1 minute ago, Philalethes said:

El campo geomagnético es más fuerte en los polos y más débil cerca del ecuador; es especialmente débil cerca de la Anomalía del Atlántico Sur (SAA), que es más prominente alrededor de Paraguay y el sur de Brasil. Es por eso que las partículas cargadas, como los protones de alta energía, se canalizan hacia los polos y provocan importantes apagones de radio allí durante las tormentas de radiación solar. Tienes razón en que las "grietas" como la SAA permiten que las partículas penetren más profundamente en la ionosfera y causen más perturbaciones allí, pero en última instancia, lo que importa es la dirección del campo: en el ecuador, las líneas de campo son más o menos paralelas a la superficie y, por lo tanto, transportan partículas a los polos, mientras que cerca de los polos las líneas de campo se vuelven cada vez menos paralelas a la superficie y, en última instancia, conducen directamente a la Tierra misma.

Do you know any source to take magnetic field data in real time graphically anywhere in the world? 

15 minutes ago, Philalethes said:

The geomagnetic field is strongest at the poles and weakest near the equator; it's especially weak near the South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA) that's most prominent around Paraguay and southern Brazil. That's why charged particles, like high-energy protons, get funneled to the poles, and cause significant radio blackouts there during Solar radiation storms. You're right that "cracks" like the SAA do allow particles do penetrate deeper into the ionosphere and cause more disturbance there, but ultimately what matters is the direction of the field: at the equator the field lines are more or less parallel to the surface, and thus carry particles to the poles, whereas near the poles the field lines become less and less parallel to the surface and ultimately lead directly into Earth itself, hence why the particles are led down into the lower atmosphere there.

I would be interested in studying this subject in depth.

14 minutes ago, Jhon Henry Osorio Orozco said:

How is the protection of the magnetic field towards the poles? How is the weak magnetic field in the South Atlantic anomaly explained?

Earth's magnetic field is strongest at the poles. The positive pole loops around Earth to the negative pole to create the magnetosphere that protects Earth. It is a loop/donut though and not a sphere, so certain solar events can impact us most at the poles.

I'm not a full on expert on it, but you can open your own topic under the correct forum that it applies to as well.

2 minutes ago, Jhon Henry Osorio Orozco said:

Do you know any source to take magnetic field data in real time graphically anywhere in the world? 

There are a lot of different sources for such data, as there are magnetometers all over the world measuring the magnetic field at their respective locations. The "Magnetometers" section here on this site has some of them, for example, but you can probably find many more.

However, note that since the overall field itself doesn't change that much from year to year, global maps of the magnetic field are typically not compiled that often; here's e.g. a contour map of the field strength at various locations from 2020:

As you can see, the field strength is as low as ~25,000 nT around the SAA, and as much as 65,000 nT in the strongest sections near the  poles.

So what's typically most important for geomagnetic activity measurements is the level of disturbance to the field, i.e. how far away they are from the baseline at any given period of time. The Kp-index is perhaps the most well-known such measurement. The Dst is another.

Slight impact in process :

17 minutes ago, Jesterface23 said:

Earth's magnetic field is strongest at the poles. The positive pole loops around Earth to the negative pole to create the magnetosphere that protects Earth. It is a loop/donut though and not a sphere, so certain solar events can impact us most at the poles.

I'm not a full on expert on it, but you can open your own topic under the correct forum that it applies to as well.

I suspect what might be confusing to them is indeed why a stronger field near the poles would lead to more particles being lead there; that's certainly not so intuitive if one e.g. erroneously conceptualizes the field as a sphere and the strength as its ability to block particles.

This is of course due to the fact that the strength measures how well the field is able to capture particles instead, and so the stronger field near the poles means particles are more easily held in place there as they are led down into the lower atmosphere along the field lines. Maybe images like these help visualize it better:

 

31 minutes ago, Philalethes said:

There are a lot of different sources for such data, as there are magnetometers all over the world measuring the magnetic field at their respective locations. The "Magnetometers" section here on this site has some of them, for example, but you can probably find many more.

However, note that since the overall field itself doesn't change that much from year to year, global maps of the magnetic field are typically not compiled that often; here's e.g. a contour map of the field strength at various locations from 2020:

As you can see, the field strength is as low as ~25,000 nT around the SAA, and as much as 65,000 nT in the strongest sections near the  poles.

So what's typically most important for geomagnetic activity measurements is the level of disturbance to the field, i.e. how far away they are from the baseline at any given period of time. The Kp-index is perhaps the most well-known such measurement. The Dst is another.

I am going to analyze all these models in detail to start , thank you .

21 minutes ago, Jhon Henry Osorio Orozco said:

Ligero impacto en el proceso :

It's not a slight impact,  Everything is normal, there is no impact, or anything, just an effect on the solar wind from the cme of Manzo 7 so everything is normal, tomorrow I'll be busy in the afternoon in my country, so... if there's an impact or something, I'll be talking here, well I'll try

Edited May 11, 20232 yr by Isatsuki San

I share to start studies of the magnetic field : https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campo_magnético_terrestre

impact in process :

UTC : 21 : 51 

11-05-2023

rO MP = 10.57 Re

UTC : 22:04 

11 -05 -2023 

rO MP = 9.44 Re 

UTC : 22: 38 

11 -05 -2023 

rO MP = 8.46 Re 

 

UTC : 22:35 

11-05-2023 

rO MP = 8.54 Re 

 

UTC : 22: 58 

11 -05-2023 

rO MP = 8.72 Re

Note : The impact seems to be slight because at the moment the decompression of the magnetosphere is noticeable .

 

UTC : 23 : 19 

11 -05 -2023 

rO MP = 8.85 Re 

 

UTC : 23 :16 

11 -05 -2023 

rO MP = 8.94 Re

 

The graph is a CME impact model, the red arrow shows that as the value of 6 on the vertical axis approaches, the impact is imminent.  https://iswa.gsfc.nasa.gov/IswaSystemWebApp/  Here you can see it in real time.  No doubt it is coming slowly it is even visible in the increase in speed for periods.

 

 

Edited May 12, 20232 yr by Jhon Henry Osorio Orozco

4 hours ago, Jhon Henry Osorio Orozco said:

impact in process :

UTC : 21 : 51 

11-05-2023

rO MP = 10.57 Re

UTC : 22:04 

11 -05 -2023 

rO MP = 9.44 Re 

UTC : 22: 38 

11 -05 -2023 

rO MP = 8.46 Re 

 

UTC : 22:35 

11-05-2023 

rO MP = 8.54 Re 

 

UTC : 22: 58 

11 -05-2023 

rO MP = 8.72 Re

Note : The impact seems to be slight because at the moment the decompression of the magnetosphere is noticeable .

 

UTC : 23 : 19 

11 -05 -2023 

rO MP = 8.85 Re 

 

UTC : 23 :16 

11 -05 -2023 

rO MP = 8.94 Re

 

The graph is a CME impact model, the red arrow shows that as the value of 6 on the vertical axis approaches, the impact is imminent.  https://iswa.gsfc.nasa.gov/IswaSystemWebApp/  Here you can see it in real time.  No doubt it is coming slowly it is even visible in the increase in speed for periods.

 

 

There was an impact on stereo A

1 minute ago, Isatsuki San said:

There was an impact on stereo A

Upload the data, so that we all have the evidence of our records, but, without a doubt, although slight, something is coming little by little, let's see how this is going in the next few hours.

4 minutes ago, Jhon Henry Osorio Orozco said:

Sube los datos, para que todos tengamos la evidencia de nuestros registros, pero, sin duda, aunque leve, algo se viene poco a poco, a ver cómo va esto en las próximas horas.

here the impact, from stereo to A, it looks like a level impact, well it makes sense I spend 56 hours, it takes a long time

Edited May 12, 20232 yr by Isatsuki San

Well, it finally reached L1.

And it doesn't look very impressive.

4 hours ago, MZPL said:

And it doesn't look very impressive.

It's barely distinguishable from "background noise" as far as geomagnetic disturbances go, I'd say. SWPC predicts up to G3 for this?

1 hour ago, Christopher S. said:

It's barely distinguishable from "background noise" as far as geomagnetic disturbances go, I'd say. SWPC predicts up to G3 for this?

I think the bigger question (at least to me) is why was this impact so weak?  There was a pretty obvious full hall CME on LASCO with estimated speeds >1000 km/a followed by a prolonged solar radiation storm.  While the bulk of the CME was aimed west, it still looked pretty good for us.

I know there is a pretty large data gap between the initial view from lasco/soho and when the plasma front starts impacting the L1 satellites, so predictions often fail to live up to expectations, but still this looked like a pretty easy forecast, if anything I thought G3 might have undersold it.

In the end, the CME came in at about half the speed as initially thought, with barely more than a hiccup in the plasma density and magnetic field.

Perhaps these a best for a different thread entirely but some initial comments:

1) is it possible there was negative interference between the wake of the may 7 CME (which was also kind of a bust) and the may 9 CME?  

2) is there something about being on the  east. Vs. west side of the CME bow wave? 
 

3) negative feedbacks associated with Parker spiral interactions?

4) did it just … miss?

Really, I’m just curious if there anything at all to learn from this, or is it just a collective 🤷‍♂️?

10 hours ago, Isatsuki San said:

aqui el impacto, de estereo a A, parece un impacto de nivel, bueno tiene sentido me paso 56 horas, se tarda mucho

We are in a state of geomagnetic disturbance, although in some parts no aurora has been observed, in others, yes, as is the case of the Belgrano II Base -Argentina- at the South Pole and other areas of the northern hemisphere.

1 hour ago, NEAurora said:

Creo que la pregunta más importante (al menos para mí) es ¿por qué este impacto fue tan débil? Hubo una CME de sala completa bastante obvia en LASCO con velocidades estimadas> 1000 km / a seguido de una tormenta de radiación solar prolongada. Si bien la mayor parte de la CME estaba dirigida al oeste, todavía se veía bastante bien para nosotros.

Sé que hay una brecha de datos bastante grande entre la vista inicial de Lasco/Soho y cuando el frente de plasma comienza a impactar en los satélites L1 , por lo que las predicciones a menudo no cumplen con las expectativas, pero aún así parecía un pronóstico bastante fácil, en todo caso. Pensé que G3 podría haberlo subestimado.

Al final, la CME llegó aproximadamente a la mitad de la velocidad que se pensó inicialmente, con poco más que un contratiempo en la densidad del plasma y el campo magnético.

Quizás estos sean los mejores para un hilo completamente diferente, pero algunos comentarios iniciales:

1) ¿Es posible que haya una interferencia negativa entre la estela de la CME del 7 de mayo (que también fue una especie de quiebra) y la CME del 9 de mayo ?  

2) hay algo acerca de estar en el este. contra lado oeste de la ola de proa de CME ? 
 

3) retroalimentaciones negativas asociadas con las interacciones en espiral de Parker?

4) ¿se acaba de... perder?

Realmente, solo tengo curiosidad si hay algo que aprender de esto, o es solo un colectivo 🤷‍♂️ ?

Without a doubt, that is the question and it is not the first time that it has happened, previous events have also had this same peculiarity; Without a doubt, we have an investigation based on these events.

1 hour ago, NEAurora said:

I think the bigger question (at least to me) is why was this impact so weak?  There was a pretty obvious full hall CME on LASCO with estimated speeds >1000 km/a followed by a prolonged solar radiation storm.  While the bulk of the CME was aimed west, it still looked pretty good for us.

I think we've all expected more of a bulk hit, but got a glancing blow instead. At least my calculation for a bulk hit was an arrival at 2023/05/11 13:10Z and using the same numbers, except for a glancing blow number, comes at 2023/05/12 02:30Z. Maybe just the difficulty of seeing a 3D object in 2D imagery.

• 6 minutes ago, Jesterface23 said:

  Creo que todos esperábamos más de un golpe masivo, pero en su lugar recibimos un golpe de refilón. Al menos mi cálculo para un golpe masivo fue una llegada el 2023/05/11 13:10Z y usando los mismos números, excepto por un número de golpe de refilón, llega el 2023/05/12 02:30Z. Tal vez solo la dificultad de ver un objeto 3D en imágenes 2D.

  I think it is time to improve the prediction models, from coronagraphs to improvement of discovery, in that sense they could be 3D models, so we have to do them and together with neural networks, they must be improved, surely it can be done if governments make a good investment, solar science will advance too far in space weather.

1 hour ago, NEAurora said:

Creo que la pregunta más importante (al menos para mí) es ¿por qué este impacto fue tan débil? Hubo una CME de sala completa bastante obvia en LASCO con velocidades estimadas> 1000 km / a seguido de una tormenta de radiación solar prolongada. Si bien la mayor parte de la CME estaba dirigida al oeste, todavía se veía bastante bien para nosotros.

Sé que hay una brecha de datos bastante grande entre la vista inicial de Lasco/Soho y cuando el frente de plasma comienza a impactar en los satélites L1 , por lo que las predicciones a menudo no cumplen con las expectativas, pero aún así parecía un pronóstico bastante fácil, en todo caso. Pensé que G3 podría haberlo subestimado.

Al final, la CME llegó aproximadamente a la mitad de la velocidad que se pensó inicialmente, con poco más que un contratiempo en la densidad del plasma y el campo magnético.

Quizás estos sean los mejores para un hilo completamente diferente, pero algunos comentarios iniciales:

1) ¿Es posible que haya una interferencia negativa entre la estela de la CME del 7 de mayo (que también fue una especie de quiebra) y la CME del 9 de mayo ?  

2) hay algo acerca de estar en el este. contra lado oeste de la ola de proa de CME ? 
 

3) retroalimentaciones negativas asociadas con las interacciones en espiral de Parker?

4) ¿se acaba de... perder?

Realmente, solo tengo curiosidad si hay algo que aprender de esto, o es solo un colectivo 🤷‍♂️ ?

Without a doubt, that is the question and it is not the first time that it has happened, previous events have also had this same peculiarity; Without a doubt, we have an investigation based on these events.

6 minutes ago, Jhon Henry Osorio Orozco said:

• Creo que es hora de mejorar los modelos de predicción, desde los coronógrafos hasta la mejora de discovery, en ese sentido podrían ser modelos 3D, entonces hay que hacerlos y junto con las redes neuronales hay que mejorarlos, seguro que se puede hacer si los gobiernos hacen una buena inversión, la ciencia solar avanzará demasiado en el clima espacial.

Sin duda, esa es la cuestión y no es la primera vez que sucede, los hechos anteriores también han tenido esta misma peculiaridad; Sin duda, tenemos una investigación basada en estos hechos.

Clear! that there is something to learn both on earth and planetary events, if we talk about spacecraft that we use to study space weather, we could analyze how these spacecraft are affected by events directed by those areas, such as towards Mars, the moon, how it is not affecting right now on earth with slow shock events.

On 23/4/2023 at 8:35, Isatsuki San said:

Parece que la bz está al sur y está provocando que haya una actividad geomagnética kp4

Before the impact, it was evidenced several times, but it seems that the same affectation caused by the event affected data generation, delaying the evidence and it is still being noticed in some applications,  the effect, typical of slowing down, in the transmission of data is perceived.

A flux rope may have started

2 hours ago, NEAurora said:

Creo que la pregunta más importante (al menos para mí) es ¿por qué este impacto fue tan débil? Hubo una CME de sala completa bastante obvia en LASCO con velocidades estimadas> 1000 km / a seguido de una tormenta de radiación solar prolongada. Si bien la mayor parte de la CME estaba dirigida al oeste, todavía se veía bastante bien para nosotros.

