In relation to the flare database update (and Cycle 25)

[Sn00tplex]

Hi all, its been a while since I've posted. I was planning to follow up on this post once the 2022 paper had released... but that date has come and gone and it still isn't available 😅.

Either way, a paper has recently come out with a new estimate for the size of the Carrington Event, reclassifying it as an ~X80 flare. However, as the paper itself mentions, this is using the new post-2017 GOES scale, which is 1.43 times higher. So in relation to all flares listed on this site (before 2018), it would be classified as an ~X56.

After finishing the paper, I was reminded of this graph;

2022, and 2023 (so far) look noticeably abnormal. The flare counts are way higher relative to their mean sunspot number when compared to prior years. I decided to multiply the number of flares in each class by 1.43 for the years 1997-2017, to get an approximate look at the new scaling system (Since the number of X-class flares is low, I converted each individually to get the number):

Sure enough, 2022 ended up looking more analogous to 2011 or 2015. On the other hand, 2023 looks on track to be in a similar realm to 2014, if it maintains the activity it had for most of this year. An easy way to find out which flares on this site will go up a class, is to see which ones are >= 7 (since 7 x 1.43 = 10.01), eg; M7 -> X1. Things get more interesting when taking a look at the X-class flares.

2022 is similar to 2011 in that they were both the first year of their respective cycle where the number of flares picked up. They both possess a similar number of smaller x flares, but 2011 has twice the total x flares when including all its higher end flares. As for 2014 (which is a peak), and 2023 (which looks like a peak), at the rate this year is going, while the number of small x flares is catching up, the amount of large x flares does not look like it'll reach the level of 2014.

So my question is this; where are the high end X-class flares? My best guess is that (as I read somewhere), all the big ones have been getting "stage fright" and firing off on the other side of the sun 😂. Any thoughts?

This turned into something else as i was typing, i should have put it in solar activity. 😅

Edited September 4, 2023 by Sn00tplex
incorrect link

[tniickck]

1 hour ago, Sn00tplex said:

Hi all, its been a while since I've posted. I was planning to follow up on this post once the 2022 paper had released... but that date has come and gone and it still isn't available 😅.

Either way, a paper has recently come out with a new estimate for the size of the Carrington Event, reclassifying it as an ~X80 flare. However, as the paper itself mentions, this is using the new post-2017 GOES scale, which is 1.43 times higher. So in relation to all flares listed on this site (before 2018), it would be classified as an ~X56.

After finishing the paper, I was reminded of this graph;

2022, and 2023 (so far) look noticeably abnormal. The flare counts are way higher relative to their mean sunspot number when compared to prior years. I decided to multiply the number of flares in each class by 1.43 for the years 1997-2017, to get an approximate look at the new scaling system (Since the number of X-class flares is low, I converted each individually to get the number):

Sure enough, 2022 ended up looking more analogous to 2011 or 2015. On the other hand, 2023 looks on track to be in a similar realm to 2014, if it maintains the activity it had for most of this year. An easy way to find out which flares on this site will go up a class, is to see which ones are >= 7 (since 7 x 1.43 = 10.01), eg; M7 -> X1. Things get more interesting when taking a look at the X-class flares.

2022 is similar to 2011 in that they were both the first year of their respective cycle where the number of flares picked up. They both possess a similar number of smaller x flares, but 2011 has twice the total x flares when including all its higher end flares. As for 2014 (which is a peak), and 2023 (which looks like a peak), at the rate this year is going, while the number of small x flares is catching up, the amount of large x flares does not look like it'll reach the level of 2014.

So my question is this; where are the high end X-class flares? My best guess is that (as I read somewhere), all the big ones have been getting "stage fright" and firing off on the other side of the sun 😂. Any thoughts?

This turned into something else as i was typing, i should have put it in solar activity. 😅

We haven't reached the peak yet, actually, it should happen in 2024

[hamateur 1953]

And if you wished, take a look at 2003. Most ( not all, of course) Larger events occur on the downslopes after the respective SC has peaked.  Edit. Look skyward for comet Nishimura. Last trip by was in 1588.  It is overcast here in Seattle as usual, but you are probably more fortunate wherever you live! 

