Comment on 'A re-examination of impulsive VLF signals in the night ionosphere of Venus'

Physics

Scientific paper

Rate now

  [ 0.00 ] – not rated yet Voters 0   Comments 0

Details

3

Venus, Nightside, Ionosphere, Electrical Field, Whistlers, Radiowaves, Emissions, Solar Effects, Plasma, Spacecraft Observations, Atmosphere, Pvo Mission, Waves, Frequencies, Lighting, Magnetic Field, Analysis, Morphology, Oefd Instrument

Scientific paper

Taylor and Cloutier (TC, 1988) previously argued that Singh and Russell (SR, 1986) wrongly identified telemetry interference as VLF broadband signals originating in Venus 'lightning events'. A response was made by Russell and Singh (RS, 1989). This comment criticizes RS, arguing that the SR did not distinguish between signal and noise and that RS makes false claims about the SR analysis. In a reply to TC, Russell argues that the SR paper, while flawed, was not intended to be quantitative and succeeds in bringing attention to the morphology of the signals seen in the upper three channels of the Pioneer Venus electric field detector.

No associations

LandOfFree

Say what you really think

Search LandOfFree.com for scientists and scientific papers. Rate them and share your experience with other people.

Rating

Comment on 'A re-examination of impulsive VLF signals in the night ionosphere of Venus' 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 Comment on 'A re-examination of impulsive VLF signals in the night ionosphere of Venus', we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Comment on 'A re-examination of impulsive VLF signals in the night ionosphere of Venus' will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

     

Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-1791517

  Search
All data on this website is collected from public sources. Our data reflects the most accurate information available at the time of publication.