Backward Sunspot Heralds Next Solar Cycle 73
GoramFrackinWacko writes "A backward sunspot chronicled on July 31st heralds the next solar cycle, and it looks to be a big one! From the article: 'Satellite operators and NASA mission planners are bracing for this next solar cycle because it is expected to be exceptionally stormy, perhaps the stormiest in decades. Sunspots and solar flares will return in abundance, producing bright auroras on Earth and dangerous proton storms in space.'"
wishing for news (Score:5, Insightful)
This story reminds me of the recent "predictions" of a potentially devastating hurricane season with greater than average frequency hurricanes and more of these hurricanes being Category 5 (the strongest hurricane defined). On what basis?
On the buzz around global warming and its effect on hurricanes among other things, and the recent "example" season of a record-breaking number of hurricanes. So, naturally the prediction for this season was "lots of big hurricanes". I'm not sure, but so far I don't recall any hurricanes well into the season, but if you watch the Weather Channel, they're almost praying for some... The recent "tracking" of Chris showed almost despondent correspondents (pretending to show relief at Chris' dissipation) when Chris fizzled.
Similarly with sun spots, sun cycles and predictable sun cycle behaviors. We know more than ever about the sun, but the more we know the less we know how to predict what it's going to do. This is an interesting story in that stories about the sun and sun spots are inherently interesting (in my opinion). But, from the article: Satellite operators and NASA mission planners are bracing for this next solar cycle because it is expected to be exceptionally stormy, perhaps the stormiest in decades.... That is purely conjecture -- no more likely to be correct than not. Especially when considering the builtin caveat from the article:
Makes for good news though -- something scary to be afraid of.Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If the writeup is correct, however, we could get some awesome Northern Lights. The negative repercussions would most likely be limited to fleeting disruptions in some radio traffic. Some phone calls and television feeds may have momentary issues, but even at its worst I doubt all of the doomsday predictions that claim we will arrive back at the stone age from having everything in orbit nuked.
Above all you must
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, this is all speculation, but there is another thing to consider. Bare in mind how much (still dark) fiber got laid during the 90s tech boom. I expect having all the satellites blown/fried from orbit would be an inconvenience (albeit a major one) more than a disaster of epic proportions. Navigation for trans-oceanic plans/ships would probably suffe
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, not everything will be nuked - only the less protected satellites (either by design, or through age and/or col
Re:wishing for news (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure they're wrong sometimes, but the fact that the science is imperfect does not warrant discounting these observations altogether.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
But to the parent's point, it may indeed warrant discounting predictions.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:wishing for news (Score:5, Informative)
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/10mar_sto
Re: (Score:1)
Re:wishing for news (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, dire predictions boost ratings and sell airtime. This is why the chance of snowfall is always hyped in the winter, etc.
Sure, thanks for pointing out that some people in all fields have a predilection for sensationalism -- but anyone who doesn't take all such predictions with a grain of salt needs some critical thinking skills.
Just as anecdotal evidence is not proof of something, anecdotal evidence is also not proof that something is false. We have an imperfect understanding of weather, and while all the conditions indicate that something is likely, it does not mean that something will happen. Also, note that the hurricane estimates for this season were revised downward based upon new, more current, readings in early August.
One more thing to note -- hurricane season isn't in full-swing until mid-August (now). A light June/July may be insignificant compared to what happens during peak season, Aug-Oct. Related to that, maybe a lack of early hurricanes bodes poorly for the rest of the season -- there is a lot of energy yet to be dissipated.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Also, here in Omaha, we're like 4 inches above normal rainfall. There have been heavy rains here around 7 of the last 14 days.
Not that I don't think we should get away from the coal-fired plants, as they put a lot more crap (includ
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Well, how about historical trends, climate modelling, the NOAA... need I go on?
As to the hurricanes (Score:3, Insightful)
It *has* been a big year for hurricanes (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
At this years rate, we're looking at a very quiet year, the global amount of storms will still be significantly down from average.
And they will blame the lack of storms on the climate change brought about by global warming.
Re: (Score:2)
Earth's Magnetic Field? (Score:2)
Cool (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Solar minimum wasn't too long ago [nasa.gov].
somewhere out there (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This will be the catalyst for them to start worrying about 'solar warming'. "Cycles? My fellow Americans, do not believe that for a second. The sun is a violent, chaotic planet and it must be cooled or removed from our universe. The more that yellow thing in our atmosphere is allowed to shine, the worse our global warming will be."
In the words of Jon Stewart.. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Uh oh (Score:2, Funny)
OMG, they were right - pollution & global warming are destroying the sun!
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe superman shouldn't have thrown all those nuclear weapons at the sun in the late 1980's...
Waiting (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Waiting (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, because it took me more than 5 to RTFM and read the posted comments then post myself.
After posting I get a new refresh of the article. Crap, a couple other people make comments along the same lines, and slashdot doesn't let you cancel a comment.
So I get a redundent mod.
Wish the durn moderators would take the Nyquist Sampling Theorem into account befor modding.
And I bet this comment if more than 5 minutes after you coughed too. :)
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree. The moderation is for the benefit of readers and to them your comment is indeed redundant. Ok, it sucks to be you right now, but if you honestly try to contribute to civilized discussion you'll end up with excelle
Re: (Score:1)
I wish the trolls would go away as much as anyone, maybe if you don't have good karma, your postings would be delayed for 10 or 20 minutes? (Allowing them to be pushed down in sequence). It would also ameliorate all those stupid GNAA and goat.se postings.
In any case, unless you have bad posting habits, one redundant posting i
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Nope, Al Qaeda (Score:2)
We must hunt them down and stop them from destroying our way of life. Please, if you won't think of the children, think of the parents who will have no TV to use as a babysitter 10 hours a day. Tragedy, I tell you.
*preemptive troll clarification: Yes, much of the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And, for the record, YES, they are terrorists. I used to cower in the corner every month when the bill came.
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly this was caused by solar warming (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What? (Score:4, Funny)
If this sunspot had popped up at those coordinates on Earth, I think we'd actually all be dead, or at least severely discomforted.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. Despite being arbitrary, it gives a useful way to say where sunspots are relative to each other. Ie. the absolute longitude is arbitrary, but the differences are not, making them useful. But to talk about a single sunspot's longitude is completely and utterly pointless. What's not to laugh at?
People like these kinds of trivia because they have been misled into thinking they are meaningful facts.
Yesterday I le
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No permanent features -- but there are periodic relative positions than can be used to assign longitude. The easiest one, of course, would be the relative position of the Earth. Since we know the Earth's orbit, we can just use trig, along with the date and time, to determine longitude on the sun.
Yes, it's not direct observation, but it works -- and it's no less arbitrary that Greenwich being Earth longitude zero.
Interesting, but cycle 24 prediction may be wrong. (Score:2, Interesting)
http://www.leif.org/research/Polar%20Fields%20and% 20Cycle%2024 [leif.org]
how do they *know*? (Score:2)
What I didn't get was, how do they KNOW the polarity of the sunspot? There shouldn't be a pattern difference between the two poles, should there? They ought to be equal. Are they using a special sensor on one of the solar satellites? How would you possibly detect the magnetic polarity of even so large a phenomenon from a distanc
Re: (Score:2)
Re:how do they *know*? (Score:4, Informative)
great news! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Solar Storms and Satellites (Score:2)
Sacrifice (Score:1)
Global Warming? (Score:1, Insightful)
Inconvenient Truth? (Score:1)
Just remember, this is all Bush's fault... (Score:2)
Bad humans!
-------------
(If it wasn't obvious, that was supposed to be funny).
Re: (Score:2)
Why does the sun... (Score:2)