Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Space

No, a Piece of the Sun Didn't Just 'Break Off' (www.cbc.ca) 63

The CBC reports: You may have seen stories over the past week or so with headlines like, "Part of the sun breaks free and forms a strange vortex, baffling scientists," or "Unbelievable moment a piece of the sun BREAKS OFF baffles scientists" or even "NASA captures piece of sun breaking off, baffles scientists." It all started with a harmless, informative tweet. Tamitha Skov, a space weather forecaster and science communicator, just broke away from the main filament... Implications for understanding the sun's atmospheric dynamics above 55 degrees here cannot be overstated!"

But are scientists actually baffled? Tamitha Skov laughs. "No," she said....

The eight-hour event started off with a solar prominence (also known as a solar filament), that began to rise up near the north pole of the sun, which is seen at the top in satellite images. Prominences are made up of plasma, a hot gas of electrically charged hydrogen and helium. They are common on the sun, but it was the location of this one — at the sun's north pole — that was of particular interest to heliophysicists. "What ended up happening was something that started off as a very normal, average, what we call a polar crown filament. It became this kind of tweeted her excitement that "material from a northern prominence big tower, like a big volcano that was beginning to rise up near the very northern pole," Skov explained. The prominence was near the top of the north pole, above 60 degrees latitude where it got caught in an electromagnetic wind. "And it began to yank and pull at some of the material in that prominence," Skov said.

"So it was rising like a hot air balloon, so to speak, up in the air. And as it cooled, instead of just cooling back down and falling, or perhaps erupting, like a normal polar crown filament, part of it got ripped off in this wind. And as it shredded off into this wind, we got to watch it cool down, swirl in a vortex. And that is a very rare, if not, fundamentally new observation."

It looks like the material ultimately just returns to the surface of the sun -- albeit providing clues about the sun's polar winds and the specifics of its magnetic activity cycle.

Skov also says that the sun's magnetic polar fields "flip" during its 22-year solar cycle, which increases the odds of non-charged particles traveling to the poles, according to the article. "So scientists weren't baffled, since they already had some knowledge about this type of activity. But they were thrilled to be able to witness it."

Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader aduxorth for sharing the news.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

No, a Piece of the Sun Didn't Just 'Break Off'

Comments Filter:
  • No no (Score:4, Funny)

    by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Saturday February 18, 2023 @09:57PM (#63304863)

    It broke off. Let people think that. We need some way of identifying who the idiots are.

    • Re:No no (Score:5, Funny)

      by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Saturday February 18, 2023 @10:38PM (#63304905)

      It broke off. Let people think that. We need some way of identifying who the idiots are.

      To be fair... A lot of people don't have a good understanding of science including, perhaps especially, Astronomy. For example, way back in 2011, Bill O'Reilly asserted on his nationally-televised Fox show, "O'Reilly Factor", to David Silverman, president of the American Atheist Group, that God controlled the tides. From O'Reilly: God Causes The Tides, Not The Moon [huffpost.com] (and other sources):

      O'REILLY: I'll tell you why [religion's] not a scam, in my opinion: tide goes in, tide goes out. Never a miscommunication. You can't explain that.

      SILVERMAN: Tide goes in, tide goes out?

      O'REILLY: See, the water, the tide comes in and it goes out, Mr. Silverman. It always comes in, and always goes out. You can't explain that.

      He later doubled-down [huffpost.com] questioning:

      Okay, how did the moon get there? How'd the moon get there? Look, you pinheads who attacked me for this, you guys are just desperate. How'd the moon get there? How'd the sun get there? How'd it get there? Can you explain that to me? How come we have that and Mars doesn't have it? Venus doesn't have it. How come? Why not? How'd it get here?

      Oh wait... I'm helping you here, aren't I? :-)

      • Why does this article pretend nothing about the sun baffles astronomers?

