02.02.509/ 05-1), and the programs of the Russian Academy of Sciences “Solar Activity and Physical Processes in the Sun-Earth System” and “Plasma Heliophysics”. VG is indebted to the SHINE and the US National Science Foundation for providing support to attend the 2007 Workshop. Discussions held there greatly helped in illuminating different aspects of problems in question. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Birn, J., Gosling, J. T., Hesse, M., Forbes, T. G., Priest, E. R.: 2000, Astrophys. J. 541, 1078. Brueckner, G. E, Howard, R. A., Koomen, M. J., Korendyke, C. M., Michels, D. J., Moses, J. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Cane, H. V., Erickson, W. C., Prestage, N. P.: 2002, J. Geophys. Res. 107, A101315. Cane, H. V., von Rosenvinge, T. T., Cohen, C. M. S., Mewaldt, R. A.: 2003, Geophys. Res. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Cane, H. V., Mewaldt, R. A., Cohen, C. M. S., von Rosenvinge, T. T.: 2006, J. Geophys. Res. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | D´emoulin, P., Vial, J. C.: 1992, Solar Phys. 141, 289. Dere, K. P., Brueckner, G. E., Howard, R. A., Koomen, M. J., Korendyke, C. M., Kreplin, R. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Didkovsky, L. V., Judge, D. L., Jones, A. R., Rhodes, E. J., Jr., Gurman, J. B.: 2006, Astron. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Kahler, S. W.: 1982, J. Geophys. Res. 87, 3439. Kahler, S. W.: 2001, In: Song, P., Singer, H.J., Siscoe, G.L. (eds.), Space Weather, Geophys. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Kuznetsov, S., Kurt, V., Myagkova, I., Yushkov, B., Kudela, K., Belov, A., Caroubalos, C., Hilaris, A., Mavromichalaki, H., Moussas, X., Preka-Papadema, P.: 2005b, Int. J. Modern Phys. A, 20, 6705. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Neupert, W. M.: 1968, Astrophys. J. 153, L59. Ng, C. K., Reames, D. V., Tylka, A. J.: 2003, Astrophys. J. 591, 461. Oraevsky, V. N., Sobelman, I. I.: 2002, Astron. Lett. 28, 401. Owens, M., Cargill, P.: 2004, Ann. Geophys. 22, 661. Plainaki, C., Belov, A., Eroshenko, E., Mavromichalaki, H., Yanke, V.: 2007, J. Geophys. Res. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | A. J., Lin, R. P.: 2006, AAS SPD Meeting, Abstract #28.06. Silva, A. V. R., Wang, H., Gary, D. E.: 2000, Astrophys. J. 545, 1116. Simnett, G. M.: 2006, Astron. Astrophys. 445, 715. Slemzin, V., Kuzin, S., Bogachev, S.: 2005, In: Danesy, D., Poedts, S., De Groof, A., Andries, J. (eds.), The Dynamic Sun: Challenges for Theory and Observations, Proc. 11th European Solar Phys. Meeting, ESA SP-600, 166. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Somov, B. V.: 2006, Solar System Res. 40, 85. Somov, B. V., Bogachev, S. A.: 2003, Astron. Let. 29, 621. Su, Y. N., Golub, L., Van Ballegooijen, A. A., Gross, M.: 2006, Solar Phys. 236, 325. ˇSvestka, Z.: 2001, Space Sci Rev. 95, 135. Torii, C., Tsukiji, Y., Kobayashi, S., Yoshimi, N., Tanaka, H., Enome, S.: 1979, Proc. Res. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | Tylka, A. J., Cohen, C. M. S., Dietrich, W. F., Lee, M. A., Maclennan, C. G., Mewaldt, R. |
Processed_An_Extreme_Solar_Event_of_20_January_2005:_Propert.txt | White, S. M., Thomas, R. J., Schwartz, R. A.: 2005, Solar Phys. 227, 231. Zarro, D. M., Sterling, A. S., Thompson, B. J., Hudson, H. S., Nitta, N.: 1999, Astrophys. J. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | Abstract—1 In this paper, we have studied the energy efficiency of cooperative networks operating in either the fixed Amplify- and-Forward (AF) or the selective Decode-and-Forward (DF) mode. We consider the optimization of the M -ary quadrature amplitude modulation (MQAM) constellation size to minimize the bit energy consumption under given bit error rate (BER) constraints. In the computation of the energy expenditure, the circuit, transmission, and retransmission energies are taken into account. The link reliabilities and retransmission probabilities are determined through the outage probabilities under the Rayleigh fading assumption. Several interesting observations with practical implications are made. For instance, it is seen that while large constellations are preferred at small transmission distances, constellation size should be decreased as the distance increases. Moreover, the cooperative gain is computed to compare direct transmission and cooperative transmission. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | In wireless networks, the introduction of relaying provides higher link reliability when the source-destination link suffers severe fading. Among different cooperative strategies, the fixed (AF) and the selective (DF) cooperative techniques are often employed in cooperative networks. In the fixed AF, the relay doesn’t perform decoding on received signals and always forwards the amplified received signals to the destination. The selective DF model differs from the fixed AF in that it will perform Decode-and-Forward only if its received signal-to- noise ratio (SNR) γs,r from the source is greater than a thresh- old γth. By comparison, the fixed AF is easy to implement while the selective DF may be more complicated on hardware but performs better in terms of bandwidth efficiency. In this paper, we consider both models and propose maximum ratio combining (MRC) and non-MRC decoding at the destination and analyze their energy efficiencies. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | consumption normalized by the transmission rate, i.e., energy per bit, rather than total power consumption should be used in order to provide fair comparison between different modulation schemes. In addition, energy expended in retransmissions, together with circuit energy consumption, should be included in the energy efficiency analysis for more accurate results. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | source-destination (S-D) link, the source-relay (S-R) link and the relay-destination (R-D) link. Moreover, white Gaussian noise with zero mean and variance N0 is assumed to be added to the received signals at receivers. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | q where Pt is the transmit power of the source. In the above β s,d denote the path loss components s,r and d− formulation, d− as functions of the S-D distance ds,d, the S-R distance ds,r and the path loss exponent β. hs,r and hs,d are channel fading coefficients between S-R and S-D, respectively, modeled as zero-mean circularly symmetric Gaussian complex random variables. ns,d and ns,r are the additive Gaussian noise at the destination and relay, respectively. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | the amplifier power αPt, the circuit power Pct at the source transmitter and Pcr at the destination receiver and the transient power Ptr. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | We can similarly calculate the average bit energy consump- tion Ea2 and the cooperative gain2 in the fixed AF with MRC similarly as in (16) and (17) in the AF without MRC. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | increasing S-D distance. However, at small distances such as 5m and 25m, whatever the constellation size is, the link reliability is always very high. So, large constellation size is always preferred because it consumes less energy in a single transmission. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | It is immediately seen, as expected, that the MRC model outperforms the non-MRC model especially at large b and S-D distances. However, at small distances, these 2 models achieve almost the same performance. In such cases, simpler non-MRC techniques can be preferred. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | In Fig. 3, the bit energy is plotted as a function of S-D distance at a specific b ∈ [2, 4, 6, 8, 10]. We see that while large constellation sizes are performing well at small distances, small constellations should be preferred when the distance gets large. Again, the MRC model outperforms the non-MRC model in terms of lower bit energy consumption. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | energy overhead, counteracting its energy saving from added reliability and making it less efficient. On the other hand, at larger b and distances, the energy saving from less number of retransmissions by improved reliability dominates so that the system achieves very high cooperative gains. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | Now, we fix b = 10 and move the location of the relay either closer to the source or closer to the destination, indicated by a normalized location index from 0.1 to 0.9, where 0.5 means the relay is located right in the middle, in order to see the impact on cooperative gain. In Fig. 5, when the S-D distance is 25m, both non-MRC and MRC achieve the same gain, almost always less than 1. At higher transmission distances such as 75m and 100m, very high gains show that the system significantly benefits from the cooperative transmission and MRC always outperforms non-MRC. Also, we observe that the maximal cooperative gain is achieved when the relay is located in exactly the middle of the source and the destination. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | exclusive working states in the DF: 1. S-D link successful; 2. both S-D link and S-R link in outage; 3. S-D link in outage, but S-R and R-D links successful; 4. S-D link and R-D in outage, but S-R link successful. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | psuccess4 = p(γs,d ≥ γth) + p(γs,d < γth)p(γs,r ≥ γth)p(γs,d + γr,d ≥ γth). |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | We can substitute (27), (28) and (35) into (33) and similarly calculate the average bit energy consumption Ea4 and the cooperative gain4 in the DF with MRC as in (30), (31) in the case of DF without MRC. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | the bit energy consumption with re- spect to b ∈ [2, 4, 6, 8, 10] at a specific distance d ∈ [5m, 25m, 50m, 75m, 100m]. Results similar to those already identified in the fixed AF model are observed. At small S- D distances, the highest constellation should be preferred. The optimal constellation size gets smaller as the distance increases. It is noticed that MRC in the DF model provides only very limited improvement in energy efficiency compared with non-MRC. Only at points with large b and S-D distances, MRC curves show better energy efficiency over non-MRC. However, compared with Fig. 2 in the fixed AF, the bit energy consumption on these points has been significantly decreased in the selective DF model. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | Very close performance of MRC and non-MRC in the DF models is also illustrated in the following figures. In Fig. 7, at a given b, the bit energy consumption is increasing as the S-D distance increases, due to the increasing system outage. But, the bit energy consumption when b = 10 at large distance has been significantly decreased in the selective DF models compared with Fig. 3 in the fixed AF. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | achieve very high cooperative gains as the distance increases. Compared with Fig. 4, the DF models are more energy efficient than the AF models, especially at large b and S-D distance. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | In Fig. 9, we have fixed b = 10. When the S-D distance is 25m in both MRC and non-MRC, changing the relay location doesn’t affect the gain and direct transmission is more energy efficient because of gain < 1. At higher S-D distances such as 75m and 100m, we observe that the system benefits from the cooperative transmission and achieves relatively high cooperative gains. MRC provides higher gain when the relay is closer to the source. As the relay moves closer to the destination, both MRC and non-MRC models tend to achieve the same performance. The maximal cooperative gain is again achieved when the relay is located right in the middle. |
Processed_Energy_Efficiency_Analysis_in_Amplify-and-Forward_.txt | AF and DF, and the optimal constellation sizes are identified. Several interesting results are observed: 1) in fixed AF, MRC outperforms non-MRC in terms of achieving less bit energy and higher cooperative gain; 2) in selective DF, MRC doesn’t show much improvement on energy efficiency over non-MRC; 3) at small constellation sizes, direct transmission is more energy efficient in both models, while at large constellation sizes, the system can achieve significant cooperative gains as distance increases; 4) the optimal relay location is the middle between the source and the destination; 5) the selective DF is more energy efficient than the fixed AF, especially at large constellation size and transmission distance. |
Processed_A_radio_survey_of_supersoft,_persistent_and_transi.txt | We present a radio survey of X-ray sources in the Large and Small Magellanic clouds with the Australia Telescope Compact Array at 6.3 and 3.5 cm. Specifically, we have observed the fields of five LMC and two SMC supersoft X-ray sources, the X-ray binaries LMC X-1, X-2, X-3 & X-4, the X-ray transient Nova SMC 1992, and the soft gamma-ray repeater SGR 0525-66. None of the targets are detected as point sources at their catalogued positions. In particular, the proposed supersoft jet source RXJ 0513-69 is not detected, placing constraints on its radio luminosity compared to Galactic jet sources. Limits on emission from the black hole candidate systems LMC X-1 and X-3 are consistent with the radio behaviour of persistent Galactic black hole X-ray binaries, and a previous possible radio detection of LMC X-1 is found to almost certainly be due to nearby field sources. The SNR N49 in the field of SGR 0525-66 is mapped at higher resolution than previously, but there is still no evidence for any enhanced emission or disruption of the SNR at the location of the X-ray source. |
Processed_A_radio_survey_of_supersoft,_persistent_and_transi.txt | Targets for our survey included most of the Magellanic cloud supersoft X-ray sources, several bright LMC X-ray bi- naries and other transient systems. |