Sé que hay una brecha de datos bastante grande entre la vista inicial de Lasco/Soho y cuando el frente de plasma comienza a impactar en los satélites L1 , por lo que las predicciones a menudo no cumplen con las expectativas, pero aún así parecía un pronóstico bastante fácil, en todo caso. Pensé que G3 podría haberlo subestimado.

Al final, la CME llegó aproximadamente a la mitad de la velocidad que se pensó inicialmente, con poco más que un contratiempo en la densidad del plasma y el campo magnético.

Quizás estos sean los mejores para un hilo completamente diferente, pero algunos comentarios iniciales:

1) ¿Es posible que haya una interferencia negativa entre la estela de la CME del 7 de mayo (que también fue una especie de quiebra) y la CME del 9 de mayo ?   

2) hay algo acerca de estar en el este. contra lado oeste de la ola de proa de CME ? 
 

3) retroalimentaciones negativas asociadas con las interacciones en espiral de Parker?

4) ¿se acaba de... perder?

Realmente, solo tengo curiosidad si hay algo que aprender de esto, o es solo un colectivo 🤷‍♂️ ?

For example, how was the telemetry for sending data in terms of time from the ships to the ground, and how is it? How much is it affecting global communications? , How can the information on the planet be affecting the delay of information? ,   We are in G1 

G1 : Minmor

Effects :

G 1 Minor Power systems: Weak power grid fluctuations can occur. Spacecraft operations: minor impact on satellite.

operations possible. Other systems: migratory animals are affected at this and higher levels; aurora is commonly visible at high latitudes (northern Michigan and Maine).** Kp=5 1700 per cycle (900 days per cycle)

Edited May 12, 20232 yr by Jhon Henry Osorio Orozco
Events in progress

3 hours ago, NEAurora said:

Creo que la pregunta más importante (al menos para mí) es ¿por qué este impacto fue tan débil? Hubo una CME de sala completa bastante obvia en LASCO con velocidades estimadas> 1000 km / a seguido de una tormenta de radiación solar prolongada. Si bien la mayor parte de la CME estaba dirigida al oeste, todavía se veía bastante bien para nosotros.

Sé que hay una brecha de datos bastante grande entre la vista inicial de Lasco/Soho y cuando el frente de plasma comienza a impactar en los satélites L1 , por lo que las predicciones a menudo no cumplen con las expectativas, pero aún así parecía un pronóstico bastante fácil, en todo caso. Pensé que G3 podría haberlo subestimado.

Al final, la CME llegó aproximadamente a la mitad de la velocidad que se pensó inicialmente, con poco más que un contratiempo en la densidad del plasma y el campo magnético.

Quizás estos sean los mejores para un hilo completamente diferente, pero algunos comentarios iniciales:

1) ¿Es posible que haya una interferencia negativa entre la estela de la CME del 7 de mayo (que también fue una especie de quiebra) y la CME del 9 de mayo ?  

2) hay algo acerca de estar en el este. contra lado oeste de la ola de proa de CME ? 
 

3) retroalimentaciones negativas asociadas con las interacciones en espiral de Parker?

4) ¿se acaba de... perder?

Realmente, solo tengo curiosidad si hay algo que aprender de esto, o es solo un colectivo 🤷‍♂️ ?

I think I have an explanation, where was the cme that was launched, the road was not clear and it took so long, because of that when its path was obturated, also, when I saw the cme launched it was not as dense or Not so impressive, the only thing that surprised you was its speed, when it lost its speed the impact was weak because it was the only important thing about cme

46 minutes ago, Jhon Henry Osorio Orozco said:

For example, how was the telemetry for sending data in terms of time from the ships to the ground, and how is it? How much is it affecting global communications? , How can the information on the planet be affecting the delay of information?

