4.2 Article Proceedings Paper

Storm time phase space density radial profiles of energetic electrons for small and large K values: SCATHA results

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jastp.2008.03.014

关键词

Magnetosphere; Radiation belts; Energetic electrons; Phase space density

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Measurements of the radial gradient of the phase space density (PSD) at constant first and second invariants provide a test of whether storm time electron acceleration processes are dominated by inward radial transport of electrons or whether other processes must be considered. We used the detailed energetic electron angular and spectral data from the SCATHA satellite to determine the evolution of electron PSD radial profiles through a moderate magnetic storm (2 May 1986: D(st) = -95 nT). We compared the changes that occur in the profiles in the storm recovery period to the pre-storm profiles for first invariant values M = 200-2500 MeV/G and for K values of 0.055-0.65 Re root G over the V range of similar to 5.2-7.3 Re. The PSD radial profiles showed a range of features from peaked in V at small K and M during the pre-storm period to those in the late storm recovery phase, that were flat, had negative slopes for small K and had peaks in the L* = 5.2-6.5 range for intermediate to large K. There were significant differences in the radial profiles for small and intermediate K values at constant M. For example, during the recovery period the PSD profiles were flat or decreasing for K = 0.06 and M > 1200 MeV/G, while they were peaked near L* = 5.75 for K > 0.2. These results imply that radial diffusion is a reasonable explanation of the near-equatorial post-storm PSD enhancements for L* > 5.2 for this storm but that either significant electron pitch angle transport, losses, and/or acceleration of off-equatorial mirroring electrons by waves play an important role in the evolution off-equator PSD profiles during the storm recovery. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据