Aerospace Electronic and Defense Systems: August 2023

Thursday, August 31, 2023

Only 1,280 Breeding Humans Once Roamed Earth, Gene Study Shows

In a near extinction event, humankind struggled to survive during a 100,000 year period during the early Pleistocene, according to researchers who used a computer model to discover a severe population bottleneck in our species’ ancient past.

The bottleneck occurred between 813,000 years ago and 930,000 years ago, and reduced an ancestral human species to less than 1,300 breeding individuals. The issue persisted for 117,000 years, and aligns with a chronological gap in the African and Eurasian human fossil records in that period. The team’s research on the bottleneck was published today in Science.

Population bottlenecks are events in which a species’ total population is severely reduced, which causes an overall reduction in genetic diversity across the species. The loss of genetic diversity can cause populations to become less healthy. Bioengineers can now synthesize genetic diversity in animal populations through cloning and gene editing.

Around 900,000 years ago, during the Middle Pleistocene epoch, Earth underwent several important geological, climatic, and evolutionary changes. Here are some key events and developments during that time:

Glacial-Interglacial Cycles: The Middle Pleistocene was characterized by a series of glacial and interglacial periods, where the climate alternated between colder and warmer conditions. These fluctuations were driven by changes in Earth's orbital parameters, including variations in the tilt of its axis and the shape of its orbit.
Ice Age Extent: During this time, large ice sheets covered significant portions of North America, Europe, and Asia. These ice sheets expanded and contracted over the course of glacial cycles, shaping the landscapes and influencing global sea levels.
Homo erectus: Human evolution was ongoing during the Middle Pleistocene. Homo erectus, an early human species, had already migrated out of Africa and was present in regions across Asia and Europe. They were adapted to a variety of environments and are known for their sophisticated use of tools and ability to control fire.
Megafauna: The Middle Pleistocene was a time of diverse megafauna (large animals). Species like mammoths, mastodons, giant sloths, and saber-toothed cats roamed various parts of the world. These animals had to adapt to the changing climatic conditions and the presence of early humans.
Environmental Changes: The shifting climate and the advance and retreat of ice sheets had a profound impact on ecosystems. As ice sheets expanded, they displaced habitats and caused significant changes in plant and animal distribution. This could have led to extinctions and the emergence of new species as organisms adapted to changing conditions.
Early Human Culture: Homo erectus populations during this time were developing more advanced tool-making techniques and potentially exhibiting early forms of social behavior. Evidence of controlled fire usage also suggests advancements in cooking and shelter, which likely provided an advantage in the harsh Pleistocene environment.
Sea Level Changes: The fluctuating ice sheets had a direct impact on global sea levels. During glacial periods, sea levels were lower due to the accumulation of water in ice sheets, exposing land bridges between continents and influencing the migration of species, including early humans.
Continental Drift: The Middle Pleistocene also saw ongoing movement of Earth's tectonic plates, shaping the positions of continents and oceans. This movement influenced ocean currents, climate patterns, and the distribution of terrestrial and marine life.

It's important to note that our understanding of the Middle Pleistocene is based on a combination of geological, paleontological, and archaeological evidence. The specifics of events and conditions during this time can vary depending on geographic location, as well as the availability and accuracy of the fossil and sedimentary record.

Early ancestral bottleneck could've spelled the end for modern humans

How a new method of inferring ancient population size revealed a severe bottleneck in the human population which almost wiped out the chance for humanity as we know it today.

An unexplained gap in the African/Eurasian fossil record may now be explained thanks to a team of researchers from China, Italy and the United States.

Using a novel method called FitCoal (fast infinitesimal time coalescent process), the researchers were able to accurately determine demographic inferences by using modern-day human genomic sequences from 3,154 individuals. Researchers published their findings online in the journal Science.

These findings indicate that early human ancestors went through a prolonged, severe bottleneck in which approximately 1,280 breeding individuals were able to sustain a population for about 117,000 years. While this research has illuminated some aspects of early to middle Pleistocene ancestors, there are many more questions to be answered since uncovering this information.

A large amount of genomic sequences were analyzed in this study. However, "the fact that FitCoal can detect the ancient severe bottleneck with even a few sequences represents a breakthrough," says senior author Yun-Xin Fu, a theoretical population geneticist at University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.

The results determined using FitCoal to calculate the likelihood for present-day genome sequences found that early human ancestors experienced extreme loss of life and therefore, loss of genetic diversity.

"The gap in the African and Eurasian fossil records can be explained by this bottleneck in the Early Stone Age as chronologically. It coincides with this proposed time period of significant loss of fossil evidence," says senior author Giorgio Manzi, an anthropologist at Sapienza University of Rome.

Reasons suggested for this downturn in human ancestral population are mostly climatic: glaciation events around this time lead to changes in temperatures, severe droughts, and loss of other species, potentially used as food sources for ancestral humans.

An estimated 65.85% of current genetic diversity may have been lost due to this bottleneck in the early to middle Pleistocene era, and the prolonged period of minimal numbers of breeding individuals threatened humanity as we know it today.

However, this bottleneck seems to have contributed to a speciation event where two ancestral chromosomes may have converged to form what is currently known as chromosome 2 in modern humans. With this information, the last common ancestor has potentially been uncovered for the Denisovans, Neanderthals, and modern humans (Homo sapiens).

We all know that once a question is answered, more questions arise.

"The novel finding opens a new field in human evolution because it evokes many questions, such as the places where these individuals lived, how they overcame the catastrophic climate changes, and whether natural selection during the bottleneck has accelerated the evolution of human brain," says senior author Yi-Hsuan Pan, an evolutionary and functional genomics at East China Normal University (ECNU).

Now that there is reason to believe an ancestral struggle occurred between 930,000 and 813,000 years ago, researchers can continue digging to find answers to these questions and reveal how such a small population persisted in assumably tricky and dangerous conditions. The control of fire, as well as the climate shifting to be more hospitable for human life, could have contributed to a later rapid population increase around 813,000 years ago.

"These findings are just the start. Future goals with this knowledge aim to paint a more complete picture of human evolution during this Early to Middle Pleistocene transition period, which will in turn continue to unravel the mystery that is early human ancestry and evolution," says senior author LI Haipeng, a theoretical population geneticist and computational biologist at Shanghai Institute of Nutrition and Health, Chinese Academy of Sciences (SINH-CAS).

This research was jointly led by Li Haipeng at SINH-CAS and Yi-Hsuan Pan at ECNU. Their collaborators, Fabio Di Vincenzo at the University of Florence, Giogio Manzi at Sapienza University of Rome, and Yun-Xin Fu at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, have made important contribution to the findings.

The research was first-authored by Hu Wangjie and Hao Ziqian who used to be students/interns at SINH-CAS and ECNU. They are currently affiliated with Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and Shandong First Medical University & Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, respectively. Du Pengyuan at SINH-CAS, and Cui Jialong at ECNU also contributed to this research.

More information: Wangjie Hu et al, Genomic inference of a severe human bottleneck during the Early to Middle Pleistocene transition, Science (2023). DOI: 10.1126/science.abq7487. www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abq7487

Citation: Early ancestral bottleneck could've spelled the end for modern humans (2023, August 31) retrieved 31 August 2023 from https://phys.org/news/2023-08-early-ancestral-bottleneck-couldve-modern.html

This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Imagine it's 900,000 years ago and you're wandering naked in the beautiful harshness of nature. It's getting colder and drier, food is scarce and almost everyone around you is dying. Your own survival hangs in the balance.

If that feels far from reality, it couldn't have been more real for your great-great-great... times 30,000.... grandparents.

A study published in the journal Science

on August 31 says our ancestors, then living in Africa, were on the brink of extinction.

There was a sudden reduction in the population, leaving only about 1,280 early humans. What caused the near full extinction is unclear, but it may well have been a form of climate change, similar to what we're experiencing today.

