solar storm

Summary:

www.spaceweather.com

solar storm

bryan (guest) 28 Oct 2010 01:32

so i dont get it, i thought nasa was predicting a smaller than average solar maximum. But on the website spaceweather.com , the sun seems to be starting to head towards solar maximum. I hope that is a good thing, and normal. Are we doing as much as possible to get satellites and our grids ready for the next solar storm, and does the hole in the magnetosphere pose any danger to us? and wouldnt this hole be around for a long time, it doesnt take a few years to develop, im sure its been around for a very long time by now. sorry about all the questions, its just that the upcoming solar max seems to be the only theory with any validity to it.

Re: solar storm

TheGreatJuju 28 Oct 2010 02:01

The Sun is heading toward solar maximum, currently projected for spring 2013 with "a maximum sunspot number of 90." Solar minimum was in 2008. A solar max isn't something that just happens. It's a gradual rise in activity, followed by a gradual decline. Solar maxes and minimums are identified retrospectively.

Are we doing as much as possible to get satellites and our grids ready for the next solar storm

Knowing is half the battle, and the SOHO, STEREO and SDO are and will be invaluable in that respect. The other half of the battle is preparedness and response capacity following a major event, which of course will vary from region to region.

does the hole in the magnetosphere pose any danger to us?

Holes form in the magnetosphere routinely. These openings can conceivably cause a "loading" of the atmosphere, that might result in more severe geomagnetic activity later. It is no direct danger to us or life in general.

and wouldnt this hole be around for a long time, it doesnt take a few years to develop, im sure its been around for a very long time by now.

Such breaches generally last for only as long as what cause them, such as a strong gust of solar wind.

its just that the upcoming solar max seems to be the only theory with any validity to it.

There have been solar maximums and solar minimums recorded since the 11-year cycle was first noted. It would be unusual to not see these changes.

---

"They tell you, but do you believe it? If so, why?"

http://www.undeadrufus.com

Re: solar storm

Astrogeek 28 Oct 2010 05:06

Hi Bryan;

JuJu's comments are right on the mark.

I'll delve into your comments in a slightly different direction, and that is to what I perceive as a bit of confusion on your part between solar storms and solar maximums (or 'maxima').

Every 11 years (on average) there is a full cycle in solar activity, including one solar maximum and one solar minimum. As we discuss on our solar flares page, this is actually one half of a 22-year magnetic cycle, which the solar activity is tied to. Think of the solar activity as a sine wave, constantly going up and down, with 11 years peak-to-peak, more or less regularly, with occasional sags or spikes. That is the backdrop of our solar weather.

There is a lot of intense study of the sun, because we (the space-faring nations of the world) have painted ourselves into a technological corner with our dependence on satellites. Intense solar weather can cause all kinds of problems for satellites, including frying the electronics, to causing low-orbit satellites to have to plough through more atmosphere than they were intended, causing them to have to expend fuel to keep them aloft.

Solar storms are more likely to occur at or shortly after a solar maximum. In addition there was a 2006 publication by a group called NCAR (National Center for Atmospheric Research) which made a prediction (based on a 'conveyor belt' theory of sunspots that I don't really understand) that the upcoming solar maximum would be more active than average, and perhaps as active as the 1956 solar max. In addition, the National Academy of Science published a 'Workshop Report' in 2008 (perhaps prompted by the NCAR report) which detailed what could happen to us in a worst-case scenario, and it was pretty unsettling.

However, the NAS Workshop Report is not a prediction of what will occur in 2012 (even though they used the 2012 date in the report, because it coincided with the estimate of the next solar max). It was intended as a 'wake up call' to the government and private industry, and should be considered the same as the USGS talking about which bridges will fail in the San Francisco Bay Area during an 8.5 earthquake. It's something that needs to be paid attention to, but not panic about.

So that is my summary: Solar maximums are normal. They happen every 11 years on average. They are periods of increased solar activity.

Solar storms are brief bouts of solar activity which can cause flares (large explosions on the surface of the sun that release radiation, particularly in X-Rays) or CMEs (coronal mass ejections) which toss a blob of solar plasma out of the sun. Solar storms can cause some damage, including damage to unprotected electronics in orbit (which is why Satellite manufacturers now 'harden' their birds, because they are expensive and they don't want them taken out by a CME), and they have the potential under very extreme circumstances to cause effects on the ground.

The upcoming maximum is now predicted to be a 'wimpy' one (in comparison with others), and there is some speculation that we may be headed for another period of reduced activity like the Maunder Minimum (1645 to 1715) when there were virtually no sunspots at all.

