Difference between flare, CME and SPEs

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jairo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Difference
AI Thread Summary
Coronal mass ejections (CMEs) and solar flares are distinct phenomena that can lead to solar particle events (SPEs), with CMEs emitting particles at about 1,000 km/s and flares producing particles near light speed. While flares are often associated with higher radiation doses during SPEs, CMEs generally pose a lower risk. The X-ray emissions from flares are not a significant concern for individuals in deep space, particularly beyond the Van Allen belts, although they can damage satellites in Earth's atmosphere. The discussion also touches on the classification of solar flares, specifically the Helen Dodson Prince classification, which may help assess the danger to astronauts. Overall, understanding the differences between these solar events is crucial for evaluating risks in space.
Jairo
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I read that coronal mass ejections and flares are independent things that can cause solar particle events. The particles emitted by the first travels at about 1,000km/s and can reach us in days, while the particles emitted by the last travels at near light speed and can reach us in minutes. Besides that, as I noticed that the most dangerous SPEs are often associated with flares, I suppose CMEs offer smaller radiation doses in average.

And according with what I read, I suppose that the X-ray emission of the flare is not a concern for someone in deep space, when compared with the SPE it can produce. I would like to confirm those things.

I have found great information about equivalent doses for galactic cosmic rays and some major SPEs of the past, but info on internet is somewhat oversimplified when the matter is to tell the differences between flares, CMEs, SPEs, and the risk each one offers to someone in deep space, considering their strength and likeliness to happen.

Thanks.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
You should try to define what you mean by "deep space". Of course the X-ray content of very strong flares would be damaging to a person in Earth if that person wouldn't be protected by Earth's athmosphere. In fact, communication satellites are damaged when a malign flare occurs. But the X-ray content of solar flares will not affect to a person "in deep space" if "deep space" means for example, a comoving radial distance of 20 Gly

The strongest solar flare ever recorded was rated as X28, and ocurred in 2003
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/xtreme_flare_031105.html

Neutron stars can also produce flares. Neutron star flares are now candidates to mini GRBs
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0502052
 
Last edited:
By deep space I mean outside Van Allen belts.

I would like to add one more question: I have heard about the Helen Dodson Prince classification for flares,

http://ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/SOLAR/ftpsolarflares.html#cfi
(botton of the page)

wich can range from 1 to 17. It takes several new features in account if compared with the usual 1-8A W/m2 flux. I´m interested in flares which might be dangerous to astronauts. Is that classification a good one for that matter? What would be a "malign flare" in that scale?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can anyone **** ten times in fifteen hours?
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top