Balloon-borne observations of the galactic positron fraction during solar minimum negative polarity

Similar documents
JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 114, A02103, doi: /2008ja013689, 2009

What Voyager cosmic ray data in the outer heliosphere tells us about 10 Be production in the Earth s polar atmosphere in the recent past

Temporal and spectral variations of anomalous oxygen nuclei measured by Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 in the outer heliosphere

Solar wind termination shock and heliosheath effects on the modulation of protons and antiprotons

Monthly Proton Flux. Solar modulation with AMS. Veronica Bindi, AMS Collaboration

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Charge sign dependence of cosmic ray modulation near a rigidity of 1 GV

Anomalous cosmic rays in the distant heliosphere and the reversal of the Sun s magnetic polarity in Cycle 23

Evaluation of Galactic Cosmic Rays Models Using AMS2 Data. Francis F. Badavi 1. Christopher J. Mertens 2 Tony C. Slaba 2

Correlation between energetic ion enhancements and heliospheric current sheet crossings in the outer heliosphere

Caltech, 2 Washington University, 3 Jet Propulsion Laboratory 4. Goddard Space Flight Center

1. New Mexico State University, Department of Astronomy, Las Cruces, NM 88003, USA

The PAMELA Satellite Experiment: An Observatory in Space for Particles, Antiparticles and Nuclei in the Cosmic Rays

PoS(IDM2010)013. Antiproton and Electron Measurements and Dark Matter Searches in Cosmic Rays. Piergiorgio Picozza.

THE UNFOLDING OF THE SPECTRA OF LOW ENERGY GALACTIC COSMIC RAY H AND HE NUCLEI AS THE VOYAGER 1 SPACECRAFT EXITS THE REGION OF HELIOSPHERIC MODULATION

The Energetic Particle Populations of the Distant Heliosphere

W.R. Webber 1 and P.R. Higbie New Mexico State University, Department of Astronomy, Las Cruces, NM 88003, USA

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 108, NO. A9, 1355, doi: /2003ja009863, 2003

Geomagnetic cutoff simulations for low-energy cosmic rays

Experimental review of high-energy e e + and p p spectra

Spectra of Cosmic Rays

Results from the PAMELA Space Experiment

Space Physics / Plasma Physics at BRI

Energy Spectrum of all Electrons and Positron Fraction

DIETRICH MÜLLER University of Chicago SLAC SUMMER INSTITUTE 2011

Long-term Modulation of Cosmic Ray Intensity in relation to Sunspot Numbers and Tilt Angle

Tri-diurnal anisotropy of cosmic ray daily variation for the solar cycle 23

Correlative Study of Solar Activity and Cosmic Ray Intensity Variations during Present Solar Cycle 24 in Comparison to Previous Solar Cycles

Propagation in the Galaxy 2: electrons, positrons, antiprotons

Effects of the solar wind termination shock and heliosheath on the heliospheric modulation of galactic and anomalous Helium

Production of the cosmogenic isotopes 3 H, 7 Be, 10 Be, and 36 Cl in the Earth s atmosphere by solar and galactic cosmic rays

1939 Baade&Zwicky 1949 Fermi 1977 (Krymski; Axford; Bell; Blandford & Ostriker

arxiv:hep-ph/ v1 5 Apr 1993

W.R. Webber. New Mexico State University, Astronomy Department, Las Cruces, NM 88003, USA

Primary Cosmic Ray Fluxes at Various Solar Activities

Modelling cosmic ray intensities along the Ulysses trajectory

magnetic reconnection as the cause of cosmic ray excess from the heliospheric tail

Solar Energetic Particles measured by AMS-02

Measurements in Interstellar Space of Galactic Cosmic Ray Isotopes of. Li, Be, B and N, Ne Nuclei Between MeV/nuc by the

What Can GLAST Say About the Origin of Cosmic Rays in Other Galaxies

arxiv:astro-ph/ v3 21 Apr 2007

arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.he] 2 Aug 2014

Observations with the Mini Neutron Monitor at Sierra Negra, Mexico

Theoretical Assessment of Aircrew Exposure to Galactic Cosmic Radiation Using the FLUKA Monte Carlo Code