I hope this helps.

---

"Do you ever think about things you do think about?" - Henry Drummond to Matthew Harrison Brady in Inherit the Wind

bryan (guest) 29 Oct 2010 05:54

by the National Academy of Science published a 'Workshop Report' in 2008 report, what did they say is the worst case scenario, and what is unsettling about it?

Astrogeek 29 Oct 2010 06:18

It's a fairly lengthy report, which you can download for free from their site, which is linked on our solar flares page.

It details the effects on the economy and the number of lives lost due to the loss of electricity due to damage to major transmission transformers, among other things.

Like I said, it is a 'worst case scenario'. With the fleet of satellites we have watching the sun now, I'm not even sure it's possible.

---

"Do you ever think about things you do think about?" - Henry Drummond to Matthew Harrison Brady in Inherit the Wind

Astrogeek 29 Oct 2010 06:20

Here's the link: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12507

---

"Do you ever think about things you do think about?" - Henry Drummond to Matthew Harrison Brady in Inherit the Wind

Matthew (guest) 26 Apr 2011 19:37

So this Workshop Report is just an account of what would happen in the event of another Carrington Scenario? Is there any reason to expect one any time soon? And how would the satellites help; I thought we couldn't detect one until seven minutes before hitting Earth?

Gary A 26 Apr 2011 19:52

With a cme you get at least a days notice, a solar flare travels at the speed of light so that would take roughly seven minutes to hit. A cme consists of the type of particles that could be dangerous to electrical equipment. There's no reason to expect one any time soon, indeed the next solar maximum is shaping up to be the weakest in 100 years. However, large flares and cme's can happen at any time, even during solar minimum. Don't be fooled by the hysteria about solar activity putting modern technology back to the stone age, that's highly unlikely. The sun is monitored constantly and solar physicists are getting better are predicting solar activity, so I wouldn't panick over it.

---

The great thing about science is, it's true whether you believe in it or not.

TheGreatJuju 26 Apr 2011 19:55

So this Workshop Report is just an account of what would happen in the event of another Carrington Scenario?

It's an account of what might happen in a Carrington-caliber event with next to no preparation. As Astrogeek notes above, the forewarning we have now makes such a scenario pretty unlikely, if not impossible.

Is there any reason to expect one any time soon?

No, but they aren't predictable.

And how would the satellites help; I thought we couldn't detect one until seven minutes before hitting Earth?

Who told you that? We can monitor sunspots 24/7, and we can track ejecta from the Sun all the way to Earth. STEREO has a 360° view.

---

"They tell you, but do you believe it? If so, why?"

http://www.undeadrufus.com

Matthew (guest) 26 Apr 2011 20:51

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/super-solar-flares-armageddon-from-the-sun.html

It says something about 7 1/2 minutes. I've never heard of 'super solar flares', just the CMEs that come with them.

TheGreatJuju 26 Apr 2011 21:34

Who is Gary Orlando?

AFAIK, there is no such thing as a "super solar flare," except maybe in colloquial language to describe a monstrous one, such as an X-class. It takes light longer than 7.5 minutes to reach Earth, so unless your flare particles are traveling faster than light, ain't gonna happen. It usually takes hours for the particles to reach Earth, but a very strong proton stream was observed reaching Earth-orbit in 15 minutes back in 2005, temporarily scrambling SOHO. It happens, dude, and we're learning more and more with the recent rash of satellites dedicated to heliophysics. I can't tell you that a solar/geomagnetic event can't disrupt our way of life, but I can say that the article you just linked to references the same report we've all talked about dozens of times.

---

"They tell you, but do you believe it? If so, why?"

http://www.undeadrufus.com

Last edited on 26 Apr 2011 21:35 by TheGreatJuju Show more

Matthew (guest) 27 Apr 2011 15:47

I read that the sun is behaving strangely. Is this true? Presumably it's referring to the unprecedented low levels of activity recently. And on this website, it's been implied that a solar storm would therefore be weaker. What's the fuss then; why didn't NASA issue warnings for 2001? Is it because the magnetic energy cycle peaks in 2013 as well?

Also, is it true that the Carrington event of 1859 led to widespread fires? And my final question: can the sun create electromagnetic pulses as well? I read an article in the National Review which talked about EMPs in a similar vein to CMEs. Was this a mistake, or is this a separate threat?
http://hubpages.com/hub/SUNSPOTS-SOLAR-FLARES-SOLAR-STORMS-SOLAR-MAX-solar-cycle-sunspot-activity-sunspot-cycle-maximum

TheGreatJuju 27 Apr 2011 19:04

I read that the sun is behaving strangely. Is this true? Presumably it's referring to the unprecedented low levels of activity recently.

