I've recently gotten a lot more interested in studying cosmic rays and thinking about their content and their implication as it relates to solar physics and astrophysics.
In terms of the highest speed charged particles in the universe, the fastest, most abundant forms of current which we observe from space are contained in high speed ions that are slamming onto the suns atmosphere, and all of the various bodies in the solar system constantly. Apparently 99 percent of all cosmic rays are positively charged ions. About 1 percent of cosmic rays are pretty evenly divided between electrons and positrons, with positrons being fewer in number at the lower kinetic energy states while composing a majority at the higher kinetic energy states. if we assume that the electrons and positron "ambiplasma" is pretty much net neutral with respect to charge, that means that the vast majority of the inbound flow of high speed charged particles are net positive ions of various types.
IMO, that particular observation of the relative charge of "space', tends to support Birkeland's cathode solar model better than it supports Juergen's anode model.
The paper would also seem to imply that electrons are less massive, and therefore their loss of kinetic energy is more affected by Bremsstrahlung than heavier high speed ions. That would tend to explain why there's such a high ratio of ions vs high speed electrons/positrons.
The cosmic rays seem to all show a pattern that is consistent with a single source as I'm "interpreting' the paper.
Does that seem like a reasonable premise and interpretation to others, or am I just being biased, and/or am I missing something important here? I'm really looking for feedback on this issue.