Physics
Scientific paper
Nov 1993
adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1993jgr....9819127h&link_type=abstract
Journal of Geophysical Research (ISSN 0148-0227), vol. 98, no. A11, p. 19,127-19,131
Physics
2
Airglow, Atmospheric Ionization, Earth Atmosphere, Gravity Waves, Oxygen Spectra, Aeronomy, Nonlinearity
Scientific paper
Weinstock (1978) (hereafter referred to as W78) presented a theory of airglow response to the passage of atmospheric gravity waves. He dealt in particular with certain molecular oxygen emmissions that were a by-product of atomic oxygen recombination in the lower thermosphere. Because of the rapid height variation of atomic oxygen concentration on the underside of the emitting region, he discovered that perturbations of concentration there, when measured in an Eulerian frame of reference, were so large as to invalidate a linearized treatment of them. Hines and Tarasick (1987) (hereafter referred to as HT 87), showed that the motivating objective of Weinstock's nonlinear development was of no relevance to vertical airglow observations. This was because the line-of-sight integration that the technique entails removes from the calculation the nonlinear effect of large gradients of minor species concentration. Thus a linearized theory of the airglow emissions would be adequate, provided only that a linearized theory of the waves themselves was adequate. Isler et al. (1991) (hereafter referred to as ITPM91) have taken issue with the method and conclusions of HT87, claiming that some 'new nonlinearity', presumably not recognized by us, was inherent in our transition from an Eulerian to a Lagrange-like form of analysis. They found this nonlinearity to be important observationally and found it 'tempting to think' that it was due implicitly to Weinstock' original nonlinearity, a conclusion that would contradict the conclusion of HT87. The present note is a response to their claims, firstly with respect to their implying error or oversight on our part and secondly with respect to the residual question of the importance of nonlinearities in the response of airglow to gravity waves. We find that the new nonlinearity is neither new nor due implicitlty to that of Weinstock, although we agree that some degree of nonlinearity, different from that which they calculate, may well be relevant observationally when the gravity waves are of sufficient amplitude.
Hines Colin O.
Tarasick David W.
No associations
LandOfFree
On the nonlinear response of airglow to atmospheric gravity waves does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.
If you have personal experience with On the nonlinear response of airglow to atmospheric gravity waves, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and On the nonlinear response of airglow to atmospheric gravity waves will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-810976