        ãSThe coronal heating problem continues to baffle researchers studying the Sunã

        Why is the tone so defensive? Would a reasonable observer fairly conclude scientists are pretending to be know-it-alls while omitting key mysteries about the sun which are forbidden by thermodynamics?

        Also, does local weather impact tides much more than scientists predict, recently resulting in a 2-foot underprediction of high tide by the standard mo

        • Re: No no (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 ) on Sunday February 19, 2023 @09:50AM (#63305699)

          Why does this article pretend nothing about the sun baffles astronomers?

          ãSThe coronal heating problem continues to baffle researchers studying the Sunã

          Why is the tone so defensive? Would a reasonable observer fairly conclude scientists are pretending to be know-it-alls while omitting key mysteries about the sun which are forbidden by thermodynamics?

          Also, does local weather impact tides much more than scientists predict, recently resulting in a 2-foot underprediction of high tide by the standard models?

          In short, are scientists just using emotional arguments?

          It isn't defensive. It's being tired of the stupid headlines of constant scientist total bewilderment and state of confusion about apparently everything. "Scientists baffled" is a stupid meme at this point. A simple web search on DDG tells us that scientists are apparently baffled about:

          The earth spinning faster than usual, a lake filled with a lot of jellyfish, a particle experiment that threatens fundamental theory, Some "unique object of uncertain nature", Things the James Webb telescopes sees, giraffe skin disease, "worm tornado" in New Jersey, "mysterious whiting events" in the ocean, a new substance found in the earth's core, X-rays from Uranus, and..

          That's just the first page.

          Science is my world. Want to know what bores the bejabbers out of scientists? everything being the same. Lack of cool stuff to research.

          And baffle is the wrong word. Scientists and researchers are not remotely baffled by these things - they are really excited by these things.

          Just like Tamitha Skov noted, it was exciting, not confusing and bewildering.

      • To be fair... A lot of people don't have a good understanding of science including, perhaps especially, Astronomy.

        Following up on myself...

        If you want to see horrendously bad science / Physics / Astronomy, etc... watch the new SyFy show The Ark" [wikipedia.org]. I don't know if the show's producers don't know any better, just don't care, think the audience is dumb or won't care, but I have trouble getting through episodes w/o slapping my head in disbelief a couple of times. Ya, I know it's just a TV show, but geesh. I think I'm currently still watching, three episodes in, for the same reasons people watch slow-motion replays of t

        • Well the third episode especially was wonky, especially with the comet that had a tail and liquid water despite being a full light year from a star. They could explain it with some contrived BS though. The whole tethering thing was nonsenical too. Still, compared to a lot of OTHER sci-fi it wasn't that bad. There's also the terrible acting of some of the cast. Well I am not sure if it's the acting or the director/writing. I know the Ark concept is a favorite of sci-fi yet nobody seems to be able to get it r

          • Well the third episode especially was wonky, especially with the comet that had a tail and liquid water despite being a full light year from a star.

            Yes, a visible tail and being visible itself, even (somehow) glowing blue -- in deep space.

            The whole tethering thing was nonsensical too.

            With the shuttle turning the entire ship on a dime -- a ship with apparently no maneuvering thrusters and dead in the water w/o its main engine. A ship with gravity in the non-rotating areas of the ship, which I know is a standard sci-fi trope but it doesn't seems to align with the level of technology in the show.

            There's also the terrible acting of some of the cast.

            Don't get me started in the lazy stereotypes -- sigh. Obviously all the survivors being young(er) is f

            • Don't get me started in the lazy stereotypes -- sigh. Obviously all the survivors being young(er) is for desired demographics, etc...

              How about Another Life on Netflix a few years ago? The in-show explanation for the entire crew being 20-somethings (except for Katie Sackhoff) is that by the time someone hits 30 they're already in physical and mental decline. I'm sure it's not because 20-somethings look better in their underwear coming out of cryo-sleep.

              But my favorite part was when they had to travel at

              • I haven't seen Another Life (don't have Netflix) but will look into it, thanks.

                To be fair (again) good Science Fiction is hard and the results can be complicated -- which can be good.
                I'm still working my way through a few Alastair Reynolds books...

      • There's not having a good understanding, then there's willful ignorance. There's really no arguing with someone who is unable to suffer an honest thought in his mind...
      • Using Bill O'Reilly, an author, and journalist as a stalwart of science ignorance is kind of unfair. I mean, there are billions of people on the planet who don't even understand solar energy or how plants grow, or even what gravity is, much less what words and numbers mean. Let's be real here. The world is still largely steeped in dark ignorance of the entirety of the world.
        • All good points and (probably) true, but not as much fun as watching O'Reilly being dumb on his own nationally-televised Fox show. :-)

    • Eh. If people want to believe that, let them; let's just hope those people aren't employed to do anything importent, like think critically.
    • by q4Fry ( 1322209 )

      Daily Mail April 2010: [wikipedia.org] "A piece of the Earth BROKE OFF!! Scientists baffled!"

    • What? A piece of the sun broke off??? Damn you global warming! We are doomed! I told you all to stop eating meat!
      • What? A piece of the sun broke off??? Damn you global warming! We are doomed! I told you all to stop eating meat!

        Sounds something like:

        "Save The World !! Die Now !!"

        obligatory sarcasm tag

    • It broke off. Let people think that. We need some way of identifying who the idiots are.

      I thought it was the title of a video on Youtube that had earned millions of views in just a few days.

    • millennials and Z'ers are the most retarded generation.
  • This just in (Score:5, Insightful)

    by chill ( 34294 ) on Saturday February 18, 2023 @10:19PM (#63304883) Journal

    Scientists baffled as to why anyone would trust science "news" from general information tabloids, much less The Daily Mail.

  • Rewrite Please! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by divide overflow ( 599608 ) on Saturday February 18, 2023 @10:29PM (#63304893)
    Could that article summary have been written more clumsily?
    • by Skapare ( 16644 )

      I'm trusting you to come up with a way. after all, it's your idea.

      • I'd trust anyone who has passed 5th grade English to come up with a way. Shit man I'd trust Microsoft "new Bing" AI bot to produce a better summary than this.

    • Could that article summary have been written more clumsily?

      Maybe there will be a follow up article, written by a scientist, titled, "Technical Writing Baffles Journalists". :-)

      • by q4Fry ( 1322209 )

        Maybe there will be a follow up article, written by a scientist, titled, "Technical Writing Baffles Journalists".

        "Eggcrate Foam Baffles Journalists"

      • We don't need an article to say that. It's universally understood.
    • Quote from TFS: "It all started with a harmless, informative tweet. Tamitha Skov, a space weather forecaster and science communicator, just broke away from the main filament..."
      Yeah, "a piece broke off of the sun" is actually more accurate than "a science writer broke off of the filament".
    • It all started with a harmless, informative tweet. Tamitha Skov, a space weather forecaster and science communicator, just broke away from the main filament... Implications for understanding the sun's atmospheric dynamics above 55 degrees here cannot be overstated!"

      So, Tamitha broke away from the main filament... ok...

      It became this kind of tweeted her excitement that "material from a northern prominence big tower, like a big volcano that was beginning to rise up near the very northern pole," Skov explained.

      It became this kind of tweeted her excitement, she explained?!

      Even ChatGPT-3 wouldn't fuck a summary up like this.

  • When I read that a whole class of professionals is "baffled", or "terrified", I can absolutely believe what will happen next. I will mentally toss out the the clickbait and move on.

    I wish everybody wore their true self as plainly as that. How much easier would the world be to navigate?

    • by Potor ( 658520 )
      In headlines, words like baffled and terrified are used the exact same way topless and naked are.
      • âoeWe donâ(TM)t know how the sunâ(TM)s magnetic cycle works,â says Tim Horbury of Imperial College London.

