Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-wpx69 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-12T15:05:03.081Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Development of Sunspot Groups

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

Robert F. Howard*
Affiliation:
National Solar Observatory, National Optical Astronomy Observatories, *Tucson, AZ85726

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

It is shown that the growth and decay rates of sunspot groups are both a function of the axial tilt angles of the groups. Both of these rates reach a maximum near the average tilt angle, which is around +5°, not 0°. (A positive tilt angle represents the situation where the leading spots are equatorward of the following spots). The fact that this peak angle is close to the average tilt and not 0° suggests that this may be the orientation of the subsurface toroidal flux tube(s) from which the sunspot groups form. In general, spot groups with positive tilt angles show faster average percentage growth rates for greater positive tilt angles. For negative tilt angles (following spots equatorward of leading spots) the situation is quite different. Within certain well-defined ranges of tilt angles the average group percentage area growth rates are quite high and the dispersion in this quantity is large. In other well-defined tilt angle ranges the percentage growth rates are uniformly (relatively) small. The difference between these average growth rates is more than a factor two. The reality of this result can be demonstrated by selecting for analysis various subsets of the data. It may be hypothesized that in general the dispersion measured in group tilt angles results from the random action of large-scale convection on the rising magnetic flux loops. Both growth and decay are facilitated in the case of flux loops that have a minimum twist. The percentage growth and decay rates are affected by the fact that groups with tilt angles near the average value tend to be larger than groups with different tilt angles. The ‘quantized’ behavior of the percentage growth rates for negative tilt angles is difficult to fit into any rough model of flux emergence. The more or less ‘quantized’ nature of the growth-tilt angle relationship for negative tilt angles is quite puzzling and may reflect some characteristic of the subsurface flux orientation or development which is at present unknown.

Type
Session 8. Structure and Role of Emerging Flux Regions
Copyright
Copyright © Astronomical Society of the Pacific 1993

References

Howard, R.F. 1991a, Solar Phys., 135, 327.Google Scholar
Howard, R.F. 1991b, Solar Phys., 135, 339.Google Scholar
Howard, R.F. 1991c, Solar Phys., 136, 251.Google Scholar
Howard, R.F. 1992, Solar Phys., 137, 205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, R.F. 1993, Solar Phys., (in press).Google Scholar
Howard, R.F., Gilman, P.A., and Gilman, P.I. 1984, Ap. J., 283, 373.Google Scholar
Parker, E.N. 1987, Solar Phys., 110, 11.Google Scholar
Parker, E.N. 1988, Ap. J., 325, 880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar