8 ms·

Radiation belts detected around Earth after solar storm

146 points by jandrewrogers 2y ago

MrGuts 2y ago
"Mysterious Radiation Belts Detected Around Earth After Epic Solar Storm" I'm sure there was a 1950's sci-fi movie based on this premise.
ck2 2y ago
vague memories of Starfish Prime https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime#After_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime#After_effects where they accidentally created a new radiation belt in orbit and destroyed some of the first commercial satellites
- le-mark 2y ago
  Is it true this is also why nuclear pulse propulsion from Earth surface to orbit is impractical?
  - floydnoel 2y ago
    no that would be because you can't reach escape velocity
jjulius 2y ago
[flagged]
- codr7 2y ago
  Pretending to know everything, and especially being right, is a pretty big thing around here.
- Cthulhu_ 2y ago
  It's the problem with 3rd / 4th level articles, that is, 1st level is a scientific paper, 2nd is a press release, 3rd / 4th are the media and popular science outlets. It's how you get from some numbers / statistics representing a slight dimming in a distant star to artist's renditions of verdant blue/green exoplanets. But the scientific papers aren't interesting on their own, they need explanation first so people know what it entails, then entertainment so people get interested. Or in this case, provoke outrage so that they get people upset and reacting to it.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    Papers are interesting, but usually much less accessible. There is nothing inherently wrong with the idea of scientific reporting. However, many publishers have historically gone overboard with sensationalism, which spurred a lot of knee-jerk reactionary sentiment. In this case, I don't think it is really warranted. I thought the article was about as straight forward as one could expect for an introduction of this length, and avoided sensationalism. The only hazard mentioned is that to satellites, which is mentioned as a concern on area of research in the original article (which they actually linked for once!).
- IAmGraydon 2y ago
  I assure you that scientists did not use the word “mysterious”. The site did to get more people to click. The people of HN really dislike it when a site treats them like gullible idiots.
  - jjulius 2y ago
    Yeah, I know they didn't, which is why I didn't use the word in my own quotes. My point was that seizing on "mysterious" is stupid. Scientists found something new to them and were fascinated. "Mysterious" might not be the most perfectly cromulent word for this situation, but it's close enough with regards to conveying their awe. Discussing what was discovered is a far more interesting conversation that yet another rant about how some word in a headline feels like clickbait to someone. For a site that prides itself on fostering quality discussion, it surprises me that this sort of perspective is downvoted.
roymurdock 2y ago
Interesting, so the 2 new belts (fields) are closer than the 2 stable existing belts (Van Allen Belts) that shield us from radiation. These fields could affect the launch and operation of satellites. Or maybe they will help shield us further? Or affect our atmosphere in some way? To be studied...
beretguy 2y ago
Anton Petrov made a video about Van Allen Belts about 4 years ago where he also talks about a 3rd belt appearing during a solar storm: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BpMeRWcIxNI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BpMeRWcIxNI
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  I think this article is about a 4th
cossatot 2y ago
I wonder how much the Van Allen radiation belts are a contributor to the Fermi paradox, i.e. how much they contributed to providing a suitable place for life to originate and flourish, and how rare they are. The belts themselves are an effect of Earth's magnetic field, which I believe is particularly strong because of flow within the Earth's liquid iron-nickel outer core. (I had long believed that the spinning of the inner core was the primary contributor but given a surface-level skim of the literature that doesn't seem to be the case; convection seems to be more of a driver.) I think perhaps many otherwise similar planets don't have a liquid iron core, so they may not have the strong radiation belts that shield life from the solar wind. Of course I am not sure what fraction of otherwise-similar planets have liquid iron cores, but Mars for example does not seem to. It is probably a function of the size of a planet (governing the pressure distribution in the interior), the ratio of iron to other elements, the temperature field (a function of the amount of radiogenic elements in the planet and its age), and perhaps other factors. Other planets may not be hot enough to have a liquid iron core at the right pressures, or be too massive (too much pressure) at the right temperatures, etc.
- dekhn 2y ago
  I'm pretty sure that the belts are a requirement for some types of life to originate and survive. Along with Jupiter helping protect us, our location in the galaxy, etc.
  - doctoboggan 2y ago
    If abiogenesis occurred in the thermal vents deep under the ocean I believe that could have happened without the radiation protection as the water would be more than adequate.
    - dekhn 2y ago
      Sure, but small amounts of radiation are beneficial. And those early organisms would eventually ahve to move to the shallows and land and deal with all the masked radiation at some point. It's all speculation, we really have no idea whether it was vents-first or not.
dang 2y ago
[stub for offtopicness]
- porcoda 2y ago
  I really wish sites would stop with the clickbait style headlines. “Mysterious” is unnecessary here since there isn’t much mystery about this. If anything, this kind of wording gives non-experts and non-scientists the wrong message since mysterious often gets read as “scary” or “unexplainable”, which is often misleading.
  - 52-6F-62 2y ago
    This is a projection of your inner state onto the word and not the word itself. It truly is a mystery. Like most things.
    - baxtr 2y ago
      I wonder almost daily why anything at all exists. It’s an absolute mystery. Why isn’t there just void? So here we are on a tiny planet alone. Alone? How did we get here? Are we living in a simulation? Maybe we are in Sim Planet game for another entity? All of our existence is mystery.
      - card_zero 2y ago
        Being in a simulation only makes the question more complicated, in a "turtles all the way down" style.
      - netsharc 2y ago
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8mJr4c66bs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8mJr4c66bs
        baxtr 2y ago
        Nah, what’s the point of living then anyway? It’s sounds smart but if you look past it you realize it’s just nihilistic.
aussieguy1234 2y ago
I was out that night to capture the Aurora mentioned in the article, captured this time-lapse of the action: https://bsky.app/profile/robbiecahill.bsky.social/post/3lbt5up23sc2k https://bsky.app/profile/robbiecahill.bsky.social/post/3lbt5...
gregwebs 2y ago
A reason given for the dramatic increase in solar storm effects on Earth is that the Earth’s magnetic field is weakening. This is due to the current geomagnetic excursion where the location of the geomagnetic poles is changing.
sieste 2y ago
I wonder if the spatial distribution of intensity from radiation belts correlate with "cancer clusters". Even if the effect is tiny you might be able to see it in the population.

