Volumes:
Issue 1
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4
Issue 5
Issue 6
Issue 7
Issue 8
Issue 9
Issue 10
Issue 11
Issue 12
Issue 13
Issue 14
Issue 15
Issue 16
Issue 17
Issue 18
Issue 19
Issue 20
Issue 1
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4
Issue 5
Issue 6
Issue 7
Issue 8
Issue 9
Issue 10
Issue 11
Issue 12
Issue 13
Issue 14
Issue 15
Issue 16
Issue 17
Issue 18
Issue 19
Issue 20
Issue 1
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4
Issue 5
Issue 6
Issue 7
Issue 8
Issue 9
Issue 10
Issue 11
Issue 12
Issue 13
Issue 14
Issue 15
Issue 16
Issue 17
Issue 18
Issue 19
Issue 20
Issue 1
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4
Issue 5
Issue 6
Issue 7
Issue 8
Issue 9
Issue 10
Issue 11
Issue 12
Issue 13
Issue 14
Issue 15
Issue 16
Issue 17
Issue 18
Issue 19
Issue 20
Issue 1
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4
Issue 5
Issue 6
Issue 7
Issue 8
Issue 9
Issue 10
Issue 11
Issue 12
Issue 13
Issue 14
Issue 15
Issue 16
Issue 17
Issue 18
Issue 19
Issue 20
Issue 1
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4
Issue 5
Issue 6
Issue 7
Issue 8
Issue 9
Issue 10
Issue 11
Issue 12
Issue 13
Issue 14
Issue 15
Issue 16
Issue 17
Issue 18
Issue 19
Issue 20
Issue 1
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4
Issue 5
Issue 6
Issue 7
Issue 8
Issue 9
Issue 10
Issue 11
Issue 12
Issue 13
Issue 14
Issue 15
Issue 16
Issue 17
Issue 18
Issue 19
Issue 20
Issue 1
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4
Issue 5
Issue 6
Issue 7
Issue 8
Issue 9
Issue 10
Issue 11
Issue 12
Issue 13
Issue 14
Issue 15
Issue 16
Issue 17
Issue 18
Issue 19
Issue 20
Issue 1
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4
Issue 5
Issue 6
Issue 7
Issue 8
Issue 9
Issue 10
Issue 11
Issue 12
Issue 13
Issue 14
Issue 15
Issue 16
Issue 17
Issue 18
Issue 19
Issue 20
Issue 1
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4
Issue 5
Issue 6
Issue 7
Issue 8
Issue 9
Issue 10
Issue 11
Issue 12
Issue 13
Issue 14
Issue 15
Issue 16
Issue 17
Issue 18
Issue 19
Issue 20
Issue 1
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4
Issue 5
Issue 6
Issue 7
Issue 8
Issue 9
Issue 10
Issue 11
Issue 12
Issue 13
Issue 14
Issue 15
Issue 16
Issue 17
Issue 18
Issue 19
Issue 20
|
Telecommunications and Radio Engineering
DOI: 10.1615/TelecomRadEng.v69.i19.50
pages 1735-1750 COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND MODEL WAVEFORMS OF Q-BURSTS
A. P. Nickolaenko
O.Ya. Usikov Institute for Radio Physics and Electronics, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine 12, Academician Proskura St., Kharkiv 61085, Ukraine
Masashi Hayakawa
Hayakawa Institute of Seismo Electromagnetics Co. Ltd.(Hi-SEM), The University of Electro-Communications (UEC) Alliance Center #521, Advanced & Wireless and Communications Research Center, UEC, Chofu, Tokyo, 182-8585, Japan
Toshio Ogawa
A. Usikov Institute of Radio Physics and Electronics, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
Masayuki Komatsu
A. Usikov Institute of Radio Physics and Electronics, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine ABSTRACTExperimental waveforms of natural ELF transient signals (Q-bursts) are compared with model computations. Vertical electric field component of Q-bursts was recorded at Tochi, Japan (33.3° N and 33.4° E) in 2003−2005. Separate pulses were chosen recoded in fair weather conditions in a wide frequency band with the help of the "ball" antenna. The computations were performed for the uniform isotropic spherical Earth − ionosphere cavity model with the linear frequency dependence of the wave propagation constant. Pulses arriving from different distances were compared, and each pair showed a high reciprocity of waveforms. Coincidence indicates that the model applied is correct; it simultaneously shows that distances are accurate found from the time delay between the first pulse and the antipodal wave. KEY WORDS: Q-bursts, global electromagnetic resonance
|
Begell Digital Portal | Begell Digital Library | eBooks | Journals | References & Proceedings | Research Collections |