Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
201,818 studies31 sourcesUpdated 32 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY 4.0The Astrophysical Journal

What Does 2D Coronal Seismology Measure?

  • Zihao 子浩 Yang 杨1
  • Yuhong Fan1
  • Giuliana de Toma1
  • Sarah Gibson1
  • Matthias Rempel1
  1. 1National Center for Atmospheric Research
Open at sourcePDFDOICite

Abstract

Two-dimensional (2D) coronal seismology based on coronagraphic imaging spectroscopy has emerged as a promising method for mapping the coronal magnetic field, but the physical meaning of its inferred quantities under optically thin line-of-sight (LOS) integration remains uncertain. We investigate this problem by synthesizing coronagraphic observables from a global wave-driven magnetohydrodynamic model with a long LOS extent and a structured corona and by applying the same analysis procedures used for observations. We compare the diagnosed density, wave propagation direction, phase speed, and magnetic-field strength with different LOS-weighted reference quantities from the model. We find that the measured density and the wave propagation direction are both well represented by LOS emissivity-weighted quantities. In contrast, the phase speed is not controlled by emissivity weighting alone: the LOS distribution of wave velocity amplitude also plays an important role. As a result, the inferred magnetic field is better represented by combining the emissivity-weighted density with an amplitude-dependent effective speed. Emissivity weighting nevertheless remains a reasonable approximation, and a useful baseline, over much of the field of view, especially where the LOS does not cross strongly structured plasma-sheet-like regions. These results clarify the physical interpretation of 2D coronal seismology and provide guidance for future coronal magnetic-field tomography and model-constrained applications.

Related

  1. What does self-supervision add to engineered features for stellar light curves?
    Zijun Liu, Yue Ma, Christopher A. Theissen
    arXivPreprintarXiv licenceFull textInstrumentation & methodsSolar & stellar physicsarXiv
  2. The H IX galaxy survey IV: What does the molecular gas reveal in HI eXtreme galaxies
    V. A. Capa, H. Dénes, K. A. Lutz +1
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textGalaxiesarXiv
  3. The H IX galaxy survey IV: What does the molecular gas reveal in H i eXtreme galaxies?
    V A Capa, H Dénes, K A Lutz +1
    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietyPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textGalaxiesCrossref
  4. On what scales does strong lensing robustly constrain the mass profile of low-mass perturbers?
    M Tajalli, S Vegetti
    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietyPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textGalaxiesCrossref
  5. Saturn’s Evolutionary History and Seismology: Survival of Deep Stably Stratified Regions in Evolutionary Models of Saturn Consistent with Ring Seismology
    Yubo Su, Janosz W. Dewberry, Roberto Tejada Arevalo +2
    The Astrophysical JournalPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textSolar & stellar physicsIOP/AASCrossref

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{杨2026what,
  title = {{What Does 2D Coronal Seismology Measure?}},
  author = {Zihao 子浩 Yang 杨 and Yuhong Fan and Giuliana de Toma and Sarah Gibson and Matthias Rempel},
  journal = {The Astrophysical Journal},
  year = {2026},
  month = nov,
  doi = {10.3847/1538-4357/aeb2f6},
  url = {https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/aeb2f6},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - What Does 2D Coronal Seismology Measure?
AU  - Zihao 子浩 Yang 杨
AU  - Yuhong Fan
AU  - Giuliana de Toma
AU  - Sarah Gibson
AU  - Matthias Rempel
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/11/06
JO  - The Astrophysical Journal
DO  - 10.3847/1538-4357/aeb2f6
UR  - https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/aeb2f6
AB  - Two-dimensional (2D) coronal seismology based on coronagraphic imaging spectroscopy has emerged as a promising method for mapping the coronal magnetic field, but the physical meaning of its inferred quantities under optically thin line-of-sight (LOS) integration remains uncertain. We investigate this problem by synthesizing coronagraphic observables from a global wave-driven magnetohydrodynamic model with a long LOS extent and a structured corona and by applying the same analysis procedures used for observations. We compare the diagnosed density, wave propagation direction, phase speed, and magnetic-field strength with different LOS-weighted reference quantities from the model. We find that the measured density and the wave propagation direction are both well represented by LOS emissivity-weighted quantities. In contrast, the phase speed is not controlled by emissivity weighting alone: the LOS distribution of wave velocity amplitude also plays an important role. As a result, the inferred magnetic field is better represented by combining the emissivity-weighted density with an amplitude-dependent effective speed. Emissivity weighting nevertheless remains a reasonable approximation, and a useful baseline, over much of the field of view, especially where the LOS does not cross strongly structured plasma-sheet-like regions. These results clarify the physical interpretation of 2D coronal seismology and provide guidance for future coronal magnetic-field tomography and model-constrained applications.
SN  - 1538-4357
SN  - 0004-637X
ER  -