Showing posts with label Bessel functions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bessel functions. Show all posts

Monday, October 2, 2017

Math Revisited: Bessel Functions


Plot of Bessel function of the first kind, Jα(x), for integer orders α = 0, 1, 2.

Among the most important special functions is the Bessel function. In the field of solar physics, for example, it's of inestimable importance in the analysis of solar magnetic fields and their evolution. One very key equation is the Helmholtz, viz.

1/ r  [/ r  ( r  / r)] B  +  (a)2 B = 0

where r is the radial coordinate, B  the magnetic field intensity, and a a quantity called the "force free parameter". Then the axially symmetric (i.e.- in cylindrical coordinates r, z, q) Bessel function solutions are

B z (r)    =   Bo Jo(a r)  

B q (r)  =  Bo J1(ar)


where the axial (top) and azimuthal magnetic field components are given, respectively, and  Jo(a r) is a Bessel function of the first kind, order zero and J1(ar) is a Bessel function of the first kind, order unity. (See graphs at the top for Bessel functions of the orders 0, 1 and 2).

The Bessel functions are mathematically defined (cf. Menzel, 'Mathematical Physics', 1961, p. 204):

Jm (x) = (1/ 2m m!) xm [1 -  x 2/ 22 1! (m + 1)  +  x4/ 242! (m + 1) (m + 2) -  ….(-1)j x2j / 2 2j j! (m + 1) (m + 2)…(m + j) +  …]
 

which we terminate with second order terms.

For m = 0 and m = 1 forms one gets:

Jo(x) = 1 - x2/ 22 (1!)2 + x4/ 24 (2!)2 - x6/ 26 (3!)2 + ......

and:

J1(x) = x/ 2 - x3/ 23 ·1! 2! + x5/ 25 ·2!3! - x7/ 27 ·3!4! - .....

The equations in B z (r),  B q (r),  with the special Bessel functions at root, are critical in describing the respective magnetic fields for a magnetic tube. For a cylindrical magnetic flux tube (such as a sunspot represents viewed in cross-section) the “twist” is defined:
T(r)  =  (L B q(r))/  (r  B z (r))

Where L denotes the length of the sunspot-flux tube dipole and r, the radius. If the twist exceeds 2p then the magnetic configuration may be approaching instability and a solar flare.


Problems for the Math Maven:

1) Compute the Bessel functions for Jo(x)   and  J1(x)  with x = 1 and then compare with the values obtained from the graph shown at top.


2) Find the twist in a solar loop (take it to be a magnetic tube) if: B q(r) = 0. 1T and B z (r) = 0.2T. Take the radius of the tube to be r = 10 4  km and the length L = 10 8  m.   Is the tube kink unstable or not? (Kink instability is said to obtain when: T(r) > 2p)


Monday, June 30, 2014

A Cavity Resonator Model Applied to Solar Loops and Flare Triggers (2)


Preparing the Hybrid Model:

We begin with a coronal loop segment of the form depicted  in Fig. 1 (Part 1)  in which capacitative domains apply, such that:

 C = e [ℓ2||    +  ℓ2^ ]   =  [1  +  (i 4p s2)/ wo ]( ℓ2||    +  ℓ2^ )

Where wo  is the associated frequency. The region has associated with it an initial E-field:  E(z)  =   Eo cos i(wo t – k||  z)

For the fast-mode kink waves expected to be generated we have for the wave number vector associated with the resonator of loop BC in AR 2776::

k||  =  2p / ℓ2||    = 6.2 x  10 -7 m-1

Because of the varying E-field, arising from loop oscillations (for which no  tan(noa - p/4)  =    mo ), we expect a B-field to form in the region, leading to:

ò B j (r) dl  = /  t   òc Ez (r)·n dA

Such that:

B j (r)=   iwo r (m 0 e 0)1/2 /2 [Eo cos i(wo t – k||  z)]

With the most critical observation being that we obtain “corrective” functions in E, based on the zeroth order Bessel function, J o (wo r (m 0 e 0)1/2)  

Assuming a precise boundary cut-off at the value J o (ar)   = 2.405 where:

 ar =(wr Öm 0 Öe 0 ) so that the critical radius is:  r =  2.405/ (wo Öm 0 Öe 0) ,  the cavity is resonant at:

wo =  2.405/ (r Öm 0 Öe 0)

Ideally, this should be a harmonic of the kink-mode global oscillation frequency. This is used here to set up the basic initial tests for falsification, and will lead to more complete falsifying tests based upon the twist of the loop and its helicity current density (which ought to be estimated using proxy indicators)

In the treatment that follows we have in the interior of the loop (cf. Edwin and Roberts, 1983)

Ñ·v    =   R(r) exp (wo t + nq + k||  z)

Where R(r) satisfies the Bessel equation:


So:  d2R/dr2  +   1/r (d R / dr  ) -     (mo2  +  n2/r 2) R  = 0

Where:  mo2  =  [(k2 co2 -   wo 2)( k2 vA2 -   wo 2) /   (co2 +  vA 2)( k2 ck2 -   wo 2)

Where  ck was previously defined (Part 1), as was co.