Most died, some survived, and then we came

The fate of humanity was literally in the hands of a few, and all our history, our loved ones and everyone we know comes from those very few lucky survivors. They managed to keep the population afloat for about 117,000 years, the study authors found.

"The fact that we are here today, populating this planet with over 8 billion individuals, means that we managed to survive myriad unfavorable events thanks to our adaptive abilities and, why not, a touch of luck," said Giorgio Manzi, professor of anthropology at Sapienza University of Rome. Manzi collaborated on the research.

A jaw from the skull of a Homo heidelbergensis, an ancient early human species — Homo heidelbergensis was a species of early humans that is believed to be a common ancestor of Neanderthals, Denisovans and modern humansImage: Hendrik Schmidt/ZB/dpa/picture alliance

A bottleneck event is when a large number of living things get squeezed by a natural event — like the name suggests, much like the thin neck of a bottle — and then a lucky few come out of the opening and spread out again.

A gap in the human fossil record

Science has taught us a lot about our origins, mostly through fossils.

It's generally accepted that about 700,000 to 500,000 years ago Neanderthals, Denisovans and an ancient version of us split from a common ancestor. That common ancestor may have been what scientists call, Homo heidelbergensis, and this new study appears to support that theory.

But there's a gap in the fossil records. There's very little fossil evidence from about 900,000 years ago, and that has puzzled scientists for decades.

This new study, however, presents a possible reason for the fewer fossils. It could be that between 930,000 and 813,000 years ago around 98.5% of those early humans died out.

If there were fewer individuals, it makes sense that fewer of them would have been fossilized — hence the reduction in fossil evidence.

Were Neanderthals more artistic than previously thought?

A carved prehistoric bone provides new insight into the Neanderthals' culture. We take a look at the famous fossils that shed light on our ancestors and their creative pursuits.

Image: Niedersächsisches Landesamt für Denkmalpflege/dpa/picture-alliance

Two views of a prehistoric bone show deliberate carvings.

Did a changing climate lead to their extinction?

The researchers said their findings strongly correlate with a "dramatic" climate change event that occurred about 1 million years ago.

The event, known as the Transition of the Lower and Middle Pleistocene, was a turning point for many living things.

"Our discovery draws attention to how climate changes have influenced our evolution," said Manzi, who also drew attention to how current human-caused climate change "could once again lead us to the brink of extinction."

It could have been a severe glaciation event, when ice spreads from the Earth's poles, severe droughts and the loss of other species, such as those that our ancestors may have eaten.

Sound familiar? We're seeing similar events today, the only difference being that the polar ice is melting, not spreading.

Looking into our past through human genes

The researchers analyzed the genome sequences of more than 3,000 modern humans, using a new statistical method called FitCoal.

FitCoal looks back in time through genetic material to gain an understanding about previous populations.

The findings still need to be tested against existing fossil and archaeological records. For instance, the researchers would like to find out whether those 1,280 survivors were indeed the ancestors of Neanderthals, Denisovans and modern humans.

And with FitCoal, all they need is a little genetic information.

Edited by: Zulfikar Abbany

Monday, August 28, 2023

Two Jesuits, A Pope And The Big Bang Cosmology Connection

Two Priests, A Pope And The Big Bang

There is no evidence that Fr. Georges Lemaître ever met Fr. Teilhard de Chardin, although their scientific careers overlapped to a considerable degree.

But they both played a role in one of the key debates about faith and science in the the last century.

Fr. Lemaître (1894-1966), the man who became known as the Father of the Big Bang, had a huge impact on cosmology in the mid 1920s and '30s. His idea of the 'primeval atom' (1931) set the stage for the mainstream Big Bang theory familiar to people today.

Georges Lemaître

Image courtesy Lemaître Archive at the Catholic University of Leuven.

His ideas also inspired the Jesuit paleontologist Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955) in his writings on human evolution and the prospect of a dynamic cosmos developing towards a metaphysical Omega Point.

Both men were standouts in their fields-- Lemaître more so than Teilhard, I would say, but both attracted the attention of the press because of the fact they were Catholic priests as well as scientists, rare birds then, as now.

But only one of the two, Fr. Lemaître, was honored by his own Church, while Fr. Teilhard... was treated like a leper.

For his scientific achievements, Lemaître was made a member of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences by Pope Pius XI in 1936. Under Pope John XXIII he would become its director. He was much praised by Catholics in the U.S., where the press covered his meetings with Einstein and other famous scientists--and loved to ask him about the interplay between science and faith. From his interview with the Literary Digest of 1933:

The writers of the Bible were illuminated more or less— some more than others— on the question of salvation. On other questions they were as wise or as ignorant as their generation. Hence it is utterly unimportant that errors of historic or scientific fact should be found in the Bible, especially if errors relate to events that were not directly observed by those who wrote about them.

In contrast, Teilhard, very early in the formative period of his career, was betrayed by a fellow cleric to the cardinals in Rome responsible for guarding the doctrine of the faith. They didn't like his unpublished freewheeling speculations on human evolution and what this meant for the theology surrounding human origins.

Indeed, it was largely to address some of the more disquieting notions Teilhard raised about Adam and Eve and the earliest humans, that Pope Pius XII issued the encyclical Humani Generis in 1950. Without specifically naming Teilhard or his writings, the pope reaffirmed the obligation for Catholics to accept the traditional belief that humanity was directly descended from a single mating pair and that original sin was passed on by descent from this couple. Teilhard had questioned the need for such a literal belief in light of evolution.

Denied any opportunity to defend his work, Teilhard was never allowed to publish a single word on his ideas during his life, despite repeated pleas to make his case in Rome. All that we have of his considerable output, was published by friends and colleagues after his death in 1955.

So here is a great tale of opposites in the modern saga of faith and science. But since the two priests never met, what else is there to be said?

As it happens, quite a bit. The recent English translation of Dominique Lambert's superb biography of Lemaître, The Atom of the Universe, goes into some detail on an incident not long after the pope's encyclical outlined its deep reservations about evolution.

Specifically, events surrounding a speech that Pope Pius XII made before the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in November 1951.

I want to make a brief aside here, although it should eventually be a post in its own right. I think Pope Pius XII doesn't get enough credit for being... well, one of the unacknowledged super geeks in the history of the papacy. From a history of science perspective, it is unfortunate that his biography is usually cast only in terms of the Second World War and the Vatican's attitude toward European Jews during the Holocaust.

In his private routine, for example, Pius was a pope who preferred to eat his meals alone so he could immerse himself in science magazines and technology reviews. And he couldn't resist discussing them in public as he believed there was no aspect of modern society the Church should not engage with.

It was under these circumstances that he took the opportunity to voice his enthusiasm for the Big Bang theory in that November of 1951. And in the view of some scholars, including the Father of the Big Bang theory himself, the pope got a little carried away.

Clearly and critically, as when it [the enlightened mind] examines facts and passes judgment on them, it perceives the work of creative omnipotence and recognizes that its power, set in motion by the mighty Fiat of the Creating Spirit billions of years ago, called into existence with gesture of generous love and spread over the universe matter bursting with energy. Indeed, it would seem that present-day science, with one sweep back across the centuries, has succeeded in bearing witness to the august instant of the Fiat Lux, when, along with matter, there burst forth from nothing a sea of light and radiation, and the elements split and churned and formed into millions of galaxies.

The speech made headlines worldwide, and it's not hard to see why it was commonly regarded as an attempt on the part of the Roman pontiff to view science as giving great support to the idea of the universe's creation by God.

Lemaître was not happy about the speech because he felt the Big Bang theory as it was proposed at the time, did not have compelling evidence to support it. (The key evidence was still a decade and a half away.)

One of his graduate students, the late Fr. Ernan McMullin, later wrote that he “could recall very vividly, Lemaître storming into class on his return from the Academy meeting in Rome, his usual jocularity entirely missing. He was emphatic in his insistence that the Big Bang model was still very tentative, and further that one could not exclude the possibility of a previous cosmic stage of construction."

