Inclusion of photoexcitation in radiative losses?

[Cosima Breu]

Dear all,

I am currently trying to make radiative loss tables for simulations of stellar atmospheres with CHIANTI's radloss function. 

Currently we are assuming solar abundances, and I found that the only parameter I would need to change when going from the Sun to other stars in this case is the surface temperature to determine the radiation field for photoexcitation. 

Now I have found that photoexcitation does usually not seem to be included when calculating optically thin radiative losses for solar 3D MHD simulations e.g. with MURaM.

Is there any specific reason why this process seems to be usually neglected?

Kind regards

Cosima Breu

[G Del Zanna]

Cosima,

there are usually many processes that are usually neglected..

I presume most people think of the losses as coronal losses for which what we have in CHIANTI is OK and  PE is not relevant (at the surface).

PE would be most relevant for the chromosphere, where actually 

CHIANTI is a bit limited. 

We are in the process to include several other processes in CHIANTI,

which affect the transition region and chromosphere mostly.

In the future we will also add photoionization, which might be 

important for you, depending on what kind of stars you want to model.. 

Giulio

---

From: chi...@googlegroups.com <chi...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Cosima Breu <cosim...@gmail.com>
Sent: 01 November 2023 17:45
To: chianti <chi...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Inclusion of photoexcitation in radiative losses?

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "chianti" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chianti+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chianti/1bb063c2-a588-4711-91f3-9b9d55be3c4cn%40googlegroups.com.