Sunspot transition region oscillations in NOAA 8156

Abstract: Based on observations obtained with the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory - SOHO joint observing program for velocity fields in sunspot regions, we have detected 3 min transition region umbral oscillations in NOAA 8156. Simultaneous recordings of O V $\lambda$629 and N V $\lambda$1238, $\lambda$1242 with the SUMER instrument give the spatial distribution of power in the 3 min oscillations, both in intensity and line-of-sight velocity. Comparing loci with the same phase we find that the entire umbral transition region oscillates. The observed maxima in peak line intensity are nearly in phase with the maxima in velocity directed towards the observer. We discuss the suggestion that the waves are upward propagating acoustic waves.

\section{Introduction}

The study of oscillations in the atmosphere of sunspots dates
back to the detection of umbral flashes in the K line (Beckers
\& Tallant 1969), followed by the detection in H$_\alpha$
of penumbral waves (Zirin \& Stein 1972, Giovanelli 1972) and
umbral oscillations (Giovanelli 1972).
The nature and mode identification of the 3~min
oscillations in the umbral chromosphere have been debated.
Based on linear theory two cavities have been discussed,
{\frenchspacing i.e.} a cavity for fast modes in the low
photosphere and sub-photosphere and a cavity for resonant slow
modes in the umbral chromosphere as well as a unified model with
contributions from both cavities ({\frenchspacing e.g.}
Thomas \& Weiss 1992).
However, the 3 minute umbral oscillations in the chromosphere show a
non-linear character, suggesting the presence of upward propagating
shock waves (Lites 1992, Bard \& Carlsson 1997).
Knowledge of the oscillations in the transition region originates from
the study of eight sunspots in the C~{\scriptsize IV} $\lambda$1548 line
by Gurman et al. (1982), see also Henze et al. (1984).
Interestingly, the observed waves with periods of 129 - 173~s, show no
signs of shocks and appear to be upward propagating acoustic waves.
Recently, Rendtel et al. (1998) reported transition region intensity
oscillations in the 2~min range in sunspot NOAA 7986.

We focus on transition region sunspot oscillations
in NOAA 8156, observed simultaneously in O~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$629
and N~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$1238, $\lambda$1242.
The observations were obtained on 1998 February 18 between 16:00 UT and
21:07 UT with the Solar Ultraviolet Measurements of Emitted Radiation
(SUMER; Wilhelm et al., 1995) instrument as part of a
joint observing program on the {\it Solar and Heliospheric
Observatory (SOHO)}.

\section{OBSERVATIONS}

The pointing of the SUMER slit is kept constant to 525$\arcsec$~W and
332$\arcsec$~S off the solar disk center, i.e. at a heliocentric
distance of 40$^{\circ}$. The solar rotation moves the image of
the sunspot, with umbral size 15$\arcsec$ and penumbral size
50$\arcsec$, over the narrow slit, 0.3$\arcsec \times$ 120$\arcsec$.
From each spectrum 90$\arcsec \times$ 2.2 {\AA} spectral windows,
centered on O~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$629
and N~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$1238, $\lambda$1242, are recorded with
detector B.
With an exposure time of 15 s it takes 20 min to observe 80 consecutive
spectra, called one raster, while the solar rotation moves the image
2.2$\arcsec$.
Figure~1 (bottom) shows the positions of the 12 rasters and
the location of the sunspot, between 300$\arcsec$ and
350$\arcsec$~S off disk center.
Between each raster, exposures with the rear slit camera give
the slit position in relation to the sunspot and 100 s
exposures of 90$\arcsec \times$ 40~{\AA} spectra give the wavelength scale,
from the wavelength positions of chromospheric lines.
The data reductions include corrections for the fixed pattern noise,
defects of the detector and corrections for the geometrical distortions,
see Wilhelm et al. (1995).
A least squares fit of a single Gaussian to each observed line profile
gives the peak line intensity, $I$, the relative line-of-sight velocity,
$v$, and the line width, $w = FWHM/(2\sqrt{ln~2})$.
We estimate the accuracy in the relative line-of-sight velocity determinations
to be 1 km~s$^{-1}$ for O~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$629 and
1.5 km~s$^{-1}$ (2 km~s$^{-1}$) for N~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$1238
($\lambda$1242).

\begin{figure}[htb]
   \centerline{\psfig{figure=fig1_osc.ps,width=8cm}}
 \figcaption[]{Observed O~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$629
oscillations in relative line-of-sight velocity, $\Delta v = v - <v>$, and
relative peak intensity, $\Delta I/<I>$, in the center of the umbra, see
hatched area in the sunspot image, observed with
the MDI instrument (Scherrer et al. 1995).}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}

From the SUMER observations alone it is difficult to separate temporal
from spatial changes in oscillatory power.
Simultaneous observations with the Coronal Diagnostic Spectrometer
(CDS; Harrison et al. 1995) in ten emission lines,
including the O~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$629 line, with a cadence of 25 min,
show only small temporal variations in the overall intensity and
line-of-sight velocity patterns during the time span of the observations.
For a description of sunspot velocity field observations with CDS,
see Brynildsen et al. (1998).
The CDS results encourage us to use the SUMER observations to investigate
the spatial distribution of the power in the transition region oscillations.
By deriving the observed characteristics within each raster for 2$\arcsec$
sections along the slit the power distribution is studied within an area
of 33.5$\arcsec$ $\times $ 90$\arcsec$ with a spatial resolution of
2.2$\arcsec$ $\times$ 2$\arcsec$.

\section{Results}

As an example Figure~1 shows the observed O~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$629
umbral oscillations in relative line-of-sight velocity,
$\Delta v~=~v~-~<v>~$, and relative peak line intensity, $\Delta I/<I>$.
The hatched area in the umbra marks the location of this oscillation.
Slow variations in the background fields have been
removed from the average values, $<v>$ and $<I>$.
This corresponds to applying a low frequency filter in
the Fourier domain.
Note that the observed oscillations are linear in character without
clear signs of shocks.
The amplitudes of the oscillations are listed in Table~1.

\begin{table}[htb]
\caption{{\scriptsize OSCILLATION AMPLITUDES - SEE FIGURE~1}}
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\tableline
                 & Velocity        & Peak Intensity  &  & \\
Line             & (km s$^{-1}$)    & (\%)            &   & \\
\tableline
O~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$629 &  2.7      & 11          &  &      \\
N~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$1238 & 2.4      &  9          &  &      \\
N~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$1242 & 2.7      & 10          &  &      \\
\tableline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}

\begin{figure}[htb]
   \centerline{\psfig{figure=fig2_osc.ps,width=9cm}}
 \figcaption[]{Observed power in the transition region sunspot oscillation
in line-of-sight velocity and relative peak line intensity for the same
position as in Figure~1.}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}

Figure~2 shows the corresponding power spectra for the oscillations
in line-of-sight velocity and peak line intensity.
The power spectra are nearly identical with one maximum within the
frequency interval 5.0~-~6.7 mHz, corresponding to periods between 150 and
200~s, and maximum power close to 170 s.
We also find a 5\% variation in the line width. The corresponding
power spectrum is similar to those shown in Figure~2, but is more noisy.
The results are scrutinized by tests where artificial noise is
added to the observed signal and new values of the line parameters are
derived.
The tests show that the results for the intensity and the line-of-sight
velocity oscillations are confirmed, but the results are less certain
for the line width.

Figure~1 shows near temporal coincidence of maxima in peak line intensity
and maxima in blueshift.
From the corresponding power spectra we deduce a phase difference
$\phi_v(629)$ - $\phi_I(629)$ = 173$^{\circ}$ between the line-of-sight
velocity and the peak line intensity for the O~{\scriptsize V} line.
The corresponding phase difference for the N~{\scriptsize V} line,
$\phi_v(1238)$ - $\phi_I(1238)$ = 172$^{\circ}$.
We give less weight to the observed phase difference of 160$^{\circ}$
in the $\lambda$1242 line since this line is weaker than the other lines.
In Figure~5, below, we present this phase difference for the
O~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$629 line for the entire sunspot region.

The determination of the phase difference in velocity or intensity between
the N~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$1238 and O~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$629 lines
is difficult since it involves careful alignment along the slit of lines
observed in different locations on the detector.
For the umbra we find that the wave arrives on average 10~s~$\pm$~5~s
earlier in N~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$1238 line than in
O~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$629 line.
If the N~{\scriptsize V} line originates at a lower height than the
O~{\scriptsize V} line, as seems reasonable considering the
temperatures of formation for the N~{\scriptsize V} (1.5 $\times$ 10$^5$K)
and O~{\scriptsize V} (2.1 $\times$ 10$^5$K) lines, this suggests an
upward propagating wave.

\begin{figure}[htb]
   \centerline{\psfig{figure=fig3_col_osc.ps,width=8cm}}
 \figcaption[]{Observed O~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$629 variation
in relative peak line intensity (left) and line-of-sight velocity
(right) along the slit in raster 7. Blue (red) color corresponds to
motion towards (away from) the observer.
To enhance the visibility, the observed signal at time $t$ is subtracted
from the observed signal at time $t$ -~90~s - this time difference
is close to half the wave period, 170~s.}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}

Consider next the observed variation along the slit in raster 7,
{\frenchspacing i.e.} in the 2.2$\arcsec \times 90\arcsec$ wide raster
that includes the central part of the umbra.
Figure~3 gives the O~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$629 variations
in peak line intensity, $\Delta I/<I>$, and relative line-of-sight velocity,
$v - <v>$, as a function of time and position along the slit.
The visibility and shape of the oscillation wave front is enhanced by
subtracting the observed signal at time $t$ from the signal observed at
$t$ - 90~s, a time difference close to half of the dominant period.
Figure~3 shows that waves with periods close to 170~s are observed
mainly within the umbra and do not extend into the penumbra to
any great extent.
The wave front in the central part of the umbra leads the wave
front at the rim of the umbra by nearly a full wave period.
Clearly the observed oscillation affects the entire umbral
transition region, but the generation or transmission of
the wave depend on the position within the umbra.

\begin{figure}[htb]
   \centerline{\psfig{figure=fig4_osc.ps,width=8cm}}
 \figcaption[]{Comparison of calculated line profiles that are formed
in a region pervaded by upward propagating acoustic waves and
observed values (dots and crosses), for ($\omega t - k z$) = $\pi/2$
and $3\pi/2$. The r.m.s. deviations between six observed values with
the same phase are shown. The sunspot is located at $\theta$ = 40$^\circ$.}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure*}[htb]
   \centerline{\psfig{figure=fig5_osc.ps,width=14cm}}
 \figcaption[]{Left to right: Spatial distribution of the
O~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$629 power in relative line-of-sight velocity,
relative peak line intensity, phase difference $|\phi_v - \phi_I + \pi|$,
and the CDS peak line intensity image, where sunspot plumes
with $I \ge 5 \times <I>$ are marked with yellow contours.
The contours of the umbra and penumbra are shown.}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure*}

To investigate the suggestion by Gurman et al. (1982) that the
oscillations are caused by upward propagating acoustic waves, we make
use of the property that the relative perturbation in number density,
$\Delta N/ N_{0}$, varies in phase with the line-of-sight velocity,
$v_{\parallel}$, ({\frenchspacing e.g.} Hansteen \& Maltby 1992).
Regarding $v_{\parallel}$ as positive when
directed away from the observer we may write,

\begin{eqnarray}
{{{v_{\parallel,m}}\over {v_{S}}} sin (\omega t - k z)} = {-\,{{cos \theta}} {{\Delta N_{m}}\over {N_{0}}} sin (\omega t - k z)}
\end{eqnarray}

\noindent
for an upward propagating acoustic wave with a sinusoidal variation.
Here $v_{S}$ is the sound speed, $\theta$ is the aspect
angle and the index $m$ denotes the amplitude.
For N~{\scriptsize V} and O~{\scriptsize V}, formed in a gas with a
mean molecular weight of 0.60 at temperatures close to
1.5 $\times$ 10$^5$ K and 2.1 $\times$ 10$^5$ K, we estimate the sound
speeds to be 58~km~s$^{-1}$ and 69~km~s$^{-1}$.
We will use equation (1) to calculate line profiles that may be compared
with observations. Since the lines may be
regarded as optically thin, the intensity is determined by an
integration along the line-of-sight of the product of the line
profile, the electron number density, $N_e$, the N~{\scriptsize V}
(O~{\scriptsize V}) ion density, $N_i$, and a temperature dependent
function, $g (T_e)$ ({\frenchspacing e.g.} Mariska 1992).
The influence of the wave on the function $g (T_e)$ is small
({\frenchspacing e.g.} Gurman et al. 1982).
Assuming ionization balance, such that $N_i \propto N_e$, and
neglecting possible variations in the thickness of the transition region,
we may write the line intensity as
$I_{\nu}(\theta) \propto N_e^2 \propto N^2$. This implies that we may
use the observed intensity amplitudes of 9\% and 11\%, see Table~1, to
determine the corresponding density amplitudes and equation (1) to
calculate the line profile for different values of ($\omega t - k z$).
Figure~4 shows the calculated line profiles for O~{\scriptsize V}
$\lambda$629 and N~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$1238, with $\Delta N_{m} /
N_{0}$ = 0.055 and $\Delta N_{m} / N_{0}$ = 0.045, and line broadening owing
to the instrument and non-thermal velocities of 27 km~s$^{-1}$ and 24
km~s$^{-1}$, respectively.  For ($\omega t - k z$) = $\pi/2$ both the
peak line intensity and the line shift towards shorter wavelengths
reach their maxima, whereas for ($\omega t - k z$) = $3\pi/2$ a maximum
in line shift towards longer wavelengths occurs while the peak line
intensity reaches a minimum.

The observed values at each wavelength are averages of six intensity
values from the center of the umbra at the corresponding phases.
The averages are determined from the time series in raster 7,
where six minima and maxima are observed.
The average is constructed from a 2$\arcsec$ wide strip centered
at position -326$\arcsec$, see Figure~3.
The agreement between observed and calculated profiles in
Figure~4 is remarkable and supports the interpretation of the
oscillations as caused by upward propagating acoustic waves.
To obtain a deeper understanding of this result, the wave propagation
through the transition region should be thoroughly discussed, see
Zugzda, Staude, \& Locans (1984) for a discussion of this topic.

Figure~5 gives the spatial distributions of power in
line-of-sight velocity and peak line intensity oscillations
between 5.0 - 6.7 mHz for the O~{\scriptsize V} $\lambda$629 line.
The phase difference $|\phi_v - \phi_I + \pi| < 20^\circ$
throughout most of the umbra, {\frenchspacing i.e.} the maximum
intensity is nearly in phase with the maximum velocity directed
towards the observer.
The oscillations are restricted to the umbra and interestingly, the
spatial distributions of power in velocity and intensity differ.
Whereas the power in velocity shows one maximum, the power in
intensity also show maxima closer to the umbral rim, not far from
the sunspot plumes observed with CDS (Figure~5, right), the plumes have
peak line intensity $I \ge 5 \times <I>$.
For a recent discussion of sunspot plumes, see Brynildsen et al. (1998).
Possibly the direction of wave propagation changes with position in
the umbra.

In summary, significant oscillations in line-of-sight velocity and
peak line intensity are observed, with periods close to 170 s.
The observed transition region oscillations are concentrated to the umbra
and the entire umbral transition region oscillates.
We study the observed line profiles and find support for the suggestion
that the waves are upward propagating acoustic waves.
Discussions of the relation between the shock waves observed
in the chromosphere and the present observations are of interest, but
outside the scope of this letter.

\acknowledgements

We are indebted to the international SUMER team and thankful to the
MDI team for permission to use their data.
SUMER is supported by DLR, CNES, NASA and the ESA Prodex programme
(Swiss contribution).  SOHO is a project of international cooperation
between ESA and NASA.


Eta Carinae's Declining Outflow Seen in the UV, 2002-2015

Abstract: Existing HST UV data offer many previously neglected clues to eta Car's behavior since 2000. Here we examine a subset of observations with diverse results. (1) The star's rapid change of state is confirmed by major changes in UV absorption lines, circumstellar extinction, and other features. (2) N III] 1750 is one of the two most luminous emission features in eta Car's observable spectrum, comparable to H-alpha. This and other semi-forbidden lines are useful because they have no P Cyg absorption. (3) N III] multiplet ratios provide the first direct diagnostic of gas densities in eta Car's outflow. They strongly suggest that high-excitation lines originate in condensations within the colliding-wind shocked region. The parameters imply that published models have not adequately represented the essential small size scales. (4) In 2002-2004, a very large amount of N III] emission had anomalous Doppler velocities from +400 to +1200 km/s. This is a mystery; we conjecture that it may have resulted from a burst of mass ejection in the 2003.5 periastron event. Various other effects are also difficult to explain and merit further investigation.

\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}

Eta Carinae's unique role in stellar astrophysics arises from
three circumstances:
\begin{enumerate}
  \item Its primary star is the only supernova impostor
  or giant-eruption survivor that can be studied in detail.
  \item Its dense wind has changed dramatically in the past 20 years.
  \item Extraordinary effects occur at 5.5-year intervals during
  periastron passages of a companion star.
\end{enumerate}
Item 1 is fundamental because the basic instability remains
mysterious after many years of study; while 2 and 3 can provide
clues to the star's internal recovery following its Great Eruption
observed in 1830--1860.  For general information, see reviews by
many authors in \citet{dh12}.

    \vspace{1mm}

The Hubble Space Telescope (HST) revolutionized this topic, because all
ground-based photometry and spectroscopy of $\eta$ Car is severely
contaminated by ejecta at $r \sim$ 300-1500 AU, seen less than
0.5 arcsec from the star.
(See Fig.\/ 1 in \citealt{da15}, Fig.\/ 5 in \citealt{da95},
and discussions in \citealt{me11,me12}.)
The Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS) has played the
largest role in this story, using wavelengths longer than 250 nm.
In this paper we explore FUV wavelengths between 160 and 230 nm --
a spectral region that is physically different as noted in
{\S}\ref{sec:contin} below.

    \vspace{1mm}

For stellar astrophysics the {\it major\/} problem
of $\eta$ Car is the nature of its instability and its Great
Eruption (see \citealt{da12} for a semi-theoretical account).
In that sense, the most crucial development in this topic
since 2000 has been the rapid trend of changes in the star.
Recent publications tend to focus instead on geometries
of the colliding winds, the binary orbit, and other matters
that are less fundamental (e.g., \citealt{gu16,ri16,te16,we16}
and many others).  That is true of {\S}\ref{sec:niii1750} and
{\S}\ref{sec:emlines} in this paper as well,
but our motivation differs.    Rather than viewing the complicated
gas flows as the main topic in their own right, we hope that their
secular changes  will eventually lead to information about the
disequilibrium structure of the post-eruption star.  Observed
long-term spectroscopic
{\it trends\/} are therefore critical.  The goal of linking
them to the star's internal structure has not been approached
yet, but no other known object can offer comparable views into
a supernova impostor.

    \vspace{1mm}

Here we explore a particular subset of UV observations, selected by a
criterion noted in {\S}\ref{sec:data}.  They contain a  wide variety
of results.  Some of these relate to $\eta$ Car's secular trend,
while others involve the morphology and physics of gas flows in the
system.  Several phenomena were not recognized earlier, and appear
difficult to explain.

    \vspace{1mm}

Section 2 below is a brief description of the data set, and Section 3
is an overview of the rapidly  growing UV brightness levels.
In Section 4 we focus on the extraordinarily bright
\ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750 multiplet which has several
important implications.   In Section 5 we note the
potential importance of other semi-forbidden lines, and Section 6
contains an account of a few especially suggestive absorption
features.  Finally, Section 7 is an attempt to summarize the
resulting situation.

\section{STIS/MAMA/UV Observations and Data Reduction}
\label{sec:data}

    \vspace{1mm}

HST/STIS has played a unique role in our knowledge of $\eta$ Car for
three reasons: (1) As noted above, it can separate the central star
from the surprisingly bright ejecta located 0.1--0.5 arcsec away.
(2) It allows UV observations.
(3) It also provides unrivaled data homogeneity
since 1998, immune to atmospheric effects and far more reproducible
in spatial coverage than ground-based data.

   \vspace{1mm}
 \begin{figure}

 \plotone{fig01.eps}
 \caption{ The 5.54-year orbit of $\eta$ Car's companion star, with dates
    of UV observations discussed in this paper.  In most models our line
    of sight passes upward in the figure, inclined 45$^\circ$ from the
    orbital plane, but some authors advocate the opposite direction.
    Here we assume eccentricity 0.85,  see refs.\ cited in the text. }
 \label{fig:orbit}
 \end{figure}

Here we are interested in secular trends at $\lambda < 2400$ {\AA},
observable with the STIS/MAMA detectors.
In order to minimize periodic variations related to the
5.54-year orbit,  we chose pairs of observations that
occurred  at similar orbital phases.   There are only
two such pairs, shown in Figure \ref{fig:orbit}.  One of them includes
$t =$ 2002.51 and 2013.82, about a year before periastron; while the other
pair occurred at 2004.18 and 2015.67, after periastron.  Eta Car was
not observed with STIS/MAMA in the intermediate years 2005--2012.
Table \ref{tab:obslist} lists the four selected observations, plus another
that occurred during the 2003.5 spectroscopic event near periastron.

   \vspace{1mm}

\begin{deluxetable}{ccccc}
    \tablenum{1}
\tablecaption{Times of HST/MAMA echelle observations used in this paper}
\label{tab:obslist}
\tablehead{
	\colhead{Year}  & \colhead{Calendar} & \colhead{MJD}
	& \colhead{Phase\tablenotemark{a} }
	& \colhead{Program\tablenotemark{b} }   }
\startdata
J2002.51  &  2002-07-05  &  52459.9  &  0.8136  &  \ 9337  \\
J2003.51  &  2003-07-05  &  52825.0  &  0.9941  &  \ 9973  \\
J2004.18  &  2004-03-06  &  53070.3  &  0.1153  &  \ 9973  \\
J2013.82  &  2013-10-27  &  56591.8  &  0.8561  &   13377  \\
J2015.67  &  2015-09-02  &  57267.3  &  0.1900  &   13789  \\
\enddata
\tablenotetext{a}{Phase in the 5.54-year orbit, with nominal period
   2023.0 days and zeropoint at J1998.000.  Periastron is
   ill-determined but most likely occurs in the phase range
	0.988--0.998. }
\tablenotetext{b}{HST/GO program number. P.I.'s were
   K.\/ Davidson in 2002-2004 and A.\/ Mehner in 2013-2015. }
\end{deluxetable}

    \vspace{1mm}

The STIS/MAMA/FUV detector sampled wavelength range
1300--1700 {\AA} with echelle grating E140M, and the NUV
detector sampled 1610--2360 {\AA} with grating E230M.
Spectral resolution was equivalent to ${\Delta}v \sim 10$ km s$^{-1}$,
much narrower than most of the spectral features.  In 2002-2004
the integration times were around 2000 s with E140M, and 3500 s
with E230M.  Eleven years later $\eta$ Car's brightening allowed
shorter integrations, about 1000 s and 800 s respectively.
Since the resulting data had many thousands of counts per {\AA}
at most wavelengths,  statistical noise was much smaller than
other sources of uncertainty that will be obvious below.
The spectrograph aperture size was $0.2 \times 0.2$ arcsec for
E140M, and $0.2 \times 0.3$ arcsec for E230M.  These were near the
maximum size that can exclude emission from nearby ejecta.
On the other hand,  \citet{hi06} noted that we must include
as much as possible of a UV scattering halo whose effective
diameter  exceeded 0.1 arcsec in 2002-2004.  Therefore
the chosen aperture size was a reasonable compromise.

     \vspace{1mm}

Our data reduction methods essentially followed the standard STScI
CALSTIS pipeline processing.  Spectral extractions presented in this
paper were performed with the full aperture width and standard
pipeline aperture corrections.  Strictly speaking the aperture
corrections may be unreliable for $\eta$ Car due to the noticeable
extent of its emission;  but there is not enough information
to do much better.
Judging from the near-absence of very narrow emission lines, and from
spatial structure within the aperture width, the nearby slow-moving
ejecta did not appreciably contaminate these data.

    \vspace{1mm}

Orbital positions at the times of these observations are sketched
in Figure \ref{fig:orbit}.  According to most authors we view the
orbit from below the bottom edge of the figure and roughly 45$^\circ$
out of its plane, but a nearly opposite line of sight has also been
proposed, see refs.\ in \citet{ka16}.  As noted in
{\S}\ref{sec:niii1750}  below, high-excitation species such as
He$^+$ and N$^{++}$ should occur in and near a shocked zone where the
two winds collide, between the two stars.
Concerning the orbit parameters, see \citet{da01,da17},
{\S}6.2 in \citet{me11}, and    references therein.
None of our conclusions depend on their precise values.

    \vspace{1mm}

Regarding ``phase'' in the 5.5-year orbital cycle, we use the definition
adopted 15 years ago for the $\eta$ Car Treasury Project:
period = 2023.0 days exactly, and phase is zero (or alternatively an integer)
at MJD 56883.0 = 2014 August 14, MJD 54860.0 = 2009 January 29, etc.
This system has been used in most accounts of HST data on the central
star, and reasons for it are outlined in an Appendix in \citet{me11}.

   \vspace{1mm}

Quoted wavelengths are in vacuum, and Doppler velocities are heliocentric.
Eta Car's heliocentric systemic radial velocity is probably in the range
0 to $-20$ km s$^{-1}$ \citep{da97}.

   \vspace{4mm}

\section{The UV Jungle, and Diminishing Extinction}
\label{sec:contin}

  \vspace{1mm}

Figure \ref{fig:uvtracing} shows $\eta$ Car's UV spectrum at $t = 2015.67$.
It is far  more complex than the spectral region $\lambda > 3500$ {\AA},
cf.\ tracings in \citet{da95,da99a,hu99,hi01,hm12,na12}.  The UV continuum
level cannot be clearly identified.  \citet{eb97}, \citet{wa99}, and
\citet{hi01} compared $\eta$ Car's FUV spectrum to various known
single-star winds, but later it was recognized that the hot companion
star photoionizes some of the observed gas -- see {\S}6 in
\citet{hu08}, and {\S}\ref{sec:niii1750} below.
The secondary star itself is relatively faint at wavelengths
examined here  \citep{me10a}.

      \vspace{1mm}
 \begin{figure}

 \plotone{fig02.eps}
 \caption{UV spectrum observed at 2015.67, and also at 2004.18 to show
    the apparent brightening.  Horizonal marks indicate flux level
    $f_\lambda = 3 \times 10^{-11}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ {\AA}$^{-1}$,
    not corrected for extinction.  The spectral features visible here
    are nearly all real, since the statistical noise level is too small
    to discern at this scale. }
 \label{fig:uvtracing}
 \end{figure}

One might hope that the hundreds of features in $\eta$ Car's UV spectrum
can be  analyzed via numerical simulations
\citep{hi01,gr12a,mad13,cl15}.
However,  there are too many asymmetric emitting regions and
small-scale processes, with far too many free parameters, for a reliable
model with any set of computer codes available now or in the near
future (see {\S}\ref{subsec:niiic} and {\S}\ref{subsec:sum2} below).
We therefore concentrate on spectral features that depend chiefly
on just a few physical processes.

       \vspace{1mm}

\subsection{A minor paradox}
\label{subsec:contin_a}

First, though, note that most features in this wavelength range
do not depend on the same parameters as the violet-to-red spectrum.
\citet{me10b} found that $\eta$ Car's \ion{Fe}{2} emission lines at
$\lambda > 4000$ {\AA} weakened by factors of 2--5 between the years
2000 and 2010, relative to the continuum.  In our UV data, however,
the \ion{Fe}{2} forest appeared roughly the same in 2015 as it did
in 2002.  This difference is not a contradiction, for the following
reasons.

  \vspace{1mm}

\ion{Fe}{2} has about three dozen levels with $E_i < 3$ eV, mostly
well populated because they are metastable.  They
produce a few hundred UV absorption lines with
substantial optical depths in $\eta$ Car's {\it outer} wind, at
$r \sim$ 50--200 AU.  A typical absorption event is followed by
re-emission either in the same line, or in another UV line with
$\lambda < 3000$ {\AA}.   (Longer-wavelength transitions
have much smaller probabilities.)  Many scattering events -- really
absorption and re-emission -- may occur before the photon escapes.
Consider first a simplified  case with only
one spectral line.   In a stellar wind, it produces a P Cyg
profile of the pure-scattering type:  some energy is removed from
a narrow wavelength interval and transferred to slightly longer
wavelengths.  If the
line-center optical depth ${\tau}_0$ is larger than about  1.5,
then the amplitude and width of the resulting line
profile do not strongly depend on the actual value of ${\tau}_0$.
In other words, if more than (say) four scattering events occur
before photon escape, then the specific number of them has only
a weak influence on the line's apparent strength.  Thus {\it a major
change in the gas density does not greatly alter the appearance of
the spectral feature.}  The line's quantitative details are affected,
but not its basic nature.

    \vspace{1mm}

In reality each \ion{Fe}{2} absorption event may be followed
by re-emission in a different UV transition,  but this fact merely
re-distributes the scattering among a limited set of spectral lines,
and the pure-scattering P Cyg concept remains valid for their average.
In summary, we should not expect a conspicuous change in the general
appearance of $\eta$ Car's ultraviolet \ion{Fe}{2} forest;  that would
happen only if nearly all of the line optical depths ${\tau}_0$ fall
below 1.5.     The same remarks apply to \ion{Ni}{2} and other complex
species.

    \vspace{1mm}

Sometimes the scattering sequence ends with a relatively unlikely
non-UV decay, producing a photon with $\lambda > 4000$ {\AA} which
escapes more easily.  This has a specific probability of occurring
after each UV absorption event,   so the resulting amount of
longer-wavelength emission is roughly proportional to the average
number of UV absorption events that occur before a re-emitted photon
escapes.  Thus a higher UV optical depth implies relatively more
photons with $\lambda > 4000$ {\AA}.  Consequently the
violet-to-red emission lines strongly depend on the \ion{Fe}{2} density,
unlike the UV lines.  This is why
the features noted by \citet{me10b} weakened dramatically without
a proportionate change in the UV spectrum.

    \vspace{1mm}

\subsection{The UV brightening}
\label{subsec:contin_b}

The flux levels in our UV data increased by factors of about 5 between
2002 and 2015, see below.  Since $\eta$ Car is fairly close to the Eddington
Limit, it cannot brighten intrinsically by such a factor.  Hence the observed
brightening must indicate a rapidly declining circumstellar extinction.
Two complications
must be acknowledged, however.  First, what we call ``extinction'' may
involve a scattering halo at $r \sim $ 100 to 500 AU \citep{hi06},
not just line-of-sight obscuration.  The halo is correlated with
the circumstellar outflow density.  Secondly, the star's SED may have
changed by a small amount.  In order to simplify the narrative, here we
report the observed trend as though it were simple line-of-sight extinction
by dust; future theoretical studies can make suitable corrections.

    \vspace{1mm}

\begin{deluxetable}{cccccc}
    \tablenum{2}
\tablecaption{Quasi-continuum Flux Levels\tablenotemark{a}}
\label{tab:uvflux}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Date} & \colhead{1733\AA} & \colhead{1777\AA}
	& \colhead{1968\AA} & \colhead{2072\AA}
	& \colhead{2000-2200{\AA}\tablenotemark{b} }  }
\startdata
2002.51  &  \ 3.2  & \ 3.2  & \ 2.1  & \ 2.0  &  1.80  \\
2004.18  &  \ 2.9  & \ 3.5  & \ 2.8  & \ 2.5  &  1.90  \\
2013.82  &   13.0  &  12.8  & \ 8.9  & \ 7.5  &  6.48  \\
2015.67  &   16.8  &  17.0  &  12.2  &  11.3  &  8.49  \\
\enddata
\tablenotetext{a}{$f_\lambda$ expressed in units of $10^{-12}$
   erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ {\AA}$^{-1}$, not corrected for extinction.
   The four narrow samples are each 4 to 7 {\AA} wide.}
   \tablenotetext{b}{The broad 2000-2200 {\AA} interval includes
   many absorption lines.}
\end{deluxetable}

    \vspace{1mm}

 \begin{figure}

 \plotone{fig03.eps}
 \caption{Observed flux at four quasi-continuum wavelengths listed in
    Table \ref{tab:uvflux}, not corrected for extinction.  Here the unit
    for $f_\lambda$ is $10^{-12}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ {\AA}$^{-1}$. }
 \label{fig:contin}
 \end{figure}

As quasi-continuum samples, we adopt four narrow wavelength intervals
which appear as local plateaus in $f_\lambda$;  see Table \ref{tab:uvflux}.
These provide meaningful flux
measures even if they do not represent a true continuum, because
(1) they had similar plateau-like appearances at each of the observation
dates, and (2) their relative flux ratios remained consistent
through the 2002, 2004, 2013, and 2015 observations.
These $f_\lambda$ samples are plotted in Figure \ref{fig:contin}.
Table \ref{tab:uvflux} and most of our figures do not
include corrections for extinction, because $A_\lambda$ is only
vaguely known for this object.  A primary goal of the next few
paragraphs is to estimate the extinction.

   \vspace{1mm}

The uncertainties in Table \ref{tab:uvflux} are not statistical, but
likely error sizes can be be estimated with a few assumptions.  Suppose
that the intrinsic fluxes at 1733, 1777, 1968, and 2072 {\AA}
were constants, and that changes of extinction had the local wavelength
dependence ${\Delta}A_\lambda \propto {\lambda}^{\alpha}$ in the range
1700-2100 {\AA},  with a constant value of $\alpha$.  Given the
16 data points, one can calculate a best-fit model that has eight parameters:
three numbers that describe the intrinsic fluxes relative to each other,
values of ${\Delta}A_{\lambda}(2000 \; \mathrm{\AA})$ at four observation
times, and $\alpha$.  (The best-fit $\alpha$ turns out to be about $-0.5$.)
Then we can deduce typical errors  from differences between the measured
$f_\lambda$ values and the model, allowing for its degrees
of freedom.  Based on this method, the r.m.s. error in each listed
$f_\lambda$ value is roughly $\pm 10$\% or $\pm 0.11$ magnitude, much
larger than the statistical count-rate errors.
This probably involves real fluctuations in the spectrum,  and the
largest deviations occurred at the shortest wavelength 1733 {\AA}.

   \vspace{1mm}
 \begin{figure}

 \plotone{fig04.eps}
 \caption{ Progressive increase in apparent flux, an average of the 1968
    {\AA} and 2072 {\AA} data listed in Table \ref{tab:uvflux}.  The
    unit of $f_\lambda$ is $10^{-12}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ {\AA}$^{-1}$.
    Vertical marks indicate the times of periastron events in 2003,
    2009, and 2014.  A conjectural discontinuity in 2009 is consistent
    with HST photometry at longer wavelengths (Martin et al.\ 2018,
    in preparation).   }
 \label{fig:brighten}
 \end{figure}

As noted above, the five-fold
increase in Figure  \ref{fig:contin} represents primarily
a decrease in extinction.  Most likely the rate of mass outflow
along our line of sight has diminished, so less dust is being formed
at $r \sim $ 100 to 400 AU \citep{mar06b,mar10,hm12,da99b}.
Figure  \ref{fig:brighten} shows the trend for an average of the
fluxes centered at $\lambda \approx $ 1968  and 2072 {\AA}.   The time-averaged
rate of brightening from 2002 to 2015 was between 12\% and 16\%  per year
at all four wavelengths in Table \ref{tab:uvflux}, with an overall average
of 13.8\% per year or 0.14 $\pm$ 0.01 magnitude y$^{-1}$.
(Here the quoted error may be doubtful because it is based on
the $f_\lambda$ uncertainty estimated above, where normal statistics
do not apply.)
The brightening rate was approximately proportional to ${\lambda}^{-0.5}$
in the sampled range 1733--2072 {\AA}.
``Normal'' extinction increases with $\lambda$ in this range
\citep{ca89}, but $\eta$ Car's extinction law is notoriously peculiar
with large grains and nitrogen-rich gas, see refs.\ in
\citet{wa12} and \citet{dh97}.  Moreover, the ``UV halo'' effects
mentioned earlier may affect the wavelength dependence.
These remarks apply only to recently formed outflowing dust
within 1000 AU of the star.

  \vspace{1mm}

Other wavelength samples give similar rates of change.
For instance, the 2000-2200 {\AA} flux in Table \ref{tab:uvflux}
is a simple average across that broad interval, including many
spectral lines.  It shows an average brightening rate of 0.13
magnitude per year.

   \vspace{1mm}

We can estimate the total UV extinction, based on the following
assessment of intrinsic brightness.  Since $\eta$ Car's
photospheric temperature is probably in the range 15000--25000 K
\citep{da12}, most of its emergent radiation should be in the wavelength
range 1000--3000 {\AA}.  Scattering effects noted by
\citet{hi06} cannot  shift a major fraction of the integrated
flux out of this range.  For simplicity, first
consider a Planck distribution with a Lyman cutoff near 912 {\AA}.
If $\Phi_{2000}$ denotes the intrinsic value of $\lambda f_\lambda$
at  $\lambda = 2000$ {\AA} (i.e., what we would see in the
absence of extinction), and $F$ is the total intrinsic energy flux
$\int f_\lambda d\lambda$ including all wavelengths,  then
$0.5 F < \Phi_{2000} < 0.8 F$   for any Planck temperature in the range
noted above.  Further  details are too lengthy to explore here,
but $\Phi_{2000} \approx 0.6 F$ appears probable, within a factor
of 1.6 or so, for a realistic SED with free-free emission, a scattered
halo, and other effects.  Given the standard
luminosity $L \approx 4 \times 10^6 \ L_\odot$ for the primary
star and $D \approx 2.3$ kpc, we thus expect
$\Phi_{2000} \sim 1.5 \times 10^{-5}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$
and $f_\lambda(2000 \; \mathrm{\AA}) \sim 7.5 \times 10^{-9}$
erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ {\AA}$^{-1}$ without extinction.
A factor-of-two  error in this quantity would alter the extinction
$A_\lambda$ derived below by only about 10\%.

  \vspace{1mm}

In 2015 the apparent $f_{\lambda}(2000 \; \mathrm{\AA})$ was smaller
than the above value by a factor of about 630 (Table \ref{tab:uvflux}),
implying 7.0 magnitudes of extinction.  Since $\eta$ Car's
{\it interstellar\/} extinction amounts to roughly 3.3 magn at
2000 {\AA},\footnote{

  $A_V \approx 1.5$ \citep{dh97} with an $R = 4$ Cardelli law
  \citep{ca89}.  }
the circumstellar extinction in 2015 was evidently about
3.7 magn at 2000 {\AA} with an informal pseudo-sigma uncertainty of the
order of $\pm$0.6 magn.  Thirteen years earlier the star
appeared 1.8 magn fainter (Fig.\ 4),
so the UV circumstellar extinction
decreased by roughly 33\%.  Note, however, that an unknown
fraction of the ``circumstellar'' extinction occurs in older ejecta
located at $r \sim 10^3$ to $10^4$ AU, which would have changed
at a much smaller rate due to expansion.  Hence, allowing for normal
uncertainties, the current dust-formation  rate appears to have fallen
by more than 30\% between 2002 and 2015.  Extrapolating back to 1998
when $\eta$ Car's rapid brightening was first noticed, we conclude
that {\it the dust-formation rate along our line of sight
decreased by at least 35\%} and probably more, perhaps
about 50\%.

   \vspace{1mm}

\subsection{Related issues}
\label{subsec:contin_c}

Part of the measured brightening may involve a decrease in the size
of a UV scattering halo \citep{hi06};  but that too would
indicate a diminished outflow density, so the basic implication is
not materially altered.   (The STIS/MAMA 0.2-arcsec aperture included
most of the halo according to Hillier's Figure 15.)  One might attribute
the trend to a destruction of dust grains, rather than a decreased rate
of grain    formation;  but  that would require a change
in the UV output or some other characteristic of the star, which would
alter the mass flow rate as well.  As \citet{da99b} explained, the
observed trend has been far too rapid to be a mere consequence of
expansion or sideways motion of pre-existing dust.  That paper also noted
reasons to suspect that the effect is less dramatic in some other
directions from the star.    Incidentally,  outflowing gas reaches
the dust-formation region about two years after leaving the star.

    \vspace{1mm}

In principle the temporal baseline can be extended about a decade earlier,
because $\eta$ Car was observed in 1991--1997 with HST's Faint Object
Spectrograph (FOS) and Goddard High Resolution Spectrograph (GHRS)
\citep{da95,hu99,eb97}.  One datum is highly relevant here:
at $t = 1991.62$, near the same orbital phase as 2002.51 and 2013.82,
the average apparent $f_\lambda$(1450-1700 {\AA}) was {\it probably\/}
about $7 \times 10^{-13}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ {\AA}$^{-1}$ \citep{da95}.
We emphasize ``probably'' because those early FOS data required
unorthodox analysis to achieve sufficient spatial resolution.
Relative to Table \ref{tab:uvflux}, {\it one deduces a UV brightening
rate of roughly 0.13 magn y$^{-1}$ from 1991 to 2002\/} -- practically the
same as in 2002--2015.

    \vspace{1mm}

This result is moderately surprising for two reasons: (1) the accelerated
brightening in ground-based photometry began several years after 1991;
and (2) in the early 1980's, the star appeared definitely brighter than
the Weigelt knots \citep{we86}.  Since their energy budget and line ratios
indicate much less extinction than for the star
\citep{ha12,da97,dh97}, a naive extrapolation of the 1998-2015 trend
back to 1984 would make the star no brighter than the knots at that
time, even at far-red wavelengths.
{\it The FOS and GHRS data, and also the International Ultraviolet
Explorer (IUE) observations of $\eta$ Car in the 1980's, merit
new examinations relative to the STIS data\/} -- a task beyond
the scope of this paper.

   \vspace{1mm}

Concerning the FUV quasi-continuum level (Fig.\ 2),
one must be careful with the word ``photosphere'' in a diffuse flow.
In order to be physically meaningful as well as consistent with
traditional usage, a photosphere should be the region that determines
the emergent photon energy distribution.   In a hot atmosphere
or wind,  this is the thermalization depth where
$ (3 \, \tau_\mathrm{tot} \, \tau_\mathrm{abs})^{1/2} \, \approx \, 1$.
If $\eta$ Car has $\dot{M} \gtrsim 3 \times 10^{-4} \ M_\odot$ y$^{-1}$,
then its photosphere defined this way is located in the wind rather than
near the star's surface \citep{da87}.\footnote{

   Calculations by \citet{ow16} agree in their essentials with
   the simplified view in \cite{da87}, if we allow for modern
   opacity values.  Their discussion seems to imply otherwise,
   largely because they quoted only textual comments rather than the
   quantitative temperatures shown in Davidson's Figure 1. }
The single-star wind model described by \citet{hi01}, for example, had
a characteristic photosphere temperature somewhat above 15000 K.
The classical effective temperature $T_\mathrm{eff}$ has no physical
significance in a diffuse configuration.

   \vspace{2mm}

\begin{deluxetable}{cccc}
\tablenum{3}
\tablecaption{The \ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750 Multiplet\tablenotemark{a} }
\label{tab:1750}
\tablehead{
\colhead{${\lambda}_0$ (\AA)}
   & \colhead{$J_\mathrm{lower}$\tablenotemark{b} }
   & \colhead{$J_\mathrm{upper}$\tablenotemark{b} }
   & \colhead{ \ \ $A_{ji}$ (s$^{-1}$) }  }
\startdata
    1746.823  &  1/2  &  3/2  & \ \   8.8  \\
    1748.646  &  1/2  &  1/2  &     346.8  \\
    1749.674  &  3/2  &  5/2  &     266.0  \\
    1752.160  &  3/2  &  3/2  &  \   60.2  \\
    1753.995  &  3/2  &  1/2  &     361.5  \\
\enddata
\tablenotetext{a}{See \citet{be95} and \citet{st94}.}
\tablenotetext{b}{Lower and upper terms are
   $2s^{2}2p \ ^{2}\mathrm{P}^\mathrm{o}$ and
   $2s2p^{2} \ ^{4}\mathrm{P}$ respectively. }
\end{deluxetable}

\section{Extremely Luminous \ion{N}{3}] Emission}
\label{sec:niii1750}

The secondary star in $\eta$ Car has $T_\mathrm{eff} \sim  40000$ K
\citep{me10a}, hot enough to photoionize helium in some parts of the
primary star's wind.  Nitrogen is more
abundant there than carbon plus oxygen
\citep{da86}, and tends to be doubly ionized in a zone of He$^+$.
Therefore semi-forbidden \ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750 emission
(Table \ref{tab:1750}) is a very strong coolant in the He$^+$
zone.  Three attributes together make this feature unique in
$\eta$ Car's spectrum:  (1) It is fundamentally strong as just
noted;  (2) it has a rather high excitation energy;  and
(3) being semi-forbidden, it has no P Cyg absorption or other
self-absorption.

    \vspace{1mm}

The \ion{N}{3}] multiplet provides evidence for a long-standing
question,  the location of the photoionized He$^+$ region
within the wind structure. It also reveals some fresh problems.
Throughout the following discussion, we invoke numerous conventional
parameters for the $\eta$ Car system.  For explanations of them and
references, see the review articles in \citet{dh12}.

    \vspace{2mm}

 \begin{figure}

 \plotone{fig05.eps}
 \caption{\ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750 emission observed in 2002-2004.
   Horizontal marks indicate
   $f_{\lambda} = 10^{-11}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ {\AA}$^{-1}$, not
   corrected for extinction.  A vertical dashed line
   marks $-500$ km s$^{-1}$ for the \ion{Ni}{2} $\lambda$1751.9
   absorption line.
   The middle panel is atypical because it represents
   a brief  ``spectroscopic event'' at periastron. }
 \label{fig:niii2002}
 \end{figure}
 \begin{figure}

 \plotone{fig06.eps}
 \caption{\ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750 emission in 2013-2015.
   Horizontal marks indicate
   $f_\lambda = 10^{-10}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ {\AA}$^{-1}$,
   not corrected for extinction.  A vertical dashed line
   marks $-500$ km s$^{-1}$ for the \ion{Ni}{2} $\lambda$1751.9
   absorption line.  }
 \label{fig:niii2013}
 \end{figure}
\subsection{ The \ion{N}{3}] luminosity }
\label{subsec:niiia}

   \vspace{1mm}

\ion{N}{3}] emission, like the \ion{He}{1} recombination lines, does
{\it not\/} depend primarily on the amount of material present.
Instead it represents the EUV luminosity of the hot secondary star.
Most photons with $h\nu \gtrsim 25$ eV are absorbed by
He$^0$ $\rightarrow$ He$^+$ events somewhere in the gas flow,
and most of their  energy flux is then recycled to
$h\nu \lesssim 10$ eV by recombination, \ion{N}{3}] emission,
and other cooling processes \citep{hu08}.
To a first approximation, the \ion{N}{3}] luminosity is thus
independent of the gas density distribution.
The line profile, however, depends on flow velocities of
the EUV-absorbing material.
Figures \ref{fig:niii2002} and \ref{fig:niii2013} show the observed profile
of \ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750 in 2002-2015.  The very different-looking
middle panel in Figure \ref{fig:niii2002} represents the 2003.5 periastron
event which was too complicated to discuss here
\citep{dh12,mar06a,me11,me15}.

    \vspace{1mm}

The luminosity of \ion{N}{3}] emission can be estimated as follows.
For a reason noted in {\S}\ref{subsec:niiie}, let us focus
on the data at $t = 2013.82$.  The integrated apparent flux was then
$F$(\ion{N}{3}]) $\approx \ 2.4 \times 10^{-10}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$,
continuum subtracted and not corrected for extinction.
Here we interpolated across the absorption lines via a model in
{\S}\ref{subsec:niiib} below, and the informal pseudo-sigma uncertainty
is roughly $\pm$15\%.  Extinction at 1750 {\AA} amounted to 7.7 $\pm$ 0.7
magnitudes ({\S}\ref{subsec:contin_b} above, adapted to 2013
rather than 2015).  Hence the flux without extinction would be
$F_0$(\ion{N}{3}]) $\approx 3 \times 10^{-7}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$.
This implies luminosity
$L$(\ion{N}{3}]) $\approx \ 2 \times \ 10^{38}$ ergs s$^{-1}$
$ \approx \ 5 \times 10^4 \; L_\odot$,
which is enormous for a stellar-wind emission feature.
The uncertainty is a factor of about 2.

   \vspace{1mm}

This value exceeds the total kinetic energy outflow of the wind,
and a single-star wind produces far less \ion{N}{3}]
emission \citep{hi01,hi06}.  Hence this feature is almost certainly
powered by ionizing radiation from the hot secondary star, perhaps
supplemented by an effect noted in {\S}6 of \citet{hu08}.  But the
energy budget seems problematic in light of the following facts:
\begin{enumerate}
    \item The 40000 K companion star discussed by \citet{me10a}
    radiates less than $10^5 \; L_\odot$ at helium-ionizing photon
    energies $h\nu > 24.6$ eV.
  \item Even though \ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750 emission may be the
    strongest individual cooling mechanism in a He$^{+}$ zones,
    other processes should account for much of the total  cooling.
  \item Collisional de-excitation reduces the efficiency
    of the $\lambda$1750 emission ({\S}\ref{subsec:niiib} below).
  \item In any likely geometry ({\S}\ref{subsec:niiic} below), some
    fraction of the secondary star's radiation escapes
    along paths through the secondary wind, which is not dense enough
    for appreciable absorption or emission.
\end{enumerate}
Hence the observed feature is brighter than we would have predicted.
Several possible explanations are available.   We may have overcorrected
$F$(\ion{N}{3}]) for extinction; or  the secondary star may be hotter
than 40000 K; or FUV photons from the primary star may contribute
to the heating via a trick noted in {\S}6 of \citet{hu08}; etc.  The
main point is that $L$(\ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750) {\it appears to be
comparable to the maximum  attainable value.}

    \vspace{4mm}
 \begin{figure}

 \plotone{fig07}
 \caption{Density-dependent line ratios in the \ion{N}{3}] multiplet. }
 \label{fig:niiiratios}
 \end{figure}

\subsection{Density of the He$^+$, N$^{++}$ zone}
\label{subsec:niiib}

Gas density $n_e$ can help to indicate the location of the He$^+$,
N$^{++}$ region, as explained later.
Relative intensities of the \ion{N}{3}] multiplet components
(Table \ref{tab:1750}) depend approximately on $\, n_e/T^{0.4}$.
We calculated them across a broad density range,
using collision strengths and radiative rates reported by \citet{st94}
and \citet{be95}.  Let us adopt
$T = 15000$ K;  for other temperatures one can simply multiply each
quoted $n_e$  value by $(T/15000 \; \mathrm{K})^{0.4}$.  Figure
\ref{fig:niiiratios} shows the brightness ratios of the three most
useful lines $\lambda$1750, $\lambda$1752, $\lambda$1754 as functions
of density.

   \vspace{1mm}

Consider the HST data at $t = 2013.82$, the lower panel
in Figure \ref{fig:niii2013}.
Strong peaks near 1748 and 1752 {\AA} represent the $\lambda$1750
and $\lambda$1754 lines shifted by $-300$ km s$^{-1}$,
and another member of the multiplet can be discerned near
1747 {\AA}.  But there is no peak at 1750 {\AA} corresponding to
the $\lambda$1752 line. Evidently $\lambda$1752 is
considerably fainter than $\lambda$1754, so Figure \ref{fig:niiiratios}
immediately indicates $n_e \gtrsim 10^{10}$ cm$^{-3}$.

  \vspace{1mm}

In order to be more definite, we need a model for the emission profile.
Unrelated absorption lines prevent us from using a deconvolution
technique to separate the multiplet structure from the underlying
Doppler profile.  Instead we estimated the latter by informal
trial-and-error experiments.  The adopted Doppler profile is shown in the
lower panel of Figure \ref{fig:niiiprofile}.  We are not confident
of the longer-wavelength tail extending to $+450$ km s$^{-1}$,
but it fits the data reasonably well and its influence on the density
estimate is smaller than other uncertainties.  The upper panel
in  Figure \ref{fig:niiiprofile} shows the resulting total profile
for $n_e = 10^{9}, \ 10^{10}$, and $10^{11}$ cm$^{-3}$, normalized
to the major peak.   A density of $10^9$ cm$^{-3}$ is clearly
unsuitable,  $10^{11}$ cm$^{-3}$ gives the best fit, and higher
densities are practically indistinguishable from $10^{11}$ cm$^{-3}$.
The main uncertainty results from irregularities in the underlying
fluxes at 1752 {\AA} vs.\ 1748 {\AA} -- i.e., the subtracted
``continuum.''  Assuming that this
wavelength region has the same statistical distribution of relative
fluxes as the 2000-2200 {\AA} interval (Fig.\ \ref{fig:uvtracing}),
we estimate that the probabilities of $n_e < 10^{10.0}$ cm$^{-3}$ and
$n_e < 10^{10.3}$ cm$^{-3}$ are less than 5\% and 22\% respectively.
A more elaborate analysis, employing a model of the superimposed
\ion{Fe}{2} and \ion{Ni}{2} spectrum, would reduce the uncertainty
but is far too lengthy to attempt here.

    \vspace{1mm}

 \begin{figure}

 \plotone{fig08.eps}
 \caption{Observed \ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750 profile (shaded), compared
    to models for densities $n_e  = 10^9, \; 10^{10}, \; 10^{11}$
    cm$^{-3}$  (see text).  Small vertical bars indicate relative
    strengths of the multiplet components in the high-density limit.
    Each model used the Doppler profile shown in the bottom panel. }
 \label{fig:niiiprofile}
 \end{figure}

Collisional de-excitation \citep{of06} reduces the efficiency of
\ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750 in the favored density range, because
its critical density is $n_c \approx 10^{10.4}$ cm$^{-3}$.
Note, however, that \ion{N}{3}] emission is a dominant
cooling process and it depends strongly on temperature.
If collisional de-excitation reduces the emission efficiency, then
the equilibrium temperature rises so \ion{N}{3}] is almost as strong
as it would have been without collisional de-excitation.
If nearly
all of the cooling is due to this feature plus recombination and
free-free emission, then the resulting \ion{N}{3}] luminosity is
reduced by 25\% at $n_e \sim 10^{11.2}$ cm$^{-3}$, and by 50\%
at $10^{11.7}$  cm$^{-3}$.  Expected temperatures are in the range
13000-23000 K depending on density.

   \vspace{1mm}

In summary, the \ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750 data favor the density
range  $10^{10.3} \lesssim n_e \lesssim 10^{11.5}$ cm$^{-3}$.
Lower values produce
unsatisfactory multiplet ratios, while higher densities entail excessive
collisional de-excitation.  The dominant uncertainties are not
statistical and they are not caused by imperfections in the data;
instead they involve the complex nature of
$\eta$ Car's spectrum.  This estimate applies to gas with
Doppler velocities near $-300$ km s$^{-1}$, because it is based essentially
on the peaks seen near 1748 and 1752 {\AA}.  Also, of course, it presumably
represents a weighted average for gas that has a range of densities.

   \vspace{1mm}

\subsection{Location of the N$^{++}$, and small-scale structure in
   the shocked region}
\label{subsec:niiic}

   \vspace{1mm}

Where is this gas located in $\eta$ Car's wind structure?  Figure
\ref{fig:zones} identifies five different zones, with the primary
star at the bottom and the secondary star above it.  Every part of
this idealized map is inhomogeneous and unstable, but  the zones
are meaningful regarding ionization states.
Regions \underline{1,2,3} are differently ionized parts of the
primary wind, which has $v \sim 500$ km s$^{-1}$.   Zone \underline{4}
is a shocked region between the two winds, and \underline{5} is the
lower-density secondary wind with $v \sim 3000$ km s$^{-1}$.
He$^+$ and N$^{++}$ may exist in each zone except \underline{2}.
We tentatively dismiss the inner wind \underline{1} in this problem,
because relevant single-star wind models do not produce much
\ion{N}{3}] emission \citep{hi01,hi06}; but this statement is not
absolutely robust and zone \underline{1} will be mentioned again in
{\S}\ref{subsec:niiid}.  The secondary wind \underline{5} has far
too low a density, so we are left with zones \underline{3} and
\underline{4}.

