text:
# Mean flow and spiral defect chaos in Rayleigh-Bénard convection

## I Introduction

Rayleigh-Bénard convection in a horizontal layer of fluid heated from below provides a canonical example for spatially-extended systems exhibiting pattern formation the\_review  and spatiotemporal chaos stc ; stc\_nature ; stc\_char . (The latter term refers to states that are disordered in space and that show chaotic dynamics in time.) In this article, we present results from direct numerical simulations of Rayleigh-Bénard convection to investigate the importance of nonlocal flow modes, generally referred to as the mean flow SigZip\_mf ; Cross\_mf ; Newell\_mf ; Newell\_mf2 ; Newell\_mf3 , in the formation and dynamics of patterns and spatiotemporal chaos.

In a typical Rayleigh-Bénard convection experiment, a fluid layer is confined between two horizontal plates, and is thermally driven far from equilibrium by maintaining the bottom plate at a temperature that is higher than that of the top plate. As the temperature difference is increased, the fluid undergoes an instability to a state in which there is motion driven by the buoyancy forces. When the temperature difference between the plates is above but near this convective threshold, a pattern comprised of patches of locally parallel convection rolls forms with roll diameters that are close to the depth of the cell; see, for example, Fig. 6(a). When the temperature difference is increased, the fluid undergoes other instabilities that may result in the pattern developing a simple or chaotic time-dependence. Finally, when the temperature difference is increased further, spatiotemporal chaotic states may appear. In particular, a state called spiral defect chaos MBCA  is observed for Rayleigh number $`R\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3000}`$, Prandtl number $`\sigma 1`$, and aspect ratio $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}16}`$. This state is a disordered collection of spirals that rotate in both directions and coexist with dynamical defects such as grain boundaries and dislocations (see, for example, Fig. 2(a)).

The following facts are known about spiral defect chaos: The parameter values for which it appears MBCA ; Hu ; Hu2 ; Liu ; MBCA2 ; the distributions of local roll properties such as the wavenumber Egolf ; statistics of spiral and defect populations Egolf ; Ecke\_Science ; the mechanisms for the generation of chaos from spatial disorder Egolf\_Nature ; the wavenumber selection mechanism for spirals yuhai ; yuhai2 ; and the conditions under which spiral defect chaos transitions to other states. Of particular interest to this article are experiments Assen1 ; Assen2  that have observed that the spirals transform into targets when the Prandtl number is increased from $`\sigma 1`$ to $`\sigma 10`$ and when the Rayleigh number $`R\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3500}`$. While this observation establishes that spiral defect chaos occurs only at low Prandtl numbers, it does not allow us to conclude which of the many dynamic phenomena that occur at low Prandtl numbers the\_review  is responsible for the formation of spiral defect chaos.

One particular phenomenon that becomes important at low Prandtl numbers is the presence of mean flow. Mean flow is the name given to the velocity field with a non-zero mean over the depth of the convective cell that is generated by the variations of the structure of the convection rolls such as their curvature, amplitude, and wavenumber, and that in turn couples through advection to further modify the roll structure. Its magnitude is approximately inversely proportional to the Prandtl number CN .

It is believed that spiral defect chaos is an effect of mean flow which in turn is important at low Prandtl numbers MBCA ; MBCA2 . This hypothesis has been investigated in numerical studies of model equations of convection. For example, by coupling a mean flow-like field to the Swift-Hohenberg equation SH , chaotic behavior is observed HSG\_mf . Furthermore, when the parameter in the model that gives the strength of the mean flow is made large, spatiotemporal chaotic states akin to spiral defect chaos is observed Xi ; Xi2 ; Xi3 ; Tsimring . However, the above results are tenuous because of two reasons. Firstly, the Swift-Hohenberg equation describes the spatiotemporal behavior of a field in two dimensions, whereas convection is a three-dimensional phenomenon. Secondly, there are known limitations to the Swift-Hohenberg modelling. For example, it is known that the long-time dynamics of the Swift-Hohenberg equation may not correspond to that of the Boussinesq equations of convection. In particular, Swift-Hohenberg models exhibit spiral defect chaos as a transient behavior, whereas in experiments, spiral defect chaos is known to persist for much longer times SH\_limit . In addition, it is also known that the small-scale structure of the mean flow at the cores of the spirals, which might be crucial for the persistence of spiral defect chaos, is not perfectly captured in the Swift-Hohenberg equation SH\_limit .

Our goal in this article is to show by direct numerical simulations of Rayleigh-Bénard convection that spiral defect chaos is indeed a consequence of the presence of mean flow. In the absence of mean flow, we find that spiral defect chaotic states cease to exist, and are replaced by states whose statistical properties differ from those of spiral defect chaos. In general, studies of mean flow are difficult to perform in experiments, primarily because it is difficult to measure mean flow in an experimental setup. This is due to several reasons, namely that the magnitude of mean flow is small (typically on the order of $`1\%`$ of the magnitude of the velocity of the convecting rolls), and that it exists only in distorted and not regular patterns. To the best of our knowledge, there has only been one experiment that has successfully imaged aspects of the mean flow, but only in a simple distorted pattern french\_paper ; french\_paper2 . It is not clear if such imaging techniques can be applied to more general and complicated patterns. Thus, direct numerical simulations are particularly valuable for the study of mean flow.

We achieve this goal by numerically constructing a *gedanken* fluid whose velocity field is modified to have zero mean flow. By investigating the states that arise from the dynamics of this fluid and by comparing them with spiral defect chaos, we can infer directly the role of mean flow in the formation and dynamics of spiral defect chaos.

Once we have the capability to remove mean flow from the fluid dynamics, we can apply it to the study of other problems. One such problem that we have investigated is the relation between mean flow and lateral boundaries. Using our numerical simulations, we have shown for the first time how mean flow can contribute to the commonly observed phenomenon of convection rolls terminating perpendicularly into lateral walls, an observation that is still without much theoretical understanding.

The remaining of this article is organized as follows: In Section II, we define the equations governing Rayleigh-Bénard convection, what a mean flow is, and how it can be measured and eliminated numerically. In Section III, we present results on the relation between mean flow and spiral defect chaos, stripe textures, and lateral boundaries. In Section IV, we present our conclusions.

## II Definitions

### II.1 Boussinesq Equations

The evolution of a low-velocity and hence approximately incompressible convecting fluid is governed to good approximation by the three-dimensional Boussinesq equations the\_review . They are the combination of the incompressible Navier-Stokes and heat equations, with the further assumption that density variations are proportional to temperature variations and that this density variation appears only in the buoyancy force. Written in a dimensionless form, they are:

$`\sigma ^1\left(_t+𝐮\stackrel{}{}\right)𝐮(x,y,z,t)`$ $`=`$ $`p+^2𝐮+RT\widehat{z},`$ (1)
$`\left(_t+𝐮\stackrel{}{}\right)T(x,y,z,t)`$ $`=`$ $`^2T,`$ (2)
$`\stackrel{}{}𝐮`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (3)
The field $`𝐮(x,y,z,t)`$ is the velocity field at point $`(x,y,z)`$ at time $`t`$, while $`p`$ and $`T`$ are the pressure and temperature fields respectively. The variables $`x`$ and $`y`$ denote the horizontal coordinates, while the variable $`z`$ denotes the vertical coordinate, with the unit vector $`\widehat{z}`$ pointing in the direction opposite to the gravitational acceleration. The spatial units are measured in units of the cell depth $`d`$, and time is measured in units of the vertical diffusion time $`d^2/\kappa `$, where $`\kappa `$ is the thermal diffusivity of the fluid. The parameter $`R`$ is the Rayleigh number, defined to be the dimensionless temperature difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ across the top and bottom plates,

$$R=\frac{\alpha gd^3}{\nu \kappa }\mathrm{\Delta }T,$$
(4)
where $`\alpha `$ is the thermal expansion coefficient, $`\kappa `$ the thermal diffusivity, and $`\nu `$ the viscous diffusivity (kinematic viscosity) of the fluid. In this article, we will also frequently use the reduced Rayleigh number,

$$ϵ=\frac{RR_c}{R_c},$$
(5)
where $`R_c1708`$ is the critical Rayleigh number at the onset of convection in an infinite domain the\_review . The parameter $`\sigma `$ is the Prandtl number, defined to be the ratio of the fluid’s thermal to viscous diffusivities,

$$\sigma =\frac{\nu }{\kappa }.$$
(6)
The material walls are no-slip so that the velocity field satisfies

$$𝐮=0,\text{on all material walls}.$$
(7)
The temperature field is constant on the top and bottom plates:

$$T(x,y,z=\frac{1}{2},t)=\pm \frac{1}{2},$$
(8)
and we assume that the lateral walls are perfectly insulating, so that

$$\widehat{n}\stackrel{}{}T=0,\text{on lateral walls,}$$
(9)
where $`\widehat{n}`$ is the unit vector perpendicular to the lateral walls at a given point. The pressure field $`p`$ has no associated boundary condition since it does not satisfy a dynamical equation.

The influence of the lateral walls on the dynamics is determined by the dimensionless aspect ratio $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, defined to be the half-width-to-depth ratio of the cell if it is rectangular and the radius-to-depth ratio if it is cylindrical.

### II.2 Direct Numerical Simulations

We used two different numerical schemes to solve the Boussinesq equations. The first is a serial second-order-accurate finite-difference scheme that is based on a cubic colocated mesh. It is highly efficient for simulating a rectangular cell of moderate aspect ratio. The second is a parallel spectral element scheme that is second-order-accurate in time and is able to treat more complex geometries with arbitrary lateral boundaries. Both schemes were used to obtain the results presented in this article and were found to give good agreement with each other. Details of both of these schemes are available elsewhere mclai ; nekton . For applications of these schemes to related problems in Rayleigh-Bénard convection, see Refs. mark1 ; mark2 ; mark3 .

### II.3 Mean Flow

When the convection pattern is made up of rolls that are not straight and parallel, a mean flow, slowly varying in the horizontal coordinates, will be set up. The importance of mean flow is that it is a nonlocal flow mode, and as such, affects the global behavior of the convection pattern even though its magnitude is small. A detailed derivation of mean flow can be found in Ref. CN . Heuristically, it can be understood as follows. When there are inhomogeneities in the amplitude $`A(x,y)`$ and wave vector $`𝐤(x,y)`$ (or equivalently, the phase $`\varphi (x,y)`$ where $`_{}\varphi =𝐤`$) of the convection rolls, a Reynolds stress will be generated locally from the gradients of $`𝐤`$ and $`A`$. This results in a flow slowly varying in the plane. In addition, these inhomogeneities will also induce a varying component $`p_s(x,y,t)`$ in the pressure field that is constant across the depth of the cell and slowly varying in the plane. The gradient $`_{}p_s`$ will then drive a global flow that, together with the Reynolds-stress-induced flow, distorts the convection rolls further. If we call the slowly varying flow $`𝐮_D`$, then we can write CN

$$\sigma _{zz}𝐮_D=_{}p_s+\frac{1}{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }𝑑\varphi 𝐮\stackrel{}{}𝐮_{},$$
(10)
where the integral over the phase variable $`\varphi `$ serves to average out the fast modes of the integrand. The as yet unknown field $`p_s`$ can be determined via the incompressibility condition, Eq. (3), which requires that

$$_{}\stackrel{}{}_{1/2}^{1/2}𝑑z𝐮_D(x,y,z,t)=0.$$
(11)
Eq. (10) can then be integrated twice with respect to $`z`$, with boundary condition Eq. (7), to completely give $`𝐮_D`$. Finally, the slow distortions, $`𝐮_D`$, advect the phase contours of the convection rolls, yielding an additional advection term in the phase equation CN ,

$$_t\varphi _t\varphi +𝐔\stackrel{}{}_{}\varphi .$$
(12)
The velocity field $`𝐔`$ is called the mean flow. It is an average of the slow distortions over the depth of the cell,

$$𝐔(x,y,t)=_{1/2}^{1/2}𝑑z𝐮_D(x,y,z,t)g(z),$$
(13)
with $`g(z)`$ a function that depends on the nonlinear structure of the rolls.

We can approximate the mean flow from our numerical simulations as the average over the depth of the cell of the slow components of the horizontal velocity,

$$𝐔(x,y,t)\frac{1}{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }𝑑\varphi _{1/2}^{1/2}𝑑z𝐮_{}(x,y,z,t).$$
(14)
In practice, we replace the integral over the phase variable $`\varphi `$ with a Gaussian filter of characteristic width $`𝒪(1)`$ so that variations over short length scales are smoothed out.

For the approximation of Eq. (14), and with the no-slip boundaries Eq. (7), the mean flow $`𝐔(x,y,t)`$ is solenoidal:

$$_{}\stackrel{}{}𝐔=0.$$
(15)
We will also find it convenient to use the mean flow stream function, $`\zeta (x,y,t)`$, and the vertical component of the mean flow vorticity, $`\omega _z`$, defined by

$$_{}^2\zeta =\omega _z=\widehat{z}\stackrel{}{}\left(_{}\times 𝐔\right).$$
(16)
The stream function, in particular, is useful to visualize because it gives the stream lines and so the geometry of the mean flow.

### II.4 Quenching Mean Flow

We now describe a procedure to construct a modified velocity field that does not have any mean flow. To do this, we want to add to the right-hand-side of Eq. (10) the negative of the source of the slow distortions, i.e., the depth average of the Reynolds stress, so that $`𝐮_D`$ becomes zero for all $`(x,y,z,t)`$. In Appendix A, we show that this additional term takes the form

$$𝚽(x,y,t)=\rho _{1/2}^{1/2}𝑑z𝐮\stackrel{}{}𝐮_{}$$
(17)
with $`\rho 1.5`$ a constant. We can then add $`𝚽`$ to the fluid equation, so that Eq. (1) becomes

$$\sigma ^1\left(_t+𝐮\stackrel{}{}\right)𝐮(x,y,z,t)=p+^2𝐮+RT\widehat{z}+\sigma ^1𝚽.$$
(18)
If $`𝚽`$ is introduced at time $`t=t_q`$, the time needed for the modified velocity field $`𝐮`$ to respond to this additional forcing can be estimated by applying dimensional arguments on the terms in Eq. (18). This time scale is $`𝒪(\sigma )`$. In this paper, we consider $`\sigma =1`$ so we expect the mean flow to be quenched in a time scale of $`𝒪(1)`$ from time $`t_q`$.

For a pattern that does not have mean flow, such as a pattern comprising straight parallel rolls with no defects or concentric circular rolls, the quenching procedure should leave the convective properties, such as the Nusselt number, of the fluid unchanged. The Nusselt number is the ratio of convective heat transfer to heat transfer that would occur by conduction alone if the fluid remained at rest. In Fig. 1, we show that this is true. The Nusselt number before (denoted by solid lines) and after (dashed lines) the quenching procedure, which occurred at $`t=t_q=50`$, are indeed the same.

## III Results

### III.1 Mean Flow and Spiral Defect Chaos

Using the numerical schemes described in Section II.2, we evolved Eqs. (2), (3), and (18) from the initial conditions

$$𝐮(x,y,z,t=0)=p(x,y,z,t=0)=0,$$
(19)
and

$$T(x,y,z,t=0)=z+\eta (x,y,z),$$
(20)
where $`T=z`$ is the linear conduction profile and $`\eta `$ is randomly chosen from a uniform distribution in the range $`[10^5,10^5]`$. We observed spiral defect chaos when the parameters are chosen such that the reduced Rayleigh number $`ϵ`$ lies in the range $`[0.6,3.0]`$, the Prandtl number $`\sigma 1`$, and the aspect ratio lies in the range $`[16,30]`$. In Fig. 2(a), we show an example: a planform of the mid-plane temperature field $`T(x,y,z=0)`$ at time $`t=500`$ for parameters $`ϵ=1.0`$, $`\sigma =1`$, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_x=\mathrm{\Gamma }_y=20`$. In general, the planforms we observed are qualitatively similar to those observed in experiments in both cylindrical MBCA  and rectangular rect\_SDC  geometries.

We note that the range of aspect ratios that we have simulated are smaller that those of past experiments which extend up to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}50}`$ MBCA ; Hu2 ; MBCA2 . This limitation is caused by the need to integrate up to at least the horizontal diffusion time scale, $`t\mathrm{\Gamma }^2`$, which is an estimate of the minimum time for thermal transients to diffuse over the entire cell and thus for the pattern to reach an asymptotic state. Because of this quadratic dependence on the aspect ratio, the time needed to execute the numerical schemes so that an asymptotic pattern is reached becomes prohibitively long for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ beyond about $`20`$ to $`30`$ (based on current computational resources; for details, see Ref. mclai ).

In the rest of this Section, we report on results simulated in a rectangular cell of aspect ratio $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_x=\mathrm{\Gamma }_y=20`$. We integrated for $`500`$ time units, and then, at time $`t=t_q=500`$, invoked the forcing term given by Eq. (17) that will quench the mean flow dynamics. In Fig. 2(b), we plot the mid-plane temperature field at time $`t=510`$ which is ten time units after the quenching of the mean flow has begun. (Recall that the quenching takes place in a time of $`𝒪(\sigma )`$ so the quenched state at ten time units should have already been asymptotic for our $`\sigma =1`$ state here.) We see that the rolls have “straightened out” in that they have lost their curvature and have developed angular bends. More strikingly, the straightened roll patches become stationary, leaving the only dynamics in the pattern to come from the motion of defects such as dislocations and grain boundaries. To illustrate this transition from a dynamical state to a seemingly “frozen” one, we plot in Fig. 3 the time series of the rate of change of the temperature field at several locations in the cell. We see that, for $`t<t_q=500`$, the derivative $`dT(x,y)/dt`$ fluctuates and is significantly different than zero at all $`t<t_q`$. However, after the quenching of the mean flow is initiated at $`t=t_q=500`$, the derivative $`dT(x,y)/dt`$ relaxes to approach zero in a time scale of $`𝒪(1)`$, suggesting that all dynamics is becoming “frozen” and that a stationary pattern is being approached.

We have also repeated the quenching of the mean flow at other Rayleigh numbers ranging from $`ϵ=0.6`$ to $`3.0`$, and for different instances of the initial condition Eq. (20). In all cases, we observed similar stationary planforms as shown in Fig. 2(b). In addition, this spiral-to-angular transition can be observed in the reverse direction. When the mean flow quenching is turned off at a later time $`t=550`$ so that mean flow is again restored to the system, the angular bends develop into spirals and the stationary planform becomes dynamical again. Spiral defect chaos is fully restored movie . Furthermore, the stationary textures of stripes with angular bends can also be observed when the quenching is initiated at other times. For example, instead of initiating the mean flow quenching procedure at a time when a spiral defect chaotic state is already asymptotic, we have also initiated the quenching procedure immediately at the start of the simulation, $`t=t_q=0`$, again using Eqs. (19)-(20) as initial conditions. In Fig. 4(a), we show the planform after $`100`$ time units for the parameters $`ϵ=1.0`$, $`\sigma =1`$, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_x=\mathrm{\Gamma }_y=20`$. We see that it comprises patches of locally straight rolls ending into each other in angular bends. There are no spirals present. When mean flow is restored at time $`t=100`$, we find that, after a time of $`𝒪(1)`$, spiral defect chaos appears, as can be seen in Fig. 4(b) which shows the planform at $`500`$ time units after the mean flow has been restored.

Thus, we have shown that spiral defect chaos does not exist without the presence of mean flow.

Before we conclude this section, we qualitatively compare the differences between the states observed when mean flow is quenched and at high Prandtl numbers, for which mean flow is weak. (Recall that the magnitude of mean flow is inversely proportional to the Prandtl number.) Starting from the state shown in Fig. 2(a), we instantaneously increased the Prandtl number for that state from $`\sigma =1`$ to $`\sigma =10`$ at time $`t=500`$. Although increasing the Prandtl number changes the convective properties of the fluid and hence the dynamics of the state, we nevertheless observed (see Fig. 5(a)) stripes with angular bends that are similar to those observed when the mean flow is quenched. Thus, the states observed when the mean flow is quenched and unquenched states observed at high Prandtl numbers are similar. In addition, we also show in Fig. 5(b) the state observed when we invoke the mean flow quenching procedure after increasing the Prandtl number to $`\sigma =10`$. We see that it is again similar to the pattern at $`\sigma =10`$, suggesting that even at $`\sigma =10`$, the residual mean flow components are negligible.

Finally, we note that, contrary to the results of Assenheimer and Steinberg Assen1 ; Assen2 , we do not observe the transition from spirals to targets as the Prandtl number is increased to $`\sigma =10`$. Several explanations are plausible: Firstly, in the Assenheimer and Steinberg experiments, non-Boussinesq effects are significant Assen1 ; Assen2 , whereas our direct numerical simulations are only for Boussinesq fluids. Secondly, our smaller aspect ratios may not support the formation of targets, and that we would indeed see the spiral to target transition in larger aspect ratios. Thirdly, the transition to targets may be strongly dependent on the history of the system, in particular on the path (in system space) that the parameters traverse.

### III.2 Mean Flow and Pre-chaotic Stripe Textures

At lower Rayleigh numbers near the convective threshold, the planforms observed take the form of stripe textures rather than exhibiting spiral defect chaos. They comprise patches of locally parallel rolls and arcs such that each patch terminates at the boundaries of another at a different orientation, and the boundaries between the patches are usually populated by defects. In general, the stripe textures are stationary after transients, except for the motion of defects at the grain boundaries. In Fig. 6(a), we show a planform of the mid-plane temperature field at time $`t=500`$ at $`ϵ=0.15`$ and $`\sigma =1`$ in a rectangular cell of aspect ratio $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_x=\mathrm{\Gamma }_y=20`$ .

When the mean flow is quenched at time $`t=t_q=500`$, we observe that the stationary stripe textures remain stationary, and that those rolls that are curved are straightened out. The resulting pattern, shown in Fig. 6(b) which is at $`10`$ time units after the quenching, comprises patches of angular structures that replaced patches of curved arcs.

### III.3 Nusselt Numbers

One way to quantify the changes introduced by the quenching procedure to a pattern is to look at its global convective properties, such as the Nusselt number. For a pattern with mean flow, its Nusselt number will be different than those of the unmodified velocity field of Eq. (18) because the latter is not a solution to the Boussinesq equations. An alternate way of saying this is that Eq. (18), together with Eqs. (2) and (3), can be interpreted as the driven Boussinesq equations with a driving force $`\sigma ^1𝚽`$ that is turned on at time $`t_q`$. Owing to this driving, we expect the convective properties of the fluid to be stronger at time $`t>t_q`$ than at time $`t<t_q`$. This is illustrated in Fig. 7. The fractional change in the Nusselt number $`\mathrm{\Delta }N/N`$ caused by the introduction of the quenching of the mean flow increases with the reduced Rayleigh number. A best linear fit to the data yields the relation

$$\mathrm{\Delta }N/N=(0.052\pm 0.005)ϵ.$$
(21)
Thus, for example, when $`ϵ1`$, modifying the velocity field to quench the mean flow introduces a change of approximately $`5\%`$ to the averaged convective properties of the fluid.

### III.4 Wavenumber Distributions

In this section, we quantify the differences between the patterns observed with mean flow and with mean flow quenched by studying the wavenumber distributions. We compute the probability density function of wavenumbers, $`P(k)`$, from a time-average of the patterns. We used the local method discussed in Ref. Egolf  to calculate the wavenumber distributions. We have found that, for smaller aspect ratios $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}20}`$, this method produces better statistics than global Fourier transform methods that were used in previous experiments MBCA ; MBCA2 ; Hu2 . The mean of the wavenumber distribution then gives the mean wavenumber $`k(ϵ)`$ as a function of the reduced Rayleigh number $`ϵ`$.

Before we highlight the differences, we point our that the mean wavenumbers obtained from our numerical simulations of spiral defect chaos lie within the Busse stability balloon the\_review ; Busse . In addition, they are also consistent with existing theory for the selection of wavenumbers in spiral defect chaos yuhai ; yuhai2 , which suggests that the wavenumbers of convecting spirals are “frustrated”, i.e., they lie between two competing selection mechanisms, selection by focus-type singularities BC  and selection by dislocations q\_d ; annu . These two sets of selected wavenumbers, at $`\sigma =1`$, are denoted in Fig. 8 by the dashed and the dotted lines, respectively. We see that our direct numerical simulations produced wavenumbers (denoted by the circle symbols) that lie within these two sets of selected wavenumbers. For comparison purposes, we have also included the mean wavenumbers calculated in a previous experiment MBCA ; MBCA2  performed in a cylindrical cell with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=78`$ and $`\sigma =0.95`$ (diamond symbols). We see that, at lower Rayleigh numbers, the mean wavenumbers from our simulations agree with the experimental findings. However, at higher Rayleigh numbers, the wavenumbers from our simulations are smaller than those of the experiments. Presumably, the smaller aspect ratios used in our simulations mean that our wavenumbers are affected by finite size effects.

For the range $`0.6ϵ1.2`$, the mean wavenumbers of the stripes with angular bends when mean flow is quenched (denoted by the cross symbols in Fig. 8) appear to fall onto a straight line whose mathematical form can be obtained from a linear fit,

$$k=(3.14\pm 0.05)(0.16\pm 0.06)ϵ.$$
(22)
This relation is consistent with the wavenumbers selected by focus-type singularities at Prandtl number $`\sigma =1`$ BC ,

$$k_f=3.1170.13ϵ.$$
(23)
The local pattern in focus-selected convection includes rolls that form closed contours about a point within the cell. In our rectangular geometries, the four corners act as focus centers, as can be seen by the presence of approximately axisymmetric roll patches emanating from the corners, see Fig. 2(a). In the absence of mean flow, the wavenumber selected therefore appears to be dominated by that selected by the focus centers (i.e., the corners) to give a mean wavenumber consistent with that selected in focus-type singularities.

Furthermore, in the absence of mean flow, the wavenumbers $`k_f`$ lie at the boundary of the zig-zag instability CN . The patterns observed with mean flow quenched are thus dominated by lateral “zig and zag” bendings, leading to the stripes with angular bends observed in Figs. 2(b) and 6(b).

We have also computed the correlation length $`\xi (ϵ)`$ of the patterns as a function of $`ϵ`$. The correlation length, defined here as the inverse of the standard deviation of the probability density function $`P(k)`$, is a measure of the average length scale of correlated regions in the pattern. In Fig. 9, we show $`\xi (ϵ)`$ calculated for both unquenched patterns (denoted by the circle symbols in Fig. 9) and for patterns observed when the mean flow is quenched (cross symbols). For comparison purposes, we have also included the correlation lengths calculated from a previous experiment MBCA ; MBCA2  performed in a cylindrical cell with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=78`$ and $`\sigma =0.95`$ (diamond symbols). We see that the correlation lengths for the states when mean flow is quenched are, on the average, about twice as large as those for spiral defect chaos at all values of $`ϵ`$. In addition, the correlation lengths for the unquenched patterns can be fitted with the power law $`\xi ϵ^{1/2}`$, as has been suggested by past experiments Hu2 ; MBCA2 , and which is predicted by dimensional arguments to be valid at least near threshold. However, the same cannot be said for the quenched states. In fact, the data suggests that while an exponent of $`1/2`$ might be fitted for $`ϵ\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.7}`$, the correlation lengths appear to have saturated at $`\xi \mathrm{\Gamma }=14`$ for $`ϵ\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.7}`$. This suggests that finite size effects become important, and that, in order to obtain a better estimate of the scaling relation for the patterns observed when mean flow is quenched, we would need to use a larger aspect ratio. Owing to the lack of data over more decades of reduced Rayleigh numbers, actual fittings to the data were not carried out.

### III.5 Curvature Distributions

Finally, we quantify how much the quenching of the mean flow straightens the rolls by looking at the distribution of the local curvature $`\chi `$, defined at every point in the planform to be the magnitude of the divergence of the unit wave vector:

$$\chi =|\stackrel{}{}\widehat{k}|.$$
(24)
A value of $`\chi =0`$ corresponds to a straight roll, whereas a value of $`\chi =1`$ corresponds to a roll with a radius of curvature of unity.

We have computed the probability density function $`P(\chi )`$ for spiral defect chaos observed at $`ϵ=1.0`$, $`\sigma =1`$, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_x=\mathrm{\Gamma }_y=20`$, as well as for the resulting stripes with angular bends observed at $`10`$ time units after mean flow is quenched. In Fig. 10, we plot the two distributions. The curvature distribution for spiral defect chaos (solid line) peaks at a value of $`\chi 0.1`$, suggesting that the pattern is dominated by spirals whose radius of curvature is $`\chi ^110`$, consistent visually with the pattern shown in Fig. 2(a). We see that this peak broadens to become a plateau at $`0\stackrel{<}{}\chi \stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.1}`$ for the quenched state (dashed line), suggesting an increase in the dominance of straighter rolls in the pattern.

We observed similar results for the comparison of the curvature distribution for the stripe textures. In Fig. 11, we show the comparisons for a state at $`ϵ=0.15`$. We see that both distributions, with (solid line) and without (dashed line) mean flow decrease approximately monotonically and rapidly with increasing $`\chi `$. Both the comparisons for spiral defect chaos and for stripe textures suggest that the consequence of quenching mean flow is to straighten out the rolls.

In addition, the distribution at $`ϵ=0.15`$ for the quenched case is higher for $`\chi \stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.05}`$ as well as for $`0.1\stackrel{<}{}\chi \stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.4}`$ (see the inset of Fig. 11), and lower otherwise. This suggests that another consequence of quenching mean flow is the development of angular structures that have large curvatures.

### III.6 Mean Flow and Lateral Boundaries

In experiments where the Rayleigh number is sufficiently high, it has been frequently observed that convection rolls terminate perpendicularly into the lateral walls. We show in this section that mean flow generated by amplitude gradients near lateral walls can be used to explain this phenomenon, although the applicability of this argument rests on a number of factors, among them the presence of defects which affects the ability of the patterns to reorient themselves.

If we call $`\widehat{n}`$ the outward unit vector normal to the lateral boundary and $`\widehat{k}`$ the wave director of the rolls, then we can define the wall-roll obliqueness angle as

$$\mathrm{\Theta }\mathrm{arccos}|\widehat{k}\stackrel{}{}\widehat{n}|.$$
(25)
In practice, the numerical value of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ at a particular location along the lateral boundary is obtained by averaging Eq. (25) over a length $`r=0.5`$ to $`r=1.5`$, where $`r`$ is the perpendicular distance away from that location along the lateral boundary. The value $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\pi /2`$ corresponds to rolls terminating perpendicularly into the walls. The common occurrence of this value remains a phenomenological observation, without much theoretical understanding, although it has been found Cross\_boundary  that $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is not fixed by the physical boundary conditions, Eqs. (7)-(9).

However, when rolls do not terminate perpendicularly at a lateral boundary, variations in the amplitude of the convection rolls as it decays near the lateral boundaries results in the generation of a mean flow. (Recall from Eq. (10) that a mean flow is generated by inhomogeneities in the wavenumbers and amplitudes of the convection rolls.) The normal component (with respect to the lateral boundary) of this mean flow is cancelled by the flow generated from from slow pressure gradients, resulting in the mean flow being parallel to the lateral boundary. It then tends to push the rolls back to a perpendicular orientation. The actual calculations are worked out in Appendix B. The importance of this mean flow in ensuring that the rolls terminate perpendicularly is indicated by observing that, in the absence of mean flow, oblique rolls are more prevalent. In Fig. 12, we plot the wall-roll obliqueness angle averaged over the lateral boundaries for patterns observed at $`t=500`$ at various reduced Rayleigh number $`ϵ`$, Prandtl number $`\sigma =1`$ and in a rectangular cell of aspect ratio $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_x=\mathrm{\Gamma }_y=20`$, with mean flow and with the mean flow quenched. We see that, with mean flow, the rolls are close to perpendicular, $`\mathrm{\Theta }\pi /2`$. However, when mean flow is quenched, the rolls are more oblique, $`\mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{<}{}\pi /2`$. In fact, the difference in the mean obliqueness between the states with mean flow and with mean flow quenched, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Theta }`$, increases approximately linearly with $`ϵ`$,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Theta }=(0.16\pm 0.01)ϵ,$$
(26)
as the inset of Fig. 12 depicts.

When mean flow is quenched, the reorientation of the rolls away from $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\pi /2`$ is almost instantaneous. We illustrate this result in Fig. 13 for one particular reduced Rayleigh number, $`ϵ=1.0`$. In this case, the mean flow quenching takes place at time $`t=t_q=500`$. We see that, at time $`t=500`$, the mean wall-roll obliqueness angle moves away from $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\pi /2`$ in a time scale of $`𝒪(1)`$.

The above argument that mean flow restores the rolls to a perpendicular orientation may not always be applicable. For example, when we performed simulations in a cylindrical cell of aspect ratio $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=30`$, we find that, at $`ϵ=1.0`$, the mean obliqueness angle $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ still remains close to $`\pi /2`$ when mean flow is quenched. This can be seen more clearly in Fig. 14, where we show the probability density $`P(\mathrm{\Theta })`$ of obliqueness angles along the lateral boundaries for states observed in a rectangular cell of aspect ratio $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_x=\mathrm{\Gamma }_y=20`$ and cylindrical cell of aspect ratio $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=30`$. We see that in a cylindrical cell with mean flow quenched, the peak at $`\mathrm{\Theta }\pi /2`$ is still observed after the mean flow has been quenched. One possible explanation might be that, in a cylindrical cell, there are more defects existing near the lateral boundaries and that these defects then pin the rolls, preventing them from reorienting away from $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\pi /2`$ when the mean flow is quenched.

Another instance where the above argument does not apply is at low Rayleigh numbers. From Eq. (42) in Appendix B, the magnitude of the mean flow $`|𝐔|ϵ^{1/2}`$ so that at low Rayleigh numbers, the mean flow may not be strong enough to reorient the rolls perpendicularly. This is evident in Fig. 6(a), where, at the reduced Rayleigh number $`ϵ=0.15`$, rolls are seen to terminate with an acute angle at the lateral walls. In this case, the presence of a restoring mean flow can also be visualized. The mean flow vorticity plot corresponding to this pattern, shown in Fig 15(a), shows the presence of strong vorticity along the bottom half of the left wall and the top half of the right wall. There, the restoring mean flow vorticity takes the form of long and narrow circulating “jets” that are about one roll size wide and several roll sizes long. In Fig. 15(b), the vorticity is plotted as a function of distance away from the lateral wall along the solid and dashed horizontal lines shown in Fig. 15(a). The existence of a positive vorticity patch close to the wall and a negative patch further away from the wall, which together indicates the presence of a restoring mean flow, agree qualitatively with the theoretical results of Fig. 18 in Appendix B. When the Rayleigh number of the state in Fig. 6 is increased from $`ϵ=0.15`$ to $`ϵ=1.0`$, the mean flow becomes strong enough to reorient the rolls to become perpendicular to the lateral walls, and subsequently disappears.

## IV Conclusion

In this article, we have described a novel procedure to construct a modified velocity field that does not have any mean flow in a convecting flow. We have applied this procedure to show that spiral defect chaos does not survive when the mean flow is quenched. Instead, a pattern characterized by textures of stripes with angular bends appears. We have also shown that the mean wavenumbers of these quenched patterns approach those selected by focus-type singularities, which, in the absence of mean flow, lie at the boundary of the zig-zag instability.

We next presented a heuristic argument on how mean flow can contribute to rolls terminating into a lateral boundary perpendicularly. We provided data to show that, in the absence of mean flow, rolls begin to deviate from a perpendicular orientation, and this obliqueness increases with Rayleigh number. However, the ability of this mean flow to restore the rolls to a perpendicular orientation may be impeded by the presence of defects that do not allow the rolls to reorient themselves, and at low Rayleigh numbers where the restoring mean flow is weak.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work is supported by the Engineering Research Program of the Office of Basic Energy Sciences at the Department of Energy, Grants DE-FG03-98ER14891 and DE-FG02-98ER14892. We acknowledge the Caltech Center for Advanced Computing Research and the North Carolina Supercomputing Center. We also thank Paul Fischer for helpful discussions.

## Appendix A Derivation of Quenching of Mean Flow

In this appendix, we derive the functional form of the forcing term $`𝚽`$ that is to be added to the fluid equation, Eq. (1), to make the resulting fluid dynamics have zero mean flow.

As mentioned in Section II.3, the mean flow comprises a local component generated by the Reynolds stress $`1/(2\pi )_0^{2\pi }𝑑\varphi 𝐮\stackrel{}{}_{}𝐮_{}`$ and a global component driven by slow a horizontal pressure gradient that is present in order to guarantee the incompressibility condition, Eq. (3). Thus, if the Reynolds stress is subtracted from the dynamics at all times, then mean flow will not be generated. We thus suggest that

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(x,y,t)=\frac{1}{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }𝑑\varphi \rho _{1/2}^{1/2}𝑑z𝐮\stackrel{}{}_{}𝐮_{},$$
(27)
where the operator $`\rho _{1/2}^{1/2}𝑑z`$ serves as an average over the depth of the cell. This $`𝚽`$ can then be subtracted from the fluid equation, Eq. (1), resulting in Eq. (18).

We now need to evaluate the value of the constant $`\rho `$. To do this, we rewrite the equation for the slow distortions, Eq. (10), as

$$\sigma _{zz}𝐮_D=_{}p_s+\frac{1}{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }𝑑\varphi 𝐮\stackrel{}{}𝐮_{}𝚽.$$
(28)
Following Ref. CN , the Reynolds stress term near threshold takes the form

$$\frac{1}{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }𝑑\varphi 𝐮\stackrel{}{}𝐮_{}I(k,z)𝐑(x,y).$$
(29)
where

$$𝐑(x,y)𝐤_{}\stackrel{}{}(𝐤A^2),$$
(30)
and

$$I(k,z)w_0(k,z)_z\frac{\varphi _0(k,z)}{k_c^2}\frac{w_0(k,z)}{k_c^2}_z\varphi _0(k,z),$$
(31)
with $`w_0(k,z)`$ and $`\varphi (k,z)`$ the vertical profiles of the vertical velocity and the potential of the horizontal velocities, respectively. For systems satisfying the rigid boundary condition, Eq. (7), these functions are the familiar Chandrasekhar functions Chandra .

We can then rewrite Eq. (28) as

$`\sigma _{zz}𝐮_D`$ $`=`$ $`_{}p_s+I(k,z)𝐑(x,y)`$ (32)
$`\rho {\displaystyle _{1/2}^{1/2}}𝑑zI(k,z)𝐑(x,y).`$
Integrating Eq. (32) with respect to $`z`$ twice, and making use of the boundary condition, Eq. (7),

$`\sigma 𝐮_D`$ $`=`$ $`p(z)_{}p_s+J(k,z)𝐑(x,y)`$ (33)
$`p(z)\rho {\displaystyle _{1/2}^{1/2}}𝑑zI(k,z)𝐑(x,y),`$
with

$$p(z)\frac{1}{2}\left(z^2\frac{1}{4}\right)$$
(34)
the Poiseuille profile, and $`J(k,z)`$ the double integral of $`I(k,z)`$ with respect to $`z`$. Employing the incompressibility condition, Eq. (11), we then arrive at the equality

$$\rho =\frac{12_{1/2}^{1/2}𝑑zJ(k,z)}{_{1/2}^{1/2}𝑑zI(k,z)}.$$
(35)
Evaluating these integrals numerically yields $`\rho 1.5`$ for the rigid boundary condition, Eq. (7). Moreover, $`\rho `$ is relatively independent of the wavenumber $`k`$, varying from $`\rho =1.4886`$ at $`k=2.8`$ to $`\rho =1.4887`$ at $`k=k_c=3.117`$ and to $`\rho =1.4886`$ at $`k=3.4`$, suggesting the validity of treating it as a constant.

Finally, to numerically confirm this result, we carry out the quenching of the mean flow, as described in Eq. (18), for a range of values for $`\rho `$, at $`ϵ=1.0`$ in a rectangular cell of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_x=\mathrm{\Gamma }_y=20`$. At $`10`$ time units after effecting the quenching, we then measure the maximum magnitude of the mean flow as a function of $`\rho `$. We plot our results in Fig. 16, where we show the maximum mean flow magnitude (normalized by the maximum mean flow magnitude observed without quenching) vs. $`\rho `$ for data from three different Prandtl numbers. We see that, when $`\rho 1.5`$, the normalized maximum mean flow magnitude is indeed zero.

## Appendix B Restoring Mean Flow Near a Lateral Boundary

In this appendix, we show that a set of straight and parallel rolls that are oriented obliquely at an angle $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ to a lateral boundary sets up a mean flow that tends to restore the rolls back to being perpendicular to the lateral boundary. The various quantities used here are defined in the sketch in Fig. 17.

We will make the assumption that the wave vectors of the rolls are constant near the lateral boundary,

$$𝐤=(k\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta },k\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }),$$
(36)
and that the convection amplitude within a correlation length $`\xi `$ of a lateral boundary is suppressed the\_review ; Wesfreid :

$$A(x,y)=A_0\mathrm{tanh}\left(\frac{x}{\xi \mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }}\right).$$
(37)
The quantity $`A_0`$ is the amplitude in the bulk. The correlation length $`\xi =\sqrt{2}ϵ^{1/2}\xi _0`$ with $`\xi _0=0.385`$. The variable $`x`$ is the perpendicular distance away from the lateral boundary.

Then, from the Cross-Newell equation CN , the amplitude gradients near the lateral wall will result in a non-zero mean flow vorticity, $`\omega `$, given by

$$\omega =\gamma \widehat{z}\stackrel{}{}_{}\times [𝐤_{}\stackrel{}{}(𝐤A^2)],$$
(38)
where $`\gamma `$ is a constant that is inversely proportional to the Prandtl number $`\sigma `$. (If we relax the assumption that the wavenumbers of the rolls are constant, then the compression and dilation of the rolls as well as inhomogeneities in their curvatures will also contribute to the mean flow.) Substituting Eqs. (36) and (37) into Eq. (38) then gives

$$\omega (x)=2\gamma A_0^2k^2\xi ^2f(\mathrm{\Theta },x)$$
(39)
where the normalized mean flow vorticity,

$`f(\mathrm{\Theta },x)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{tan}(\mathrm{\Theta })\text{sech}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{x}{\xi \mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }}}\right)`$
$`\times \left[13\mathrm{tanh}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{x}{\xi \mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }}}\right)\right],`$
is plotted in Fig. 18(a) for several representative values of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. We see that $`\omega `$ is positive for $`x/\xi \stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$, and negative otherwise. The currents from this vorticity pair will then drive the rolls back to a perpendicular orientation.

The mean flow generated by this vorticity can also be easily computed. Along the lateral wall, it is given by

$$|𝐔|=\gamma |𝐤_y|_{}(𝐤A^2).$$
(41)
(The component of the mean flow normal to the lateral wall is cancelled by the flow coming from the slow pressure gradient.) Using Eqs. (36) and (37), we arrive at

$$|𝐔|=2\gamma A_0^2k^2\xi ^1g(\mathrm{\Theta },x)$$
(42)
where the normalized restoring mean flow magnitude in the direction of the lateral wall

$$g(\mathrm{\Theta },x)=\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Theta })\text{sech}^2\left(\frac{x}{\xi \mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }}\right)\mathrm{tanh}\left(\frac{x}{\xi \mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }}\right).$$
(43)
is plotted in Fig. 18(b) for several representative values of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$.

Finally, we plot the quantity $`\mathrm{max}|𝐔|`$ as a function of $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ in Fig. 19. We see that the restoring mean flow magnitude grows monotonically from zero at $`\mathrm{\Theta }=0`$ (corresponding to sets of rolls parallel to the lateral wall) to attain its largest value at $`\mathrm{\Theta }\pi /2`$ (corresponding to sets of rolls perpendicular to the wall). Our analysis actually breaks down for $`|\mathrm{\Theta }\pi /2|\stackrel{<}{}ϵ^{1/4}`$ because modifications at the next order in Eq. (37) become important Cross\_boundary .


format: text

text:
# On Variation of the Latitudinal Structure of the Solar Convection Zone

## 1 Introduction

Analysis of the global p-mode oscillations of the Sun reveals the Sun’s internal structure and constrains the physics of the solar interior. In this paper we focus on the latitudinal variation of the structure of the solar convection zone and the possible temporal variation of that structure during the rising phase of solar cycle 23. The convection zone occupies the outer thirty per cent by radius of the Sun, as was deduced from helioseismic inversions for the Sun’s radial hydrostatic structure (Christensen-Dalsgaard, Gough & Thompson 1991; cf., Gough 1977; Ulrich & Rhodes 1977). Such an investigation uses the mean multiplet p-mode frequencies to deduce the spherically symmetric component of the Sun’s structure. But with high-quality data such as from the Global Oscillation Network Group (GONG) and the Michelson Doppler Imager (MDI) instrument on board the SOHO satellite (Harvey et al. 1996; Scherrer et al. 1995) it has become possible to make deductions also about the latitudinal variation of the structure from the dependence on the azimuthal order of the frequencies within multiplets (Gough et al. 1996; Antia et al. 2001). What is measured is acoustic asphericity, i.e., the deviation from spherical symmetry of the propagation speed of the p-mode waves as a function of position. The relevant wave speed is the adiabatic sound speed but possibly modified by magnetic effects in regions of magnetic fields. The acoustic structure of the convection zone may be expected to reflect the asphericity caused by the Sun’s rotation, but also perhaps the cellular convection and the presence of magnetic fields. At the resolution scale at which the global helioseismic inversions can be undertaken, we are not here concerned with granular or even supergranular scales. But the thermal effects of giant cells or other such large-scale circulatory structures may be detectable in the inferred latitudinal variation of sound speed, as perhaps may also be a sufficiently strong large-scale magnetic field. In the present paper we present results of inversions of a more extensive data set than was considered by Antia et al. (2001). We also show that there is some evidence for the temporal variation of the latitudinal structure during the rising phase of the solar activity cycle. However, one should be cautious because of possible instrumental variation during the period of observations, and so we wish to examine such a possibility more closely.

## 2 Seismic data and inversions

The helioseismic datasets comprise measures of frequencies (so-called even a-coefficients) from GONG and MDI. The modes are identified by radial order $`n`$, spherical harmonic degree $`l`$ and azimuthal order $`m`$. The frequencies $`\nu _{nlm}`$ are grouped in multiplets, corresponding to modes with all azimuthal orders (i.e., $`m=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{},\pm l`$) for given $`n`$ and $`l`$. In a spherically symmetric star, all frequencies in the multiplet would be equal, but rotation and asphericity raise this degeneracy. Rather than report individual frequencies for every mode in the multiplet, the observers’ data analysis procedure provides mean frequencies $`\nu _{nl}`$ and splitting coefficients $`a_j(n,l)`$ defined by

$$\nu _{nlm}=\nu _{nl}+\underset{j=1}{\overset{j_{\mathrm{max}}}{}}a_j(n,l)𝒫_j^{(l)}(m),$$

where the $`𝒫_j^{(l)}(m)`$ are orthogonal polynomials in $`m`$ which are approximately equal to $`l`$ times Legendre polynomial $`P_j(m/l)`$ when $`l`$ is large (e.g., Schou et al. 1994).

Odd splitting coefficients $`a_1`$, $`a_3`$, etc. are used to infer the Sun’s internal rotation (e.g., Schou et al. 1998): we shall not consider those further here. The even coefficients contain information about the Sun’s aspherical structure, and here we use these coefficients, applying to them a 2D regularised least-squares inversion technique as described by Antia et al. (2001). In brief, the data are fitted with an expression of the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{la_{2k}(n,l)}{\nu _{nl}}}=`$ (1)
$`(2k+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})Q_{lk}{\displaystyle _0^R}\mathrm{d}r{\displaystyle _0^\pi }\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{d}\theta (K_{c^2,\rho }^{nl}(r){\displaystyle \frac{\delta c^2}{c^2}}(r,\theta )`$
$`+K_{\rho ,c^2}^{nl}(r){\displaystyle \frac{\delta \rho }{\rho }}(r,\theta ))P_{2k}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )+Q_{lk}{\displaystyle \frac{F_k(\nu _{nl})}{E_{nl}}}.`$
Here the known quantities are the kernels $`K_{c^2,\rho }^{nl}`$ and $`K_{\rho ,c^2}^{nl}`$, the factors $`Q_{lk}`$, and the mode inertias $`E_{nl}`$; and the unknowns are the aspherical perturbations $`\delta c^2`$ and $`\delta \rho `$ to the squared sound speed and density respectively, and the surface terms $`F_k`$. The errors on aspherical perturbations, $`\delta c^2/c^2`$ and $`\delta \rho /\rho `$ are estimated through a Monte-Carlo simulation. The inversion procedure is repeated for different realisations of data, with Gaussian noise added according to the estimated errors on splitting coefficients, to estimate the standard deviation in the values of $`\delta c^2/c^2`$ and $`\delta \rho /\rho `$ at each point.

The solar oscillations frequencies from the GONG project (Hill et al. 1996) were obtained from 108-day time series, while the MDI data sets were derived from 72-day time series (Schou 1999). We use data sets that consist of mean frequencies and splitting coefficients. In this work we are only concerned with even splitting coefficients which are determined by the second order effect of rotation, asphericity in solar structure or of a magnetic field. We use 66 data sets from GONG each covering a period of 108 days, starting from 1995, May 7 and ending on 2002, January 17 with a spacing of 36 days between consecutive data sets. Thus each set overlaps with the two preceding and two following sets. The MDI data sets (Schou 1999) consist of 28 non-overlapping sets each obtained from observations taken over a period of 72 days. The first set begins on 1996 May 1 and the last set ends on 2002 March 30 with a gap in between during July 1998 to January 1999 when contact with SOHO was temporarily lost.

Since the dominant north-south symmetric component of solar rotation rate is reliably determined from odd splitting coefficients, we use these values to calculate the second order effect of rotation as described by Antia et al. (2000). This second order contribution to even splitting coefficients is subtracted from the observed coefficients to get the residuals which could be due to the effect of magnetic field or any other asphericity in solar structure. In all results described in the following sections the rotational contribution has been subtracted out. All these results have been obtained through inversion of even coefficients $`a_2,a_4,\mathrm{},a_{16}`$. The mean frequencies $`\nu _{nl}`$ are determined by the spherically symmetric structure. Since this component has been extensively studied we do not consider it in the present work. The even splitting coefficients are sensitive only to the north-south symmetric component of the structure variations and hence that is the only component that can be determined with these data.

## 3 Sun’s latitudinal structure

Several investigations of the medium-degree even splitting coefficients in the last several years have pointed to a latitudinally dependent spatial variation in sound propagation speed for the solar p modes at a depth of about 40 Mm beneath the surface (Antia et al. 2000; Dziembowski et al. 2000). The magnitude of the effect is such that it could correspond to a relative thermal perturbation at that depth of order $`10^4`$, or a magnetic field with rms field strength of roughly $`50`$kG. Antia et al. (2000) speculate that such a field may be concentrated and retained at that location by downward convective plumes (cf., Li & Sofia 2001).

The results of 2-D inversion by Antia et al. (2001) strikingly show that the aspherical perturbation to the sound speed peaks at latitude of about $`60^{}`$, with a drop towards the pole. These results have been updated using additional data that have become available since then: Fig. 1 shows the contours for the temporal average of the aspherical sound-speed perturbation from the updated MDI and GONG data. The MDI and GONG results are in reasonable agreement about the location of the perturbation and its global behaviour. However, note that the period over which the average is taken differs in the two panels because the GONG data start a little earlier (in mid-1995) and there are also two periods without data from MDI.

Figure 2 shows the cuts through Fig. 1 at constant latitudes from both GONG and MDI data. It is clear that the two results are roughly consistent with each other. The cut through $`60^{}`$ latitude shows a clear peak around $`r=0.9R_{}`$. We cannot tell from the seismic data whether this is due to a thermal asphericity in the solar interior or to a magnetic field. If it is due to a randomised magnetic field in the convection zone, then this value may be taken as indicative of the order of magnitude of the ratio $`v_A^2/c^2`$, where $`v_A`$ is the Alfvén speed. From this we can calculate the magnetic field: the results are shown in Fig. 3. Because of the increasing gas pressure the estimated magnetic field keeps increasing with depth. Around the base of the convection zone the magnetic field strength could be 200–300 kG, which is comparable to the upper limit obtained by Antia et al. (2000). The upper limit of Antia et al. is applicable only to a field concentrated near the base of the convection zone, while the magnetic field shown in Fig. 3 is spread throughout the convection zone and hence the earlier upper limit is not applicable.

The inversion results indicate that the positive perturbation, though peaked around $`r=0.9R_{}`$, extends through much of the convection zone. Although the finite resolution of the inversion certainly spreads the features around, it appears from a resolution study (Antia et al. 2001) that the spread in depth seen here is more extensive than one would expect from a perturbation wholly confined around $`r=0.95R_{}`$ say. The results appear to show that this peak extends below the convection zone also, but this extension could be due to limited resolution of the inversion process. It may be pointed out that the peak of this perturbation has shifted downwards as compared to what Antia et al. (2000) found. This shift has arisen because, unlike in our earlier work, in this work we have removed the surface contribution ($`Q_{lk}F_k(\nu _{nl})/E_{nl}`$) during inversion. That shifts the peak a little downwards. If this peak is due to magnetic field, the field strength should be around 70 kG.

These results come from an inversion which attempts to isolate the different contributions to Eq. (1). There is a known excellent correlation between the even splitting coefficients $`a_{2k}`$ and the surface unsigned magnetic flux projected onto $`P_{2k}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$. The latitudinal distribution of surface flux varies over the solar cycle. This is reflected in the surface term that we fit in Eq. (1). The surface term is shown in Fig. 4, which displays contours of constant surface term as a function of time and latitude at a frequency of 3 mHz. Note that scale and hence the contour spacing of the surface term is arbitrary. This figure shows distinct bands of positive surface term moving towards the equator with time, which should coincide with the bands in the magnetic butterfly diagram. At high latitudes there is a hint of bands migrating polewards, particularly, after 1998. This also has been seen in magnetic features at the solar surface (Leroy and Noens 1983; Makarov & Sivaraman 1989b).

## 4 Apparent temporal variations

Clearly there is a substantial temporal variation in the even $`a`$ coefficients that is associated with the near-surface variations of magnetic flux. This is taken up by the surface term in Eq. (1); see Fig. 4. Once this is removed, however, it is of interest to see whether there is any residual temporal variation coming from the deeper layers.

We first study the development of acoustic asphericity by examining the cuts at different radii from the MDI asphericity inversion results, at six different epochs (the beginnings of 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002). Each of these results is obtained from MDI data set starting in the beginning of the corresponding year and represents an average over 72 day period. Fig. 5 shows latitudinal cuts at fixed radii ($`r/R=0.98,0.96,0.94,0.90,0.80,0.70`$). For the two highest locations, the asphericity clearly appears to evolve, with a pronounced variance at high latitudes. In the $`60^{}`$ peak, there is a substantial difference between 1997 and later years, and the peak strengthens and broadens approaching 2000. The slightly deeper cuts show the peak sharpening but the polar values are very steady. Much deeper in the convection zone (bottom two panels) the amplitude is much reduced, but it is still somewhat larger than one might expect if the underlying perturbation were strictly confined in the layers around e.g. $`0.95R_{}`$. Thus its spread to greater depths may be to some extent real. It is difficult to make out any systematic temporal variation in asphericity from this figure as even in the upper layers the variation is only of the order of 2–3$`\sigma `$.

