Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Supercomputer Models Sun's Corona Dynamics

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the waiting-for-the-vogons dept.

gihan_ripper writes "Researchers from San Diego are using supercomputers to accurately predict the shape of the Sun's corona, based on magnetic field data from the photosphere. It is hoped that this model will enable us to predict Coronal Mass Ejections. When CMEs reach the Earth, they produce geomagnetic storms and can wreak havoc with communcations, GPS, and power networks. In the decade or so, the researchers hope to be able to predict CME collisions with the Earth and determine their impact."

105 comments

  1. Awesome! by Monkeys!!! · · Score: 4, Funny

    I just hope the next advancement is getting the Earth to dodge the CME. :)

    1. Re:Awesome! by Maelwryth · · Score: 4, Informative

      HAARP is working in it right now. It might take some time though because they are one series of earthquakes and a rather large lightning strike behind this year. Not to mention the alien request to study us "sans atmosphere", but thats due after christmas.

      --
      I reserve the write to mangle english.
    2. Re:Awesome! by x2A · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why bother when we can LAUNCH NUKES at the incoming CMEs!!!

      Quickly, ready the missiles!

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    3. Re:Awesome! by helioquake · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's like launching a nuke into a Category 5 hurricane.

      Actually the scale is more like launching a big firework.

      No worry, though, Earth's magnetic field is a pretty good shield.

    4. Re:Awesome! by bepe86 · · Score: 1

      I don't understand the scientists, how hard can that be? Let's just build a 30ft thick roof of lead in the atmosphere, and we get rid of all that dangerous electromagnetic radiation... wait, nevermind...

    5. Re:Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good God that is cool. I feel like such a schmuck sometimes building ecommerce sites when there are projects like that going ahead.

    6. Re:Awesome! by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, you see... When it gets sufficiently advanced, the earth won't _need_ to dodge the CME.

      --
      - These characters were randomly selected.
    7. Re:Awesome! by Elemenope · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It's funny you should say that. I would think that a sizeable nuclear detonation (at the right time and place) would cause a pressure wave powerful enough to disrupt the dynamo that is the low pressure center of a hurricane, and dissipate it. I dunno, any meteorologists in the crowd? Just how sensitive is a hurricane to disruptions of that magnitude? Do we even have a vaguest notion?

      --
      All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
    8. Re:Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you happen to live near a hurricane zone? Perhaps you could offer to set one off at the right moment ;)

    9. Re:Awesome! by Leebert · · Score: 4, Informative
      I would think that a sizeable nuclear detonation (at the right time and place) would cause a pressure wave powerful enough to disrupt the dynamo that is the low pressure center of a hurricane, and dissipate it.


      No. See: http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/C5c.html
    10. Re:Awesome! by JerkBoB · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would think that a sizeable nuclear detonation (at the right time and place) would cause a pressure wave powerful enough to disrupt the dynamo that is the low pressure center of a hurricane, and dissipate it. I dunno, any meteorologists in the crowd? Just how sensitive is a hurricane to disruptions of that magnitude? Do we even have a vaguest notion?

      The NOAA might.

      On top of not working, it'd just spew nuclear fallout everywhere. That's silly.

      --
      A host is a host from coast to coast...
      Unless it's down, or slow, or fails to POST!
    11. Re:Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you, an evil supervillain? Nuking the center of a hurricane wouldn't disrupt it, it would just produce a radioactive hurricane.

    12. Re:Awesome! by Elemenope · · Score: 1

      On top of not working, it'd just spew nuclear fallout everywhere. That's silly.

      I didn't think it was a good (tm) idea (LOL!); I was just curious if it was a basically feasible idea for the immediate goal of destroying the hurricane. Apparently I'm not the only one who's thought of this twisted plan, though (I though not. On second thought, It's too damn obvious.) BTW, thanks for the link.

      --
      All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
    13. Re:Awesome! by jcgf · · Score: 1
      fire ze missiles!

      but i'm le tired...

      ok, have a nap, then fire ze missiles!!!

  2. Cool. A day off of work! by Skidge · · Score: 3, Funny
    In the decade or so, the researchers hope to be able to predict CME collisions with the Earth and determine their impact.

    Hopefully that means in the future we'll get CME days off from work, since havok-wreaking on communcations, GPS, and power networks would severly limit my productivity.
    1. Re:Cool. A day off of work! by s31523 · · Score: 1

      Funny, but it may be true someday! If a CME is bad enough being outside may just kill you! We may even have CME shelters one day that are shielding and evacuation to the shelter might be called for. I mean, who knows, with the rate we are hosing up our environment we may damage the earths natural protections against this stuff, or just get a real whopper of a CME that the earth can't handle.

    2. Re:Cool. A day off of work! by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 3, Funny

      I already get Sun days off.

      --
      Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
    3. Re:Cool. A day off of work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I already get Sun days off.


      It doesn't count when you work for Microsoft, and they're trying to keep their employees unaware of their upstream tech providers.
  3. Sounds like trying to predict the weather by brian0918 · · Score: 1

    Just looking at this superficially, it seems unlikely that we will ever accurately predict these events. Chaos has already doomed weather forcasters, who will never be able to predict the formation, maximum strength, or path of a tropical storm well in advance (well, unless they placed sensors on ever single particle on Earth, and then placed sensors on those sensors). The same is probably true of solar events.

    1. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by kozumik · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > it seems unlikely that we will ever accurately predict these events. Chaos has already doomed weather forcasters

      Let me guess, you heard a butterfly can cause a hurricaine due to chaos theory right? :rolleyes

      It depends what you mean by "accurately" I guess. If you mean predictions with high probability several days in advance, yes that's doable. As you may recall we're already predicting hurricaine formation and movement days to a week or more in advance now, with a decent level of accuracy, and getting better all the time.

      Global forcasting is already able to predict micro-climate changes months and even years in advance on a resolution of only several miles due to shifting weather patterns on a global/continential scale.

      If weather was truly chaotic, i.e. if the total of all buterflys and other tiny variables made for completly unpredictable weather, then such predictions wouldn't be possible. Obviously the weather is not as chaotic as many HS professors have cliamed in that famous example. For that matter we wouldn't likely see big stable spots on Venus or have predictble trade winds here on earth, or all sorts of other fairly predictable features.

      From monitoring the globe via satellite for things like ocean temps, and with many sensors for wind speed, forecasters construct fluid dynamic simulations which make it possible to predict smaller and smaller weather patterns further into the future, with increasing accuracy, butterflys or no.

    2. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by brian0918 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Let me guess, you heard a butterfly can cause a hurricaine due to chaos theory right? :rolleyes"

      No, I've read a couple books on chaos, and did experiments with chaotic pendulums and water drop formation back in undergrad senior physics lab. The equations underlying weather prevent one from ever accurately predicting the condition in a specific location the further you go into the future, and that "distance" into the future is not going to increase as our technology increases. It's going to remain short.

    3. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by mrcaseyj · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Good point about trade winds and such. But while some weather features are long term predictable to some degree, I think for the most part weather really is quite chaotic. I doubt forcasts more than a couple days will ever be very precise. If you can't appreciate the large influence of a small butterfly on a partially chaotic system, then consider the forest fire. It will probably always be impossible to predict where someone will throw down their cigarette and start a forest fire. After a day or two a forest fire will have effects that will significantly alter the weather around the world, thus making precise prediction impossible because you never know what the inputs to the system are going to be.

    4. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by kozumik · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sorry, but you're over estimating the chaotic qualities of weather based on some outdated thinking. Yes it's true weather is too chaotic to ever be completly deterministic and there is a limited horizon on forcasting. We're not ever likly to predict individual rainshowers months or years in advance for example.

      However, it will be possible to predict large weather patterns long in advance, years and even decades. For averages over longer periods of time they're already making predictions by running simulations on a global resolution of only several miles.

      Medium scale weather events like hurricaines can be predicted days in advance now becasue it's not that chaotic, it relies on large events like global weather fronts, ocean temps, etc which allow prediction to a high degree of accuracy now. And yes, better methods and increased comuatational power are making those predictions more accurate, earlier.

      You should actually read papers on what's being done on climate modeling by going to some of the relevant sites. Operating on classroom theory of chaos generalized to weather isn't exactly useful.

    5. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by dickko · · Score: 1, Informative

      "The equations underlying weather prevent one from ever accurately..."

      Um, there are no equations underlying weather. There are equations that model weather patterns, however (I presume that's what you meant...). These current models are limited by, for example, available processing power. New technologies allow for alternative models, which may be more accurate at making predictions about future weather patterns. So to say that "It's going to remain short" is a bit short-sighted.