Lemaître made his reservations known to the pope, probably through an intermediary, although it's also possible he met with the pope in person. And the next time the pope spoke on the science/faith connection a year later, he was indeed more cautious about the theory's support.

But what's odd about the pope's 1951 speech was the fact that when he talked up the Big Bang, he never mentioned Lemaître by name. And here, as Lambert argues in book, is the fascinating connection between Lemaître and Teilhard.

It seems to be the case, Lambert argues, that the pope's theological advisers were aware of the influence that Lemaître's cosmology had on the thought of the ostracized Teilhard. And because they considered Lemaître's influence on the Jesuit to be considerable, they urged the pope not to mention Lemaître while discussing his theory.

Indeed, the pope and his advisers would have avoided quoting Lemaître, according to Lambert, "because they were conscious of a certain intellectual proximity between the cosmology of the Canon and the 'natural philosophy' of Teilhard which was judged, during the period, highly problemastic."

While Lemaître's scientific contributions were held in high regard by Pius XII, it is also certain that the Holy Father could be distrustful of Lemaître's implicit philosophy that insistently defended a purely natural state of the beginning of the universe and that was close, in a manner, to Teilhard's phenomenology. The pope's advisers could not have helped but contribute to reinforcing that mistrust.

This would also explain why Lemaître was not consulted before the speech was given, even though the pope knew him well.

Lemaître had always embraced a view of God as fairly detached, as the Deus Absconditus, or Hidden God. Like a good priest, Lemaître believed God had created the world. But like a good scientist, he believed the world operated according to its own laws, with its own autonomy, an autonomy he considered a gift of the creator. This idea could be considered by some at odds with the more traditional view of the personal God of the Bible who often directly intervenes in human history.

Lambert suggests that this broad and more dispassionate view of God was also one that Teilhard embraced, and to avoid the appearance of giving even an implicit nod to such views, the pope decided to discuss the Big Bang without reference to its principal proponent.

It's quite ironic, too. Lemaître's wide ranging work has been enjoying something of a revival these days among scientists and the general public. And he is always cited with pride by Catholic news sites and magazines eager to hold him up as a shining example of the harmonious coexistence of faith and science.

But Teilhard, despite the warm regard that later popes like Benedict XVI and Francis have expressed for his ideas, remains officially suspect, largely I think because the Church itself has not yet fully figured out how to integrate human evolution with its doctrines.

So we have here a little known but revealing historical connection.

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin Quotes And Sayings (With Images) - LinesQuotes.com Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881–1955) was a French Jesuit priest, paleontologist, philosopher, and theologian. He is known for his attempts to reconcile science and religion, particularly in the context of evolution and human spirituality. Teilhard de Chardin's ideas often sparked controversy within the Catholic Church, as his views pushed the boundaries of traditional theology.

Some key concepts associated with Teilhard de Chardin include:

Omega Point: Teilhard proposed the concept of the Omega Point, which he described as a final stage of evolution where humanity and the universe would converge into a higher state of unity and consciousness. He believed that the universe was evolving toward a point of ultimate complexity and consciousness.
Noosphere: Teilhard introduced the term "noosphere" to describe the sphere of human thought and consciousness. He saw the noosphere as the next stage of evolution after the biosphere (life) and believed that human collective consciousness would continue to grow and evolve.
Evolution and Spirituality: Teilhard sought to bridge the gap between science and spirituality by suggesting that evolution was not just a biological process but also a spiritual one. He believed that evolution was directed toward higher levels of consciousness and ultimately union with the divine.
Divine Milieu: Teilhard's concept of the "divine milieu" referred to the presence of God within all aspects of creation. He saw the universe as infused with the divine, and he encouraged individuals to seek spiritual growth and connection through engagement with the world.
Controversy: Teilhard's ideas faced criticism from some within the Catholic Church due to concerns that his views on evolution and the interplay between science and theology challenged traditional interpretations. Some of his works were temporarily restricted by the Vatican.
Writings: Teilhard's major works include "The Phenomenon of Man," "The Divine Milieu," and "The Human Phenomenon." These writings explore his thoughts on evolution, consciousness, and the relationship between science and spirituality.

Teilhard de Chardin's ideas continue to influence discussions about the intersection of science, religion, and philosophy. While not all of his concepts have been embraced universally, his work remains significant for those interested in exploring the relationship between humanity, the universe, and spirituality. More details on is contributions can be found at The American Teilhard Society.

A few favorite quotes to give a sense of the man:

The Most Satisfying Thing In Life Is To Have Been Able To Give A Large Part Of One's Self To Others.

I Owe The Best Of Myself To Geology, But Everything It Has Taught Me Tends To Turn Me Away From Dead Things.

I Am A Little Too Absorbed By Science To Be Able To Philosophise Much; But The More I Look Into Myself, The More I Find Myself Possessed By The Conviction That It Is Only The Science Of Christ Running Through All Things, That Is To Say True Mystical Science, That Really Matters. I Let Myself Get Caught Up In The Game When I Geologise.

We Are One, After All, You And I, Together We Suffer, Together Exist And Forever Will Recreate Each Other.

Love Is An Adventure And A Conquest. It Survives And Develops, Like The Universe Itself, Only By Perpetual Discovery.

The Profoundly 'Atomic' Character Of The Universe Is Visible In Everyday Experience, In Raindrops And Grains Of Sand, In The Hosts Of The Living, And The Multitude Of Stars; Even In The Ashes Of The Dead.

The history of the universe: Big Bang to now in 10 steps | Space

Galaxies near the beginning of the history of the universe

This artist’s impression shows galaxies at a time less than a billion years after the Big Bang, when the universe was still partially filled with hydrogen fog that absorbed ultraviolet light. (Image credit: ESO/M.Kornmesser)

The history of the universe and how it evolved is broadly accepted as the Big Bang model, which states that the universe began as an incredibly hot, dense point roughly 13.7 billion years ago. So, how did the universe go from being fractions of an inch (a few millimeters) across to what it is today?

Here is a breakdown of the Big Bang to now in 10 easy-to-understand steps.

Step 1: How it all started

Diagram of the big bang — An illustration of the timeline of the universe following the big bang. (Image credit: NASA/WMAP Science Team)

The Big Bang was not an explosion in space, as the theory's name might suggest. Instead, it was the appearance of space everywhere in the universe, researchers have said. According to the Big Bang theory, the universe was born as a very hot, very dense, single point in space.

Cosmologists are unsure what happened before this moment, but with sophisticated space missions, ground-based telescopes and complicated calculations, scientists have been working to paint a clearer picture of the early universe and its formation.

A key part of this comes from observations of the cosmic microwave background, which contains the afterglow of light and radiation left over from the Big Bang. This relic of the Big Bang pervades the universe and is visible to microwave detectors, which allows scientists to piece together clues of the early universe.

In 2001, NASA launched the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) mission to study the conditions as they existed in the early universe by measuring radiation from the cosmic microwave background. Among other discoveries, WMAP was able to determine the age of the universe — about 13.7 billion years old.

Step 2: The universe's first growth spurt

When the universe was very young — something like a hundredth of a billionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second (whew!) — it underwent an incredible growth spurt. During this burst of expansion, which is known as inflation, the universe grew exponentially and doubled in size at least 90 times.

Dark Energy’s Effect Over Time Tracked by Astronomers

0 seconds of 1 minute, 8 secondsVolume 0%

"The universe was expanding, and as it expanded, it got cooler and less dense," David Spergel, a theoretical astrophysicist at Princeton University in Princeton, N.J., told SPACE.com. After inflation, the universe continued to grow, but at a slower rate.

As space expanded, the universe cooled and matter formed.

Step 3: Too hot to shine

Light chemical elements were created within the first three minutes of the universe's formation. As the universe expanded, temperatures cooled and protons and neutrons collided to make deuterium, which is an isotope of hydrogen. Much of this deuterium combined to make helium.

