Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/29/2020 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    Hi Spaceweatherlive Tried to email you, but you dont like hotmails, so... I noticed that your register over spotless days has been stuck on 112 days for about a week or so, even when the sun is as spotless as it gets!! Just want to let you now if you didnt already. Keep up the good work
  2. 2 points
    hmm you're indeed correct. i'll dig in the code tonight to see what went wrong! Update: identified the issue, should auto-fix itself in one of the next days and shouldn't happen again
  3. 2 points
    The filters of SDO have several filters filtering various wavelengths (expressed in Ångstrom) which reveal several parts of the solar atmosphere. These filters block nearly all visible light (except HMI Continuum). So a region can look bright, but it's not really bright because the filters block large parts of the visible spectrum (for example a h-alpha telescope reveals prominences sunspot regions and plages and arches in the near infrared spectrum but that's 0.6 Ångstrom or about 99,99% of the light). In terms of solar irradiance it's the case that in solar maximum the Sun solar irradiance is a bit more than in solar minimum, about 0,09%.
  4. 2 points
    I took ill in late November with unusual effects. I wasn't even sure if I was sick at times. Then in mid December my heart was stressed by whatever it was affecting me. At the same time my brother 300 miles to the south of me ended up in the hospital for a week with a heart attack. His son also had the worst flu of his life in late November. A number of people up here in the mountains where I live also said they had severe cases of the flu back in November. So there is further confirmation for some of what you are saying. I would like to get tested for the corona virus when the tests become available in my area.
  5. 2 points
    I'm sorry but I need to say something. It seems to me that as a science board, we have the responsibility to fight off pseudoscience. Now things that remain to be proven certainly belong here, but attacks on the scientific consensus or disproven pseudoscience should be weeded out, specially in times like this, when pseudoscience and conspiracy theories are all the rage among our less-educated fellows.
  6. 2 points
    The reason for the retraction can be found here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-61020-3
  7. 1 point
    Yeah it was the whole module bar that had the same issue 😋 good thing you noticed it because we overlooked it (shame on me). It's now updated frequently and shouldn't happen again 🙂
  8. 1 point
    NASA answered this question here: https://go.nasa.gov/3en9Maf
  9. 1 point
    @VoltarDark Yes you can add that as another effect that influences the nr of covid19 (infections/cases) So we have (at least) 2 effects that work together (against us) (1) Less UV-radiation so less virus is killed (UVC) (2) Less vitamine-D produced ..so our immunity is lower (UVB) In other words ...If both UVC and UVB are lower ...there will be even more covid19 cases compared to one of the effects alone. You could more or less add them together ..to understand that the effect doubles or at least does have a stronger effect as you might think. This was not studied but both the individual facts (1 & 2) were ...someone should do research involving these both at the same time I think we can assume that UVB follows the same curve as UVC ... since all wavelengths available at sda-nasa follow the same curve It is also established that ..that UVB-levels follow the summer/winter curve I myself can see the UVC variations from the sdo-nasa pics & videos I dont see the UVB from them cause they dont supply that ... so the only thing available to me is the reports on "total irradiance" but those measurements suck ...since they are not really standardized ...and receive a mess of all wavelengths mixed together and as i have found most of these dont even include the full spectrum. .. so a specific daily UVB measurement is needed. Best: we should measure full spectrum (no gaps) that reaches the earth ... to be fully able to study the sun's effect on life on earth.
  10. 1 point
    Viruses do not live exposed in hostile environments. They multiply within organisms which shield them from things that would kill them. There is also something called "indoors" which would shield them from UV rays. Moreover, exposure to the broad range of elements without a host would render the virus innate and dead within a matter of minutes, at most. If UV rays were the answer to destroying the virus, then all an infected person would need to do is stand outside in the sunlight for a little while and viola, cured. That's obviously not the case. For an "engineer" speaking down at everyone, you have a very murky understanding of how such simple things work.