    6. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by amorsen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If weather was truly chaotic, i.e. if the total of all buterflys and other tiny variables made for completly unpredictable weather, then such predictions wouldn't be possible.

      The weather is a chaotic system in the mathematical sense of the word. That doesn't mean it's impossible to predict anything about the system. A coffee cup you pour milk into forms a chaotic system. The average temperature of the cup over time is easily predictable.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    7. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by mrcaseyj · · Score: 3, Insightful
      We are having some confusion here about what constitutes accurate or inaccurate prediction. It would be nice if we could predict which STATE a hurricane will hit. I'm not sure about the current state of the art, but it seems that currently they can only do this reliably about two maybe three days ahead. I doubt they will ever be able to predict a hurricane path say, ten days ahead, because the weather is chaotic enough that it is sensitive to small changes like butterflies and forrest fires, which simply can't be predicted.

      Forcasts that go years ahead are subject to an even more huge array of uncertainties. A species of algae may evolve a one percent more efficient metabolism thus changing the influence of the ocean. A human inventor may develop a more popular diesel car engine. We may find out that Saudi Arabia has been grossly exaggerating their oil reserves. A volcanic eruption can throw things out of whack for quite a while. Forecasts that go years in advance can barely be considered "predictions" at all. Rough estimate would be a generous description.

    8. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by indifferent+children · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Yes it's true weather is too chaotic to ever be completly deterministic

      Unless you believe that Thor, Zeus, and friends are meddling in our weather, it is completely deterministic. The fact that we cannot measure enough of the inputs to the system to make long-range predictions, does not mean that it is not a deterministic system created and controlled by causation.

      --
      Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
    9. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by fredrik70 · · Score: 1
      >If weather was truly chaotic, i.e. if the total of all buterflys and other tiny variables made for
      >completly unpredictable weather, then such predictions wouldn't be possible.

      That would be random weather, not chaotic weather, which is a quite different beast.

      --
      if (!signature) { throw std::runtime_error("No sig!"); }
    10. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by brian0918 · · Score: 1

      There was nothing incorrect in my reply. While we may be able to predict that hurricanes will be stronger in a future season, we can't say where/when the early stages of a hurricane or tropical storm will appear, and thus we won't be able to predict the number of hurricanes.

    11. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      the best models we have of our universe have indeterminism; probabilities not certainties. Your views are those of the 17th, 18th and 19th century physicists.

    12. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by dankelley · · Score: 1

      Since some sensible things are being said on this thread, and since there is evidently a lack of uniformity about the meanings of words, I am tempted to propose something a bit un-slashdotty -- provide literature citations. Resolving issues such as this, which partly hinge on the precise meanings of words (even the word "precise" itself) is something for which the conventional literature is rather effective.

    13. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by kozumik · · Score: 1

      I meant deterministic in the sense of what we're able to predict, obviously. Whether the entire universe is deterministic or whether free will even exists are philisophical and spiritual qustions outside the scope of this converstaion.

    14. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by indifferent+children · · Score: 1

      I assume that the indeterminism that you are talking about is the result of quantum effects, and not just insane-complexity-treated-as-randomness. However, at the macro level these quantum effects can be treated as static, since for large enough samples, they will average out to 0.5 (assuming range of zero to one). For instance, an average human brain contains approx. 456 trillion trillion atoms. For that many tests of randomness, the results will cancel out, and can pretty much be discounted. Scale that number up to the volume of the atmosphere (for weather systems), and the coin will come up heads "exactly" 50% of the time.

      --
      Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
    15. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by indifferent+children · · Score: 1

      Okay, but in the future I recommend the use of the "unpredictable" rather than "nondeterministic". Though even with "unpredictable", we have to wonder wether you mean "We do not have the means to measure the inputs, and the models to allow us to predict...", or do you mean, "Regardless of any advances in technology and expenditure of extreme effort, it will never be possible to predict..." Noting that the latter still does not mean that the system under discussion is not deterministic. These distinctions can be applied to human thought processes, and your reference to Free Will and spirituality comes into play. But discussions of choatic, but not conscious, systems such as weather don't touch on the Free Will issue. They could bump into some meddling-god(s) issue(s).

      --
      Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
    16. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by kozumik · · Score: 1

      :rolleyes

      I think your understanding of the terminology is rather superficial. Your introducing the philisopical dimension of the word into the discussion was a silly attempt to say something smart sounding.

    17. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by kozumik · · Score: 1

      > But discussions of choatic, but not conscious, systems such as weather don't touch on the Free Will issue.

