Did a solar flare cause tunguska?

  • Thread starter Thread starter battery
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cause Solar
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the hypothesis that a solar flare may have caused the Tunguska event, which devastated a large area of forest in Russia. Participants explore various theories regarding the nature of solar flares and their potential impact on Earth, contrasting these ideas with the more widely accepted explanation of a meteoroid explosion.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that a solar flare could be responsible for the Tunguska event, questioning how such an event might occur.
  • Others argue that the prevailing belief is that a meteoroid exploded in the atmosphere, dismissing the solar flare hypothesis.
  • A participant speculates that gas ejected from the sun could cool and form a stable ball of charged particles that might heat up as it enters the atmosphere, similar to a meteor.
  • Another participant challenges this idea, stating that it would not be possible for such a ball of gas to exist and remain stable under the conditions described.
  • Some participants discuss the concept of ball lightning and its potential relation to the Tunguska event, suggesting that electromagnetic or strong force interactions could play a role.
  • A later reply questions the feasibility of a solar flare contracting into a ball and the necessary mass and density required to cause destruction similar to that of a meteoroid.
  • One participant notes that overly speculative posts violate forum guidelines, indicating a concern for maintaining a focus on more grounded theories.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the cause of the Tunguska event, with multiple competing views presented. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus reached regarding the role of solar flares versus meteoroids.

Contextual Notes

Some claims made in the discussion rely on speculative scenarios regarding the behavior of charged particles and the nature of solar flares, which may not be fully supported by current scientific understanding.

battery
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Did a solar flare cause tunguska and devestate a huge area of forest in Russia?
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
Why do you think a solar flare could be responsible? How could one bring about what happened?
 
matthyaouw said:
Why do you think a solar flare could be responsible? How could one bring about what happened?


Watching quasi-scientific "documentaries" on cable-TV causes solar flares to impact the earth. With devasting explosive power.

Seriously, Matt - where do you think most of these non-standard ideas come from? It is not from reading Scientific American. It is from people who want to know about things, but do not know where to look, so they turn to tabloid TV. Or whatever is the local equivalent. And they are not science trained at all so they cannot tell hokum from real science.
 
I asked because if gas is ejected from the sun I thought it might cool on its way to earth
(and be held together as a ball by electric charges in the form of ions) and then heat up similar to a meteor as it fell through the Earth's atmosphere.
 
battery said:
... if gas is ejected from the sun I thought it might cool on its way to Earth and be held together as a ball by electric charges in the form of ions and then heat up similar to a meteor as it fell through the Earth's atmosphere...
Um.. No. I don't think that would be possible.
 
g33kski11z said:
Um.. No. I don't think that would be possible.

Some people say they have seen ball lightning on the Earth which is not supposed to be possible.I think the question is: is it possible to heat a ball of gas with a weak gravitational filed - a small mass -to a very high temperature and for that ball to be stable over a long period of time.The answer could be yes if either:

(a) the ball is essentially electromagnetic in nature and made of regions of high negative charge density separated and insulated ( insulated so charges don't come together quickly and form neutral atoms or molecules )from regions of high positive charge density.

(b) the ball is made of quarks held together by the strong force

Option (a) is most likely because it would require less energy input and there is some anecdotal evidence from witnesses around the world for ball lightning and also there is the phenomenon ( on a small scale of about 10^-6 metres ) of sonoluminescence in which the concentration of sound energy can cause a very high temperature bubble to form -
perhaps thunder causes ball lightning to form similarly on a larger scale.
 
Last edited:
battery said:
Some people say they have seen ball lightning on the Earth which is not supposed to be possible.I think the question is: is it possible to heat a ball of gas with a weak gravitational filed - a small mass -to a very high temperature and for that ball to be stable over a long period of time.The answer could be yes if either:

(a) the ball is essentially electromagnetic in nature and made of regions of high negative charge density separated and insulated ( insulated so charges don't come together quickly and form neutral atoms or molecules )from regions of high positive charge density.

(b) the ball is made of quarks held together by the strong force

QUOTE]

A ball of quarks would be potentially very energetic and explosive if the quarks became pions on hitting the Earth's atmosphere, and the pions then decayed into photons ( a well established decay mode for pions).
 
First, how would this solar falre after cooling down contract into a ball? Second, how large and dense would a giant ball of charged particles have to be to create the frictional energy to cause the destruction of Tunguska?

I'd say that a contracting solar flare is likely to not happen and if it could the giant ball would need to have roughly the same mass and density of a meteor to cause the destruction.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
7K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K