Great to finally see this issue sorted out (at least for now... just kidding, I hope!).
Now, what is the interaction between this result and the paper published by Swisdak et al. a month ago which argued that Voyager 1 had crossed the heliopause? Is this confirmation in some sense of their claim (albeit by distinct means) or is the Voyager team's conclusion qualitatively different?
PS: I recognize that this new result was already submitted by the time the other paper came out, and the Science embargo would have prevented open discussion back then about the available evidence.
As a grad student, I'm looking forward to another exciting AGU this December!
heliophysicist4 karma
Great to finally see this issue sorted out (at least for now... just kidding, I hope!).
Now, what is the interaction between this result and the paper published by Swisdak et al. a month ago which argued that Voyager 1 had crossed the heliopause? Is this confirmation in some sense of their claim (albeit by distinct means) or is the Voyager team's conclusion qualitatively different?
PS: I recognize that this new result was already submitted by the time the other paper came out, and the Science embargo would have prevented open discussion back then about the available evidence.
As a grad student, I'm looking forward to another exciting AGU this December!
View HistoryShare Link