Slashdot Mirror


Today's Solar Flare

An anonymous reader writes "X1-class solar flare today (13:30 Universal Time). Still the SOHO spacecraft offers some of the all-time greatest snapshots anywhere on the web. The flare's residual activity would be shown white and at around 9 o'clock position here. There are 3 major categories, each 10 times stronger than the next: X-class flares are big; they are major events that can trigger planet-wide radio blackouts and long-lasting radiation storms. M-class flares are medium-sized; they generally cause brief radio blackouts that affect Earth's polar regions. C-class flares are small with few noticeable consequences here on Earth. If it were headed towards Earth, arrival is usually 48-72 hrs later (this is not coming this way). Future Mars astronauts should take a lead umbrella because one radiation day on Mars is like living at 70,000 feet on Earth." Nature is pretty.

107 comments

  1. WOW by bottlecap · · Score: 1

    love the picture of the earth for size comparison, HUGE!!!

  2. Of course it happens today! by joshua404 · · Score: 3, Funny

    It -always- rains on holiday weekends!

  3. All electronic devices? by G0SP0DAR · · Score: 5, Funny

    Isn't that what Intel said caused Pentium 4's to underperform? Must have been.

    --


    Calm down, it's *only* ones and zeroes.
    1. Re:All electronic devices? by mister+sticky · · Score: 1

      see the white dot? that's my P4 8.6
      all i need now is a decent liquid cooling system.

      and no, the earth is not an option

    2. Re:All electronic devices? by packeteer · · Score: 1

      the ocean... if you live in a coastal region you can use ocean cooling... sea water might not be the cleanest but you can run two hoses to the ocean... one for intake the other for dumping the water back...

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
  4. Um, info please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what time is that in EDT? WTF is universal time? Is that EDT? A little warning would be nice. Guess I'll go outside and look for the flare.

    1. Re:Um, info please by jetlag11235 · · Score: 2, Informative

      See http://www.eaaa.net/ut_conversion.htm for translation in the US. Those mathematically inclined should be able to use the table and common sense to translate to any time zone. So 13:30 UT = 09:30 EDT.

    2. Re:Um, info please by Joe+U · · Score: 1

      Nice conversion chart, too bad there's no such thing as 12:00am or 12:00pm.

      And to top it all off, of the people who usually think there is a 12am and 12pm, 12am is midnight and 12pm is noon, so the chart would be backwards for the majority of the people looking at it.

      For those who care, if you are measuring time using anti meridian (am) and post meridian (pm), there's a point when both times are equal, this would be 12 meridian. To make things easier, we call these times noon and midnight.

      I recommend everyone visit http://www.usno.navy.mil/ for most time related issues. They'll also help sync your computer's clock.

  5. That explains everything by Schlemphfer · · Score: 4, Funny

    An X1 class solar flare, huh? No wonder I've gotten so many popup ads of provocatively dressed women staring longingly into webcams today.

    --
    I'm generally "Interesting," "Insightful," and even "Funny" here. What the hell happens to me at parties?
    1. Re:That explains everything by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      No wonder I've gotten so many popup ads of provocatively dressed women staring longingly into webcams today.

      No, it is just you're lack of flair.

  6. One of the best GW quotes ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    "hey'll if it's hot, we just crank up the AC"

    AC!=Anonymous Coward

  7. Holy fucking shit by trenton · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I guess I forgot how big that sun is. Goddamn!

    --
    Too big to fail? Does that make me to small to succeed?
    1. Re:Holy fucking shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess I forgot how big that sun is. Goddamn!

      They are working on a pocket model.

  8. Sounds like these asteroid miss stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To paraphrase: There's this huge solar flare that could trigger planet-wide radio blackouts, but it's not headed our way. Have a nice day.

  9. Not unusual by matman · · Score: 5, Informative

    X class flares happen quite often, especially around the peak of the solar cycle (which we are currently moving away from). Often, they are not earth directed and do not cause anything so nice as aurora (even if they do cause blackouts on some frequencies). Keep an eye on spaceweather.com and notice how often these things occur. The flare referenced in the article was probably the one that occured on Friday from sunspot 95 and did not appear to be earth directed (it occured while SS95 was just comming into vision). I'm surprised that this flare got on the front page, since there have been larger ones recently (I can't recall exactly when - obviously, its effects were small enough).

