> SWPC Forecasters have issued G3 (Strong) Geomagnetic Storm Watches for 04-06 October due to a pair of coronal mass ejections that are anticipated to arrive over the course of the next three UTC days. Stay tuned for updates as we monitor this activity!
> The solar flare emanated from the sunspot group AR3842, which has made headlines before. On Oct. 1, the same sunspot region fired off a powerful X7.1 solar flare and unleashed a coronal mass ejection (CME) — a plume of plasma and magnetic field — which is currently barreling toward Earth. That incoming CME is expected to hit Earth between Oct. 3 and Oct. 5, possibly triggering widespread auroras.
I actually just saw an aurora for the first time in my life a few months ago in Oregon, where they're hardly ever visible. It was quite a sight. Maybe I'll get to see them again.
Holy cow that's an insane website design. So, where exactly do I see the tracking? Is it below the grift of a 3D printed moon? Is it near the ads for casinos. Or maybe the mood rings?
This isn't a bitch about ads. It's I honestly cannot easily find the actual information the site is supposedly hosting.
There's an information/status bar on the left. There's a header on top with important info/ current events. Then it's kind of in blogpost format. And if you ever want to know what info was there last year, there's an archive viewer on the top right, that actually shows the page just like it was, at any date!
I spent way too long trying to find basic info before I gave up on that site. The two questions I was hoping to see:
1. When will it be the strongest
2. What latitudes should expect to see auroras.
That site design is awesome. That level of information density is exactly what makes a good site. The information is right in the front, ads are off to the side. It's basically like a newspaper. Which is great for information.
My 'local' page is [1] which is fairly simple but likely has only the information you're interested in, nothing else and none of that side-scrolling bullshit you need to do to see the forecasts on the https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ page.
Weird as in self-hosting? This is what ads should be like instead of 3rd party auction data harvesting non-sense. It's just some people have no concept of couth, or less is more, or self control. There's no stopping bad taste.
They're not using an automated ad service of any kind they have manually put these ads in the source code of their web page. We all see the same ads.
I prefer it, these ads mean something to the people that run the site, they put some effort into putting them there and presumably purchasing the products benefits the organisation in some way.
> these ads mean something to the people that run the site
I wouldn't go that far. They mean something as in somebody was willing to spend money, so this is what they get in return. Just look at the randomness of the types of ads. I doubt there was any "qualifying" of the ads other than did the check clear.
For a couple years I had a process running on a PC without ECC that simply filled a large buffer with a bit pattern that was 50% ones and 50% zeros, and then periodically scanned the buffer for changes. It never found a changed bit.
I used a 2008 Mac Pro at work and a 2009 Mac Pro at home for several years. They had ECC memory. I would periodically check the RAM status and I never saw anything that said an error had been corrected.
For that test with the big buffer I don't remember how big a buffer I used, but I remember my calculations based on the error rate data I could find said that with the size buffer I was using I should have seen a few errors per year.
But I think all the error rate data I found was from servers with a lot of RAM and located in data centers. I wonder if that environment is more prone to RAM errors than the environment of the typical home computer?
A buffer is much too small to catch any errors, unless you dedicate more than half of your installed memory to it.
Typical memory rates for a computer with only 8 to 32 GB of DRAM might be of at most a few errors per year when new. For some aged memory modules, after several years of use, the error rate can increase a lot and it can become noticeable. For myself this has been the main benefit of ECC, the ability to detect early the memory modules that must be replaced to avoid data corruption.
Besides the errors from cosmic radiation, which depend mainly on the altitude of the location, there are also errors caused by electrical noise from the environment. The latter may be more frequent in data centers and in industrial computers.
I found my code, and it looks like I was using 128 MB. This was around 2005.
A study done [1] at Google based on 2.5 years of observations of their servers, first published in 2009, found error rates from 25000-70000 errors per billion device hours per Mb. That would put the time Google was doing the study in the right era for when I did my test.
Based on that I would expect to see about 1 error per 40 hours in a 128 MB buffer if the buffer was on a Google server. I suppose that supports the theory that the data center environment is a lot more error prone than my home environment was.
Memory sizes are constantly growing, as semiconductor feature sizes continue to shrink. It stands to reason that random energetic photons (gamma rays, etc.) have a higher chance of flipping a bit on modern memory than on stuff from 15 years ago.
As long as you're not in space you should be fine. If you are on the ISS, then you have some other experts you can consult, us randos on HN won't be able to help you much.
More serious answer: No risk for people, not even astronauts based on the current projections for the associated solar radiation storm (beyond the normal increased exposure they get up there). We'll almost certainly all have some trouble with GPS this weekend, and the folks maintaining satellites will have their hands full. Other RF systems will be disrupted at times this weekend.
Yes but you have to be an astronout in the outer space without enough added protection for the increase of radiation. Or maybe some increased exposure for high altitude flights near the poles. Other than that earth's atmosphere would make it that not enough exposure will reach the surface of the earth. Well things would be different for indirect harm because of satellite and signal failures. They could even cause disruption for power grid. But I think most of the protection for these systems in place take solar flares into account. So probably the effects will be minimal.
