1 minute ago, hamateur 1953 said:

It is difficult for many to misunderstand this!   It drove me nutso at the time when Jester was working on revisions of the database as I remember!!   I remember thinking like Huh???  Why??? Then finally a week later no less after reading up on it, I understood why.   Cuz I knew the dude was sharper than me, I trusted that even if I didn’t understand it, he most certainly did and it would work out well for all in the end anyway 🤣🤣🤣

Yes of course! Space weather is very complex! And I am still learning, just like the new community members!

23 minutes ago, Zhe Yu said:

You have misunderstood. The highest flare that occurred during the last solar minimum was around the M1 mark, and because of scaling of the x-ray flux, the flares didn't even get recorded as a M class flare from the SWPC. The last solar minimum was from Autumn 2016 to 2020.

I think you might have misunderstood something here, because there were indeed a series of strong X-flares in 2017; see e.g. here on SWL (which is scaled appropriately). The two flares referred to here are the strongest ones, the X13 and the X11 (almost X12).

31 minutes ago, Bry said:

I was wondering about that too. Like, how did those top 7th and 11th solar flares on record happen in september 2017?

It's not uncommon for there to be some bursts with a lot of activity on the downslopes towards minimum, even within a couple of years of it. This seems to be what's at least partially responsible for the geomagnetic maxima of the cycles occurring a couple of years after the SSN peak on average.

As an even better example there's e.g. the New York Railroad Storm of May 1921; while we don't know the exact flare intensity associated with the CME(s), it was likely the largest geomagnetic storm of the 20th century, likely comparable in strength to the Carrington Event. As we read here:

Quote

The storm attained an estimated maximum −Dst on 15 May of 907 ± 132 nT, an intensity comparable to that of the Carrington event of 1859. The May 1921 storm brought spectacular aurorae to the nighttime sky.

And it happened within just a little over two years of minimum, much like the 2017 flares). Here's the location of the storm relative to SC15:

In fact, the average monthly SN of that May is registered as just a puny 37.0! Really goes to show that some such events really can come "out of nowhere" so to speak, even if it's generally less likely than closer to the peak(s).

18 minutes ago, Philalethes said:

I think you might have misunderstood something here, because there were indeed a series of strong X-flares in 2017; see e.g. here on SWL (which is scaled appropriately). The two flares referred to here are the strongest ones, the X13 and the X11 (almost X12).

It's not uncommon for there to be some bursts with a lot of activity on the downslopes towards minimum, even within a couple of years of it. This seems to be what's at least partially responsible for the geomagnetic maxima of the cycles occurring a couple of years after the SSN peak on average.

As an even better example there's e.g. the New York Railroad Storm of May 1921; while we don't know the exact flare intensity associated with the CME(s), it was likely the largest geomagnetic storm of the 20th century, likely comparable in strength to the Carrington Event. As we read here:

And it happened within just a little over two years of minimum, much like the 2017 flares). Here's the location of the storm relative to SC15:

In fact, the average monthly SN of that May is registered as just a puny 37.0! Really goes to show that some such events really can come "out of nowhere" so to speak, even if it's generally less likely than closer to the peak(s).

So in fact that "first M class flare in several years" post by SWPC NOAA in 2020 only referred to two and a half years. Alright I'm confused already

@3gMike take a look at this 

Edited November 2, 2024Nov 2 by Zhe Yu
Added reference

why under Geomagnetic storm the time of days running so fast?? chan, i think the geomagnetic activity have an impact in Neurochronoregulation or simple perception of time , but i know the neurons have magnetic connections and that knowledge is recently.... and... what will be the impact of magnetic interaccion between solar particles and energies with our brain in space??, why really that situation is too agressive for neurons? that's questions still me alive

Edited November 2, 2024Nov 2 by ApoloScience

1 hour ago, Zhe Yu said:

You have misunderstood. The highest flare that occurred during the last solar minimum was around the M1 mark, and because of scaling of the x-ray flux, the flares didn't even get recorded as a M class flare from the SWPC. The last solar minimum was from Autumn 2016 to 2020.

