CME's, active regions and high energy flares

[Michael Mozina]

Are you saying there will not be a CME observed during that time? That's a testable prediction too,

I have no idea whether there will be an EM flare driven CME during the next three hours, but it takes awhile for such events to be seen in LASCO and COR images. Your odds are approximately 1 in 8 that a CME will occur during any three hour window. If you picked a side and/or a quadrant (front or back), your "guess' would become more impressive.

I don't know how to identify one. But I know that I don't know. I also know that you don't know and that you don't know that you don't know.

Leaves us in a bit of a bind, doesn't it?

It only leaves you in the blind. I already know how to predict them and I promise you that I'll do it again.

 

[D'rok]

No, you didn't. You cited *A* source which relates to a SPECIFIC point in the solar cycle which is unrelated to what's going on today.

I cited two articles Michael. Try to keep up. You could even read them if you were so inclined.

I'm not asking you to trust me, I'm asking you to do your homework! Use that link to the STEREO imags and watch both COR2 images for a week or two and count the number of CME's you come up with. It's nowhere near 5 a day, let alone 5 a day *PER ACTIVE REGION* as you seem to believe.

I don't believe anything on this issue other than my faith in your incompetence. I cited two articles that have conflicting information. Neither of them agree with you, by the way.

 

[Michael Mozina]

I'm not going by a mathematical abstraction (average is a mathematical abstraction? Jesus Michael, you've really got math issues), I'm going by what Universe Today and NASA say.

No you are NOT. They were talking about the ACTIVE cycle of the sun and we aren't even close.

 

[D'rok]

To posters that aren't named Mozina:

Just how many CMEs per day on average should we expect in active regions right now?

 

[GeeMack]

It would be a little difficult to observe something on a side we can't see. Don't you agree?

Actually by using the science of helioseismology, another area of legitimate science that Michael simply does not possess the qualifications to understand, we can image the far side of the Sun. We can "see" solar activity before it comes around to the facing side, far in advance of Michael's method, which of course is to look at an area of existing activity and "predict" there will be more activity in that area.

 

[Michael Mozina]

The frequency of ejections depends on the phase of the solar cycle: from about one every other day near solar minimum to 5–6 per day near solar maximum.

FYI, there is the quote from YOUR link. It doesn't say 5 per day PER ACTIVE REGION, it simply says five to six per day at MAXIMUM for the entire sun. We are not even at maximum, nor are we even close to it in terms of the number of CME's a day we're SEEING in satellite images *THIS WEEK*.

 

[Michael Mozina]

To posters that aren't named Mozina:

Just how many CMEs per day on average should we expect in active regions right now?

Less than one. There are one or two CME's per day *MAXIMUM* right now, and typically there are more than two active regions on the sun at any given time during this part of the solar cycle.

 

[D'rok]

Actually by using the science of helioseismology, another area of legitimate science that Michael simply does not possess the qualifications to understand, we can image the far side of the Sun. We can "see" solar activity before it comes around to the facing side, far in advance of Michael's method, which of course is to look at an area of existing activity and "predict" there will be more activity in that area.

Thanks. I should have remembered about helioseismology from previous lurking.

 

[Tubbythin]

Ok, so we have about 1 CME a day happening on average and I picked a specific region (we'll just go with a quadrant for now). What are the odds?

Do we? I thought we had 5 or 6.

There are 24 hours in a day and we'll divide that by 3 hours giving us a 1 in 8 shot of guessing the right time of the day for that CME to occur.

If the events are independent and the average rate is 1 per day then the probability of getting at least one flare in 3 hours is actually 0.1175. If, on the other hand the rate is 5 per day then the probability goes up to 0.465.

Since it can happen on either side of the sun, that's a one in sixteen shot at picking *THIS* side of the sun correctly.

Without checking the references, this is somewhat dubious. You have to check where your rates are calculated from.

I also isolated the CME to the lower left section of this side of the sun, so now were up to at least a 1 in 64 chance of hitting that window and that quadrant on this side of the sun.

Err, no. You're assuming that all regions are equally likely. This is clearly completely wrong.

There's less than a two percent chance of "guessing" it correctly, maybe three percent if we bumped the number of CME's to 2 a day. Is that statistically significant enough for you?

Well, since your numbers are wrong (apart from the small matter of claiming a statistically significant result from a single data point), no.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Do we? I thought we had 5 or 6.