No, the Sun is not behaving strangely, and the long minimum was not "unprecedented," though I believe we're exiting the least active stretch in a couple hundred years.

And on this website, it's been implied that a solar storm would therefore be weaker.

I don't recall anyone stating that anywhere on this site, and it's not true. We could technically experience a Carrington-type event during Solar Minimum. We are more likely to experience storms near a maximum and less likely to experience them during a minimum, but any level of storm can occur at any time.

What's the fuss then;

Misinformation, I guess. You're the one fussing, so maybe you should answer that one yourself. ;)

why didn't NASA issue warnings for 2001?

As I recall, NASA's coverage of the solar max in 2001 wasn't much different from how they're approaching this one. They do understand the Sun better today, thanks to another decade with SOHO and the benefit of other satellites, like SDO and STEREO, so maybe there's slightly more attention on the Sun now. I really haven't taken a census and see no reason to.

Is it because the magnetic energy cycle peaks in 2013 as well?

I don't know what you mean by "magnetic energy cycle." The sunspot cycle peaks every 11 years on average, the next maximum currently forecasted for 2013.

Also, is it true that the Carrington event of 1859 led to widespread fires?

I'm sure some overloaded telegraph machines ignited paper, and overloaded lines might have caused brush fires in dry areas. I don't know how to quantify "widespread."

And my final question: can the sun create electromagnetic pulses as well?

I don't know what you mean by "electromagnetic pulses." Solar radiation is electromagnetic by definition. When you stand in sunlight, you are absorbing electromagnetic radiation. When you open you're refrigerator, you are absorbing electromagnetic radiation. You're absorbing it right now as you read this message.

I read an article in the National Review which talked about EMPs in a similar vein to CMEs. Was this a mistake, or is this a separate threat?
http://hubpages.com/hub/SUNSPOTS-SOLAR-FLARES-SOLAR-STORMS-SOLAR-MAX-solar-cycle-sunspot-activity-sunspot-cycle-maximum

That article was written by an anonymous, self-described "programmer/analyst," not an astronomer or solar physicist. I've seen worse, but the number of inaccuracies and claims lacking citation exceeds my willingness to deal with them. Seriously, just don't get your information from these free-for-all "news" sites that pass all types of fantasy off as fact.

I'm not familiar with EMP bombs, so I really can't speculate on what they might do compared to our Sun's capabilities. However, we've already been over and over and over the potential effects of solar storms on Earth and on spacecraft. We might have power outages. Satellites and other telecom infrastructure could be temporarily disrupted. In an extremely severe event, you could potentially even see some of your home appliances or personal devices damaged, though most likely indirectly from power surges if at all. The most likely scenario is that we will have CMEs and solar flares that spark geomagnetic storms, and you won't even notice, like has already happened several times this year.

Some anonymous blogger's posting of an alleged "Paraphrased Excerpt from Testimony before the Committee on Homeland Security" doesn't change any of this.

---

"They tell you, but do you believe it? If so, why?"

http://www.undeadrufus.com

Last edited on 27 Apr 2011 19:13 by TheGreatJuju Show more

Matthew (guest) 26 Apr 2011 20:53

Also, I read somewhere that a Carrington event is supposed to happen every hundred years or so, which means we are 50 years overdue. Is this true? I don't know how they worked this out; I didn't think records go back far enought o predict this sufficiently accurately.

Gary A 26 Apr 2011 21:06

The article you linked looks like nonsense to me. What's a "super solar flare"? X-class flares are the largest flares our sun can produce, in fact we had an X6.6 class flare in February this year, did you notice any adverse effects? Our sun clearly does on occasion produce larger than normal flares, the carrington event has proven that, but to say this happens every 100 years is ludacris. How can that be proven? The bottom line is that the sun has been producing flares and cme's for 6.4 billion years, so this isn't a new thing by any means. Sure, our Technology is at slight risk, but the article you linked talks about protecting tv's and other domestic appliances. I assure you these things wouldn't be affected by a carrington type cme, our power grids may lose a transformer or two, but in my opinion, that's the worst thing that will happen.

---

The great thing about science is, it's true whether you believe in it or not.