146 points by jandrewrogers 2y ago

"Mysterious Radiation Belts Detected Around Earth After Epic Solar Storm" I'm sure there was a 1950's sci-fi movie based on this premise.

ck2 2y ago

vague memories of Starfish Prime https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime#After_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime#After_effects where they accidentally created a new radiation belt in orbit and destroyed some of the first commercial satellites

le-mark 2y ago
Is it true this is also why nuclear pulse propulsion from Earth surface to orbit is impractical?
- floydnoel 2y ago
  no that would be because you can't reach escape velocity

jjulius 2y ago

[flagged]

codr7 2y ago
Pretending to know everything, and especially being right, is a pretty big thing around here.
Cthulhu_ 2y ago
It's the problem with 3rd / 4th level articles, that is, 1st level is a scientific paper, 2nd is a press release, 3rd / 4th are the media and popular science outlets. It's how you get from some numbers / statistics representing a slight dimming in a distant star to artist's renditions of verdant blue/green exoplanets. But the scientific papers aren't interesting on their own, they need explanation first so people know what it entails, then entertainment so people get interested. Or in this case, provoke outrage so that they get people upset and reacting to it.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  Papers are interesting, but usually much less accessible. There is nothing inherently wrong with the idea of scientific reporting. However, many publishers have historically gone overboard with sensationalism, which spurred a lot of knee-jerk reactionary sentiment. In this case, I don't think it is really warranted. I thought the article was about as straight forward as one could expect for an introduction of this length, and avoided sensationalism. The only hazard mentioned is that to satellites, which is mentioned as a concern on area of research in the original article (which they actually linked for once!).
IAmGraydon 2y ago
I assure you that scientists did not use the word “mysterious”. The site did to get more people to click. The people of HN really dislike it when a site treats them like gullible idiots.
- jjulius 2y ago
  Yeah, I know they didn't, which is why I didn't use the word in my own quotes. My point was that seizing on "mysterious" is stupid. Scientists found something new to them and were fascinated. "Mysterious" might not be the most perfectly cromulent word for this situation, but it's close enough with regards to conveying their awe. Discussing what was discovered is a far more interesting conversation that yet another rant about how some word in a headline feels like clickbait to someone. For a site that prides itself on fostering quality discussion, it surprises me that this sort of perspective is downvoted.

