Recently, I was able to concoct a new index system for measuring the intensity of geomagnetic disturbances caused by solar events such as solar flares or CMEs, who would I talk to about refining this system or to talk to about possibly incorporating it into the currently used systems?
beach > ... a new index system for measuring > the intensity of geomagnetic disturbances ...
I think we would all like to hear your idea. Are you talking about measuring small perturbations in the Earth's magnetic field? We'll leave it up to Dr. Svalgaard to determine if it offers a contribution over any existing standards.
Perhaps if Dr. Svalgaard would be willing to read my paper once it is proofed by my teacher, then it would be much simpler? It uses a series of 5 or 6 variables that are set within each other, and confused my classmates. 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. It is a logarithmic formula that takes into account the minimum/maximum "hit" where the field is most disturbed after a flare, then taking the recovery point of the field after that point, and using the average of all the points between them which then takes the maximum from prior to the start of the even divided by that average, THEN, taking that resulting number as a, we put it into log(a/t) where t is equal to the number of seconds and it gives you a number between 0 to -6 which can judge the intensity of events compared to other events, and I'm sure a number of other things.
beach > Perhaps if Dr. Svalgaard would be willing to read my paper once it is proofed by my > teacher, then it would be much simpler? It uses a series of 5 or 6 variables that > are set within each other, and confused my classmates.
While you're waiting on your teacher, you should be doing a little more homework in explaining how your index works and how it contributes to the science of geomagnetism (besides confusing your classmates )
IHV makes the following claims as contributions: - Easy to understand - Completely objective (no subjective determination of baselines) - Easy to duplicate by other researchers for verification purposes - Physically quantitative - Suitable for studies of long-term variations (on time scales of weeks and longer) - Having the property that its limitations are clearly stated and understood - Constant calibration over time for any given station
So your homework is: 1) Come up with a snappy name for your index (if it doesn't have a name, it doesn't exist) 2) A concise overview/synopsis of what it is and how it's computed 3) A list of contributing claims (Answering: "Why would I want to use the Beach Index?")
1) Come up with a snappy name for your index (if it doesn't have a name, it doesn't exist) 2) A concise overview/synopsis of what it is and how it's computed 3) A list of contributing claims (Answering: "Why would I want to use the Beach Index?")
1) Geomagnetic Variance Intensity Scale 2) (Refer to the attachment for better explanation of variables.) All measurements are made in the Bz field component of the geomagnetic field in local Remus, MI by the THEMIS magnetometer at Chippewa Hills High School. GVIS = log(a/t) , when a > 1; GVIS = log(t/a) , when a < 1; GVIS = 0 , when a =1.
A = m/d M = maximum field strength prior to arrival of the flare D = average of all points between N and P N = minimum field strength after the arrival of the flare P = recovery point of field after flare arrival T = duration of flare in seconds between N and P
A geomagnetic disturbance/event can be classified by a few criteria in which they are to fit. Events are usually prefaced by a Coronal Mass Ejection or a Solar Wind Stream buffeting the magnetic field. A) Have a small spike (either maximum or minimum) at the front of the event B) Have a large spike in the data after the small spike, either negative or positive depending on if a maximum or minimum was used. The spike would be positive if a minimum were to occur, and the spike would be negative if a maximum were to occur C) Have a point in time after the large spike where the magnetic field has settled and returned to a similar strength as the maximum or minimum at the beginning of the event.
3) A list of contributing claims (Answering: "Why would I want to use the Geomagnetic Variance Intensity Scale?") -Measures intensity of single geomagnetic disturbance events and puts it into an easy to scale integer value -Does not depend on set time intervals, but can work on any time interval -Allows non-experts to see the strength of CME impacts and other similar events that cause geomagnetic disturbances or storms -Easily calculatable by any persons with a basic understanding of the geomagnetic field -Can be applied to any number of geomagnetic disturbances, and allows for fair measuring of their intensities between any time intervals depending on the geomagnetic field's strength at the time of arrival -Can be calculated for multiple stations and show differences in geomagnetic disturbances throughout a geographic area such as North America and Europe
I did create a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet that calculates the scale with only some minimal work needed by a person, just inputting some data ranges. It will be available if asked for.
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.
I modified my post from before, so it is now better organized and answers your questions even better. I will have the paper done by next weekend, and it shows within it that the GOES classifications of flares are not accurate for predicting geomagnetic disturbances, so that is also another point for this scale, is that it can accurately judge the disturbances unlike an arbitrary number like the GOES scale for solar flares.