Comment on “A statistical study of the central plasma sheet: Implications for substorm models”

C. A. Cattell; R. C. Elphic

doi:10.1029/GL014i007p00773

Comment on “A statistical study of the central plasma sheet: Implications for substorm models”

C. A. Cattell
, R. C. Elphic

Physics and Astronomy (Twin Cities)

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate › peer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

We show that the conclusions of the above paper are seriously compromised by flaws in the methodology of the statistical study. In addition, the authors' definition of a physically significant flow is not consistent with the physics of the magnetotail.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	773-775
Number of pages	3
Journal	Geophysical Research Letters
Volume	14
Issue number	7
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1029/GL014i007p00773
State	Published - Jul 1987

Publisher link

10.1029/GL014i007p00773

Find It

Find It at U of M Libraries

Cite this

@article{63818fb90c58495bb9997351e25b9dc8,

title = "Comment on “A statistical study of the central plasma sheet: Implications for substorm models”",

abstract = "We show that the conclusions of the above paper are seriously compromised by flaws in the methodology of the statistical study. In addition, the authors' definition of a physically significant flow is not consistent with the physics of the magnetotail.",

author = "Cattell, \{C. A.\} and Elphic, \{R. C.\}",

year = "1987",

month = jul,

doi = "10.1029/GL014i007p00773",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "14",

pages = "773--775",

journal = "Geophysical Research Letters",

issn = "0094-8276",

publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",

number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comment on “A statistical study of the central plasma sheet

T2 - Implications for substorm models”

AU - Cattell, C. A.

AU - Elphic, R. C.

PY - 1987/7

Y1 - 1987/7

N2 - We show that the conclusions of the above paper are seriously compromised by flaws in the methodology of the statistical study. In addition, the authors' definition of a physically significant flow is not consistent with the physics of the magnetotail.

AB - We show that the conclusions of the above paper are seriously compromised by flaws in the methodology of the statistical study. In addition, the authors' definition of a physically significant flow is not consistent with the physics of the magnetotail.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0023488652

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0023488652#tab=citedBy

U2 - 10.1029/GL014i007p00773

DO - 10.1029/GL014i007p00773

M3 - Comment/debate

AN - SCOPUS:0023488652

SN - 0094-8276

VL - 14

SP - 773

EP - 775

JO - Geophysical Research Letters

JF - Geophysical Research Letters

IS - 7

ER -

Comment on “A statistical study of the central plasma sheet: Implications for substorm models”

Abstract

Publisher link

Find It

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this