Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-pfhbr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T21:40:21.091Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of the Muon Contribution on the Barometric Coefficient of Neutron Monitors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 April 2016

T. T. Quang ,
A. G. Fenton  and
K. B. Fenton
T. T. Quang
Affiliation:
Physics Department, University of Tasmania, Hobart
A. G. Fenton
Affiliation:
Physics Department, University of Tasmania, Hobart
K. B. Fenton
Affiliation:
Physics Department, University of Tasmania, Hobart
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The barometric coefficient of a cosmic-ray neutron monitor is found to increase with atmospheric depth from ~ 150 mm Hg to 600 mm Hg and then to decrease slowly with depth down to 760 mm Hg (Bachelet et al. 1965; Carmichael and Bercovitch 1969). Bachelet et al. 1965) tentatively attributed this change in the slope of the barometric coefficient versus atmospheric depth curve at 600 mm Hg to the contribution made by muons to the neutron monitor counting rate. Carmichael and Bercovitch (1969) have shown that the contribution to the monitor counting rate made by obliquely incident nucleons may be the real cause. Singh et al. (1970) have derived an expression for the barometric coefficient for vertically incident particles in a neutron monitor which increases continuously with increasing atmospheric depth down to 760 mm Hg, demonstrating more definitely that the above explanation of Carmichael and Bercovitch is correct.

Type
Cosmic Ray Astronomy
Information
Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia , Volume 2 , Issue 5 , September 1974 , pp. 304 - 305
Copyright
Copyright © Astronomical Society of Australia 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bachelet, F., Balata, P., Dyring, E. and lucci, N., Nuovo Cimento, 35, 23 (1965).Google Scholar
Carmichael, H. and Beicovitch, M., Can. J. Phys., 47, 2073 (1969).Google Scholar
Hatman, C. V. and Hatton, C. J., Can. J. Phys., 46, S1052 (1968).Google Scholar
Hatton, C. J., Prog. Elem. Part. Cos. Ray Phys., 10, 2 (1971).Google Scholar
Hatton, C. J. and Carmichael, H., Can. J. Phys. V42, 2443 (1964).Google Scholar
Hughes, E. B. and Marsden, P. L., J. Geophys. Res., 71, 1435 (1966).Google Scholar
Kodama, M. and Inoue, A., Jap. Antarct. Res. Exped. Sci. Rep. Ser. A, No. 9 (1970).Google Scholar
Quang, T. T., Fenton, A. G. and Fenton, K. B., Conference Papers, 13th Int. Conf. on Cosmic Rays, Denver, 1973 (University of Denver), 4, 2796 (1973).Google Scholar
Singh, P., Lockwood, J. A. and Razdan, H., J. Geophys. Res., 75, 4354 (1970).Google Scholar