4.7 Article

The solar wind in time: a change in the behaviour of older winds?

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 476, Issue 2, Pages 2465-2475

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/sty394

Keywords

stars: mass-loss; stars: solar-type; stars: winds, outflows

Funding

  1. Trinity College Postgraduate Award through the School of Physics

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this paper, we model the wind of solar analogues at different ages to investigate the evolution of the solar wind. Recently, it has been suggested that winds of solar type stars might undergo a change in properties at old ages, whereby stars older than the Sun would be less efficient in carrying away angular momentum than what was traditionally believed. Adding to this, recent observations suggest that old solar-type stars show a break in coronal properties, with a steeper decay in X-ray luminosities and temperatures at older ages. We use these X-ray observations to constrain the thermal acceleration of winds of solar analogues. Our sample is based on the stars from the 'Sun in Time' project with ages between 120 and 7000 Myr. The break in X-ray properties leads to a break in wind mass-loss rates (<(M)over dot>) at roughly 2 Gyr, with <(M)over dot> (t < 2Gyr) alpha t(-0.74) and <(M)over dot> (t > 2Gyr) alpha t(-3.9). This steep decay in <(M)over dot> at older ages could be the reason why older stars are less efficient at carrying away angular momentum, which would explain the anomalously rapid rotation observed in older stars. We also show that none of the stars in our sample would have winds dense enough to produce thermal emission above 1-2 GHz, explaining why their radio emissions have not yet been detected. Combining our models with dynamo evolution models for the magnetic field of the Earth, we find that, at early ages (approximate to 100 Myr), our Earth had a magnetosphere that was three or more times smaller than its current size.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available