Astron. Astrophys. 353, 729-740 (2000)
5. Effect of plasma electrons
Central to the above mechanism for HXR production is the assumption
that the neutral beam survives as such along the stopping length of
the protons without the beam electrons being stripped from them. As
discussed by Brown et al. (1998a) and by Simnett & Haines (1990)
the presence in the background gas of free electrons, which we have
ignored here so far, modifies the electrodynamics and can result in
electron stripping. Since there will always be some free background
electrons present in the real solar atmosphere, even in the low
chromosphere, we reconsider here whether a neutral beam can in fact
survive the propagation process. In doing so we correct an error in
the discussion of this problem by Brown et al. (1998a) which may
change their conclusions under some conditions.
When a neutral beam enters a region with free background electrons
these respond to the p-e charge separation electric field and so
contribute to the return current. Denoting by
, and
the current densities of the beam
electrons, beam protons, and ambient electrons respectively, steady
current neutralisation then requires
. Background electron motion results
in so that
and since
in the beam
implies
so that the electrons fall
progressively further behind the protons. Whether this effect is large
enough to affect our conclusions regarding HXR production depends on
how large a current the background
can carry in response to the electric field and this will depend on
the free electron density and on the effective collisionality
(resistivity) of the background plasma. The dynamics of this process
are described by Eqs. (16)-(18) of Brown et al. (1998a) which, in the
above notation (dropping subscript e for simplicity and
denoting the electric field by )
are
![[EQUATION]](img222.gif)
![[EQUATION]](img223.gif)
![[EQUATION]](img224.gif)
where
![[EQUATION]](img225.gif)
and is the collisonal drag
force. If the beam persists long enough, the solution of these
equations approaches the steady state (Brown et al. 1998a)
![[EQUATION]](img227.gif)
with determined by
![[EQUATION]](img229.gif)
The error in Brown et al. (1998a) was the argument that (35)
implies (meaning that the beam
electrons are stripped from the protons and join the plasma electron
drift) "since is monotonic". In
Brown et al. the treatment was solely 1-D and deterministic and the
beam and plasma were cold so no spread in
were included. In real plasmas
is, however, only monotonic
( ) for drift speeds well above the
thermal speed but turns over at
around the thermal speed and tends to
for slow drifts. Unless the plasma
is very highly conductive (i.e. hot) the plasma drift speed
, and hence the plasma drift current
, at which (33) reaches a steady
state are smaller than ( ) found by
Brown et al. In short, the plasma electrons are more collisional than
the beam electrons and their contribution to neutralising
will be less likely to result in
beam stripping than suggested by Brown et al. To quantify this for
general drift speed we adopt (with
at temperature T)
![[EQUATION]](img240.gif)
which for is
![[EQUATION]](img242.gif)
where is the background plasma
temperature. (Here we have essentially taken the Spitzer conductivity
limit for a fully ionised gas and ignored any anomalous effects -
these classical are pessimistic in minimising the collisionality and
hence maximising ). For the beam
electrons ( ) it is
![[EQUATION]](img245.gif)
where we have added the factor f from Eq. (1) to allow as
before for the fact that, as they propagate, beam electrons become
`warm' relative to the bombarding background.
Inserting (37) and (38) in (35) to find
we get
![[EQUATION]](img246.gif)
and inserting this in (34) gives
![[EQUATION]](img247.gif)
Once the beam electron heating, which we have described in previous
Sections, is well developed we approach
giving
![[EQUATION]](img249.gif)
with . Thus
and stripping is negligible even
for quite high beam densities - even moreso in the chromosphere than
in the corona since falls across
the transition zone
At the start of beam propagation, however, we have
and so
![[EQUATION]](img254.gif)
This suggests that if the above steady state is approached and the
beam starts and in the corona then very substantial electron stripping
may occur ( ) even for an
of 10 MeV unless:
, which is unlikely; and/or the beam
density is very high ( - i.e.
essentially all of the plasma is accelerated; and/or substantial
anomalous resistivity (collisionality) exists. If on the other hand
the beam started in the chromosphere the facts that
falls by a factor
across the transition zone, that
the number density of free electrons drops with depth, and that the
beam becomes denser as the protons slow down, all make survival of the
neutral beam more likely. This analysis rests on consideration of the
steady state. This is approached on a timescale
. At the start of the beam the
relevant numbers yield
![[EQUATION]](img261.gif)
which is short compared to the time for the beam to reach the
chromosphere or to stop unless and
.
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 2000
Online publication: December 17, 1999
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |