AR 13217

[Philalethes]

36 minutes ago, mozy said:

We now have delta/deltas forming once again.

Yep, I saw the beginnings of it earlier too.

28 minutes ago, MinYoongi said:

Where?

19 minutes ago, Sam Warfel said:

I don’t see a delta, at least not yet. What are you referring to, Mozy?

What I do see is what may be a light bridge forming in the main core, that worries me 

Same place as before, here:

There's even hints at a second small positive spot to the right there.

It does look like the big negative spot is indeed breaking up, but I'm not sure that's necessarily going to adversely affect the area of interest, maybe. I do suppose having spots break up isn't exactly what you want for activity in general.

Edited February 11, 2023 by Philalethes Bythos

[mozy]

6 minutes ago, Philalethes Bythos said:

Yep, I saw the beginnings of it earlier too.

Same place as before, here:

There's even hints at a second small positive spot to the right there.

It does look like the big negative spot is indeed breaking up, but I'm not sure that's necessarily going to adversely affect the area of interest, maybe. I do suppose having spots break up isn't exactly what you want for activity in general.

Yeah, but it looks like the growth kinda stopped with those spots, almost looks like it's decaying slightly already, but that can change again real quick.

[Philalethes]

5 minutes ago, mozy said:

Yeah, but it looks like the growth kinda stopped with those spots, almost looks like it's decaying slightly already, but that can change again real quick.

True, sadly. As mentioned earlier, these small delta groups aren't exactly something to go crazy over, they're certainly not like the huge deltas of yore and lore. Worth keeping an eye on for sure, though, the region has produced a fair amount of flares already after all. That being said, I think the size of the deltas is definitely relevant to how much eruptive activity one should typically expect, i.e. that a region like this with relatively small deltas will tend to not be that eruptive. Surprises happen all the time, though.

Edited February 11, 2023 by Philalethes Bythos

[mozy]

Just now, Philalethes Bythos said:

True, sadly. As mentioned earlier, these small delta groups aren't exactly something to go crazy over, they're certainly not like the huge deltas of lore. Worth keeping an eye on for sure, though, the region has produced a fair amount of flares already after all. That being said, I think the size of the deltas is definitely relevant to how much eruptive activity one should typically expect, i.e. that a region like this with relatively small deltas will tend to not be that eruptive. Surprises happen all the time, though.

Yeah, I don't really care for small spots like these as deltas of this size usually don't do anything, but it sure could be a start of something bigger to come.

And we've already seen a random X-flare from this region so who knows what more It's capable of

[Philalethes]

1 minute ago, mozy said:

Yeah, I don't really care for small spots like these as deltas of this size usually don't do anything, but it sure could be a start of something bigger to come.

And we've already seen a random X-flare from this region so who knows what more It's capable of

My sentiments exactly.

[WildWill]

19 minutes ago, Philalethes Bythos said:

My sentiments exactly.

I’m afraid this is another area where we may just have to agree to disagree. To me, it looked like a small delta did form as noted above. If you look now, while it has deteriorated a bit, I still see a really small delta there… look at the two side by side tiny spots at the bottom of that little group. 
 

Didn’t this AR, with its tiny little delta just kick out an X flare? I don’t think size matters here… I could be wrong, but in this case, I don’t think so.

Ive seen a number of “large deltas” over the last year which have done nothing. Isn’t this the same location as the three X flares a month ago? Small deltas then too I believe. 
 

It is the magnetic intensity and shear that are most important in my view. I think that a lot of that stuff is going on underneath the group- so it’s very hard to tell until it kicks out an X flare and in this instance I do not believe size matters like it does with many other things… 

I just hope it keeps it up! 
 

All Y’all Have Ya A Good Un…

Will

1 hour ago, Sam Warfel said:

I don’t see a delta, at least not yet. What are you referring to, Mozy?

What I do see is what may be a light bridge forming in the main core, that worries me 

Howdy,

I wouldn’t worry too much, it did the same thing last time around. Opened up and closed up a few hours later with a little different shape. I think there is obviously a lot of magnetic energy twisted up in there. Hopefully, we’ll see it expend some more of that energy with another nice reconnect! 
 

Cheers.
 

Will

[Philalethes]

4 minutes ago, WildWill said:

To me, it looked like a small delta did form as noted above. If you look now, while it has deteriorated a bit, I still see a really small delta there… look at the two side by side tiny spots at the bottom of that little group. 

