PROBLEMS OF GEOCOSMOS

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Proceedings of the 7th International Conference "Problems of Geocosmos" (St. Petersburg, Russia, 26-30 May 2008) The magnetic storm on 15-17 May 2005 The magnetic storm was produced by fast CME reaching the Earth's magnetosphere at ~3UT on 15 May 2005. Plasma density at shock front approached 18 cm -3 , bulk velocity was about 1000 km/sec. After inretplanetary magnetic field (IMF) southward turning the magnetic storm develops with peak Dst about - 260 nT. Strong auroral activity with AL
Proceedings of the 7th International Conference "Problems of Geocosmos" (St. Petersburg, Russia, 26-30 May 2008) Figure 2. SEP penetration boundary variations during geomagnetic storms in May 2005. Dst-variation is shown by solid line. Because the proton flux on the penetration boundary does not fall down abruptly, it is possible to apply different criteria to the analysis of the penetration boundary position. Along with (Kuznetsov et al., 2002), we have used the traditional for Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics Lomonosov Moscow State University criterion - twice below the maximum of the SEP flux. The values of penetration boundary obtained during the morning MLT are marked as open symbols, during evening MLT – as closed ones. The time variation of the Dst index is also shown in Figure 1 for comparison. We can see that penetration boundary variations correlate with Dst in accordance with (Panasyuk et al., 2004, Kuznetsov et al., 2005). The dashed line on the Fig. 2 represents the distance to the inner edge of the magnetospheric tail current – projection of the equatorward boundary of the auroral oval at midnight to the geomagnetic equator. This distance was obtained on the base of magnetic field calculations by paraboloid model of the Earth's magnetosphere (Alexeev et al., 2001). We can see that during storm maximum penetration boundary lies below the auroral oval in the region of trapped particles, while during recovery phase it shifts to the higher latitudes. Obviously, during magnetic storm main phase there exist the additional mechanisms transporting energetic particles from solar wind to magnetosphere on the closed L-shells. During storm maximum SEP approached latitudes corresponding L-shells about 2.5. It is accepted that SEP fluxes are measured in the region of open field lines, but latitudes with L=2.5 can be hardly associated with open magnetic field flux tube. It is interesting to compare the obtained results with those obtained from the other experimental sources or model calculations. Figure 3 represents auroral oval observed by IMAGE WIC instrument at 06:25:31 15 May 2005 (data from http://workshops.jhuapl.edu/s1/science.html), and SEP penetration boundary cross-sections by CORONAS-F satellite pass through the polar cap measured at 6.42 UT and 6.72 UT. These time moments correspond to the storm main phase. Electric field equipotentials in the polar cap calculated by mapping of electric potential from the magnetopause along the open field lines are shown by pink lines. They fill the area that can be associated with polar cap. We can see that SEP penetration boundary lies on the latitudes lower than not only the polar cap but also than whole auroral oval. The experimental data and the results of calculations in four time moments before the storm, during storm maximum and during recovery phase are presented in the Table 1. The values of the proton flux with the energy 1-5 MeV, magnetic local time (MLT), geographic latitude and longitude (LAT) (LON), magnetic latitude and longitude (MLAT), (MLON), experimental and calculated L-shell values are shown. The Lcoordinate of the ionospheric point is often considered as the distance to its projection to geomagnetic equator along the magnetic field line. 196
Page 1 and 2:
Saint-Petersburg State University P
Page 3 and 4:
Proc. of the 7th Intern. Conf. "Pro
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Î�ÒÙ×�ØØ��Ñ��Ò
Page 13 and 14:
Proceedings of the 7th Internationa
Page 15 and 16:
��ÒÓÛÐ��Ñ�ÒØ
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
(the first number), two three-lette
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
vertical fields. The vertical field
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154: Proceedings of the 7th Internationa
Page 171 and 172: 90 60 30 0 -30 -60 Proceedings of t
Page 203: Proceedings of the 7th Internationa
Page 241 and 242: a Proceedings of the 7th Internatio
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Introduction ON THE NATURE OF PLASM
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Vy Here index j =1,2 characterizes,
Page 311 and 312:
Jy Proceedings of the 7th Internati
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
Fig. 3. Dependence of 1D interpreta
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
Page 379 and 380:
Page 381 and 382:
Page 383 and 384:
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
Page 389 and 390:
Page 391 and 392:
Page 393 and 394:
Page 395 and 396:
Page 397 and 398:
Page 399 and 400:
Page 401 and 402:
Page 403 and 404:
Page 405 and 406:
Page 407 and 408:
Page 409 and 410:
Page 411 and 412:
Page 413 and 414:
Page 415 and 416:
Page 417 and 418:
Page 419 and 420:
Page 421 and 422:
Page 423 and 424:
Page 425 and 426:
Page 427 and 428:
Page 429 and 430:
Page 431 and 432:
Page 433 and 434:
Page 435 and 436:
Page 437 and 438:
Page 439 and 440:
Page 441 and 442:
Page 443 and 444:
Page 445 and 446:
Page 447 and 448:
Page 449 and 450:
Page 451 and 452:
Page 453 and 454:
Page 455 and 456:
Page 457 and 458:
Page 459 and 460:
Page 461 and 462:
Page 463 and 464:
Page 465 and 466:
Page 467 and 468:
Page 469:
Page 476 and 477:
Page 478 and 479:
Page 480 and 481:
Page 482 and 483:
Page 484 and 485:
Page 486 and 487:
Page 488 and 489:
Page 490 and 491:
Page 492 and 493:
Page 494 and 495:
2. Burlaga & Klein method. The main
Page 496 and 497:
Page 498 and 499:
Page 500 and 501:
Page 502 and 503:
Page 504 and 505:
show all

PROBLEMS OF GEOCOSMOS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?