    1. Re:Not unusual by batboy78 · · Score: 1

      I used to work for a spaceweather organization in Colorado that monitored solar events as their primary mission. We were the code pounders that organized all of there satellite data into pretty little charts and maps. You would be suprised at the number of flares that happen, most are really harmless. We always we on alert when the initail stages of the International Space Station where going up, or any space-walk done by the shuttle crew.

    2. Re:Not unusual by packeteer · · Score: 1

      most are harmless but i cant wait to see the look on a case modders face when we get one that goes through his window into his computer... computers are put in cases for a reason... they trap interferance in and keep it out... but im not really worried... if you worry about sun flares on a regular basis your going to get an ulcer...

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
  10. how long before.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    ....jerry falwell comes out with the inevitable "god caused this solar flare because of our homosexual degenerates" ?

  11. starpr0n by The+Moving+Shadow · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    yummy this is considered pr0n for all stargazers. mmmm starpr0n ;-)

    1. Re:starpr0n by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn, it must be a slow day on Slashdot. Check this out from CNN: Kentucky prisons just figured out allowing the practice of Satanism might be a bad idea.

  12. Tech Support meets BOFH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Reminiscent of BOFH Excuse of the day:
    Your probleme is Solar Flares, call back later if the problem persists.
    (note, I'm tech support for wireless networking. YAY, less work today!)

  13. And I thought those fools tanning on earth were... by saskboy · · Score: 1

    Nuts! Better pack the SPF 120 sun screen. With that protection, only about 99.9999% of the UVA and UVB rays are blocked, so you would still be screwed. Best to stick with the lead parisol, people. I think lead-foil hats may catch on, not only with the crazy.

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  14. Re:WOW , size only, not distance... by saskboy · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://umbra.nascom.nasa.gov/eit/images/Sun_and_ea rth.jpg Just a heads up to anyone, that the size may be to scale, but not the earth's distance from the sun. I still would like to see a to-scale model of the solar system. I guess a to-scal model of the galaxy, would be a "leetle deeficult" to make ;-)

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  15. Re:WOW , size only, not distance... by bmwm3nut · · Score: 1

    we have one at our campus...it's kinda neat...the sun is about the size of a softball (maybe a little bigger) and the whole solar system goes out about 500 yards or so. so if you wanted a scale model to fit in a room, the planets would probably be too small to see.

  16. Odd by Tablizer · · Score: 2


    Strange how all the "plasma" looks somehow connected together.

    It does not look like a solar flare, but rather like Mr. Sun sneezed and blew his tupee off.

    1. Re:Odd by Loko+Draucarn · · Score: 1

      Frankly, that flare looks slightly demonic to me... but seeing as it's not headed our way, I suppose it's just a nifty looking explosion.

    2. Re:Odd by mister+sticky · · Score: 1

      sorry man, this is a +5 funny only discussion.
      just head yourself back on over to the yahoo chat groups.

    3. Re:Odd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sorry man, this is a +5 funny only discussion.

      Sue me!

    4. Re:Odd by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      (* Frankly, that flare looks slightly demonic to me... but seeing as it's not headed our way, I suppose it's just a nifty looking explosion. *)

      Well, it is not alone in that department. My favorite is still the "middle finger nebula" near Eta Coroni (sp?). I want to buy a poster of that, but my wife won't let me put it up.

  17. Re:WOW , size only, not distance... by saskboy · · Score: 1

    Care to share the campus with this nifty model?

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  18. Re:Episode Six: Houston (preliminary draft) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, trash that draft. You can do better.

  19. Re:WOW , size only, not distance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In one of his books Sagan said there was a model like this at Cornell.

  20. Re:WOW , size only, not distance... by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    (* that the size may be to scale, but not the earth's distance from the sun. *)

    I should certainly hope that the Earth is not anywhere near that close. 2/3 of the daytime sky would be pure sun. However, before our Sun goes nova, it will swell up so that about 2/3 of the sky will be sun according to current theories. (Not that any humans would live through the process to watch, barring special environ suits/houses.)

    Some museums and campuses have scale models of the solar system including distances. In the cheezier ones, the sun is represented as a painted circle instead of a physical sphere. But even with painted stuff, you can still get a better feel for the scale. The problem is that the outer planets are often way off campus. You have to go hiking around to find them. Some students get pissed when they go hiking for miles only find a little B-B for pluto. (Now that I think about it, maybe it *was* a B-B that some kid shot into the wooden marker. Nobody would know the difference.)

  21. M-class overloaded by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    M-class flares are medium-sized

    That could make for some confusion in the Trek world:

    "You idiot human! I said find and land on an M-class *planet*, not an M-class flare! [sizzle sizzle]"

  22. That is amazing.. by billatq · · Score: 1

    Though I'm not usually interested in the universe, I find it interesting that the sun in this picture is more or less the same as depicted in the opening to Star Trek: TNG.

    1. Re:That is amazing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well gee, thats amazing, since the sun depected in TNG is after all, Sol.

    2. Re:That is amazing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL. I think you refer to the sun in Voyager, which the flare looks more like.

  23. Holy 802.11b wireless BatMan! by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 2

    Man is the wife going to give me shit when my wireless connection between be office and the apartment goes out.

    --
    "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
    --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    1. Re:Holy 802.11b wireless BatMan! by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      (* Man is the wife going to give me shit when my wireless connection between be office and the apartment goes out. *)

      Perhaps if you are going to get accused of it, you might as well just have an affair. Pre-emptive sin :-)

      Sounds like you wore out the 'solar flare' excuse anyhow, naughty boy.

  24. Predictions by dmarx · · Score: 1

    Are there any predictions as to the problems (blackouts, etc) that might be caused by this?

    --
    "Do I dare disturb the universe?"
  25. College footbal is more interesting qjkx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop talking about science. I want to talk college football! Or Golf. Science will get you nowhere, look at the job market! Science is dead. OP.

    1. Re:College footbal is more interesting qjkx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeh guy, watch the bling bling roll in when you're a professional college football watcher.

  26. Not the 'Mars Radiation' virus again! by Howzer · · Score: 3, Interesting
    This one sure gets about! Don't worry though, from the very article actually linked in the story above, the "problem" is immediately debunked:

    Fortunately, astronauts can find the protection they need indoors (from solar storms) ; shelter walls made of lightweight materials provide adequate shielding.

    For those needing more on this, go find what you need here or, for something a little more cautious and "NASA" here.

    Now only if we can get people to stop running about waving their arms and shouting "The Radiation! The Radiation!" we might get something productive done... Heh! No chance of that I guess, might as well join them...

    *waves hands over head, runs about, starts screaming "The Radiation!" and giggling*

    1. Re:Not the 'Mars Radiation' virus again! by SpaceJunkie · · Score: 1

      1. Land on Mars... 2. Build radiation shelters.. 3. ???? 4. Profit (The pointless comments society has hijacked this comment)

      --
      OrionRobots.co.uk - Robots From sol
    2. Re:Not the 'Mars Radiation' virus again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think i speak for everyone else here when i say:
      FUCK YOU!

  27. Best Editor Comment Ever by HimalayanRoadblock · · Score: 1

    Nature is pretty.

    No long winded "the world is ending, hide your computer." No inane jokes. There actually is a comment so you know the Slashdot computer didn't just pass it through cause so many people were sending it. Sums it up in 3 words.

  28. Solar Flares! Excellent! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now I just need to get up there with a ship, perform the slingshot maneuver, and...hellooooooooo, Aeryn Sun!

    *bow* chicka *bow*

  29. How big was that burrito? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    It'd be cool to light that on fire!

    Oh, wait....

  30. Hmm... by Rob.Mathers · · Score: 2

    SOHO Spacecraft eh? Where can I accquire one of these for my small office/home office?

    --

    My other sig is funny!
  31. The whole submission seems trollish to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What have we got:

    - a link to a "spaceweather" page that will be obsolete in a day
    - a link to a "Sun_and_earth.jpg" picture from 15-Mar-1999
    - a link to a "sunnow" website that will be obsolete in a day
    - a link to a "Space Weather on Mars" story from June 02, 2002

    Where is the _article_?

  32. Small red dots in space? by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    I am curious what all those red star-like dots are.

    I doubt they are stars or distant X-ray sources, because those are usually overwhelmed by the Sun's local radiation. In other words, they often have to turn *down* the sensativity when looking at the Sun (strong filters), but you normally have to turn *up* the sensativity to look at stars or take long exposures. I don't know what wavelength that image is in. It does not look like X-ray nor visible light. I guess infrared or ultraviolet.

    Those "star spots" are signal noise I guess, not really actual objects.

    1. Re:Small red dots in space? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > [ ... what wavelength? ... ]

      That particular image is 304 Angstroms, which I believe is a once-ionized line of Helium. It's particularly good for seeing those large prominence ejections (blobs of stuff heading off into space) over the horizon.

      It's been a while since I thought about it, and I couldn't tell without staring at a movie for a few minutes, but I believe some of those background dots are stars. (some will just be cosmic ray hits on the CCD.)

      As for sensitivity -- looking at the sun vs. looking at the stars -- in this case, nay, in every case where they have a telescope with narrowband filters in front of it, they try as hard as they can to get the transmission up. It turns out to be a real small number! This is why folks looking at stars tend to use spectrographs (think of the double-slit experiment post from a few days ago) to look at specific wavelength emissions from stars.

      A Former Solar Astronomer

  33. Re:WOW , size only, not distance... by Corbin+Dallas · · Score: 1
    I still would like to see a to-scale model of the solar system.


    Try this program. Granted, it's a simulator rather than a model, but it's pretty accurate.
    --
    Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.
  34. Uhoh ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Genetically modified chimpanzee, with a down-regulated CMAH gene says "nature pretty".

  35. [Walmart Security] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am, actually. These are intended only to outline the plot.

  36. Here it is... by Lurkingrue · · Score: 1

    One (of several throughout the US) is centered on Boston/Cambridge, MA. The Museum of Science has organized it, and it requires some travel to see all the planets.

    Here are details.

  37. Re:WOW , size only, not distance... by undeg+chwech · · Score: 1

    If you can get to D.C., USA, there's one along part of the Mall.

    Description

  38. Nature is Pretty, DIY by Leeji · · Score: 2

    You can actually see sunspots (it'll look kinda like this, but in grayscale) any time you want by projecting the sun onto paper. Binoculars work well, a telescope works even better.

    Aim your binoculars at the sun, without looking into them. If you look into them, you'll only see the steam rise from your eyes as they cook. Put a piece of white paper about 2m away from your binoculars. Cover a lense so only 1 circle shows on the paper. Finally, focus your binoculars to make the remaining circle as crisp as possible. This is easiest when you mount your binoculars on a tripod, but still works by hand.

    If you look closely, you'll see the sunspots.

    --
    It all goes downhill from first post ...
    1. Re:Nature is Pretty, DIY by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      Aim your binoculars at the sun, without looking into them. If you look into them, you'll only see the steam rise from your eyes as they cook.

      Mmmmm. Chinese food!

      Put a piece of white paper about 2m away from your binoculars. Cover a lense so only 1 circle shows on the paper. Finally, focus your binoculars to make the remaining circle as crisp as possible.

      Doesn't that burn the area around the eye-peice. True, it is not a perfect focus at that point, but perhaps hot enough to damage your binocs. The image may sometimes land on the edge of the lense and cook the glue holding it in place, or the grease and dust on the surface of the lens, making it foggy or hard to clean.

      I don't know. It sounds a little risky on the equipment if you ask me.

    2. Re:Nature is Pretty, DIY by mamba-mamba · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It seems to me that it probably could damage your binocs (exactly as you say). On the other hand, I used my binocs in the same fashion to view a solar eclipse, even when it was only about 20% eclipsed, and they still work fine. FWIW they are expensive 7x50 marine binoculars. They are gas-tight and filled with nitrogen.

      I guess, since binocs transmit 9x% of the light, the power absorption is very low, once you get them adjusted so that the image is going through them. (But as you say, while you are adjusting, the image may briefly get projected on the edges somewhere, which can't be good.)

      If you are worried about it, you could use something opaque like heavy paper to reduce the aperture of the objective. Or obtain some neutral density filters.

      Another way to observe the sun is with a pinhole camera, although that is a bit more involved.

      MM
      --

      --
      By including this sig, the copyright holders of this work or collection unreservedly place it in the public domain.
  39. FALSE ALARM! No X class flares today! (yet) by tiohero · · Score: 3, Informative
    Nothing listed on www.spaceweather.com indicates an X class flare at 13:00 utc today nor do any of the other usual websites.

