Paper detail

Extragalactic ultra high energy cosmic rays, II. Comparison with experimental data

We compare the expected contribution of FR-II hot spots to the ultra-high energy cosmic ray spectrum (Rachen & Biermann 1993, A&A in press, BB paper astro-ph/9301010) to improved experimental results. We introduce a "world data set" of UHE cosmic rays by comparing the data of various experiments, extracting relative systematic errors in the energy derivation and averaging over energy bins. Since the contribution of FR-II hot spots is expected to be dominated by protons, we can also compare it to the recent experimental results for the proton component of cosmic rays between 0.1 and 1 EeV from both the Fly's Eye and the Akeno airshower detector (Gaisser et al. 1993, Phys Rev D in press, and Stanev et al. 1992, A&A submitted). The result is striking: Our prediction for energies below 1 EeV fits very well to the data for the proton component, while explaining the total flux at highest energies as well. The result is consistent with the expectation of a galactic component, consisting of heavy nuclei only, that has a slope of about -3.1 and cuts off at 5 EeV, as predicted by Biermann 1993 (A&A in press, BB paper astro-ph/9301008)

preprint1993arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.