Next Article in Journal
Searching for γ-ray Emission from Binary Black-Hole Mergers Detected in LIGO/Virgo O3 Run
Next Article in Special Issue
Helium Abundance Decrease in ICMEs in 23–24 Solar Cycles
Previous Article in Journal
X-ray Insight into High-Energy Processes in Extreme Galactic Nuclear Environment
Previous Article in Special Issue
Peculiarities of the Heliospheric State and the Solar-Wind/Magnetosphere Coupling in the Era of Weakened Solar Activity
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Dynamics of He++ Ions at Interplanetary and Earth’s Bow Shocks

Universe 2022, 8(10), 516; https://doi.org/10.3390/universe8100516
by Olga V. Sapunova *, Natalia L. Borodkova, Georgii N. Zastenker and Yuri I. Yermolaev
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Universe 2022, 8(10), 516; https://doi.org/10.3390/universe8100516
Submission received: 2 September 2022 / Revised: 21 September 2022 / Accepted: 27 September 2022 / Published: 1 October 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is a work on determining some characteristics related to alpha particles across a set of interplneatry shock events as well as that of Earth's bow shocks. The authors performed the analysis using the obervations from several satellites and found a meaningful relation between alpha particle density ratio relative to proton density and the magnetic field-to-shock normal angle. Overall I find this work interesting, but the manuscript may be improved after addressing the following points. 

1. It will be helpful if some comments are added about (if any) previous works on the same topic as here, perhaps in the introduction. Otherwise it is good to emphasize that this is the first work. 

2.  Giving satellites' locations for the example events in all figures (when appropriate) will be helpful to understand the data. 

3. Line 150-152: Is there any possibility that (if so, what is the extent to which) possibly inhomogeneous density distributions at different locations of two satellites contibute to this discrepancy in proton density between two satellites in Figure 2?  Also, does the different sensitivities between two satellites' sensors cause the proton density discrepancy in a consistent way? Or does it ever vary depending on specific observations? 

4. I see that the difference in proton density between two satellites in Figure 5 is much less significant than in the case of the event in Figure 2... why is the discrepancy more significant in one event while it is much less serious in another event?

Author Response

The  authors  are  grateful  to  Referee  for  all comments  to  the manuscript. Our reply is in pdf-file, please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report


Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

The  authors  are  grateful  to  Referee  for  all comments  to  the manuscript. Our reply is marked with initials OS.  Our reply is in pdf-file, please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop