Arxiv:1403.6528V1 [Astro-Ph.IM] 25 Mar 2014

25 Years of Self-Organized Criticality: Solar and Astrophysics Markus J. Aschwanden Lockheed Martin, Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory (LMSAL), Advanced Technology Center (ATC), A021S, Bldg.252, 3251 Hanover St., Palo Alto, CA 94304, USA; e-mail: [email protected] Norma Crosby Belgian Institute for Space Aeronomy, Ringlaan-3-Avenue Circulaire, B-1180 Brussels, Belgium Michaila Dimitropoulou Kapodistrian University of Athens, Dept. Physics, 15483, Athens, Greece Manolis K. Georgoulis Research Center Astronomy and Applied Mathematics, Academy of Athens, 4 Soranou Efesiou St., Athens, Greece, GR-11527. Stefan Hergarten Institute für Geo- und Umweltnaturwissenschaften, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Albertstr. 23B, 79104 Freiburg, Germany James McAteer Dept. Astronomy, P.O.Box 30001, New Mexico State University, MSC 4500, Las Cruces, USA Alexander V. Milovanov Associazione EURATOM-ENEA sulla Fusione, Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Frascati Research Centre, Via E. Fermi 45, C.P.-65, I-00044 Frascati, Rome, Italy; Space Research Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Profsoyuznaya str. 84/32, 117997 Moscow, Russia; Max Planck Institute for the Physics of Complex Systems, Noethnitzer Str. 38, 01187 Dresden, Germany Shin Mineshige Dept. Astronomy, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8602, Japan arXiv:1403.6528v1 [astro-ph.IM] 25 Mar 2014 Laura Morales Canadian Space Agency, Space Science and Technology Branch, 6767 Route de l’Aeroport, Saint Hubert, Quebec, J3Y8Y9, Canada Naoto Nishizuka Inst. Space and Astronautical Science, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Sagamihara, Kanagawa, 252-5210, Japan Gunnar Pruessner Dept. Mathematics, Imperial College London, 180 Queen’s Gate, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom Raul Sanchez –2– Dept. Fisica, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Avda. de la Universidad 30, 28911 Leganes, Madrid, Spain Surja Sharma Dept. Astronomy, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20740, USA Antoine Strugarek Dept. de Physique, University of Montreal, C.P. 6128 Succ. Centre-Ville, Montreal, Quebec, H3C-3J7, Canada Vadim Uritsky NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Code 671.0, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA ABSTRACT Shortly after the seminal paper “Self-Organized Criticality: An explanation of 1/f noise” by Bak, Tang, and Wiesenfeld (1987), the idea has been applied to solar physics, in “Avalanches and the Distribution of Solar Flares” by Lu and Hamilton (1991). In the following years, an in- spiring cross-fertilization from complexity theory to solar and astrophysics took place, where the SOC concept was initially applied to solar flares, stellar flares, and magnetospheric substorms, and later extended to the radiation belt, the heliosphere, lunar craters, the asteroid belt, the Saturn ring, pulsar glitches, soft X-ray repeaters, blazars, black-hole objects, cosmic rays, and boson clouds. The application of SOC concepts has been performed by numerical cellular automaton simulations, by analytical calculations of statistical (powerlaw-like) distributions based on physical scaling laws, and by observational tests of theoretically predicted size distributions and waiting time distributions. Attempts have been undertaken to import physical models into the numerical SOC toy models, such as the discretization of magneto-hydrodynamics (MHD) processes. The novel applications stimulated also vigorous debates about the discrimination be- tween SOC models, SOC-like, and non-SOC processes, such as phase transitions, turbulence, random-walk diffusion, percolation, branching processes, network theory, chaos theory, fractality, multi-scale, and other complexity phenomena. We review SOC studies from the last 25 years and highlight new trends, open questions, and future challenges, as discussed during two recent ISSI workshops on this theme. Subject headings: instabilities — methods: statistical — Sun: flare — stars: flare — planets and satellites: rings — cosmic rays . –3– Contents 1 INTRODUCTION 6 2 BASICS OF SELF-ORGANIZED CRITICALITY SYSTEMS 8 2.1 SOCDefinitions ...................................... ..... 8 2.2 TheDriver ......................................... ..... 9 2.3 Instability and Criticality . ....... 9 2.4 Avalanches ........................................ ...... 11 2.5 Microscopic Structure and Complexity . ........... 11 2.6 The Scale-Free Probability Conjecture . ............ 12 2.7 GeometricScalingLaws ................................ ....... 13 2.8 FractalGeometry.................................. ......... 14 2.9 Spatio-Temporal Evolution and Transport Process . ............... 15 2.10FluxandEnergyScaling............................... ........ 17 2.11 CoherentandIncoherentRadiation . ............. 