Implications on the origin of cosmic rays in light of 10 TV spectral softenings
Chuan Yue, Peng-Xiong Ma, Qiang Yuan, Yi-Zhong Fan, Zhan-Fang Chen,, Ming-Yang Cui, Hao-Ting Dai, Tie-Kuang Dong, Xiaoyuan Huang, Wei Jiang,, Shi-Jun Lei, Xiang Li, Cheng-Ming Liu, Hao Liu, Yang Liu, Chuan-Ning Luo, Xu, Pan, Wen-Xi Peng, Rui Qiao, Yi-Feng Wei, Li-Bo Wu

TL;DR
Recent precise measurements of cosmic ray spectra around 10 TV reveal spectral softenings that challenge single-component models, favoring multi-source or nearby source scenarios for their origin.
Contribution
This paper analyzes new spectral softening data from DAMPE and ground-based experiments, proposing two multi-component models to explain cosmic ray origins.
Findings
Single component models cannot fit all data.
Multiple source and nearby source scenarios both fit the data.
Nearby source model is favored considering anisotropy observations.
Abstract
Precise measurements of the energy spectra of cosmic rays (CRs) show various kinds of features deviating from single power-laws, which give very interesting and important implications on their origin and propagation. Previous measurements from a few balloon and space experiments indicate the existence of spectral softenings around 10 TV for protons (and probably also for Helium nuclei). Very recently, the DArk Matter Particle Explorer (DAMPE) measurement about the proton spectrum clearly reveals such a softening with a high significance. Here we study the implications of these new measurements, as well as the groundbased indirect measurements, on the origin of CRs. We find that a single component of CRs fails to fit the spectral softening and the air shower experiment data simultaneously. In the framework of multiple components, we discuss two possible scenarios, the multiple source…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