    \vspace{1mm}

Zone \underline{3} is the part of the primary wind where helium
may be photoionized by the hot secondary star.  If the wind had
$\dot{M} \approx 10^{-3} \; M_\odot$ y$^{-1}$ and
$v \approx 500$ km s$^{-1}$  (see reviews in \citealt{dh12}),
then the average density there at $t = 2013.82$ would have been
$n_e \sim 10^{9.2}$ cm$^{-3}$, far below the range indicated by the
\ion{N}{3}] multiplet ratios.  Instabilities, however,
cause the wind to be inhomogeneous, perhaps with localized density
maxima above $10^{10}$ cm$^{-3}$ \citep{hi01},  and
emission lines originate chiefly in those high-density locales.
On the other hand, the mass loss rate probably declined well below
$10^{-3} \ M_\odot$ y$^{-1}$ before 2013, if our interpretation
of the secular changes is even partially valid.
In summary,  region \underline{3} is {\it probably\/} not dense
enough,  but a resourceful skeptic can devise models that avoid
this result.  The existence or non-existence of this He$^+$ zone
is a non-trivial question, see below.

 \begin{figure}

 \plotone{fig09.eps}
 \caption{Conceptual arrangement of ionization zones in the two stellar
   winds.  The primary and secondary stars are indicated near the botton
   and top respectively.  The primary wind includes zones 1, 2, and 3,
   while the less dense secondary wind is zone 5.  Region 4 is the complex
   shocked region.  This sketch is {\it highly\/} idealized, because
   every zone is unstable and inhomogeneous. }
 \label{fig:zones}
 \end{figure}

    \vspace{1mm}

The shocked region \underline{4} is hostile to simple analysis, and
below we shall note reasons to mistrust the numerical simulations that
have appeared so far.   Boundary \underline{3-4} is not a
well-defined shock front, because it is extremely unstable.
Consider a sample  of gas flowing from region \underline{3} into
\underline{4}.  After being compressed by a factor of about 4 and
heated to $T \sim 10^{6.6}$ K,
{\it it is thermally unstable\/} with a cooling time less than a day
\citep{dr11}.  When the resulting small cloudlets or filaments have
cooled to some level below 30000 K, their temperatures stabilize
because of UV heating   by the two
stars.  (Here ``cloudlet'' means, essentially, a local density
maximum.)   Meanwhile, gas from the secondary
wind forms a hot medium in region \underline{4}, because
its shock front \underline{4-5} has  $T \gtrsim 10^8$ K with a cooling
time of the order of 0.3 year.  Judging from the sound speeds and
timescales,  pressure equilibrium has a rough validity.  Based on
pressure quasi-equilibrium, the cooled cloudlets should have
densities $n_e \sim 10^{11}$ to $10^{12}$ cm$^{-3}$.  This picture
is obviously consistent with our \ion{N}{3}] results.

    \vspace{1mm}

So far as we know, the morphology of the cooled shocked gas has
not yet been modeled with a realistic range of size scales and
physical processes.  The mass and size of a typical cloudlet may
result from one or the other of two effects:
(a) Each ``clump'' in the inhomogeneous primary wind might become a
cloudlet, or (b) alternatively, the  characteristic size scale for thermal
instability may be more decisive: $\ell \sim$ (sound speed) $\times$
(cooling time) $\sim$ 0.03 AU.\footnote{

   A classical adiabatic shock would produce
   $T \approx 4 \times 10^6$ K there, implying a sound speed of about
   200 km s$^{-1}$ and cooling time of $2 \times 10^4$ s or less.
   Instabilities, however, may cause the transition \underline{3-4}
   to be a succession of oblique subshocks.  In that case the
   resulting temperature is lower and the cooling time is shorter. }
This suggests a size less than 0.01 AU for a typical cloudlet or filament
after it has shrunk due to cooling and surrounding pressure.
These condensations might be rapidly disrupted by Kelvin-Helmholtz
and/or Rayleigh-Taylor effects, photoionization-driven evaporation, etc.,
but the observed strong \ion{N}{3}] emission with
$n_e \sim 10^{11}$ cm$^{-3}$ suggests that this is not the case.

    \vspace{1mm}

{\it Do they absorb nearly all helium-ionizing photons that enter the
shocked region?\/}  If not, then a He$^+$ zone \underline{3} exists in
the primary wind.   Each cloudlet is opaque at $\, h\nu \sim 25$ to
30 eV, but photons might pass between them.  Therefore, as \citet{me12}
emphasized, the answer depends on sizes, shapes, orientations, and
geometrical correlations of the cloudlets.  (See the last part of that
paper's  {\S}3.1.)  Imagine  a conceptual model with average cloudlet
size $s \approx 0.007$ AU.  A density compression factor of 100 in
each cloudlet implies volume filling factor $\epsilon \approx 0.01$, so
the number density of cloudlets would be
$N \sim {\epsilon}/s^3 \sim 10^{4.5}$ AU$^{-3}$.
In order to block almost all photon paths through the shocked region,
the mist of cloudlets must extend to a thickness
$H \; \gtrsim \; 1/s^2 N \sim 0.6$ AU
perpendicular to boundary \underline{3-4}.  Given the flow speeds in
that region,  this extent requires a cloudlet survival
time of at least 10 days,  which is roughly 10 times the sound-speed
crossing time in an individual cloudlet.  It is difficult to say
whether this survival time is theoretically reasonable.

    \vspace{1mm}

\citet{cl14,cl15} described elaborate numerical simulations of
the shocked flow, but they did not clarify the small-scale morphology.
Roughly $10^6$ cloudlets are required, so a valid ``global''
simulation needs at least $10^8$ adaptive sample points with
small local time steps -- far more than the Clementel et al.\/
figures appear to indicate.  Those authors' density maps show maxima
below $10^{10.3}$ cm$^{-3}$.  Perhaps these are averages over
regions large enough to portray in a figure, but {\it the root of
the problem lies at small size scales} $\, {\Delta}x \lesssim 0.005$ AU,
which are not shown.  Moreover, the large compression factors suggest
that MHD effects should be included.  If some factor prevents
compression to the small sizes suggested above,  then \ion{N}{3}]
should have indicated lower densities.   Most helium-ionizing photons
are probably absorbed in the shocked region as Mehner et al.\/
indicated, but this opinion is not based on numerical simulations,
and it has not been proven by them.

\subsection{The puzzling Doppler profile}
\label{subsec:niiid}

Our best-fit distribution of Doppler velocities for \ion{N}{3}]
(lower panel in Fig. \ref{fig:niiiprofile}) does not resemble
simple models.  Based on the discussion above, one would expect
the N$^{++}$ to flow roughly along pseudo-hyperboloidal
surfaces like those sketched in Figure \ref{fig:zones} --
somewhat analogous to water on an umbrella.
At the times of observation, the angle between our line of
sight and the umbrella axis was probably in the range
40$^\circ$ to 75$^\circ$, with us on the concave side.\footnote{

   Quantitative details in this paragraph are based on
   elementary geometry calculations that are too lengthy
   and distracting to recite here.  They are  consistent
   with most published models of the wind-wind structure.
   But if the orbit orientation is reversed \citep{ka16},
   then the above discussion has to be modified. }
In that situation, the positive-velocity tail of the Doppler
distribution makes no apparent sense.  Assuming that the peak
at $-300$ km s$^{-1}$, represents the nearest parts of the
umbrella, the extreme redshift on the other side should have
been less than $+250$ km s$^{-1}$.
Moreover, $\eta$ Car's \ion{He}{1} recombination lines
do not have conspicuous long-wavelength wings.

   \vspace{1mm}

Admittedly we used an informal method to estimate the \ion{N}{3}]
Doppler profile, but a glance at Figure \ref{fig:niii2013}
strongly suggests that the long-wavelength side of the profile
extends farther than the short-wavelength side.

   \vspace{1mm}

We have no good solution to this problem, but here are three
speculative ideas.   First, the receding N$^{++}$ might be in a
distant part of zone \underline{3} in the primary wind.  Figure 5b in
\citet{me12} shows that positive velocities may exist there, and the
lower density is acceptable because our estimate $n_e \sim 10^{11}$
cm$^{-3}$ really applies only to the peak of the Doppler profile.

    \vspace{1mm}

A second, less orthodox idea is that \ion{N}{3}] might originate
in the inner wind (zone \underline{1}), contrary to published wind
models.  The density there has the right order of magnitude, and the
energy supply in that region is adequate.  The redshifted
wing might even be caused by Thomson scattering, since the
optical depth there is of order unity in some
models \citep{hi01}.  A non-spherical   wind might
achieve such results, in more or less the same vein
as \citet{gr12a,gr12b,gr15}.

   \vspace{1mm}

As a third possibility, the long-wavelength wing might be the
same as the feature noted in {\S}\ref{subsec:niiie} below.

    \vspace{1mm}

Arguably the  \ion{N}{3}] profile ``should have'' differed between
the 2013 and 2015 observations, because the angle between our
line of sight and the shock axis differed by about $20^\circ$
between those two occasions.
At least one would expect the $-300$ km s$^{-1}$ velocity to
differ measurably between those orientations.  In fact, however,
the two profiles  in Figure \ref{fig:niii2013} are practically
indistinguishable,  apart from the variable feature noted
below.

    \vspace{1mm}

 \begin{figure}

 \plotone{fig10.eps}
 \caption{Partial \ion{N}{3}] fluxes in range 1746.0--1749.0 {\AA},
     expressed in units of $10^{-12}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ with no
     correction for extinction.  Open squares below are the averages
     of $f_{\lambda}(1733)$ and $f_{\lambda}(1777)$ in Table \ref{tab:uvflux},
     in units of $10^{-12}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ {\AA}$^{-1}$.  Vertical marks
     indicate periastron times.  A conjectural discontinuity in the
     dashed trend line coincides with the 2009 periastron event,
     cf.\/ Fig.\/  \ref{fig:brighten}.  }
 \label{fig:1750vars}
 \end{figure}

\subsection{Variability, and mysterious redshifted emission}
\label{subsec:niiie}

In order to assess the \ion{N}{3}] brightness trend without too much
absorption-line influence,  we integrated $f_\lambda$
across only the brightest, least affected interval
1746.0--1749.0 {\AA}.  Figure \ref{fig:1750vars} shows the results
with no extinction corrections nor continuum subtraction.  There
are two noteworthy findings:   (1) The average rate of brightening
was 0.17 magnitude per year, about 20\% faster than the nearby
wavelengths listed in Table \ref{tab:uvflux}.  (2) In both 2002-2004
and 2013-2015, the sample was noticeably fainter after
periastron.  This deficit was comparable to the luminosity of the
anomalous broad feature discussed next.

    \vspace{1mm}

The $t = 2004.18$ tracing in Figure \ref{fig:niii2002} shows {\it strong,
broad emission around 1755 {\AA}, resembling a dominant emission bump seen
during the 2003.5 periastron event.\/}  It also appears,
less strongly, in the 2015.67 data  (Fig.\/ \ref{fig:niii2013}).
In view of the innate strength of the \ion{N}{3}] multiplet, this
feature is almost certainly the $\lambda$1750 line with
Doppler velocities ranging from $+400$ to $+1200$ km s$^{-1}$.
It had an impressive luminosity in 2003-2004,
thousands of $L_\sun$.
Considering Figures \ref{fig:orbit} and \ref{fig:zones} together,
{\it we cannot easily find a locale for N$^{++}$ with
these velocities.\/}   Certain parts of the secondary shock had
large positive Doppler velocities in 2004, but the other parts
would not,  and there is no reason to expect much N$^{++}$
near the secondary shock ({\S}\ref{subsec:niiic} above).

    \vspace{1mm}

Perhaps the 1755 {\AA} feature was a remnant of the 2003.5 periastron
event that occurred 8 months earlier.  In the oldest, and in some
respects the most successful interpretation of a periastron event in
$\eta$ Car, $\dot{M}$ temporarily increases so a considerable amount of
ejecta moves outward \citep{za84,mar06a,da12}.  Since the detailed
mechanisms remain unclear, and the secondary star is probably located
on the far side of the primary at periastron, we should not be
surprised to see large recession velocities in the special ejecta
-- for example,  the broad 1755 {\AA} emission in the middle panel
of Figure \ref{fig:niii2002}.  Can it remain detectable later?
By $t = 2014.18$ the special fast ejecta  would have been more than
50 AU from the star, and N$^{++}$ would exist there only if there
was a clear path for EUV photons from the secondary star to the
receding material.  This may be possible due to the spiral
patterns caused by orbital motion;  see Figures in  \citet{pa09}
and \citet{ok08}, especially the right-hand panel in Figure 3 of
Parkin et al.  However, this picture would not explain the same feature
at 2002.51,  if it was weakly present then (Fig. \ref{fig:niii2002}).

   \vspace{1mm}

Evidently we have no satisfying explanation for the broad
emission around 1755 {\AA}.  Of course the same can be said of
some other spectral lines in $\eta$ Car; but this one has an
extraordinary luminosity of the order of $10^4 \; L_\odot$.
That amount is comparable to the total
kinetic energy flow in the wind, and greatly exceeds the total
X-ray flux.  As Oscar Wilde said, to misplace so much energy
almost looks like carelessness.

\section{Other unusual emission features}
\label{sec:emlines}

  \vspace{1mm}

Various authors have discussed the familiar types of UV stellar wind
features seen in $\eta$ Car \citep{eb97,hi01,hi06,gr12a}.
Most of those features have deep P Cyg absorption and require
sophisticated analyses.  Here we note two special emission lines
with different characteristics.

   \vspace{1mm}

Figure \ref{fig:1900A} shows a grove of bright lines near
$\lambda \sim 1900$ {\AA}, as seen in 2002, 2004, 2013, and 2015.
Most of the unlabeled features are \ion{Fe}{2}, but the lines of
interest here are semi-forbidden \ion{Si}{3}] and \ion{C}{3}] near
1890 {\AA} and 1907 {\AA}.\footnote{

  For a useful list of identifications in $\eta$ Car's spectrum,
  see \citealt{vi89}. }
Semi-forbidden lines are useful because their short-wavelength sides are
not complicated by P Cyg absorption (see below).  From 2002 to 2015 the
\ion{Si}{3}] and \ion{C}{3}] emission generally increased by modest
amounts relative to \ion{Fe}{2} and \ion{Fe}{3}, and also became
somewhat narrower.   Like the \ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750 peak,
their average velocities were close to $-300$ km s$^{-1}$.

 \begin{figure}

 \plotone{fig11.eps}
 \caption{Bright emission lines near 1900 {\AA} in $\eta$ Car's
    spectrum.   Vertical dashed lines mark Doppler velocities of
    $-300$ km s$^{-1}$ for \ion{Si}{3}] and \ion{C}{3}].
    Horizontal marks at the sides indicate
    $f_\lambda = 10^{-11}$ erg cm$^{-1}$ s$^{-1}$ {\AA}$^{-1}$,
    not corrected for extinction. }
 \label{fig:1900A}
 \end{figure}

    \vspace{1mm}

\ion{C}{3}] $\lambda$1909 most likely originates in the same gas as
\ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750, since the ionization
energy for C$^+$ $\rightarrow$ C$^{++}$ is nearly the same as for
He$^0$ $\rightarrow$ He$^+$.  Based only on the nature of the $\eta$ Car
system, we expect the luminosities of \ion{N}{3}] and \ion{C}{3}] to
depend chiefly on the flux of helium-ionizing photons from the secondary
star.   However, the critical $n_e$ for collisional de-excitation of
\ion{C}{3}] is   about $10^{9.7}$ cm$^{-3}$, far below the density range
favored  in {\S}\ref{subsec:niiib} above.
If $n_e \sim 10^{11}$ cm$^{-3}$, the observed ratio of \ion{C}{3}] to
\ion{N}{3}] brightness is consistent with an abundance ratio
$n_C/n_N \approx 0.1$.
The width of \ion{C}{3}] $\lambda$1909 decreased by a significant
amount; its FWHM was roughly 240 km s$^{-1}$ in 2002-2004 but only
160 km s$^{-1}$ in 2013-2015.

    \vspace{1mm}

\ion{Si}{3}] $\lambda$1892 should originate in ionization zones
of H$^+$ and He$^0$.  It is the second most conspicuous
emission line between 1300 and 2400 {\AA}
(Fig.\/ \ref{fig:uvtracing}), and appears to have at least two
components in the range $-300$ to $-120$ km s$^{-1}$.  Since it can be
formed via an exotic two-photon process \citep{jo06}, this line may
convey unique information about the radiation field.

    \vspace{1mm}

These three semi-forbidden features -- \ion{N}{3}], \ion{C}{3}], and
\ion{Si}{3}] -- share a suggestive velocity trend.
Vertical dashed lines in Figure \ref{fig:1900A}
assist in seeing this effect.  In 2002 and 2004, the left sides
of \ion{Si}{3}] and \ion{C}{3}] in the figure had wavelengths
about 0.6 {\AA} smaller than in 2013 and 2015 -- i.e., at the earlier
times, some material was approaching us about 100 km s$^{-1}$ faster.
A careful comparison of Figures
\ref{fig:niii2002} and \ref{fig:niii2013} shows the
same effect for the main peak in the \ion{N}{3}] multiplet.   This
velocity change is substantial, even though it appears inconspicuous
in the figures.  If these were permitted lines, P Cyg absorption
would obscure that part of the emission profile.

   \vspace{1mm}

The above effect might indicate a diminished wind speed;
but another, more interesting explanation involves the geometry
of the shocks.   Consider an emission line that originates
in or near the shocked region, in gas flowing
roughly parallel to a pseudo-hyperboloid surface like
boundary \underline{3-4} in Figure \ref{fig:zones}.
(In {\S}\ref{subsec:niiid} we called it an umbrella.)
Further suppose that our line of sight direction (L.O.S.) was
just within the opening angle of the pseudo-hyperboloid at those
times -- i.e., HST viewed the umbrella obliquely from its
concave side.  Then the most extreme negative Doppler
velocities originate in the region where the flow is almost
anti-parallel to the L.O.S.\/ -- the near side of the umbrella.
Due to gradual weakening of the primary wind, the shock's opening
angle should have widened between 2002 and 2015.
This trend increased the projection angle between the
flow velocity and the anti-L.O.S.;  thereby causing the observed
effect on the short-wavelength side of the Doppler profile.
An increase of the opening angle can have a similar effect on
emission from primary wind region \underline{3} in Figure \ref{fig:zones},
for partially different reasons.  If an explanation
in this vein is correct, then the total opening angle of the
shocked zone must have increased by at least 20$^\circ$.

    \vspace{1mm}

Alternative explanations can be devised, but in any case
this velocity effect is one example of the range of questions
that a realistic {\it evolving } model needs to answer.

  \vspace{1mm}

    \vspace{3mm}

\section{Absorption lines and vanishing material}
\label{sec:abslines}

   \vspace{1mm}

Unlike visual wavelengths, the UV has many permitted transitions from
well-populated levels near the ground states.  Even small amounts of
material can thus form strong absorption features.  In $\eta$ Car's
spectrum, they show rapidly declining column densities of
several ion species.

     \vspace{1mm}

Low-ionization absorption lines can occur at large distances from the
primary star,  and many component velocities have been listed, e.g.,
by \citet{gu06}.  In the time
interval from 2002 to 2015, material flowing outward from $\eta$ Car
could move through distances of the order of 1000 AU.
Here we examine only a few definite features
seen at $t = 2002.51$ and 2013.82.  Other lines, and the data from 2004
and 2015, are  consistent with these findings.

 \begin{figure}

 \plotone{fig12.eps}
 \caption{The \ion{Fe}{2} $\lambda$1618 absorption feature
    in 2002 and 2013.  The zero-velocity absorption is interstellar,
    and the broad absorption on the right side is a different line.
    Horizontal marks at the sides indicate
    $f_\lambda = 4 \times 10^{-12}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ {\AA}$^{-1}$,
    not corrected for extinction. }
 \label{fig:1617A}
 \end{figure}

   \vspace{1mm}

Figure \ref{fig:1617A} shows \ion{Fe}{2} $\lambda$1618 absorption.
One vertical line marks the lab wavelength and interstellar absorption,
while another indicates Doppler velocity $-500$ km s$^{-1}$.
Very strong  absorption extended from $-520$ to $-420$ km s$^{-1}$ in
2002, but eleven years later the longer-wavelength half of this
interval had become nearly transparent.  Column densities also
declined in velocity ranges $-420$ to $-360$ km s$^{-1}$
and $-200$ to $-100$ km s$^{-1}$.  Quantitative assessments would
be complicated, but Figure \ref{fig:1617A} strongly suggests that
{\it the optical depth fell to less than half of its initial value\/}
at most velocities between $-470$ and $-100$ km s$^{-1}$.  A similar
decrease may have occurred between $-520$ and $-470$ km s$^{-1}$,
but if so it was undetectable because the optical depth there
remained large.

   \vspace{1mm}

\ion{Ni}{2} $\lambda$1752, which obscures the \ion{N}{3}] profile
at 1749 {\AA}, exhibits the same tendencies;  compare Figures
\ref{fig:niii2002} and \ref{fig:niii2013}.  This weaker line
shows that the amount of material at $-350$ to $-100$ km s$^{-1}$
was small compared to the main outflow;  but here we emphasize
the consistent trends.  Near the left edge of
Figures \ref{fig:niii2002} and \ref{fig:niii2013} one can see a
stronger \ion{Ni}{2} line with similar changes.  These effects
appear to be consistent among the numerous low-ionization UV
absorption lines.

    \vspace{1mm}

The strong \ion{Al}{2} $\lambda$1671 and \ion{Al}{3}
${\lambda}{\lambda}$1855,1863 lines have unique qualities for
this subtopic.  Al$^+$ coexists with H$^0$ and Fe$^+$, while Al$^{++}$
coexists with H$^+$ and Fe$^{++}$;  but these aluminum ions have much
simpler spectra than \ion{Fe}{2} and \ion{Fe}{3}.  Instead of hundreds
of confused features, they show only the three lines named above --
all arising from ground level, with strong oscillator strengths
$f_{ij} \approx$ 1.77, 0.56, and 0.28.  Moreover, we can
employ the fact that \ion{Al}{3} $\lambda$1855 is
intrinsically twice as strong as $\lambda$1863.

    \vspace{1mm}
 \begin{figure}

 \plotone{fig13.eps}
 \caption{The \ion{Al}{2} $\lambda$1671 absorption feature in the years
    2002 and 2013.  Horizontal marks at the sides indicate
    $f_\lambda = 4 \times 10^{-12}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ {\AA}$^{-1}$,
    not corrected for extinction.  The data have a gap around
    1671.5 {\AA} because two echelle orders did not overlap. }
 \label{fig:1670A}
 \end{figure}
 \begin{figure}

 \plotone{fig14.eps}
 \caption{\ion{Al}{3} ${\lambda}{\lambda}$1855,1863 absorption
     features seen in 2002 and 2013.  The vertical dashed line at
     $-250$ km s$^{-1}$ is a guide for noting a subfeature
     noted in the text.  Horizontal markers at the sides indicate
     $f_\lambda = 4 \times 10^{-12}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ {\AA}$^{-1}$,
     not corrected for extinction. }
 \label{fig:aliii}
 \end{figure}

These features are shown in Figures \ref{fig:1670A} and
\ref{fig:aliii}, and together they support a particular
chain of reasoning.  First, the changes in \ion{Al}{2}
$\lambda$1671 were consistent with the \ion{Fe}{2} and \ion{Ni}{2}
trends;  absorption decreased at velocities between
$-420$ and $-150$ km s$^{-1}$.  But the next point is less
routine:  {\it The \ion{Al}{3} profile in 2013 nearly matched
that of \ion{Al}{2} in 2002!}  (Compare the two figures.
The $\lambda$1671 tracing has a data gap between $+50$ and
$+200$ km s$^{-1}$ which probably hides an emission peak,
but this does not affect its absorption part.)  If we view only
this striking resemblance by itself, an obvious interpretation
is that  some gas became more highly ionized.