        Are you afraid that if scientists admit bafflement, social structure will break down and you will suffer lots of pain, immediately?

        • by Potor ( 658520 )

          Not sure if my irony detector is working, so I'll just say "no."

          "Baffled" can be replaced by "trying to understand," or "studying." My concern is with the sensationalism of the news through SEO.

          • Not sure if my irony detector is working, so I'll just say "no."

            "Baffled" can be replaced by "trying to understand," or "studying." My concern is with the sensationalism of the news through SEO.

            True. Baffled is definitely the wrong word. From experience, "excited" or "fascinated" is a whole lot more accurate, although not as clickbaity.

            Especially in this case. It's really nothing other than something to add to the knowledge base.

            • by Potor ( 658520 )

              True. Baffled is definitely the wrong word. From experience, "excited" or "fascinated" is a whole lot more accurate, although not as clickbaity.

              You make a good point. As Aristotle held, science begins with wonder.

  • by Powercntrl ( 458442 ) on Saturday February 18, 2023 @10:45PM (#63304911) Homepage

    Did the sun try looking for it on Second Avenue towards St. Mark's Place, where all those people sell used books and other junk on the street? I bet the piece is lying on a blanket (which is probably now on fire) next to a broken toaster oven.

    The guy selling it wants twenty-two bucks, but you'll be able to talk him down to seventeen.

  • I thought they got the sun confused with a balloon and tried to score some big points.

    • I thought they got the sun confused with a balloon and tried to score some big points.

      When Chelsea Handler hosted The Daily Show the other week, she covered "the balloon incident" and remarked [youtube.com] that if China wants to conceal their balloons, they should either (a) paint them blue so, "we can't see it in the sky", or (b) write "The Moon" on them; "no one here will know the difference." :-)

      • "The Moon" on them; "no one here will know the difference."

        Great, now they are mooning us. I’ll have you know that many brave stalwart Americans are not afraid to shoot the moon.

  • Since when does "the truth" generate page views, eh? Any schmuck can write the truth, people want some sizzle, some mystery some ZAZZ!!

    "Scientists fight off solar death cloud, Norfolk Southern investigated!" or "DeSantis saves US from clueless woke scientists trying to teach trans-solar rights!!!", now those would get some clicks!
  • by RightwingNutjob ( 1302813 ) on Saturday February 18, 2023 @11:08PM (#63304969)

    It looked like a critter took a big ol' bite out of that there Sun. Maybe he's at it again now that it grew back!

  • King of Pain (Score:4, Interesting)

    by PPH ( 736903 ) on Saturday February 18, 2023 @11:49PM (#63305009)

    There's a little black spot on the sun today
    It's the same old thing as yesterday

  • by Anonymous Coward

    running this shit...
    not sure why I bother reading slashdot any more....

  • One scientist interviewed by NPR said that basically, yes, a piece did break off. But it's largely how you define "piece".

    • by Briareos ( 21163 )

      It's totally not like pieces of the sun don't break off all the time [wikipedia.org]...

      • by Tablizer ( 95088 )

        This "chunk" was larger than normal. While often the sun flings up visible matter, it usually loops back down due to gravity. But this one "surfed" the magnetic field to go higher than normal. (Some fell back down, some became thicker "solar wind".)

  • Nothing to see beside the amazing videos of the sun and the dumbness of some random "journalists".
  • The CBC is not what it once was. Have a look at the main pages. It is Fox North now. But a "woke" version, ironically, with discussion moderated by reformers from Alberta. Its identity crisis is causing its implosion. They have been publishing illegal material for some time now (hate propaganda, and illegal drug advertisements - both as "advertorials").
  • I am shocked to find out that journalists are ignoramuses.

  • Not even Readers' Digest worthy. Ol said it upstream. This is kiddie pool stuff.

A committee takes root and grows, it flowers, wilts and dies, scattering the seed from which other committees will bloom. -- Parkinson

Working...