Comment on “Evidence of Potential Thermospheric Overcooling During the May 2024 Geomagnetic Superstorm” by Kumar Ranjan et al.

Abstract The post‐storm neutral density ρ decrease (when it takes place) cannot be prescribed to a decrease in neutral temperature because this contradicts the observed negative foF 2 deviations normally observed during the recovery storm phase. Neutral temperature decrease also contradicts empirical (based on observations) thermospheric models such as MSISE00. The post‐storm neutral density decrease is due to a decrease in the atomic oxygen abundance during the recovery storm phase. The increase in atomic oxygen along with elevated storm‐time neutral temperature prevents the post‐storm neutral density decrease in winter. The observed rarity of the post‐storm ρ decrease is due to the interplay between the storm‐time decrease in atomic oxygen abundance and the increase in neutral temperature. The two processes work simultaneously in opposite directions during magnetic storms, compensating each other to a great extent. Therefore, the post‐storm neutral density decrease is not related to the NO overcooling but can be explained in the framework of the F 2 ‐layer storm mechanism.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics
Published
2025-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1029/2025ja033891
Primary Topic
Ionosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comment on “Evidence of Potential Thermospheric Overcooling During the May 2024 Geomagnetic Superstorm” by Kumar Ranjan et al.

Loredana Perrone, A. V. Mikhailov
Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics
Ionosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
article

Comment on “Evidence of Potential Thermospheric Overcooling During the May 2024 Geomagnetic Superstorm” by Kumar Ranjan et al.

Loredana Perrone, A. V. Mikhailov
article en

Abstract

Abstract The post‐storm neutral density ρ decrease (when it takes place) cannot be prescribed to a decrease in neutral temperature because this contradicts the observed negative foF 2 deviations normally observed during the recovery storm phase. Neutral temperature decrease also contradicts empirical (based on observations) thermospheric models such as MSISE00. The post‐storm neutral density decrease is due to a decrease in the atomic oxygen abundance during the recovery storm phase. The increase in atomic oxygen along with elevated storm‐time neutral temperature prevents the post‐storm neutral density decrease in winter. The observed rarity of the post‐storm ρ decrease is due to the interplay between the storm‐time decrease in atomic oxygen abundance and the increase in neutral temperature. The two processes work simultaneously in opposite directions during magnetic storms, compensating each other to a great extent. Therefore, the post‐storm neutral density decrease is not related to the NO overcooling but can be explained in the framework of the F 2 ‐layer storm mechanism.

Journal of Geophysical Research Space PhysicsVol. 130(11)
Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (IT), Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism Ionosphere and Radio Wave Propagation (RU)
Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, Leibniz-Gemeinschaft
Openalex Percentile: Top 75%
Ionosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.