    \vspace{1mm}

However, the \ion{Al}{3} lines then lead to an intricate
puzzle with potentially major implications.  Figure \ref{fig:aliii}
shows a declining, not increasing, column density of
Al$^{++}$.  In both 2002 and 2013, that quantity appears to have
been {\it larger} than the Al$^+$ column density in the velocity range
where a difference can be detected.  Now, consider the local brightness
maximum (i.e., absorption minimum) between $-350$ and
$-200$ km s$^{-1}$, marked by vertical lines in Fig. \ref{fig:aliii}.
It was conspicuous in \ion{Al}{2} in 2002, and in \ion{Al}{3} in 2013.
Judging from the overall appearance
of this subfeature,  one would naively guess that optical depths
in that velocity range were moderately small when it was visible.
However: both \ion{Al}{3} lines represent precisely the same
material, and the $\lambda$1855 line has an oscillator strength
twice as large as for $\lambda$1863. Therefore the optical depth
$\tau(-250 \; \mathrm{km} \; \mathrm{s}^{-1})$ should have
been visibly larger in the $\lambda$1855 feature. Hence
the bump should have been appreciably fainter or less prominent
in the \ion{Al}{3} $\lambda$1855 line compared to $\lambda$1863,
contrary to  observations.

   \vspace{1mm}

How can we explain this discrepancy?  A hypothetical ``extra emission''
source for the bump would be implausible, since the emissivities differ
greatly among the three \ion{Al}{2} and \ion{Al}{3} lines.
The UV halo \citep{hi06} does not provide a simple explanation, since
the two \ion{Al}{3} features almost certainly depend on optical depth
$\tau(v)$ even if it refers to scattering paths
rather than a direct line of sight.  If this were not true, then the
changing structure in Figure \ref{fig:aliii} would be very hard to
understand.  Hence the $\lambda$1863 line should appear different from
$\lambda$1855 even if one cannot predict the details.\footnote{

  The arguments concerning optical depth in {\S}\ref{subsec:contin_a} do
  not apply here, because they applied only to the general appearance
  of the \ion{Fe}{2} forest with fairly large optical depths.  The
  problems in this section refer, instead, to particular velocity
  intervals in particular lines, where the optical depths ceased
  to be large. }
We propose the following idea, which significantly affects the
small-scale geometry of the situation.
Suppose that the brightness in these absorption lines between $-100$ and
$-350$ km s$^{-1}$   depends chiefly on area covering factors, rather than
a simple optical depth.  In this scenario, part of the projected area
is quite dark at those wavelengths because it is optically thick,
but another part is almost free of Al$^+$ and Al$^{++}$.
Since velocities depend on location, the area covering factor is
a function of Doppler velocity.
The resulting $\lambda$1855 and $\lambda$1863 absorption
profiles should look alike, as observed.  With a few
additional assumptions, this concept may partially explain
the resemblance   between \ion{Al}{2} in 2002 and \ion{Al}{3}
in 2013.  Note that this problem involves tiny amounts of material
in the stated velocity range.  Since the required optical depths
imply scarcely more than 0.1\% of the expected outflow of
aluminum ions in our direction, perhaps we should be
surprised that these absorption lines are not dark at all
wavelengths from zero to $-600$ km s$^{-1}$.

     \vspace{1mm}

In summary, the above discussion has an obvious underlying thread:
{\it In each absorption feature, at almost every velocity where
the optical depths are suitable for detecting a change in column
density, a decrease was seen} -- and it generally appeared to be
of the order of 50\% in 11 years, not 10\% or 20\%.
This was not merely an ionization effect, since it includes both
Al$^+$ and Al$^{++}$.  We can safely assume that these represent
most of the aluminum in the absorption-line regions, because
the next ionization stage Al$^{+3}$ would require a considerable
flux of helium-ionizing photons above 28 eV, at distances far
from the star.

    \vspace{3mm}

\section{Summary}
\label{sec:sum}

Above we have presented an initial survey of some particular
HST UV observations of $\eta$ Car.  The results fall into
three categories;
(1) the star's rapid change of state,
(2) morphology of gas flows across a wide range  of size scales, and
(3) strange features that are not easy to explain.

\subsection{$\eta$ Car's rapid secular trends}
\label{subsec:sum1}

As noted in {\S}\ref{sec:intro}, we consider the change of state
to be the main development in this topic since 2000, because it
relates to   stellar structure and giant-eruption instability.   The
UV results outlined in this paper expand the variety of evidence.

    \vspace{1mm}

Figures 4-6, 10, and 12-14 show many large changes in 2002-2015.
Circumstellar UV extinction decreased by 30\% or more along our
line of sight
({\S}\ref{sec:contin} above).  Absorption lines indicate that column
densities greatly decreased at almost every Doppler velocity where
a change would be detectable, and practically vanished at some
velocities ({\S}\ref{sec:abslines}).  This statement includes Al$^{++}$,
not just singly-ionized species.  These results are consistent with
trends seen at longer wavelengths \citep{mar06b,mar10,me10b,me12,da15}.
In addition, the short-wavelength sides of some emission line profiles
shifted between 2004 and 2013 ({\S}\ref{sec:emlines}).

    \vspace{1mm}

If one wishes to explain the observed facts without a major change in
$\eta$ Car's wind, it is necessary to invoke multiple hypotheses.
$(a)$ Our line of sight must be abnormal in showing major decreases
in extinction and line absorption.
$(b)$ Low-excitation emission lines -- whose appearance depends
only mildly on viewing direction --  must be very sensitive to minor
changes in the star and its wind.
$(c)$ Some third idea must account for spectacular changes in the
nature of periastron events from 1998 to 2014 \citep{da05,da15,me11,me15}.
$(d)$ Velocity profiles of semi-forbidden emission lines (which are not
complicated by P Cyg absorption) changed in a particular way noted in
{\S}\ref{sec:emlines} above.
Each of these points can individually be explained with its own
special hypothesis, but we would need to accept all of them
together.

   \vspace{1mm}

{\it It is simpler to deduce, instead, that the stellar wind has
diminished by a significant amount} -- e.g., by roughly 50\%
since the earliest STIS observations in 1998.  That one
hypothesis, perhaps including a change in the latitude dependence,
can explain nearly all of the observed effects -- see
\citet{da12,me12,mar06a} and references therein.  It
strongly suggests a progressive alteration in the stellar
radius and/or surface rotation and/or luminosity.

     \vspace{10mm}

\subsection{Morphology of the emission regions, and numerical simulations}

\label{subsec:sum2}

Eta Car produces an extraordinary amount of \ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750
emission, carrying about as much energy as the entire stellar wind.
In {\S}\ref{subsec:niiib} we used the \ion{N}{3}] multiplet ratios
to estimate a
characteristic gas density $n_e \sim 10^{11}$ cm$^{-3}$,  about two
orders of magnitude denser than the primary wind in that vicinity.
The high density implies that \ion{N}{3}] $\lambda$1750
originates in condensations within the colliding-wind shocked region.
If our density estimate is seriously wrong, then the \ion{N}{3}]
and \ion{He}{1} emission lines probably occur in a region of the
primary wind, zone  \underline{3} in Figure \ref{fig:zones}.

   \vspace{1mm}

As outlined in {\S}\ref{subsec:niiic}, thermal instability should
produce small dense ``cloudlets'' in the shocked gas.  The observed
strength of \ion{N}{3}] emission, combined with the high density noted
above, appears to confirm that this does happen and shows that the
cloudlets are not immediately destroyed.  Roughly $10^5$ to
$10^7$ cloudlets are required in order to convert most of the secondary
star's helium-ionizing photons into \ion{N}{3}] and other emission.
(Filamentary condensations can be regarded as strings of cloudlets.)

    \vspace{1mm}

Thus, a valid global model of the shocked region requires more
than $10^8$ adaptive sample points,  with many time steps
in the densest locales.  A more practical approach, of course, is
to produce local simulations of a few hundred cloudlets and combine
them with a lower-resolution global flow model -- but we are not
aware of efforts like that for this object.  Published accounts of
calculations for $\eta$ Car's shocked region (e.g. \citealt{cl15})
have not described the small-scale morphology with densities
$n_e \sim 10^{11}$ cm$^{-3}$.

     \vspace{1mm}

Realistic models will need additional effects.  For instance, both winds
are generally thought to be inhomogeneous with dense ``clumps.''  When
a clump enters the shocked region, it may penetrate to a considerable
distance like a raindrop falling on soft snow, with a density-enhanced
cooling rate.  On the secondary wind side, this effect should
increase the observable X-ray luminosity and tends to
destabilize the shock front.  On the primary side, it may determine
the size, number, and morphology of cloudlets.  A simple filling
factor is not adequate for modeling the winds!  Meanwhile, since
cloudlet formation entails a large density compression factor,
magnetic pressures and tensions are likely to be significant.
Models of the primary wind are presumably more robust, but similar
doubts apply to them as well. They neglect details of the inhomogeneities
and other phenomena, and they have simplified geometries.
In summary, {\it existing numerical simulations of $\eta$ Car's outflows
should be regarded as preliminary sketches, not accurate models.}

    \vspace{1mm}

In {\S}\ref{subsec:niiid} and {\S}\ref{sec:emlines} we mentioned
some details that relate to large-scale morphology.  They concern
emission line profiles and very likely the opening angle
of the shocked region;  see those sections.  Velocity components
within the absorption lines ({\S}\ref{sec:abslines}) represent
structures in the outflow, but without other information their
locations are conjectural.

\subsection{A major unexplained feature}
\label{subsec:sum3}

In 2003-2004, there was a huge amount of  \ion{N}{3}] emission
at velocities around $+800$ km s$^{-1}$
({\S}\ref{subsec:niiie} and Fig. \ref{fig:niii2002}).  Such a large
{\it recession} velocity is unusual in $\eta$ Car, and the
associated luminosity was extraordinary.  We suspect that it
was related to a burst of mass ejection in the 2003.5 periastron
event (cf.\ \citealt{mar06a}), but we do not understand its
excitation.  A similar but weaker feature probably existed
in 2015 (Fig. \ref{fig:niii2013}),  and possibly in 2002.

    \vspace{1mm}

Helium-ionizing EUV from the hot secondary star is probably the
only available energy source for this type of emission, but it
requires a clear path between that star and the receding gas on
the far side of the primary, with no intervening part of the
primary wind.  The system's large-scale spiral pattern might
provide such a path
-- see, e.g., the fourth panel in Figure 3 of \citet{pa09}.
However, only a very small fraction of the secondary star's EUV
goes in that direction, so the energy budget is doubtful.

    \vspace{1mm}

Theorists who enjoy unorthodox models may be able to devise
other ways to excite this strange  \ion{N}{3}] emission.
For instance, the latitude-dependent primary star might
conceivably have a hot equatorial zone providing EUV.
Our main point here, though, is twofold:  This feature
constitutes a fascinating puzzle, and its high velocities
may be significant regarding the periastron
spectroscopic event.

    \vspace{1mm}

Finally, we emphasize two facts. (1) This paper has been essentially
a reconnaissance.  Many features in the data have been omitted here,
and no elaborate models have been employed.
(2) HST observed $\eta$ Car in the UV on several other occasions,
ignored here because their orbit phases were unsuitable for
our present purpose.   {\it The entire HST UV  data set
on this object contains enough material for many investigations
in a variety of interesting and significant problems.}

     \vspace{4mm}

   ---   ---   ---
   \vspace{1mm}

{\it Acknowledgements --}
We are grateful to A. Mehner for many contributions;  she was the P.I.
for HST programs GO 13377 and 13789 which obtained the UV spectra in
2013 and 2015.  As always, we appreciate the excellent help given by
B. Periello and other STScI staff members in planning and scheduling
the HST observations.  K.I. was supported by Grant-in-Aid for
Scientific Research (C) (JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP26400227).

Solar and Stellar Astrophysics (astro-ph.SR)