Okay so what does this mean without all the jargon. Often in space physics we have only one or perhaps multiple but very infrequent (in space) observations. In the more recent years we're starting to get more densely populated measurements, but their still quiet far apart. Turns out space is big. We often have trouble determining how large an active region (say something analogous to a rain cloud) is. We don't necessarily know if observations of electron loss to the atmosphere from the radiation belts are part of the same system or if they are due to multiple systems (say the same thunderstorm over Wisconsin and Michigan or just two separate thunder storms which happen to be occurring at the same time). In this paper we were able to have measurements from just the right place to show that we think these regions are all connected together as the observations were coherent. In fact we had measurements that showed that the waves we saw in space were highly likely (as we can never quiet prove something in science) the cause of the electron loss observed by BARREL.
So why does this matter. Well we showed that a theory postulated about 40 years ago seems to hold true with observations. Not just any old observations, but perhaps the most complete set of observations obtained to test this theory. We also have shown that the waves inside the plasmasphere, at lest at times, can respond very coherently which has large implications for the inner boundary of the outer radiation belt.
So if you are looking for some fun light summer beach reading, I suggest you pick up the latest Nature journal and turn the page to 193. There's a great article there :). And if you want to learn more, had to their website and take a look at the methods section. *
*To all my Australian friends and others who live in the southern hemisphere. I tried to get them to flip the image of the Earth showing Australia at the top of the cartoon. However I was out voted by all the northern hemispheric biased collaborators.