Nightglow 6300 A and electron density data from Maui, Hawaii, have been analyzed by using the formulas of the paper by Peterson, VanZandt, and Norton (referred to as part 1). The observed 6300 A emission is found to consist of two components. The primary component may vary considerably during the night, and its variations are explained satisfactorily by the chemical reactions discussed in part 1; these variations correspond to variations in the height, shape, and magnitude of the electron density profile. The secondary, or background, component does not seem to vary rapidly during the night but may vary considerably from one night to another. The source of the background component is unknown. It is shown that the magnitude deduced for it is insensitive to errors in the many parameters that enter the calculations. Finally, even though the theory given in part 1 does satisfactorily explain the observations, the pertinent chemical reactions seem to be inefficient in producing the 6300 A nightglow.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Peterson et al. (1966) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: