Abstract
We critically examine recent claims of a high solar metallicity by von Steiger \& Zurbuchen (2016) based on \textit{in situ} measurements of the solar wind, rather than the standard spectroscopically-inferred abundances (Asplund et al. 2009). We test the claim by Vagnozzi et al. (2016) that a composition based on the solar wind enables one to construct a standard solar model in agreement with helioseismological observations and thus solve the decades-old solar modelling problem. We show that, although some helioseismological observables are improved compared to models computed with spectroscopic abundances, most are in fact worse. The high abundance of refractory elements leads to an overproduction of neutrinos, with a predicted $^8$B flux that is nearly twice its observed value, and $^7$Be and CNO fluxes that are experimentally ruled out at high confidence. A combined likelihood analysis shows that models using the vSZ16 abundances fare worse than AGSS09 despite a higher metallicity. We also present astrophysical and spectroscopic arguments showing the vSZ16 composition to be an implausible representation of the solar interior, identifying the first ionisation potential effect in the outer solar atmosphere and wind as the likely culprit.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.