The February 5, 1965 solar proton event 2 - Low energy proton observations and their relation to the magnetosphere

Temporal and spatial behavior of low energy solar protons in magnetospher

Proton energy into the magnetosphere on 26 May 1967

Proton entry into magnetosphere over polar cap on 26 May 196

Solar Protons and Magnetic Storms in July 1961

Injun i satellite observations of solar protons and magnetic storm

Relativistic Disk Reflection in the Neutron Star X-ray Binary XTE J1709-267 with NuSTAR

We perform the first reflection study of the soft X-ray transient and Type 1 burst source XTE J1709-267 using NuSTAR observations during its 2016 June outburst. There was an increase in flux near the end of the observations, which corresponds to an increase from $\sim$0.04 L$_{\mathrm{Edd}}$ to $\sim$0.06 L$_{\mathrm{Edd}}$ assuming a distance of 8.5 kpc. We have separately examined spectra from the low and high flux intervals, which were soft and show evidence of a broad Fe K line. Fits to these intervals with relativistic disk reflection models have revealed an inner disk radius of $13.8_{-1.8}^{+3.0}\ R_{g}$ (where $R_{g} = GM/c^{2}$) for the low flux spectrum and $23.4_{-5.4}^{+15.6}\ R_{g}$ for the high flux spectrum at the 90\% confidence level. The disk is likely truncated by a boundary layer surrounding the neutron star or the magnetosphere. Based on the measured luminosity and using the accretion efficiency for a disk around a neutron star, we estimate that the theoretically expected size for the boundary layer would be $\sim0.9-1.1 \ R_{g}$ from the neutron star's surface, which can be increased by spin or viscosity effects. Another plausible scenario is that the disk could be truncated by the magnetosphere. We place a conservative upper limit on the strength of the magnetic field at the poles, assuming $a_{*}=0$ and $M_{NS}=1.4\ M_{\odot}$, of $B\leq0.75-3.70\times10^{9}$ G, though X-ray pulsations have not been detected from this source.Comment: Accepted for publication in ApJ, 5 pages, 4 figures, 1 table. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1701.0177

Prediction and explanation in the multiverse

Probabilities in the multiverse can be calculated by assuming that we are typical representatives in a given reference class. But is this class well defined? What should be included in the ensemble in which we are supposed to be typical? There is a widespread belief that this question is inherently vague, and that there are various possible choices for the types of reference objects which should be counted in. Here we argue that the ``ideal'' reference class (for the purpose of making predictions) can be defined unambiguously in a rather precise way, as the set of all observers with identical information content. When the observers in a given class perform an experiment, the class branches into subclasses who learn different information from the outcome of that experiment. The probabilities for the different outcomes are defined as the relative numbers of observers in each subclass. For practical purposes, wider reference classes can be used, where we trace over all information which is uncorrelated to the outcome of the experiment, or whose correlation with it is beyond our current understanding. We argue that, once we have gathered all practically available evidence, the optimal strategy for making predictions is to consider ourselves typical in any reference class we belong to, unless we have evidence to the contrary. In the latter case, the class must be correspondingly narrowed.Comment: Minor clarifications adde

An Infrared Divergence Problem in the cosmological measure theory and the anthropic reasoning

An anthropic principle has made it possible to answer the difficult question of why the observable value of cosmological constant ($\Lambda\sim 10^{-47}$ GeV${}^4$) is so disconcertingly tiny compared to predicted value of vacuum energy density $\rho_{SUSY}\sim 10^{12}$ GeV${}^4$. Unfortunately, there is a darker side to this argument, as it consequently leads to another absurd prediction: that the probability to observe the value $\Lambda=0$ for randomly selected observer exactly equals to 1. We'll call this controversy an infrared divergence problem. It is shown that the IRD prediction can be avoided with the help of a Linde-Vanchurin {\em singular runaway measure} coupled with the calculation of relative Bayesian probabilities by the means of the {\em doomsday argument}. Moreover, it is shown that while the IRD problem occurs for the {\em prediction stage} of value of $\Lambda$, it disappears at the {\em explanatory stage} when $\Lambda$ has already been measured by the observer.Comment: 9 pages, RevTe