Blasi-3.ppt-4thSchoolonCosmicRaysandAstrophysics.pptVIP

ALTERNATIVE INTERPRETATION OF THE TRANSITION: MIXED COMPOSITION Allard et al. 2005-2008 UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENCE: DIP VS MIXED From Kampert 2008 UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENCE: DIP VS ANKLE Aloisio, Berezinsky, PB Ostapchenko 2008 DIP ANKLE XMAX and RMS OF XMAX Auger HiRes * Pasquale Blasi INAF/Arcetri Astrophysical Observatory 4th School on Cosmic Rays and Astrophysics UFABC - Santo André - S?o Paulo – Brazil WHAT NEXT? We have found the elegant results of the theory of DIFFUSIVE SHOCK ACCELERATION in the TEST PARTICLE approximation and also found some of its limitations: TOO LARGE EFFICIENCIES TO EXPECT TEST PARTICLES THE EXPECTED DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT LEADS TO TOO LOW EMAX IF PARTICLES DIFFUSE THEY ALSO LEAD TO WAVE GROWTH ALL THESE PHENOMENA SUGGEST THAT WE NEED TO MOVE BEYONDTHE TEST PARTICLE APPROXIMATION NON LINEAR THEORY OF DIFFUSIVE SHOCK ACCELERATION Dynamical Reaction of Accelerated Particles PRECURSOR Undisturbed Medium Shock Front v subshock Precursor Conservation of Momentum Transport equation for cosmic rays SUBSHOCK Velocity Profile WHAT SHOULD BE EXPECT? High p UPSTREAM Velocity SUBSHOCK PRECURSOR PARTICLES WITH HIGH P FEEL LARGER COMPRESSION FACTOR THEN LOW P PARTICLES 2. THE TOTAL COMPRESSION BECOMES LARGER THAN 4 3. THE SPECTRUM SHOULD BE NO LONGER A POWER LAW! 4. AT HIGH P THE SLOPE SHOULD BE FLATTER THAN 2 !!! 5. THE GAS BEHIND THE SHOCK SHOULD BE COOLER THAN FOR AN ORDINARY SHOCK Rtot Rsub INJECTION Ideal Collisionless Shock (More) Real Collisionless Shock ?rL WHICH PARTICLES AND HOW MANY PARTICLES ENTER THE ACCELERATION CYCLE? THIS IS THE LEAST UNDERSTOOD ASPECTS OF ALL ! INJECTION…cont’d f(p) p Maxwellian for the Downstream gas Pinj = ? pth,2 Relation between Rsub, ξ and η T2 T1 OUTPUT OF THE CALCULATIONS SHOCK HEATING and SPECTRA PB, Gabici Vannoni 2005 SHOCK MODIFICATION REDUCED HEATING Particle Diffusion ?? Wave Growth Remem