19 2.12WaitingTimesandMemory.............................. ....... 20 2.12.1 StationaryPoissonProcesses . ........ 21 2.12.2 Non-StationaryPoissonProcesses . .......... 21 2.12.3 Waiting Time Probabilities in the Fractal-Diffusive SOC Model . ....... 23 2.12.4 Weibull Distribution and Processes with Memory . ........ 25 2.13 TheSeparationofTimeScales . ......... 26 2.14 Cellular Automaton Models . ....... 27 3 ASTROPHYSICAL APPLICATIONS 30 3.1 SolarPhysics:Observations . .......... 30 3.1.1 Statistics of Solar Flare Hard X-Rays . ....... 30 3.1.2 Statistics of Solar Flare Soft X-rays . ........ 33 3.1.3 Statistics of Solar Flare EUV Fluxes . ...... 35 3.1.4 Statistics of Solar Flare Radio Fluxes . ...... 36 3.1.5 Statistics of Solar Energetic Particle (SEP) Events . ........... 40 3.1.6 Statistics of Solar Flare Waiting Times . ...... 42 –4– 3.1.7 SolarFractalMeasurements . ....... 43 3.1.8 FlareGeometryMeasurements . ...... 48 3.1.9 SolarWindMeasurements ............................. .... 49 3.1.10 Solar-TerrestrialEffects . ........ 51 3.2 Solar Physics: Theoretical Models . .......... 53 3.2.1 Solar Cellular Automaton Models . .... 53 3.2.2 Analytical Microscopic Solar SOC Models . ..... 55 3.2.3 Analytical Macroscopic Solar SOC Models . ...... 57 3.2.4 Solar Magnetic Field Models and SOC . ... 58 3.2.5 Magnetic Reconnection in Solar Flares and SOC . ...... 60 3.2.6 Particle Acceleration in Solar Flares and SOC . ...... 61 3.2.7 Hydrodynamic Flare Models and SOC . .... 62 3.2.8 TheRoleofNanoflares ............................... .... 66 3.3 PLANETS .......................................... .... 68 3.3.1 TheEarth’sMagnetosphere . ...... 68 3.3.2 TerrestrialGamma-RayFlashes . ....... 73 3.3.3 LunarCratersandMeteorites . ....... 75 3.3.4 TheAsteroidBelt ................................... .. 76 3.3.5 Mars ............................................ 76 3.3.6 Saturn’sRingSystem ................................ ... 77 3.3.7 JovianandNeptunianTrojans . ..... 78 3.3.8 KuijperBeltObjects ................................ .... 78 3.3.9 ExtrasolarPlanets ................................. .... 79 3.4 STARSANDGALAXIES ................................. .... 81 3.4.1 Stellar Flares . .. 81 3.4.2 StarFormation.................................... .... 83 3.4.3 Pulsars .......................................... .. 85 3.4.4 SoftGammaRayRepeaters. ...... 87 3.4.5 Blazars .......................................... .. 88 3.4.6 Black Holes and Accretion Disks . ..... 88 3.4.7 GalacticStructures ................................ ..... 89 –5– 3.4.8 Cosmology........................................ .. 89 3.4.9 CosmicRays ....................................... 92 4 DISCUSSION: SOC CONCEPTS, CRITIQUES, NEW TRENDS, AND OPEN PROB- LEMS 93 4.1 A Dual Approach of Self-Organized Criticality Systems . ............. 93 4.2 UniversalAspectsofSOCSystems . .......... 94 4.3 PhysicalAspectsofSOCSystems . .......... 94 4.4 PowerlawsandDeviations .............................. ....... 95 4.5 The Meaning of Self-Organized Criticality . ......... 96 4.6 SOCandTurbulence .................................. ...... 97 4.7 SOCandPercolation.................................. ....... 98 4.8 SOCandBranchingTheory............................. ........ 99 4.9 Challenges and Open Questions in Solar SOC Models . ......... 100 5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 104 6 REFERENCES 109 7 ACRONYMS 139 –6– 1. INTRODUCTION About 25 years ago, the concept of self-organized criticality (SOC) emerged (Bak et al. 1987), initially envisioned to explain the ubiquitous 1/f-power spectra, which can be characterized by a powerlaw function P (ν) ν−1. The term 1/f power spectra or flicker noise should actually be understood in broader terms, in- ∝ cluding power spectra with pink noise (P (ν) ν−1), red noise (P (ν) ν−2), and black noise (P (ν) ν−3), ∝ ∝ ∝ essentially everything except white noise (P (ν) ν0). While white noise represents traditional random ∝ processes with uncorrelated fluctuations, 1/f power spectra are a synonym for time series with non-random structures that exhibit long-range correlations. These non-random time structures represent the avalanches in Bak’s paradigm of sandpiles. Consequently, Bak’s seminal paper in 1987 triggered a host of numerical simulations of sandpile avalanches, which all exhibit powerlaw-like size distributions of avalanche sizes and durations. These numerical simulations were, most commonly, cellular automata in the language of complexity theory, which are able to produce complex spatio-temporal patterns by iterative application of a simple mathematical redistribution rule. The numerical algorithms of cellular automata are extremely simple, ba- sically a one-liner that defines the redistribution rule, with an iterative loop around it, but can produce the most complex dynamical patterns, similar to the beautiful geometric patterns created by Mandelbrot’s

Load more