Yeah!

but T CrB won't be impressive, just cool for those who like staring at night skies.

I  have just read about Crab nebula that you mentioned, looks very cool

And apparently the X rays emitted  by the nebula were used in the 50s/60s to study our Sun's corona during the Sun's transits over the nebula in June.. (that's how it ends up to be on-topic... haha)

Edited January 28Jan 28 by Manu

5 hours ago, Archmonoth said:

Drones, lots of drones. Drone research is paramount for military and pursued by every military nation on the planet right now. The last few military fashion shows (military tech conventions) are full of new drones, new automation etc. What you are seeing is a drone.

Tons of the sightings were also confirmed as airplanes and stars/planets (and others) too, so there's a great deal of mass hysteria involved as well. One US governor literally posted a video of Sirius and Orion and surrounding stars while angrily demanding answers to the "drones". When it was going on I was watching a lot of clips, and I think I only saw one or two videos during the entire ordeal which were of actual drones, heh.

In any case, calling these lights UFOs/UAPs at this point seems rather tenuous, given how the vast majority of them are readily identified as known objects.

10 hours ago, MJOdorczuk said:

I am unsure, how the mass and drag are connected here. Most models (if not all) assume the same, nearly fully proton plasma, so the proton mass is just a scaling factor.

Well, x2 speed won't be from x2 energy, which was your statement what I was replying to. Yes, it is a scaling factor and the factor will have a non-linear relationship.

 

10 hours ago, MJOdorczuk said:

Not sure also, where you get viscosity here from.

Attempting to describe how plasma would behave differently. 

 

10 hours ago, MJOdorczuk said:

If by the ratio you mean linear relation between the solar wind speed and the energy injection, it varies a bit, and I just based it specifically on a rather old Akasofu's epsilon. Some models take different exponent factor.

Well, your statement looked like you were suggesting a x2 speed to mean x2 energy. 

Edited January 28Jan 28 by Archmonoth

27 minutes ago, Archmonoth said:

Attempting to describe how plasma would behave differently.

Differently from what? Where does viscosity come here?

28 minutes ago, Archmonoth said:

Well, your statement looked like you were suggesting a x2 speed to mean x2 energy.

Yes, that's what would come from Akasofu's epsilon (we worked with it in our classes so now it is the only one I recall, but there were other models that also included the velocity as a linear component), but it probably is not the best model. @Philalethes mentioned earlier other models, which had a different exponent factor. Still, we have rather sparse data on the energy distribution in the ionosphere and magnetosphere, so it will take some longer time before we will be confident about the specific relation between the solar wind parameters and our local phenomena.

11 hours ago, MJOdorczuk said:

Differently from what? Where does viscosity come here?

Viscosity is relevant for the Reynolds number. Since the solar wind and CMEs transition from laminar flow to turbulent flow both at a certain distance from the Sun (terminal edge) and when a plasma cloud brushes our atmosphere. A domestic analogy is a water facet with the water turned on, the water will have a circle in the sink where the flow transitions from laminar to turbulent flow. 

 

Also, Plasma will have a total charge, but the charge of a proton might vary from section to section. So, when the plasma cloud hits the atmosphere, there will be different energy levels of the protons. These different energy amounts will affect the speed of protons descending into the atmosphere. Observations of protons shows there is a variety of speeds and energy levels. I understand you are referring to a model and many models have different issues, just trying to describe and discuss why x2 speed probably won't mean x2 energy. 

 

A semitruck has way more energy going at the same speed as a car due to its mass, as another example. 

 

There could be some other aspect of plasma I am missing, but there are some dynamics which I think would prevent it from reflecting the model you are referring to. 

11 hours ago, MJOdorczuk said:

Yes, that's what would come from Akasofu's epsilon (we worked with it in our classes so now it is the only one I recall, but there were other models that also included the velocity as a linear component), but it probably is not the best model. @Philalethes mentioned earlier other models, which had a different exponent factor. Still, we have rather sparse data on the energy distribution in the ionosphere and magnetosphere, so it will take some longer time before we will be confident about the specific relation between the solar wind parameters and our local phenomena.

I don't think so, since the solar wind seems to resemble fluid dynamics, which we can explore more easily. For example, the Monto Carlo method (which is a stochastic process) might be more productive in this situation because fluid dynamics can be a bit fuzzy. Approaching large solar cycle (like the Jose cycle) from a stochastic framework rather than a clockwork/determined pattern, which I think will give more useful observations.

 

Also, thanks for the ongoing convo and welcome to the forum!

Edited January 28Jan 28 by Archmonoth

7 minutes ago, Archmonoth said:

Plasma will have a total charge, but the sections of a cloud might vary from section to section. So, when the plasma cloud hits the atmosphere, there will be different energy levels of the protons. These different energy amounts will affect the speed of protons descending into the atmosphere. Observations of protons shows there is a variety of speeds and energy levels. I understand you are referring to a model and many models have different issues, just trying to describe and discuss why x2 speed probably won't mean x2 energy. 