  11. 1 point
    The solar wind acts like a broom sweeping cosmic gamma radiation away from our solar system. When the sun is producing sunspots, the solar wind stays strong and constant. The past 11 years the sun has not produced very many sunspots, leaving the solar wind spotty if best. Point, that's why it's important to go over this data all together. It's IMPORTANT. We all know what gamna radiation is and what it's affects are. (I HOPE) Robert Todaro
  12. 1 point
    Central factor for emergence and virulence of germs look rather «good» but beyond that more knowledge is required. Found this : Enhanced UV-B generally decreased chlorophyll content, whereas it increased UV-B absorbing compounds in many algae. Decrease in photosynthesis, particularly at higher UV-B doses, was due to both direct (effect on photosystem) and indirect (decrease in pigments) effects. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15986833/
  13. 1 point
    TY. https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/green-antarctica-1.5576532?fbclid=IwAR0QPSZnhkAA9y5Fp9XKCun-W6fnHdyQ3b1bVhFxDKlihfghWHoUxi_9N-U Could this be related to the solar cycles ? I see why you are worry. An yes it would be blind not to see a minimal correlation between the two. Sun & germs. We could/should know exactly where on the globe the UV are the lowest all the time. Scarlatine is what i fear the most. Some of it could already be taken for case of Covid19.... It would be an explosive duo... In Quebec/Canada All public and commercial building's ventilation will use an UV sanitizer. They installing them now...
  14. 1 point
    We must take into account the fact of the seasonal variations that affect viruses precisely because of the terrestrial inclination. This is why many viruses thrive in the winter and the summer sucks. UV radiation certainly has its harmful effects. But I'm not the serial killer of all the viruses we know. Take for example the Spanish flu in 1918, or the sweat fever of 1500, to those viruses the summer did not give any problem. Looking at the graph shown above, the IST has certainly fallen in recent decades, certainly 50 years. In all honesty I am not too worried about a second wave of COVID19, now prevention is rooted in society, but I believe there are at least three other epidemics that should be paid attention to. As I see it, high levels of space radiation are dangerous and the topic deserves special attention from the origin to their effects in general. This is the only way to understand what you are talking about.
  15. 1 point
    The variation in light intensity due to earth-sun distance around the year is about 1%. How much reduction in UV is need to make corona virus pathogen enough to start a pandemic ? Volcanoes eruption are times of plague? Island's volcano dust cover could have trigger plagues in Europe ? Air pollution is now more dangerous.
  16. 1 point
    Hello all, We have decided to remove the ''Question forum'' and open a new forum in the Space Weather category. It is called ''Other'' and you are visiting this forum right now. Most of the topics posted in the old Question forum resulted in discussions and due to the way this old Question forums worked, all the posts were scrambled as they were ordered by the numbers of up votes each post received. This made it very confusing to follow the discussions. We welcome in this new ''Other'' forum any topic that fits within the general space weather theme but doesn't fit in the Solar Activity or Geomagnetic Activity forums. Questions can now be posted in any forum that fits your topic. We also want to address something else and that's topics about alternative science. SpaceWeatherLive is a serious website with two core goals: We aim to educate the general public about main stream space weather science and bring the latest space weather news and data all on one easy to navigate website. We do not get involved in topics about what we like to call alternative space weather science as this is not a topic that we cover on our website. We mean with alternative science, topics about coronal holes causing earthquakes and that kind of stuff. However we do think that everyone is free to believe what they want and we do not want to kill such discussions as soon as they pop up. There is obviously a significant audience that wish to discuss such topics and as long as the discussions remain civil and constructive we see no reason to ban such topics. However we do invite you to keep such topics in this forum and this forum only. We hope you understand our reasoning. One more thing... Yes... I couldn't think of a better name than ''Other'' for this forum so... if you got a better idea for a name feel free to reply. With kind regards, Marcel de Bont
  17. 1 point
    Spotless plages are no sunspot regions. Sunspots get numbered by the SWPC during their solar observation hours, so there will always be moments when there are new regions that have emerged that get numbered during the day. Only visible regions will be numbered, spotless plages are never counted. On the magnetogram you’ll always see the magnetic layout of visible regions and spotless plages.
  18. 1 point
    @Ron NL There has been solar activity many times this year. They just haven't been very note-worthy yet. I bet many of us are waiting for something to cause a decent solar storm though.
  19. 1 point
    @goldminor I'm sorry for what happened to you. Even my granddaughter had a relative of hers among the victims of this pandemic. I think this minimum will probably end in the summer of 2021, however now with the arrival of summer things should improve considerably. If he returns in the fall, we would all be prepared now, thanks to prevention. I'm sure you're right to be tested for the vaccine.
  20. 1 point
    Just to bookend my participation in this pseudo-scientific rabble, I'll point out two glaring discrepancies between your arguments and the conclusions you have come to. The first issue is that the virus typically survives in an infected person's body for, on average, 14 days. This means that it wouldn't take much more than a matter of months for a civilization to collectively be exposed to the virus and develop antibodies within the individuals therein. The second issue is speaking of the correlation between the solar cycle and the mortality rate of the virus in strong denial of the immune responses within a civilization that are taking place at the same time. This is a bias which has clearly made you blind to more likely possibilities and drives you desperately to prove, armed only with correlative data alone, that it is not how living organisms combat specific strains of viruses but instead the incidence of cosmic rays above an observed average. In short, what causes a pandemic is a rapid spread of viral infection throughout civilization, simple as that. The severity of that pandemic is determined by chemical nuances and our genetic and anatomical predisposition to effectively diminish that virus' conduciveness to reproduce in our bodies before we die of the complications it causes. A new strain of influenza, as in a virus our body has never produced the antibodies for, will always claim lives depending on factors like age, pre-existing medical conditions, and air quality. Remember that this particular virus didn't materialize in open air, it has to grow within some organism at some point before it eventually found its way into our society. I'm pretty sure the cosmic rays didnt make a difference in any way.
  21. 1 point
    I'm just a normal person asking maybe too many questions. But i know that it's very easy to see for us see the sun and earth cycles influencing our life , it's call the seasons. So it maybe not so stupid to think that the sun's intensity variation over the centuries could have some influence over ours bodies. Their is a cause/a meaning for everything.
  22. 1 point
    The drop in mortality from the Spanish flu pandemic in 1918 occurred almost synchronized across the world. This meant that the virus had mutated into a less lethal version. Being that the collapse of mortality occurred worldwide, it means that a common factor globally has made it less lethal. Probably the collapse of solar activity. This reminds me of how COVID19 appears to have changed differently, and from pre-existing strains in different nations when neutron levels rose to 2009 levels. According to a study, the COVID19 virus has mutated into different strains. Researchers from Zhejiang University in Hangzhou, China found that COVID-19 has mutated in at least 30 different variants and that the new coronavirus' ability to mutate has been underestimated. The study analyzed the coronavirus strains that had infected 11 Hangzhou patients. The researchers found that there were many more mutations in the samples than previously reported. Within the sample, officials detected over 30 mutations, of which about 60% were new. Laboratory tests also found that some mutations resulted in deadly coronavirus strains. Sars-CoV-2 has acquired mutations capable of substantially changing its pathogenicity. The study also determined that the deadliest mutations in the sample group were also found in the coronavirus strain identified most frequently in Europe. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20060160v1 In March 2020, Adriano Decarli, epidemiologist and professor of medical statistics at the University of Milan, said that between October and December last year there was a "significant" increase in the number of people hospitalized for pneumonia and influenza in areas of Milan and Lodi. He said he was unable to provide exact figures, but "hundreds" of more than usual people were brought to the hospital in the last three months of 2019 in those areas two of the most affected cities in Lombardy with pneumonia and similar symptoms. flu, and some of them were dead. This seems to highlight that this pandemic not only did not seem to have necessarily started in the People's Republic of China, but even the pre-existing virus could have mutated and spread in a different and independent way from different regions and then spread all over the world. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN21D2IG The favorable time to induce these mutations uniformly across the world seems to have manifested itself synchronously when the neutron rate of space origin rose to 2009 levels. Namely: at the levels of the H1N1 pandemic. Interestingly, WHO says that COVID19 is 10 times worse than the H1N1 Pandemic. Indeed numbers and deaths confirm it. https://www.france24.com/en/20200413-who-says-covid-19-is-10-times-more-deadly-than-swine-flu This fact if we compare it with the levels of neutrons of spatial origin of the OULU graph, it doesn't make much sense. But if we compare it to the more reliable Russian monitor, it turns out that the neutron rate has already passed the 2009 level. A fact that highlights how this solar minimum is deeper.
  23. 1 point
    The great solar recessions never have an equal duration. They are all different, however if you compare the official studies often the start-end dates are different from each other, this is because they are approximate. Also consider that they are preceded by mediocre cycles similar to solar cycle 24, or even at the minimum of Damon (although I don't understand why there is so little documentation on this solar minimum) My guess is that these prolonged low stages, followed by moderate solar cycles, and then other prolonged low stages etc. before a large solar maximum such as that of the 1960s, they are part of solar pluri-centennial depressions, followed by a secular phase of great activity. In simple words: the regular pulsations of a variable star. The great solar recessions belong to the long period of minimum activity. The great secular solar maxima at the peak of activity.
  24. 1 point
    @VoltarDark The Spanish pandemic of 1918 corresponds with a solar maximum of a relatively weak cycle. My impression is that atmospheric ionization has a primary role on the behavior of these viruses. Not just neutrons of spatial origin. Weak cycles + Solar Maxima =? High neutron levels + positive ions =?
  25. 1 point
    Anyone can attach math to their argument for the sake of sounding correct to others, but when the math itself is disproven, it would be quite difficult to justify accepting the conclusions derived from said math. "lololol" -> Doesn't exactly inspire confidence that you are mature enough to recognize this logic, nor does your conspiracy theory that the retraction of the article was "bought" for the sake of "influence". Your antagonistic and pseudo-scientific sentiments are best kept to yourself, if you value your dignity, lest you aim to give further support to the conclusions stated in the aforementioned article, ideally with math that is not arbitrary in nature(which was the case for that article.)
  26. 1 point
    A good topic for a paper! Note as you collect your data there is a difference between "number of sunspots" and "sunspot number." How scientists count sunspots and the various ways they are categorized and reported would be a great introduction in your paper.
  27. 1 point
    Hello! This information can be found in our archive. Just browse to the day you want to know the sunspot number of and you will find a lot of information of that specific date, including the sunspot number. Example: https://www.spaceweatherlive.com/en/archive/2003/10/28/dayobs
  28. 1 point
    Thank you Aeon. The point is that we dont have time ... descisions and (possibly wrong) strategies/models are choosen now and the regular virologist ...etc ...that advise the governments ...totally ignore Solar-Activity (i know that since i follow their discussions and not even one suffest to look in to it (minimal solar-activity vs virus-outbreaks) nomatter how much their collegues previously have warned for this in serious publications it seems to be to much out of theit attention-range ...so we should bring this to their attention i;lm trying very hard but was in 1 whole week not able to talk to any keyfigure to at least bring it to their attention. Most research has gone to MAXIMAL solar-activity which also causes epedemics and also electromagnetic problems. The lack of natural (UVC) protection at MINIMAL has with a few exceptions been ignored or even discussed. THEREFORE WE HAVE TO BRING THIS TO THEIR ATTENTION A.S.A.P. ...since keyfigures and modelmakers obvioulsy do not known enough about it ... by observing the soon upgoing curve (very educated prediction) they could make better models and strategies. Draw their attention to it ... and let them at least think about if they could include that knowledge. If you know any politician, scientist,press or media ...let them know ...you may refer them to me also. Today i have started a facebookgroup about this ..please join the discussion: https://www.facebook.com/groups/147312296606308/ My personal facebookpge : https://www.facebook.com/mambito.degroot
  29. 1 point
    It is clear that the current situation had been indirectly predicted. They have done an excellent job, given the large amount of data it is now quite evident that a connection actually exists. I believe we should adapt to these new conditions from now and in the future.
  30. 1 point
    Indeed, everyone is entitled to their own thoughts and ideas. How we convey them must always be at least somewhat coherent, but most importantly, respectful of others. I admit I am surprised, pleasantly of course, that this website has been allowed by the administrators to act as a community-driven source of forum and education for all things even remotely space-related. I would ask that, even if we may all see things differently at times, that the atmosphere of such discussions remains open, clean, and mature, so others feel invited in to give new, unique ideas, or simply to ask questions. Preserving the foundation of an open, educational platform on the internet where all questions are welcome(although, answers may be difficult to come by when unrelated to space weather) and all people regardless of nation are free to think and believe what they will is my own goal, which runs parallel to SWL's goal of providing live, free access to information for all who are curious. If you haven't yet, donate a small amount to aid in the maintenance of this website and development of the mobile apps, to help show appreciation for the hard work that has brought together(albeit in small portions) the aurora watching community, the seismic monitoring community, and a community of people whom generally practice alternative approaches in their research. We are all benefiting, directly or indirectly, from those who access and use this website, and mainly from the generous people who created it and welcomed us in.