Processed_A_radio_survey_of_supersoft,_persistent_and_transi.txt | The prototypical supersoft X-ray sources, CAL 83 and CAL 87, were first detected in the Large Magellanic Cloud in 1979-1980 with the Einstein X-ray Observatory (Long, Helfand & Grabelsky, 1981), although later ROSAT obser- vations have considerably enlarged the group (Tr¨umper et al. 1991). The defining characteristics of the supersoft sources are their extremely low X-ray energies and high bolometric −1 and Tbb ∼ tens luminosities (typically Lbol ∼ 1038 erg s of eV, where Tbb is the blackbody temperature). |
Processed_A_radio_survey_of_supersoft,_persistent_and_transi.txt | currently known systems are therefore optically faint extra- galactic objects, predominantly in the Magellanic clouds and M31 (see e.g. Kahabka & Tr¨umper 1996 for a review). Al- though the term “supersoft source” has been previously ap- plied to a range of objects such as planetary nebula nuclei (Wang 1991) and PG 1159 stars (Cowley et al. 1995), we shall consider here only those objects exhibiting the charac- teristics of X-ray binaries (e.g. Crampton et al. 1987; Smale et al. 1988; Pakull et al. 1988; Cowley et al. 1990; Pakull et al. 1993). |
Processed_A_radio_survey_of_supersoft,_persistent_and_transi.txt | considered here, supersoft objects RXJ 0513-69 is unique in being the only SSS to exhibit opti- cal jets (Pakull 1994, private communication; Cowley et al. 1996). The source is an X-ray transient which was discovered in outburst during the ROSAT All Sky Survey (Schaeidt, Hasinger & Tr¨umper 1993). The optical spectrum (Pakull et al. 1993; Cowley et al. 1993; Crampton et al. 1996; Southwell et al. 1996) is similar to that of CAL 83, and the two sources have comparable optical magnitudes (V ∼ 16 − 17 mag). However, only RXJ 0513-69 exhibits Doppler-shifted com- ponents of Heii 4686 and Hβ, with velocities characteristic of the escape speed of a white dwarf (Southwell et al. 1996), implying the presence of a highly-collimated outflow. How- ever, despite the drawing of analogies with SS433, neither this source nor any other supersoft X-ray binary have ever been detected at radio wavelengths. |
Processed_A_radio_survey_of_supersoft,_persistent_and_transi.txt | One of the LMC sources considered here, RX J0550-71, does not yet have an optical counterpart, hence it should be noted that the nature of this object is particularly uncertain. |
Processed_A_radio_survey_of_supersoft,_persistent_and_transi.txt | Radio emission has been detected from approximately 20% of Galactic X-ray binary systems, comprising a neutron star or black hole accreting matter from a more normal companion (e.g. Hjellming & Han 1995). In several cases the emission has been resolved by high-resolution observa- tions into jet-like structures reminiscent of outflows from AGN, and relativistic or near-relativistic velocities inferred (e.g. Fender, Bell Burnell & Waltman 1997 and references therein). It now seems that black hole systems are particu- larly likely sources of radio emission, whether transient or persistent – in either case the characteristics of the radio emission are mirrored in those of the X-ray emission. |
Processed_A_radio_survey_of_supersoft,_persistent_and_transi.txt | LMC X-1 and LMC X-3, two very luminous black hole candidates may be included in the class of persistent X-ray sources. At a distance of 55 kpc, we would only expect to observe a flux density of a few tens of µJy, by analogy with their Galactic cousins. However, lack of knowledge of their true nature and the chance of catching a rare flaring state makes the observations worthwhile. In the case of LMC X-1 this is particularly so, as Spencer et al. (1997) report the detection of a significant (∼ 80 mJy) flux from the field of this source. |
Processed_A_radio_survey_of_supersoft,_persistent_and_transi.txt | LMC X-4 is an X-ray pulsar system, containing a highly magnetised accreting neutron star. Such systems in our Galaxy are found not to be radio-emitters (Fender et al. 1997). LMC X-2 is a low-mass X-ray binary system thought to contain a neutron star. While we considered both these sources far less likely to be detected than LMC X-1 or LMC X-3, they were included in the survey for completeness. |
Processed_A_radio_survey_of_supersoft,_persistent_and_transi.txt | Nova SMC 1992 (Clark, Remillard & Woo 1996) was discovered in archival ROSAT observations of 1992 Oct 1- 2 as an extremely bright transient X-ray source. Clark et al. (1996) proposed a nearby 14th magnitude blue star as the optical counterpart, and suggested the source may be the first high-mass black hole X-ray nova detected. While previous X-ray ‘novae’ have often been very bright radio sources (see above), they are also generally associated with low-mass companion stars and the nature of this system remains uncertain. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.