Jump to content
Aeon

Did the historic solar minimum cause the pandemic?

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

@Jesterface ... there was only one noteworthy a few weeks ago

that was the dual polarity one (cycle 24+25)  .. lets wait and see if more shows up when it has rotated more.

Edited by Ron NL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

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.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Ron NL
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 uren geleden, Ron NL zei:

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 ?  ;)   

Small sunspots with magnetic alpha or beta layout only produce very minor activity. Spotless plages do not produce activity, they just appear as bright zones on the Sun with neglectible activity (in these solar quiet conditions it can sometimes reflect a bit on the x-ray data but still not noteworthy). We speak of higher solar activity with sunspot regions with a stronger magnetic layout that's able to produces stronger activity. The number of spots doesn't say much about their complexity, but the more spots on the disk and the more spots in an active region, the magnetic complexity of those regions increases with a stronger likehood of producing solar flares and strong solar activity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@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 ?

 

Edited by Ron NL
  • Thanks 1
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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%.totalsolarirradiance2017.png

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Confinement=less pollution so it help in mega-cities.

That also tell me that next time we reach that trigger level should be next fall from September to February. Be prepared.

The inclination matter.

Thanks folks, keep that good science coming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@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  ;)  

spacer.png

Picture-source:   https://spaceplace.nasa.gov/solar-cycles/en/

Edited by Ron NL
  • Thanks 1
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said, the images of SDO and SOHO have filters that block 99,9% of the light in various wavelengths of the spectrum. The visible light is filtered out completely to reveal the photosphere and chromosphere (depending on the filter). With some filters, parts seem more bright but because the light was already filtered out for more than 99.9%, the difference between solar minimum and solar maximum is in terms of solar irradiance very very low. 
in the graph I posted you see the solar irradiance (without filters) as measured by several satellites and that confirms solar irradiance is only 0,09% higher in solar max. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aeon said:

but I believe there are at least three other epidemics that should be paid attention to.

 

Which one are you refering to ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

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...

Edited by VoltarDark
Mistakes...
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not doubt the role of ultraviolet radiation in contrasting pathogens.
However, what I disagree with is the fact that it is considered a central factor when there are clearly viruses that are able to resist.
As for algae, I'm not sure, but I know that studies have shown that space radiation increases the growth of trees.
So why not other types of vegetation?


https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.03060.x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.
 
 
 
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@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. 

 

Edited by Ron NL
  • Thanks 1
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Different plant's type respond differently to specific wavelength so germs «should» behave the same.

It's the pattern/the relationship that we must find. The color (related to WL) ? the size ? ?

Alone, we mean nothing, we can do nothing. But acting as humanity, we can go to the Moon, find the buildings block of matter etc.

We can do it !!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the effect the solar minimum  has on the earth's magnetic field, low solar activity means a weak magnetic field which in turn let's in not just cosmic Ray's but possibly other microscopic life from outer space, panspermia is a real possibility especially with a weak magnetic field, which we have. Pabdenics usually follow solar minimum patterns so somethings happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I find it an impossible theory.
Maybe tardigrade, but very difficult.

-Temperature lower than - 200 C.
- Solar radiation from flare and solar wind.
-Radiation of space.
- Absence of water or forms of feeding.
* Even if they are hibernated, in these conditions, can they last for years, centuries, millennia, millions of years?
-The atmosphere they find compatible?
-Resistance to the thermosphere.
-Resistance to other microbial life forms?

That's why I'm so skeptical.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not an big ice comet like the one that could have caused the deluge event without  leaving a trace of impact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/13/2020 at 7:10 AM, Aeon said:

@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 =?

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

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@VoltarDarkWhat kind of ice?
They seem to me to be somewhat vague terms when describing comets in this way.

@Rob TodaroThe effects as a whole would be unpleasant, we can move on to a period of multiple epidemics of various epidemics (historical data).
In 1918 two pandemics occurred: lethargic encephalitis, Spanish flu.
 

Edited by Aeon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Iceberg's grad ice ? Frozen salted water...Add  dust and rock to the mix.

What about Spores ?.

So its like : «Germs» have worst wavelength and best one and each wavelength can have it's own solar minimal «condition» while another wavelength is having a different fluctuation.

 Is there a correlation between physical size and wavelength? physical size-wavelength resonance is a  bold start. Resonance is key to many mysteries...

Gravitational resonance is then related to gravity wavelength and the size of a celestial body. Logic if the first is true...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • 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.