From Spaceweather.com
NOAA forecasters estimate a 75% chance of M-class solar flares and a 20% chance of X-flares during the next 24 hours. Any eruptions are likely to be geoeffective because the source, sunspot AR1476, is directly facing our planet.
Yesterday, May 10th, amateur astronomer David Maidment of Sohar, Oman caught the active region in mid-flare during a strong M5-class eruption:
The blast, which almost crossed the threshold into X-territory, did not produce a significant coronal mass ejection (CME). “There seemed to be no CME due to the fact that the plasma was captured and dragged back down to the sun,” notes Maidment.
Here’s the latest SDO image:
And the closeup:
Keep a close watch on this graph for X-ray bursts:
Get X-flare alerts: text, phone.
Roger says:
May 11, 2012 at 3:26 pm
Has anyone noticed that Jo Anne Novas site has been down for quite a few days now i wonder if the freaks have not hacked her site. It would be highly unlikely for her to close down the site for maintenece for such a long period.
No Roger, no one else has noticed. Just like we didn’t notice the several-day advance warning Jo gave prior to the down time. And like we haven’t noticed that the site’s been back up for several hours now.
So, thanks to your watching eye we are now all aware.
For Roger’s benefit: /sarc
@mjm;
Only within the US. Pity. [Ref: Cdn Red Rose tea commercial of many moons ago.]
vukcevic says:
May 11, 2012 at 3:05 pm
There are indications that the Earth’s magnetic field secular change responds to the solar flares and CME’s after an impact of a geomagnetic storm.
There are no such indications of evidence of anything like that.
I am getting a bit concerned, two solar threads
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/10/solar-cycle-update-for-april-sun-still-slumping/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/11/sunspot-ar1476-takes-aim-on-earth/
and no posts from Dr. Svalgaard.
I hope he is well, we need him here, to keep in line wild and unruly speculators, myself included.
[REPLY: You spoke a moment too late. See here. -REP]
vukcevic says:
May 12, 2012 at 12:35 pm
I hope he is well, we need him here, to keep in line wild and unruly speculators, myself included.
Once invalid speculations have been unmasked, one might think it the job for the modulators to remind the commenter of that. Or for the commenter himself to show the decency of not keep polluting the discussion with further nonsense.
Here’s a pdf. Great read: http://files.meetup.com/1753834/inconstant_moon_larry_niven.pdf
Leif Svalgaard says: May 12, 2012 at 12:25 pm
There are no such indications of evidence of anything like that.
Current reference
University of Colorado:
historical reconstruction of TSI based on that of Wang, Lean, and Sheeley (The Astrophysical Journal, 625:522-538, 2005 May 20) using a flux transport model to simulate the Sun’s magnetic flux, with those annual values provided courtesy of J. Lean.
……. Measurements of total solar irradiance (TSI) are known to be linked to Earth climate and temperature.
http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/data/tsi_data.htm
IPCC:
Figure 2.17. Reconstructions of the total solar irradiance time series starting as early as 1600. The upper envelope of the shaded regions shows irradiance variations arising from the 11-year activity cycle. The lower envelope is the total irradiance reconstructed by Lean (2000), in which the long-term trend was inferred from brightness changes in Sun-like stars. In comparison, the recent reconstruction of Y. Wang et al. (2005) is based on solar considerations alone, using a flux transport model to simulate the long-term evolution of the closed flux that generates bright faculae.
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter2.pdf page 190
Let us compare this widely accepted reference for the TSI to the bi-decadal changes of the Earth’s magnetic field.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN-dBzA1.htm
So what is going on here?
– the most up to date solar science’s TSI reference is totally wrong (possible)
– there is a sun-Earth magnetic connection not known to the modern science (possible)
– just a coincidence (most unlikely)
Solar scientists and geophysicists have access to all data required, once alerted to this anomaly they need to consider it from all possible angles and hopefully provide a credible explanation.
Another acne flare up. A glass of potato juice a day is good for acne.
NASA video of May 5 to May 11 of AR1476
May 13 (Aussie time) of the latest CME. It is earthbound:
“Filament Eruption & Earth Directed CME May 13, 2012”
Amino, thanks for that NASA video of May 5 to May 11. It’s amazing! Our star is mindblowing.
Solar cycle frequency is low (long cycle). The butterfly has no wings yet.
De-trended delta Bz (the Antarctic’s magnetic field change) has also good correlation with the Dr. Svalgaard’s (trend-less) TSI
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN-dBzA1.htm
(last graph in the above link)
vukcevic says:
May 12, 2012 at 2:03 pm
Solar scientists and geophysicists have access to all data required, once alerted to this anomaly they need to consider it from all possible angles and hopefully provide a credible explanation.
No explanation is required for a spurious correlation.
I was able to see 1476 with my ‘eclipse glasses’–no magnification! (Don’t try without the right filter!)
Leif Svalgaard says: May 12, 2012 at 10:05 pm
No explanation is required for a spurious correlation.
It is curious that the correlation you call spurious
for the Svalgaard’s TSI data since 1900 to date, is stronger than the one for Wang et al (2005), while prior to 1900 it is about equal.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN-dBzA1.htm
(for the Svalgaard’s TSI see last graph)
Leif Svalgaard says:
May 12, 2012 at 10:05 pm
vukcevic says:
May 12, 2012 at 2:03 pm
Solar scientists and geophysicists have access to all data required, once alerted to this anomaly they need to consider it from all possible angles and hopefully provide a credible explanation.
No explanation is required for a spurious correlation.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That is most curious, Vuks. (Dr. might just be mispelling the word)
Even to the lay person that doesn’t look like any wiggle matching going on. Hmmm wonder what other dots like on the interstellar scale can be connected to this. Just kidding but maybe some interplanetary fog. lol
Hi Carla
I think it is a consequence of the geomagnetic storms’ cumulative effect on the magnetic poles. http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/Tromso.gif
Here come the paired sunspots, again.
In a belated response to michaeljmcfadden the story was “Inconstant Moon” by Larry Niven.
vukcevic says:
May 13, 2012 at 2:22 pm
I think it is a consequence of the geomagnetic storms’ cumulative effect on the magnetic poles.
There is no such influence.
I just ran across this:
Colossal superflares erupt from sun-like stars
Their explosions can have 10,000 times more energy than solar bursts from our sun
“Stars like our sun can release “superflares,” explosions of up to 10,000 times more energy than the solar flares seen from our sun, researchers say.
“However, it looks unlikely that our sun currently has superflares, scientists added.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47448502/ns/technology_and_science-space/#.T7Rv3FKwUW4
Spector;
Looks like Niven might not have been so far off!