Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T00:12:07.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Dominating active regions in the minima of solar activity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2024

R. A. Suleymanova*
Affiliation:
Crimean Astrophysical Observatory of Russian Academy of Sciences, Nauchny, Russia
V. I. Abramenko*
Affiliation:
Crimean Astrophysical Observatory of Russian Academy of Sciences, Nauchny, Russia
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

During minima of solar activity, it is possible to estimate the influence of convection zone turbulence on the magnetic flux tubes forming active regions (ARs), because the toroidal field of the old cycle weakens, and the new toroidal field is still weak. We analyzed ARs of solar minima between 23-24 and 24-25 solar cycles. ARs were classified as regular, irregular and unipolar spots. Regular ARs follow the empirical laws consistent with the Babcock–Leighton dynamo theory. We found that regular ARs dominate by flux and by number during the solar minima. Irregular ARs are mainly represented by bipolar structures of deformed orientation and contribute only one-third in the total flux and one-third in the total number. Very complex multipolar ARs are extremely rare. So, during solar minima the global dynamo still guides the formation of ARs, whereas the turbulence only slightly affects the toroidal flux tubes orientation.

Type
Contributed Paper
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of International Astronomical Union

References

Abramenko, V.I. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 3698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abramenko, V.I., Suleymanova, R.A., Zhukova, A.V. 2023, MNRAS,518, 4746.Google Scholar
Abramenko, V.I., Zhukova, A.V., Kutsenko, A.S. 2018, G&A,58, 1159.Google Scholar
Babcock, H.W. 1961, A&A, 133, 572.Google Scholar
Hale, G.E., Ellerman, F., Nicholson, S.B., et. al 1919, ApJ,49, 153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leighton, R.B. 1969, ApJ, 156, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherrer, P.H., Bogart, R.S., Bush, R.I., et al. 1995, SoPh,162, 129.Google Scholar
Scherrer, P.H., Schou, J., Bush, R.I., et al. 2012, SoPh,275, 207.Google Scholar
Schou, J., Scherrer, P.H., Bush, R.I., et al. 2012, SoPh,275, 229.Google Scholar
van Driel–Gesztelyi, L., Green, L.M. 2015, LRSP,12, 1.Google Scholar