Impulsive Increase of Galactic Cosmic Ray Flux Observed by IceTop The IceCube Collaboration†, Pierre-Simon Mangeard‡, Pradiphat (ฝุ่น) Muangha♯, Roger Pyle♮, David Ruffolo♯ and Alejandro Sáiz♯ Corresponding Author: Paul Evenson‡ † http://icecube.wisc.edu/collaboration/authors/icrc17_icecube ‡ University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA ♯ Mahidol University, Bangkok 10400, Thailand ♮ Pyle Consulting Group, St. Charles, IL 60174, USA
Paul Evenson ICRC
IceCube and IceTop IceCube uses a large volume (one cubic kilometer) of ice at the South Pole to detect rare neutrino interactions. The Delaware contribution to IceCube is IceTop, the air shower array on the surface. Paul Evenson AGU
Why IceTop Works as a GeV Particle Spectrometer Diffusely reflecting liner IceTop “tanks” are thick (90 g/cm2) blocks of clear ice. Cherenkov light output is a function of both species and energy of incoming particles 4
Particle Response Functions (Arbitrary Normalization) IceTop particle response functions change with counting discriminator threshold. Simple count rates from IceTop, above different discriminator thresholds, yield multiple response functions simultaneously. A neutron monitor has only a single response function. Paul Evenson ICRC
2017January 18 Pulse Event IceTop and some nearby neutron monitors saw a pulse-like increase in cosmic ray fluxes. Better statistical precision and spectral response of IceTop show that it is not a solar energetic particle event. Paul Evenson ICRC
Similar Event on 2015 June 22 The IceTop event is similar to the event seen by GRAPES-3 on 2015 June 22 (Mohanty et al. PRL 117, 171101, 2016) Paul Evenson ICRC
No Pulse at IceTop on 2015 June 22 The lack of a pulse at IceTop is consistent with the interpretation of the GRAPES-3 event as a brief decrease in geomagnetic cutoff, but … Paul Evenson ICRC
2017January 18 Pulse Event … this event could not be a lowering of cutoff – it is already zero here! It must be the result of a transient anisotropy. Paul Evenson ICRC
Reconsider 2015 June 22 Examine whether this event is more probably a cutoff variation or a transient anisotropy as well. Paul Evenson ICRC
Neutron monitors show a definite pattern 2015 June 22 Neutron monitors show a definite pattern Paul Evenson ICRC
Pulse appearance is ordered by geographic location 2015 June 22 Pulse appearance is ordered by geographic location Paul Evenson AGU
Tsyganenko Model Cutoff Decrease Calculations Even with an extrapolation to Kp=8 it is unlikely that changes in cutoff can be local effects. They must almost certainly be global. Paul Evenson ICRC
Conclusions Both the 2017 January 18 and 2015 June 22 events are most likely due to transient anisotropy. Detailed analysis of possible 2015 June 22 asymptotic direction variations is difficult because of the highly disturbed magnetosphere. Paul Evenson AGU