How Is Non-Thermal Radiation from the Sun Detected?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter skeptic2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Radiation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of non-thermal radiation from the Sun, specifically its definition, detection methods, and the validity of a related study. Participants explore the nature of non-thermal radiation and its distinction from thermal radiation, as well as the implications of different types of radiation in the electromagnetic spectrum.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants seek clarification on what constitutes non-thermal radiation and how it can be detected, referencing a 2007 article for context.
  • One participant expresses skepticism about the study's merit, suggesting it may have been overhyped and lacks substantial references beyond its initial publication.
  • Another participant discusses the semantics of thermal versus non-thermal radiation, noting that all electromagnetic radiation carries energy relative to its frequency, with examples like microwave energy and gamma rays.
  • A participant highlights the distinction between electromagnetic rays and other types of rays, specifically noting that cosmic rays are charged subatomic particles and not electromagnetic radiation, emphasizing their potential dangers.
  • There is a mention of the energy equivalence of cosmic rays compared to everyday objects, prompting a reflection on the implications of energy and mass as described by E=mc².

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity of the study or the definitions of non-thermal radiation, with differing views on its significance and the clarity of terminology used in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations include the lack of detailed definitions for non-thermal radiation and the potential ambiguity in the terminology surrounding different types of radiation. The discussion also reflects varying levels of understanding and interpretation of the electromagnetic spectrum.

skeptic2
Messages
1,776
Reaction score
60
Astronomy news on Phys.org
I don't understand the point, and would withhold any judgements before reading and understanding the paper, though a quick search suggests it was a flash-in-pan article that generated press because of it's sexy title - most web references I found all come from about the same timeframe, four years ago. But generally, non-thermal radiation is radiation generated by non-thermal processes, i.e. by something that is not simply hot and emitting radiation characteristic of it's temperature. One example would be synchrotron radiation.
 
This is mostly just semantics. We describe thermal radiation as a specific range of electromagnetic radiation that is experienced, in the presence of matter, as heat. However, all electromagnetic radiation carries energy proportionate to its frequency. For instance, microwave electromagnetic energy is very good at heating up TV dinners.

The most energetic electromagnetic energy seems to be Gamma Rays. You really really do not want to observe very many of these up close and personal. ALL electromagnetic energy is simply photons with specific frequencies. The various frequencies interact with matter in wildly different ways.

The electromagnetic spectrum, however, is vast.
 
Rays versus Rays. Science had not done a good job of differentiating electromagnetic "rays" from other types of rays. Most importantly, Cosmic Rays ARE NOT electromagnetic rays. They are "energetic charged subatomic particles". X-rays are, however, electromagnetic rays that have a wavelength in the range of 0.01 to 10 nanometers.

Cosmic rays are very very bad things. Probably worse then even gamma electromagnetic radiation. A single cosmic ray [for instance a single proton] carries as much energy as a baseball thrown at 100 miles per hour. Happily these tend to crash into atmospheric particles that then cascade in a variety of forms.

I invite you to ponder how much velocity a single proton would need to equal a baseball at 100 miles per hour. E=mc2 suddenly become comprehensible.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
12K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
6K
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
601
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K