roymurdock 2y ago

Interesting, so the 2 new belts (fields) are closer than the 2 stable existing belts (Van Allen Belts) that shield us from radiation. These fields could affect the launch and operation of satellites. Or maybe they will help shield us further? Or affect our atmosphere in some way? To be studied...

beretguy 2y ago

Anton Petrov made a video about Van Allen Belts about 4 years ago where he also talks about a 3rd belt appearing during a solar storm: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BpMeRWcIxNI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BpMeRWcIxNI

s1artibartfast 2y ago
I think this article is about a 4th

cossatot 2y ago

I wonder how much the Van Allen radiation belts are a contributor to the Fermi paradox, i.e. how much they contributed to providing a suitable place for life to originate and flourish, and how rare they are. The belts themselves are an effect of Earth's magnetic field, which I believe is particularly strong because of flow within the Earth's liquid iron-nickel outer core. (I had long believed that the spinning of the inner core was the primary contributor but given a surface-level skim of the literature that doesn't seem to be the case; convection seems to be more of a driver.) I think perhaps many otherwise similar planets don't have a liquid iron core, so they may not have the strong radiation belts that shield life from the solar wind. Of course I am not sure what fraction of otherwise-similar planets have liquid iron cores, but Mars for example does not seem to. It is probably a function of the size of a planet (governing the pressure distribution in the interior), the ratio of iron to other elements, the temperature field (a function of the amount of radiogenic elements in the planet and its age), and perhaps other factors. Other planets may not be hot enough to have a liquid iron core at the right pressures, or be too massive (too much pressure) at the right temperatures, etc.

dekhn 2y ago
I'm pretty sure that the belts are a requirement for some types of life to originate and survive. Along with Jupiter helping protect us, our location in the galaxy, etc.
- doctoboggan 2y ago
  If abiogenesis occurred in the thermal vents deep under the ocean I believe that could have happened without the radiation protection as the water would be more than adequate.
  - dekhn 2y ago
    Sure, but small amounts of radiation are beneficial. And those early organisms would eventually ahve to move to the shallows and land and deal with all the masked radiation at some point. It's all speculation, we really have no idea whether it was vents-first or not.

dang 2y ago

[stub for offtopicness]

porcoda 2y ago
I really wish sites would stop with the clickbait style headlines. “Mysterious” is unnecessary here since there isn’t much mystery about this. If anything, this kind of wording gives non-experts and non-scientists the wrong message since mysterious often gets read as “scary” or “unexplainable”, which is often misleading.
- 52-6F-62 2y ago
  This is a projection of your inner state onto the word and not the word itself. It truly is a mystery. Like most things.
  - baxtr 2y ago
    I wonder almost daily why anything at all exists. It’s an absolute mystery. Why isn’t there just void? So here we are on a tiny planet alone. Alone? How did we get here? Are we living in a simulation? Maybe we are in Sim Planet game for another entity? All of our existence is mystery.
    - card_zero 2y ago
      Being in a simulation only makes the question more complicated, in a "turtles all the way down" style.
    - netsharc 2y ago
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8mJr4c66bs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8mJr4c66bs
      - baxtr 2y ago
        Nah, what’s the point of living then anyway? It’s sounds smart but if you look past it you realize it’s just nihilistic.

aussieguy1234 2y ago

I was out that night to capture the Aurora mentioned in the article, captured this time-lapse of the action: https://bsky.app/profile/robbiecahill.bsky.social/post/3lbt5up23sc2k https://bsky.app/profile/robbiecahill.bsky.social/post/3lbt5...

gregwebs 2y ago

A reason given for the dramatic increase in solar storm effects on Earth is that the Earth’s magnetic field is weakening. This is due to the current geomagnetic excursion where the location of the geomagnetic poles is changing.

sieste 2y ago

I wonder if the spatial distribution of intensity from radiation belts correlate with "cancer clusters". Even if the effect is tiny you might be able to see it in the population.