PROBLEMS OF GEOCOSMOS

Proceedings of the 7th International Conference "Problems of Geocosmos" (St. Petersburg, Russia, 26-30 May 2008)
Fig 5. Radial profiles measured by CORONAS-F spectrometer from October 27 to 30, 2003. Channels 1-5 MeV (left) and
14-26 MeV (right)
Fig 6 Storm-time variation during magnetic storms, July
2004
Fig. 7 Radial profiles of the 1.2 MeV protons,
SERVIS-1. All profiles were taken at the same
longitude over BMA.
25.07.04 Important changes of the radial profiles were registered after the main phase of the second magnetic
storm. Previously created proton belt disappeared because it was occupied by the region of the direct SCR
penetration, the quasitrapping region. What was the fate of this trapped protons – do they escaped from the
magnetopause into the solar wind or were lost by diffusion into the loss cone, or they survive due to the
radial diffusion from L=3.7 to L=3.2? Anyway, new proton belt was created during the initial part of the
recovery phase of the second storm.
26.07.04 Before the beginning of the last magnetic storm one can see that intensity of the proton belt
increased and maximum shifted a little earthward. That we can ascribe to the action of the recovery phase.
27.07.04 It seems that this new (solar) proton belt was too close to the Earth to be affected by the PB motion
during the main phase of the third magnetic storm. As was mentioned previously, there were no effects
indicating on the particle SC injection (see Fig. 2).
28-29.07.04 During the recovery phase of the third magnetic storm one can see an increase of the intensity
and earthward shift of the proton belt maximum.
It is evident from the radial profile transformation discussed above, that it was created and accelerated at the
recovery phase of the magnetic storm, not by the SC-injection.
6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
Process of the solar proton capture to the proton belt at L=2-3 was confirmed by the observation during
several magnetic storms, there are no doubts on the reality of this process. But there are different opinions on
the mechanisms of this process. We analyzed here two models which were discussed in publications.
156