In terms of the solutions as applied to the axis (r= 0) of  typical coronal loops, one has (Edwin and Roberts, ibid.)

R(r )    =  Ao Io(mor)       mo2  >  0

               Ao Jo(nor)        no2  =  - mo2     >  0


Where  Io(mor)  and  Jo(nor)  are Bessel functions

For the conditions in the corona, a fast kink mode will govern such that:

no  tan(noa - p/4)  =    mo

with period t  = 2L/ ck       »  9 s

In the case of loop BC in AR2776, we have a =   5.5 x 10 8 cm, so that a/ L » 0.006

This rules out “sausage-mode” waves for the loop BC, since these propagate only for the condition:  ka > 1.2 and a = L/10 (cf. Edwins and Roberts, 1983)[1]. 

If the model is correct the coronal cavity for loop BC initiates frequency “pumping” at:

wo  = wcav =  2.405/ (a Öm 0 Öe 0)  =  1.3 x 10 2 s-1

This is the theoretical value we expect to obtain.  Its relatively low magnitude is surprising at first glance and in order to see what is happening, one needs to invoke the conductivity and permittivity   tensors, viz.:
No photo description available.

The main interest in terms of the preceding is how the elements are functions of the various frequencies, e.g. Fitzpatrick, 2004)[2]:

e11 = 1  -  we 2  / w 2  { w/ w -  We  }  -  wi 2  / w 2  { w/ w +  Wi  } 

e22 = 1  -  we 2  / w 2  { w/ w -  We  }  -  wi 2  / w 2  { w/ w -  Wi  } 

e22 = 1  -  we 2  / w 2  -  wi 2  / w 2  

Where e11 and e22 denote permittivities for right and left circularly polarized waves. Now, let there be derivative quantities denoted:

S  =  ½  [e11 + e22] 

And:   D =  ½  [e11 - e22] 

Then for low-frequency wave propagation in magnetized plasma one finds:

   D »  0      S    »  1  +  wi 2  / Wi  2    and  e33      »   - we 2  / w 2  


With:   we 2  / w 2   >>  wi 2  / Wi  2      (in low frequency ordering regime)

To find the approximate observed (empirical analog) value for the loop BC’s coronal cavity resonator angular frequency we use the cavity resonator prescription of Federov et al, 2004, Sec. 4) such that:

wAR  =   p VAR/ dr

Where  k AR is the cavity-associated wave –number vector,  k AR =  wAR / vAR

and VAR  is the Alfven velocity in the cavity, with dr a height-scaled quantity for the cavity (e.g. when seen in edge-on dimension and with curvature correction applied). This is taken to be 1.1 x  10 6 m or roughly the minimal value of xi  in the range noted earlier.

This  yields an observed value:

wAR    =  1.6 x 10 2 s-1

This difference  (wAR    -  wAR )  suggests either: 1) the resonant cavity Alfven speed, VAR  is too high or 2) the quantity d r   is underestimated.  Adopting the theoretical value as given (1.3 x 10 2 s-1) one finds the Alfven velocity in the cavity resonator VAR = 4.5 x 10 7 ms-1  whereas if the observed value is used, one finds: V’AR = 5.6 x 10 7 ms-1  .  The cavity wavelength parameter is:  kAR =  k’AR = 2.8 x 10 -6 m-1  applicable to either VAR or  V’AR .  Hence, k AR is a good proxy wavenumber indicator for the cavity. The Alfven wave conductance for the cavity SAR  = (mo VAR) -1  = 0.017 W -1 based on the theoretical value of  wAR. (0.014 W -1  otherwise). The Alfven wave impedances are, respectively:  ZAR  = (SAR) -1  = 57 W, and Z’AR  = (SAR) -1  = 70 W.  The “characteristic  impedance” can also be approximated using:

 Zch »  ZAR ( kBC/ k AR)

This is modified from the auroral cavity version given by Federov et al (2004, op. cit.). In the above, kBC denotes a wavelength number vector applicable to the loop, and we use the observational (cavity) values for  ZAR , since k BC is an observed value.  For the date on which the 1B/M4 event occurred (11- 5- 80) we have k BC = 1.9 x 10 -7 m-1  so that Zch » 4.6 W.

We are now in position to more realistically assess the quality factor (Q) for the date using equation 64(a) of Hollweg (1983):  Q  » k2r/ (2 êk2i ê) where here we have  k2r »  kAR  and k2i »  kBC . From this we obtain:  Q  »7.5. The loop heating rate from the data (EH = 0.60 erg cm-3 s-1)  allows us to obtain the amplitude damping rate (w i) as defined by Hollweg and thence the resonant period: T = 2 p/  (w r). Using the (EH) datum in conjunction with Hollweg’s equation (31) for the wave energy density (assuming vA2 =  VAR  and that the magnetic energy density (B2/8p, in c.g.s.)  is the primary contributor for a cavity between two nodes cf. Zugzda and Locans, 1982, op.cit.), we get:

T » 69 s

The preceding shows the general approach in obtaining cavity parameters for model testing. With sufficient data resolution and discrimination available for other coronal loops, of the type that was available for loop BC in AR 2776, we should be able to obtain a much better idea of how well this cavity resonator model works and whether it can be suitably generalized.

 The reader should be aware of why the period found here  (»  69 s) differs from that estimated in the June 22 post (»  52 s). In particular, note the latter assumed global kink mode oscillations for a total loop length L = 9.3 x 10 9 cm



[1] P.M. Edwin and B. Roberts, Solar Phys., 88, 179, 1983.
[2] Richard Fitzpatrick: 2004, Introduction to Plasma Physics, Lulu Books, p. 109.
[3] Hollweg, op. cit
[4] .Zugzda and Locans, op. cit.

Friday, June 27, 2014

A Cavity Resonator Model Applied to Solar Loops and Flare Triggers (1)



The problem of identifying a unique trigger for solar flares has been pursued for over 4 decades, but with little to show for it. In this post I examine a possible approach that might be productive, especially after higher resolution images become available from a planned solar telescope.


1.     Background to Cavity Resonator Approaches:


On the Sun itself, the 5-minute oscillations, more figuratively described from time to time as a “ringing of the photosphere” were first tied to waves trapped in a resonant cavity by Schatzman, 1956[2]. The gist of the model is that the upper and lower cavity boundaries reflect waves into the cavity and thereby engender a standing wave, which may either be acoustic or gravity.

 Properties of generic coronal cavity resonators were elucidated by Hollweg (1984)[3] whereby a coronal loop is treated as three relatively disjoint regions, separated by discontinuities. The standing waves produced are invoked to account for energy dissipation and heating in the corona. Some aspects of Hollweg’s model (e.g. reflection properties of Alfven waves, quality factor Q, relation to wave number vectors) are also employed in my own resonator model for solar flare inception.

 Where I diverge from both the (e.g. Federov et al) auroral cavity resonator and the coronal one proposed by Hollweg is that in this flare trigger model I adopt a dual resonator for a given compact flare loop. The basic sketch is shown above. Thus, to trigger a specific (e.g. compact) flare the conditions must be such that the Q-(quality) value in each resonator reinforce the other. In my generic model, I include a small coronal arch cavity resonator with some resemblance to Hollweg’s and a large scale loop resonator which depends on the oscillations arising from magnetic (Alfven) waves in combination with the loop’s twist (and associated kink instability)

 The difference is that I go into much more detail to incorporate ex-post facto data into my model to show how the magnitudes of the changing physical quantities vary not only in the corona in its pre-flare state, but during the flare as well. As an application ansatz, dual resonators in the electrical engineering setting often use closed-loop resonators in order to shift down the original resonator and arrive at a very small structure (e.g. Collado et al, 2007)[4]. In the flare trigger model context this would be the kernel or coronal loop apex resonator.  In the engineering context, mirrors are sometimes employed to linear cavities (analogous to the extended coronal loop with its primary cavity at the apex) to obtain simultaneous dual wavelength oscillations. It is precisely within the scope of these dual oscillations that the flare trigger can be conceived – e.g. for specific cases when a dual resonance is achieved and with it the maximum instability.

2.     Motivation:

Having established that a hybrid flare model is the most plausible one to approach the 1B/M4 flare of November 5, 1980, I now single out the key feature for the flare trigger. Before proceeding, let us inspect the gestalt for what this article is all about, as depicted in the schematic below:
No photo description available.

