4.4 Article

Temporal and Spatial Evolutions of a Large Sunspot Group and Great Auroral Storms Around the Carrington Event in 1859

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2019SW002269

Keywords

sunspot; aurora; magnetic storm; Carrington event; extreme space weather event; solar-terrestrial relationship

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan [JP15H05814, JP18H01254, JP15H05816]
  2. mission project of the RISH in Kyoto University
  3. AFOSR [FA9550-17-10258]
  4. European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program [824135]
  5. [JP17J06954]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Carrington event is considered to be one of the most extreme space weather events in observational history within a series of magnetic storms caused by extreme interplanetary coronal mass ejections from a large and complex active region that emerged on the solar disk. In this article, we study the temporal and spatial evolutions of the source sunspot active region and visual aurorae and compare this storm with other extreme space weather events on the basis of their auroral spatial evolution. Sunspot drawings by Schwabe, Secchi, and Carrington describe the position and morphology of the source active region at that time. Visual auroral reports from the Russian Empire, Iberia, Ireland, Oceania, and Japan fill the spatial gap of auroral visibility and revise the time series of auroral visibility in middle to low magnetic latitudes. The reconstructed time series is compared with magnetic measurements and shows the correspondence between low-latitude to mid-latitude aurorae and the phase of magnetic storms. The spatial evolution of the auroral oval is compared with those of other extreme space weather events in 1872, 1909, 1921, and 1989 as well as their storm intensity and contextualizes the Carrington event, as one of the most extreme space weather events, but likely not unique.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available