Propagation of Cosmic rays in the Heliosphere and in the Earth magnetic field

Current and Future balloon and space experiments L. Derome (LPSC Grenoble) Tango, May 4-6th, 2009

Voyager observations of galactic and anomalous cosmic rays in the helioshealth

The positron and antiproton fluxes in Cosmic Rays

W.R. Webber. New Mexico State University, Astronomy Department, Las Cruces, NM 88003, USA

Supernova Remnants as Cosmic Ray Accelerants. By Jamie Overbeek Advised by Prof. J. Finley

particle acceleration in reconnection regions and cosmic ray excess from the heliotail

R(p,t) sensitivity P o (GV)

New results from the AMS experiment on the International Space Station. Henning Gast RWTH Aachen

A Study of the B/C Ratio Between 10 MeV/nuc and 1 TeV/nuc in. Cosmic Rays Using New Voyager and AMS-2 Data and a Comparison with

a cosmic- ray propagation and gamma-ray code

Antimatter in Space. Mirko Boezio INFN Trieste, Italy. PPC Torino July 14 th 2010

Solar Wind Turbulent Heating by Interstellar Pickup Protons: 2-Component Model

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

COSMIC-RAY ENERGY CHANGES IN THE HELIOSPHERE. II. THE EFFECT ON K-CAPTURE ELECTRON SECONDARIES

Antimatter research in space

Indirect Dark Matter search in cosmic rays. F.S. Cafagna, INFN Bari

Gamma ray and antiparticles (e + and p) as tools to study the propagation of cosmic rays in the Galaxy

NASA Balloon programs AESOP-lite and ANITA John Clem University of Delaware

W.R. Webber 1, N. Lal 2, E.C. Stone 3, A.C. Cummings 3 and B. Heikkila 2

Electron Polar Cap and the Boundary oœ Open Geomagnetic Field Lines

2-D Modelling of Long Period Variations of Galactic Cosmic Ray Intensity

Topics. 1. Towards a unified picture of CRs production and propagation: 2. AMS-02 good candidates for Dark Matter space search

Five Years of PAMELA in orbit

Justin Vandenbroucke (KIPAC, Stanford / SLAC) for the Fermi LAT collaboration

Searching for signatures of nearby sources of Cosmic rays in their local chemical composition

Comparative study of solar and geomagnetic indices for the solar cycle 22 and 23 C. M Tiwari Dept. of Physics, APS University, Rewa (M. P.

Antimatter and DM search in space with AMS Introduction. 2 Cosmology with Cosmic Rays

arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.he] 28 Aug 2015

Mesoscale Variations in the Heliospheric Magnetic Field and their Consequences in the Outer Heliosphere

A new mechanism to account for acceleration of the solar wind

Dark Matter Searches with AMS-02. AMS: Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer

arxiv: v1 [astro-ph] 17 Nov 2008

New Calculation of Cosmic-Ray Antiproton and Positron Flux

Title: AMPLITUDE OF SOLAR CYCLE 24 BASED ON POLAR MAGNETIC FIELD OF THE SUN

Antiparticle detection in space for dark matter search: the PAMELA experiment.

The Two Sources of Solar Energetic Particles

Study of High Energy Cosmic Ray Anisotropies with Solar and Geomagnetic Disturbance Index

Evidence of Stochastic Acceleration of Secondary. Antiprotons by Supernova Remnants! Ilias Cholis, 08/09/2017

AMS-02 Antiprotons Reloaded

Lags, hysteresis, and double peaks between cosmic rays and solar activity

Antimatter and dark matter: lessons from ballooning.

The vertical cut-off rigidity means that charged particle with rigidity below this value cannot reach the top of atmosphere because of the earth's

W.R. Webber 1 and D.S. Intriligator 2

The electron spectrum from annihilation of Kaluza-Klein dark matter in the Galactic halo

Limitations of the force field equation to describe cosmic ray modulation

Lecture 14 Cosmic Rays

Spectral Intensities of Antiprotons and the Lifetime Of Cosmic Rays

Relationship between the neutron time delay distribution and the rigidity spectrum of primary cosmic rays up to 16.8 GV

The Cosmic Ray Boron/Carbon Ratio Measured at Voyager and at AMS-2 from 10 MeV/nuc up to ~1 TeV/nuc and a Comparison With Propagation Calculations

Heliospheric modulation of galactic cosmic rays: Effective energy of ground-based detectors

arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.he] 2 Jul 2009

Measurement of the Cosmic-ray Antiproton spectrum in the range 0.12 to 0.4 GeV with BESS-Polar II

Properties of Elementary Particle Fluxes in Cosmic Rays. TeVPA Aug. 7, Yuan-Hann Chang National Central University, Taiwan

BADHWAR O NEILL GALACTIC COSMIC RAY MODEL UPDATE BASED ON ADVANCED COMPOSITION EXPLORER (ACE) ENERGY SPECTRA FROM 1997 TO PRESENT

The High-Energy Interstellar Medium

Transcription:

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 114,, doi:10.1029/2009ja014225, 2009 Balloon-borne observations of the galactic positron fraction during solar minimum negative polarity John Clem 1 and Paul Evenson 1 Received 8 March 2009; revised 16 June 2009; accepted 1 July 2009; published 23 October 2009. [1] Galactic cosmic ray electrons and nuclei respond differently to solar modulation, with the differences directly related to the reversals of the solar magnetic field, which occur every 11 years. If the large-scale heliospheric magnetic field has certain types of structures, the charge sign of cosmic ray particles can affect their propagation. Careful study of the behavior of cosmic ray positrons, relative to negative electrons (which have identical masses), allows for a definitive separation of the effects due to charge sign from the other possible effects. As part of an ongoing investigation of charge sign dependence in solar modulation, cosmic ray positron fraction in the energy range of 0.6 to 4.5 GeV was measured on a balloon flight from Kiruna, Sweden, to Victoria Island, Canada, during 2 6 June 2006. Measurements from this flight are compared to previous results and current models. Citation: Clem, J., and P. Evenson (2009), Balloon-borne observations of the galactic positron fraction during solar minimum negative polarity, J. Geophys. Res., 114,, doi:10.1029/2009ja014225. 1. Introduction [2] The anticorrelation between cosmic ray fluxes and the level of solar activity (solar modulation) is caused by magnetic field fluctuations carried by the solar wind that scatter charged particles out of the solar system and/or decelerate them. Even though the sun has a complex magnetic field, the dipole term nearly always dominates the magnetic field in the solar wind. The projection of this dipole on the solar rotation axis (A) can be either positive, which we refer to as the A+ state, or negative, which we refer to as the A- state. At each sunspot maximum, the dipole reverses direction, leading to alternating magnetic polarity in successive solar cycles. [3] Electromagnetic theory has an absolute symmetry under simultaneous interchange of charge sign and magnetic field direction, but positive and negative particles can exhibit systematic differences in behavior when propagating through a magnetic field structure with nonuniform characteristics such as curvature and gradients. [4] The Parker field has opposite magnetic polarity above and below the helioequator, but the spiral field lines themselves are mirror images of each other. This asymmetry produces drift velocity fields that (for positive particles) converge on the heliospheric equator in the A+ state or diverge from it in the A- state [Jokipii and Levy, 1977]. Negatively charged particles behave in the opposite manner, and the drift patterns interchange when the solar polarity reverses. Primary cosmic ray electrons are predominantly negatively charged, even during the A+ polarity state, so 1 Bartol Research Institute, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, USA. Copyright 2009 by the American Geophysical Union. 0148-0227/09/2009JA014225$09.00 differential modulation of electrons and nuclei provides a direct way to study the large-scale nonuniformity in solar wind magnetic fields. [5] Since electrons and nuclei have greatly different charge/mass ratios, the relation of velocity and magnetic rigidity is very different for these two particle species. This ongoing study of the behavior of cosmic ray positrons, relative to negative electrons (which have an identical relationship between velocity and rigidity), definitively separates effects due to charge sign from that arising in velocity differences for the same particle rigidity. 2. New Observations [6] In this brief report we present observations of the positron abundance measured by the balloon borne AESOP instrument [Clem et al., 1996] launched 2 June 2006 from Esrange Base, Kiruna, Sweden and safely landed 7 June 2006 on Victoria Island, Canada. The instrument flew on a40 10 6 ft 3 light balloon that reached an altitude of 138 kft (2.3 mb) as shown in Figure 1. This flight provided the second observation of the positron abundance during a solar minimum A- polarity cycle with energies between 0.6 and 4.5 GeV [Fanselow et al., 1969]. Since the 2006 flight, the Pamela spacecraft has been launched into a polar orbit around the Earth and has provided the 3rd observation [Adriani et al., 2009]. [7] Spectral results from the AESOP flight are shown in Figure 2 (see also Table 1), compared with other data. Table 2 also provides a data compilation of observations from the AESOP flights. As expected, for observations made during an A- epoch, the positron abundance levels remain low but the errors are reduced compared to prior flights occurring during this polarity as a result of the longer flight and lower solar modulation level. The 2006 observations support the results from the 2000 and 2002 flights, which revealed a 1of5

Figure 1. The 2006 AESOP flight path. 2of5

Figure 2. The world summary of the positron abundance and calculations of the positron abundance as a function of energy for different epochs of solar magnetic polarity. Solid line is the modulated (charge sign independent, i.e., no drifts) abundance as calculated by Protheroe [1982]. Dashed lines are from Clem et al. [1996] for A+ (top line) and A- (bottom line). Solid symbols show data taken in the A+ state, while the open symbols represent data taken in the A- state. significant decrease in the positron abundance from the previous polarity state. Prior to publication of any observation made in the 1990s, Clem et al. [1996] made a specific prediction of the expected positron abundance for both positive and negative polarity states. This model is based on the leaky box calculation by Protheroe [1982] of the galactic positron abundance. Under the assumption that electrons and positrons behave symmetrically, Clem et al. [1996] examined electron fluxes at the same phase of successive solar cycles and then solved for the observed abundance as a function of rigidity in the two polarity states. This prediction is displayed as dashed lines in Figure 2. [8] In Figure 3 (left), measurements of the cosmic ray positron abundance at 1.25 GV (black symbols) are ordered in chronological order. This plot clearly reveals the significant decrease between 1999 and 2000 from the level that remained relatively constant throughout the prior magnetic polarity (1990s). Within measurement errors the abundance has remained constant since. The results at 1.25 GV suggest the predicted magnitude of the change may be somewhat too large as the high statistical precision of the new measurement may indicate a discrepancy. The Pamela observation at higher energies supports this as well [Adriani et al., 2009]. An analysis to understand this difference is currently ongoing. The goal is to develop a new physicsbased prediction that incorporates simultaneously a 3D solar modulation drift model and an updated local interstellar spectrum model that together better quantifies the relationship of fundamental parameters used to predict observables such as the positron abundance and antiproton/proton ratio Table 1. Explanation of References for Figure 2 Reference Platform Type and Observation Period Adriani et al. [2009] spacecraft: July 2006 to February 2008 Fanselow et al. [1969] balloon: five 1-day-duration flights 5 July, 5 August 1965; 10, 15, 26 June 1966 Daugherty et al. [1975] balloon: two 1-day flights, July 1972 Hartman and Pellerin [1976] balloon: two 1-day flights, 15 July, 3 August 1974 Golden et al. [1987] balloon: 20 May 1976 Barwick et al. [1997] balloon: 23 24 August 1995 Alcaraz et al. [2000] spacecraft: 2 12 June 1998 Boezio et al. [2000] balloon: 8 9 August 1994 Clem et al. [2000] balloon: 1 September 1997 and 29 August 1998 Clem and Evenson [2002] balloon: 16 August 1999 Clem and Evenson [2002] balloon: 25 August 2000 Clem and Evenson [2004] balloon: 13 14 August 2002 This work balloon: 2 6 June 2006 3of5

Table 2. Compiled Observations of the AESOP Flights Energy (GeV) e + /(e + +e ) Error 1997 and 1998 AESOP Flights 0.749275 1.525E-01 2.96E-02 1.24E+00 1.543E-01 2.54E-02 2.11E+00 1.124E-01 2.19E-02 3.48E+00 0.775E-01 2.24E-02 1999 AESOP Flight 2.79E-01 1.91E-01 8.95E-02 4.46E-01 2.00E-01 6.56E-02 7.31E-01 1.23E-01 3.31E-02 1.24E+00 1.38E-01 2.87E-02 2.11E+00 9.51E-02 2.59E-02 3.48E+00 1.11E-01 3.84E-02 2000 AESOP Flight 1.24E+00 5.39E-02 2.72E-02 2.11E+00 2.79E-02 1.58E-02 3.48E+00 7.05E-02 3.15E-02 2002 AESOP Flight 1.24E+00 4.93E-02 upper limit 2.11E+00 3.73E-02 1.80E-02 3.48E+00 4.17E-02 1.42E-02 2006 AESOP Flight 7.31E-01 4.37E-02 2.30E-02 1.24E+00 5.88E-02 1.55E-02 2.11E+00 4.25E-02 1.82E-02 3.48E+00 4.41E-02 2.10E-02 as a function of time [Burger et al., 2009; Pei et al., 2009; Yüksel et al., 2009]. Preliminary results are very promising, however more development is needed before it will be released as a model for general publication. [9] As shown in Figure 3 (right), the inverse effect is revealed in the antiproton/proton ratios at 1.3 GV (red circle symbols) measured by the BESS instrument. The structure in the antiproton/proton ratio model is significantly different from that of the positron abundance. This effect is primarily caused by the spectral differences of antiprotons and protons in the local interstellar medium resulting in a strong rigidity dependence in the ratio [Bieber et al., 1999]. Therefore, the antiproton/proton ratio spectrum observed at Earth modulates (due to adiabatic deceleration) much more than the positron abundance even though drift effects should be identical. 3. Summary [10] The cosmic ray positron abundance spectrum was measured on a 5-day balloon flight, launch from Kiruna, Sweden on 2 June. These observations confirm results from the 2000 and 2002 flights, which revealed a significant decrease in the positron abundance at the time of the solar polarity reversal. The high statistical precision of the 2006 flight results at 1.25 GV suggest the predicted magnitude of the decrease in the Clem et al. [1996] model may be somewhat too large. An ongoing effort to analyze this difference will hopefully provide an improved description of charge sign dependence in modulation [Burger et al., 2009; Pei et al., 2009; Yüksel et al., 2009]. Figure 3. Figure 3 (left) displays the time profile of the positron abundance observations with rigidities near 1.25 GV. Solid symbols show data taken in the A+ state, while the open symbols represent data taken in the A- state. Shaded rectangles represent periods of well-defined magnetic polarity. The black line is a positron abundance prediction based on the analysis of Clem et al. [1996]. Figure 3 (right) is the same as Figure 3 (left) with the antiproton ratio superimposed (red) at a rigidity of roughly 1.3 GV. The red line is an antiproton/proton ratio drift (steady state) model [Bieber et al., 1999] interpolated to 1.3 GV. The current sheet tilt angles used in the drift model were acquired from the Wilcox Solar Observatory database. Dashed lines represent the predicted results for future observations. The antiproton ratios were measured by the series of BESS flights [Asaoka et al., 2002; Mitchell et al., 2007]. 4of5

[11] Acknowledgments. This research is supported by NASA Award NASA grant NNG05WC08G. We thank Brian Lucas, Andrew McDermott, James Roth, and Leonard Shulman for their technical assistance in conducting the flights. We also thank the National Scientific Balloon Facility for our excellent series of flights and the Swedish Esrange Space Base staff for the great support. We also express gratitude to the BESS collaboration for permitting the use of the 2004 2005 BESS final results [Mitchell et al., 2007]. [12] Amitava Bhattacharjee thanks A. W. Strong and another reviewer for their assistance in evaluating this paper. References Adriani, O., et al. (2009), An anomalous positron abundance in cosmic rays with energies 1.5 100 GeV, Nature, 458, 607 609, doi:10.1038/ nature07942. Alcaraz, J., et al. (2000), Leptons in near Earth orbit, Phys. Lett. B, 484(10), doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(00)00588-8. Asaoka, Y., et al. (2002), Measurements of cosmic-ray low-energy antiproton and proton spectrum in a transient period of solar field reversal, Phys. Rev. Lett., 88, 051101, doi:10.1103/physrevlett.88.051101. Barwick, S. W., et al. (1997), The cosmic-ray electron and positron spectra measured at 1 AU during solar minimum activity, Astrophys. J., 482, L191, doi:10.1086/310706. Bieber, J. W., et al. (1999), Antiprotons at solar maximum, Phys. Rev. Lett., 83, 674, doi:10.1103/physrevlett.83.674. Boezio, M., et al. (2000), The cosmic-ray electron and positron spectra measured at 1 AU during solar minimum activity, Astrophys. J., 532, 653, doi:10.1086/308545. Burger, A., et al. (2009), Modeling the near-earth positron fraction, paper presented at 31st International Cosmic Ray Conference, Univ. of xódź, xódź, Poland. Clem, J., and P. Evenson (2002), Positron abundance in galactic cosmic rays, Astrophys. J., 568, 216, doi:10.1086/338841. Clem, J., and P. Evenson (2004), Observations of cosmic ray electrons and positrons during the early stages of the A- magnetic polarity epoch, J. Geophys. Res., 109, A07107, doi:10.1029/2003ja010361. Clem, J. M., et al. (1996), Solar modulation of cosmic electrons, Astrophys. J., 464, 507, doi:10.1086/177340. Clem, J. M., et al. (2000), Charge sign dependence of cosmic ray modulation near a rigidity of 1 GV, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 23,099, doi:10.1029/ 2000JA000097. Daugherty, J. K., R. C. Hartman, and P. J. Schmidt (1975), A measurement of cosmic ray positron and electron spectra between 50 and 800 MV, Astrophys. J., 198, 493, doi:10.1086/153626. Fanselow, J. L., et al. (1969), Charge composition and energy spectrum of primary cosmic-ray electrons, Astrophys. J., 158, 771, doi:10.1086/ 150236. Golden, R. L., S. A. Stephens, B. G. Mauger, G. D. Badhwar, R. R. Daniel, S. Horan, J. L. Lacy, and J. E. Zipse (1987), Observation of cosmic ray positrons in the region from 5 to 50 GeV, Astron. Astrophys., 188, 145. Hartman, R. C., and C. J. Pellerin (1976), Cosmic-ray positron and negatron spectra between 20 and 800 MeV measured in 1974, Astrophys. J., 204, 927, doi:10.1086/154241. Jokipii, J. R., and E. H. Levy (1977), Effects of particle drifts on the solar modulation of galactic cosmic rays, Astrophys. J., 213, L85, doi:10.1086/ 182415. Mitchell, J., et al. (2007), Solar modulation of low-energy antiproton and proton spectra measured by BESS, paper 1149 presented at 30th International Cosmic Ray Conference, Univ. Nac. Autón. de Méx.Merida, Mexico. Pei, C., et al. (2009), On a stochastic approach to cosmic-ray modulation, paper presented at 31st International Cosmic Ray Conference, Univ. of xódź, xódź, Poland. Protheroe, R. (1982), On the nature of the cosmic ray positron spectrum, Astrophys. J., 254, 391, doi:10.1086/159743. Yüksel, H., et al. (2009), TeV gamma rays from Geminga and the origin of the GeV positron excess, Phys. Rev. Lett., 103, 051101, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.103.051101. J. Clem and P. Evenson, Bartol Research Institute, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Delaware, 217 Sharp Laboratory, Newark, DE 19716, USA. (clem@bartol.udel.edu) 5of5