Cosmic ray phenomena during the November 1960 solar disturbances

Roederer, Juan G.; Manzano, J. R.; Santochi, O. R.; Nerurkar, N. W.; Troncoso, O.; Palmeira, R. A. R.; Schwachheim, G.

doi:10.1029/jz066i006p01603

Cited by 15 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We were able to make some fundamental contributions, particularly to the study of the propagation of solar flare protons through interplanetary space and the effects of what was then called "magnetic bottles" on the galactic and solar components of cosmic radiation. We published a series of papers (Roederer et al, 1960, Roederer et al, 1963Roederer, 1964a) which had considerable impact, including on the media. As a matter of fact, I claim (until proven wrong) that our paper on the 1960 flare protons trapped in interplanetary space between two plasma shock boundaries (see sketch in Figure 4) was the first one presenting evidence of a coronal mass ejection.…”

Section: A Child Of the Igymentioning

confidence: 99%

Space Physics from Both Ends of the Americas, 1949–2019

Roederer

2019

JGR Space Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

though politically messed-up country and very Catholic-but I was baptized Protestant. So, I was assigned to an elective Bible class, separate from the official one. One day the teacher called my mother in for a conference and asked her to take me out of that course. Reason? Der fragt zuviel (he asks too many questions). Later, in high school in Argentina I hated history and literature classes, and in the university some lower division physics courses because they only taught me what, where, and when, but never why. This longing for the why continued during my entire life, first as a science student, then as a science teacher and researcher.I always preferred to explain old things rather than finding new ones. I always preferred pedagogy to discovery, ranking teaching higher than investigating. And in my teaching, I emphasized understanding more than knowing. I always preferred the foundations of a discipline to its applications. These most likely were the reasons for switching from experimentalist to theoretician early in my scientific career and for becoming an interdisciplinarian in science, branching into psychoacoustics and information theory-and also why as an academic administrator like institute director or dean, I always preferred explaining to the public and politicians why we were doing what, rather than peddling funding agencies for more research dollars. And in a more indirect way, it is the ultimate reason why I was so heavily involved during my entire career in international cooperation in science: If we wanted to find out why things happen the way they do in the geophysical world, we must ignore man-made boundaries.Space research in Argentina began in the late 1940s, in the historic downtown building of the School of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of the University of Buenos Aires. Well-not exactly: the term "space research," as we now understand it, really did not exist at that time. Everything above the ionosphere was thought to be deep vacuum, except for occasional ionized hot gas and energetic charged particle bursts associated with solar activity, a tenuous flux of ultra-high energy cosmic ray particles from who knows where in the Universe, and the dipole-like remnants of the Earth's internal magnetic field. The ground-based study of time variations of the surface magnetic field, cosmic rays, auroral displays, and radio wave propagation were the only techniques available to monitor the behavior of the particle emissions from the Sun. Therefore, if somebody had introduced the term "space research" at that time, he or she indeed would have legitimately included the study of the cosmic radiation flux as an integral part of it.In 1949 I and my high school sweetheart Beatriz Cougnet-now my wife of 67 years-were physics sophomores at the University of Buenos Aires. A young teaching assistant in the Physics Department, Estrella Mazzoli de Mathov, had just returned from an international cosmic ray conference in Brazil and with much enthusiasm was telling her students about the new projects and t...

show abstract

Section: A Child Of the Igymentioning

confidence: 99%

Space Physics from Both Ends of the Americas, 1949–2019

Roederer

2019

JGR Space Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This event was registrated with the IGY-monitors from Chacaltaya and Mina Aguilar and so an attempt is made to estimate an upper flux limit in order to check directly Lingenfelter's model calculations for the slowing down phase. The registrations, published by Roederer et al (1961) show, between 1400-1900 UT, a small peak of 1%. Monitors from higher geomagnetic latitudes show during this time interval a superimposed proton-event from the preceding day (Ehmert et al, 1963).…”

Section: August 28 (Pic-du-midi)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimation of an upper limit for the solar neutron emission during large flares

Kirsch¹

1973

Sol Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Solar neutron emission during large flares is investigated by using neutron monitor data from the mountain stations Chacaltaya (Bolivia), Mina Aguilar (Argentine), Pic-du-Midi (France) and Jungfraujoch (Switzerland). Registrations from such days on which large flares appeared around the local noon time of the monitor station are superimposed with the time of the optical flare as reference point.No positive evidence for a solar neutron emission was found with this method.. However, by using an extrapolation of the neutron transport functions given by AlsmiIler and Bouglmer a rough estimation of mean upper limits for the solar neutron flux is possible. The flux limits are compared with Lingenfelter's model calculations.From the Chacaltaya measurements it follows:and from Pic-du-Midi measurements:No ~< 6.7 • 10 3 Ncm-2 s-Z per proton flare, E> 50 MeV, if Po = 125 MV N0~<4 • E>50MeV, if Po--60MVP0 --characteristic rigidity of the producing proton spectrum on the Sun. The flux limits estimated for some special proton flares are consistent with Lingenfelter's predictions for the acceleration phase but are too small for the slowing down phase. Therefore it is believed that Lingenfelter's assumption of isotropic proton emission from the flare region is not fulfilled.

show abstract

“…It was of considerable interest that the solar cosmic ray flux suddenly disappeared after the arrival of this plasma cloud. It has deen found by Roederer et al (1961) that, by examining the energy spectrum of incoming particles, the steep spectrunm characteristic for solar cosmic rays disappeared and a shallow spectrum remained which is common for galactic cosmic rays.…”

Section: The Event Of November 20 1960mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Solar Geophysical Events of November 1960

Obayashi

1961

J. geomagn. geoelec

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cosmic ray phenomena during the November 1960 solar disturbances

Cited by 15 publications

References 7 publications

Space Physics from Both Ends of the Americas, 1949–2019

Space Physics from Both Ends of the Americas, 1949–2019

Estimation of an upper limit for the solar neutron emission during large flares

The Solar Geophysical Events of November 1960

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About