      Btw, that's also a rather silly and superficial distinction in regards to life on earth and the weather. If you want to be a weenie (which you seem to desire greatly) you could argue our free will and interaction with the universe makes everything non-deterministic or conversely the universe is deterministic and therefore no free will.

      > or do you mean, "Regardless of any advances in technology and expenditure of extreme effort, it will never be possible to predict..."

      That is also a silly infinitive assertion to make if you're trying to be perfectly correct.

      Another silly person mentioned chaos and Feynman inappropriately in context of weather and modern forcasting which has improved exponentially since Feynman's era. The term "chaotic" isn't very meaningful these days because it's a blanket term for logarithmic increase in complexity, but lacking useful quantification. Under such simplistic definitions many systems are both chaotic and very much predictable.

    18. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      Quantum events can have huge unpredictable macroscopic consequences, it's an error to think they all "average out" in the macroscopic universe. Suppose we had a geiger counter displaying an average count rate of 120 per minute. Then we make a detonator that explodes a bomb if 121 counts are made in the next minute. There's no way to know if the bomb will go off or not in the next minute, regardless of the amount of information you have about the universe beforehand. Aside from quantum effects, the universe also is indeterministic because of chaotic systems.

    19. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by indifferent+children · · Score: 1
      Suppose we had a geiger counter displaying an average count rate of 120 per minute. Then we make a detonator that explodes a bomb if 121 counts are made in the next minute.

      But if a single neuron is composed of approx. 4 quadrillion atoms, these effects cancel each other out much more effectively, than if you are talking about 120 atoms. I've heard this called "The Law of Big Numbers", but that might have been a joke from a math professor.

      Aside from quantum effects, the universe also is indeterministic because of chaotic systems.

      This is really the point that I was trying to make originally: choatic systems are deterministic. They are not predictable by us, because the amount of complexity (the number of inputs to the system and the seemingly disproportionate impact of those inputs) is huge. But just because we are not able to predict them, does not mean that they are not inherently deterministic.

      Even a system which would require a computer the size of the entire Universe to model (hence, being totally and forever 'unpredictable') can still be deterministic; its results are the result of causation, even if those results can never be predicted or precisely modelled.

      --
      Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
    20. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      causation assumes the reason and result of things lie along a time-axis. what if it turns out that for macroscopic phenomenon there's other dimensions where this is true? As an example, the universe seems to have a definite beginning, but the reasons for it would be outside of time, so what we cal "casualty" can't apply

    21. Re:Sounds like trying to predict the weather by indifferent+children · · Score: 1
      You're right that in general, causation pretty much depends upon a time axis. Are we really close to dispelling the notion that there is one time axis? I don't know much about that.

      As for the beginning of the Universe lying outside of time, that might speak against the future being predetermined at the beginning of time. However, that would not impact the notion of ongoing causation. The state of the Universe one hour from now is caused by the state of the Universe right now.

      Perhaps the "Law of Big Numbers" cuts both ways, and for large enough units of time, the quantum uncertainty of even the largest mass (the Universe) does mean that determinism breaks down (I'm tap dancing here, don't try to hold me to 'random' thoughts). But this wouldn't much influence a few months worth of weather on our planet. And even if this notion pans out, we probably still should not say that causation or determinism has broken down, but predictability has gotten even harder. When two surfaces 'collide' (electro-magnetic repulsion of the probability clouds of the electrons of the two surfaces), the effects of one probability function on the the other probability function can be deterministic without ever resolving the precise location of either electron. Okay, this last para puts me well out of my depth (IANAP). If you have any solid information on non-unidirectional time (esp. outside of the quantum-level), and the interaction of electron probability functions (esp. for laymen), I would be interested.

      --
      Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
  4. Incredible videos by caryw · · Score: 5, Interesting

    CME's produce some incredible video when they hit our sun-pointed satellites. If you haven't seen them I highly recommend checking out NASA's "Best Of SOHO Movies" for a better idea of what these things are capable of.

    http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/bestofsoho/Movies/m ovies2.html
    --
    Northern Virginia? Forums and Arrest/Ticket Database. Seeking additions to the (new) wiki

    1. Re:Incredible videos by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      Best of Soho, eh?
      This is is the /. we like.

      --
      Defining Statistics and Social Research
    2. Re:Incredible videos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Solar pyhsics is not my field, hence I have found it rather staggering to read some of the recent advances. Earlier this year, I bought "The Sun" by Jay M. Pasachoff ("The Complete Idiot's Guide To" Series). The TRACE telescope in space observes the sun using different filters. Some of these are in the extreme ultraviolet, including a 195 Angstrom filter that observes Iron (Fe) that has lost 11 of its 26 electrons, an event that occurs at 1,500,00 degrees C. Rather than the sun just being one giant bar magnet, it also has smaller regions of polarity. From these polarized regions, ionized gas loops out hundreds of thousands of km into space. Here is an article I found that simulates the current prevailing theory "that active regions on the solar surface originate from strong toroidal magnetic fields generated by the solar dynamo mechanism at the thin tachocline layer at the base of the solar convection zone." http://solarphysics.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrs p-2004-1/ whose author looks kinda cute: http://www.hao.ucar.edu/Public/about/Staff/yfan/

    3. Re:Incredible videos by diamondmagic · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of Disaster Area From the Hitchhikers Guide

      --
      Wonder what the public key field is for?
  5. Now really! This is ridoculous... by PixelPirate · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...this is clearly a computer that should have come from Sun Microsystems! Honestly, the nerve!

    1. Re:Now really! This is ridoculous... by heinousjay · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      You win Slashdot's "best new spelling of "ridiculous" award.'

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    2. Re:Now really! This is ridoculous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /me seconds parent's vote

      TheStonepedo

  6. Java? by StarkRG · · Score: 3, Funny

    Ok, fine, fine, it'll enable them to predict things coming out of Sun, but will it tell us if Java will ever be open source?

  7. Global warming? by hackwrench · · Score: 1
    Well then, I guess the first step to stop global warming is to shut these puppies down.
    The HAARP IRI is an ionospheric heater, one of many around the world. It is comparable in function and power to most of them.
  8. The designer by XanC · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Dr Reyga is finally getting his due...

  9. For a moment... by Clueless+Nick · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...I read the headline as "Supermodel Computes Sun's Corona Dynamics". Blame it on hectic Tuesday. But we would love to see the day, won't we?

    -clueless

    --
    Chat with other atheists http://secularchat.org
    1. Re:For a moment... by polansky · · Score: 1

      You're not the only one who read the headline wrong. That almost made my day.

    2. Re:For a moment... by alphamugwump · · Score: 1

      I bet Scientist/Supermodel Symmetra could do it. http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volum e2/v2i3/v2i3-toc.html

    3. Re:For a moment... by TadZimas · · Score: 0

      All I have to say is, I'd like to compute HER corona dynamics, if you catch my drift.
      *wink wink wink wink wink innuendo rush*

    4. Re:For a moment... by Ana10g · · Score: 1

      Okay, I need more coffee. I couldn't see the difference and had to re-read your statement 7 or 8 times. Sheesh.

      --
      just an analog boy living in a digital age.
  10. collision avoidance by rucs_hack · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    The next thing they plan to do is build gigantic 'strafe' keys on either side of the planet.

    After that it's a rocket jump control to avoid incoming asteroids. I beleive that's going on belgium.

    1. Re:collision avoidance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do gamers insist on misusing the word strafe? Are all you people really that illiterate?

  11. I love it when you talk that way... by djupedal · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Mass.....ejections....ahhhh ----- Oh, wait - e-J-E....-ctions - damn, and here I thought we had dutifully wandered back onto the subject of female ejaculations & I've got a paper due on just that very pertinent topic by tomorrow this time and.... urrggg nevermindddddd::::::

    What is it, something along the lines of 8+ minutes for CME effects to flood our area post clip...? Not much time for adjustments if the predict fails.

    1. Re:I love it when you talk that way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least you RTF Title right, I read it as "Supermodel Computes Sun's Corona Dynamics" and started thinking that THAT paper would be read with interest by the mathmatical community; and, damn those babes sometime ARE smarter than they look :)

      Need more caffine before reading /. in the morning.

  12. What we could do even we could predict it? by mk_is_here · · Score: 1

    Currently seems we could do nothing to work against it. Maybe we could assign a evacuate procedure to the satillites to move to the night side of the Earth to hide from CMEs in future?

