4.3 Article Proceedings Paper

In search of a new ULF wave index: Comparison of Pc5 power with dynamics of geostationary relativistic electrons

Journal

PLANETARY AND SPACE SCIENCE
Volume 55, Issue 6, Pages 755-769

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pss.2006.03.013

Keywords

ULF waves; electron acceleration; plasma turbulence; magnetic storms

Funding

  1. Directorate For Geosciences
  2. Division Of Earth Sciences [0836152] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A new ULF wave index, characterizing the turbulent level of the geomagnetic field, has been calculated and applied to the analysis of relativistic electron enhancements during space weather events in March-May 1994 and September 1999. This global wave index has been produced from the INTERMAGNET, MACCS, CPMN, and Greenland dense magnetometer arrays in the northern hemisphere. A similar ULF wave index has been calculated using magnetometer data from geostationary (GOES) and interplanetary (Wind, ACE) satellites. During the periods analyzed several magnetic storms occurred, and several significant increases of relativistic electron flux up to 2-3 orders of magnitude were detected by geostationary monitors. However, these electron enhancements were not directly related to the intensity of magnetic storms. Instead, they correlated well with intervals of elevated ULF wave index, caused by the occurrence of intense Pc5 pulsations in the magnetosphere. This comparison confirmed earlier results showing the importance of magnetospheric ULF turbulence in energizing relativistic electrons. In addition to relativistic electron energization, a wide range of space physics and geophysics studies will benefit from the introduction of the ULF wave index. The ULF index database is freely available via anonymous FTP for all interested researchers for further validation and statistical studies. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available