Edited September 5, 2023 by hamateur 1953

[Sn00tplex]

5 hours ago, tniickck said:

We haven't reached the peak yet, actually, it should happen in 2024

When i said "peak" i meant as in first peak of the cycle, since they have been double peaked these past few cycles. I was expecting the next one to be around 2025-2026. Are you saying that 2024 will be the first or the second?

1 hour ago, hamateur 1953 said:

And if you wished, take a look at 2003. Most ( not all, of course) Larger events occur on the downslopes after the respective SC has peaked.  Edit. Look skyward for comet Nishimura. Last trip by was in 1588.  It is overcast here in Seattle as usual, but you are probably more fortunate wherever you live! 

Oh yeah for sure, i was just mentioning how in comparable years in terms of total activity, Cycle 25 has been rather disappointing (for big flares). Even 2012 and 2014 have had more high end flares, despite not being on the downslope. I'm assuming it's just been a fluke, but i wanted to be sure.

Btw, I'm in the southern hemisphere, so unfortunately I don't have good viewing conditions for the comet. 😔

[hamateur 1953]

Sorry about your location. A good friend gave me a heads up on this in the unlikely event our skies clear eventually.  I felt safer bringing up the comet thing as I noted this thread was moved into the “ other “ region. See ya. Mike/ Hagrid. 

[Philalethes]

1 hour ago, hamateur 1953 said:

Sorry about your location. A good friend gave me a heads up on this in the unlikely event our skies clear eventually.  I felt safer bringing up the comet thing as I noted this thread was moved into the “ other “ region. See ya. Mike/ Hagrid. 

Where was this thread originally posted? Feels like it belongs in Solar Activity rather than Other if you ask me, but I guess that's besides the discussion.

12 hours ago, Sn00tplex said:

Hi all, its been a while since I've posted. I was planning to follow up on this post once the 2022 paper had released... but that date has come and gone and it still isn't available 😅.

Either way, a paper has recently come out with a new estimate for the size of the Carrington Event, reclassifying it as an ~X80 flare. However, as the paper itself mentions, this is using the new post-2017 GOES scale, which is 1.43 times higher. So in relation to all flares listed on this site (before 2018), it would be classified as an ~X56.

After finishing the paper, I was reminded of this graph;

2022, and 2023 (so far) look noticeably abnormal. The flare counts are way higher relative to their mean sunspot number when compared to prior years. I decided to multiply the number of flares in each class by 1.43 for the years 1997-2017, to get an approximate look at the new scaling system (Since the number of X-class flares is low, I converted each individually to get the number):

Sure enough, 2022 ended up looking more analogous to 2011 or 2015. On the other hand, 2023 looks on track to be in a similar realm to 2014, if it maintains the activity it had for most of this year. An easy way to find out which flares on this site will go up a class, is to see which ones are >= 7 (since 7 x 1.43 = 10.01), eg; M7 -> X1. Things get more interesting when taking a look at the X-class flares.

2022 is similar to 2011 in that they were both the first year of their respective cycle where the number of flares picked up. They both possess a similar number of smaller x flares, but 2011 has twice the total x flares when including all its higher end flares. As for 2014 (which is a peak), and 2023 (which looks like a peak), at the rate this year is going, while the number of small x flares is catching up, the amount of large x flares does not look like it'll reach the level of 2014.

So my question is this; where are the high end X-class flares? My best guess is that (as I read somewhere), all the big ones have been getting "stage fright" and firing off on the other side of the sun 😂. Any thoughts?

This turned into something else as i was typing, i should have put it in solar activity. 😅

I don't know much about this scale revision, but are you sure it makes sense to scale up the previous years in this context? In other words, are you sure it has not already been accounted for?

As for why SC25 appears to be anomalous in this regard, whether in many flares relative to sunspots or fewer large X-flares, I could potentially see several reasons for why that seems to be the case. As you mention, one reason for the latter could simply be that more of the largest flares so far have occurred on the far side, particularly in times of poor coverage by e.g. SolO to get some idea of what happened. One that comes to mind is the huge blast I believe occurred last year which produced a very powerful full halo CME, albeit in the "wrong" direction. A reason for the higher amount of flares relative to sunspots could on the other hand be related to the apparently higher flux in general relative to SN that we've observed so far, which it has been speculated could e.g. be caused by a greater number of smaller sunspots (average sunspot size apparently varies both intra- and intercyclically).

Other than specific explanations it should also be noted that the sample size in question is quite low, and SC25 is only being compared to two previous cycles; for all we know it could be those two cycles that are anomalous, or maybe all are perfectly within range of what is normal to observe, which might only become obvious if you had a larger number of cycles to compare to, i.e. natural variance.

It's not easy to say, but what you bring up is certainly interesting, especially the new paper and estimate of the Carrington flare; something to keep investigating and post more about for sure.

[Andrey M]

15 hours ago, Sn00tplex said:

...So my question is this; where are the high end X-class flares? My best guess is that (as I read somewhere), all the big ones have been getting "stage fright" and firing off on the other side of the sun 😂

I'm interested in statistics on this: are there any publications confirming that strong flares (and CMEs) love limbs and the far side of the Sun? 🤔

Thanks. 

[Sn00tplex]

54 minutes ago, Philalethes said:

I don't know much about this scale revision, but are you sure it makes sense to scale up the previous years in this context? In other words, are you sure it has not already been accounted for?

As stated in the paper of my previous post, the database update is still not released (and by the fact that the reference link still says "to be submitted" today, it's still not available in 2023). Considering that the values for the flares on this site haven't changed since they were first put in, i think its safe to assume that they are not accounted for in that graph yet. For convenience here's an excerpt:

It is important to note that it states that all the pre-GOES 16 peak fluxes mentioned in the paper need to be adjusted, for reference here are some of them (the nov 2003 flare has varying estimates from different sources which is why its different from the value on this site):

These are, of course, the values listed on this site.

54 minutes ago, Philalethes said:

Other than specific explanations it should also be noted that the sample size in question is quite low, and SC25 is only being compared to two previous cycles; for all we know it could be those two cycles that are anomalous, or maybe all are perfectly within range of what is normal to observe, which might only become obvious if you had a larger number of cycles to compare to, i.e. natural variance.

That's a good point, I'm hoping we'll get a more accurate picture of the average frequency of X, and X10+ flares once the paper/new database is released. Since the database includes data back to the year 1976 the sample size will encompass SC21 and SC22 as well.

3 minutes ago, Andrey M said:

I'm interested in statistics on this: are there any publications confirming that strong flares (and CMEs) love limbs and the far side of the Sun? 🤔

Thanks. 

Sorry, when i said "read somewhere" i meant a joke in these forums 😂. While to me it's felt like more than a few interesting regions have been developing on the right limb, only to rotate off disc these past 2 years, I guess it's probably just bad luck.

[hamateur 1953]

“Stage Fright” was absolute genius.  
someone needs to construct the  appropriate meme!   🤣🤣

Edited September 5, 2023 by hamateur 1953
Typo

[tniickck]

STIX Quick-look data browser (i4ds.net) 
you can anytime look here for farside flares. personally, i saw X6.5 flare on 29 Sep 2022 here and X4.5 somewhen this year, so now we can say that we are unlucky for strong flares on the earthside, including that this summer we saw 4 X-flares, but on the farside there were like 7-10 (you can count, if you want)

you motivated me to check all this cycle's farside flares, wait

Edited September 5, 2023 by tniickck
typo

[Sn00tplex]

10 minutes ago, tniickck said:

STIX Quick-look data browser (i4ds.net) 
you can anytime look here for farside flares. personally, i saw X6.5 flare on 29 Sep 2022 here and X4.5 somewhen this year, so now we can say that we are unlucky for strong flares on the earthside, including that this summer we saw 4 X-flares, but on the farside there were like 7-10 (you can count, if you want)

you motivated me to check all this cycle's farside flares, wait

Oh wow this is actually really useful. Thanks for the link!

[tniickck]

also found x5.5 on 3rd Jan 2023

[hamateur 1953]

Excellent link! 

[Philalethes]

45 minutes ago, tniickck said:

STIX Quick-look data browser (i4ds.net) 
you can anytime look here for farside flares. personally, i saw X6.5 flare on 29 Sep 2022 here and X4.5 somewhen this year, so now we can say that we are unlucky for strong flares on the earthside, including that this summer we saw 4 X-flares, but on the farside there were like 7-10 (you can count, if you want)

you motivated me to check all this cycle's farside flares, wait

31 minutes ago, Sn00tplex said:

Oh wow this is actually really useful. Thanks for the link!