 

1 hour ago, hamateur 1953 said:

It is difficult for many to misunderstand this!   It drove me nutso at the time when Jester was working on revisions of the database as I remember!!   I remember thinking like Huh???  Why??? Then finally a week later no less after reading up on it, I understood why.   Cuz I knew the dude was sharper than me, I trusted that even if I didn’t understand it, he most certainly did and it would work out well for all in the end anyway 🤣🤣🤣

Wait, I'm confused then, are you both saying these two X13.37 and X11.88 in 2017 did not actually happen or get down rated to be Mclass after recalibration?

1 hour ago, Zhe Yu said:

So in fact that "first M class flare in several years" post by SWPC NOAA in 2020 only referred to two and a half years. Alright I'm confused already

@3gMike take a look at this 

Originally the article referred to a bit longer, but as 3gMike pointed out in his reply to you recently this would technically have been shortened quite significantly when the correction factor was removed, with an M-flare as late as May of 2019 (and also a very early one in May of 2020, a few months before that article). However, the article itself reads "since 20 Oct 2017", which would indeed have been correct before the correction factor was removed. Perhaps you got 2017 and 2016 mixed up? In any case there were indeed very strong X-flares in 2017.

45 minutes ago, Bry said:

 

Wait, I'm confused then, are you both saying these two X13.37 and X11.88 in 2017 did not actually happen or get down rated to be Mclass after recalibration?

I think it's just some confusion based on the thread I linked to above, mixing up the latest M-flare in 2017 before the correction factor was removed with 2016 (or alternatively having looked insufficiently at 2016 and concluded that this is when minimum started without even looking at 2017).

Those 2017 flares very much did occur, and were listed as strong X-flares even before the correction factor was removed.

Edited November 2, 2024Nov 2 by Philalethes
correct dates, some more context and corrections

11 minutes ago, ApoloScience said:

why under Geomagnetic storm the time of days running so fast?? chan, i think the geomagnetic activity have an impact in Neurochronoregulation or simple perception of time , but i know the neurons have magnetic connections and that knowledge is recently.... and... what will be the impact of magnetic interaccion between solar particles and energies with our brain in space??, why really that situation is too agressive for neurons? that's questions still me alive

I think the website is automatically translating your message, so my response might not be perfect. 

I do not know if geomagnetic activity can impact the way we perceive time. But I do not think our brains and bodies are sensitive to magnetic forces. Birds and insects are, but I believe we aren't. Our perception of time is impacted by other factors.

There are experiments on Earth where people are very close to magnets that are almost 1,000,000,000 times stronger than the magnetic forces in space. Currently, the IMF field is 10 nanotesla while the strongest magnet we've ever made is over 30 tesla. None of the people working with those magnets have issues.

A real issue is that astronauts are more vulnerable to solar particles and radiation from the sun and CMEs. If spacesuits aren't protective enough, it's life-threatening. But, we build and design space stations and rockets to protect our astronauts well enough.

@3241silo I search for Studies and found this!! . It was found that most of the effects are localized in amplitude–frequency “windows” In other words, not every frequency has an effect on neurons only a special frecuencies, that is really interesting  https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10740910/

2 hours ago, Zhe Yu said:

Good question, it looks confused on the HMI Intensitygram and the Magnetogram.

AIA 097 and AIA 131 it looks like it's raising its eyebrows and looking confused

AIA 193 and AIA 211, it looks like it's rolled onto its side

AIA 304 looks like it's not impressed - _ - tired ~_~ and the sun is on its side again |:

AIA 355 looks shocked.

And AIA 1600 and AIA 1700 look like a pig.

SDO created the new Mona Lisa.

You made me laugh more than I should!

Edited November 2, 2024Nov 2 by Pleroma

39 minutes ago, Philalethes said:

Originally the article referred to a bit longer, but as 3gMike pointed out in his reply to you recently this would technically have been shortened quite significantly when the correction factor was removed, with an M-flare as late as May of 2019 (and also a very early one in May of 2020, a few months before that article). However, the article itself reads "since 20 Oct 2017", which would indeed have been correct before the correction factor was removed. Perhaps you got 2017 and 2016 mixed up? In any case there were indeed very strong X-flares in 2017.

I think it's just some confusion based on the thread I linked to above, mixing up the latest M-flare in 2017 before the correction factor was removed with 2016 (or alternatively having looked insufficiently at 2016 and concluded that this is when minimum started without even looking at 2017).

Those 2017 flares very much did occur, and were listed as strong X-flares even before the correction factor was removed.

Tnx @Philalethes

1 hour ago, Philalethes said:

Originally the article referred to a bit shorter, but as 3gMike pointed out in his reply to you recently this would technically have been extended a bit when the correction factor was removed, with an M-flare as late as May of 2019 (and also a very early one in May of 2020, a few months before that article). Perhaps you got 2019 and 2016 mixed up? In any case there were indeed very strong X-flares in 2017, a year before the last M-flares in 2018.

I think it's just some confusion based on the thread I linked to above, mixing up the latest M-flare in 2018 with misremembering it as 2016. Those 2017 flares very much did occur, and were listed as strong X-flares even before the correction factor was removed.

I'm out of reactions for the day, thanks for the clarification and dialogue redirection! Those two Xclass flares in 2017 certainly seem widely accepted already despite their timing approaching a solar minimum period. I have loads more stupid questions but I'll refrain for now lol.

3 hours ago, Zhe Yu said:

So in fact that "first M class flare in several years" post by SWPC NOAA in 2020 only referred to two and a half years. Alright I'm confused already

@3gMike take a look at this 

The article referred to a flare on 20th October 2017. This is currently shown as an M1.59. If we scale by the SWPC factor that would imply it was originally shown as an M1.1

Now it gets a little bit confusing because the most recent flare referred to in the article happened on 29th May 2020 and, based on the image in the article, it was barely over M1. If that were scaled up it would become M1.43, but the SWL archive shows it as M1.19. Perhaps it somehow escaped the update (That page does not include the scaling notice).

The other potential source of confusion is the note in the archive which states that " Because of the SWPC scaling factor in the operational data, flare indices for the operational data were reported as 42% smaller than for the science quality data". In fact they are reduced by 30%

4 hours ago, Bry said:

 

Wait, I'm confused then, are you both saying these two X13.37 and X11.88 in 2017 did not actually happen or get down rated to be Mclass after recalibration?

Sorry Bry!  As you may have already noticed I said “ It is difficult for many to misunderstand this”. Well gee, that’s a double negative.  Perhaps applied to the more knowledgeable among us, it fits perfectly!  I usually reread before posting, but obviously didn’t in this particular case.  🤣🤣🤣

Czy aktywność słoneczna ma wpływ na obecność ładunków statycznych na Ziemi? Czy "mocniej kopie w klamkę" podczas rozbłysku słonecznego?

1 hour ago, kekus69 said:

Czy aktywność słoneczna ma wpływ na obecność ładunków statycznych na Ziemi? Czy "mocniej kopie w klamkę" podczas rozbłysku słonecznego?

"Is solar activity impacting occurrence of static charges on Earth? Does it <<kick when touching the door handle>> during solar flare?"

 

Activity on the Sun does not impact static charges on the ground in any meaningful direct way. Solar flares may ionise some things with highly energetic radiation, this however does not reach the surface level. Geomagnetic storms, on the other hand, are characterised by changes in the magnetic field. This is still quite low and should not impact small-scale objects like a door handle. It did, however, impact some bigger circuits (Carrington event, Quebeck 1989) several times in history.

2 hours ago, kekus69 said:

Czy aktywność słoneczna ma wpływ na obecność ładunków statycznych na Ziemi? Czy "mocniej kopie w klamkę" podczas rozbłysku słonecznego?

Hello, welcome to the forum, but please use English in the International Forums!

Translates to:

Quote

Does solar activity affect the presence of static charges on Earth? Does he "kick the doorknob harder" during a solar flare?

 

On 11/7/2024 at 12:28 PM, kekus69 said:

Czy aktywność słoneczna ma wpływ na obecność ładunków statycznych na Ziemi? Czy "mocniej kopie w klamkę" podczas rozbłysku słonecznego?

Welcome to the forums.  Please use English here in our international forums, as said in our rules page.
Thank you!

So with this Coronal Hole facing us, would it help smaller flares reach us, provide more material for CMEs to bring us, hinder their smooth flow, or (d) none of the above/no effect. 

1 hour ago, Mikotos said:

So with this Coronal Hole facing us, would it help smaller flares reach us, provide more material for CMEs to bring us, hinder their smooth flow, or (d) none of the above/no effect. 

Interesting questions. Hmm. Well it is known that CMEs can sweep the intervening space between us and the sun, thus permitting less interference to subsequent CME activities. And increased speeds naturally.   CH discharges should help as well I suppose.  But how much would be highly speculative imo. 

Here's my stupid question: why does it seems that the radio absorption most commonly happens on the western hemisphere specially the American continent? Of course I ask as totally uneducated person on this topic. Thanks in advance if someone takes the time to answer this

Edit: typo 

Edited November 11, 2024Nov 11 by olive1989

7 hours ago, olive1989 said:

Here's my stupid question: why does it seems that the radio absorption most commonly happens on the western hemisphere specially the American continent? Of course I ask as totally uneducated person on this topic. Thanks in advance if someone takes the time to answer this

Most likely a combination of selection bias and salience bias; the former in particular is the most likely contributor here, as you only watch the D-RAP model images when you're awake, which is more likely during the day, and hence the absorption will tend to be over the Americas (assuming that you live at those longitudes).

In reality the absorption shown in the model is simply centered on wherever local noon is at any given time (more specifically where the sun is directly overhead), so it spends equal time at all longitudes.

Edited November 12, 2024Nov 12 by Philalethes
clarifications, typo

This is probably the wrong place for this as I am probably just experiencing a lag in the data - but I'm looking at the LASCO and other imagery (https://www.spaceweatherlive.com/en/solar-activity/solar-flares.html#imgflare-2)  from around 17:12-17:38 UTC and seeing what appears to be a large or dense CME in what I believe to be the southwest part of the sun. Yet nothing appears about this on any of the space weather tables on this site. Is there just a general slowdown in data being transferred - or is this just something that doesn't get counted as important (maybe because it's on the far side of the sun or something like that)? Can anyone explain it?

Thank you in advance if you have the answer!

On 11/2/2024 at 7:26 PM, 3241silo said:

I think the website is automatically translating your message, so my response might not be perfect. 

I do not know if geomagnetic activity can impact the way we perceive time. But I do not think our brains and bodies are sensitive to magnetic forces. Birds and insects are, but I believe we aren't. Our perception of time is impacted by other factors.

There are experiments on Earth where people are very close to magnets that are almost 1,000,000,000 times stronger than the magnetic forces in space. Currently, the IMF field is 10 nanotesla while the strongest magnet we've ever made is over 30 tesla. None of the people working with those magnets have issues.

A real issue is that astronauts are more vulnerable to solar particles and radiation from the sun and CMEs. If spacesuits aren't protective enough, it's life-threatening. But, we build and design space stations and rockets to protect our astronauts well enough.

 

On 11/2/2024 at 7:26 PM, 3241silo said:

I think the website is automatically translating your message, so my response might not be perfect. 

I do not know if geomagnetic activity can impact the way we perceive time. But I do not think our brains and bodies are sensitive to magnetic forces. Birds and insects are, but I believe we aren't. Our perception of time is impacted by other factors.

There are experiments on Earth where people are very close to magnets that are almost 1,000,000,000 times stronger than the magnetic forces in space. Currently, the IMF field is 10 nanotesla while the strongest magnet we've ever made is over 30 tesla. None of the people working with those magnets have issues.

A real issue is that astronauts are more vulnerable to solar particles and radiation from the sun and CMEs. If spacesuits aren't protective enough, it's life-threatening. But, we build and design space stations and rockets to protect our astronauts well enough.

I think the original poster is Italian (ciao!) but to be honest, I have heard that the maximum allowable limit for long term human exposure to more than 1 Gauss (I am unsure if this is the correct measurement)  is quite short. So I don't know how true it would be to suggest that magnetism has no discernible or dangerous effect on the Human mind, since many safety limits have been put in place worldwide to stop anyone suffering negative effects. 

Magnetic fields that are too strong (according to official standards) can make you a bit crazy and if you go over those limits, probably time dilation or contraction could be one of those deleterious effects you experience. It would probably be like taking bad drugs.

Modern technology regularly exceeds safety limits but this is disregarded as long as it occurs in a setting where no long term exposure is possible.

19 minutes ago, Stella said:

This is probably the wrong place for this as I am probably just experiencing a lag in the data - but I'm looking at the LASCO and other imagery (https://www.spaceweatherlive.com/en/solar-activity/solar-flares.html#imgflare-2)  from around 17:12-17:38 UTC and seeing what appears to be a large or dense CME in what I believe to be the southwest part of the sun. Yet nothing appears about this on any of the space weather tables on this site. Is there just a general slowdown in data being transferred - or is this just something that doesn't get counted as important (maybe because it's on the far side of the sun or something like that)? Can anyone explain it?

Thank you in advance if you have the answer!

 

I think the original poster is Italian (ciao!) but to be honest, I have heard that the maximum allowable limit for long term human exposure to more than 1 Gauss (I am unsure if this is the correct measurement)  is quite short. So I don't know how true it would be to suggest that magnetism has no discernible or dangerous effect on the Human mind, since many safety limits have been put in place worldwide to stop anyone suffering negative effects. 

Magnetic fields that are too strong (according to official standards) can make you a bit crazy and if you go over those limits, probably time dilation or contraction could be one of those deleterious effects you experience. It would probably be like taking bad drugs.

Modern technology regularly exceeds safety limits but this is disregarded as long as it occurs in a setting where no long term exposure is possible.

I don't know why my own post is merged with one that is totally not related to it but this is what the system has done. Sorry for any confusion !

Edited November 11, 2024Nov 11 by Stella

2 hours ago, Stella said:

This is probably the wrong place for this as I am probably just experiencing a lag in the data - but I'm looking at the LASCO and other imagery (https://www.spaceweatherlive.com/en/solar-activity/solar-flares.html#imgflare-2)  from around 17:12-17:38 UTC and seeing what appears to be a large or dense CME in what I believe to be the southwest part of the sun. Yet nothing appears about this on any of the space weather tables on this site. Is there just a general slowdown in data being transferred - or is this just something that doesn't get counted as important (maybe because it's on the far side of the sun or something like that)? Can anyone explain it?

It's a filament eruption; it's not as readily picked up by SWL due to not being associated with any major flare and typically not very explosive eruptions, but it is being discussed in this thread if you're interested.

 

i have another question: why do the aurora factors(solar wind, density, IMF Bt and Bz) sometimes spike up really high for like 1 minute?

1 hour ago, YourLocalCapybara2 said:

i have another question: why do the aurora factors(solar wind, density, IMF Bt and Bz) sometimes spike up really high for like 1 minute?

That is usually due to data error from the satellites.