Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
We have previously argued (e.g. Szabelski et al 2002 Astropart. Phys. 17 125) that the well-known ‘ankle’ in the cosmic ray energy spectrum, at log E (eV) ∼ 18.7–19.0, marks the transition from mainly galactic sources at lower energies to mainly extragalactic above. Recently, however, there have been claims for lower transitional energies, specifically from log E (eV) ∼ 17.0 (Thompson et al 2004 Proc. Catania Cosmic Ray Conf. ) via 17.2–17.8 (Berezinsky et al 2004 Astropart. Phys. 21 617) to 18.0 (Hillas 2004 Proc. Leeds Cosmic Ray Conf. ). In our model the ankle arises naturally from the sum of simple power law-spectra with slopes differing by Δγ ∼ 1.8; from differential slope γ = −3.8 for galactic particles (near log E = 19) to γ ∼ −2.0 for extragalactic sources. In the other models, on the other hand, the ankle is intrinsic to the extragalactic component alone, and arises from the shape of the rate of energy loss versus energy for the (assumed) protons interacting with the cosmic microwave background (CMB). Our detailed analysis of the world's data on the ultra-high energy spectrum shows that taken together, or separately, the resulting mean sharpness of the ankle (second derivative of the log(intensity × E 3 ) with respect to log E ) is consistent with our ‘mixed’ model. For explanation in terms of extragalactic particles alone, however, the ankle will be at the wrong energy—for reasonable production models and of insufficient magnitude if, as seems likely, there is still a significant fraction of heavy nuclei at the ankle energy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
E et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: