TAGS
ON CAMPUS
STUDENT LIFE
OFF CAMPUS
EDUCATION
GOVERNMENT

COOL
MONEY
VARSITY BLUES
UTSU
ADMINISTRATION
BIOLOGY
MUSIC
ART
FOOD & DRINK
ELECTIONS
IN THE LAB
FACULTY
TECHNOLOGY
HEALTH
FILM
NUMBERS
PROFILE
INTERVIEW
LITERATURE
PSYCH
THEATRE
BRIEFS
ENVIRONMENT
DESIGN
LOVE & SEX
TORONTO
GENDER
POP CULTURE
SIMCOE HALL
LONG FORM
LAW
PRO SPORTS
THE VARSITY
SPACE
MISSISSAUGA
UTSU DEFEDERATION
HUMAN RIGHTS
SCARBOROUGH
FROSH
PHOTOGRAPHY
INFOGRAPHICS
GUIDES
FAITH
BEST OF 2012
FASHION
ALUMNI
LGBTQ
RACE
EUREKA
DRUGS
EDITORIAL
DANCE
SGRT
NXNE
RELIGION
JOURNALISM
COMMUTE
INTRAMURALS
JOB MARKET
INVESTIGATIVE
PODCAST
University of Toronto's Student Newspaper Since 1880

Neutrons forecast space weather

Researchers develop mechanism for detecting imminent solar flares

By Timmy Yiu Nam Mo and Minhee Bae
Published: 7:22 pm, 25 August 2012
Modified: 10 pm, 5 February 2013
Vol CXXXIII, No. 01 under
UPDATED

It’s that time in the solar cycle again. According to physicists, solar activity increases and decreases according to an approximately 11-year cycle. During periods of high activity, sunspots amass and solar flares grow frequent.

A new low period began in 2008: scientists observed a record scarcity of sunspots, and solar irradiance was extremely low. In 2009, NASA predicted that the sun’s activity would reach its next maximum in May 2013.

MINHEE BAE/THE VARSITY

Sunspots have recently begun to pepper the sun. On July 6, the sixth X-class solar flare of 2012 erupted from a sunspot. July 19 saw the emission of an M7.7-class solar flare. M- and X-class solar flares are the second-strongest and strongest classes of solar flares respectively; A-, B-, and C-class solar flares are weaker.

Hurling charged particles, x-rays, and other radiation towards Earth, solar flares have the potential to be destructive (though not, as the film 2012 suggested, apocalyptic). During past cycles, solar flares have induced additional currents in power lines, damaging transformers and causing blackouts — the 1859 solar storm destroyed transmission cables and caused telegraph systems to catch fire. According to the National Academy of Sciences, a comparable storm today would cause one to two trillion US dollars in damage. Moreover, although the Earth’s magnetic field diverts some of the sun’s emissions away from Earth, radiation can seep in at the poles, where the magnetic field is the weakest. Passengers travelling by plane across the North Pole risk being doused with radiation during a solar storm. The radiation can also affect astronauts and spacecraft.

Although satellites provide scientists with a way to monitor the sun for flares, satellites cannot determine when a solar flare will hit Earth. Fortunately, scientists from South Korea and the University of Delaware have been investigating a way to determine both the arrival time and intensity of imminent solar storms. The team, directed by Professor John Bieber of the University of Delaware, used neutron detectors located at the South Pole. High speed protons irradiated by solar flares strike atoms in Earth’s atmosphere, causing the atoms to split and release neutrons downwards. The sensors detect these neutrons.

Not all  of the solar flare’s protons move at the same speed, though; a fast-moving proton has more energy and consequently does more damage than a slow-moving proton. Solar flares typically release larger numbers of slower particles, so the less energetic particles actually cause most of the damage. The scientists found that they could accurately estimate the damage an incoming solar flare would cause by attuning two sensors to neutrons of different energies and comparing the number of neutrons detected.

In examining data collected during solar storms between 1989 and 2005, the scientists found that protons moving at 53–76 per cent of the speed of light hit Earth approximately 95 minutes after a solar flare’s first protons hit Earth. After an extra 71 minutes, protons moving at 29–39 per cent of the speed of light arrived. By detecting a solar flare’s first protons, the sensors provide scientists with a 166-minute warning before the slower, most destructive wave of protons hits Earth. The almost three-hour warning would give astronauts enough time to take shelter and engineers enough time to temporarily turn off satellites in the flare’s path.

Although the South Pole detectors are far too large to be carried on a spacecraft, scientists are hopeful that Bieber and his colleagues’ research will pave the way for smaller, lighter sensors to be made. Lighter sensors would be valuable because spacecraft frequently travel outside Earth’s magnetic field, where there is no protection from the sun’s radiation. As a new maximum in the solar cycle approaches, Professor Bieber and his colleagues’ work seems more relevant than ever.

Sources: NASA, Huffington Post, Space.com, NewScience, ScienceNOW

  • Anonymous

    I think it’s impossible to predict the behavior of sunspots, if the real cause is not known, and the challenger, and the release of these phenomena on the Sun.
    Let me address these scientists that, if I can help you once and for all resolve the issue.
    In this way, one can not, in general, to predict the behavior of sunspots and their cycles.

  • Oliver Manuel

    The real cause of sunspots is a deep-seated energy source [1,2] that frightened world leaders agreed to obscure after “nuclear fires” consumed Hiroshima on 6 Aug 1945 and Nagasaki on 9 Aug 1945.

    They hurriedly established the United Nations on <b24 Oct 1945 and began to promote misinformation on energy (E) stored as mass (m) in cores of heavy atoms [3] and stars [4].

    The corruption of government science and the loss of constitutional limits on our increasingly tyrannical world government stem from the instinct of survival when world leaders reacted in fear to “nuclear fires” in 1945.

    The rest of the story: http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/#comment-818

    Oliver K. Manuel
    Former NASA Principal
    Investigator for Apollo
    http://www.omatumr.com

    References:

    1. Oliver K. Manuel, Barry W. Ninham and Stig E. Friberg, “Super-fluidity in the solar interior: Implications for solar eruptions and climate,” Journal of Fusion Energy 21, 193-198 (2002).http://www.springerlink.com/content/r2352635vv166363/?MUD=MP 2. Oliver K. Manuel, “Neutron repulsion,” The Apeiron Journal 19, 123-150 (2012) http://tinyurl.com/7t5ojrn 3. Hideki Yukawa, Introduction to Quantum Mechanics (1946); Introduction to the Theory of Elementary Particles (1948) http://www.nndb.com/people/759/000099462/4. Fred Hoyle, “The chemical composition of the stars,” Monthly Notices Royal Astronomical Society 106, 255-59 (1946); “The synthesis of the elements from hydrogen,” Monthly Notices Royal Astronomical Society 106 343-83 (1946)

  • Jonathan

    And I think that grammar is conspiracy that Truman and Churchill cooperated on to make internet commenters seem less credible.