Map of universe created from WMAP data — WMAP has produced a new, more detailed picture of the infant universe. Colors indicate "warmer" (red) and "cooler" (blue) spots. (Image credit: NASA/WMAP Science Team)

For the first 380,000 years after the Big Bang, however, the intense heat from the universe's creation made it essentially too hot for light to shine. Atoms crashed together with enough force to break up into a dense, opaque plasma of protons, neutrons and electrons that scattered light like fog.

Step 4: Let there be light

About 380,000 years after the Big Bang, matter cooled enough for electrons to combine with nuclei to form neutral atoms. This phase is known as "recombination," and the absorption of free electrons caused the universe to become transparent. The light that was unleashed at this time is detectable today in the form of radiation from the cosmic microwave background.

Yet, the era of recombination was followed by a period of darkness before stars and other bright objects were formed.

Step 5: Emerging from the cosmic dark ages

Roughly 400 million years after the Big Bang, the universe began to come out of its dark ages. This period in the universe's evolution is called the age of re-ionization.

This dynamic phase was thought to have lasted more than a half-billion years, but based on new observations, scientists think re-ionization may have occurred more rapidly than previously thought.

During this time, clumps of gas collapsed enough to form the very first stars and galaxies. The emitted ultraviolet light from these energetic events cleared out and destroyed most of the surrounding neutral hydrogen gas. The process of re-ionization, plus the clearing of foggy hydrogen gas, caused the universe to become transparent to ultraviolet light for the first time.

Step 6: More stars and more galaxies

Hubble image of galaxies — An image taken BY NASA's Hubble Space Telescope, showing a cluster of galaxies residing 10 billion light-years away. (Image credit: NASA/ESA/University of Florida, Gainsville/University of Missouri-Kansas City/UC Davis)

Astronomers comb the universe looking for the most far-flung and oldest galaxies to help them understand the properties of the early universe. Similarly, by studying the cosmic microwave background, astronomers can work backwards to piece together the events that came before.

Data from older missions like WMAP and the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE), which launched in 1989, and missions still in operation, like the Hubble Space Telescope, which launched in 1990, all help scientists try to solve the most enduring mysteries and answer the most debated questions in cosmology.

Step 7: Birth of our solar system

Our solar system is estimated to have been born a little after 9 billion years after the Big Bang, making it about 4.6 billion years old. According to current estimates, the sun is one of more than 100 billion stars in our Milky Way galaxy alone, and orbits roughly 25,000 light-years from the galactic core.

Infrared image of developing star — An infrared view of a developing star taken by NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope. It illustrates what our solar system might have looked like billions of years ago. (Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/AURA)

Many scientists think the sun and the rest of our solar system was formed from a giant, rotating cloud of gas and dust known as the solar nebula. As gravity caused the nebula to collapse, it spun faster and flattened into a disk. During this phase, most of the material was pulled toward the center to form the sun.

Step 8: The invisible stuff in the universe

In the 1960s and 1970s, astronomers began thinking that there might be more mass in the universe than what is visible. Vera Rubin, an astronomer at the Carnegie Institution of Washington, observed the speeds of stars at various locations in galaxies.

Basic Newtonian physics implies that stars on the outskirts of a galaxy would orbit more slowly than stars at the center, but Rubin found no difference in the velocities of stars farther out. In fact, she found that all stars in a galaxy seem to circle the center at more or less the same speed.

This mysterious and invisible mass became known as dark matter. Dark matter is inferred because of the gravitational pull it exerts on regular matter. One hypothesis states the mysterious stuff could be formed by exotic particles that don't interact with light or regular matter, which is why it has been so difficult to detect.

An illustration of Earth and dark matter filaments — An illustration of Earth surrounded by filaments of dark matter called "hairs". (Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech)

Step 9: The expanding and accelerating universe

In the 1920s, astronomer Edwin Hubble made a revolutionary discovery about the universe. Using a newly constructed telescope at the Mount Wilson Observatory in Los Angeles, Hubble observed that the universe is not static, but rather is expanding.

Decades later, in 1998, the prolific space telescope named after the famous astronomer, the Hubble Space Telescope, studied very distant supernovas and found that, a long time ago, the universe was expanding more slowly than it is today. This discovery was surprising because it was long thought that the gravity of matter in the universe would slow its expansion, or even cause it to contract.

Dark energy is thought to be the strange force that is pulling the cosmos apart at ever-increasing speeds, but it remains undetected and shrouded in mystery. The existence of this elusive energy, which is thought to make up 80% of the universe, is one of the most hotly debated topics in cosmology.

Step 10: We still need to know more

While much has been discovered about the creation and evolution of the universe, there are enduring questions that remain unanswered. Dark matter and dark energy remain two of the biggest mysteries, but cosmologists continue to probe the universe in hopes of better understanding how it all began.

The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), launched in 2021, will continue the hunt for the elusive dark matter, as well as peering back to the beginning of time and the evolution of the universe using its infrared instruments.

Illustration of JWST — An artist's impression of the NASA/ESA/CSA James Webb Space Telescope. (Image credit: ESA, NASA, S. Beckwith (STScI) and the HUDF Team, Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems / STScI / ATG medialab)

Additional resources

For more information about the evolution of the universe check out, "The History of the Universe" by David H. Lyth or "A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking. You can also keep up to date with the discoveries of JWST, visit NASA's dedicated webpage or the European Space Agency's dedicated webpage.

Bibliography

Scientific American, "The Evolution of the Universe", October 1994.

Walter Perry, "Origin and Evolution of the Universe", Journal of Modern Physics, Volume 12, November 2021.

Bharat Ratra and Michael S. Vogeley, "The Beginning and Evolution of the Universe", Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, Volume 120, March 2008,

NASA, "Brief History of the Universe", December 2006.

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.

Breaking space news, the latest updates on rocket launches, skywatching events and more!

Denise Chow is a former Space.com staff writer who then worked as assistant managing editor at Live Science before moving to NBC News as a science reporter, where she focuses on general science and climate change. She spent two years with Space.com, writing about rocket launches and covering NASA's final three space shuttle missions, before joining the Live Science team in 2013. A Canadian transplant, Denise has a bachelor's degree from the University of Toronto, and a master's degree in journalism from New York University. At NBC News, Denise covers general science and climate change.

Saturday, August 26, 2023

The Solar Orbiter spacecraft may have discovered what powers solar winds | Engadget

We know the sun belches out solar winds, but the origin of these streams of charged particles remain a mystery and has been the subject of numerous studies over the past decades. The images captured last year by the Extreme Ultraviolet Imager (EUI) instrument aboard ESA's and NASA's Solar Orbiter, however, may have finally given us the knowledge needed to explain what powers these winds. In a paper published in Science, a team of researchers described observing large numbers of jets coming out of a dark region of the sun called a "coronal hole" in the images taken by the spacecraft.

The team called them "picoflare jets," because they contain around one-trillionth the energy of what the largest solar flares can generate. These picoflare jets measure a few hundred kilometers in length, reach speeds of around 100 kilometers per second and only last between 20 and 100 seconds. Still, the researchers believe they have the power to emit enough high-temperature plasma to be considered a substantial source of our system's solar winds. While Coronal holes have long been known as source regions for the phenomenon, scientists are still trying to figure out the mechanism of how plasma streams emerge from them exactly. This discovery could finally be the answer they'd been seeking for years.

Lakshmi Pradeep Chitta, the study's primary author from the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research, told Space: "The picoflare jets that we observed are the smallest, and energetically the weakest, type of jets in the solar corona that were not observed before...Still, the energy content of a single picoflare jet that lives for about 1 minute is equal to the average power consumed by about 10,000 households in the UK over an entire year."

Chitta's team will continue monitoring coronal holes and other potential sources of solar winds using the Solar Orbiter going forward. In addition to gathering data that may finally give us answers about the plasma flows responsible for producing auroras here on our planet, their observations could also shed light on why the sun's corona or atmosphere is much, much hotter than its surface.

All products recommended by Engadget are selected by our editorial team, independent of our parent company. Some of our stories include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, we may earn an affiliate commission. All prices are correct at the time of publishing.

Picoflare jets power the solar wind emerging from a coronal hole on the Sun | Science

Science

24 Aug 2023

Vol 381, Issue 6660

pp. 867-872

Editor’s summary

Plasma is constantly streaming away from the Sun, forming the solar wind. A likely source of this plasma is coronal holes, regions of the Sun’s corona with magnetic field lines that open outward. Chitta et al. observed a coronal hole in the extreme ultraviolet using the Solar Orbiter spacecraft and identifed several types of small-scale jets within it (see the Perspective by Ugarte-Urra and Wang). Large numbers of jets occurred during the observation, but each one lasted only a few dozen seconds. The authors calculated that the jets provide enough energy and plasma to supply a large fraction of the solar wind, at least during quiet periods. —Keith T. Smith

Abstract

Coronal holes are areas on the Sun with open magnetic field lines. They are a source region of the solar wind, but how the wind emerges from coronal holes is not known. We observed a coronal hole using the Extreme Ultraviolet Imager on the Solar Orbiter spacecraft. We identified jets on scales of a few hundred kilometers, which last 20 to 100 seconds and reach speeds of ~100 kilometers per second. The jets are powered by magnetic reconnection and have kinetic energy in the picoflare range. They are intermittent but widespread within the observed coronal hole. We suggest that such picoflare jets could produce enough high-temperature plasma to sustain the solar wind and that the wind emerges from coronal holes as a highly intermittent outflow at small scales.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Supplementary Materials

This PDF file includes:

Materials and Methods

Supplementary Text

Figs. S1 to S9

Tables S1 to S4

References (53–75)

Download
2.96 MB

Other Supplementary Material for this manuscript includes the following:

Download
99.94 MB

References and Notes

E. N. Parker, Dynamics of the Interplanetary Gas and Magnetic Fields. Astrophys. J.128, 664 (1958).

M. Neugebauer, C. W. Snyder, Solar Plasma Experiment. Science138, 1095–1097 (1962).

J. Woch, W. I. Axford, U. Mall, B. Wilken, S. Livi, J. Geiss, G. Gloeckler, R. J. Forsyth, SWICS/Ulysses observations: The three-dimensional structure of the heliosphere in the declining/minimum phase of the solar cycle. Geophys. Res. Lett.24, 2885–2888 (1997).

D. J. McComas, B. L. Barraclough, H. O. Funsten, J. T. Gosling, E. Santiago-Muñoz, R. M. Skoug, B. E. Goldstein, M. Neugebauer, P. Riley, A. Balogh, Solar wind observations over Ulysses’ first full polar orbit. J. Geophys. Res.105, 10419–10433 (2000).

S. R. Cranmer, Coronal Holes. Living Rev. Sol. Phys.6, 3 (2009).

Y.-M. Wang, Y.-K. Ko, Observations of Slow Solar Wind from Equatorial Coronal Holes. Astrophys. J.880, 146 (2019).

S. D. Bale, S. T. Badman, J. W. Bonnell, T. A. Bowen, D. Burgess, A. W. Case, C. A. Cattell, B. D. G. Chandran, C. C. Chaston, C. H. K. Chen, J. F. Drake, T. D. de Wit, J. P. Eastwood, R. E. Ergun, W. M. Farrell, C. Fong, K. Goetz, M. Goldstein, K. A. Goodrich, P. R. Harvey, T. S. Horbury, G. G. Howes, J. C. Kasper, P. J. Kellogg, J. A. Klimchuk, K. E. Korreck, V. V. Krasnoselskikh, S. Krucker, R. Laker, D. E. Larson, R. J. MacDowall, M. Maksimovic, D. M. Malaspina, J. Martinez-Oliveros, D. J. McComas, N. Meyer-Vernet, M. Moncuquet, F. S. Mozer, T. D. Phan, M. Pulupa, N. E. Raouafi, C. Salem, D. Stansby, M. Stevens, A. Szabo, M. Velli, T. Woolley, J. R. Wygant, Highly structured slow solar wind emerging from an equatorial coronal hole. Nature576, 237–242 (2019).

G. Poletto, Solar Coronal Plumes. Living Rev. Sol. Phys.12, 7 (2015).

N. M. Viall, J. E. Borovsky, Nine Outstanding Questions of Solar Wind Physics. J. Geophys. Res. Space Phys.125, JA026005 (2020).

S. R. Cranmer, A. A. van Ballegooijen, R. J. Edgar, Self-consistent Coronal Heating and Solar Wind Acceleration from Anisotropic Magnetohydrodynamic Turbulence. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.171, 520–551 (2007).

T. Matsumoto, T. K. Suzuki, Connecting the Sun and the Solar Wind: The First 2.5-dimensional Self-consistent MHD Simulation under the Alfvén Wave Scenario. Astrophys. J.749, 8 (2012).

M. Shoda, B. D. G. Chandran, S. R. Cranmer, Turbulent Generation of Magnetic Switchbacks in the Alfvénic Solar Wind. Astrophys. J.915, 52 (2021).

C.-Y. Tu, C. Zhou, E. Marsch, L.-D. Xia, L. Zhao, J.-X. Wang, K. Wilhelm, Solar wind origin in coronal funnels. Science308, 519–523 (2005).

L. Yang, J. He, H. Peter, C. Tu, W. Chen, L. Zhang, E. Marsch, L. Wang, X. Feng, L. Yan, Injection of Plasma into the Nascent Solar Wind via Reconnection Driven by Supergranular Advection. Astrophys. J.770, 6 (2013).

Y.-M. Wang, Small-scale Flux Emergence, Coronal Hole Heating, and Flux-tube Expansion: A Hybrid Solar Wind Model. Astrophys. J.904, 199 (2020).

H. Tian, E. E. DeLuca, S. R. Cranmer, B. De Pontieu, H. Peter, J. Martínez-Sykora, L. Golub, S. McKillop, K. K. Reeves, M. P. Miralles, P. McCauley, S. Saar, P. Testa, M. Weber, N. Murphy, J. Lemen, A. Title, P. Boerner, N. Hurlburt, T. D. Tarbell, J. P. Wuelser, L. Kleint, C. Kankelborg, S. Jaeggli, M. Carlsson, V. Hansteen, S. W. McIntosh, Prevalence of small-scale jets from the networks of the solar transition region and chromosphere. Science346, 1255711 (2014).

P. Kayshap, K. Murawski, A. K. Srivastava, B. N. Dwivedi, Rotating network jets in the quiet Sun as observed by IRIS. Astron. Astrophys.616, A99 (2018).

J. Gorman, L. P. Chitta, H. Peter, Spectroscopic observation of a transition region network jet. Astron. Astrophys.660, A116 (2022).

H. Tian, S. W. McIntosh, S. R. Habbal, J. He, Observation of High-speed Outflow on Plume-like Structures of the Quiet Sun and Coronal Holes with Solar Dynamics Observatory/Atmospheric Imaging Assembly. Astrophys. J.736, 130 (2011).

S. Pucci, G. Poletto, A. C. Sterling, M. Romoli, Birth, Life, and Death of a Solar Coronal Plume. Astrophys. J.793, 86 (2014).

N.-E. Raouafi, G. Stenborg, Role of Transients in the Sustainability of Solar Coronal Plumes. Astrophys. J.787, 118 (2014).

V. M. Uritsky, C. E. DeForest, J. T. Karpen, C. R. DeVore, P. Kumar, N. E. Raouafi, P. F. Wyper, Plumelets: Dynamic Filamentary Structures in Solar Coronal Plumes. Astrophys. J.907, 1 (2021).