Which is *EXACTLY* why you folks fail to grasp anything. You always begin with a host of mathematical assumptions that aren't even close to reality. Go over to the STEREO images and find me even one day out of the last 60 that had 5 CME's in a day.

 

[Tubbythin]

The question is "Do you"?

Well... err... to a degree. I would certainly check my working with a good text book before I went making any claims. I'm defo not a statistics whizz.

 

[D'rok]

FYI, there is the quote from YOUR link. It doesn't say 5 per day PER ACTIVE REGION, it simply says five to six per day at MAXIMUM for the entire sun. We are not even at maximum, nor are we even close to it in terms of the number of CME's a day we're SEEING in satellite images *THIS WEEK*.

I grant that it is not claming 5-6 per active region. That was a misstatement on my part.

Unfortunately, neither article quantifies what "near" solar maximum means. It's approx one year away. When will it be "near"?

 

[Michael Mozina]

Are you a poster not named Mozina?

Why do you need someone to tell you when I told you how to count them for yourself? Start with the STEREO data on the 11th, watch the CME occur in COR2 Ahead and Behind, and work your way backwards. You won't find any days with 5-6 CME's in the STEREO data. I don't think it's even been up in space for a whole cycle yet.

 

[Michael Mozina]

I grant that it is not claming 5-6 per active region. That was a misstatement on my part.

Unfortunately, neither article quantifies what "near" solar maximum means. It's approx one year away. When will it be "near"?

D'rok, the only way to KNOW how many CME's happen per day this week is to COUNT them.

 

[GeeMack]

No you are NOT. They were talking about the ACTIVE cycle of the sun and we aren't even close.

Except that the "peak of the next sunspot cycle will come in late 2011 or early 2012", which is only a year away. But since you aren't able to demonstrate that you have the qualifications to understand math at the level of a typical 10 year old child, your use of the phrase, "we aren't even close," can't possibly mean anything quantitative, and is therefore another of your many arguments comprised of meaningless gibberish.

 

[Tubbythin]

Which is *EXACTLY* why you folks fail to grasp anything. You always begin with a host of mathematical assumptions that aren't even close to reality. Go over to the STEREO images and find me even one day out of the last 60 that had 5 CME's in a day.

Actually, no we don't, I was just looking at a previously quoted source. It is up to you to show us that the rate is around 1 per day and that they are uncorrelated. Regardless, your statistical analysis was wrong.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Except that the "peak of the next sunspot cycle will come in late 2011 or early 2012", which is only a year away.

So what? This has been one of THE slowest cycles on record and we're still a year away!

But since you aren't able to demonstrate that you have the qualifications to understand math at the level of a typical 10 year old child,

Of course I did what you can't do, and any child can *COUNT* CME's in COR/LASCO images and see that you don't have a clue what your talking about.

Your grasp of solar physics is so pathetically flawed and useless that you can't even do what you claim a typical 10 year old can do. Predict a CME for us in some quadrant GM and show us how easy it is.

 

[Tubbythin]

Why do you need someone to tell you when I told you how to count them for yourself?

You really don't get this science malarkey do you? The idea is that you are supposed to be showing us the predictive power of your model. It is thus up to you and you alone to provide the evidence. Telling everybody you're right doesn't cut it. Telling others to do your work for you doesn't cut it either.

 

[Michael Mozina]

Actually, no we don't, I was just looking at a previously quoted source.

Your previously quoted source has *ABSOLUTELY NOTHING* to do with the present moment and the number of CME's occuring per day during *THIS WEEK*. It is therefor another perfect example of USELESS math and math that is completely unrelated to solar physics in the present moment. FYI I actually COUNTED them, but you go right ahead and stick to a quote that isn't even relevant today since you don't want to embrace reality *TODAY*.

 

[Michael Mozina]

You really don't get this science malarkey do you? The idea is that you are supposed to be showing us the predictive power of your model. It is thus up to you and you alone to provide the evidence. Telling everybody you're right doesn't cut it. Telling others to do your work for you doesn't cut it either.

I just computed the odds of guessing correctly for you based on statics that are relevant *TODAY* not at some distant (year away) point in the future. What you're doing is "fudging the numbers" to suit yourself and your ignoring the real "science malarkey" entirely.