ASYMMETRY VARIATIONS IN THE 24TH CYCLE OF SOLAR ACTIVITY

In May 2019 there was a long and sloping decreasing of cosmic ray’s intensity (up to ~4%), which was observed on neutron monitors. Despite this was a small decreasing compared to quasi-eleven-period variation, it stands out well in 24th cycle of solar activity. According to LASCO/SOHO and STEREO-A data from spectrometer in different UHF bands and from coronograph, there was a series of CMEs which affected on modulation of cosmic rays by creating a series of Forbush decrea - sing, which didn’t restore. This series was connected to two active regions on sun and began on April 30 from “reversed halo” CME. This CME didn’t reach the earth, but led to significant additional modulation of cosmic rays, mostly on east side. Later there was a series of smaller CMEs on May 1-6, which also didn’t reach the earth, but were gradually approaching to Earth. Recent CMEs on 8-9 and 12-13 created a normal Forbush decreasing. In May 2019, cosmic rays shown again, that they can collect information about distant objects of geliosphere and transmit it to Earth. The ground-level detectors sometimes can observe an interaction of interplanetary distur- bances, which didn‘t reach the earth. East CMEs are especially effective, because they closing magnetic field lines beyond the orbit of earth and can interfere the restoring of cosmic ray’s intensity.

Download Full-text

From Hector Mine M7.1 to Ridgecrest M7.1 Earthquake. A Look from a 20-Year Perspective

Atmosphere ◽

10.3390/atmos12020262 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 (2) ◽

pp. 262

Author(s):

Sergey Pulinets ◽

Marina Tsidilina ◽

Dimitar Ouzounov ◽

Dmitry Davidenko

Keyword(s):

Solar Activity ◽

Los Angeles ◽

Earthquake Precursor ◽

Abnormal Behavior ◽

Close Similarity ◽

High Solar Activity ◽

Essential Difference ◽

North East ◽

24Th Cycle ◽

Precursory Phenomena

The paper provides a comparative analysis of precursory phenomena in the ionosphere and atmosphere for two strong earthquakes of the same magnitude M7.1 that happened in the same region (North-East from Los Angeles) within a time span of 20 years, the Hector Mine and Ridgecrest earthquakes. Regardless of the similarity of their location (South-Eastern California, near 160 km one from another), there was one essential difference: the Hector Mine earthquake happened during geomagnetically disturbed conditions (essential in the sense of ionospheric precursors identification). In contrast, the quiet geomagnetic conditions characterized the period around the time of the Ridgecrest earthquake. The Hector mine earthquake happened in the middle of the rising phase of the 23-rd solar cycle characterized by high solar activity, while the Ridgecrest earthquake happened by the very end of the 24th cycle under very low solar activity conditions. We provide a comprehensive multi-factor analysis, determine the precursory period for both earthquakes and demonstrate the close similarity of ionospheric precursors. Unlike the majority of papers dealing with earthquake precursor identification based on the “abnormality” of observed time-series mainly determined by amplitude difference between “normal” (usually climatic) behavior and “abnormal” behavior with amplitudes exceeding some pre-established threshold, we used the technique of cognitive recognition of the precursors based on the physical mechanisms of their generation and the morphology of their behavior during the precursory period. These permits to uniquely identify precursors even in conditions of disturbed environment as it was around the time of the Hector Mine earthquake. We demonstrate the close similarity of precursors’ development for both events. The leading time of precursor appearance for the same region and similar magnitude was identical. For the Hector Mine it was 11 October 1999—5 days in advance—and for 2019 Ridgecrest it was 28 June—7 days before the mainshock and five days before the strongest foreshock.

Download Full-text