That is indeed exactly what we just said; there is indeed a small delta there as of writing this. It looks almost exactly the same as the delta I posted previously, which you at that point quite vehemently refused to acknowledge as a delta. That broke up, and now it reformed.

10 minutes ago, WildWill said:

Didn’t this AR, with its tiny little delta just kick out an X flare?

Yes, as we both said just now as well; it has indeed showed promising flare activity, so definitely noteworthy, but still no significant eruptive activity after it rounded the limb. I absolutely agree that it can be deceptive and that it's very hard to say what's going on under the surface, and also that large deltas conversely don't necessarily have to bring with them activity either, but based on the historical records there does seem to be a general correlation between size and activity, with larger spots and larger deltas in general tending to be responsible for the biggest flares and eruptions.

 

[mozy]

55 minutes ago, WildWill said:

I’m afraid this is another area where we may just have to agree to disagree. To me, it looked like a small delta did form as noted above. If you look now, while it has deteriorated a bit, I still see a really small delta there… look at the two side by side tiny spots at the bottom of that little group. 
 

Didn’t this AR, with its tiny little delta just kick out an X flare? I don’t think size matters here… I could be wrong, but in this case, I don’t think so.

Ive seen a number of “large deltas” over the last year which have done nothing. Isn’t this the same location as the three X flares a month ago? Small deltas then too I believe. 
 

It is the magnetic intensity and shear that are most important in my view. I think that a lot of that stuff is going on underneath the group- so it’s very hard to tell until it kicks out an X flare and in this instance I do not believe size matters like it does with many other things… 

I just hope it keeps it up! 
 

All Y’all Have Ya A Good Un…

Will

1. No one said the delta is completely gone yet.

2. You wont find strong magnetic shear with a really small delta like that, and when that X-flare occurred, I barely saw a delta present.

3. Size in deltas definitely do matter.

4. I'm sorry but why do you always have to come with your "I have to disagree comments" with every delta spot we mention especially when ur the one asking us to point them out... It will only yet again cause a debate which will end up with a moderator removing comments or closing a thread..

 

Edited February 11, 2023 by mozy

[hamateur 1953]

I recall one group with delta making nearly a full transit across our side as well W W.  It was incredibly frustrating. Then it died. 

I recall being worried that I stared at it too long in pique as well. Cannot take this subject too seriously. Or at least I can’t cuz Iman idiot just sitting here waiting for some action. 

Edited February 11, 2023 by hamateur 1953

[MinYoongi]

25% for a X? O.o

Im sorry but I don’t even see a proper delta?

[mozy]

4 minutes ago, MinYoongi said:

25% for a X? O.o

Im sorry but I don’t even see a proper delta?

Ha, ikr.. 

[MinYoongi]

7 minutes ago, mozy said:

Ha, ikr.. 

is noaa drunk again? Or did the region significantly got less complex from when the synoptic map was made? 
It looks nothing like yesterday to me. Still some intermixing but just not.. 25% for an x.

[Philalethes]

55 minutes ago, MinYoongi said:

25% for a X? O.o

Im sorry but I don’t even see a proper delta?

Maybe they're using certain statistical inferences to make those predictions; for example, WildWill mentioned previously that Scott had said something about X-flares rarely appearing alone, so maybe heuristics like that are included in the forecast without adjusting for specifics (in this case that the X-flare was extremely impulsive and not eruptive at all, and barely peaked above X at all). It's hard to say without more insight into their methodology, just speculating as to what their reasons might be.

Also, even if the delta is only very barely still there, you can still make out that the region has some complexity given how the positive spots (which have almost dwindled to nothing by now) are positioned almost directly above the larger negative spot, and to the right of two smaller negative spots; in that hemisphere it would be normal for the positive region to be on the left, so I would assume there's some electromagnetic tension keeping it there.

It did produce a couple of M-flares earlier as well, but I agree that if it keeps developing in this way, another X-flare seems unlikely. But as always, who knows, it might redevelop too, happens to regions frequently.

[mozy]

Well, this region looks to be over.. for now

[MinYoongi]

57 minutes ago, mozy said:

Well, this region looks to be over.. for now

Deltas died?

[mozy]

10 minutes ago, MinYoongi said:

Deltas died?

Whole region is dying

[Philalethes]

14 minutes ago, MinYoongi said:

Deltas died?