Only thing to note is that SolO is not always located on the far side, but it's definitely very useful when it is; that's what I meant previously by SolO coverage sometimes being poor.

1 hour ago, Sn00tplex said:

As stated in the paper of my previous post, the database update is still not released (and by the fact that the reference link still says "to be submitted" today, it's still not available in 2023). Considering that the values for the flares on this site haven't changed since they were first put in, i think its safe to assume that they are not accounted for in that graph yet.

Yeah, I did check it out, but I'm still not entirely sure the values here on SWL don't account for it; I haven't paid close enough attention to that, maybe you have. Perhaps @Vancanneyt Sander knows for sure whether or not they are adjusted or need to be adjusted accordingly?

[Jesterface23]

The GOES XRS data look to be about half processed so far going back to 2001 and they noted the remaining data should come this year. It is just about right, values are multiplied by about 1/0.7. The November 4th, 2003 flare flat lined the scale, but now sits at a X24.8793 flare from GOES 12.

Edited September 5, 2023 by Jesterface23

[Sn00tplex]

26 minutes ago, Philalethes said:

Only thing to note is that SolO is not always located on the far side, but it's definitely very useful when it is; that's what I meant previously by SolO coverage sometimes being poor.

Was wondering if that was the case, thanks for the clarification.

18 minutes ago, Jesterface23 said:

The GOES XRS data look to be about half processed so far going back to 2001 and they noted the remaining data should come this year. It is just about right, values are multiplied by about 1/0.7.

Who noted? The people in the paper? If so, I wouldn't mind a link for more info.

18 minutes ago, Jesterface23 said:

The November 4th, 2003 flare flat lined the scale, but now sits at a X24.8793 flare from GOES 12.

Since the saturation level was previously ~X17.4 in the old scale, the new level is ~X24.9 (1.43 times larger). So that makes sense.

Edited September 5, 2023 by Sn00tplex

[Jesterface23]

22 minutes ago, Sn00tplex said:

Who noted? The people in the paper? If so, I wouldn't mind a link for more info.

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/data/goes-space-environment-monitor/access/science/xrs/GOES_1-15_XRS_Science-Quality_Data_Readme.pdf

Then the current available science data is here under the GOES 1-15 tab,
https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/satellite/goes-r.html

[Sn00tplex]

6 minutes ago, Jesterface23 said:

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/data/goes-space-environment-monitor/access/science/xrs/GOES_1-15_XRS_Science-Quality_Data_Readme.pdf

Then the current available science data is here under the GOES 1-15 tab,
https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/satellite/goes-r.html

This is really helpful, thank you!

[Vancanneyt Sander]

35 minuten geleden, Philalethes zei:

Only thing to note is that SolO is not always located on the far side, but it's definitely very useful when it is; that's what I meant previously by SolO coverage sometimes being poor.

Yeah, I did check it out, but I'm still not entirely sure the values here on SWL don't account for it; I haven't paid close enough attention to that, maybe you have. Perhaps @Vancanneyt Sander knows for sure whether or not they are adjusted or need to be adjusted accordingly?

We havent updated any of the historic solar flares in our solar flare database. Reason for it are:

• We would need to update all data with a multiplying factor, a big process and then manually edit each flare in the flare database to get the right value (can do it easy by just multiplying with a factor but still)
• it would lead to differences between the daily historic SWPC reports and our news articles where the flare strength would defer to those in the database and cause confusion with many visitors

Also our flare database has many many many corrections made in the last decade, even with recent flares we need to edit it a lot.

[Sn00tplex]

4 minutes ago, Vancanneyt Sander said:

We havent updated any of the historic solar flares in our solar flare database. Reason for it are:

• We would need to update all data with a multiplying factor, a big process and then manually edit each flare in the flare database to get the right value (can do it easy by just multiplying with a factor but still)
• it would lead to differences between the daily historic SWPC reports and our news articles where the flare strength would defer to those in the database and cause confusion with many visitors

Also our flare database has many many many corrections made in the last decade, even with recent flares we need to edit it a lot.