If we ever colonise Mars, will the colonies be more or less vulnerable to solar flares than Earth? Not that I know anything this subject, but my understanding is that Mars has a much thinner atmosphere than Earth, and no magnetosphere. Would that make solar flares more dangerous? Or would the colonists be protected by whatever habitat is protecting them from everything else on Mars?
What about electronic equipment that sits outside the human-habitable zones? Could it be fried by a solar flare that would be relatively harmless on Earth?
It woud need to be planned heavily and these Colonies would need to dig underground for protections during strong solar flares. Another option will be to use shields around the Colonies. Otherwise the short exposure will lead to traditions sickness which could lead to many complications. The longer exposure however would lead to cancer due to severe damage to tissues.
Also protecting electronics would be much harder. Your ability to do anything except digging during these times will be limited.
It's my understanding that a Carrington event would destroy the bulk of the electrical grid on the side of earth facing the sun at the time. But would be pleased to hear how I'm wrong!
It depends on how much preparation the power grid in different places would have. I think the even will not be catastrophic but will cause a lot of damage and disruption. Mainly because we will lose satellite communication system and GPS systems and there will be at least localized problems with the grid system in different parts of the world.
That's a good world model until it's not. There was an HN article on this some months ago, I can't remember what keywords the title used to find it again though
No warnings at NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center.[1]
No warnings on PJM grid dashboard.
Probably not going to be a problem.
[1] https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/
Perhaps you checked a few minutes too soon?
> SWPC Forecasters have issued G3 (Strong) Geomagnetic Storm Watches for 04-06 October due to a pair of coronal mass ejections that are anticipated to arrive over the course of the next three UTC days. Stay tuned for updates as we monitor this activity!
Is a UTC day a different length to a common solar day? At this level of pre soon leap seconds and even sidereal day difference makes no difference
Yes, but they probably mean "the next 72 hours from right now given in UTC".
Or maybe they mean "day" as starting from UTC midnight.
Maybe they’re contrasting with sidereal days?
I'd guess that's actually more likely. Interesting bit of jargon.
Which would be the same as the next 72 hours in PST
Any new auroras?
The aurora forecast is looking good
https://www.gi.alaska.edu/monitors/aurora-forecast
> The solar flare emanated from the sunspot group AR3842, which has made headlines before. On Oct. 1, the same sunspot region fired off a powerful X7.1 solar flare and unleashed a coronal mass ejection (CME) — a plume of plasma and magnetic field — which is currently barreling toward Earth. That incoming CME is expected to hit Earth between Oct. 3 and Oct. 5, possibly triggering widespread auroras.
I actually just saw an aurora for the first time in my life a few months ago in Oregon, where they're hardly ever visible. It was quite a sight. Maybe I'll get to see them again.
Track the impacts on https://www.spaceweather.com/
Thanks, I'll add it to my bookmarks.
Holy cow that's an insane website design. So, where exactly do I see the tracking? Is it below the grift of a 3D printed moon? Is it near the ads for casinos. Or maybe the mood rings?
This isn't a bitch about ads. It's I honestly cannot easily find the actual information the site is supposedly hosting.
There's an information/status bar on the left. There's a header on top with important info/ current events. Then it's kind of in blogpost format. And if you ever want to know what info was there last year, there's an archive viewer on the top right, that actually shows the page just like it was, at any date!
I spent way too long trying to find basic info before I gave up on that site. The two questions I was hoping to see: 1. When will it be the strongest 2. What latitudes should expect to see auroras.
The first question is answered by: https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/3-day-forecast (Strongest at Fri 2100-0000 UTC)
That site design is awesome. That level of information density is exactly what makes a good site. The information is right in the front, ads are off to the side. It's basically like a newspaper. Which is great for information.
And it loads really fast. Slow-ass loading (and things jumping around as the ads load) are what really drives me to ad blockers.
Looks good to me even on Netscape 4.7.
https://www.w6rz.net/netscape.png
Best viewed at 640x480. That way, there's no extra space to place those ads
Any constraint is a driving force for art. I'd love to see creative pixel-art ads.
How do we call the equivalent of steam-pubk aesthetics but where tech has stopped on pixel art instead of steam?
Insane? It's pretty typical for an early 2000s era site.
My 'local' page is [1] which is fairly simple but likely has only the information you're interested in, nothing else and none of that side-scrolling bullshit you need to do to see the forecasts on the https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ page.
[1] https://www.sws.bom.gov.au/
I love the design! It has heart.
You've just been sheltered by bootstrap for the last 10 years. All science on the web is 'fun' like this.
Woah, they must be doing something weird to get past ad blockers. This is an outrageous monstrosity of a website
Weird as in self-hosting? This is what ads should be like instead of 3rd party auction data harvesting non-sense. It's just some people have no concept of couth, or less is more, or self control. There's no stopping bad taste.
They're not using an automated ad service of any kind they have manually put these ads in the source code of their web page. We all see the same ads.
I prefer it, these ads mean something to the people that run the site, they put some effort into putting them there and presumably purchasing the products benefits the organisation in some way.
They also have a no AI disclaimer at the top.
> these ads mean something to the people that run the site
I wouldn't go that far. They mean something as in somebody was willing to spend money, so this is what they get in return. Just look at the randomness of the types of ads. I doubt there was any "qualifying" of the ads other than did the check clear.
I hope you have ECC memory! :-)
H've never hAd any issues wiphout ECC.
That you know about... ;-)
For a couple years I had a process running on a PC without ECC that simply filled a large buffer with a bit pattern that was 50% ones and 50% zeros, and then periodically scanned the buffer for changes. It never found a changed bit.
I used a 2008 Mac Pro at work and a 2009 Mac Pro at home for several years. They had ECC memory. I would periodically check the RAM status and I never saw anything that said an error had been corrected.
For that test with the big buffer I don't remember how big a buffer I used, but I remember my calculations based on the error rate data I could find said that with the size buffer I was using I should have seen a few errors per year.
But I think all the error rate data I found was from servers with a lot of RAM and located in data centers. I wonder if that environment is more prone to RAM errors than the environment of the typical home computer?
A buffer is much too small to catch any errors, unless you dedicate more than half of your installed memory to it.
Typical memory rates for a computer with only 8 to 32 GB of DRAM might be of at most a few errors per year when new. For some aged memory modules, after several years of use, the error rate can increase a lot and it can become noticeable. For myself this has been the main benefit of ECC, the ability to detect early the memory modules that must be replaced to avoid data corruption.
Besides the errors from cosmic radiation, which depend mainly on the altitude of the location, there are also errors caused by electrical noise from the environment. The latter may be more frequent in data centers and in industrial computers.
I found my code, and it looks like I was using 128 MB. This was around 2005.
A study done [1] at Google based on 2.5 years of observations of their servers, first published in 2009, found error rates from 25000-70000 errors per billion device hours per Mb. That would put the time Google was doing the study in the right era for when I did my test.
Based on that I would expect to see about 1 error per 40 hours in a 128 MB buffer if the buffer was on a Google server. I suppose that supports the theory that the data center environment is a lot more error prone than my home environment was.
[1] https://cacm.acm.org/research/dram-errors-in-the-wild/
Memory sizes are constantly growing, as semiconductor feature sizes continue to shrink. It stands to reason that random energetic photons (gamma rays, etc.) have a higher chance of flipping a bit on modern memory than on stuff from 15 years ago.
Recent/relevant XKCD about these kinds of things
https://xkcd.com/2979/
Does this have any effect on the human body? Is this exposure measurably damaging for people?
As long as you're not in space you should be fine. If you are on the ISS, then you have some other experts you can consult, us randos on HN won't be able to help you much.
This guy edge-cases
I would not be surprised if some space folk frequent this site.
I work on space weather stuff... but only on it's impact to satellite orbits, not impact to humans, sorry!
https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/noaa-scales-explanation
https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/
More serious answer: No risk for people, not even astronauts based on the current projections for the associated solar radiation storm (beyond the normal increased exposure they get up there). We'll almost certainly all have some trouble with GPS this weekend, and the folks maintaining satellites will have their hands full. Other RF systems will be disrupted at times this weekend.
> us randos on HN won't be able to help you much.
and then he did it anyway
Yes but you have to be an astronout in the outer space without enough added protection for the increase of radiation. Or maybe some increased exposure for high altitude flights near the poles. Other than that earth's atmosphere would make it that not enough exposure will reach the surface of the earth. Well things would be different for indirect harm because of satellite and signal failures. They could even cause disruption for power grid. But I think most of the protection for these systems in place take solar flares into account. So probably the effects will be minimal.
If we ever colonise Mars, will the colonies be more or less vulnerable to solar flares than Earth? Not that I know anything this subject, but my understanding is that Mars has a much thinner atmosphere than Earth, and no magnetosphere. Would that make solar flares more dangerous? Or would the colonists be protected by whatever habitat is protecting them from everything else on Mars?
What about electronic equipment that sits outside the human-habitable zones? Could it be fried by a solar flare that would be relatively harmless on Earth?
It woud need to be planned heavily and these Colonies would need to dig underground for protections during strong solar flares. Another option will be to use shields around the Colonies. Otherwise the short exposure will lead to traditions sickness which could lead to many complications. The longer exposure however would lead to cancer due to severe damage to tissues.
Also protecting electronics would be much harder. Your ability to do anything except digging during these times will be limited.
It's my understanding that a Carrington event would destroy the bulk of the electrical grid on the side of earth facing the sun at the time. But would be pleased to hear how I'm wrong!
It depends on how much preparation the power grid in different places would have. I think the even will not be catastrophic but will cause a lot of damage and disruption. Mainly because we will lose satellite communication system and GPS systems and there will be at least localized problems with the grid system in different parts of the world.
[flagged]
Prediction: Absolutely nothing significant will happen here.
Nothing ever happens
That's a good world model until it's not. There was an HN article on this some months ago, I can't remember what keywords the title used to find it again though