Astron. Astrophys. 333, 970-976 (1998)
3. The energy distribution of relativistic electrons
The energy distribution of the relativistic electrons responsible
for the observed emission changes with time due to different types of
losses, that depend on the environment where the emission takes place.
Electrons are affected by synchrotron losses in the presence of the
magnetic field, and undergo Coulomb collisions with the particles of
the background thermal plasma.
A detailed study of the influence of the different types of loss
mechanisms on the electron distribution have been developed for the
analysis of the decaying phase of flares (see Franciosini &
Chiuderi Drago 1995 and references therein). Generally speaking,
Coulomb collisions have a typical time scale
hours, where is the thermal electron density,
while for synchrotron losses hours. In the case
of UX Arietis the quoted values for the magnetic field range from
10 G in the corona to G
at photospheric level, while an almost constant thermal density with
cm-3 can be assumed (see Massi &
Chiuderi Drago 1992 for details). Hence, collisional losses will
influence the emission in the same way everywhere in the loop and on
time scales of the order of day, while
synchrotron losses will strongly suppress the emission from the
compact region near the photosphere in a few minutes after the
injection onset, but will affect the radiation from the extended
coronal region only after some hours. Therefore, the consequences of
radiative losses will be seen first at higher frequencies, while the
low frequency emission coming from the diffuse region remains
unaffected. The above considerations imply that radiative losses must
be taken into account even during the rising phase of the flare, i.e.,
during the phase in which a large amount of new accelerated particles
is injected in the loop.
In order to quantify how synchrotron and collision losses influence
the electron distribution, it is necessary to define a specific model
of the radio source. The geometry of the region where the flare energy
is produced is not known, although the emission properties, related to
the presence of the magnetic field, let us imagine loop-like
structures analogous to those present in the solar corona. This
picture is consistent with the one suggested in the previous section
by the spectral shape and can also account for different radiative
losses, as outlined above. In fact, in a magnetic loop anchored to the
photosphere the compact region, whose emission peaks at higher
frequencies, is the one which suffers from stronger radiative losses
and the one which is more easily obscured by the stellar rotation. The
extended coronal part of the loop emits longer and constitutes almost
an halo around the star.
We assume here that the loop structure is the same of the model by
Franciosini & Chiuderi Drago (1995), i.e. a dipolar magnetic field
generated by a dipole buried under the stellar surface, and connecting
two starspots of radius and angular separation
. The strength of the dipole is determined by
the value of the magnetic field in the center
of the spots. As shown in Fig. 2, the magnetic field is described
in terms of polar coordinates ( ) on the plane
perpendicular to the line of sight, where
corresponds to the loop top and r is the distance from the
dipole, and is assumed to be constant along the line of sight.
![[FIGURE]](img34.gif) |
Fig. 2. A sketch of the magnetic field structure: the dashed curves identify the loop and the bold segments the starspots
|
We suppose that electrons are injected at the top of the loop
( ), uniformly, isotropically and at a constant
rate. The dynamical time for relativistic electrons is very short,
sec; hence, the injected electrons spread out
rapidly from the acceleration site into the whole magnetic loop and,
being reflected in the appropriate mirror points, reach in a very
short time a definite spatial distribution. From our point of view,
the attainment of this spatial distribution can be considered
instantaneous since, for the moment, we have no way of investigating
this short transient phase.
In order to derive the electron energy distribution as a function
of space and time, we must solve the full kinetic equation. In our
case, however, it is not possible to have any spatial resolution of
the observed fluxes, so it has no sense to solve the equation exactly
for the spatial dependence. Moreover, the time scales over which we
are interested to investigate the effects of radiative and collision
losses and of the continuous particle acceleration are much longer
( ) than the dynamical time needed to attain a
stationary distribution in absence of losses ( ).
For this reason we decided to analyse the problem in two separate
steps: we first derived the spatial density distribution just after
the short transient phase neglecting energy losses. We then used this
distribution as source function to study the time evolution including
all losses (see Eq. (3)).
The solution of the kinetic equation along the magnetic field lines
has been studied in the context of solar flares (see e.g. McTiernan
& Petrosian 1990). For the first step we are interested in the
stationary solution in the case of a non-uniform magnetic field and in
the absence of losses. In the simplest case of an isotropically
injected distribution at the loop top, as the one we are considering
here, Leach & Petrosian (1981) show that the electron number
density remains unaltered while electrons stream along the magnetic
field lines and are reflected at the mirror points. This happens only
if the thermal density scale height is larger than the magnetic one
and if the adimensional column depth,
( is the coordinate along the loop axis), is
smaller than one. This is the case for the emitting region in this
binary system since an almost constant thermal density
cm-3 is quoted (see before) and
since the maximum loop length can not be larger than the binary
separation cm. Therefore, for times longer than
the dynamical time the electron density is independent of the spatial
coordinate. Thus, we can assume that relativistic electrons are
injected uniformly and isotropically in the whole loop at a constant
rate el. cm-3 sec-1 and
we can study how this uniform distribution evolves in time due to
losses.
The equation describing the time evolution of the electron energy
distribution, , in the case of injection plus
energy losses is:
![[EQUATION]](img46.gif)
where
![[EQUATION]](img47.gif)
represents the energy variation due to synchrotron and collision
losses, respectively, and represents the
electrons that escape from the emitting region into the loss-cone. The
loss-cone term has been evaluated by Franciosini & Chiuderi Drago
(1995) as:
![[EQUATION]](img49.gif)
where is the loss-cone solid angle, with
, ( local magnetic field),
and sec ( ) is the
"deflection time" (Spitzer 1962), i.e. the characteristic time scale
over which collisions with the background protons isotropize again the
electron distribution.
The general solution of Eq. (3) is given by Melrose & Brown
(1976) as
![[EQUATION]](img55.gif)
where
![[EQUATION]](img56.gif)
is the electron energy at time
and the relation between
and can be derived by integrating Eq. (4) (see
Chiuderi Drago & Franciosini 1993 for detailed calculations). The
complete expression of the energy distribution at time t is
obtained by carrying out the integral in Eq. (6) and substituting the
relation . We have assumed for the injected
energy distribution and for the initial
distribution the same functional
dependence:
![[EQUATION]](img62.gif)
and
![[EQUATION]](img63.gif)
In the above expressions and
is the total electron number density at
. The result of the integral in Eq. (6) depends
on the value of : since at a given time t
the distribution is defined for
, while is defined only
for (and is zero elsewhere), the effective
integration limits are:
![[EQUATION]](img70.gif)
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1998
Online publication: April 28, 1998
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |