Coupled Effects of a Perturbation in a Complex Structure Observed with SDO/AIA, SDO/HMI and ROSA/HARDcam

We study properties of intensity fluctuations in NOAA Active Region 11250 observed on 13 July 2011 starting at UT 13:32. Included are data obtained in the EUV bands of the Atmospheric Imaging Assembly on board the Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO/AIA) as well as nearly simultaneous observations of the chromosphere made, at much higher spatial and temporal resolution, with the Rapid Oscillations in the Solar Atmosphere (ROSA) and Hydrogen-Alpha Rapid Dynamics camera (HARDcam) systems at the Dunn Solar Telescope. A complex structure seen in both the ROSA/HARDcam and SDO data sets comprises a system of loops extending outward from near the boundary of the leading sunspot umbra. It is visible in the ROSA Ca II K and HARDcam Hα images, as well as the SDO 304 Å, 171 Å and 193 Å channels, and it thus couples the chromosphere, transition region and corona. In the ground-based images the loop structure is 4.1 Mm long. Some 17.5 Mm, can be traced in the SDO/AIA data. The chromospheric emissions observed by ROSA and HARDcam appear to occupy the inner, and apparently cooler and lower, quarter of the loop. We compare the intensity fluctuations of two points within the structure. From alignment with SDO/HMI images we identify a point "A" near the loop structure, which sits directly above a bipolar magnetic feature in the photosphere. Point "B" is characteristic of locations within the loops that are visible in both the ROSA/HARDcam and the SDO/AIA data. The intensity traces for point A are quiet during the first part of the data string. At time ~ 19 min they suddenly begin a series of impulsive brightenings. In the 171 Å and 193 Å coronal lines the brightenings are localized impulses in time, but in the transition region line at 304 Å they are more extended in time. The intensity traces in the 304 Å line for point B shows a quasi-periodic signal that changes properties at about 19 min. The wavelet power spectra are characterized by two periodicities. A 6.7 min period extends from the beginning of the series until about 25 minutes, and another signal with period ~3 min starts at about 20 min. The 193 Å power spectrum has a characteristic period of 5 min, before the 20 min transition and a 2.5 min periodicity afterward. In the case of HARDcam Hα data a localized 4 min periodicity can be found until about 7 min, followed by a quiet regime. After ~20 min a 2.3 min periodicity appears. Interestingly a coronal loop visible in the 94 Å line that is centrally located in the AR, running from the leading umbra to the following polarity, at about time 20 min undergoes a strong brightening beginning at the same moment all along 15 Mm of its length. The fact that these different signals all experience a clear-cut change at time about 20 min suggests an underlying organizing mechanism. Given that point A has a direct connection to the photospheric magnetic bipole, we conjecture that the whole extended structure is connected in a complex manner to the underlying magnetic field. The periodicities in these features may favor the wave nature rather than upflows and interpretations will be discussed.

'Battling in Brussels': The DUP and the European union

Although the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) does not conform to the model of Europeanization outlined by Ladrech (2002), there is some evidence of change along the lines identified by De Winter and Gomez-Reino (2002) with reference to other European ethnoregionalist parties. For example, the DUP has certainly adapted its behaviour and policies at both local and European levels with a view to exploiting new political opportunities offered by Europeanization. However, De Winter and Gomez-Reino's argument that participation in European institutions has made formerly-Eurosceptic ethnoregionalist parties 'moderate Eurocritics' does not fully apply to the DUP. The DUP continues to demonstrate a number of Eurosceptic characteristics, including ones grounded in extreme religious interpretations of the purpose and process of European integration. Nevertheless, the party's Eurosceptic outlook does not prevent it from being willing to 'battle in Brussels' (as put in its 2009 manifesto for the European elections) in order to serve domestic (party) interests - a tactic not dissimilar to the DUP's approach to Northern Ireland politics in general.

A Constitution of Social Governance for the European Union

This chapter considers the EU’s socio-economic constitution under the lens of humaneness. It argues that the EU’s unique socio-economic constitution demands equilibrium of socio-economic integration instead of widening the gap between economic integration at EU levels and social integration at national levels. While the EU lacks the legislative competences to achieve this equilibrium, the constitutional principle still prevails. Indeed, the EU competences reflect its own values as well as the socio-economic constitutions of its constituent Member States. These frequently do not allow for total state-governance of social spheres such as working life, education, care or other social services. Instead, societal actors are given scope to (co-)govern these spheres at national levels. Accordingly, the apparent tension between the EU’s socio-economic values and principles and its limited competences in the social policy field can be resolved through a dynamic interpretation of the EU Treaties towards a “constitution of social governance”. This interpretation reads the Treaties as authorising governance by societal actors. The chapter connects the idea of humanness to the ideals of social governance at EU level and proposes two options for practical application of the concept. These are rules for trans-national labour markets based on European collective labour agreements and a European higher education sector developed by agreements between universities.

Using Comparative Reasoning in Human Rights Adjudication:The Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights Compared

This article examines the relationship between the methods that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) use to decide disputes that involve ‘human’ or ‘fundamental’ rights claims, and the substantive outcomes that result from the use of these particular methods. It has a limited aim: in attempting to understand the interrelationship between human rights methodology and human rights outcomes, it considers primarily the use of ‘comparative reasoning’ in ‘human’ and ‘fundamental’ rights claims by these courts. It is not primarily concerned with examining the extent to which the use of comparative reasoning is based on an appropriate methodology or whether there is a persuasive normative theory underpinning the use of comparative reasoning. The issues considered in this chapter do some of the groundwork, however, that is necessary in order to address these methodological and normative questions.

Researching gender democracy in the European Union: challenges and prospects

working paper no 5, 2008