Because there is an apparent temporal variation we should look at its origin more closely. Fig. 6 shows as a contour plot the results for aspherical component of squared sound speed obtained using GONG data at $`r=0.96R_{}`$ as a function of latitude and time. To see the temporal variations more clearly, the figure shows the residuals obtained after subtracting the temporal average at each latitude. There is no evident pattern in the residuals. Similar results are obtained at other depths.

Fig. 7 similarly shows the residuals in sound speed at $`r=0.96R_{}`$, but using the MDI data. The left panel which displays the results using full data shows a distinct temporal variation. This is consistent with what was seen in Fig. 5, but is in contrast to the GONG results (Fig. 6). Antia (2002) has pointed out that most of the temporal variation occurs between July 1998 and January 1999, when the contact with SOHO satellite was lost. This period is marked by the gap in the contour diagram. Before the gap there is positive asphericity at low latitudes and negative values at high latitudes. This is reversed after the gap and in fact there is very little systematic variations in the results before or after the gap. It is possible the Sun has had some interesting transition while the MDI instrument was not operating. This hypothesis gets little support from the GONG data, however, which does not appear to show any unusual trend during this period. We must therefore consider the possibility that the apparent variation is due to systematic errors introduced by instrumental variations during the recovery of the SOHO satellite. We suspect the high-degree data may be responsible: the right panel of Fig. 7, which shows results using only modes with $`\mathrm{}<110`$, displays no particular temporal variation in asphericity. In fact, the temporal average for the MDI data shown in Fig. 1 is also obtained using only modes with $`\mathrm{}<110`$. If all modes are used then the peak is much more pronounced with maximum value of more than $`2\times 10^4`$ which is double the peak height in Fig. 1. As a result, in the following results we have used only the restricted mode set from MDI.

With a view to studying the possibility of small temporal variation in inferred asphericity in sound speed, we divide the data sets into two parts: a low activity period before 1998.4 and a high activity period after 1999.4, and take temporal averages separately over these parts. The results are shown in Fig. 8. There is a slight increase in asphericity in high activity set as compared to that in low activity set in both GONG and MDI results. Fig. 8 also shows the difference between the high and low activity periods. The increase appears at a level of $`2\times 10^5`$ in some regions and is spread over a wide region, though the maximum change appears to occur around $`r=0.9R_{}`$ at high latitude as well as in the equatorial region. By comparison, the typical errors in low latitude region inside the convection zone is about $`10^5`$ which is half the contour spacing. The errors increase with depth and latitude. The significance of this increase in asphericity is not very clear, but with the availability of data over a complete solar cycle it may be possible to confirm whether there is indeed an increase in asphericity with activity.

## 5 Discussion

The helioseismic inversions for asphericity in sound speed show a distinct peak at a latitude of $`60^{}`$ inside the convection zone. These inferences raise a number of questions. What is so special about $`60^{}`$ latitude? Perhaps it is the boundary between two oppositely directed meridionally circulating cells, or at least the poleward limit of a low-latitude cell. If the perturbation to the sound speed is indeed caused by magnetic field, as we have suggested (Antia et al. 2000), then the flux could accumulate at this latitude in a convergent lane between the two cells. We can envisage two possibilities. Earlier studies of surface magnetism emphasised the poleward migration of prominences and faculae from around this location (e.g., Waldmeier 1981; Makarov & Sivaraman 1989a,b) and led to a picture where this latitude had surface flows diverging from it. In that case, the cells could act to dredge dynamo-generated flux from the lower convection zone into this latitude. On the other hand, ring diagram analyses of local helioseismic data (Basu et al. 1999; Haber et al. 2000) find poleward meridional circulations at low latitudes, in the outer 20 Mm or so that they can image. Small-scale fields could be generated by the alpha effect operating in the upper convection zone, or could come from the decay of old sunspots and active regions. The meridional flows could sweep up this near-surface flux and collect it like jetsam in a downflow lane at $`60^{}`$ latitude.

A further point of interest about $`60^{}`$ latitude is that this is where the near-surface shear changes sign, according to MDI helioseismic measurements: the angular velocity increases with depth beneath the surface at low latitudes whereas it decreases with depth at high latitudes (Schou et al. 1998; Corbard & Thompson 2002). This could reflect the role of differently signed meridional circulation flows in the transport of angular momentum on either side of $`60^{}`$. Furthermore, the time-dependence of rotation at high latitudes is perhaps another manifestation of the interplay between magnetic field and flows. The variation in rotation rate in the upper convection zone shows a pattern with bands of faster and slower than average rotation rate moving towards the equator with time at low latitudes (Howe et al. 2000; Antia & Basu 2000) while at high latitudes these bands appear to be moving towards the pole (Antia & Basu 2001). The transition between equatorward and poleward movement occurs around a latitude of $`50^{}`$. The near-surface rotation at high latitudes, as revealed by helioseismology, has been slowing down until 1999 during the rising phase of the present cycle (Schou 1999; Antia & Basu 2001). At high latitudes, the rotation rate decreases with time, reaches a minimum and then starts increasing again. The epoch at which the minimum occurs is a function of latitude: it gradually shifts to later times as one goes to higher latitudes. One might envisage that it is the open magnetic field lines that slow the rotation. As the open flux retreats glacier-like back to high latitudes, it releases its brake on the rotation at a given latitude and so at that latitude the rotation rate springs back up.

One of the outstanding problems in solar physics is to identify the location of a plausible mechanism responsible for simultaneous variations of the Sun’s luminosity, radius, effective temperature and p-mode frequencies with the activity cycle. The seat of the solar dynamo is generally believed to be located in the tachocline region beneath the convection zone where the mechanism for solar luminosity variation could also reside. However, it has been argued by Balmforth et al. (1996) that an agent like a magnetic field concentrated at the base of the solar convection zone is unlikely to be directly responsible for the observed cyclic modulations; nor can the purely thermal changes occurring in the near-surface layers of the Sun account for the observed irradiance variations. Any deeply seated driving mechanism would yield values of the quantity $`W=(dR/R)/(dL/L)`$, which measures the relative changes in solar radius and luminosity, somewhere between $`0.2`$ and $`0.5`$. The current estimates of $`W`$ seem to suggest much lower values, of order $`0.02`$ (Emilio et al. 2000). In fact, these results from satellite observations indicate that the principal cause of the solar luminosity variation is unlikely to be located very deep inside the Sun.

Helioseismic inversions have revealed the existence of a shear layer below the photosphere, extending to depths of about 50 Mm below the photosphere, with its peak occurring at 30 Mm depth, in the midst of the helium ionisation zone. (The above values depend somewhat on latitude, the depth of shear layer reducing with increasing latitude.) Dikpati et al. (2002) have explored the role of this subphotospheric radial shear layer in driving a solar dynamo, and find that a differentially rotating shear layer is capable of generating toroidal magnetic fields of up to 1 kG strength. Antia et al. (2000) had invoked the pumping of downward moving plumes (downdrafts) to concentrate toroidal magnetic field in the outer convection zone and to enhance its strength to values approaching 70 kG at depths around 70 Mm below the surface. This takes place at depths around 70 Mm below the surface, where some sort of equipartition is achieved between the magnetic energy density $`B^2/8\pi `$ and the kinetic energy density of downdrafts $`\rho w^2`$. Note, the velocities of the order of 1 km/s adopted here, refer to the downdraft motions which have velocities several times those given by the standard mixing length theory for convective elements (cf., Mestel 1999). This process, of course, does not exclude the generation of a large fraction of the toroidal magnetic field in the solar interior, with the help of differential rotation in the tachocline. We are merely pointing out that part of the toroidal field in the convection zone may be generated in the sub-surface shear layer itself, where the poloidal field could be reinforced by some kind of alpha effect. This would then be immediately available for further generation of the toroidal field by the action of strong subsurface radial shear.

Earlier it was noted by Antia et al. (2000) and Dziembowski et al. (2000) that residual splitting coefficient $`a_2`$ showed a striking peak around $`r=0.96R_{}`$. If this peak should result solely from the presence of large-scale magnetic field at depths of order 30 Mm, the inferred magnetic field strength comes out to be 20–30 kG. But with the removal of surface term, this peak shifts downwards to 70 Mm depth and required magnetic field strength would be about 70 kG.

It is readily seen from Fig. 1 that the contours of constant $`\delta c^2/c^2`$ in both the GONG and MDI data show a pronounced radial extension around the $`60^{}`$ latitude peak situated at a depth of about 70 Mm. Even though a comparison of the contours of constant $`\delta c^2/c^2`$ in the pre-1998.4 and post 1999.4 GONG and MDI data sets displayed in Fig. 8 barely shows a detectable temporal variation, the difference in acoustic asphericity between the high and low activity averages shown in the bottom panels of Fig. 8 has some indication of a possible temporal variation of asphericity around a depth of $`0.1R_{}`$ at both equatorial and higher latitudes. It may therefore be tempting to speculate that there is a reservoir of magnetic energy stored in the outer $`0.1R_{}`$ of the convection zone which perhaps undergoes some temporal variation. Such a time-varying storage of magnetic energy might even play a role in driving the solar activity cycle. We suggest that the solar irradiance variation is probably due to the periodic release of such a stored magnetic energy in the outer layers of the Sun, resulting from an interplay between the solar magnetic field, subsurface radial shear and pumping by convective downdrafts.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work utilises data obtained by the Global Oscillation Network Group (GONG) project, managed by the National Solar Observatory, which is operated by AURA, Inc. under a cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation. The data were acquired by instruments operated by the Big Bear Solar Observatory, High Altitude Observatory, Learmonth Solar Observatory, Udaipur Solar Observatory, Instituto de Astrofisico de Canarias, and Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory. This work also utilises data from the Solar Oscillations Investigation/ Michelson Doppler Imager (SOI/MDI) on the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO). SOHO is a project of international cooperation between ESA and NASA. SMC is grateful to DAE-BRNS for support under the Senior Scientist Scheme and to Ian Roxburgh for supporting his visit to Queen Mary, University of London under the Leverhulme Trust Visiting Professorship scheme.


text:
# On Hrushovski’s Proof of the Manin-Mumford Conjecture

## 1 . Introduction

The Manin-Mumford conjecture is the following statement.

###### Theorem 1.1

Let $`A`$ be an abelian variety defined over $`\overline{}`$ and $`X`$ a closed subvariety of $`A`$. Denote by $`Tor(A)`$ the set of torsion points of $`A`$. Then

$$XTor(A)=\underset{iI}{}X_iTor(A),$$

where $`I`$ is a finite set and each $`X_i`$ is the translate by an element of $`A`$ of an abelian subvariety of $`A`$, immersed in $`X`$.

This conjecture has a long history of proofs. A first partial proof was given by Bogomolov in , who proved the statement when $`Tor(A)`$ is replaced by its $`\mathrm{}`$-primary part for a prime number $`\mathrm{}`$; he applies results of Serre, Tate and Raynaud (see ) on the existence of Hodge-Tate module structures on the Tate module of abelian varieties over discrete valuation rings. A full proof of the conjecture was then given by Raynaud in  (see  for the case $`dim(X)=1`$); his proof follows from a study of the reduction of $`A`$ modulo $`p^2`$. A third and full proof of the conjecture was given by Hrushovski in ; he uses Weil’s theorem on the characteristic polynomial of the Frobenius morphism on abelian varieties over finite fields in conjunction with the model theory (of mathematical logic) of the theory of fields with a distinguished automorphism. A fourth proof of the conjecture was given by Ullmo and Zhang (based on ideas of Szpiro) in  and  and goes via diophantine approximation and Arakelov theory. They actually prove a more general conjecture of Bogomolov which generalizes the Manin-Mumford conjecture.

This article was inspired by Hrushovski’s proof. The bulk of Hrushovski’s proof lies in the model theory part. It culminates in a result which, when applied to the special case of abelian varieties and stripped of model theoretic terminology, is essentially Theorem 2.1 below. In Section 2 we prove Theorem 2.1 with classical algebraic geometry alone. Neither scheme theory, nor Arakelov theory, nor mathematical logic are used. In section 3, for the sake of completeness, we show how to apply Theorem 2.1 to prove the Manin-Mumford conjecture.

In a subsequent article (cf. ), we shall consider the analogue of 2.1 for varieties over function fields of characteristic $`p>0`$.

## 2 . Hrushovski’s theorem for abelian varieties

Let $`K`$ be an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero, endowed with an automorphism $`\sigma `$. Let $`A`$ be an abelian variety over $`K`$ and $`X`$ a closed subvariety of $`A`$. For ease of notation, we use the language of classical algebraic geometry; thus $`A`$ and $`X`$ denote the respective sets of $`K`$-valued points. We assume that $`XA`$ are defined already over the fixed field $`K^\sigma `$. The automorphism of $`A`$ induced by $`\sigma `$ is again denoted by $`\sigma `$. Let $`P(T)[T]`$ be a monic polynomial with integral coefficients. In \[4, Cor. 4.1.13, p.90\], Hrushovski proves the generalisation of the following theorem to semi-abelian varieties.

###### Theorem 2.1

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ denote the kernel of the homomorphism $`P(\sigma ):AA`$. Assume that no complex root of $`P`$ is root of unity. Then

$$X\mathrm{\Gamma }=\underset{iI}{}X_i\mathrm{\Gamma },$$

where $`I`$ is a finite set and each $`X_i`$ is the translate by an element of $`A`$ of an abelian subvariety of $`A`$, immersed in $`X`$.

Remark If roots of unity are not excluded, the group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ becomes too large for such a result. For example, if $`T^m1`$ divides $`P`$, all points of $`A`$ over the fixed field $`K^{\sigma ^m}`$ of $`\sigma ^m`$ are contained in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Proof  Write $`P(T)=_{i=0}^na_iT^i`$ with $`a_i`$ and $`a_n=1`$. Let $`F`$ be the endomorphism of $`A^n`$ defined by the matrix

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}0& 1& 0& \mathrm{}& 0\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& 0& 1\\ a_0& a_1& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& a_{n1}\end{array}\right)$$

which is the companion matrix of the polynomial $`P`$, and note that $`P(F)=0`$. In the obvious way $`\sigma `$ induces an automorphism of $`A^n`$, denoted again by $`\sigma `$, that sends $`X^n`$ to itself. Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ denote the kernel of the homomorphism $`F\sigma :A^nA^n`$. By construction, there is a canonical bijection

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Delta },x(x,\sigma (x),\mathrm{},\sigma ^{n1}(x)).$$

Since $`\sigma (X)=X`$, this induces a bijection

$$X\mathrm{\Gamma }X^n\mathrm{\Delta }.$$

Its inverse is given by the projection to the first factor $`A^nA`$. Clearly, we are now reduced to the following theorem, applied to $`X^nA^n`$ in place of $`XA`$.

###### Theorem 2.2

Let $`F:AA`$ be an algebraic endomorphism that commutes with $`\sigma `$ and that satisfies $`P(F)=0`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ denote the kernel of the homomorphism $`F\sigma :AA`$. Assume that no complex root of $`P`$ is root of unity. Then

$$X\mathrm{\Delta }=\underset{iI}{}X_i\mathrm{\Delta },$$

where $`I`$ is a finite set and each $`X_i`$ is the translate by an element of $`A`$ of an abelian subvariety of $`A`$, immersed in $`X`$.

###### Remark 2.3

If $`K`$ is algebraic over the fixed field $`K^\sigma `$, every element $`a\mathrm{\Delta }`$ satisfies $`F^m(a)=\sigma ^m(a)=a`$ for some $`m1`$. In other words, we have $`aKer(F^m\mathrm{id})`$. The assumptions on $`F`$ and $`P`$ imply that $`F^m\mathrm{id}`$ is an isogeny; hence $`a`$ is a torsion element. It follows that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a torsion subgroup, and the theorem follows from the Manin-Mumford conjecture in this case. However, the scope of the above theorem is somewhat wider, and the Manin-Mumford conjecture will be deduced from it.

Proof  Let $`Y`$ be the Zariski closure of $`X\mathrm{\Delta }`$. We claim that $`\sigma (Y)=F(Y)=Y`$. To see this, note first that $`\sigma `$ commutes with $`F`$, and so $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Delta })=\mathrm{\Delta }`$. By assumption we have $`\sigma (X)=X`$; hence $`\sigma (X\mathrm{\Delta })=X\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Since $`\sigma :AA`$ comes from an automorphism of the underlying field, it is a homeomorphism for the Zariski topology, so we have $`\sigma (Y)=Y`$. On the other hand, the maps $`\sigma `$ and $`F`$ coincide on $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, which implies $`F(X\mathrm{\Delta })=X\mathrm{\Delta }`$. As $`F`$ is a proper algebraic morphism, we deduce that $`F(Y)=Y`$. Clearly, Theorem 2.2 is now reduced to the following theorem (see \[3, Th. 3\] for the case where $`F`$ is the multiplication by an integer $`n>1`$).

###### Theorem 2.4

Let $`A`$ be an abelian variety over an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero. Let $`F:AA`$ be an algebraic endomorphism none of whose eigenvalues on $`LieA`$ is a root of unity. Let $`Y`$ be a closed subvariety of $`A`$ satisfying $`F(Y)=Y`$. Then $`Y`$ is a finite union of translates of abelian subvarieties of $`A`$.

Proof  We proceed by induction on the dimension $`d`$ of $`A`$. For $`d=0`$ the statement is obvious; hence we assume $`d>0`$. Next observe that $`YF(A)`$. Thus if $`F`$ is not surjective, we can replace $`A`$ by $`F(A)`$ and $`Y`$ by $`F(A)Y`$, and are finished by induction. Thus we may assume that $`F`$ is an isogeny.

Since $`F`$ is proper and $`F(Y)=Y`$, every irreducible component of $`Y`$ is the image under $`F`$ of some irreducible component of $`Y`$. Since the set of these irreducible components is finite, it is therefore permuted by $`F`$. We fix such an irreducible component $`Z`$ and an integer $`m1`$ such that $`F^m(Z)=Z`$.

Any power $`F^{rm}:AA`$ is an isogeny, and since $`char(K)=0`$, it is a separable isogeny. As a morphism of schemes it is therefore a finite étale Galois covering with Galois group $`Ker(F^{rm})`$, acting by translations on $`A`$. The same follows for the induced covering $`(F^{rm})^1(Z)Z`$. As $`Z`$ is irreducible, the irreducible components of $`(F^{rm})^1(Z)`$ are transitively permuted by $`Ker(F^{rm})`$ and each of them has dimension $`dim(Z)`$. Since $`F^{rm}(Z)=Z`$, we have $`Z(F^{rm})^1(Z)`$, and so $`Z`$ itself is one of these irreducible components. Let $`G_r`$ denote the stabilizer of $`Z`$ in $`Ker(F^{rm})`$. Then $`F^{rm}:ZZ`$ is generically a finite étale Galois covering with Galois group $`G_r`$.

We now distinguish two cases. Let $`Stab_A(Z)`$ denote the translation stabilizer of $`Z`$ in $`A`$, which is a closed algebraic subgroup of $`A`$.

###### Lemma 2.5

If $`|G_1|>1`$, then $`dim(Stab_A(Z))>0`$.

Proof  For any $`r1`$, the morphism $`F^{rm}:ZZ`$ is finite separable of degree $`|G_r|`$. Since degrees are multiplicative in composites, this degree is also equal to $`|G_1|^r`$. Thus if $`|G_1|>1`$, we find that $`|G_r|`$ becomes arbitrarily large with $`r`$. Therefore $`Stab_A(Z)`$ contains arbitrarily large finite subgroups, so it cannot be finite. $`𝐐.𝐄.𝐃.`$

###### Lemma 2.6

If $`|G_1|=1`$, then $`dim(Stab_A(Z))>0`$ or $`Z`$ is a single point.

Proof  Since $`Z`$ is irreducible, the assertion is obvious when $`dim(Z)=0`$. So we assume that $`dim(Z)>0`$. The assumption $`|G_1|=1`$ implies that $`F^m`$ induces a finite (separable) morphism $`\phi :ZZ`$ of degree $`1`$. The set of fixed points of any positive power $`\phi ^r`$ is then $`ZKer(F^{rm}\mathrm{id})`$. On the other hand the assumptions on $`F`$ and $`P`$ imply that $`F^{rm}\mathrm{id}`$ is an isogeny on $`A`$. Thus this fixed point set is finite for every $`r1`$; hence $`\phi `$ has infinite order.

Assume now that $`Stab_A(Z)`$ is finite. By Ueno’s theorem \[12, Thm. 3.10\] $`Z`$ is then of general type, in the sense that any smooth projective variety birationally equivalent to $`Z`$ is of general type (see \[12, Def. 1.7\]). But the group of birational automorphisms of any irreducible projective variety $`Z`$ of general type is finite (see  and also \[5, Th. 10.11\]) which yields a contradiction. $`𝐐.𝐄.𝐃.`$

If $`Z`$ is a single point, it is a translate of the trivial abelian subvariety of $`A`$. Otherwise we know from the lemmas above that $`dim(Stab_A(Z))>0`$, and we can use the induction hypothesis. Let $`B`$ denote the identity component of $`Stab_A(Z)`$. Since $`F^m(Z)=Z`$, we also have $`F^m(B)=B`$. Set $`\overline{A}:=A/B`$ and $`\overline{Z}:=Z/B`$, and let $`\overline{F}`$ denote the endomorphism of $`\overline{A}`$ induced by $`F^m`$. Then we have $`\overline{F}(\overline{Z})=\overline{Z}`$, and every eigenvalue of $`\overline{F}`$ on $`Lie\overline{A}`$ is an eigenvalue of $`F^m`$ on $`LieA`$ and therefore not a root of unity. By Theorem 2.4, applied to $`(\overline{A},\overline{Z},\overline{F})`$ in place of $`(A,Y,F)`$, we now deduce that $`\overline{Z}`$ is a finite union of translates of abelian subvarieties of $`\overline{A}`$. But $`Z`$ is irreducible; hence so is $`\overline{Z}`$. Thus $`\overline{Z}`$ itself is a translate of an abelian subvariety. That abelian subvariety is equal to $`A^{}/B`$ for some abelian subvariety $`A^{}A`$ containing $`B`$, and so $`Z`$ is a translate of $`A^{}`$, as desired. This finishes the proof of Theorem 2.4, and thus also of Theorems 2.2 and 2.1. $`𝐐.𝐄.𝐃.`$

Remark Suppose that in the statement of the preceding theorem, we replace the assumption that none of the eigenvalues of $`F`$ on $`LieA`$ is a root of unity by the weaker assumption that none of the eigenvalues of $`F`$ on $`LieA`$ is an algebraic unit. This case is sufficient for the application to the Manin-Mumford conjecture. Under this weaker assumption, the following alternative proof of Lemma 2.6 can be given; it does not use the theorems of Ueno and Matsumura but only elementary properties of cycle classes.