    1. Re:What we could do even we could predict it? by helioquake · · Score: 4, Informative

      The satellites which would be severely affected by CMEs are most probably located at geo-synchronous orbit. To bring one closer to Earth, you will have to (1) move it closer to the Earth, and then (2) you also have to slow it down because, as it gets closer to Earth with its angular momentum still conserved (imagine the ice-skater's spinning with and without the arms stretched), the satellite would undergo a faster revolution around the Earth. If you don't slow it down, it'll sling back out to a higher orbit.

      Many GPS satellites are orbiting in low-Earth orbits. Those are protected by Earth's magnetic field (most of the time) and will be fine against a regular CME.

    2. Re:What we could do even we could predict it? by helioquake · · Score: 2, Funny

      pardon me about redundant remarks...shhhh, "to bring it closer, you have to bring it closer...".

      That's it. I'm going to sleep.

    3. Re:What we could do even we could predict it? by s31523 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I doubt even moving satellites would do anything, since large CME effect things on the earths surface.. If we could accurately predict a strong CME, here are some things that could be done, derived from Geomagnetic storm definition:

      1.) Send NOTAM's to pilots that Navgiation systems will be shutdown or disrupted during time X through time Y. Advise on an alternate navigation procedure.

      2.) Get the astronauts out of space; The increased radiation might kill them.

      3.) Figure out (another simulation) what will happen in the ionosphere so that better GPS and or WAAS corrections can be made

      4.) Reduce power output on electrical grids, since CME can induce current; Remember the big power outage in 1989?

      5.) Shutdown pipeline and anything like that; the CME can induce current in the pipes and cause bad flowrates to be sent to computers controlling things and that might be bad.

  13. I imagine the hardest part... by artifex2004 · · Score: 2, Funny

    was modelling the bubbles that form on the lemon slice after it's pushed into the bottle.



    (hackwrench, this should have been your comment)

    1. Re:I imagine the hardest part... by HisMother · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's a lime slice, dude.

      --
      Cantankerous old coot since 1957.
  14. Supercomputer Models Sun's Corona Dynamics? by Zx-man · · Score: 1

    I bet they use Intel CPUs!

    1. Re:Supercomputer Models Sun's Corona Dynamics? by symbeon · · Score: 1

      And run windows . . .

  15. Just ask Hactar by bananaendian · · Score: 2, Informative
    Researchers from San Diego are using supercomputers to accurately predict the shape of the Sun's corona.

    In other news researchers are using supercomputers to accurately predict the weather, earthquakes and the stockmarket.

    We already have a perfectly good satellite based early warning system for predicting Space Weather. Trouble is the damn thing keeps knocking them out. I think we should skip this trivial phase of technology and move directly to space weather control. I reckon all we need is to turn up the volume in HAARP or hire these guys.

    --
    www.tribalnetworks.org - helping tribal people around the world to own their own means of high-tech communications
  16. Coronal Mass Ejections by this+great+guy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Are we talking about the corona or Corona ? Because ejections of the second one are disgusting.

    1. Re:Coronal Mass Ejections by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i thought Sun bought the mexican beer company and was now planning on dumping them

    2. Re:Coronal Mass Ejections by the+dark+hero · · Score: 1

      Not if you use lime!

      Corona is always better with lime!

      --
      You constantly struggle for self improvement - and it shows.

      Hooray for bad Engrish on fortune cookies

  17. Here's why prediction is useful by gihan_ripper · · Score: 4, Informative

    The benefit in knowing collision dates is that we'll be able to partially protect our assets from the storm. For example, power companies can issue a planned outage, taking their transformers off-line for a brief period during the storm in order to prevent a longer outage caused by damage.

    This is like our desire to know how the (terrestrial) weather is going to behave, even though we can't influence it. Advance warning helps us to prepare for adverse weather.

    --
    Phoenix, Boston, Little Rock, see a pattern?
    1. Re:Here's why prediction is useful by GapingHeadwound · · Score: 2, Informative

      CME prediction *may* also be useful to virology. The frequencies of CMEs vary with sunspot cycle (~11 year period). Moreover, solar radiation has biological impact as well and sunspot cycles (and thus, CMEs) have been strongly corelated with flu epidemics and pandemics: 1918 Spanish Flu, 1957-58 Asian Flu, etc.

      The idea is as straightforward as radiation inducing viral mutation. We are currently at the low point in the cycle. The current, highly pathogenic H5N1 (a subtype/mutation of the Influenza A virus) and SARS both coincided with most recent peak in sunspot activity (mid 1998-2003).

      If we are on the brink of a pandemic as several virologists suggest, there is a good likelihood that predicting CMEs could help in anticipating viral mutation vectors. A stockpile of engineered viral subtypes and mutations could thus be used to engineer vaccines preventatively. Every little bit helps, right?

      So CME prediction may be useful if you assume that interfering with pandemics is a Good Thing. It might not be... who am I to judge? All the same, I'm looking to survive the next pandemic. I'd rather not die from drowning in my own fluids or other some such fun.

      Then again, if the flu Came From Outer Space! then I suppose the usefulness of CME prediction remains with telecoms and power companies.

  18. Yes by jpardey · · Score: 1

    When the ice caps melt, when there is no power/water/internet, when there is no visible light, just heat, and when the corpses lie in the streets, they will release the source code so we can all have a good laugh.

    --
    I have freaks! I did something right...
  19. Model Improvement how? by Stevecrox · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The article its interesting but doesn't really have any facts about how they improved the model. I can see the obvious advantages you'd be able to calculate when a CME is going to be strong enough to effect power systems and when it might be a good idea to move satalities into a temporary lower orbit. But some more details on the how would have been nice.

  20. An argument for coffee in the morning... by colinbrash · · Score: 1

    Supermodel Computes Sun's Corona Dynamics

  21. What OS are they using? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My guess - Solaris!

  22. yowie by fan777 · · Score: 1

    that's some super-hot models

  23. Oooooh... I thought that was a new product by ellem · · Score: 1

    I thought I was seeing some new marketing from Sun Microsystems.

    --
    This .sig is fake but accurate.
  24. Slashdot needs... by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...fewer articles about "Supercomputer Models Sun's Corona Dynamics"

    and more articles about "Dynamic Super Models Drinking Coronas"

    --
    $8.95/mo web hosting
  25. NOT Supermodels by Dekortage · · Score: 1

    Crap... I read the title as Supermodel Computes Sun's Dynamic Corona and thought it had to do with a beer commercial starring women in bathing suits.

    There goes my dyslexia again.

    --
    $nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
  26. Is this really useful? by ianlee74 · · Score: 1

    Maybe I'm missing something, but I just don't see how this helps mankind? Do we really think we're going to shield the Earth from these solar storms? Should we? If the concern is really with the danger to electronics, then shouldn't we spending the time and money on enhancing electronic shielding instead? Or is this part of a military agenda so that attacks can be coordinated with a nuclear storm so that the enemy is disoriented while we are shielded... I love science but I'm not an advocate of science without a purpose (or at least not until all of our current problems are solved). Someone please enlighten me.

    1. Re:Is this really useful? by Ana10g · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I won't get into any examples, as I'm not qualified to make such predictions (though I'm sure some here are). That being said, researching for the sake of research produces useful results. Strictly researching "science with a purpose" could have prevented a good portion of our current discoveries. We don't know what our results will bring us, and that's the best part. We can apply this information where ever it fits, and use it to further understand our problems, which might lead to more "Science with a purpose" as you put it. All science is valuable, purposeful or not.

      --
      just an analog boy living in a digital age.
    2. Re:Is this really useful? by ianlee74 · · Score: 1

      I don't mean to sound totally against non-applied sciences, but to me this has gone beyond the science and has now created a tool based around the science. The inventors must have had some purpose for this tool when they decided to create it. I just think that the author did a poor job of researching the technology by not stating what it's possible uses might be.

    3. Re:Is this really useful? by Drakai · · Score: 1

      I seem to recall some mention during the last major solar event that if the event had been predicted several power management strategies could be put into effect to mitigate or minimize the outage. It the difference of reducing output briefly vs. re-initializes a massive system after an outage.

  27. Magnets! by quantum+bit · · Score: 1

    I say we use the power from the geomagnetic storms to power a time loop machine. I want to be king of Groundhog Day!

  28. heh, movie by Spookticus · · Score: 1

    sounds like a movie plot to me. We will be able to predict the corona but then some criminal predicts a massive one that takes out a lot of communications and then steals some stuff.

  29. Hmm.... by electrosoccertux · · Score: 1

    Supercomputer Models, Mass Ejections......I think these videos are off topic.

  30. Space weather prediction from space... by Dr.+Zowie · · Score: 2, Informative
    The problem is that NOAA doesn't actually own the main satellites that it is using -- ACE (for solar wind sampling) and SOHO (for solar imaging) are both NASA satellites that are intended for research. SOHO and ACE deliver real-time data on an as-available basis. They don't have the same level of reliability and systems redundancy that a weather satellite would have.