    This is the information from SEC (NOAA): Only a few C class events are listed:
    0221 UTC C2.8
    0955 UTC C8.8
    0930 UTC C6.7

    You can easily see all the recent events from this plot of solar X-ray flux: (updated in real-time)

    There was a minor X class flare last friday (as you can see from the plot!). This is what the poster may be refereing to:
    8/30/02 1329 UTC X1.5 Sunspot 95
    It was a limb event and isn't headed our way. The plot shows there were no X-ray flares today!

    X class flares are fairly common (once every 2-3 weeks these days...) Usually they are near the limb or backside events and don't effect us other than a little radio interference. We might see an earth directed one from region 95 in the next few days. (But don't count on it!) If there is an X-ray event indicated by www.spaceweather.com, then check this alert page at Solar Terestrial Dispatch. These impact predictions are often very accurate! (Only updated if there is a strong earth directed event!)

    1. Re:FALSE ALARM! No X class flares today! (yet) by P0lyh34) · · Score: 1

      I dunno, i beg to differ, i think region 95 looks pretty promising. WEll.. promising in a certain sence of the word i suppose. I dunno, personally i'm hoping it'll happen, it'll make for damn cool aurora's. -Polyhead-

      --
      -Polyhead-
  40. the cause of the flares... by yanyan · · Score: 1

    It's the Endurium, i tell you!

    1. Re:the cause of the flares... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Must...Protect...Arth!

  41. Possible Extinction event? by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    The comparison shot got me thinking. Suppose there was a flare, say 100 times larger then one of the common X class ones. Would the radiation be enough to whipe out life on earth?

    Anyone have any idea. I suppose there really isn't much point in worrying about it though :P

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:Possible Extinction event? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

      Well if it were possible, then we wouldn't be here. :-)

      After billions and billions of years we would of been hit by one by now and wiped out.

      There have been at least 3 killer asteriods that have done mass devistation in earth's life time including a recently discovered one that probably wiped out all lifeforms except bacteria about 3 1/2 billion years ago. There are no fossils before the event because whole mountians with the fossilized rock were crushed into sand by 2 mile high waves, which travelled twice the speed of sound, and travelled over and over again untill the energy was dissapated. Even moutains higher then a few miles high(unlikely back then)were to exist, the waves and their speed would easily blow them away into dust. The one after that was about 750 million years ago which wiped out %90 of the earth's lifeforms caused again by giant waves that engulfed most of earth and a mini ice age that followed. Then you all know about the one 65 million years ago which killed the dinosaurs. All the recent asteriods however have been getting smaller and smaller. I do not know if we have just been lucky or if the bigger ones have been getting smacked into smaller ones in space. Also their have been hundreds of tiny asteriods that were powerfull enough to wipe out whole city's and change climate world wide. THey happen every couple thousand years. I wonder how big the tisuami's from those are if they hit the ocean. Yes, asteriods are a threat and we need to take them seriously unlike solar flares.

    2. Re:Possible Extinction event? by Donwulff · · Score: 1

      Well, first of all, the flare classes are logarithmic, so X10 actually is 100 times stronger than X1, "One of the common X class ones". I suspect like to earthquakes, there are strict limits to how strong solar-flare is possible from a specific sun.

      We actually had something in that category during this solar-peak; nobody is exactly sure how strong it was, though, because it flooded out all the satellites set to monitor those events for a good while, so the size had to be estimated.

      Bottom line is, it had no really observable effects to the Earthlings, even the CME missed us enough that as I recall it wasn't much of an aurora-show. That's why we have the atmosphere, it protects us from lot of cosmic stuff, and even from things out of our own solar system.

      Unless you count few mysterious radio/television blackouts as observable effects, ofcourse - though sometimes I suspect most Earthlings would notice that better than if a spaceship landed on their front-yard, so it's all relative...

      One type of "solar flare" there is that you probably could worry about; when stars collapse, they shoot immense gamma-bursts off their poles. Were Earth to be caught in the way of such an event from a star in our part of the galaxy, all life (Save for the deepest oceans) here would likely get fried in an instant.