The data is beamed to Earth at light speed, while the events in question travel far slower than that, so it isn't anywhere near as relevant as the actual distance between satellites and Earth.

I believe that you would benefit from learning rudimentary English, and not relying 100% on auto-translation. The translation given is barely adequate for a native English speaker, and there are many international visitors who I am sure have no chance of comprehending you.

Generally, what I can understand is that you are flagging events and data that are not particularly noteworthy, treating basic space weather with elevated caution and awareness. You do not need to post every SWPC alert on the forum, nor flood it with graphs that simply confirm what was predicted and can be observed on the front page of this website - it is redundant and alarmist.

31 minutes ago, Christopher S. said:

Los datos se transmiten a la Tierra a la velocidad de la luz, mientras que los eventos en cuestión viajan mucho más lento que eso, por lo que no es tan relevante como la distancia real entre los satélites y la Tierra.

Creo que se beneficiaría de aprender inglés rudimentario y no depender al 100% de la traducción automática. La traducción dada es apenas adecuada para un hablante nativo de inglés, y hay muchos visitantes internacionales que estoy seguro que no tienen posibilidad de comprenderlo.

En general, lo que puedo entender es que está marcando eventos y datos que no son particularmente dignos de mención, tratando el clima espacial básico con mucha precaución y conciencia. No necesita publicar todas las alertas de SWPC en el foro, ni inundarlo con gráficos que simplemente confirmen lo que se predijo y se puede observar en la página principal de este sitio web: es redundante y alarmista.

Thank you for the advice to learn the language, but explaining events requires scientific rigor, not speculation, and that is the idea of studying in a group to find the answer, not assuming by axiom.

7 hours ago, NEAurora said:

I think the bigger question (at least to me) is why was this impact so weak?  There was a pretty obvious full hall CME on LASCO with estimated speeds >1000 km/a followed by a prolonged solar radiation storm.  While the bulk of the CME was aimed west, it still looked pretty good for us.

I know there is a pretty large data gap between the initial view from lasco/soho and when the plasma front starts impacting the L1 satellites, so predictions often fail to live up to expectations, but still this looked like a pretty easy forecast, if anything I thought G3 might have undersold it.

In the end, the CME came in at about half the speed as initially thought, with barely more than a hiccup in the plasma density and magnetic field.

Perhaps these a best for a different thread entirely but some initial comments:

1) is it possible there was negative interference between the wake of the may 7 CME (which was also kind of a bust) and the may 9 CME?  

2) is there something about being on the  east. Vs. west side of the CME bow wave? 
 

3) negative feedbacks associated with Parker spiral interactions?

4) did it just … miss?

Really, I’m just curious if there anything at all to learn from this, or is it just a collective 🤷‍♂️?

This article suggests that -Bz geomagnetic storms are more likely during the spring equinox when the jet stream crosses through the northern hemisphere due to earths tilt (or Russel-McPherron effect) at that time.

“[2] The semiannual variation in geomagnetic activity has been recognized for a long period of time [Cortie, 1912], which shows the maximum appears around equinoxes while the minimum appears around solstices, e.g., geomagnetic storm annual distribution [Echer et al., 2011]. Over the decades, several explanations for this variation have been put forward, such as the axial hypothesis, the equinoctial hypothesis and the Russell-McPherron effect [Cortie, 1912; Bartels, 1932; McIntosh, 1959; Svalgaard, 1977; Russell and McPherron, 1973].”

I wonder if this is just for the northern hemisphere and if people in the Southern Hemisphere might have a different experience.

I would expect future CME’s to have a more +Bz or positive/northern magnetic field component as we exit the spring equinox aurora season based off this data. I’m wondering if experienced aurora hunters find this to be generally true.

I don’t see auroras at my latitude so I can’t confirm either way but I see the importance of being able to communicate the diversity in people’s experiences between the Northern vs Southern Hemisphere considering the potential impacts of the South Atlantic Anomaly.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2012JA017845#:~:text=Geomagnetic activity are rather strong,the Sun%2C which is identical