The study analyzes galactic cosmic ray (GCR) flux variations during solar cycles 23-24, focusing on the effects of solar activity and heliospheric conditions. It finds that GCR intensity is modulated by solar winds, coronal mass ejections, and interplanetary magnetic field disturbances, demonstrating an anti-correlation with solar activity indices. The research highlights the impact of these solar phenomena on GCR behavior and their relation to the dynamics of heliospheric plasma.

1. © 2024, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 8.226 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 66
Analysis of high energy charge particle in the Heliosphere
B. K. Tiwari1, B.R.Ghormare 2
1.Department of Physics,A.P.S.University, Rewa(M.P.)
2. Department of Physics, Rewa Engineering College, Rewa(M.P.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------***--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract
Data-driven analysis of the temporal dependence in the Galactic Cosmic Rays flux is performed over the Solar Cycle
23-24. Solar wind disturbances and magnetic turbulence inside the heliosphere are affected GCRs, which effect is known as
Solar Modulation . To investigate this event, GCR data collected with a global statistical inference on monthly basis,
determined the dependence of the GCR diffusion parameters upon rigidity and time . In this paper, we discuss their
interpretation in terms of basic processes of particle transport and their relations with the heliospheric plasma dynamics .
The observation based on for solar- interplanetary activity through Omniweb data centre and monthly mean count rate of
CRI data from neutron monitors (Moscow, Oulu,) for the this period . We observed high values of CR intensity with low
values of solar-interplanetary activity indices during minimum phase of solar cycle 23-24. Statistical techniques are used to
correlate data of CRI and solar- interplanetary indices , these were opposite correlated with solar activity indices.
Keywords- , Solar Activity (SA), Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs), Coronal Mass Ejections (CME), Heliospheric magnetic Field
(HMF)
Introduction
Short-term as well as on long-term variations in Cosmic ray intensity are produced by Solar outputs and their
modulation1,2 .Galactic Cosmic Rays modulation in Long-term basics were compared with the behavior of various solar
activity indices and helioshperic parameters. It is observed that SSN, 10.7 cm Solar radio flux (SRF), Solar flares and CMEs
are the causal link of Solar activity . Moreover, interplanetary plasma and field disturbances are associated with a variety of
CMEs . Irregularities in the heliospheric magnetic field structure scattered Cosmic rays and , convection and adiabatic
deceleration undergoes in the expanding solar wind changes in the heliospheric conditions as produced by the solar activity
(SA)3,4 . Modulation in the cosmic ray is usually caused by transient interplanetary phenomenon , which are related to CMEs.
The intensity of GCRs is subjected to changes in heliospheric conditions under the influence of Solar outputs and their
variations. Scott.Forbush established the correlation between Geomagnetic storm and world-wide decreases in CRI 5. The
Sunspot cycle ( ~ 11 years) in GCRs intensity and its variation are opposite in phase with Sunspot number and the transport
of GCRs understood through the model of heliospheric magnetic field 6 . HMF magnitudes increases during high Solar
activity due to larger number of CMEs ejected from the Sun (which occurs each ~11- years sunspot cycle). Therefore Solar
Magnetic Field (SMF) more effective at sweeping Cosmic rays out of the inner heliosphere which causes a strong reduction in
Cosmic rays fluxes and reproduce ~ 22 years Galactic Cosmic Rays modulation . The GCR modulated by sporadic emission
of clouds of magnetized plasma in the Interplanetary space and produces terrestrial geomagnetic storms 7. Large decreases
are associated with that MCs are preceding by shocks where as small decreases in GCRs are associated with Magnetic clouds
(MCs) are not preceded by Shocks 8,9 .
The IMF emanated from the Sun changes with changing variations in speed of particle, process of transport , such
as convection, diffusion drift and adiabatic deceleration10. Pressure and strength of Interplanetary Magnetic Field (IMF) and
Solar wind (SW) density all are their lowest values and measured a record high GCR intensity and was associated with the
relative decrease in anomalous cosmic rays, with energy about zero for low latitudes neutron monitors(NMs) during
minimum phase of Solar cycle 23/24 11 . This period is interesting for the study of CRI modulation with Solar and
Heliospheric conditions. Solar activity indices and Heliospheric parameters as, SSN and strength of the HMF was
exceptionally low between minimum period of Solar cycle 23/24. Solar interplanetary activity parameters where significant
different from the previous Solar minimum12,13 . This anomalous period shows unusual features in the GCR intensity are
excess of the maximum intensity during 2009-2010.Heliospheric magnetic field was weaker, the Sun was much quieter, and
observed higher CR diffusion coefficient, allows an increase in GCR intensity14,15,16.
International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 11 Issue: 02 | Feb 2024 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

2. © 2024, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 8.226 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 67
Data analysis
To study the long-term modulation in GCRs intensity between periods of Solar cycle 23-24 , monthly mean count
rates of Cosmic Rays data were used by neutron monitors (NMs) Moscow and Oulu http://www.nmdb.in with their cutoff
rigidities ; Moscow (Rc=2.35GV) and Oulu (Rc=0.80GV). we analyzed solar interplanetary data from Omniweb data centre
http://www.omniweb,gsfc.nasa.gov.in . and we also used data of monthly mean Sunspot Numbers (SSN) and 10.7 Solar Flare
Index (SFI) through National Geographical Data Centre (NGDC) .
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000
7500
8000
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
SSN
Count
rate
of
CRI
(
Olu)
Year
Variation in Count rate of CRI (Oulu) With SSN during 1996-2018
Year
oulu
SSN
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
7500
8000
8500
9000
9500
10000
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
SSN
Count
rate
of
CRI
(moscow)
Year
Variation in count rate of CRI (Moscow) with SSN during 1996-
2018 Year
moscow
SSN
Fig.1. (a) & (b) Long-term modulation in GCR intensity as observed by Oulu & Moscow Neutron Monitors with
Sunspot number SSN during Solar Cycle 23/24
International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 11 Issue: 02 | Feb 2024 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

3. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 11 Issue: 02 | Feb 2024 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2024, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 8.226 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 68
Fig.2. (a) & (b) Long-term modulation in GCR intensity as observed by Oulu Neutron Monitors with Solar- activity
indies[ Solar wind velocity (Vsw ) & 10.7 cm solar radio flux] during Solar Cycle 23/24.
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000
7500
8000
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Solar
wind
Velocity
(SWV)
Count
rate
of
CRI
(
Oulu)
Year
Variation in count rate Of CRI ( Oulu) with SWV during 1996-2018
Year
oulu
swv(km/s)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000
7500
8000
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
10.7cm
solar
radio
flux
Count
rate
of
CRI
(
Oulu)
Year
Variation in count rate of CRI (Oulu) with 10.7cm solar radio flux
Year
oulu
10.7cmSF

4. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 11 Issue: 02 | Feb 2024 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2024, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 8.226 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 69
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
8000
8200
8400
8600
8800
9000
9200
9400
9600
9800
10.7cm
Solar
radio
flux
Count
rate
of
CRI(Moscow)
Year
E
ffect of 10.7cm Solar Radio Flux ON
CRI(Moscow) during 1996-2018
m…
Fig.3. (a) & (c) Long-term modulation in GCR intensity as observed by Oulu Neutron Monitor with Solar-
interplanetary activity indies ( IMF ) and ( b ) CRI (Moscow) with 10.7cm Solar Radio Fluxes (SRF) during Solar
Cycle 23/24
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000
7500
8000 1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
IMF
Count
rate
of
CRI
(
Oulu)
Year
Variation in count rate of CRI (Oulu) with IMF during 1996-2018
Year
oulu
IMF

5. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 11 Issue: 02 | Feb 2024 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2024, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 8.226 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 70
(a) (b)
Fig.4. (a) & (b) Correlation between GCR intensity as observed by Moscow Neutron Monitor with Solar activity
parameters [ i.e. SSN & 10.7cm Solar Radio Flux] . Fig. (c) & (d) Correlation between GCR intensity as observed by
Moscow Neutron Monitor with Solar-interplanetary activity indies ( IMF ) and Solar wind Velocity (Vsw ) during
Solar Cycle 23/24
Result and discussion
Variations in cosmic rays intensity on long -term basics and the tilt of the heliospheric current-sheet exists in all periods of
the same heliomagnetoshperic polarity. CR intensity variation are produced by the transient disturbance like traveling
interplanetary shocks, CMEs and events vary with solar activity at the different phases of the Sunspot Cycle. MCs preceded by
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
7500 8500 9500 10500
SSN
Count Rate Of CRI Moscow
SSN
Linear (SSN)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
7500 8500 9500 10500
10.7Cm
SRF
Count Rate Of CRI Moscow
10.7cmSF
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
7500 8000 8500 9000 9500 10000
IMF
COunt Rate Of CRI Moscow
IMF
Linear (IMF)
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
7500 8000 8500 9000 9500 10000
SWV
Count Rate Of CRI Moscow
swv(km/s)
Linear (swv(km/s))
(c ) (d)

6. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 11 Issue: 02 | Feb 2024 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2024, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 8.226 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 71
shocks are associated large decreases in CRI Fig 1 (a&b) with , where as small decreases are associated magnetic clouds are
not preceded by shocks. The modulation in CRI are anti- correlated Fig.4b &Fig.4b with Solar Activity indices Fig.2b
&Fig.3b. Modulation in Cosmic rays are produced by Vsw is related to convection, diffusion depends on the IMF and its
fluctuations,Fig.2a & Fig.3a and the tilt of the heliosphereic current sheet. Solar activity has been proven of very low
Sunspot numbers nearly absent and solar magnetic field is reduced, are about half as those observed during the previous
Solar minimum.Due to weaker in B, a high cosmic ray intensity observed in 2009 and there after an unusual rapid increase
in the tilt angle is likely related to the weaker polar field. The decrease in IMF is due to either weaker input of solar polar
magnetic flux which in turn reduces the GCRs entering the inner heliosphere .
Conclusion
The sector structure and local components of the solar magnetic field take part in the formation of the heliomagnetosphere
and play an important role in GCR modulation. Modulation in GCR intensity are produced by the transient disturbance like
traveling interplanetary shocks, CMEs and events vary with Solar Activity at the different phases of the Sunspot Cycle.
Modulation in cosmic ray intensity are anti- correlated with solar activity indices . Modulations in GCRs are produced by solar
wind velocity (Vsw) is related to diffusion & convection depends on the IMF strength (B) and its variation , and the tilt of the
heliosphereic current sheet.
Refrences
1. W.S.,Smith, W.H.Matthaeus., and G.P. Zank, J .Geo.Res. 106, (2001),8253.
2. G.P. Zank, L.Adhikari, and P. Hunana, .Astrophys. J.835, (2017), 147.
3. P.Chawdhary, P.K., Kudela, and B.N. Dwivedi, Solar Physics 286, (2013) ,2.
4. L.L.Zhao, L. Adhikari, G.P. Zank, Q. Hu & X.S. Feng Astrophys.J. 856, (2018) 94.
5. Forbush , Physics Rev. 51, (1937),1108-1109.
6. E.N.Parker. Planet.Space Sci,13,9-49,doi:10.1016/0032-0633(65),(1965),90131-5.
7. L.F. Burlaga, and G.J. Chang. Geophys. Res.93, (1988)2511-2518.
8. B.K.Tiwari, B.R.Ghormare, and P.K.Shrivastava Res. J. Physical Sci. Vol. 2(5), (2014) 8-11.
9. L.F.Burlaga, E.Sitter, F.Mariani, R.Schwenn, J. Geophys. Res.86, (1981), 6673.
10. M.E.Potgieter, J.Atmos.Sci-Terr.Phys.70, (2008) , 207.
11. M.E.Potgieter, Plant.Space Res.46, (2010),402.
12. H.S.Ahluwalia and R.C. Yghuhay, AIP Conf. Proc.1216, (2010),699.
13. B.KTiwari., B.R.Ghormare., P.K.Shrivastava., D.P.Tiwari.Res. J. Physical Sci. Vol. 2(3), (2014),4-8.
14. R.Modzelewska.,M.V.Alania., Solar Phys, 286, (2013), 593-607.
15. H.Moraal , P.H.Stoker, J .Geophys.Res. 115, (2010),A12109, 1-9 .
16. K.Nagashima and I. Morishitha., Planetary and space Sciences Vol.28 No.2, (1980)P- 117.
17. Y.Z.Ding.,G.Li.,X.J.Hu.,et al 2020,RAA,20,145
18. A.L.Upton And D.H.Hathaway.2018,GeoRL,45,8091