    Perhaps more importantly, both ACE and SOHO are aging (SOHO is nearly 11 years old, compared to its original 2-year mission) and there is no currently planned mission to replace the space-weather-relevant instruments (the coronagraph on SOHO and the solar wind samplers on ACE) when those instruments ultimately fail. (the Solar Dynamics Observatory has surface imaging but no coronagraph).

  31. MODELS?!!? by LordPhantom · · Score: 2, Funny

    andCorona?!? I almost got excited there, until I saw "supercomputer".

  32. Hurricane forecasts by jmichaelg · · Score: 1
    As you may recall we're already predicting hurricaine formation and movement days to a week or more in advance now, with a decent level of accuracy, and getting better all the time.

    Really? How quickly we forget ...The National Hurricane Center was saying this about Katrina on August 25, 2005

    This forecast is rather difficult since one of the more reliable models...the GFS...shows that the cyclone barely touches the East Coast of Florida before moving northward....while the outstanding GFDL moves Katrina south of due west across extreme South Florida and the Keys as a very intense hurricane.
    ..barely touches the East Cost of Florida? Moves Northward? When the competing forecasts were made, there was no way to know which one would turn out to be correct. Notice there's absolutely no mention of New Orleans which happened three days later.

    Richard Feynman had this to say about forecasting:

    Speaking more precisely, given an arbitrary accuracy, no matter how precise, one can find a time long enough that we cannot make predictions valid for that long a time. Now the point is that this length of time is not very large... It turns out that in only a very, very tiny time we lose all our information...We can no longer predict what is going to happen!"
    Feynman may be "outdated" but I think he was right.
    1. Re:Hurricane forecasts by kozumik · · Score: 1

      Feynman's methods are totally outdated, as are his assumptions. He was in old age before the dawn of modern computing and since his death the field of simulating weather and fluid dynamics has been completly reinvented.

    2. Re:Hurricane forecasts by jmichaelg · · Score: 1
      Feynman's methods are totally outdated, as are his assumptions.

      Care to back that up or are you just trolling?

  33. And the big deal is...? by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1
    In the decade or so, the researchers hope to be able to predict CME collisions with the Earth and determine their impact.

    So we see them coming sooner than if just waiting for visual confirmation that it happened. It's not like we can do much about it with this extra warning time, is there?

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  34. Clean Nukes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Assuming that you can develope a nuke that is otherwise harmless to the environment. i.e. no residual radiations, fallouts and nuclear winters.

    What about providing a grounding path of some kind to short circuit the energy?

    1. Re:Clean Nukes? by Tony-A · · Score: 1

      What about providing a grounding path of some kind to short circuit the energy?

      Not a chance. Something about conservation of energy.
      Now if somehow you could get something in the middle of it to convert the energy to a "useful" form, you could probably do something. A big enough wind farm in the middle of a hurricane -- lots of energy. Temperature difference between surface and deep waters -- lots of energy.

      If you know exactly what you are doing, it should be possible to make stuff happen in one place rather than another -- maybe like a lot of little storms rather than one huge storm. I suspect we are nowhere near the level of knowledge required.

  35. Firefox plugin by leighklotz · · Score: 1

    You can monitor solar activity from Firefox with the Propfire plugin.
    It puts a tasteful text-based solar flux / A / K index display in the lower right corner.

  36. If only by wonkavader · · Score: 1

    Darn. At first I thought this thing was "Super Models Compute Corona's Sun Dynamics" which would, of course, have looked a lot like the gasoline fight from Zoolander, but with less clothing and without as much of a fireball.

  37. I think I speak for all of us... by VanWEric · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, I think I speak for all of us when I say I misread that as "Supermodel Computes Sun's Corona Dynamics".

    Worse, it stirred my heart.

    I need a girl...

    --
    www.olin.edu
  38. Is it just me or... by mkiwi · · Score: 1

    Does It is hoped that this model will enable us to predict Coronal Mass Ejections look like it has more than one meaning?

  39. KOOL! by obnoxiousbastard · · Score: 1

    Why can't I get a job that interesting!?

    The biggest challenge I had this month was either a dead network card or a psycotic printer.

    I need a new job.

    --
    Is that a SCSI connector or are you just glad to see me?
  40. Super Model computers? by dacaldar · · Score: 1

    Anyone else do a double-take after skimming the subject line? :)