beach> ... It basically measures the intensity of
geomagnetic
> disturbances of any size by taking a simpler approach
>
like the K index but over any period of time ...
> ... maximum magnetic field strength
> upon the arrival of each flare ...
> ... It uses a series of 5 or 6 variables
> that are set within each other ...
> -Does not depend on set time intervals,
> but can work on any time interval
I'm getting a fuzzy picture of your "index", because you haven't given us the formula, just a few claims and hand waving.
You claim your "index" is like the K-index because they both measure geomagnetic 'disturbances'. From the plot's y-axis I see field values on the order of 50,000nT, but you seem to be selecting only the events (flares) as the single input to your formula, ignoring the background signal.
You are classifying solar events, so your metric should properly be called a 'scale' not an 'index'. E.g. earthquakes are classified by the so-called "Richter" scale. It is different from the background signal, because each event must be "detected" (perhaps by characteristic changes in one or more indices). Detection of an event requires the specifying the conditions for onset and termination, which must be formally declared.
Indexes, on the other hand, provide a measure of world conditions on a continual basis, i.e. not dependent on the definition of singular events. Examples are Dow Jones Stock Index, Heat Index etc. They provide a fabric within which events could be defined in terms of extremal conditions.
For example, when the Dow Jones index crashes for a long period of time, we call that a "recession" (which could have its own "scale" for quantifying its severity). [I'm not an economist, so that's how a systems engineer might define a 'recession'
]
Yes, the K-index is based on measuring 'disturbances' in the geomagnetic field. But it is not event-based. What it means is that if you had a powerful microscope and examined a compass needle, you would note tiny tremors happening all the time. Sometimes the tremors tend to be small, sometimes they increase, but overall they are pervasive throughout the magnetic world. The K-index was designed (by Julius Bartels in 1939) to quantify those tremors in a consistent and useful way. That's why it only looks at the Horizontal magnetic field (i.e. like a compass).
Events (like 'magnetic storms') happen within the context of the K-index, but must be formally defined (e.g. K > some value, duration > some interval etc)
I'm not saying your scale is useless. In fact it would serve a useful purpose if you can provide a definition of the events you want to classify, in the context of the indicator variables you have chosen.
Solar flares are of course classified by NOAA in terms of the X-Ray intensity, received at the GOES satellites. I suppose you could add that indicator to your definition. Or you could just formalize that waveform in your plot, which seems to require a short peak, followed by a long dip etc. Whenever such a waveform is observed, meeting certain parametric requirements, then you have an 'event'.
One other comment. You say your scale doesn't "depend" on time. But clearly it does because one of your indicators (D) is a time duration. Your formula can only be "time-independent" if it doesn't contain a time variable. (So use a different word, not "depends", which is a formal term in mathematics)
I think what you meant to say was that the underlying time basis or sampling rate can be chosen arbitrarily. But if everyone uses a different time basis, then events can't be easily compared across these different time bases. So you probably will have to specify the time dependency that makes your event classifications most usable.
Again I'm not trying to discourage you, but trying to steer you in right direction and make you aware of the requirements for mathematical rigor and formality.
:-|