Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T07:20:58.119Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Maunder Convection Mode on the Sun and Long Solar Activity Minima*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

V. A. Dogiel
V. A. Dogiel*
Affiliation:
P. N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Academy of Sciences, Moscow, U.S.S.R.

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A model of velocity field oscillations in the solar convective zone is suggested. The system of convective equations is investigated for a thin rotating spherical envelope when the rotation velocity is depended on the coordinates. It is shown that two different structures of convective cells (longitudinal, or latitudinal) can exist in the envelope depending on gradients values of the rotation velocity and Prandtl number.

It is supposed that two different regimes of convection (stationary and autofluctuating) are possible in the envelope when the angular velocity gradients are determined by the convection itself. In the case of autofluctuating regime the alternation of longitudinal and latitudinal structure of convection is realized.

If one assumes that on the Sun there exists an autooscillating convection regime, then the periods of the existence of latitudinal convection structure may be associated with long periods of activity minima since according to Cowling’s theorem, the action of the axisymmetric magnetic field generation mechanism isimpossible under conditions of axisymmetric velocity structures.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 66: Problems of Solar and Stellar Oscillations , 1983 , pp. 427 - 436
Copyright
Copyright © Reidel 1983

Footnotes

*

Proceedings of the 66th IAU Colloquium: Problems in Solar and Stellar Oscillations, held at the Crimean Astrophysical Observatory, U.S.S.R., 1-5 September, 1981.

References

Busse, F. H.: 1972, Astron. Astrophys. 28, 27.Google Scholar
Cowling, T. G.: 1951, Astrophys. J. 114, 272.Google Scholar
Chandrasekhar, S.: 1961, Hydrodynamic and Hydromagnetic Stability, Oxford, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Deardorff, J. W.: 1965, Phys. Fluids 8, 1027.Google Scholar
Dearborn, D. S. P. and Newman, M. J.: 1978, Science 201, 150.Google Scholar
Dogiel, V. A.: 1980, Usp. Fiz. Nauk 132, 691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dogiel, V. A. and Syrovatskii, S. I.: 1977, Proc. IX Leningrad’s Seminar of Cosmophysics, p. 14.Google Scholar
Dogiel, V. A. and Syrovatskii, S. I.: 1979a, Izv. Acad. Nauk, ser. fizich. 43, 716.Google Scholar
Dogiel, V. A. and Syrovatskii, S. I.: 1979b, Proc. IX Leningrad’s Seminar of Cosmophysics, p.15.Google Scholar
Durney, B. R.: 1970, Astrophys. J. 161, 1115.Google Scholar
Eddy, J. A.: 1976, Science 192, 1189.Google Scholar
Gilman, P. A.: 1975, in Bumba, V. and Kleczek, J. (eds.), ‘Basic Mechanisms of Solar Activity’, IAU Symp. 71,207.Google Scholar
Gilman, P. A.: 1978, GAFD 11, 157.Google Scholar
Gilman, P. A.: 1980, Highlights Astronomy 5, 91.Google Scholar
Kocharov, G. E., Vasiliev, V. A., Dergachev, V. A., and Mikhalchenko, N. G.: 1979, Proc. XVIIntern. Cosmic Ray Conf. (Japan) 2, 256.Google Scholar
Kuo, H. L.: 1963, Phys. Fluids 6, 195.Google Scholar
Leighton, R. B.: 1969, Astrophys. J. 156, 1.Google Scholar
Link, F.: 1978, Solar Phys. 59, 175.Google Scholar
Parker, E. N.: 1975, in Bumba, V. and Kleczek, J. (eds.), ‘Basic Mechanisms of Solar Activity’, IAU Symp. 71,3.Google Scholar
Willis, D. M. and Tulunay, Y. K.: 1979, Solar Phys. 64, 237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoshimura, H.: 1975, Astrophys. J. Suppl. 29, 467.Google Scholar
Yoshimura, H.: 1978, Astrophys. J. 220, 692.Google Scholar
Zeldovich, Ya. N. and Ruzmaikin, A. A.: 1980, Dynamo Problems in Astrophysics, Preprint, Inst. Appi. Mathem., the USSR Academy of Sciences, No. 52.Google Scholar