Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/2248/5281
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Moradi, H | - |
dc.contributor.author | Baldner, C | - |
dc.contributor.author | Birch, A. C | - |
dc.contributor.author | Braun, D. C | - |
dc.contributor.author | Cameron, R. H | - |
dc.contributor.author | Duvall, T. L | - |
dc.contributor.author | Gizon, L | - |
dc.contributor.author | Haber, D | - |
dc.contributor.author | Hanasoge, S. M | - |
dc.contributor.author | Hindman, B. W | - |
dc.contributor.author | Jackiewicz, J | - |
dc.contributor.author | Khomenko, E | - |
dc.contributor.author | Komm, R | - |
dc.contributor.author | Rajaguru, S. P | - |
dc.contributor.author | Rempel, M | - |
dc.contributor.author | Roth, M | - |
dc.contributor.author | Schlichenmaier, R | - |
dc.contributor.author | Schunker, H | - |
dc.contributor.author | Spruit, H. C | - |
dc.contributor.author | Strassmeier, K. G | - |
dc.contributor.author | Thompson, M. J | - |
dc.contributor.author | Zharkov, S | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2010-12-13T10:30:01Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2010-12-13T10:30:01Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2010-11 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Solar Physics, Vol. 267, No. 1, pp. 1-62 | en |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2248/5281 | - |
dc.description | Restricted Access | en |
dc.description | The original publication is available at springerlink.com | - |
dc.description.abstract | While sunspots are easily observed at the solar surface, determining their subsurface structure is not trivial. There are two main hypotheses for the subsurface structure of sunspots: the monolithic model and the cluster model. Local helioseismology is the only means by which we can investigate subphotospheric structure. However, as current linear inversion techniques do not yet allow helioseismology to probe the internal structure with sufficient confidence to distinguish between the monolith and cluster models, the development of physically realistic sunspot models are a priority for helioseismologists. This is because they are not only important indicators of the variety of physical effects that may influence helioseismic inferences in active regions, but they also enable detailed assessments of the validity of helioseismic interpretations through numerical forward modeling. In this article, we provide a critical review of the existing sunspot models and an overview of numerical methods employed to model wave propagation through model sunspots. We then carry out a helioseismic analysis of the sunspot in Active Region 9787 and address the serious inconsistencies uncovered by Gizon et al. (2009a, 2009b). We find that this sunspot is most probably associated with a shallow, positive wave-speed perturbation (unlike the traditional two-layer model) and that travel-time measurements are consistent with a horizontal outflow in the surrounding moat. | en |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.publisher | Springer | en |
dc.relation.uri | http://www.springerlink.com/content/762089r84229x257/ | en |
dc.rights | © Springer | en |
dc.title | Modeling the Subsurface Structure of Sunspots | en |
dc.type | Article | en |
Appears in Collections: | IIAP Publications |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Modeling the Subsurface Structure of Sunspots Restricted Access | Restricted Acess | 2.81 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open Request a copy |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.