Hello Everyone, I'm a new member here and have somewhat limited knowledge of astronomy/space.

I had a question about this new upcoming Solar Cycle, I have heard from Nasa that this Solar Storm would be the strongest in about 30 years if i can recall correctly. Now i'm just wondering how this will affect us asides from cell phones, gps, power grids etc.

This question also ties in with, embarassed to say but, the whole 2012 "End of the World" issue.

Is a solar flare reaching the earth and burning us possible? Well, i mean of course its possible but is it probable? Also, will this Solar Storm be strong enough to strips Earth's magnetic field?

My common sense tells me, No, it isn't. But after being surrounded by all this nonsense of 2012 this, Planet X that, i just had to ask myself.

Does the sun polar shifting, transit of venus, galatic alignment, have any significant effect during a solar storm?

Now... where is that guy who is going to add me to his long list of 2012 threads. Haha.

At your service.

This won't hurt a bit.

2003 no, 2012 si
2012
Pole shift / Planetary alignment 2012?
2012 alignment question
about the Mayan 2012 item
2012 Debunking?
Possible asteroid impact in 2012?
2012 asteroid?
We don't have to worry about 2012!
More on 2012 from India Daily
2012 Completion of conspiracy?
Here's what's REALLY going to happen in 2012...
crop circles, Planet X and 2012
Planet X, crop circles and 2012 cataclysma
According to the Mayans, what will happen on 23rd Dec. 2012?
More 2012 Nonsense
NEO 2012?
Dangerous NEO in 2012?
Christmas 2012
2012 mayan calender end of world
Regarding the supposed polar shift/new ice age in 2012
New 2012 threat?
2012 look at this thing on the sun
Russian Expert Predicts Global Cooling from 2012
Pole shift idea origins
Dec 20 2012
2012 Stuff
Horizon Project-New End of World Scare?
Date: December 21st 2012
Earth passing thru Galactic center in 2012 - didn't that already happen?
2012: What do you think well happen (if anything)
So what will we see in 2012?
Galactic Tsunami?
Plane of the ecliptic of the galaxy?
Earth's Magnetic Field & 2012
2012?
Any truth to this?
How can the sun be aligned with Galactic centre?
the whole 2012 poles flip nonsense
Planet X Official Advertisement
What year are we in
Quick question about the sun
Galactic Alignment
Books of 2012! -
2007 = 2012
Return of Planet X By Rand
Don Alejandro - Mayan Elder.
Toutatis 4179: 2012?
Galactic Alignment in 2012 ?
Solar Storms

There. All done. Welcome to the BAUT Forum and welcome to the list of 2012-related topics.

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...

You're Quick...

Can you find that? As I recall, it was up in the air. (Ha.)

Solar Cycle 24 Prediction

Recent news: Science Daily: Sunspot Is Harbinger Of New Solar Cycle, Increasing Risk For Electrical Systems

Still iffy, it sounds. Doesn't seem like NASA/NOAA is providing evidence that this cycle is bound to be extraordinary. Some other source, perhaps?

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...

Flares can reach Earth, if they are going in the right direction. At worst it can disrupt some long distant communications and power transmissions and Earth orbit satellites. There is no way it can stip the Earth's magnetic field and there is no way it can burn someone.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple

The earth has been around in its current state for 100's of millions of years and I am sure it has seen much worse from the Sun. For you to take "Worst storms in 30 years" as a serious threat is laughable. By saying that, that are basically saying it has been even worse if you go back more than 30 years, and we seem to have survived that.

Aside from a Gamma Ray Burst from a nearby HyperNova, I don't think there is much that Earth's atmoshpere can't handle.

Thank you all for your replies.

I highly appreciate it.

Sure.

You might enjoy reading about an actual historical solar superstorm: Science@NASA: Solar Superstorm.

Since it occurred in 1859, there weren't quite so many electronic gizmos to be affected. Satellites and cell phones back then were still steam-powered. (Kidding.)

It didn't affect people much. Nobody got fried to a crisp. Not blinded, nor burned (by the sun, maybe from the fires started under some telegraph wires).

The pretty auroral displays in southern latitudes like Hawaii and Cuba must have fascinated people, though.

It was discussed briefly in topic Perfect Disaster: Solar Storm, with links to information about solar storm impacts.

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...

How did the solar storm of 1859 compare to the one that knocked out the power to a good chunk of Quebec and part of NY for a few hours in 1989?

- Maha "sunshine superflare" Vailo

__________________
When you get down to it, Science answers how. Religion answers why. - hippietrekx

The Warp Point, my new geek culture blog.

Observational evidence seems to support the conclusion that the largest, most energetic solar events are due to processes in the solar interior. Therefore the most energetic solar events would likely be caused by factors which affect the solar interior. (See this paper for details.)

http://sprg.ssl.berkeley.edu/~hhudso...ictability.pdf

The Unpredictability of the Most Energetic Solar Events by H. Hudson

A theoretical argument can be made for very energetic solar flares during cycle 24 as follows.

There are predictions, based on an observed periodicity in cosmogenic isotopes (isotopes that are produced in different amounts, depending on the strength of the solar magnetic cycle.) that solar cycle 24 will be a precursor to a Dalton like minimum, which is a period of low solar activity. What is unusual for cycle 24 is that the past solar cycles have been very high. (i.e. There is a significant amount of energy from past cycles that must be dissipated.)

It has been noted, that past solar minimums correlate with how the sun moves about its barycentre. (See paper below. The sun’s motion about its barycentre is controlled by the relative position of the large planets.) Based on past solar motion, solar cycle 23 was predicted to be a low cycle based on that hypothesis. It was not of course, however, those who support the hypothesis note that cycle 24 was delayed and appears to be having trouble starting. (Additional observational data, is required to confirm or disprove the barycentre motion hypothesis.)

http://www.springerlink.com/content/w57236105034h657/

So if cycle 24 is interrupted, (barycentre motion perhaps results in a separation or oscillation in the radiative to convection zone, which interrupts the normal cycle) the magnetic field will still build up at the interface of the radiative zone to the convection zone, however rather moving to the surface as in a normal cycle, there will be a build up to a higher level than normal, which will create a very energetic solar flare.

I hope Swift is correct. The worst in the last 30 years will likely cause only minor damage. We have learned to make our electronics and electric power grid less likely to be damaged. I don't think we can say with certainty that cycle 24 won't be a million times more distructive than the worst in 30 years, but we don't think our Sun has ever done that, but other suns = stars have produced deadly CMEs = corinal mass ejections. Neil

In reply to neilzero's comment:
There is no evidence, theoretical or proxy to support the past occurrence of a solar flare that is 1 million times greater than the typical maximum which is around X20. It is expected a solar flare that is a million times greater than a X20 flare would have left a record in the biosphere.

The theoretical limit of the mechanism (As described by Eugene Parker. The sun spot magnetic fields are believed to be created at the interface of the solar radiative zone and convection zone.) which is believed to create the magnetic field of a sunspot is around 100,000 gauss. The largest measured magnetic field in a sunspot is 3000 gauss. So assuming the strength of the generated solar flare is directly proportional to the sun spot magnetic field strength, a flare that is around 33 times, greater than the observed solar flare maximum of X20 might be theoretically possible.

The solar flare strength limit was believed to have been X20, however the following paper provides analysis that shows the October, 2003 flare was X45.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3515788.stm

This paper presents an analysis of Apollo data, which the authors believe indicates that there have been solar flares roughly 50 times greater than typical maximum, in the last 10 kyr.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1977Icar...32..106Z

Based on the above the maximum solar flare would be around X350. Large solar flares have an immediate associated coronal mass ejection (CME), so an X350 flare would have a CME that would follow the X ray burst.

Comment:
Based on an assumed mechanism, to create the super solar flare, of a solar cycle interruption, there should be some large abnormal flares observed well in advance of the very large flare. The X45 flare is interesting, as it is twice the theoretical limit of a surface flare. Normally, the magnetic fields that are generated at the tachocline float up through the convection zone where they form sunspots. If that mechanism is interrupted a larger than normal magnetic field would form. As the October 2003 X ray flare was only X45, that would indicate that the magnetic fields are still moving up through the convection zone.

We are at the verge of entering Solar Cycle 24. Some might say we have already entered it. That might be a little premature. One indicator is to track the spotless days (the number of days without sunspots).
http://users.telenet.be/j.janssens/S...ss.html#Number

Solar Cycle 24 appears to be different from the past few solar cycles. The cycle may come closer to matching solar cycles 10-15. Time will tell. If it does, then cycle 24 might produce ~ 40 percent fewer sunspots than the past few cycles. Cycles 10-15 had 38% fewer sunspots than cycles 16-23 (average yearly international mean sunspot numbers over the cycle). The interesting point is that even though there are fewer sunspots, these sunspots might produce more powerful solar storms. It is worth noting that the greatest solar storm during the last 450 years occurred on 1-2 September 1859 during Solar Cycle 10. Several very large solar storms occurred during Solar Cycles 10-15. Any prediction that Solar Cycle might produce an "end of the world" solar storm is off the mark.
http://personals.galaxyinternet.net/tunga/SSTA.pdf

Although a great solar storm will not produce an "end of world" event, it can cause significant damage to our infrastructure. We rely greatly on advanced technology which didn't exist during the Great Solar Storm of 1859. A storm of this magnitude today could shock civilization in its ability to cripple our infrastructure.
http://personals.galaxyinternet.net/tunga/SSDPP.pdf

Along these lines, there is actually a bit of duelling predictions on what is going to happen in the next cycle. NASA's group is going for big, but there are some predictions that think that the cycle will be quite small.

In reply to korjik,

The two NASA solar predictions are based on correlation of certain features of the past solar cycle with the next solar cycle. In the case of solar cycle 23 to cycle 24, it appears that cycle 23 was interrupted, therefore features of cycle 23 can no longer be used to predict cycle 24.

The proof that there was a solar magnetic field cycle interruption at the end of solar cycle 23 is the following paper. As noted in the paper, there were no solar X flares at the end of cycle 22. At the end of 23 cycle, there where 34 X-class flares (3 more X-ray flares occurred in 2007.).

Normally x flares are created by the large magnetic fields that are created at the highest point in the solar cycle. The solar magnetic field ropes are created at the interface of the solar radiative zone and convection zone. The magnetic ropes created at the solar tachocline float up through the convection zone to the solar surface where they form sunspots.

The interruption in the tachocline is believed to be due to barycentre motion of the sun by the large planets. This motion causes an oscillation in the sun which interrupts the formation of the magnetic field ropes. When the tacholine is interrupted there are a few regions that have a magnetic seed in them before the interruption. These regions continue to build a magnetic rope, except the rope no longer releases and builds to the strength required to create x ray solar flares which explains why there were 37 x ray flares at the end of solar cycle 23.


http://sprg.ssl.berkeley.edu/~hhudso...ictability.pdf


It appears a solar cycle interruption can result in a few very large solar flares being generated.

The following is an interesting link that provide newspaper accounts of past large solar flares.

http://www.solarstorms.org/SRefStorms.html