P. Kumar, J. T. Karpen, V. M. Uritsky, C. E. Deforest, N. E. Raouafi, C. Richard DeVore, Quasi-periodic Energy Release and Jets at the Base of Solar Coronal Plumes. Astrophys. J.933, 21 (2022).

N. E. Raouafi, G. Stenborg, D. B. Seaton, H. Wang, J. Wang, C. E. DeForest, S. D. Bale, J. F. Drake, V. M. Uritsky, J. T. Karpen, C. R. DeVore, A. C. Sterling, T. S. Horbury, L. K. Harra, S. Bourouaine, J. C. Kasper, P. Kumar, T. D. Phan, M. Velli, Magnetic Reconnection as the Driver of the Solar Wind. Astrophys. J.945, 28 (2023).

I. A. Ahmad, G. L. Withbroe, EUV analysis of polar plumes. Sol. Phys.53, 397–408 (1977).

Y.-M. Wang, Polar Plumes and the Solar Wind. Astrophys. J.435, L153 (1994).

S. Patsourakos, J.-C. Vial, Outflow velocity of interplume regions at the base of Polar Coronal Holes. Astron. Astrophys.359, L1–L4 (2000).

L. Teriaca, G. Poletto, M. Romoli, D. A. Biesecker, The Nascent Solar Wind: Origin and Acceleration. Astrophys. J.588, 566–577 (2003).

N. Fargette, B. Lavraud, A. P. Rouillard, V. Réville, T. Dudok De Wit, C. Froment, J. S. Halekas, T. D. Phan, D. M. Malaspina, S. D. Bale, J. C. Kasper, P. Louarn, A. W. Case, K. E. Korreck, D. E. Larson, M. Pulupa, M. L. Stevens, P. L. Whittlesey, M. Berthomier, Characteristic Scales of Magnetic Switchback Patches Near the Sun and Their Possible Association With Solar Supergranulation and Granulation. Astrophys. J.919, 96 (2021).

P. Rochus, F. Auchère, D. Berghmans, L. Harra, W. Schmutz, U. Schühle, P. Addison, T. Appourchaux, R. Aznar Cuadrado, D. Baker, J. Barbay, D. Bates, A. BenMoussa, M. Bergmann, C. Beurthe, B. Borgo, K. Bonte, M. Bouzit, L. Bradley, V. Büchel, E. Buchlin, J. Büchner, F. Cabé, L. Cadiergues, M. Chaigneau, B. Chares, C. Choque Cortez, P. Coker, M. Condamin, S. Coumar, W. Curdt, J. Cutler, D. Davies, G. Davison, J.-M. Defise, G. Del Zanna, F. Delmotte, V. Delouille, L. Dolla, C. Dumesnil, F. Dürig, R. Enge, S. François, J.-J. Fourmond, J.-M. Gillis, B. Giordanengo, S. Gissot, L. M. Green, N. Guerreiro, A. Guilbaud, M. Gyo, M. Haberreiter, A. Hafiz, M. Hailey, J.-P. Halain, J. Hansotte, C. Hecquet, K. Heerlein, M.-L. Hellin, S. Hemsley, A. Hermans, V. Hervier, J.-F. Hochedez, Y. Houbrechts, K. Ihsan, L. Jacques, A. Jérôme, J. Jones, M. Kahle, T. Kennedy, M. Klaproth, M. Kolleck, S. Koller, E. Kotsialos, E. Kraaikamp, P. Langer, A. Lawrenson, J.-C. Le Clech’, C. Lenaerts, S. Liebecq, D. Linder, D. M. Long, B. Mampaey, D. Markiewicz-Innes, B. Marquet, E. Marsch, S. Matthews, E. Mazy, A. Mazzoli, S. Meining, E. Meltchakov, R. Mercier, S. Meyer, M. Monecke, F. Monfort, G. Morinaud, F. Moron, L. Mountney, R. Müller, B. Nicula, S. Parenti, H. Peter, D. Pfiffner, A. Philippon, I. Phillips, J.-Y. Plesseria, E. Pylyser, F. Rabecki, M.-F. Ravet-Krill, J. Rebellato, E. Renotte, L. Rodriguez, S. Roose, J. Rosin, L. Rossi, P. Roth, F. Rouesnel, M. Roulliay, A. Rousseau, K. Ruane, J. Scanlan, P. Schlatter, D. B. Seaton, K. Silliman, S. Smit, P. J. Smith, S. K. Solanki, M. Spescha, A. Spencer, K. Stegen, Y. Stockman, N. Szwec, C. Tamiatto, J. Tandy, L. Teriaca, C. Theobald, I. Tychon, L. van Driel-Gesztelyi, C. Verbeeck, J.-C. Vial, S. Werner, M. J. West, D. Westwood, T. Wiegelmann, G. Willis, B. Winter, A. Zerr, X. Zhang, A. N. Zhukov, The Solar Orbiter EUI instrument: The Extreme Ultraviolet Imager. Astron. Astrophys.642, A8 (2020).

D. Müller, O. C. St. Cyr, I. Zouganelis, H. R. Gilbert, R. Marsden, T. Nieves-Chinchilla, E. Antonucci, F. Auchère, D. Berghmans, T. S. Horbury, R. A. Howard, S. Krucker, M. Maksimovic, C. J. Owen, P. Rochus, J. Rodriguez-Pacheco, M. Romoli, S. K. Solanki, R. Bruno, M. Carlsson, A. Fludra, L. Harra, D. M. Hassler, S. Livi, P. Louarn, H. Peter, U. Schühle, L. Teriaca, J. C. del Toro Iniesta, R. F. Wimmer-Schweingruber, E. Marsch, M. Velli, A. De Groof, A. Walsh, D. Williams, The Solar Orbiter mission: Science overview. Astron. Astrophys.642, A1 (2020).

Materials and methods are available as supplementary materials.

F. Moreno-Insertis, K. Galsgaard, I. Ugarte-Urra, Jets in Coronal Holes: Hinode Observations and Three-dimensional Computer Modeling. Astrophys. J.673, L211–L214 (2008).

K. Shibata, T. Nakamura, T. Matsumoto, K. Otsuji, T. J. Okamoto, N. Nishizuka, T. Kawate, H. Watanabe, S. Nagata, S. Ueno, R. Kitai, S. Nozawa, S. Tsuneta, Y. Suematsu, K. Ichimoto, T. Shimizu, Y. Katsukawa, T. D. Tarbell, T. E. Berger, B. W. Lites, R. A. Shine, A. M. Title, Chromospheric anemone jets as evidence of ubiquitous reconnection. Science318, 1591–1594 (2007).

A. C. Sterling, R. L. Moore, D. A. Falconer, M. Adams, Small-scale filament eruptions as the driver of X-ray jets in solar coronal holes. Nature523, 437–440 (2015).

S. Mandal, L. P. Chitta, H. Peter, S. K. Solanki, R. A. Cuadrado, L. Teriaca, U. Schühle, D. Berghmans, F. Auchère, A highly dynamic small-scale jet in a polar coronal hole. Astron. Astrophys.664, A28 (2022).

L. P. Chitta, A. R. C. Sukarmadji, L. Rouppe van der Voort, H. Peter, Energetics of magnetic transients in a solar active region plage. Astron. Astrophys.623, A176 (2019).

L. D. Xia, E. Marsch, W. Curdt, On the outflow in an equatorial coronal hole. Astron. Astrophys.399, L5–L9 (2003).

G. L. Withbroe, The Temperature Structure, Mass, and Energy Flow in the Corona and Inner Solar Wind. Astrophys. J.325, 442 (1988).

