|
The cross-section of a single electron for producing an X-ray photon of a certain energy is
given by the quantum mechanical Bethe–Heitler formalism. The instantaneous emissivity of an
electron beam propagating in a plasma is named thin target solution. It does not account for
the resulting particle energy change to be considered in further collisions. If the target is deep
enough, the incident particle slows down to thermal speed. The total radiation is therefore the
integral in time over all emissions starting at the entry into the target until the particle energy is
thermalized. If other deceleration processes than Coulomb collisions can be excluded, this is the
thick target situation (Brown, 1971
). The thick target photon spectrum of an electron beam
is flatter (usually called harder) than any thin target it may transverse before, as it includes
emission of the decelerating electrons. In an ideal situation including a power-law distribution of
electron energies, the power-law index of thin target emission is smaller by 2 than the thick target
spectrum.
The emission of hard X-rays with a non-thermal energy distribution was first located by Hoyng
et al. (1981) at footpoints of coronal loops. Based on stereoscopic observations, Kane (1983
) reported that
95% of the
150 keV X-ray emission in impulsive flares originates at altitudes
2500 km, that is
at the level of the chromosphere. Brown et al. (1983) concluded that this upper limit in altitude
satisfies the collisional thick-target model in which precipitating electrons loose their energy in
the dense, cold target. The emission presumably originates from flare-accelerated electrons
precipitating into the chromosphere. They follow the field line until they reach a density high enough
for collisions and emit bremsstrahlung by scattering and slowing down. Footpoint sources are
also occasionally found on H
flare ribbons some 30,000 km apart, tracing the base of a
magnetic arcade (Masuda et al., 2001). The connecting loop are observed in thermal soft X-ray
emission, indicating that the density has greatly increased. Densities of more than 1011 cm–3 are
frequently reported (e.g., Tsuneta et al., 1997
) and agree with the concept of chromospheric
evaporation. Up-streaming plasma, presumably heated by precipitating particles and filling
up a coronal loop, has been observed in blue shifted lines (Antonucci et al., 1982
; Mariska
et al., 1993).
Flare footpoints are usually observed to move, indicating propagation of the energy release site (Krucker
et al., 2003). Reconnection in a cusp above the flare ribbons predicts that footpoints move apart. Contrary
to expectation, parallel motion along the flare arcade has also been reported by Grigis and Benz (2005a
)
and Bogachev et al. (2005) (see movie in Figure 8
). Stochastic jumps in the time evolution are frequent
(Fletcher et al., 2004; Krucker et al., 2005a). These hard X-ray observations suggests that most of the
flare energy at a given site is released in an initial burst. The separation of the footpoints perpendicular to
the flare ribbon, well observed in H
, appears to be the result of a more gentle energy release in a later
flare phase (Švestka, 1976; Martin, 1989).
|
Get Flash to see this player.
|
Hard X-rays have been noted to correlate with H
kernels (Vorpahl, 1972; Wuelser and Marti, 1989),
indicating that the flare energy reaches the dense part of the chromosphere within less than 10 seconds.
Hard X-ray footpoints coincide spatially with H
kernels (Radziszewski et al., 2007, see
Figure 9
).
|
Get Flash to see this player.
|
Hard X-ray footpoints and soft X-ray flare loops are consistent with the standard flare scenario of energy
release in the corona, energy transport to the chromosphere and chromospheric evaporation, but where is
the energy released? First hints came from a third hard X-ray source above the soft X-ray loop (Masuda
et al., 1994
). The coronal X-ray emission contains a thermal part, dominating a low energies, and a weak
non-thermal part above about 8 – 10 keV. The non-thermal emission in the corona is usually soft (Mariska
and McTiernan, 1999; Petrosian et al., 2002
), consistent with the idea of a thin target (Datlowe and
Lin, 1973). Thus, the accelerated electrons lose only a small fraction of their energy and continue to
propagate towards the chromosphere. In the chromosphere they meet a thick target, yielding a
harder spectrum (Brown, 1971; Hudson, 1972). An example showing two footpoints and a
coronal source is shown in Figure 10
. In exceptional cases, only the fastest electrons reach the
chromosphere (Veronig and Brown, 2004
). The coronal source often appears before the main flare
hard X-ray increase, but is well correlated in time and spectrum with the footpoints (Emslie
et al., 2003
). These observations suggest strong coupling between corona and chromosphere during
flares.
|
The altitude of coronal hard X-ray sources, some 6000 – 25,000 km, is compatible with observed time delays of hard X-ray peaks emitted at the footpoints (Aschwanden et al., 1995). Low energy photons are emitted later compared to higher energy photons. Delay-time observations scale with the observed lengths of the soft X-ray loop (Aschwanden et al., 1996), consistent with the interpretation of longer propagation times of lower energy electrons. If only time-of-flight effects are assumed, the propagation path would put the acceleration above the loop-top hard X-ray source. The assumption of simultaneous injection puts strong constraints on the timescales involved on the acceleration process (Brown et al., 1998).
The difference in the spectrum of coronal source and footpoints can be taken as a test for the geometry.
Measurements by Petrosian et al. (2002) show that the power-law indices differ by about 1 on the average,
contrary to expectations. A possible interpretation for a value less than 2 may be a mixture of
thick and thin target emissions, overlapping in the observed resolution element. On the other
hand, an analysis based on RHESSI data demonstrates the existence of index differences larger
than two in 3 out of 9 events (Battaglia and Benz, 2007
). This discrepancy requires a more
complete physical scenario than ballistic particle motion and will be discussed in the following
section.
| http://www.livingreviews.org/lrsp-2008-1 | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.0 Germany License. Problems/comments to |