  31. 0 points
    @Jesterface23 It's NOT something different ..its exactly what i'm saying ! They say "All UVC is filtered by the atmosphere"" ... but dont provide a link to a solid sientific research where they have this from And that is what they all do (copy & paste). Show me a real (recent) scientific research (peer-to-peer reviewed) where they say the same and where they also show how it was measured ....and no not some handwritten observation from 100 years old
  32. 0 points
    My point is that ... the specialists are not doing their job. 1) No-one has measured the size of covid19 yet (to determine its sensitive wavelength) 2) No-one is currently measuring levels of UVC that reach the earth ...its only assumed on old outdated info 3) No-one is measuring the full spectrum that reaches the earth.... i have not even found old measurements. And that is the end of the story ... as long as that is not done ...we are lost and just guessing so i try to find some indications myself ...which is very difficult Even with one foot in the grave ...those that could do this are not interested,if we not solve this ...you can blame it on them.
  33. 0 points
    @Christopher S. 1) You are outdated ... it was already established by various publications that virus can survive up to 9 days depending on the surface it is on. on a surface means outside a host ... verify that ... before you state wrong assumptions 2) Virus do get killed by UV ...specifically UVC ...this is a long known fact. so yes that is one of the answers to destroy virus. Yes there is a relation between UV (irradiance from the sun) and the survival of Virus its is recently being described in publications ..one of those was posted in this forum just 2 days ago. 3) Ofcourse not ... UV will not affect virus that is already inside the body .. i did not say that ! since ofcourse UV does not penetrate the body. But there is a lot of virus outside ... not hosted by anything these live in the air or surfaces those will be killed by enough levels of UV. (dose) Dont under-estimate the quantities of virus that live outside ... the virus has mutated and adapted itself to survive outside ... it can only do that because it indeed has lived outside already Its Darwin ..."survival of the fittest" In addition ..the current low solar-activity ...results in lower levels of UV(C) it helps the virus to survive (outside) longer then it would at higher levels of UV(C) 4) I have explained it again ... and there's nothing murky about it
  34. 0 points
    . @VoltarDark ..you asked for size of Covid19 ? ..its most certainly around 120 nm so the wavelength that influences it the most will be 120 nm also (max energy transfer @ resonance) This wavelength is not completely filtered by the ozone-layer ... i estimate at times still 3 to 7 % reaches the earth and that is enough to kill viruses ... with radiation its about the Dose ... a little bit for a long time is also a lot of dose Right now its way less then those 3 % to 7 % ... because of minimal solar-activity ... so way less virus is killed. Problem -1 ... Right now no-one measures levels of UVC that reach earth-surface. Problem-2 .... No-one cares to measure the exact size of covid19 (no publications) Problem-2 ... Everyone uses "'total irradiance" ... and that does not even include UVC ! As a radio-engineer and researcher (50 years experience) .. i immidiatly grasped this whole wavelength-stuff unfortunately scientists (medics /virologists) that should research this ... have no clues about this becuase they are no radiation experts so they have to copy and paste that part from others ...without researching it themselves ("yeah lets not include UVC ... they say its filtered out") ie: some-one a long time ago said UVC is 100% filtered by the ozone-layer ... and everyone simply copies that. science is good but there's a lot wrong with it also. Source: https://viralzone.expasy.org/5216
  35. 0 points
    @Vancanneyt Sander I asked a simple question ... but you gave me again a complicated answer. Im an engineer/researcher in electronics and radio-waves ... and i very well understand that those sdo-nasa pics&videos are (bandpass) filtered ... and that they show intensities of only the mentioned wavelengths. I am not talking about visible light (spectrum that humans see with their eyes) you seem to think that im talking visible light ...which is not the case. I'm observing intensities at various wavelengths ... for covid19 i would want to see 120 nm cause that should be the wavelength of intererest because covid19 itself has a size of around 120 nm (resonance) Since nasa does not show that specific wavelength .. i mainly look at 160 nm and 171 nm they are close enough to serve as an (proxy) indicator for 120 nm i also see that most other wavelengths also follow the same intensity-curve anyway. 1) The (total) solar-irradiance (earth surface or space) is not not a good enough indicator to measure possible effects on life on earth simply because this is a measurement that shows the whole mix of all wavelengths (added) together. it does not show the individual wavelenghts. ie: even if the total irradance stays the same ..individual wavelenghts can vary ...without getting noticed Its like listening to 100 radio-channels at the same time ... the result is one big useless mess .. noise and cacofonia. So you should observe individual wavelengths ...and study which has an effect on what. ... tune your radio to one channel only to be able to hear what they say Just an example : total irradiance is 100% Just an example : that total irradiance is composed of lets say: 33% UVA , 33% UVB , 33% UVC Next time you measure : total irradiance is again 100% but now the composition is: 20% UVA , 50% UVB , 30% UVC As you can see ... if you only look at total irradiance you miss the details ...and you wont even know that changes have taken place. So using: "Total Irradiance" does not tell you much ... so you have to look at specific wavelengths. So that is what i've been doing ...and i notice form the pics & vids per individual wavelenght that the difference between a quiet background ... and high-level radiation areas (both in current measurements & 11 yr cycle) vary much more then your mentioned 0.09 % variation ..its 100's to 10000's times more ! So "total iradiance" ... throw that in the wastebin ... its useless for meaningful indications. Questions: 1) What wavelengths are included in "total radiance" ? (earth surface) 2) Is there a standardized (measurent) method for total irradiance ? (earth surface) i bet they dont even include anything below 280 nm ! (earth surface) "Total radiance" ... is a useless indicator ... because it does not include all wavelengths. "Total radiance" ... is a useless indicator ... because it does not show variations of individual wavelengths.
  36. 0 points
    @Vancanneyt Sander Let me try it again , See below nasa-pic: Do you see a radiation-intensity difference of only 0,09 % between: solar-min (1996) ... and ... solar-max (2001) ? I dont ... IT'S MANY TIMES MORE ! there's at least 100 times more bright area ! (@2001) ... that is a whole lot of %%% difference ! and those brighter areas represent levels of radiation ... so either: ... your graph is wrong ...or... the picture below is wrong ... or ... i dont understand what you are trying to tell me Picture-source: https://spaceplace.nasa.gov/solar-cycles/en/
  37. 0 points
    @VoltarDark Thank you ...that confirms exactly what i'm saying for many months now ! Less Solar-activity > Less UV > More Virus and the other way around: More Solar-activity > More UV > Less Virus based on what i found now it would be better to say Less Solar-radiation > Less UV > More Virus and the other way around More Solar-radiation > More UV > Less Virus Yes you can still use the rough solar-cycle (based on sunspots) to estimate longterm radiation-levels cause the longterm variations will follow the the solar-cycle. In case of Covid19 you should look at specific the levels that affect it most certainly that would be Covid19 resonance wavelength which i estimate to be around 120nm we can assume they roughly follow the levels @ 171nm and 160 nm which are shown by sdo-nasa. Better would be if they would add/change it to also include 120 nm ... not shure if they can change that remotely i suppose they use fixed (not variable wavelength) filters on board the spacecrafts Sad that it takes so long before the "real" scientists" pick this up if you use your brains you would have understood this a long time. The problem is also that most solar-research was not for the purpose of virus-research but for radiomateurs, radio-communications, electricity-grids, satellite, gps protection ...etc so all observation equipment was obviously build for that purpose only. Anyway ... the mentioned report fails to describe where and how they got their UV-levels vs Time they also still dont mention UVC (100-280 nm) ...sinply becuase some-one 10's of years ago said that no UVC reaches the earth ...and they all copy that without having researched it themselves. Who measures UVC that reaches the earth right now ? ... exactly ... NOBODY ! And where are the measurements that show covid19's most sensitive wavelength ? its probably near 120 nm (covid19''s size) ... unfortunately nobody cares to test this Once you know that wavelength ...you simply measure the levels of that wavelength that reaches the earth and voila you have a direct indication of virus-outbreak/kill (or at least the part that the sun is responsible for) Realy i have very little respect for the scientists that dont even grasp the basics of this ... to me they suck. @Vancanneyt Sander Thanks for your reply ! That is why i came to the conclusion now ... that sunspots are not of interest for short-term/realtime observation of radiance levels ... they might be usefull for longterm solar-cycle observations though. What is important is the levels of radiation that reach the earth ... obviously the nr of sunspots is not the best indicator for that. Question: For the purpose of knowing/seeing current levels of radiation from the sun: In those sdo-nasa videos & pics ... the brighter areas/spots represent levels of radiation the brighter .. or the bigger the bright areas ... the more radiation ...correct ? I'd really like your confirmation about that YES/NO ?
