author_facet Russell, C. T.
Russell, C. T.
author Russell, C. T.
spellingShingle Russell, C. T.
Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union
In defense of the term ICME
General Earth and Planetary Sciences
author_sort russell, c. t.
spelling Russell, C. T. 0096-3941 2324-9250 American Geophysical Union (AGU) General Earth and Planetary Sciences http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/01eo00266 <jats:p>As Burlaga [2001] correctly points out, the term “cloud” has been used for many years to describe solar wind disturbances. “Plasma cloud,” “magnetized plasma cloud,” and now “magnetic cloud” have all seen use. While the first two terms were rather inclusive in their definition, the last one is rather restrictive [<jats:italic>Burlaga et al</jats:italic>., 1981]. A magnetic cloud has to have a particular duration, a smooth rotation, strong magnetic field, and a low proton temperature. Thus, we are forced into adopting a separate name for many structures that do not fit this restrictive scheme. The term “ejecta” could be used, but there are two types of ejecta: flare ejecta and coronal mass ejecta. The latter term has been used extensively for the disturbance seen at 1 AU that arises in response to a coronal mass ejection (CME) detected at the Sun. This usage has led to some difficulties, because one line of research in this field is to compare the properties of CMEs in the corona with the disturbance seen later in the interplanetary medium. Both cannot be simply called CMEs, or confusion reigns. Thus arose the practice of using the term ICME for the interplanetary counterpart of a CME; e.g. [<jats:italic>Lindsay et al</jats:italic>., 1999; <jats:italic>Mulligan et al</jats:italic>., 1999a, b]. This term includes a wide variety of structures; in particular, structures missing one feature of a magnetic cloud, but clearly being associated with a CME on the Sun. While not every ICME detected has been identified with a specific CME, enough have that we can be confident of the association [e.g. <jats:italic>Lindsay et al</jats:italic>., 1999].</jats:p> In defense of the term ICME Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union
doi_str_mv 10.1029/01eo00266
facet_avail Online
Free
format ElectronicArticle
fullrecord blob:ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTAyOS8wMWVvMDAyNjY
id ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTAyOS8wMWVvMDAyNjY
institution DE-105
DE-14
DE-Ch1
DE-L229
DE-D275
DE-Bn3
DE-Brt1
DE-Zwi2
DE-D161
DE-Gla1
DE-Zi4
DE-15
DE-Pl11
DE-Rs1
imprint American Geophysical Union (AGU), 2001
imprint_str_mv American Geophysical Union (AGU), 2001
issn 0096-3941
2324-9250
issn_str_mv 0096-3941
2324-9250
language English
mega_collection American Geophysical Union (AGU) (CrossRef)
match_str russell2001indefenseofthetermicme
publishDateSort 2001
publisher American Geophysical Union (AGU)
recordtype ai
record_format ai
series Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union
source_id 49
title In defense of the term ICME
title_unstemmed In defense of the term ICME
title_full In defense of the term ICME
title_fullStr In defense of the term ICME
title_full_unstemmed In defense of the term ICME
title_short In defense of the term ICME
title_sort in defense of the term icme
topic General Earth and Planetary Sciences
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/01eo00266
publishDate 2001
physical 434-434
description <jats:p>As Burlaga [2001] correctly points out, the term “cloud” has been used for many years to describe solar wind disturbances. “Plasma cloud,” “magnetized plasma cloud,” and now “magnetic cloud” have all seen use. While the first two terms were rather inclusive in their definition, the last one is rather restrictive [<jats:italic>Burlaga et al</jats:italic>., 1981]. A magnetic cloud has to have a particular duration, a smooth rotation, strong magnetic field, and a low proton temperature. Thus, we are forced into adopting a separate name for many structures that do not fit this restrictive scheme. The term “ejecta” could be used, but there are two types of ejecta: flare ejecta and coronal mass ejecta. The latter term has been used extensively for the disturbance seen at 1 AU that arises in response to a coronal mass ejection (CME) detected at the Sun. This usage has led to some difficulties, because one line of research in this field is to compare the properties of CMEs in the corona with the disturbance seen later in the interplanetary medium. Both cannot be simply called CMEs, or confusion reigns. Thus arose the practice of using the term ICME for the interplanetary counterpart of a CME; e.g. [<jats:italic>Lindsay et al</jats:italic>., 1999; <jats:italic>Mulligan et al</jats:italic>., 1999a, b]. This term includes a wide variety of structures; in particular, structures missing one feature of a magnetic cloud, but clearly being associated with a CME on the Sun. While not every ICME detected has been identified with a specific CME, enough have that we can be confident of the association [e.g. <jats:italic>Lindsay et al</jats:italic>., 1999].</jats:p>
container_issue 39
container_start_page 434
container_title Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union
container_volume 82
format_de105 Article, E-Article
format_de14 Article, E-Article
format_de15 Article, E-Article
format_de520 Article, E-Article
format_de540 Article, E-Article
format_dech1 Article, E-Article
format_ded117 Article, E-Article
format_degla1 E-Article
format_del152 Buch
format_del189 Article, E-Article
format_dezi4 Article
format_dezwi2 Article, E-Article
format_finc Article, E-Article
format_nrw Article, E-Article
_version_ 1792337403304738820
geogr_code not assigned
last_indexed 2024-03-01T15:15:27.068Z
geogr_code_person not assigned
openURL url_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fvufind.svn.sourceforge.net%3Agenerator&rft.title=In+defense+of+the+term+ICME&rft.date=2001-09-25&genre=article&issn=2324-9250&volume=82&issue=39&spage=434&epage=434&pages=434-434&jtitle=Eos%2C+Transactions+American+Geophysical+Union&atitle=In+defense+of+the+term+ICME&aulast=Russell&aufirst=C.+T.&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1029%2F01eo00266&rft.language%5B0%5D=eng
SOLR
_version_ 1792337403304738820
author Russell, C. T.
author_facet Russell, C. T., Russell, C. T.
author_sort russell, c. t.
container_issue 39
container_start_page 434
container_title Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union
container_volume 82
description <jats:p>As Burlaga [2001] correctly points out, the term “cloud” has been used for many years to describe solar wind disturbances. “Plasma cloud,” “magnetized plasma cloud,” and now “magnetic cloud” have all seen use. While the first two terms were rather inclusive in their definition, the last one is rather restrictive [<jats:italic>Burlaga et al</jats:italic>., 1981]. A magnetic cloud has to have a particular duration, a smooth rotation, strong magnetic field, and a low proton temperature. Thus, we are forced into adopting a separate name for many structures that do not fit this restrictive scheme. The term “ejecta” could be used, but there are two types of ejecta: flare ejecta and coronal mass ejecta. The latter term has been used extensively for the disturbance seen at 1 AU that arises in response to a coronal mass ejection (CME) detected at the Sun. This usage has led to some difficulties, because one line of research in this field is to compare the properties of CMEs in the corona with the disturbance seen later in the interplanetary medium. Both cannot be simply called CMEs, or confusion reigns. Thus arose the practice of using the term ICME for the interplanetary counterpart of a CME; e.g. [<jats:italic>Lindsay et al</jats:italic>., 1999; <jats:italic>Mulligan et al</jats:italic>., 1999a, b]. This term includes a wide variety of structures; in particular, structures missing one feature of a magnetic cloud, but clearly being associated with a CME on the Sun. While not every ICME detected has been identified with a specific CME, enough have that we can be confident of the association [e.g. <jats:italic>Lindsay et al</jats:italic>., 1999].</jats:p>
doi_str_mv 10.1029/01eo00266
facet_avail Online, Free
format ElectronicArticle
format_de105 Article, E-Article
format_de14 Article, E-Article
format_de15 Article, E-Article
format_de520 Article, E-Article
format_de540 Article, E-Article
format_dech1 Article, E-Article
format_ded117 Article, E-Article
format_degla1 E-Article
format_del152 Buch
format_del189 Article, E-Article
format_dezi4 Article
format_dezwi2 Article, E-Article
format_finc Article, E-Article
format_nrw Article, E-Article
geogr_code not assigned
geogr_code_person not assigned
id ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTAyOS8wMWVvMDAyNjY
imprint American Geophysical Union (AGU), 2001
imprint_str_mv American Geophysical Union (AGU), 2001
institution DE-105, DE-14, DE-Ch1, DE-L229, DE-D275, DE-Bn3, DE-Brt1, DE-Zwi2, DE-D161, DE-Gla1, DE-Zi4, DE-15, DE-Pl11, DE-Rs1
issn 0096-3941, 2324-9250
issn_str_mv 0096-3941, 2324-9250
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-01T15:15:27.068Z
match_str russell2001indefenseofthetermicme
mega_collection American Geophysical Union (AGU) (CrossRef)
physical 434-434
publishDate 2001
publishDateSort 2001
publisher American Geophysical Union (AGU)
record_format ai
recordtype ai
series Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union
source_id 49
spelling Russell, C. T. 0096-3941 2324-9250 American Geophysical Union (AGU) General Earth and Planetary Sciences http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/01eo00266 <jats:p>As Burlaga [2001] correctly points out, the term “cloud” has been used for many years to describe solar wind disturbances. “Plasma cloud,” “magnetized plasma cloud,” and now “magnetic cloud” have all seen use. While the first two terms were rather inclusive in their definition, the last one is rather restrictive [<jats:italic>Burlaga et al</jats:italic>., 1981]. A magnetic cloud has to have a particular duration, a smooth rotation, strong magnetic field, and a low proton temperature. Thus, we are forced into adopting a separate name for many structures that do not fit this restrictive scheme. The term “ejecta” could be used, but there are two types of ejecta: flare ejecta and coronal mass ejecta. The latter term has been used extensively for the disturbance seen at 1 AU that arises in response to a coronal mass ejection (CME) detected at the Sun. This usage has led to some difficulties, because one line of research in this field is to compare the properties of CMEs in the corona with the disturbance seen later in the interplanetary medium. Both cannot be simply called CMEs, or confusion reigns. Thus arose the practice of using the term ICME for the interplanetary counterpart of a CME; e.g. [<jats:italic>Lindsay et al</jats:italic>., 1999; <jats:italic>Mulligan et al</jats:italic>., 1999a, b]. This term includes a wide variety of structures; in particular, structures missing one feature of a magnetic cloud, but clearly being associated with a CME on the Sun. While not every ICME detected has been identified with a specific CME, enough have that we can be confident of the association [e.g. <jats:italic>Lindsay et al</jats:italic>., 1999].</jats:p> In defense of the term ICME Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union
spellingShingle Russell, C. T., Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, In defense of the term ICME, General Earth and Planetary Sciences
title In defense of the term ICME
title_full In defense of the term ICME
title_fullStr In defense of the term ICME
title_full_unstemmed In defense of the term ICME
title_short In defense of the term ICME
title_sort in defense of the term icme
title_unstemmed In defense of the term ICME
topic General Earth and Planetary Sciences
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/01eo00266