The diagram depicts the generic inputs and processes entering the hybrid flare model (in the main rectangle), which includes components for R (reliability statistics), H (helicity considerations) and Poisson statistics. Thus, the hybrid model seeks to reconcile all of these, as well as recognizing the inputs from two paradigms: the E-J and the B-v.  For example, the B-v paradigm and its assumptions figure more prominently in the reliability analyses as well as the magnetic helicity. (E.g. see: http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2010/10/look-at-magnetic-helicity.html )  The E-J paradigm factors more into the basis for Poisson variations based on the manner in which the current densities (J) arise and how the E-field is generated.  The putative flare trigger attempts to make use of all of these.

What is desired is a model that approximately replicates the event sequence for the region AR2776 such that the flares occurring conform to the average Poisson  activity:  l (av) =  2.6 x 10-5 s-1  and the length, resonance variations described above imply a twisted cavity (dual) resonator over the region defined by (l1 + ℓ1^ +  ℓ2^   +  xi ).  (See e.g. my post of June 22nd: http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2014/06/quantifying-solar-loop-oscillations.html

Where:   0 <   xi  <  1.1 x 106 m

The basic geometry is shown in Fig. 1 (top) in the region of the apex, and primary coronal cavity. It is assumed that with compressional Alfven waves the loop aperture can vary, from a1 to the outer radius taken as r1. This variation could well account for the uncertainty in source-kernel dimensions:


The electric field E(z) shown in Fig. 1 is described according to:


E(z)  =   Eo cos w(t – z/ vp)

Where Eo  denotes the uniform (non-varying field magnitude) and  vp =  c sin(J)

is the phase velocity with J the pitch angle of the twist component for relative helicity (H(R) [T]).

The model works via the basic loop changing its effective resonator length (for which there is an associated resonator angular frequency wo) and twist (F(r)).  Radial surfaces (rs < r)  form in the loop apex (small resonant cavity) for E-field resonating corrections modeled after the J o (ar)   Bessel function.  The J o (ar)   induced field in turn generates azimuthal corrections in the axial B-field that alters the twist of the gross loop.

Thus, the twist dependence is (see also http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2013/04/looking-at-bessel-functions-applications.html):


F(r) =   L J1(ar)/ r J o (ar)   =    L B j (r) / r Bz (r)     = L E z (r)  /  r E j (r)

Such that: E z (r)  ® B j (r) ® E1 z (r) ®   B1 j (r) ® E2 z (r) ®   B2 j (r)


E j (r) ® B z (r) ®  E1 j (r) ® B1 z (r) ®  E2 j (r) ® B2 z (r) . . . . En j (r) ® Bn z (r)

From the secondary, tertiary etc. fields inner nested radii aij are generated which conform to ratios related to the Bessel functions. The key point of the mutually generated fields is that they operate according to a positive feedback which ultimately incepts a resonance condition and explosive release of energy. The radii in turn can be used to obtain wave modes associated with a given oscillation period for the resonator. The relative E-field strengths successively generated for the ideal cavity coronal resonator are defined by the Bessel series:

Jm (x) = (1/ 2m m!) xm [1 -  x 2/ 22 1! (m + 1)  +  x4/ 242! (m + 1) (m + 2) -  ….

.(-1)j x2j / 2 2j j! (m + 1) (m + 2)……(m + j) +  …]

Which may be simplified for the m = 0 case  to:


J0 (x) = 1 -  (x/2)2 + 1/(2!)2 (x/4)4 – 1/ (3!)2 (x/2)6 +  .




Where x for the E-field is defined x =  Ö mo Öo w r  =   2.405



For which a key cut-off radius is defined at the surface rs  = r .  Other surfaces  (si) may be defined for zeros of J0 (x).  Meanwhile, coronal loop oscillation periods and emergence have been well explicated by a number of authors (e.g. Edwin and Roberts, 1983, op. cit., Andries et al, 2005[5])
(More to come)



[1] E.N. Fedorov, V.A. Pilipenko, M.J. Engebretson, and T. J. Rosenber: 2004, ‘Alfven Wave Modulation of the Auroral Acceleration Region’, in Earth Planets Space, 56, p. 649.
[2] E. Schatzman: 1956, Ann. Astrophysics, 19, 45.
[3] Joseph V. Hollweg, Solar Phys., 91, 269, 1984
[4] C. Collado, J. Pozo, J. Mateu and J.M. O’Callaghan: 2007, European Microwave Week.
[5] J. Andries, M. Goosens, J.V. Hollweg, I. Arregui and T. Van Doorselaere,: 2005,  Astronomy & Astrophysics,  430, 1109.