JOURNAL REVIEW

Cosmic Ray Muon

Based from the study conducted by Abdullahman and Almutayri in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. They
employ cosmic tray data and radiosonde to measure the muon production. They were able the
found out the effect of atmospheric pressure, level of pion production and temperature at that
level. They have used three parameter coefficients these are 𝛼(pressure), β(temperature), and γ
(height) respectively. The researcher was able to detect muon production with the aid of 1m 2
plastic scintillator and viewed photomultiplier tube (PMT), both are contained in a light-tight box
based from their description. During their experimental research period 2002-2012 some of the
detectors went through periods of failure like power failure, relocations and calibration procedure
these were some of the circumstances faced by the researcher. And from there study,
investigators were able to assessed that the pion production level is assumed to be 100mb. And
from the tabulated and gathered data it can be inferred that there is seasonal variation that affects
the trend of the data being plotted thus cause the yearly fluctuations of four parameters (a)
atmospheric pressure, (b) level of maximum production, (c) temperature at that level and the (d)
muon counts that is based from their mean values. They were able to established the following
relationship (1) the raw muon rate and each individual parameter (atmosphere and temperature)
considering 100mb level and found out that it is inversely correlated unlikely the muon rate is
directly proportional to the level of pion production, (2) dependence of cosmic ray muons as the
height and temperature is distorted by the dependence on the pressure. They were able to identify
that during cold times, pions will be less likely to decay thus producing more muons before they
interact while warm times it is more likely less muons. Researchers were able to conduct
regression analyses to established the effect of each individual variable on the muon rate so
multiple regression analysis were employed from the study namely(i) raw muon rate and both
pressure and temperature at production level, (ii) raw muon rate and pressure and level of pion
production, (iii) raw muon rate and the intervention of the three parameters and lastly (iv)
pressure-corrected muon rate. And based from their extracted result they were able to gather
data to correlate with the corresponding coefficient that were used in the study. It then used to
correct the measured muon rates. Though they were able to established correction, still there
exist seasonal variation they suggested that other terrestrial or extraterrestrial may be the case.
They coined the word seasonal does not pertain to long term variation but in a random similar to
seasonal variation based from their observation. Furthermore, researchers were able to divide
and group into four seasonal groups and all the four correlations were employed. Thus, the pion
production level has positive effect in muon during spring and winter and negative effect during
fall and summer (inversely correlated).

Another related study conducted by De Mendonca, Echer, Makhmutov and Fernandez G. Based
from their study they conducted series of tests and analyses of atmospheric pressure and
temperature effects on cosmic ray using CARPET as their detector. During their study they stated
agreeably that atmospheric effects on the flux of a secondary particles cannot be ignored or
should be stated to important. Hence it was evident that atmospheric temperature change has an
additional cause for the seasonal variations of cosmic ray intensities. And they were able to

Bryan Philip J. Bejerano

BS CHEM 4
 JOURNAL REVIEW

identify the maximum and minimum seasonal modulation during winter and summer. And they
were able to identify that the negative effect corresponding to the diminishing to muon intensity at
ground level but during winter there is an increase muon production thus the decrease in muon
production could be attributed to the increase in propagation path and expansion of the
atmosphere. The instrument used consisted of 24 blocks of 10 gas-discharge cylindrical STS-6
Geiger counter and in summary of the study conducted using first method they were able to
present a large reduction of the seasonal variation, while the data corrected by the temperature
at the latitude presented a small fraction on the other researcher were able to compare using
other method like the third method their result does not differ from those data gathered using the
first method. However, using the forth method they were able to deduce a more suggestable
method, a method that is integral in nature and able to correct likewise suited to the others due to
the best removal temperature effects superimposed on the seasonal variation and the good
anticorrelation with the solar activity cycle between 2006 and 2012 stated from the study.

One study by Berkova, Belov and Eroshenko et.al in Moscow Russia also proven the use of data
more effectively from global atmospheric models instead of data thus excluding the temperature
effect using integral and alternative approximated methods which is the mass-averaged
temperature method and the effective level of generation method. Based from their study the
temperature effect of the muon component occurs as a result of competition between pion and
muon decays thus the interaction with nuclei of the air. Agreeably they clearly stated that the
muon flow either decrease as a result of absorption (negative component effect) or increase due
to the additional decay of pions (positive component effect) because muon with high energies its
decay effect is negligible. They have used effective level of generation method that is based from
the assumption that muons are generated at certain isobaric level which is commonly 100mbar.
And from their result they have discussed the exclusion of the temperature variation using
different techniques to correct the data and be able to correlate them for all the telescopes whose
data was available during their experimental period. And they proved that the mass-averaged
temperature method proven to be the best method that yielded a very desirable approximation
which coincides with the correction obtained from the integral method. Nonetheless, the high
seasonal variations which the researcher observed at one of the satellite detector in Tibet, a
detector-based muon telescope and from the result they seemed to be 4 times greater than those
at other detectors they seemed to reason out that the result can be the caused of unlikely even
altitudes of the Tibet stations and the possibility of the local instrument temperature effect.

Another study conducted A. Duperier in London suggested that seasonal effect was eliminated,
thus heating of the atmosphere by conduction and convection resulting to a corresponding to a
value of height with respect to the temperature of the ground, while the greater the longer the
period it would lead to a value of the ground temperature coefficient obtained by using variations
from month to month that is much greater than that obtained from day to day. The said study was
able to identify that the change in height of the 7.5 cm was more pronounced thus in pressure-
level in winter than in summer with respect to that in ground temperature and their conclusion was
that the discrepancies between the temperature coefficients as obtained by the different

Bryan Philip J. Bejerano

BS CHEM 4
 JOURNAL REVIEW

observers could be attributed to the fact that the method or should we say the least part of the
methods of computation caused the differences in computation. Hence the 12-month variation in
cosmic- ray intensity can be the effect of meson decay as said by the researcher. The possibility
of ruling out of the observed 12-month variation can be due to heliomagnetic field this could be
explained from assumption of the researcher that the bulk of mesons originates at the 7.5cm Hg
pressure-level. And in addition, they also said that mesons are formed by primary protons the
penetrating power of which it is not too difficult from that of the hard component.

Also, the same case conducted by Braga, Lago et.al they have investigated the temperature
effect correction for the cosmic ray muon data at Brazil, from their result they were able to point
out a clear anti-correlation from the altitude of 100hPa surface observed in 20058 and for each
detector at Nagoya and Sao Martinho. They were able to deduce the data gathered from the
yearly variations in the altitude of 100hPa surface for Nagoya and Sa Martinho were out of phase
to each other thus can be accounted because of the atmospheric expansion causing the
maximum altitude of the 100hPa equi-pressure layer during the summer in each hemisphere. And
in addition the amplitude of yearly variation could be traced back that the temperature effect is
larger in Nagoya than that in Sao Martinho.

Bryan Philip J. Bejerano

BS CHEM 4