This gives a whole new meaning to “Total Solar Irradiance”. Instead of TSI, perhaps we should call the energy transfer that comes from the sun to the earth TSE for “Total Solar Energy” so that it includes the solar wind, the geomagnetics, and other yet undiscovered linkages. Jack Eddy is smiling and holding up the patch cord he’s been given at last, wondering how long it will be before we find all the connectors.
Scientists discover surprise in Earth’s upper atmosphere
From the UCLA Newsroom: By Stuart Wolpert
UCLA atmospheric scientists have discovered a previously unknown basic mode of energy transfer from the solar wind to the Earth’s magnetosphere. The research, federally funded by the National Science Foundation, could improve the safety and reliability of spacecraft that operate in the upper atmosphere.
“It’s like something else is heating the atmosphere besides the sun. This discovery is like finding it got hotter when the sun went down,” said Larry Lyons, UCLA professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences and a co-author of the research, which is in press in two companion papers in the Journal of Geophysical Research.
The sun, in addition to emitting radiation, emits a stream of ionized particles called the solar wind that affects the Earth and other planets in the solar system. The solar wind, which carries the particles from the sun’s magnetic field, known as the interplanetary magnetic field, takes about three or four days to reach the Earth. When the charged electrical particles approach the Earth, they carve out a highly magnetized region — the magnetosphere — which surrounds and protects the Earth.
Charged particles carry currents, which cause significant modifications in the Earth’s magnetosphere. This region is where communications spacecraft operate and where the energy releases in space known as substorms wreak havoc on satellites, power grids and communications systems.
The rate at which the solar wind transfers energy to the magnetosphere can vary widely, but what determines the rate of energy transfer is unclear.
“We thought it was known, but we came up with a major surprise,” said Lyons, who conducted the research with Heejeong Kim, an assistant researcher in the UCLA Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, and other colleagues.
“This is where everything gets started,” Lyons said. “Any important variations in the magnetosphere occur because there is a transfer of energy from the solar wind to the particles in the magnetosphere. The first critical step is to understand how the energy gets transferred from the solar wind to the magnetosphere.”
The interplanetary magnetic field fluctuates greatly in magnitude and direction.
“We all have thought for our entire careers — I learned it as a graduate student — that this energy transfer rate is primarily controlled by the direction of the interplanetary magnetic field,” Lyons said. “The closer to southward-pointing the magnetic field is, the stronger the energy transfer rate is, and the stronger the magnetic field is in that direction. If it is both southward and big, the energy transfer rate is even bigger.”
However, Lyons, Kim and their colleagues analyzed radar data that measure the strength of the interaction by measuring flows in the ionosphere, the part of Earth’s upper atmosphere ionized by solar radiation. The results surprised them.
“Any space physicist, including me, would have said a year ago there could not be substorms when the interplanetary magnetic field was staying northward, but that’s wrong,” Lyons said. “Generally, it’s correct, but when you have a fluctuating interplanetary magnetic field, you can have substorms going off once per hour.
“Heejeong used detailed statistical analysis to prove this phenomenon is real. Convection in the magnetosphere and ionosphere can be strongly driven by these fluctuations, independent of the direction of the interplanetary magnetic field.”
Convection describes the transfer of heat, or thermal energy, from one location to another through the movement of fluids such as liquids, gases or slow-flowing solids.
“The energy of the particles and the fields in the magnetosphere can vary by large amounts. It can be 10 times higher or 10 times lower from day to day, even from half-hour to half-hour. These are huge variations in particle intensities, magnetic field strength and electric field strength,” Lyons said.
The magnetosphere was discovered in 1957. By the late 1960s, it had become accepted among scientists that the energy transfer rate was controlled predominantly by the interplanetary magnetic field.
Lyons and Kim were planning to study something unrelated when they made the discovery.
“We were looking to do something else, when we saw life is not the way we expected it to be,” Lyons said. “The most exciting discoveries in science sometimes just drop in your lap. In our field, this finding is pretty earth-shaking. It’s an entire new mode of energy transfer, which is step one. The next step is to understand how it works. It must be a completely different process.”
The National Science Foundation has funded ground-based radars which send off radio waves that reflect off the ionosphere, allowing scientists to measure the speed at which the ions in the ionosphere are moving.
The radar stations are based in Greenland and Alaska. The NSF recently built the Poker Flat Research Range north of Fairbanks.
“The National Science Foundation’s radars have enabled us to make this discovery,” Lyons said. “We could not have done this without them.”
The direction of the interplanetary magnetic field is important, Lyons said. Is it going in the same direction as the magnetic field going through the Earth? Does the interplanetary magnetic field connect with the Earth’s magnetic field?
“We thought there could not be strong convection and that the energy necessary for a substorm could not develop unless the interplanetary magnetic field is southward,” Lyons said. “I’ve said it and taught it. Now I have to say, ‘But when you have these fluctuations, which is not a rare occurrence, you can have substorms going off once an hour.'”
Lyons and Kim used the radar measurements to study the strength of the interaction between the solar wind and the Earth’s magnetosphere.
One of their papers addresses convection and its affect on substorms to show it is a global phenomenon.
“When the interplanetary magnetic field is pointing northward, there is not much happening, but when the interplanetary magnetic field is southward, the flow speeds in the polar regions of the ionosphere are strong. You see much stronger convection. That is what we expect,” Lyons said. “We looked carefully at the data, and said, ‘Wait a minute! There are times when the field is northward and there are strong flows in the dayside polar ionosphere.'”
The dayside has the most direct contact with the solar wind.
“It’s not supposed to happen that way,” Lyons said. “We want to understand why that is.”
“Heejeong separated the data into when the solar wind was fluctuating a lot and when it was fluctuating a little,” he added. “When the interplanetary magnetic field fluctuations are low, she saw the pattern everyone knows, but when she analyzed the pattern when the interplanetary magnetic field was fluctuating strongly, that pattern completely disappeared. Instead, the strength of the flows depended on the strength of the fluctuations.
“So rather than the picture of the connection between the magnetic field of the sun and the Earth controlling the transfer of energy by the solar wind to the Earth’s magnetosphere, something else is happening that is equally interesting. The next question is discovering what that is. We have some ideas of what that may be, which we will test.”
My unit solar wind is 1 proton/cm^3 velocity 100 km/S gives a solar wind energy dump of 1.6×10E-4 Joules/m^2/S, or 1.6×10E-4 W/m^2
Oh, and proton energy of 10keV.
William (11:40:58) :
Nothing will have bearing on the “warming of the past thirty years due to CO2” as there hasn’t been any.
Alan Cheetham (11:06:07) :Extraordinary work!
William (11:40:58) : Stop breathing!
Nasif Nahle (10:47:50) : Some teratogenic products of increased GCR could be found in some recent generations of gwrs. ! 🙂
Don’t some people claim that global warming shows up at the poles first? Aren’t the poles where the solar wind has the greatest effect?
Could this be why the poles heat first?
“It’s poetry in motion
And now she’s making love to me
The spheres’re in commotion
The elements in harmony
She blinded me with science
“She blinded me with science!”
And hit me with technology”
Electrical joule heating of the atmosphere at lower elevations of the ionosphere as proposed by MAKAROVA,L.N?
Curioser and curioser.
Looks like the dynamics are a lot more complicated than we thought.
Shoulda read that box more closely before we bought the puzzle; it’s not a 300 piece puzzle but a 1,000 piece puzzle — perhaps.
Oh well, back to the drawing board.
I haven’t read any more than the press release above, and I’m utterly unqualified to evaluate this work. But when I read the sentence
“Heejeong used detailed statistical analysis to prove this phenomenon is real.”
I cringed reflexively. As we all know, “detailed statistical analysis” can be used or misused to tease a signal out of noisy data. I’m not saying they’re wrong, just that I hope others more qualified than I will take a good hard look at this.
Confirmation is important — and that is what this paper helps do.
A number of us who comment on this website have stated that charged particles in ordered motion, electrons and ions, are an electric current and this is a source of energy from the Sun to the Earth that influences the Earth’s Climate.
There are prominate voices in the comment section, here, that have strongly disagreed with this idea.
But the emerging scientific evidence is continually demonstrating that ELECTRO-magnetism plays a vital role in astrophysical relationship of the Sun and Earth.
And the scientists reporting the discoveries are constantly “surprised”.
Why?
Because of their training, as the authors of this paper readily attest.
This failure to consider “electric currents in space” is the direct result of the education astrophysicists receive and the “leading lights” that maintain the status quo.
I give tremendous credit to the authors of this paper to follow the evidence to where it leads.
My experience is that the “experimentalists” are much better at following the evidence, that the academics and their acolytes.
Electric current and electromagnetism exist in space.
Those that say otherwise need to seriously re-evaluate with reasonable scepticism for sure, but more important with an open-mind.
There are some very closed-minded people in the astrophysical “community”.
matt v. (12:35:04) :
2. Processes of transmission energy of the solar wind into the near-Earth Space A new mechanism of the thermal heating of the atmosphere by the electric currents induced by the solar wind is proposed. This process is concentrated in the middle stratosphere (altitudes 20-
30 km) where a permanent layer of heavy ion-clusters is produced by the galactic cosmic rays and by some other sporadically occurring sources.
http://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/129228.pdf
rbateman (11:45:29) :
Nasif Nahle (10:47:50) :
Possible double-whammy.
Solar wind dampened by inactivity and Interstellar medium, and Earth’s magnetic field also weakening over the last 50 years.
For the Sun, which came first chicken or egg – does the Sun’s activity alone depend on internal variations or is it directly affected by the Interstellar Medium during which the solar wind is backed off?
For Earth it’s neither here nor there: Lack of solar wind means we get more dosage of GCR’s irregardless of why the solar wind is backed off.
or—
For Earth it’s double indemnity as not only is the solar wind backed off but the intersellar medium backs of Earth’s magnetic field…double whammy. If this is correct it means David Archibald’s prediction of GCR’s counts going through the roof are a few bands of Interstellar Medium away.
Plenty to chew on.
And add to this the remnants of the supernova detected in 1976 (1, 2, 3) in which supposedly the solar system is already immersed and the anomaly of the intensity of interstellar cosmic rays in the Termination Shock of the solar system detected by the Voyagers in 2005 (4, 5) which are incoming freely to the Earth (6).
Indeed, indeed; there are many natural phenomena to chew up.
1. http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1978ApJ…223..589V&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf
2. http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/0004-637X/528/2/756/40497.web.pdf?request-id=43ef59e3-b9b2-4a59-a737-ea5a9dcd28c9
3. http://www.biocab.org/Coplanarity_Solar_System_and_Galaxy.html
4. E. C. Stone et all. Voyager Explores the Termination Shock Region and the Heliosheat Beyond. Science; Vol. 309, pages 2017 – 2020. 23. September 2005.
5. R. B. Decker et all. Voyager 1 in the Foreshock, Termination Shock, and Heliosheat. Science; Vol. 309, pp 2020-2024. 23 September, 2005.
6. Cracks in Earth’s Magnetic Shield. NASA’s Website:
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/03dec_magneticcracks.htm
Last reading on November 7th, 2005.
Leon Brozyna (12:36:21) :
Yeah, but a puzzle comes in a box where the final picture is on the lid.
This has to be much worse than that.
nogw
I’m sure you are already aware of the physics of plasmas (ionic current) so won’t preach but electrical current is associated with electron flow and the momentum forces and therefore their kinetic interactions are much smaller than ionic current which is the flow of +ion and -ions. Whilst not an expert on atmospheric physics I would imagine that the transfer of energy by a relatively very large ion on striking the molecules of the upper atmosphere might well be very painful for the molecule and leave it very excited. 🙂
Always The Sun
How many times have you woken up and prayed for the rain?
How many times have you seen the papers apportion the blame?
Who gets to say, who gets the work and who gets to play?
I was always told at school, everybody should get the same
How many times have you been told, if you don’t ask, you don’t get?
How many liars have taken your money, your mother said you shouldn’t
bet?
Who has the fun, is it always the man with a gun?
Someone must have told him, if you work too hard you can sweat
There’s always the sun (always the sun)
There’s always the sun
Always, always (always the sun)
How many times have the weathermen told you stories that made you
laugh?
I know it’s not unlike the politicians and the leaders
When they do things by half, who gets the job of pushing the knob?
That sort of responsibility you draw straws for, if you’re mad enough
There’s always the sun (always the sun)
There’s always the sun
Always, always (always the sun)
James F. Evans (12:50:02) :
Confirmation is important — and that is what this paper helps do.
A number of us who comment on this website have stated that charged particles in ordered motion, electrons and ions, are an electric current and this is a source of energy from the Sun to the Earth that influences the Earth’s Climate.
There are prominate voices in the comment section, here, that have strongly disagreed with this idea.
But the emerging scientific evidence is continually demonstrating that ELECTRO-magnetism plays a vital role in astrophysical relationship of the Sun and Earth.
As Tealc said: “Indeed”. I remember my professor of Physics, Dr. Mercado, talking about electric and magnetic currents:
“If you have not a wire or a cable, but only space, a variable magnetic flux invariably produces an electric field in the space. Conversely, if you have not a magnet, but only space, a variable electric flux invariably produces a magnetic field in the space.” (Class of physics by Dr. Roberto Mercado, PhD. 1974).
I don’t know where the idea of an asymmetry between the magnetic and the electric fields came from.
Nogw:
Check! 🙂 🙂 😀
The question that no one has asked: How that energy is supposed to be transferred to, say, the ocean?, because if only to the atmosphere it wouldn’t work further, like preparing your breakfast with you hair dryer; then we can only guess it could be like preparing the same breakfast with that kind of water boilers that work by shortcircuiting electricity: through lightning?.
Quite right, no surprise here for some of us. But what would you expect when even the physicists continue to ignore basic physics? People such as William might be partially correct about the additional input from the sun not accounting for a total 150 W/m^2 , but they are absolutely wrong about a basic fact – the earth has it’s own spatially and temporally varying magnetic field, and that produces both horizontal and vertical electrical currents running through the atmosphere. Since the gasses of which the atmosphere is composed have 2 basic electrical properties – high resistance and low conductivity – any first year physics student should be able to describe the end result in a single word.
BTW, what is commonly termed TSI is, in fact, electromagnetic energy. But what does a lowly spectroscopist know?
Think these guys were looking for the Hansen’s “fountain of global warming youth” among the clouds and they didn’ t get it that low but a higher altitude…
There were a couple of books about the effect of the magnetosphere on the climate
A Fresh Approach to Magnetism (Watson, 2006), and
“Why we are experiencing Global Warming” (Watson, 2007),
When you think of it, all those positive particles coming from the sun – electons in magnetic/micro waves hitting our magnetosphere – one solar blast can produce enough energy to the equivalent of a billion atomic bombs. This is enough to change our climate. If we receive more energy then we get more cloud and coolness for some time (Oceans, and not the atmosphere regulate our climate). There is a 6 year delay between high solar power and the cooling it gives rise to. A lot of solar physicists and oceanographers were predicting global cooling in 2002 for 2008, whilst climatologists were warning of the hottest years on record. And 6 years hence…
LAShaffer (13:20:14)
Glad you wrote that about the earth’s magnetosphere: It varies enormously from 40,000kn on the day part of the earth though many times that on the night side. Cosmic rays can really penetrate right through it and collide with the atmosphere
Well I got turned on to solar mysteries and earth links by Dr “Willie” Wei-Hock Soon’s book:- “The Maunder Minimum, and the Variable Sun-Earth Connection.”
Which is not to claim that Dr Soon pre-empted the present authors; but he certainly did point out (at least to me) that the TSI is only a part of the total physical linkage, and likely energy transfers.
I can’t say I understand all of Soon’s book as to that subject, but I bet he is interested in this recent “discovery”.
Maybe Leif can simplify it somewhat for us non-solar physicists, if the authors haven’t already done so.
George
Nogw (13:19:14)
as we understand it, Shortwave solar radiation penetrates stright through the atmosphere, which is invisible to Sw radiation – and yes, that includes c02 and high-mid level water vapour. Greenhouse gases don’t “trap” or intercept this sort of radiation, and then it adds heat to the oceans which can trasfer it via convection to other parts of the oceans
“”” stephen.richards (13:08:29) :
nogw
I’m sure you are already aware of the physics of plasmas (ionic current) so won’t preach but electrical current is associated with electron flow and the momentum forces and therefore their kinetic interactions are much smaller than ionic current which is the flow of +ion and -ions. Whilst not an expert on atmospheric physics I would imagine that the transfer of energy by a relatively very large ion on striking the molecules of the upper atmosphere might well be very painful for the molecule and leave it very excited. 🙂 “””
Well actually, electrical “current” is associated with the flow of CHARGE (Q), and the positive direction of current flow, is defined as the direction of net flow of charge; from positive (Voltage) to negative. The minor fact that the electron itself and its mass may move in the opposite direction is irrelevent; current flows from positive to negative; no matter the species of charge carrying particle.
So the early researchers goofed, and got their amber mixed up with their silk, so the elctron ended up negative charged. Same thing as why Matter survived and anti-matter didn’t; what fool is going to call the surviving species anti-matter ??
George
Nasif Nahle (13:18:43) :
I don’t know where the idea of an asymmetry between the magnetic and the electric fields came from.
My dear Nasif, you are a biologist…evidently it came from another asymmetry… in the brain (of the beholder), which clearly produces the separation of reasoning from feeling; in other words reasoning from common sense.