This sounds like it'll be a headache.

[Jesterface23]

52 minutes ago, Vancanneyt Sander said:

• We would need to update all data with a multiplying factor, a big process and then manually edit each flare in the flare database to get the right value (can do it easy by just multiplying with a factor but still)
• it would lead to differences between the daily historic SWPC reports and our news articles where the flare strength would defer to those in the database and cause confusion with many visitors

Once the past science GOES data is finished being processed and if you have the date/time of flares archived it could be updated. I guess the difficulty depends on how you have everything stored. Then maybe there could be a way to have both the old and new pre-GOES 16 data on the site.

[Vancanneyt Sander]

15 minuten geleden, Jesterface23 zei:

Once the past science GOES data is finished being processed and if you have the date/time of flares archived it could be updated. I guess the difficulty depends on how you have everything stored. Then maybe there could be a way to have both the old and new pre-GOES 16 data on the site.

If that data is available yes we could convert those into the format we use. In the past that was one hell of a job to do, I’ll have to see if I still have that original script somewhere…

Based on timestamp we could update of the database table, but because the database table is very huge it could cause script timeouts so we’ll have to see how we can manage that. Also, for the few saturation events (X17+) we need to make sure those are manually updated. And also, GOES eclipse season will also require manual edits and we have to make sure we can get a list of those. Just to say, it ain’t as easy as it looks…

plus if we do it, I won’t like it to be on the live site but first on our test environment so we can fail at the attempts without anyone noticing 😜 however it will require a lot of work…

and if we do it, people will notice a difference in mentioned flares from historic swpc reports and old news items. 

2 uren geleden, Jesterface23 zei:

Then the current available science data is here under the GOES 1-15 tab,
https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/satellite/goes-r.html

yes but in a bit unreadable format with extension nc, so that's not helpful  

[Jesterface23]

5 hours ago, Vancanneyt Sander said:

yes but in a bit unreadable format with extension nc, so that's not helpful  

Heh, not too easy to do. I have php scripts to convert them to CDF, then to text. Maybe I can send those over when they finish up the reprocessing

[Patrick P.A. Geryl]

Op 4/9/2023 om 22:13, Sn00tplex zei:

Hi all, its been a while since I've posted. I was planning to follow up on this post once the 2022 paper had released... but that date has come and gone and it still isn't available 😅.

Either way, a paper has recently come out with a new estimate for the size of the Carrington Event, reclassifying it as an ~X80 flare. However, as the paper itself mentions, this is using the new post-2017 GOES scale, which is 1.43 times higher. So in relation to all flares listed on this site (before 2018), it would be classified as an ~X56.

After finishing the paper, I was reminded of this graph;

2022, and 2023 (so far) look noticeably abnormal. The flare counts are way higher relative to their mean sunspot number when compared to prior years. I decided to multiply the number of flares in each class by 1.43 for the years 1997-2017, to get an approximate look at the new scaling system (Since the number of X-class flares is low, I converted each individually to get the number):

Sure enough, 2022 ended up looking more analogous to 2011 or 2015. On the other hand, 2023 looks on track to be in a similar realm to 2014, if it maintains the activity it had for most of this year. An easy way to find out which flares on this site will go up a class, is to see which ones are >= 7 (since 7 x 1.43 = 10.01), eg; M7 -> X1. Things get more interesting when taking a look at the X-class flares.

2022 is similar to 2011 in that they were both the first year of their respective cycle where the number of flares picked up. They both possess a similar number of smaller x flares, but 2011 has twice the total x flares when including all its higher end flares. As for 2014 (which is a peak), and 2023 (which looks like a peak), at the rate this year is going, while the number of small x flares is catching up, the amount of large x flares does not look like it'll reach the level of 2014.

So my question is this; where are the high end X-class flares? My best guess is that (as I read somewhere), all the big ones have been getting "stage fright" and firing off on the other side of the sun 😂. Any thoughts?

This turned into something else as i was typing, i should have put it in solar activity. 😅

Most of the flares in 2014 are in September - December 2014….

Repeat this year?🧐🤔

[Sn00tplex]

41 minutes ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said:

Most of the flares in 2014 are in September - December 2014….

Repeat this year?🧐🤔

I hope so!