I think I got slightly lost here. Solar plasma rarely hits Earth's atmosphere, and mainly just deforms Earth's magnetic field. What hits our atmosphere, is (afair) mostly magnetospheric plasma originating from the ionosphere, accelerated out into the tail current and the ring current, and later accelerated back. The energy or raining protons is dependent on the original energy (acceleration from the tail current distortion) plus the acceleration region, which can vary, thus varying speeds... unless you talk about highly energetic protons from the sun, which can penetrate the magnetosphere and rain directly on the atmosphere.
 

19 minutes ago, Archmonoth said:

A semitruck has way more energy going at the same speed as a car due to its mass, as another example. 

 

There could be some other aspect of plasma I am missing, but there are some dynamics which I think would prevent it from reflecting the model you are referring to. 

I slowly start to suspect, that you may mean that there are more factors to the energy coupling than just the velocity, yet I did not postulate it. I just wrote about linear relation (which does not really have to be linear if we look at some other models) between the velocity and the total energy injected into the magnetosphere (tail plasma losses + AE + joule heating + ring current). When I mention that twice the speed means twice the energy, there is a quiet assumption that I hold all other variables unchanged, so I skip for the moment variations in the density or magnetic field.

18 minutes ago, Archmonoth said:

I don't think so, since the wind seems to resemble fluid dynamics, which we can explore more easily. For example, the Monto Carlo method (which is a stochastic process) might be more productive in this situation because fluid dynamics can be a bit fuzzy. 

How come Monte Carlo came to be here? What are the random occurrences you want to model in here? I would understand if we would talk about some microscale collisional plasma phenomena, but solar wind is a large-scale, collisionless fluid.

 

I am sorry, but I think at least one of us is completely missing the point here, but I am unsure which of us (if not both).

This isn't really space weather related, but is there a reason why the austrian magnometer seems to be showing substorms almost every day? is there a calibration issue?

 

3 minutes ago, yahya said:

This isn't really space weather related, but is there a reason why the austrian magnometer seems to be showing substorms almost every day? is there a calibration issue?

 

Do you mean by that "vna" which is Neumayer Station III in Antarctica? I would like to know myself. Anybody able to answer?

2 minutes ago, MJOdorczuk said:

Do you mean by that "vna" which is Neumayer Station III in Antarctica? I would like to know myself. Anybody able to answer?

I thought it was vienna in austria 😅

11 hours ago, yahya said:

I thought it was vienna in austria 😅

That would be "wic". You can check the codes on TGO website, though probably there is a better way than choosing custom sites and checking their codes on the plot (that's how I do it so far).

is the strength of the bz component relevant or do we only care about the direction of bz?

2 minutes ago, jensei said:

is the strength of the bz component relevant or do we only care about the direction of bz?

I suppose you mean B, or magnetic field magnitude. Both are important. B should be at least somewhat southern to lead to reconnections, yet the stronger the magnetic field, the more energy is transferred into magnetosphere.

28 minutes ago, MJOdorczuk said:

I suppose you mean B, or magnetic field magnitude. Both are important. B should be at least somewhat southern to lead to reconnections, yet the stronger the magnetic field, the more energy is transferred into magnetosphere.

so bz+by+bx=bt?

5 minutes ago, jensei said:

so bz+by+bx=bt?

No, the formula to obtain Bt is is the square root of Bx to the second + By to the 2nd + Bz to the second

15 minutes ago, Vancanneyt Sander said:

No, the formula to obtain Bt is is the square root of Bx to the second + By to the 2nd + Bz to the second

where can you obtain this data?

4 minutes ago, jensei said:

where can you obtain this data?

On SWL, go to the 24h graphs of the solar wind and IMF. On the Bz chart you can select Bx and By to be shown there

How high can the IMF reach without the influence of a HSS or CME? is it unusual behaviour for the bz to be close to 10 sometimes without those components?

I have one about the magnetometer - right now the "base line" on it seems much higher than "normal", so the dips don't go near as far as they usually seem to go -- I don't remember seeing that before BUT, I don't exactly stare at it enough to be able to tell if that happens all the time.

What causes that, and is it something we see all the time (except fro those of us who don't pay much attention to it)?

 

3 hours ago, NightSky said:

I have one about the magnetometer - right now the "base line" on it seems much higher than "normal", so the dips don't go near as far as they usually seem to go -- I don't remember seeing that before BUT, I don't exactly stare at it enough to be able to tell if that happens all the time.

What causes that, and is it something we see all the time (except fro those of us who don't pay much attention to it)?

 

Is it not because of the constant northern IMF? The tail gets peeled away and the field on the midnight side gets stronger.

@MJOdorczuk - see that's why I ask - I had no clue! Thank You!

On 1/28/2025 at 10:39 AM, MJOdorczuk said:

I think I got slightly lost here. Solar plasma rarely hits Earth's atmosphere....

My apologies I seem to be under the impression we were talking about Aurora /High energy protons. Which was I thought the modelling with x2 speed and energy were in relation to. If no not, no biggy, my bad. I could have also said atmosphere/ionosphere to just cover everything but w/e. 

 

On 1/28/2025 at 10:39 AM, MJOdorczuk said:

I slowly start to suspect, that you may mean that there are more factors to the energy coupling than just the velocity, yet I did not postulate it.

Well good, because that is exactly what I was suggesting! I misunderstood the inclusion of the model as 1 of many, not as your opinion. 

 

On 1/28/2025 at 10:39 AM, MJOdorczuk said:

I just wrote about linear relation (which does not really have to be linear if we look at some other models) between the velocity and the total energy injected into the magnetosphere (tail plasma losses + AE + joule heating + ring current). When I mention that twice the speed means twice the energy, there is a quiet assumption that I hold all other variables unchanged, so I skip for the moment variations in the density or magnetic field.

I see, and I am suggesting the variables change as the contents of a collision-less plasma becomes dictated by collisions as it enters the atmosphere/ionosphere. So, if the conditions remain, sure, 100% understand what you are saying. 

On 1/28/2025 at 10:39 AM, MJOdorczuk said:

How come Monte Carlo came to be here? What are the random occurrences you want to model in here? I would understand if we would talk about some microscale collisional plasma phenomena, but solar wind is a large-scale, collisionless fluid. 

Well because stochastic processes are often a better strategy for dynamic systems. This is a separate idea/topic which isn't strictly related to solar weather.  (if you want to talk about it more of direct message)

I was suggesting that rather than modeling, using the Moneta Carlo to see what emerges. I think astrophysical fluid dynamics might have some useful observations.

 

On 1/28/2025 at 10:39 AM, MJOdorczuk said:

I am sorry, but I think at least one of us is completely missing the point here, but I am unsure which of us (if not both).

Communication can take time, thanks for the replies, and I think I see where I misunderstood. Regardless I enjoy discussing these ideas. 

Edited February 3Feb 3 by Archmonoth

A bit of a different question and not directly space weather, but how often is the magnetogram/hmibc imagery updated on spaceweatherlive and/or solarham? Or I guess, how often does JSOC/SDO provide updated imagery?

Edited February 4Feb 4 by mymorales

i have a question not about space weather but SWL itself: sometimes the quotations can translate the message to another language, like russian or spanish, why does that happen? i've never gotten it to happen

7 hours ago, Archmonoth said:

My apologies I seem to be under the impression we were talking about Aurora /High energy protons. Which was I thought the modelling with x2 speed and energy were in relation to. If no not, no biggy, my bad. I could have also said atmosphere/ionosphere to just cover everything but w/e. 

The speed was about IMF. I was talking about coupling IMF detected at L1 by ACE/DSCOVR with the energy getting injected into Earth's magnetosphere. Note, that it is magnetosphere in general, not just auroras. It means all auroral precipitation, Joule heating of the ionosphere, ring current enhancement and losses to the released tail plasma.

 

7 hours ago, Archmonoth said:

I see, and I am suggesting the variables change as the contents of a collision-less plasma becomes dictated by collisions as it enters the atmosphere/ionosphere. So, if the conditions remain, sure, 100% understand what you are saying.

There is quite a difference between the solar wind and the plasma hitting Earth's atmosphere. AFAIK, absolutely most of the plasma hitting our atmosphere comes from Earth and was earlier sucked up into the ring current or the tail current through the high electric potential. If we speak of ideal models, solar plasma does not have to enter the magnetosphere at all.

 

7 hours ago, Archmonoth said:

Well because stochastic processes are often a better strategy for dynamic systems. This is a separate idea/topic which isn't strictly related to solar weather.  (if you want to talk about it more of direct message)

I was suggesting that rather than modeling, using the Moneta Carlo to see what emerges. I think astrophysical fluid dynamics might have some useful observations.

I am still confused, where Monte Carlo can come here. As variation of unknown variables? As variations of unsure IMF parameters? I understand the usefulness of MC—I am using it extensively in plasma collisions for satellite-scale simulations—but I do not understand, how you want to apply it to this problem. The IMF-magnetosphere coupling is usually simulated by Vlasov-based models AFAIK. MHD (fluid dynamics approach) does not allow for reconnections, and it is a rather important element.

8 hours ago, mymorales said:

A bit of a different question and not directly space weather, but how often is the magnetogram/hmibc imagery updated on spaceweatherlive and/or solarham? Or I guess, how often does JSOC/SDO provide updated imagery?

For the magnetograms and intensitygrams SDO provides imagery with a 15-minute cadence.

2 hours ago, YourLocalCapybara2 said:

i have a question not about space weather but SWL itself: sometimes the quotations can translate the message to another language, like russian or spanish, why does that happen? i've never gotten it to happen

Probably just the people posting it using Google Translate or similar on the entire page when quoting.