Talk:Galactic cosmic ray

Physics Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Astronomy

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles

Definition

Define "completely uniform"? lysdexia 19:58, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Ripped from Nasa.gov

Is this a copyright violation? This, like, entire article is taken from: http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/know_l1/cosmic_rays.html. I know that the work of Federal employees while doing their job is supposed to be public domain, and I understand how it works for images, but this just doesn't seem right to me. -Dwiki 23:46, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you're right. I've deleted the plagiarized material.--207.233.86.101 23:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would it not have been simpler to give it proper credit than to put out a call to rewrite it? --Tagishsimon (talk)

Belts

"Except for the very highest energy galactic cosmic rays, the radius of gyration in the earth's magnetic field is tight enough to confine them along lines of magnetic flux, and channel them into the Van Allen Belt."

I think this is not precise. Van Allen belts are mostly fed by decay of neutrons coming from hadronic interaction of the primaries. Lowest energy primaries are just deflected away unless this phrase refers to injection of very low energy particles near the polar caps. I wait for comments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.108.253.163 (talk) 13:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest Merger

This article is almot the same as the Extragalatic Comsmic rays article, I suggest merging it until someone writes up a mor informative article for both. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.209.65.213 (talk) 04:20, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, we have a very well developed cosmic ray article and then we have galactic cosmic ray and extragalactic cosmic ray. I'm going to use main to direct the reader to the main cosmic ray page.174.49.84.214 (talk) 16:41, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Origin

The section headed "origin" does not say anything at all about the origin of the particles! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.162.107.11 (talk) 15:34, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

There's a box saying "this articles has a list of references" - but it hasn't! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.162.107.11 (talk) 15:36, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]