      Some scientists theorize this might be the reason of some of the mass-extinctions Earth has seen in its past, from stars far away not to kill everything on their way. Unlike asteroids, there isn't much that could even conceivably be done, though, so it's perhaps one thing better to not worry about.

      Back on out own Sun, I think sub-cycles in solar activity might have caused increased mutations during some periods, leading to the creation of new dominant species (Including humans) which have then quickly taken over as conditions have become more stable. In genetic algorithms this is known as "annealing". It might have caused events that to us look like mass-extinctions.

  42. Insightful Quote of the Year by Garridan · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Nature is pretty" -- CmdrTaco

  43. Old photo by macemoneta · · Score: 2

    According to the directory listing, that photo is from March 15,1999. I know it takes a while until submitted articles are posted, but this seems a little excessive.

    --

    Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

    1. Re:Old photo by Atryn · · Score: 1

      Nahh, they just keep setting the date on the computer back to avoid y2k bugs.

      --
      Come play Moral Decay!
  44. ComanderTaco's Workday... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nature is purty....

  45. Re:WOW , size only, not distance... by packeteer · · Score: 1

    on the show bill nye the science guy he showed a model of this... the sun was a soccer ball and he showed alpha cantauri (the nearest star) by driving miles away... it was a very good demonstration...

    --
    unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
  46. Re:Odd (OT) by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    When I was looking for that "skull" image on Google, I had "Chandra" (the X-ray telescope) and "skull" in the search terms. Here is the summary of one of the matches:

    "Chicago Tribune | Chandra Levy found dead ... the skeletal remains of missing intern Chandra Levy. On a remote hill of a heavily
    wooded park, a man walking his dog early Wednesday discovered a skull, human ... "

    The oddest coincidences you find using search words on the web. Let's make a cult out of it. Even El Ron didn't use coincidences to their full advantage.

  47. WTF is UT ??? by Zemran · · Score: 1

    I have been happily living with GMT as the international standard and now someone has to confuse everything and start talking in UT ??? This seems like another dumb example of confusing the easy to understand...

    --
    I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
    1. Re:WTF is UT ??? by mamba-mamba · · Score: 1

      It is a French conspiracy. They were unhappy with the zero hour being, essentially, a British posession(Greenwich Mean Time or GMT), and so they had it renamed. And not only did they change it, but they used the akward, noun-followd-by-modifier format so it sounds funny to us (Universal Time Coordinated, instead of Universal Coordinated Time).

      MM
      --

      --
      By including this sig, the copyright holders of this work or collection unreservedly place it in the public domain.
    2. Re:WTF is UT ??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it was more to do with the fact that GMT relates to (primarily naval) navigation and is still used as such, and UTC is what the rest of the world uses. Or is supposed to be using, only certain operating system vendors and information sources keep referring to it as GMT.

      And then you have the US military who have another name for it. There's a surprise - Merkins renaming a standard and claiming it as their own... ;)

  48. Next on the Trinity Broadcast Network... by gregwbrooks · · Score: 1

    "When God Lights His Farts!"

    --


    "It was a summer's tale: Just a boy, his Linux, and a head full of dreams..."
  49. Realtime movies of last 48 hours by Cally · · Score: 3, Informative
    The best pics for my money are at:

    http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/realtime/mpe g/

    In particular this:

    http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/LATEST/curre nt _c2.mpg

    is a reasonably small (3Mb) mpeg of the last 48 hours... the flare is right at the end of the sequence. Notice that although it appears on the right limb of the sun first, it's also pretty symetrical - indictating that the thing's coming straight for us.

    Incidentally, if you've ever fancies getting your name on a comet, there are people who sit in front of those pages pressing ^r constantly in order to be the first to identify a new sungrazer. No, there's no software sitting processing the images in realtime for comet-like objects, and they (or rather, their ion tails) show up nicely.
    Enjoy!

    --
    "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
    1. Re:Realtime movies of last 48 hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting that at the end of the C2 mpeg, the cadence nearly doubles. I've never seen the imaging frequency increase like that. Starting about 0 UT on the 31st. Wonder what that is about...

      And clearly, the flare report is several days late.

  50. Dumb Question by NeuroManson · · Score: 2

    What does "CCD Bakeout" mean? Does it mean NASA is suffering the /. effect, or does it mean a flare physically cooked the CCD elements, or something simpler, related to maintenance?