We work under the hypotheses of Lemma 2.6 and with the notations used above. First, everything can be defined over a countable algebraically closed subfield of $`K`$, and this subfield can be embedded into $``$; thus without loss of generality we may assume that $`K=`$. Then for every integer $`i0`$ we abbreviate $`H^i:=H^i(A,)`$. Let $`c:=codim_A(Z)`$ and let $`\mathrm{cl}(Z)H^{2c}`$ be the cycle class of $`ZA`$. We calculate the cycle class of $`(F^m)^1(Z)`$ in two ways. On the one hand, we have seen that the group $`Ker(F^m)`$ acts transitively on the set of irreducible components of $`(F^m)^1(Z)`$; the assumption $`|G_1|=1`$ implies that it also acts faithfully. Thus the number of irreducible components is $`|Ker(F^m)|`$. Recall that $`Z`$ is one of them. Since translation on $`A`$ does not change cycle classes, we find that all irreducible components of $`(F^m)^1(Z)`$ have cycle class $`\mathrm{cl}(Z)`$; hence $`\mathrm{cl}\left((F^m)^1(Z)\right)=|Ker(F^m)|\mathrm{cl}(Z)`$. On the other hand $`F`$ induces a pullback homomorphism $`F^{}:H^iH^i`$ for every $`i0`$, and by functoriality of cycle classes we have $`\mathrm{cl}\left((F^m)^1(Z)\right)=F^{}\left(\mathrm{cl}(Z)\right)`$. As $`\mathrm{cl}(Z)`$ is non-zero, we deduce that $`|Ker(F^m)|`$ is an eigenvalue of $`F^{}`$ on $`H^{2c}`$.

Let $`d:=dim(A)`$, which is also the codimension of any point in $`A`$. Repeating the above calculation with the cycle class of a point, we deduce that $`|Ker(F^m)|`$ is also an eigenvalue of $`F^{}`$ on the highest non-vanishing cohomology group $`H^{2d}`$. Since cup product yields isomorphisms $`H^i\mathrm{\Lambda }^iH^1`$ for all $`i0`$, which are compatible with $`F^{}`$, it yields an $`F^{}`$-equivariant perfect pairing $`H^{2c}\times H^{2(dc)}H^{2d}`$. From this we deduce that $`1`$ is an eigenvalue of $`F^{}`$ on $`H^{2(dc)}`$. Moreover, this eigenvalue must be a product of $`2(dc)`$ eigenvalues of $`F^{}`$ on $`H^1`$. Now the eigenvalues of $`F^{}`$ on $`H^1`$ are precisely those of $`F`$ on $`LieA`$ and their complex conjugates. By assumption, they are algebraic integers but no algebraic units. Thus a product of such numbers can be $`1`$ only if it is the empty product. This shows that $`2(dc)=0`$, that is, $`codim_A(Z)=dim(A)`$; hence $`Z`$ is a point, as desired. $`𝐐.𝐄.𝐃.`$

## 3 . Proof of the Manin-Mumford conjecture

As a preparation let $`q=p^r`$, where $`p`$ is a prime number and $`r1`$. Let $`𝔽_q`$ be the unique field with $`q`$ elements. Let $`A`$ be an abelian variety defined over $`𝔽_q`$. As in classical algebraic geometry we identify $`A`$ with the set of its $`\overline{𝔽_q}`$-valued points. Let $`\mathrm{}`$ be a prime number different from $`p`$, and let $`T_{\mathrm{}}(A)`$ be the $`\mathrm{}`$-adic Tate module of $`A`$, which is a free $`_{\mathrm{}}`$-module of rank $`2dim(A)`$. We denote by $`\phi `$ the Frobenius morphism $`AA`$, which acts on the coordinates of points by taking $`q`$-th powers. It also acts on the Tate module via its action on the torsion points. The following result, an analogue of the Riemann hypothesis, is due to Weil (see ):

###### Theorem 3.1

Let $`T`$ be an indeterminate. The characteristic polynomial of $`\phi `$ on $`T_{\mathrm{}}(A)_{_{\mathrm{}}}_{\mathrm{}}`$ is a monic polynomial in $`[T]`$. It is independent of $`\mathrm{}`$, and all its complex roots have absolute value $`\sqrt{q}`$.

Consider now an abelian variety $`A`$ defined over $`\overline{}`$ and a closed subvariety $`X`$ of $`A`$. We choose a number field $`L\overline{}`$ over which both $`XA`$ can be defined and fix their models over $`L`$. For any abelian group $`G`$ we write $`Tor(G)`$ for the group of torsion points of $`G`$. Moreover, for any prime $`p`$ we write $`Tor_p(G)`$ for the subgroup of torsion points of order a power of $`p`$, and $`Tor^p(G)`$ for the subgroup of torsion points of order prime to $`p`$. Note that $`Tor(G)=Tor^p(G)Tor_p(G)`$.

Choose a prime ideal $`𝔭`$ of $`𝒪_L`$ where $`A`$ has good reduction. Let $`𝔽_q`$ be the finite field $`𝒪_L/𝔭`$, where $`q`$ is a power of a prime number $`p`$. The following lemma is lemma 5.0.10 in \[4, p. 105\]; we reproduce the proof for the convenience of the reader. We use Weil’s theorem 3.1 and reduction modulo $`𝔭`$ to obtain an automorphism of $`\overline{}`$ and a polynomial that we can feed in Theorem 2.1 to obtain Theorem 1.1.

###### Lemma 3.2

There is an element $`\sigma _𝔭Gal(\overline{}|L)`$ and a monic polynomial $`P_𝔭(T)[T]`$ all of whose complex roots have absolute value $`\sqrt{q}`$, such that $`P_𝔭(\sigma _𝔭)(x)=0`$ for every $`xTor^p(A)`$.

Proof  Let $`L_𝔭`$ be the completion of $`L`$ at $`𝔭`$. Extend the embedding $`LL_𝔭`$ to an embedding of the algebraic closures $`\overline{}=\overline{L}\overline{L_𝔭}`$, and the surjection $`𝒪_{L_𝔭}𝔽_q`$ to a surjection $`𝒪_{\overline{L_𝔭}}\overline{𝔽_q}`$. On the prime-to-$`p`$ torsion groups we then obtain natural isomorphisms

$$Tor^p(A)Tor^p(A_{\overline{L_𝔭}})Tor^p(A_{\overline{𝔽_q}}).$$

The second isomorphism expresses the fact that the field of definition of every prime-to-$`p`$ torsion point is unramified at $`𝔭`$.

Now, as before, let $`\phi `$ denote the automorphism of $`\overline{𝔽_q}`$ and of $`Tor^p(A_{\overline{𝔽_q}})`$ induced by the Frobenius morphism over $`𝔽_q`$. Then $`\phi `$ can be lifted to an element $`\sigma _𝔭Gal(\overline{}|L)`$ making the above isomorphisms equivariant. To see this, one first lifts $`\phi `$ to an element $`\tau _𝔭^{\mathrm{nr}}`$ of $`Gal(L_𝔭^{\mathrm{nr}}|L_𝔭)`$, where $`L_𝔭^{\mathrm{nr}}`$ is the maximal unramified extension of $`L_𝔭`$. This lifting exists and is unique by \[1, Th. 1, p. 26\]. This element can then be lifted further to a (non-unique) element $`\tau _𝔭`$ of $`Gal(\overline{L_𝔭}|L_𝔭)`$, since $`L_𝔭^{\mathrm{nr}}`$ is a subfield of $`\overline{L_𝔭}`$. By construction the action of $`\tau _𝔭`$ on $`Tor^p(A_{\overline{L_𝔭}})`$ corresponds to the action of $`\phi `$ on $`Tor^p(A_{\overline{𝔽_q}})`$. The restriction of $`\tau _𝔭`$ to $`\overline{}`$ gives the desired element $`\sigma _𝔭`$.

Let $`P_𝔭(T)`$ be the characteristic polynomial of $`\phi `$ on $`T_{\mathrm{}}(A_{\overline{𝔽_q}})_{_{\mathrm{}}}_{\mathrm{}}`$ for any prime number $`\mathrm{}p`$. By construction, we then have $`P_𝔭(\phi )=0`$ on $`Tor_{\mathrm{}}(A_{\overline{𝔽_q}})`$. By Weil’s result quoted above, the same equation holds for every prime $`\mathrm{}p`$; so it holds on $`Tor^p(A_{\overline{𝔽_q}})`$. From the construction of $`\sigma _𝔭`$ we deduce that $`P_𝔭(\sigma _𝔭)=0`$ on $`Tor^p(A)`$. Finally, Weil’s result also describes the complex roots of $`P_𝔭`$. $`𝐐.𝐄.𝐃.`$

Let now $`L^p`$, $`L_p\overline{}`$ be the fields generated over $`L`$ by the coordinates of all points in $`Tor^p(A)`$, resp. in $`Tor_p(A)`$. Both are infinite Galois extensions of $`L`$. Their intersection is known to be finite over $`L`$ by Serre \[10, pp. 33–34, 56–59\]. Thus after replacing $`L`$ by $`L^pL_p`$, we may assume that $`L^p`$ and $`L_p`$ are linearly disjoint over $`L`$. The subfield of $`\overline{}`$ generated by the coordinates of all points in $`Tor(A)=Tor^p(A)Tor_p(A)`$ is then canonically isomorphic to $`L^p_LL_p`$.

Let $`𝔭^{}`$ be a second place of good reduction of $`A`$, of residue characteristic different from $`p`$. Let $`\sigma _𝔭`$, $`\sigma _𝔭^{}`$ and $`P_𝔭`$, $`P_𝔭^{}`$ be the automorphisms and polynomials provided by Lemma 3.2, applied to $`𝔭`$, resp. to $`𝔭^{}`$. The automorphism of $`L^p_LL_p`$ induced by $`\sigma _𝔭\sigma _𝔭^{}`$ then extends to some automorphism $`\sigma `$ of $`\overline{}`$ over $`L`$. Since $`P_𝔭(\sigma _𝔭)`$ vanishes on $`Tor^p(A)`$, so does $`P_𝔭(\sigma )`$. Similarly, $`P_𝔭^{}(\sigma _𝔭^{})`$ vanishes on $`Tor_p(A)Tor^p^{}(A)`$; hence so does $`P_𝔭^{}(\sigma )`$. Thus with $`P(T):=P_𝔭(T)P_𝔭^{}(T)`$ we deduce that $`P(\sigma )`$ vanishes on $`Tor(A)`$. In other words, we have $`Tor(A)\mathrm{\Gamma }:=KerP(\sigma )`$. With $`K=\overline{}`$ Theorem 1.1 now follows directly from Theorem 2.1. $`𝐐.𝐄.𝐃.`$