There's still an extremely tiny speck of the positive spot left, but for all intents and purposes I'd say it's gone for now, that tiny little umbra is hardly dark enough to qualify as a spot at this point. You can see it in the uncolorized m-gram as well:

Just to note, that tiny positive speck that remains is the white part on the right there; it might look like the part on the left, but there was never any spot there, nor is there now.

Edited February 12, 2023 by Philalethes Bythos

[MinYoongi]

Well, if youre getting bored, i just submitted something under the filament thread!

[Philalethes]

Now it looks completely gone.

[MinYoongi]

This is almost an Alpha class spot by now.

[Philalethes]

17 hours ago, MinYoongi said:

This is almost an Alpha class spot by now.

[WildWill]

On 2/12/2023 at 7:47 AM, Philalethes Bythos said:

Maybe they're using certain statistical inferences to make those predictions; for example, WildWill mentioned previously that Scott had said something about X-flares rarely appearing alone, so maybe heuristics like that are included in the forecast without adjusting for specifics (in this case that the X-flare was extremely impulsive and not eruptive at all, and barely peaked above X at all). It's hard to say without more insight into their methodology, just speculating as to what their reasons might be.

Also, even if the delta is only very barely still there, you can still make out that the region has some complexity given how the positive spots (which have almost dwindled to nothing by now) are positioned almost directly above the larger negative spot, and to the right of two smaller negative spots; in that hemisphere it would be normal for the positive region to be on the left, so I would assume there's some electromagnetic tension keeping it there.

It did produce a couple of M-flares earlier as well, but I agree that if it keeps developing in this way, another X-flare seems unlikely. But as always, who knows, it might redevelop too, happens to regions frequently.

According to the statistics (from the papers 3g posted and one of Scott's papers) BGD sunspot groups produce X flares 23% of the time. 
They may adjust the probability based on flux, but whenever there is a BGD group there is almost a 1 on 4 chance...

Hope this helps.

 

Will

[Philalethes]

40 minutes ago, WildWill said:

According to the statistics (from the papers 3g posted and one of Scott's papers) BGD sunspot groups produce X flares 23% of the time. 
They may adjust the probability based on flux, but whenever there is a BGD group there is almost a 1 on 4 chance...

Yes, that's definitely noteworthy as a general point. I do however wonder if perhaps the same trap of applying such a heuristic could be the case for that too, i.e. to keep the prediction around ~25% even after the region had already produced an impulsive and non-eruptive X-flare, despite how this would tend to noticeably rearrange the field and essentially "spend" its potential for further flares (barring more subsurface activity, of course). It's after all one thing to extrapolate from past data, but another to adjust for the specifics of the situation.

I imagine something more accurate for this type of situation would be something along the lines of, "for a region of roughly this complexity, what are the odds of a second X-flare given that the first was of so and so strength and non-eruptive"; one would of course have to make certain algorithmic determinations about how "roughly this complexity" would be classified automatically, as well as a similar determination for how eruptive a flare is, but if one were to do something like this I would suspect one would find the chances of a second X-flare in a relatively non-complex region like this after a first non-eruptive X-flare would probably be significantly lower than 25%. That is my guess, at least.

[WildWill]

19 hours ago, WildWill said:

According to the statistics (from the papers 3g posted and one of Scott's papers) BGD sunspot groups produce X flares 23% of the time. 
They may adjust the probability based on flux, but whenever there is a BGD group there is almost a 1 on 4 chance...

Hope this helps.

 

Will

Howdy,

I would add a couple of notes 

The 25% chance gets adjusted for the current configuration of the group and the size of the group (the whole group). I'm sure flux factors into it. I do not know if the size of the "delta" is taken into consideration. I couldn't find statistics on that. There are statistics related to the largest spot in the group. This falls under the "configuration" and is part of the classification. Here again, while I found statistics, I do not know if this is taken into consideration when determining/adjusting probabilities.

Additionally, it is worth noting that almost all X flares occur in groups - like in Jan when we had 3 in a week. According to the statistics/historical record. So the probability should go up after an X flare occurs in isolated (first in a while).  This doesn't take into account a group which is "falling apart" - just stochastically - statistical probably goes up.

I do not know if they adjust probabilities in their predictions because an X flare has already occurred.  I suppose that's a question for SWPC.  

Hope this helps

Will

😉
 

 

 

Edited February 14, 2023 by WildWill