Matthew (guest) 22 May 2011 16:53

Sorry to post again, but this article from Power Magazine has me worried.
http://www.powermag.com/issues/cover_stories/The-Great-Solar-Storm-of-2012_3387.html

You've said repeatedly that the next solar maximum will be weaker than usual, but according to this article:
"It is likely to happen again and, according to space scientists, it could happen in the next few years, as a period of unusually calm solar weather reverses, picks up energy, and gets nasty. Many predictions suggest that the “big one” could come this year or next."
"The fear shared by scientists at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and NOAA is that our planet could be entering a particularly vicious “solar maximum.”

You've also said that we have forewarning for such events, but according to this article:
"The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) manages the Space Weather Prediction Center as part of the National Weather Service and has a separate website (http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/elecpower/) that provides electric utilities with alerts and space weather forecasts. Although the center uses data from multiple satellites—including ACE and STEREO, described below—NOAA is unable to provide predictions fast enough that they would be useful to the power industry, according to industry officials."

It also describes the effects of the 1989 solar storm, which was not particularly ferocious, caused problems from coast to coast, and even took out two transformers in England. It also explains why power distributors are more vulnerable than ever before, and how difficult it is to respond to a solar emergency.

Basically, a large solar storm is inevitable, and we are unprepared for it, even if it is weaker than the Carrington event.

obaeyens 22 May 2011 17:00

As far as I can see, this is just a document to explain possible risks so that engineers can make it safer.
The same type of report that would discuss all things that could happen to your car, so engineers can create a safer car.

Last edited on 22 May 2011 17:01 by obaeyens Show more

TheGreatJuju 22 May 2011 19:50

"It is likely to happen again and, according to space scientists, it could happen in the next few years, as a period of unusually calm solar weather reverses, picks up energy, and gets nasty. Many predictions suggest that the “big one” could come this year or next."
"The fear shared by scientists at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and NOAA is that our planet could be entering a particularly vicious “solar maximum.”

Simply untrue.

You've also said that we have forewarning for such events, but according to this article:
"The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) manages the Space Weather Prediction Center as part of the National Weather Service and has a separate website (http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/elecpower/) that provides electric utilities with alerts and space weather forecasts. Although the center uses data from multiple satellites—including ACE and STEREO, described below—NOAA is unable to provide predictions fast enough that they would be useful to the power industry, according to industry officials."

Did you even bother to read that? It says predictions. It isn't talking about forewarning in the event of an actual storm. It's talking about predicting storms, and we've said over and over that solar storms (and consequently geomagnetic storms) can't be predicted.

It also describes the effects of the 1989 solar storm, which was not particularly ferocious, caused problems from coast to coast, and even took out two transformers in England. It also explains why power distributors are more vulnerable than ever before, and how difficult it is to respond to a solar emergency.

It wasn't a Carrington Event, but it was pretty damn "ferocious" in its own right. Have you ignored everything that has been patiently explained to you up to this point?

Basically, a large solar storm is inevitable,

Eventually, yes, one will occur. Nobody has told you otherwise. What you've been [correctly] told is that the upcoming maximum is expected to be below average in intensity.

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/

and we are unprepared for it, even if it is weaker than the Carrington event.

No, we aren't, and you're getting a bit tool-ish. If you want to sit at your computer and wring your hands because you can't understand what you read, that's your business, but stop posting here if you can't even pay attention. Everything you need to know can be found in previous posts.

---

"They tell you, but do you believe it? If so, why?"

http://www.undeadrufus.com

Last edited on 22 May 2011 19:51 by TheGreatJuju Show more

Astrogeek 23 May 2011 19:23

From that article:

The fear shared by scientists at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and NOAA is that our planet could be entering a particularly vicious “solar maximum.” The sidebar describes the various satellites that are keeping an eye on the sun.

This statement is at odds with the actual statements of NOAA and NASA. The most recent predictions have the upcoming solar max as an unusually quiet one. There are not a lot of mainstream space scientists who fear that the upcoming solar max will be "particularly vicious". In fact, the number is close to zero.

---

"Do you ever think about things you do think about?" - Henry Drummond to Matthew Harrison Brady in Inherit the Wind

Awesomeee 23 May 2011 19:33

I think people will use Psuedo science for every upcomg solar storm a.k.a every 11 years ,

2 Words theyre dumb

---

No man knows the day nor the hour when the world will end.

Become a debunker and help out those that are being fed up with lies spread by False scientists going after you'r money.
Practice what you want to and dont give up on you'r dreams my dream is to become a basketball player 'NBA'