Solar Physics

, Volume 224, Issue 1–2, pp 133–143 | Cite as

Systematically Asymmetric Heliospheric Magnetic Field: Evidence for a Quadrupole Mode and Non-Axisymmetry with Polarity Flip-Flops

Article
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Recent studies of the heliospheric magnetic field (HMF) have detected interesting, systematic hemispherical and longitudinal asymmetries which have a profound significance for the understanding of solar magnetic fields. The in situ HMF measurements since the 1960s show that the heliospheric current sheet (HCS) is systematically shifted (coned) southward during solar minimum times, leading to the concept of a bashful ballerina. While temporary shifts can be considerably larger, the average HCS shift (coning) angle is a few degrees, less than the 7.2∘ tilt of the solar rotation axis. Recent solar observations during the last two solar cycles verify these results and show that the magnetic areas in the northern solar hemisphere are larger and their intensity weaker than in the south during long intervals in the late declining to minimum phase. The multipole expansion reveals a strong quadrupole term which is oppositely directed to the dipole term. These results imply that the Sun has a symmetric quadrupole S0 dynamo mode that oscillates in phase with the dominant dipole A0 mode. Moreover, the heliospheric magnetic field has a strong tendency to produce solar tilts that are roughly opposite in longitudinal phase. This implies is a systematic longitudinal asymmetry and leads to a “flip-flop” type behaviour in the dominant HMF sector whose period is about 3.2 years. This agrees very well with the similar flip-flop period found recently in sunspots, as well as with the observed ratio of three between the activity cycle period and the flip-flop period of sun-like stars. Accordingly, these results require that the solar dynamo includes three modes, A0, S0 and a non-axisymmetric mode. Obviously, these results have a great impact on solar modelling.

Keywords

Heliospheric Current Sheet Solar Magnetic Field Multipole Expansion Solar Dynamo Heliospheric Magnetic Field 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Berdyugina, S. V.: 2004, Solar Phys. this issue.Google Scholar
  2. Berdyugina, S. V. and Usoskin, I. G.: 2003, Astron. Astrophys. 405, 1121.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  3. Bravo, S. and Gonzalez-Esparza, J. A.: 2000, Geophys. Res. Lett. 27, 847–849.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  4. Carbonell, M., Oliver, R., and Ballester, J. L.: 1993, Astron. Astrophys. 274, 497.ADSGoogle Scholar
  5. Crooker, N. U., Lazarus, A. J., Phillips, J. L., Steinberg, J. T., Szabo, A., Lepping, R. P., and Smith, E. J.: 1997, J. Geophys. Res. 102, 4673.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  6. Garcia, H.: 1990, Solar Phys. 127, 185.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  7. Hoeksema, J. T.: 1995, Space Sci. Rev. 72, 137.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  8. Jetsu, L., Pelt, J., Tuominen, I., and Nations, H.: 1991, The Sun and Cool Stars. Activity, Magnetism, Dynamos, Springer, Heidelberg, p. 381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mursula, K. and Hiltula, T.: 2003, Geophys. Res. Lett. 30, SSC 2–1-4, doi: 10.1029/2003GL018201.Google Scholar
  10. Mursula, K. and Zieger, B.: 1996, J. Geophys. Res. 101, 27077.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  11. Mursula, K., Hiltula, T., and Zieger, B.: 2002, Geophys. Res. Lett. 29, 28–1-4, doi: 10.1029/2002GL015318.Google Scholar
  12. Neugebauer, M., Smith, E. J., Ruzmaikin, A., Feynman, J., and Vaughan, A. H.: 2000, J. Geophys. Res. 105, 2315.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  13. Oliver, R. and Ballester, J. L.: 1994, Solar Phys. 169, 215.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  14. Rosenberg, R. L. and Coleman, P. J.: 1969, J. Geophys. Res. 74, 5611.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  15. Roy, J.-R.: 1977, Solar Phys. 52, 53–61.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  16. Simpson, J. A., Zhang, M., and Bame, S.: 1996, Astrophys. J. 465, L69.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  17. Smith, E. J., Jokipii, J. R., Kota, J., Lepping, R. P., and Szabo, A.: 2000, Astrophys. J. 533, 1084.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  18. Takalo, J. and Mursula, K.: 2002, Geophys. Res. Lett. 29, 31–1-4, doi: 10.1029/2002GL014658.Google Scholar
  19. Zhao, X. P., Hoeksema, H. T., and Scherrer, P. H.: 2004, J. Geophys. Res., submitted.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Physical SciencesUniversity of OuluFinland

Personalised recommendations