Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T17:37:34.389Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On Numerical Studies of Solar/Stellar Convection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

Kwing L. Chan  and
Katsuyo Serizawa
Kwing L. Chan
Affiliation:
Applied Research Corporation Landover, Maryland, USA
Katsuyo Serizawa
Affiliation:
Iowa State University Ames, Iowa, USA

Extract

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.

It has become a cliché to say that convection lies at the foundation of the activities, magnetism, and dynamos of the Sun and cool stars – the title of this colloquium. However, it has not been possible, until recently, to study theoretically these phenomena and their connections with quantitative rigor. The new development owes much to the rapid growth in the power of computers and the spread of sophisticated numerical techniques.

Since the last decade numerical studies of solar and stellar convection problems thrive. The trend towards a greater use of computers in these studies will likely become stronger. Now is a good time to reflect on the numerical approach itself, so that we may understand it better and make better use of it in the future. Here we look at two aspects of this methodology. First (Section 2), we examine its relationships to the analytical approach and observation, for which we make a differentiation between numerical experimentation and simulation. It is obvious that the ultimate test of any theory, numerical or not, is to confront observations, but not generally realized is that the connection to analytical studies is an important requisite for the healthy development of numerical studies. This point is to be elaborated. Second (Section 3), we discuss the prevalence of pitfalls in the numerical approach; two examples of current interest in convection computations are analysed in detail. In Section 4, we go on to suggest that one of these pitfalls might have caused the discrepancy between the results of numerical modelling of the solar differential rotation and helioseismology.

Type
Part I Convection and turbulence as the basis of magnetic activity
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 130: The Sun and Cool Stars: activity, magnetism, dynamos , 1991 , pp. 15 - 26
Copyright
Copyright © Springer-Verlag 1991

References

Brown, T.M., Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., Dziembowski, W.A., Goode, P., Gough, D.O., Morrow, C.A.: 1989, Astrophys. J. 343, 526 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, K.L., Sofia, S.: 1986, Astrophys. J. 307, 222 Google Scholar
Chan, K.L., Sofia, S.: 1989, Astrophys. J. 336, 1022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, K.L., Nordlund, A., Steffen, M., Stein, R.F.: 1990, in Solar interior and atmosphere, eds. Cox, A.N. and Livingston, W.C., U. Arizona Press, Tucson, in pressGoogle Scholar
Durney, B.R.: 1987, in The internal solar angular velocity, eds. Durney, B.R. and Sofia, S., Reidel, Dordrecht, p. 235 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilman, P.A., Miller, J.: 1986, Astrophys. J. Suppl. 61, 585 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glatzmeier, G.A.: 1985, Astrophys. J. 291, 300 Google Scholar
Glatzmeier, G.A.: 1987, in The internal solar angular velocity, eds. Durney, B.R. and Sofia, S., Reidel, Dordrecht, p. 263 Google Scholar
Hurlburt, N.E., Toomre, J., Massaguer, J.M.: 1984, Astrophys. J. 282, 557 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Libbrecht, K.G.: 1989, Astrophys. J. 336, 1092 Google Scholar
Massaguer, J.M., Zahn, J.-P.: 1980, Astron. Astrophys. 87, 315 Google Scholar
Narasimha, D., Antia, H.M.: 1982, Astrophys. J. 262, 358 Google Scholar
Sofia, S., Chan, K.L.: 1984, Astrophys. J. 282, 550 Google Scholar
Spiegel, E.A.: 1987, in The internal solar angular velocity, eds. Durney, B.R. and Sofia, S., Reidel, Dordrecht, p. 321 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, R.F., Nordlund, A.: 1989, Astrophys. J. (Letters) 342, L95 Google Scholar
Zahn, J.-P.: 1987, in Solar and stellar physics, eds. Schröter, E.H. and Schüssler, M.S., Springer-Verlag, New York, p. 55 CrossRefGoogle Scholar