4 hours ago, Jesterface23 said:

Keep in mind, new topics can be opened. Like right now, people do have things to share about the ongoing CHs and they 100% have the right to create a new topic for the event if they want to. It is just that no one has and everything has pretty much been in the general topic for geomagnetic activity.

This is more or less my opinion as well. If someone wants to open a topic for a specific potential CME impact, or some other activity, whether ongoing or suspected, that seems perfectly appropriate (within reasonable limits, of course, e.g. not spamming the forums with threads for every flare or things like that, as some members have done in the past). Then people can engage with that as much as they like, depending on whether they think there is any merit to it. Usually one can find a CME model and analysis for even small CMEs in DONKI (unless they are very stealthy, but that's fairly rare; even the recent stealthy M3.3 was modeled), which can serve to inform about which ones are more likely to lead to any notable activity here. To me that seems to better fulfill what the idea behind this thread is; alerting others to active geomagnetic conditions can be done in either such a specific thread or in the thread for unspecified activity.

Just my two sen.

57 minutes ago, JessicaF said:

@Samrau is there a way to access past data on all three IMF components? I looked at the charts and zoomed out but it only goes back 24h, hence the data from Wed is not there anymore. I would be interested in inspecting By to verify your hypothesis. I understand that due to the 23.5 deg tilt of the Earth's rotational axis, the other components (Bx and By) can play a role. For example, at winter solstice, we would want Bx < 0 and at the summer solstice Bx > 0, and then the corresponding inequalities for By at equinoxes. Let us assume that on Wednesday the entire IMF vector pointed in the y direction (Bz = Bx = 0). (Here, I am assuming we are equinox already) Since Bt was roughly stable at 13, we could get up to Bt * sin(23.5) = 5.2nT "cancellation" of the Earth magnetic field. This is pretty good and could certainly lead to a substorm. Again, this is for the optimal case when the IMF points exactly in the opposite direction of the Earth's magnetic field (I am ignoring the deviation of the dipole model from the rotational axis).

And thank you for pointing out the thread. Looks like an interesting reading. Will read thoroughly.

As mentioned you can check the archive here on SWL, but in some instances that can be a bit tedious, at least if you want to get a quick overview of longer time periods. SWPC's RTSW page lets you get an overview more easily, where you can zoom out to the entire set of data all the way back to 1998 in a simple manner. Another great tool is this timeline viewer, where you can zoom out even further for the datasets that go further back.

As for the notions about the projection effects due to Earth's tilt (the R-M and equinoctial effects), I think it's better if we discuss that in the thread where we recently discussed this a bit, this one; it doesn't work quite the way you suspect here, although that might be in part due to me not being quite clear about some certain details (like e.g. how the radial component at the solstices doesn't work the same way as the tangential component at the equinoctes, and also that it doesn't work quite the way you think when it comes to the By, since that's already in the GSM coordinate system, which is why ultimately the actual Bz measurement is all that's relevant except in certain edge cases, like those discussed in the thread Samrau mentioned). Feel free to make a post about it there, and I'll try to clarify to the best of my knowledge.

Edited February 28Feb 28 by Philalethes
thread mention

3 hours ago, Samrau said:

If you're interested, you can read about it: https://community.spaceweatherlive.com/topic/3627-aurora-with-positive-bz-and-negative-by/

as you can see, it's not a secret, it's just that some people aren't really interested in it )

I think that such insignificant events are not discussed en masse because of their negligible impact on life on earth. Why waste time? And we always learn about dangerous phenomena quickly and scientists will work to minimize possible damage.

I think a fair amount of people here are interested in the auroras, and they are hard to predict, which makes even the mere possibility of a CME arrival more interesting for us. Auroras don't kill or threaten anyone... but are beautiful to behold

Perhaps, as has been suggested, there could be a topic that has a 'potential-CME' focus that is specifically for aurora watchers who wants an early warning?

Or maybe one already exists and I am ignorant of it.

37 minutes ago, Stella said:

I don't know if this counts but last night at UTC 23:00 there was a pan-sky backlight behind the clouds that was so bright, the morning birds started singing (robins or larks, I'm not sure which they were). They were singing for around 30 mins before they realised "oh f*** it's not dawn, why am I awake??" and went back to sleep. (It was the middle of the night).

It was the spookiest damn thing I've experienced. We don't get ambient light pollution here so I suppose it was aurora related, or else some other geomagnetic phenomenon must've set them off!

That is weird!

Where are you located (doesn't need to be exact, just for a general idea of continent / latitude) - for me 23:00UTC is 17:00 local time, so not even dark yet.

any possible earth direct CME from this filaments eruption?

8 minutes ago, JlJ said:

any possible earth direct CME from this filaments eruption?

From lasco imagery it shows the cme most likely produced by this going mostly southeast so I wouldn't be expecting anything

Edited March 1Mar 1 by SearMr Cool
West to east

1 hour ago, JlJ said:

any possible earth direct CME from this filaments eruption?

I wondered this also. @Jesterface23 is this on your radar yet?

It'd pretty much be waiting on more detailed imagery, but a chance for a direct impact is probably out.

(Also, filaments have their own topic here, https://community.spaceweatherlive.com/topic/3073-filaments-and-prominences/)

NOAA modeled the arrival of CME probably from yesterday's filament eruption with the arrival 04.03 with a possible G1.

Not gonna lie. Because we are really only guessing at the timing and speed of each of these CME's... I really kinda wish these models would be created with multiple speed options. Say one 50%, 25% & 10% slower then estimated and another set 50, 25 & 10% faster. That way, if something changes or our initial estimate is off, we have an idea of how far off it is off by and what that impact (or non impact) could look like.

3 hours ago, WindKeeper said:

Not gonna lie. Because we are really only guessing at the timing and speed of each of these CME's... I really kinda wish these models would be created with multiple speed options. Say one 50%, 25% & 10% slower then estimated and another set 50, 25 & 10% faster. That way, if something changes or our initial estimate is off, we have an idea of how far off it is off by and what that impact (or non impact) could look like.

General rule of thumb is to give at least 8-12 hours of leeway in either direction because there's so many variables.

1 hour ago, Parabolic said:

General rule of thumb is to give at least 8-12 hours of leeway in either direction because there's so many variables.

I get the 8-10 hours in each direction. With a "different" arrival time, I would assume that also means its a different speed and thus could be a very different impact. I have really only experienced later arrivals. Has anything ended up faster or more direct then anticipated?

On 2/27/2025 at 3:10 PM, Jesterface23 said:

We already have a topic for this. https://community.spaceweatherlive.com/topic/2816-unspecified-geomagnetic-activity/

Jesterface is right, we do have a topic for this already but I also acknlowledge we have a problem is this forum for when it's appropriate to make a new topic for an incoming CH or CME etc. We will try in the coming days and/or weeks to set up better guidelines on how to keep this forum more organized. If anyone has any suggestions feel free to reply to me but for unspecified geomagnetic activity I suggest to use the topic that @Jesterface23 linked to. Thanks.

On 2/28/2025 at 10:18 PM, NightSky said:

That is weird!

Where are you located (doesn't need to be exact, just for a general idea of continent / latitude) - for me 23:00UTC is 17:00 local time, so not even dark yet.

It was around 11 pm - midnight our time. Not anywhere near dawn 😂

On 3/1/2025 at 11:10 PM, SearMr Cool said:

From lasco imagery it shows the cme most likely produced by this going mostly southeast so I wouldn't be expecting anything

Not trying to single you out... but this is more or less what 99% of negative replies to "will this produce an earth directed CME" questions look like. They are almost always phrased as "it's unlikely (or impossible)". And in my experience those negative analyses are frequently wrong.

I mean everyone is entitled to an opinion but the prevailing opinions given here, are against a CMR arrival in almost every case... And yes I know they are hard to predict. But predicting "no CME is likely" in 99% of questionable eruptions is also bound to score a lot of false negatives.

I also get that some (or many?) people here don't care that much about uncertain CME events that may not actually arrive. That is why we probably need a topic that is just for the people who do care and are optimistic one will arrive!

1 hour ago, Stella said:

It was around 11 pm - midnight our time. Not anywhere near dawn 😂

Not trying to single you out... but this is more or less what 99% of negative replies to "will this produce an earth directed CME" questions look like. They are almost always phrased as "it's unlikely (or impossible)". And in my experience those negative analyses are frequently wrong.

I mean everyone is entitled to an opinion but the prevailing opinions given here, are against a CMR arrival in almost every case... And yes I know they are hard to predict. But predicting "no CME is likely" in 99% of questionable eruptions is also bound to score a lot of false negatives.

I also get that some (or many?) people here don't care that much about uncertain CME events that may not actually arrive. That is why we probably need a topic that is just for the people who do care and are optimistic one will arrive!

Yeah I will say I was wrong in this case as I was just going based of what I have learnt (hence why I stated it didn't really seem earth directed with it being very south eastwards with not much of a halo) so will be more wary of this in the future and improve my knowledge, as to your points, I myself wasn't trying to be negative and just simply went off my observation (which again I was wrong about) but there may be some people who are more negative in a sense, and also do wanna state I don't think most people here aren't optimistic/don't care but more of that we just made a misobservation or mistake which again isn't really a good thing so saying they don't care/aren't optimistic isn't to fair.

I also guess for this forum I believe this would best be separated into perhaps a different category (like unsure cmes or something) and have a different thread for each different cme so others can review and such, would also stop this thread from getting cluttered up as I suspect this will if we ever get multiple 'uncertain' cmes at once.

1 hour ago, Stella said:

Not trying to single you out... but this is more or less what 99% of negative replies to "will this produce an earth directed CME" questions look like. They are almost always phrased as "it's unlikely (or impossible)". And in my experience those negative analyses are frequently wrong.

I mean everyone is entitled to an opinion but the prevailing opinions given here, are against a CMR arrival in almost every case... And yes I know they are hard to predict. But predicting "no CME is likely" in 99% of questionable eruptions is also bound to score a lot of false negatives.

I also get that some (or many?) people here don't care that much about uncertain CME events that may not actually arrive. That is why we probably need a topic that is just for the people who do care and are optimistic one will arrive!

NOAA predicts G1 on the 4th and 5th. This info is also on SWL. In general, I would not buy too much into opinions but make the decision whether or not to pursue this one based on just data and your own experience with these glancing blows. Many glancing blows indeed end up misses. Depending on the cost of the false alarm for you, you need to make a decision whether or not to invest in it. A Bayesian decision making in its glory. In my case, I would need to drive right after work (6 pm) for 2h south (unfortunately) to partially get rid of clouds. That's time, gas, and a partially sleepless night. I have not made a decision yet but might go for it. If at your location you have no clouds on the 4th / 5th and your geomagnetic latitude is, say 50 or higher, by all means go for it and be ready with a camera as this might be a photography only event but no one can exclude the possibility that it will be more than that. Good luck to you either way you decide.

8 hours ago, Stella said:

It was around 11 pm - midnight our time. Not anywhere near dawn 😂

Not trying to single you out... but this is more or less what 99% of negative replies to "will this produce an earth directed CME" questions look like. They are almost always phrased as "it's unlikely (or impossible)". And in my experience those negative analyses are frequently wrong.

I mean everyone is entitled to an opinion but the prevailing opinions given here, are against a CMR arrival in almost every case... And yes I know they are hard to predict. But predicting "no CME is likely" in 99% of questionable eruptions is also bound to score a lot of false negatives.

I also get that some (or many?) people here don't care that much about uncertain CME events that may not actually arrive. That is why we probably need a topic that is just for the people who do care and are optimistic one will arrive!

Maybe it's translation difficulties, but I realized that according to your logic in this thread only positive opinions and forecasts should be discussed, which should correspond to your vision of what is happening. That's not right. You could have created a thread and written your arguments about the upcoming arrival of CME, but you chose otherwise. Sorry to be a nerd, but Parabolic asked you for facts, can you provide them?

Prove the 99% you write about.

Here Hagrid made the right decision and along with hamateur 1953 created a new thread about an upcoming possible event. Why didn't you? Were you waiting for the majority of doubters to change their minds and someone to create a thread about it? And for discussing uncertainties, the admin himself said there is a corresponding thread.

Also, as far as I know NOAA in their usual fashion tries to always predict the worst case scenario for their customers.

If a G1 does come in, I certainly won't be upset about it. I'm sure I'll know about the possible aurora borealis beforehand anyway. And I certainly won't feel bad about being wrong. And I advise you to debate boldly and not be afraid of being wrong. No one will judge you too much for it ))))

12 hours ago, JessicaF said:

NOAA predicts G1 on the 4th and 5th. This info is also on SWL. In general, I would not buy too much into opinions but make the decision whether or not to pursue this one based on just data and your own experience with these glancing blows. Many glancing blows indeed end up misses. Depending on the cost of the false alarm for you, you need to make a decision whether or not to invest in it. A Bayesian decision making in its glory. In my case, I would need to drive right after work (6 pm) for 2h south (unfortunately) to partially get rid of clouds. That's time, gas, and a partially sleepless night. I have not made a decision yet but might go for it. If at your location you have no clouds on the 4th / 5th and your geomagnetic latitude is, say 50 or higher, by all means go for it and be ready with a camera as this might be a photography only event but no one can exclude the possibility that it will be more than that. Good luck to you either way you decide.

For me it's pretty easy, I can just step outside ... As long as the weather cooperates! Personally, I keep one eye on the skies anytime that there is a noteworthy solar flux, or radio emissions or other possible CME signature. It actually pays off. (But then again, I am only interesting in seeing auras and not in photographing them)

5 hours ago, Samrau said:

Maybe it's translation difficulties, but I realized that according to your logic in this thread only positive opinions and forecasts should be discussed, which should correspond to your vision of what is happening. That's not right. You could have created a thread and written your arguments about the upcoming arrival of CME, but you chose otherwise. Sorry to be a nerd, but Parabolic asked you for facts, can you provide them?

Prove the 99% you write about.

Here Hagrid made the right decision and along with hamateur 1953 created a new thread about an upcoming possible event. Why didn't you? Were you waiting for the majority of doubters to change their minds and someone to create a thread about it? And for discussing uncertainties, the admin himself said there is a corresponding thread.

Also, as far as I know NOAA in their usual fashion tries to always predict the worst case scenario for their customers.

If a G1 does come in, I certainly won't be upset about it. I'm sure I'll know about the possible aurora borealis beforehand anyway. And I certainly won't feel bad about being wrong. And I advise you to debate boldly and not be afraid of being wrong. No one will judge you too much for it ))))

Actually this isn't even my thread and as I have already stated, I'm not here for purely positive projections. But nor should every prediction be "it's nothing, just bad data, it will definitely miss us".

But, sigh, it's getting way too complicated to explain my thoughts and I feel that the level of nitpicking on each word I write only seems to make things more complicated . The overall aim of this seems to be to prove I'm wrong rather than understanding. And I can't explain myself better than I have but there is at tendency for members to write off most data suggesting CMEs until they're actually arriving in the form of a geostirm.

Well, whatever...

I will simply avoid this forum for discussions of probable CME and continue piercing together data on my own. But there is a tendency here to either miss, or dismiss, the dates when it may be worthwhile to sit outside and search for something interesting in the heavens. Until it's actually happening. I know I am making a valid point and these defensive responses do little to change my mind.

But admittedly yes the figure 99% was something of a theatrical exaggeration. This is true.

Edited March 3Mar 3 by Stella
Clarifying points

1 hour ago, Stella said:

For me it's pretty easy, I can just step outside ... As long as the weather cooperates! Personally, I keep one eye on the skies anytime that there is a noteworthy solar flux, or radio emissions or other possible CME signature. It actually pays off. (But then again, I am only interesting in seeing auras and not in photographing them)

Actually this isn't even my thread and as I have already stated, I'm not here for purely positive projections. But nor should every prediction be "it's nothing, just bad data, it will definitely miss us".

But, sigh, it's getting way too complicated to explain my thoughts and I feel that the level of nitpicking on each word I write only seems to make things more complicated . The overall aim of this seems to be to prove I'm wrong rather than understanding. And I can't explain myself better than I have but there is at tendency for members to write off most data suggesting CMEs until they're actually arriving in the form of a geostirm.

Well, whatever...

I will simply avoid this forum for discussions of probable CME and continue piercing together data on my own. But there is a tendency here to either miss, or dismiss, the dates when it may be worthwhile to sit outside and search for something interesting in the heavens. Until it's actually happening. I know I am making a valid point and these defensive responses do little to change my mind.

But admittedly yes the figure 99% was something of a theatrical exaggeration. This is true.

I just don't think that when there are any uncertainties in geomagnetic forecasts, you can develop any particular single topic about an uncertain phenomenon, they will just write a short opinion, as it happens in the corresponding thread https://community.spaceweatherlive.com/topic/2816-unspecified-geomagnetic-activity/ and they will leave this topic. Note the number of pages, only 84 since April 2023. And take a look at https://community.spaceweatherlive.com/topic/3725-ar13939-20241229-earth-directed-cme/ - 22 pages have been written there in less than two weeks. None of the experienced participants are going to prove anything, looking for a needle in a haystack like the impending possible arrival of CME (tangential impact). Also we don't have such technologies, which would give data about solar wind with 100 percent accuracy. So there is no point in creating closely related separate topics. And you do not offer us something really worthy, but only write that it is necessary to make a separate topic.

From time to time different publiki speak about “hidden SME” or inflate some other insignificant phenomena and I can explain it by the fact that the corresponding publiki in periods of calm release at least something that could satisfy the information hunger of subscribers and at the same time increase the level of their knowledge.

you don't have to be silent, you have to write and be able to bring your thought to the end so I can come back later and tell you “I'm sorry Stella, I'm such an idiot” XD

1 hour ago, Stella said:

For me it's pretty easy, I can just step outside ... As long as the weather cooperates! Personally, I keep one eye on the skies anytime that there is a noteworthy solar flux, or radio emissions or other possible CME signature. It actually pays off. (But then again, I am only interesting in seeing auras and not in photographing them)

Then, it is pretty simple for you, Stella. Just walk out and enjoy the time under the starry sky. Those of us who stay optimistic and try for even the low probability events will see the most after all. One thing I would recommend is to warm up to the idea of using a camera or a phone. Even if you are not interested in taking pretty pictures, the camera / phone is like advanced vision. It will show you if something is coming, give you more real time info. No satellite data or math models will replace actual observations. And let us know here if there is something in the sky.

The forecast where I live improved overnight, so I might need to drive less and lose less latitude tomorrow. Fingers crossed! I think everybody here is aurora-starved by now unless they recently overate in Iceland.

Any one talk about this? M1.79 flare probably produce a CME, looks like not earth direct

Are there any cme come from this flare?

16 hours ago, JlJ said:

Are there any cme come from this flare?

A small one has been modeled; posted it in the 4016 thread.

I'm a lurker and still learning so I can't provide much more than this, but wanted to bring it up anyway and see what you guys think of it

24 minutes ago, linkedwinters said:

I'm a lurker and still learning so I can't provide much more than this, but wanted to bring it up anyway and see what you guys think of it

It looks like this one. The speed is estimated in ranges of ~410-460 km/s, which is very slow. Unless it somehow carries some magnetic field of 30+ nT and gets nicely constantly southward, I do not think it will be significant for anybody else than just strictly high latitudes. I do not think I ever saw a significant impact from any CME that was slower than 550 km/s, though my memory is not the best.

Was there a significant X-Ray event associated with this ejection?

Just remembered. I can ask my Aussie friend. Back in a bit. Unfortunately I can find no significant dimming. Perhaps was a limb filament? @JessicaF may have a shot at it. A KP seven is worthwhile in Seattle.

Edited March 17Mar 17 by hamateur 1953