On flares, substorms, and the theory of impulsive flux transfer events.
Bratenahl, A. and P. J. Baum, On flares, substorms, and the theory of impulsive flux transfer events., Sol. Phys., 47, 345-360 (1976) (ADS)
(click on the image for a larger version)
To the Archivist's mind the pioneering work of Baum and Bratenahl,
which this work summarizes, was way ahead of its time. Their term
"IFTE" (for Impulsive Flux Transfer Event) never seemed to catch
on, but in what sense does our present understanding of the MHD
framework transcend what's in the reference cited here, at least
at a cartoon level?
Is this not CSHKP described with a different term,
and one that might well be more intuitive physically?
After all, only one pair of "field lines" (of negligible
substance) can actually "reconnect".
Note that "flux transfer" does not necessarily even
imply a change in topology, since field lines are not involved.
Note also that the authors embraced the aurora/solar flare
analogy, for which the Archive contains a dedicated
other, and in
fact more than one.
This cartoon, however, sticks with the preponderant point of
view that currents do not matter, just B itself.
That is clear from the largest closed field line drawn here,
which meets opposite photospheric boundary conditions on the
sense of j according to the left/right twist patterns
in the subphotospheric flux ropes.
To the Archivist's mind the pioneering work of Baum and Bratenahl, which this work summarizes, was way ahead of its time. Their term "IFTE" (for Impulsive Flux Transfer Event) never seemed to catch on, but in what sense does our present understanding of the MHD framework transcend what's in the reference cited here, at least at a cartoon level? Is this not CSHKP described with a different term, and one that might well be more intuitive physically? After all, only one pair of "field lines" (of negligible substance) can actually "reconnect". Note that "flux transfer" does not necessarily even imply a change in topology, since field lines are not involved. Note also that the authors embraced the aurora/solar flare analogy, for which the Archive contains a dedicated other, and in fact more than one.
This cartoon, however, sticks with the preponderant point of view that currents do not matter, just B itself. That is clear from the largest closed field line drawn here, which meets opposite photospheric boundary conditions on the sense of j according to the left/right twist patterns in the subphotospheric flux ropes.