    --
    Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
    1. Re:Dumb Question by hubie · · Score: 2

      It is maintenance related. A nice explanation can be found here.

    2. Re:Dumb Question by jelle · · Score: 2

      Pfew. I was worried for a second there.

      The SOHO pictures are just beatiful, especially the movies.

      I'm not an astronomer, but I think this big one is visible on the "LASCO C2" just around the '11:00' timestamp on Sept 1.

      Too bad the EIT movies are not current. I guess it was almighty Murphy who choose this week-end for the flare...

      --
      --- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
  51. Re:WOW , size only, not distance... by SarekOfVulcan · · Score: 1

    "I still would like to see a to-scale model of the solar system."

    You mean like this one? (scroll down to "A Community Solar System")

  52. Better then lead would be water by eean · · Score: 1

    Actually better then lead would be water, as this would stop most radiation and is obviously much more pratical as its something you need anyways. Robert Zubrin's plan for Mars calls for them having a room in the spacecraft surrounded by water for when there is a solar storm on the way to Mars, and just piling some rocks on the top of their building while on Mars (IIRC).

  53. Not the 'uninformed Mars advocate' virus again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Your level of "proof" to debunk things is a bit lower than mine. The first link you had talks about sheltering on Mars, which doesn't address the real dangers of the radiation exposure on the long trip to Mars. The second link you presented was so devoid of information that it sounds like those trekkies who like to lecture scientists and engineers as to why they haven't figured out how to build transporters yet.

    You might want to check out some studies that have some science behind them instead of hand waiving and talking about moving astronauts into the food locker or wrapping a copper wire around the spaceship (which reminds me, it is an excellent exercise for the student to calculate the gyroradius of a charged particle as well as the magnetic field from a ring of current; do that for some solar energetic particle events and see what kind of currents you need to carry to make a dent in their trajectories).

    A quick search of papers written by people who have some grounding in science turned up this one and this one (the second one has worst case shielding thicknesses of 20 cm Al which would be more than a few water bottles). You can also track down the several times the National Academy of Sciences covered the issue (hey, find your own links 'cause I ain't gonna spoon feed the whole thing to you!).

    You can belittle the problem, but please refrain from ridiculing people who can calculate particle rigidities, who know what kind of momenta these particles in space have, and who know what the stopping potential of a material is.

    1. Re:Not the 'uninformed Mars advocate' virus again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd laugh harder if I didn't think you were trying to be serious! As it is I'm biting my knuckles to try and avoid laughing in your face. Both your links prove the point the first poster was making - and you obviously didn't read the links provided in either the parent or the post you responded to. But your Subject was funny - which I how I got here....

    2. Re:Not the 'uninformed Mars advocate' virus again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You, my friend, must be easily amused to laugh so much. The papers to which I linked do not prove the original point at all. What they do show is that not only is it not a "debunked" issue in any sense, but that the models (circa 1998-1999 in those two links) suggest it will take a little more than a few water bottles (a good 107 cm thick wall of water as one estimate---that's a good 42" there Bubba, and that's just for one wall). My favorite part in that one article (written by the Mars advocate) was the current loop wrapped around the ship---now that is just funny if you think that will provide any protection except for the particles with low enough energy that would have been shielded by the ship structure anyway (do the math, as I suggested earlier, unless your knuckles hurt too much by now).

      The original poster was saying that there is no radiation problem and then linked to a story that basically says, "well, if there is a radiation problem, we can just move the astronauts into a locker surrounded by water containers. But, some people think that low level radiation can actually be good for you; in any event regardless of the radiation risk we just need to bite the bullet and risk it anyway."

      Now, assuming that you are not trolling (which is probably a bad assumption), and you are not the original poster being anonymous (which is also probably a bad assumption), you might want to read those papers again and perhaps look at the National Academy of Science reports too if you agree with our intrepid poster and laugh away the issue.

      "That's mathematics, Boy. Numbers don't lie."

  54. Re:WOW , size only, not distance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The problem is that the outer planets are often way off campus"

    lol - you don't say. Which ones are in your campus? Hell of a big campus...

  55. Is the moon enveloped in a magnetosphere? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't think so. Same as the concerns for a trip to mars.
    Our astronauts must have come back 'extra well done'.