E. N. Parker, Nanoflares and the Solar X-Ray Corona. Astrophys. J.330, 474 (1988).

K. L. Harvey, F. Recely, Polar Coronal Holes During Cycles 22 and 23. Sol. Phys.211, 31–52 (2002).

T. Sakao, R. Kano, N. Narukage, J. Kotoku, T. Bando, E. E. Deluca, L. L. Lundquist, S. Tsuneta, L. K. Harra, Y. Katsukawa, M. Kubo, H. Hara, K. Matsuzaki, M. Shimojo, J. A. Bookbinder, L. Golub, K. E. Korreck, Y. Su, K. Shibasaki, T. Shimizu, I. Nakatani, Continuous plasma outflows from the edge of a solar active region as a possible source of solar wind. Science318, 1585–1588 (2007).

G. A. Doschek, J. T. Mariska, H. P. Warren, C. M. Brown, J. L. Culhane, H. Hara, T. Watanabe, P. R. Young, H. E. Mason, Nonthermal Velocities in Solar Active Regions Observed with the Extreme-Ultraviolet Imaging Spectrometer on Hinode. Astrophys. J.667, L109–L112 (2007).

L. K. Harra, T. Sakao, C. H. Mandrini, H. Hara, S. Imada, P. R. Young, L. van Driel-Gesztelyi, D. Baker, Outflows at the Edges of Active Regions: Contribution to Solar Wind Formation?Astrophys. J.676, L147–L150 (2008).

D. H. Brooks, L. Harra, S. D. Bale, K. Barczynski, C. Mandrini, V. Polito, H. P. Warren, The Formation and Lifetime of Outflows in a Solar Active Region. Astrophys. J.917, 25 (2021).

Y.-M. Wang, in Cool Stars, Stellar Systems, and the Sun, R. A. Donahue, J. A. Bookbinder, Eds., vol. 154 of Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series (1998), pp. 131–152.

S. Parhi, S. T. Suess, M. Sulkanen, Can Kelvin-Helmholtz instabilities of jet-like structures and plumes cause solar wind fluctuations at 1 AU? J. Geophys. Res.104, 14781–14787 (1999).

J. Andries, M. Goossens, Kelvin-Helmholtz instabilities and resonant flow instabilities for a coronal plume model with plasma pressure. Astron. Astrophys.368, 1083–1094 (2001).

Th. Roudier, R. Muller, Structure of the solar granulation. Sol. Phys.107, 11–26 (1986).

G. W. Simon, N. O. Weiss, Supergranules and the Hydrogen Convection Zone. Z. Astrophys.69, 435–450 (1968).

B. Mampaey, F. Verbeeck, K. Stegen, E. Kraaikamp, S. Gissot, F. Auchere, D. Berghmans, SolO/EUI Data Release 5.0 2022-04 (Royal Observatory of Belgium, 2022); https://doi.org/10.24414/2qfw-tr95.

I. Zouganelis, A. De Groof, A. P. Walsh, D. R. Williams, D. Müller, O. C. St Cyr, F. Auchère, D. Berghmans, A. Fludra, T. S. Horbury, R. A. Howard, S. Krucker, M. Maksimovic, C. J. Owen, J. Rodríguez-Pacheco, M. Romoli, S. K. Solanki, C. Watson, L. Sanchez, J. Lefort, P. Osuna, H. R. Gilbert, T. Nieves-Chinchilla, L. Abbo, O. Alexandrova, A. Anastasiadis, V. Andretta, E. Antonucci, T. Appourchaux, A. Aran, C. N. Arge, G. Aulanier, D. Baker, S. D. Bale, M. Battaglia, L. Bellot Rubio, A. Bemporad, M. Berthomier, K. Bocchialini, X. Bonnin, A. S. Brun, R. Bruno, E. Buchlin, J. Büchner, R. Bucik, F. Carcaboso, R. Carr, I. Carrasco-Blázquez, B. Cecconi, I. Cernuda Cangas, C. H. K. Chen, L. P. Chitta, T. Chust, K. Dalmasse, R. D’Amicis, V. Da Deppo, R. De Marco, S. Dolei, L. Dolla, T. Dudok de Wit, L. van Driel-Gesztelyi, J. P. Eastwood, F. Espinosa Lara, L. Etesi, A. Fedorov, F. Félix-Redondo, S. Fineschi, B. Fleck, D. Fontaine, N. J. Fox, A. Gandorfer, V. Génot, M. K. Georgoulis, S. Gissot, A. Giunta, L. Gizon, R. Gómez-Herrero, C. Gontikakis, G. Graham, L. Green, T. Grundy, M. Haberreiter, L. K. Harra, D. M. Hassler, J. Hirzberger, G. C. Ho, G. Hurford, D. Innes, K. Issautier, A. W. James, N. Janitzek, M. Janvier, N. Jeffrey, J. Jenkins, Y. Khotyaintsev, K.-L. Klein, E. P. Kontar, I. Kontogiannis, C. Krafft, V. Krasnoselskikh, M. Kretzschmar, N. Labrosse, A. Lagg, F. Landini, B. Lavraud, I. Leon, S. T. Lepri, G. R. Lewis, P. Liewer, J. Linker, S. Livi, D. M. Long, P. Louarn, O. Malandraki, S. Maloney, V. Martinez-Pillet, M. Martinovic, A. Masson, S. Matthews, L. Matteini, N. Meyer-Vernet, K. Moraitis, R. J. Morton, S. Musset, G. Nicolaou, A. Nindos, H. O’Brien, D. Orozco Suarez, M. Owens, M. Pancrazzi, A. Papaioannou, S. Parenti, E. Pariat, S. Patsourakos, D. Perrone, H. Peter, R. F. Pinto, C. Plainaki, D. Plettemeier, S. P. Plunkett, J. M. Raines, N. Raouafi, H. Reid, A. Retino, L. Rezeau, P. Rochus, L. Rodriguez, L. Rodriguez-Garcia, M. Roth, A. P. Rouillard, F. Sahraoui, C. Sasso, J. Schou, U. Schühle, L. Sorriso-Valvo, J. Soucek, D. Spadaro, M. Stangalini, D. Stansby, M. Steller, A. Strugarek, Š. Štverák, R. Susino, D. Telloni, C. Terasa, L. Teriaca, S. Toledo-Redondo, J. C. del Toro Iniesta, G. Tsiropoula, A. Tsounis, K. Tziotziou, F. Valentini, A. Vaivads, A. Vecchio, M. Velli, C. Verbeeck, A. Verdini, D. Verscharen, N. Vilmer, A. Vourlidas, R. Wicks, R. F. Wimmer-Schweingruber, T. Wiegelmann, P. R. Young, A. N. Zhukov, The Solar Orbiter Science Activity Plan: Translating solar and heliospheric physics questions into action. Astron. Astrophys.642, A3 (2020).

L. P. Chitta, H. Peter, S. Parenti, D. Berghmans, F. Auchère, S. K. Solanki, R. Aznar Cuadrado, U. Schühle, L. Teriaca, S. Mandal, K. Barczynski, É. Buchlin, L. Harra, E. Kraaikamp, D. M. Long, L. Rodriguez, C. Schwanitz, P. J. Smith, C. Verbeeck, A. N. Zhukov, W. Liu, M. C. M. Cheung, Solar coronal heating from small-scale magnetic braids. Astron. Astrophys.667, A166 (2022).

C. B. Markwardt, in Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVIII, D. A. Bohlender, D. Durand, P. Dowler, Eds., vol. 411 of Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series (2009), pp. 251–254.

S. Gissot, F. Aucháre, D. Berghmans, B. Giordanengo, A. BenMoussa, J. Rebellato, L. Harra, D. Long, P. Rochus, U. Schühle, R. Aznar Cuadrado, F. Delmotte, C. Dumesnil, A. Gottwald, J.-P. Halain, K. Heerlein, M.-L. Hellin, A. Hermans, L. Jacques, E. Kraaikamp, R. Mercier, P. Rochus, P. J. Smith, L. Teriaca, C. Verbeeck, Initial radiometric calibration of the High-Resolution EUV Imager (HRIEUV) of the Extreme Ultraviolet Imager (EUI) instrument onboard Solar Orbiter. arXiv:2307.14182 [astro-ph.SR] (2023).

J.-L. Starck, F. Murtagh, Image restoration with noise suppression using the wavelet transform. Astron. Astrophys.288, 342–348 (1994).

G. A. Doschek, H. P. Warren, J. M. Laming, J. T. Mariska, K. Wilhelm, P. Lemaire, U. Schühle, T. G. Moran, Electron Densities in the Solar Polar Coronal Holes from Density-Sensitive Line Ratios of Si VIII and S X. Astrophys. J. Lett.482, L109–L112 (1997).

K. Wilhelm, Solar coronal-hole plasma densities and temperatures. Astron. Astrophys.455, 697–708 (2006).

H. N. Smitha, L. S. Anusha, S. K. Solanki, T. L. Riethmüller, Estimation of the Magnetic Flux Emergence Rate in the Quiet Sun from Sunrise Data. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.229, 17 (2017).

L. P. Chitta, H. Peter, S. K. Solanki, Nature of the energy source powering solar coronal loops driven by nanoflares. Astron. Astrophys.615, L9 (2018).

E. R. Priest, L. P. Chitta, P. Syntelis, A Cancellation Nanoflare Model for Solar Chromospheric and Coronal Heating. Astrophys. J. Lett.862, L24 (2018).

V. Upendran, D. Tripathi, On the Formation of Solar Wind and Switchbacks, and Quiet Sun Heating. Astrophys. J.926, 138 (2022).

S. R. Cranmer, Low-frequency Alfvén Waves Produced by Magnetic Reconnection in the Sun’s Magnetic Carpet. Astrophys. J.862, 6 (2018).

E. Marsch, Kinetic Physics of the Solar Corona and Solar Wind. Living Rev. Sol. Phys.3, 1 (2006).

A. R. Paraschiv, A. Bemporad, A. C. Sterling, Physical properties of solar polar jets: A statistical study with Hinode XRT data. Astron. Astrophys.579, A96 (2015).

L. P. Chitta, D. B. Seaton, C. Downs, C. E. DeForest, A. K. Higginson, Direct observations of a complex coronal web driving highly structured slow solar wind. Nat. Astron.7, 133–141 (2023).

G. R. Gupta, L. Teriaca, E. Marsch, S. K. Solanki, D. Banerjee, Spectroscopic observations of propagating disturbances in a polar coronal hole: Evidence of slow magneto-acoustic waves. Astron. Astrophys.546, A93 (2012).

S. D. Bale, J. F. Drake, M. D. McManus, M. I. Desai, S. T. Badman, D. E. Larson, M. Swisdak, T. S. Horbury, N. E. Raouafi, T. Phan, M. Velli, D. J. McComas, C. M. S. Cohen, D. Mitchell, O. Panasenco, J. C. Kasper, Interchange reconnection as the source of the fast solar wind within coronal holes. Nature618, 252–256 (2023).

T. Van Doorsselaere, N. Wardle, G. Del Zanna, K. Jansari, E. Verwichte, V. M. Nakariakov, The First Measurement of the Adiabatic Index in the Solar Corona Using Time-dependent Spectroscopy of Hinode/EIS Observations. Astrophys. J. Lett.727, L32 (2011).

J. W. Cirtain, L. Golub, L. Lundquist, A. van Ballegooijen, A. Savcheva, M. Shimojo, E. Deluca, S. Tsuneta, T. Sakao, K. Reeves, M. Weber, R. Kano, N. Narukage, K. Shibasaki, Evidence for Alfvén waves in solar x-ray jets. Science318, 1580–1582 (2007).

U. V. Möstl, M. Temmer, A. M. Veronig, The Kelvin-Helmholtz Instability at Coronal Mass Ejection Boundaries in the Solar Corona: Observations and 2.5D MHD Simulations. Astrophys. J. Lett.766, L12 (2013).

L. P. Chitta, E. R. Priest, X. Cheng, From Formation to Disruption: Observing the Multiphase Evolution of a Solar Flare Current Sheet. Astrophys. J.911, 133 (2021).

X. Li, J. Zhang, S. Yang, Y. Hou, R. Erdélyi, Observing Kelvin-Helmholtz instability in solar blowout jet. Sci. Rep.8, 8136 (2018).

P. Antolin, T. J. Okamoto, B. De Pontieu, H. Uitenbroek, T. Van Doorsselaere, T. Yokoyama, Resonant Absorption of Transverse Oscillations and Associated Heating in a Solar Prominence. II. Numerical Aspects. Astrophys. J.809, 72 (2015).

T. A. Howson, I. De Moortel, P. Antolin, Energetics of the Kelvin-Helmholtz instability induced by transverse waves in twisted coronal loops. Astron. Astrophys.607, A77 (2017).

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Science

Volume 381 | Issue 6660
25 August 2023

Copyright

Article versions

Submission history

Received: 25 August 2022

Accepted: 14 July 2023

Published in print: 25 August 2023

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request permissions

Acknowledgments

Solar Orbiter is a space mission with international collaboration between ESA and NASA, operated by ESA. The EUI instrument was built by CSL, IAS, MPS, MSSL/UCL, PMOD/WRC, ROB, and LCF/IO with funding from the Belgian Federal Science Policy Office (BELSPO/PRODEX PEA 4000134088), the Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales (CNES), the UK Space Agency (UKSA), the Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie (BMWi) through the Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR), and the Swiss Space Office (SSO). This research has made use of NASA’s Astrophysics Data System.

Funding: L.P.C. acknowledges funding by the European Union (ERC, ORIGIN, 101039844). S.P. acknowledges funding by CNES through the Multi Experiment Data & Operation Center (MEDOC). D.M.L. thanks the Science and Technology Facilities Council for the award of an Ernest Rutherford Fellowship (ST/R003246/1). A.N.Z., D.B., E.K., L.R., and C.V. thank the Belgian Federal Science Policy Office (BELSPO) for the provision of financial support in the framework of the PRODEX Programme of the European Space Agency (ESA) under contract nos. 4000134474 and 4000136424.

Author contributions: L.P.C. led the study and data analysis and wrote the manuscript with inputs from A.N.Z., D.B., H.P., S.P., S.M., R.A.C., U.S., L.T., É.B., D.M.L., and D.B.S. F.A., E.K., and C.V. contributed to data reduction. A.N.Z. led the Solar Orbiter observing campaign. D.B. is the principal investigator of EUI. All authors discussed and interpreted the results.

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Data and materials availability: The HRI_EUV level-2 data are archived by the Royal Observatory of Belgium (51). We used observations in the time range of 30 March 2022 04:30 to 05:00 UT (files from solo_L2_eui-hrieuvnon-image_20220330T043000227_V01.fits to solo_L2_eui-hrieuvnon-image_20220330T045957224_V01.fits). The data can alternatively be retrieved from ESA’s Solar Orbiter Archive https://soar.esac.esa.int/soar/ using the same time range and the Solar Orbiter Observing Plan (SOOP) (52) name “R_SMALL_HRES_MCAD_Polar-Observations.”

License information: Copyright © 2023 the authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original US government works. https://www.science.org/about/science-licenses-journal-article-reuse. This research was funded in whole or in part by the European Union through Horizon Europe (grant no. 101039844), a cOAlition S organization. The author will make the Author Accepted Manuscript (AAM) version available under a CC BY public copyright license.

Authors

Affiliations

E. Kraaikamp

Funding Information

Science Technology and Facilities Council: ST/R003246/1

Notes

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Article Usage

Altmetrics

Citations

Cite as

L. P. Chitta et al.

Picoflare jets power the solar wind emerging from a coronal hole on the Sun.Science381,867-872(2023).DOI:10.1126/science.ade5801

Export citation

Select the format you want to export the citation of this publication.

Cited by

Tables

Check Access

References