  38. 0 points
    SUNSPOTS are coming now ! Check out this NASA-dashboard, you see videos from different wavelengths. Videos are from the last 48 hours and allways updated. You see the sunspots (and flares) coming in from the left-side ..in about 3 days they will be directed at earth so we will receive loads of UVC @ 1700 nm radiation which will kill virus ! ... Interesting that weather predictions for my country (NL) also show a strong temperature-peak in 3 days from now .. Check this everyday its the 1st real big sunspots since the coronacrisis started .. im amazed that no-one in the solar world (internet) talks about it (yet) or am i stupid ? https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/data/dashboard/?d=HMIB;1600;1700;0193;0171;HMIBC By the way it seems to me that these solar-flares are coming from the inside of the sun trough the sunspots since they show at the exaxct same locations .. (at least right now) or am i talking stupid again ? if that is the case ..how come this is mentioned nowhere on 10ths of solar-websites ? My opinion on websites about solar-activity in general is that they are "lame" ..and allways behind !
  39. -1 points
    So it was peer reviewed by 50 people and the editor takes it down over some mumbo gumbo lololol. Wonder what the peers that read it thought about that. Or how even nature is politicized. Just gives more ammo to the fact that money can buy influence......especially when this paper was basically mathematical in nature. Time will tell if Copernicus was right ,,,, did he take into account the wobble,,,maybe Copernicus is wrong lololol While we get record cold,,, got to keep the the global warming garbage narrative on life support. Yeah well we need only time and looks like she has the best model out there
  40. -1 points
    If you like to discuss this ..join my fb-group: Solar-Activity vs Virus-Outbreak (Scientific)
  41. -1 points
    Did any so called scientist bother to read the paper, ,let alone understand the mathematics... maybe discuss the research that was done Oh by the way the idiotic excuse for the retraction had nothing to do with the data and interpretation of the data... again maybe read the paper before you parrot what ever you FEEL JIVES WITH YOUR DOGMA.
  42. -1 points
    @VoltarDark Maybe English isn't perfect, and it wouldn't surprise me if I didn't make myself understood. Spare me your street boy sarcasm. What I want to point out is that the change in pandemic mortality has not been localized to a few nations, but has been global.
  43. -1 points
    Ok ... i got it now 😉 > For the purpose of realtime pandemic vs solar-activity research < .. ...the sunspot-counters are useless ! they are: * not sensitve enough , * not detailed enough , * to slow , * to much averaged ... or simply * bad. i'm seeing solar-activity for 3 days going up now ... on all wavelengths on all sdo nasa-videos & pics. My opinion: If you want to see the real solaractivity that influences life on earth you should look at the radiation-levels (and their spots) and not at the sunspot counters ! Radiation levels you can see here : https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/data/dashboard/?d=HMIB;1600;1700;0193;0171;HMIBC the brighter the more radiation ... as you can see all wavelengths show the same locations. Dont tell me that is not solar-activity ! ... or ? Once again: For the purpose relating the sun to pandemics ... the radiation is what will influence earth so why not look at those directly ... skip the sunspots !!!!!! PS) We need a (better) real solar-activity counter ... one that measures and displays the intensity of (all/some) radiation-wavelengths (realtime) On a website displayed as a Counter or a graphic: Wavelengths vs Time 24h/Week/Month/Year ... etc. That is the most usefull right now.
  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you also agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.