Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T16:09:27.156Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recent Development in Solar Wind Modelling

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

Ruth Esser
Ruth Esser*
Affiliation:
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Cambridge, MA

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.

An improved knowledge of the physical conditions in the low corona and solar wind can only be obtained through careful comparisons between theoretical descriptions of the solar wind expansion and plasma parameters derived from observations. In this review we will present a summary of recent approaches in solar wind modeling. The plasma parameters characterizing the solar wind models will be compared to constraints inferred from in-situ and remote observations. We will then discuss the implications of the results obtained from this study for future model studies and observations. Emphasis will be placed on high-speed solar wind streams originating from large coronal holes.

Keywords

Transition RegionCoronaSolar Wind
Type
Coronal Heating and Solar Wind Acceleration
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 154: Solar and Interplanetary Transients , 1996 , pp. 57 - 64
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer 1997

References

Axford, W.I., 1995, this volumeGoogle Scholar
Axford, W.I., and McKenzie, J.F., 1992 Solar Wind 7, eds. Marsch, E. and Schwenn, R., Pergamem: Oxford, p 1 Google Scholar
Bürgi, A., 1992, J. Geophys. Res., 97, 3137.Google Scholar
Esser, R., Leer, E., Habbal, S.R., and Withbroe, G.L., 1986, J. Geophys. Res., 91, 2950.Google Scholar
Guhathakurta, M., and Fisher, R., 1995, Astrophys. J. Lett., in press.Google Scholar
Habbal, S.R., Esser, R., and Arndt, M., 1993, Astrophys. J., 413, 435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habbal, S.R., Hu, Y.Q., and Esser, R., 1994, J. Geophys. Res., 99, 8465.Google Scholar
Habbal, S.R., Esser, R., Guhathakurta, M., and Fisher, R., 1995, Geophys. Res. Let., in press.Google Scholar
Hammer, R., 1983, Adv. Space Res., 2, 261.Google Scholar
Hollweg, J.V., 1986, J. Geophys. Res., 91, 4111.Google Scholar
Hollweg, J.V., and Johnson, W., 1988, J. Geophys. Res., 93, 9547.Google Scholar
Isenberg, P.A., 1982, Solar Wind Five, ed. Neugebauer, M., NASA Conference Publication 2280, p. 655.Google Scholar
Kohl, J.A., Gardner, L.D., Strachan, L., and Hassler, D.M., 1994, Space. Sci. Rev., 70, 253.Google Scholar
Leer, E., and T.E., Holzer, 1991, Ann. Geophys. Res., 9, 196.Google Scholar
Noci, G., Porri, A., 1983, IAGA 18th Gen. Ass., Hamburg, paper 4L.04.Google Scholar
Parker, E.N., 1958, Astrophys. J., 126, 664.Google Scholar
Parker, E.N., 1963, Interplanetary Dynamical Processes, Interscience: New York.Google Scholar
Rosner, R., Tucker, W.H., and Vaiana, G.S., 1978, Astrophys. J., 220, 643.Google Scholar
Withbroe, G.L., 1988, Astrophys. J., 325, 442.Google Scholar