arXiv subjects

Yu. I. Yermolaev

Publications and source records attributed to Yu. I. Yermolaev.

21 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

arXiv2008

Comment on "Geoeffectiveness of halo coronal mass ejections" by N. Gopalswamy, S. Yashiro, and S. Akiyama

Comment on paper: Gopalswamy, N., S. Yashiro, and S. Akiyama (2007), Geoeffectiveness of halo coronal mass ejections, J. Geophys. Res., 112, A06112, doi:10.1029/2006JA012149 Gopalswamy et al. [2007] studied the geoeffectiveness of halo coronal mass ejections (CMEs) on the basis of solar observations during 1996-2005 and found that the geoeffectiveness of 229 frontside halo CMEs was 71%. Recently for observations of 305 frontside halo CMEs during 1997-2003 the geoeffectiveness was found to be 40% [Kim et al., 2005]. Complex analysis of both solar and interplanetary measurements showed that the geoeffectiveness of frontside halo CMEs is likely to be about 50% [Yermolaev et al., 2005; Yermolaev and Yermolaev, 2006]. Gopalswamy et al. [2007] did not discuss possible causes of this difference and were limited only to the general words: "The reason for the conflicting results (geoeffectiveness of CMEs ranging from 35% to more than 80%) may be attributed to the different definition of halo CMEs and geoeffectiveness." So, here we shall present our point of view on high geoeffectivenees of CME obtained in paper by Gopalswamy et al. [2007].

physics.space-ph↗

arXiv2006

Comment on "A statistical comparison of solar wind sources of moderate and intense geomagnetic storms at solar minimum and maximum" by Zhang, J.-C., M. W. Liemohn, J. U. Kozyra, M. F. Thomsen, H. A. Elliott, and J. M. Weygand, JGR, 2006

Conditions in the solar wind resulting in magnetic storms on the Earth are a subject of long and intensive investigations. Recently Zhang et al. (2006), published a paper, where they used superposed epoch analyses method to study solar wind features during 549 geomagnetic storms. Unfortunately, the used methodical approach has not allowed to improve essentially understanding of relation of magnetic storms with conditions in the solar wind, and first of all for the following reasons: (1) they did not take into account of existance of storms generated by different types of solar wind, and (2) they took minimum Dst index time as epoch zero time rather than storm onset.

physics.space-ph↗

arXiv2006

Geomagnetic storm dependence on the solar flare class

Content. Solar flares are often used as precursors of geomagnetic storms. In particular, Howard and Tappin (2005) recently published in A&A a dependence between X-ray class of solar flares and Ap and Dst indexes of geomagnetic storms which contradicts to early published results. Aims. We compare published results on flare-storm dependences and discuss possible sources of the discrepancy. Methods. We analyze following sources of difference: (1) different intervals of observations, (2) different statistics and (3) different methods of event identification and comparison. Results. Our analysis shows that magnitude of geomagnetic storms is likely to be independent on X-ray class of solar flares.

physics.space-ph↗