Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

livescience.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 120 posts

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#11

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

shangxiao wrote: post #8
w1zard0f0z wrote: post #7

"the air inside Steve blazed about 5,500 degrees Fahrenheit (3,000 degrees Celsius)" 3000 degrees?!:o Is that temperature a typo?

Yes, that's correct. At 300km, Steve would be situated within the thermosphere [1] > The highly diluted gas in this layer can reach 2,500 °C (4,530 °F) during the day. Even though the temperature is so high, one would not feel warm in the thermosphere, because it is so near vacuum that there is not enough contact with the few atoms of gas to transfer much heat. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermosphere Edit: typ…

If you were out there during the day you probably warm up a bit though right? with very little in the way of air to draw heat away.

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#13

Post by jacobush »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #11
shangxiao wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that's correct. At 300km, Steve would be situated within the thermosphere [1] > The highly diluted gas in this layer can reach 2,500 °C (4,530 °F) during the day. Even though the temperature is so high, one would not feel warm in the thermosphere, because it is so near vacuum that there is not enough contact with the few atoms of gas to transfer much heat. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermosphere Edit: typ…

If you were out there during the day you probably warm up a bit though right? with very little in the way of air to draw heat away.

Yes but from the sun, not from the heat in the air molecules. And if you were not shielded from the near vacuum, you’d cool down from the evaporation of sweat on your skin.

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#14

Post by mattdeboard »

gmueckl wrote: post #4
exabrial wrote: post #3

Did anyone get a spectrograph? Slim chance given the circumstances but that'd be really near to look at the spectral lines!

I don't see an optical spectrum anywhere, the linked paper ( http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/3/eaaq0030 ) contains a host of other cool data that was collected. Fig. 3 in particular has indications that this phenomenon happens at some kind of domain boundary, given how many of the shown quantities change in this relatively narrow band.

I’ll say what we’re all thinking: space tornado

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#15

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

jacobush wrote: post #13
TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you were out there during the day you probably warm up a bit though right? with very little in the way of air to draw heat away.

Yes but from the sun, not from the heat in the air molecules. And if you were not shielded from the near vacuum, you’d cool down from the evaporation of sweat on your skin.

This has got me interested now.

At the equator, on the surface of Earth, solar radiation is about 1kW per square meter. According to this¹ wikipedia article 55-60% of solar energy is lost on its way through the atmosphere.

So would ~2kW / square meter at thermosphere height be enough to make you feel warm-hot despite the heat lost to evaporative cooling from sweating?

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

Edit: correct highest to height

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#16

Post by clort »

I'm a bit surprised that no attempt was mentioned to determine which direction its coming from?

A beam, 16 miles wide.. of course its trite, but could be exhaust from starships decelerating into the solar system, or residue from a solar flare perhaps?

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#17

Post by fsloth »

pietroglyph wrote: post #10

> "To photographers and stargazers in northern climes, Steve has been a familiar night phenomenon for decades. But the mysterious ribbons of light only entered the scientific literature for the first time earlier this year" It's so exciting to realize how little we really know . Think about how many fantastic unexplained things there must be in the universe if we haven't even finished understanding the ones right und…

"Think about how many fantastic unexplained things there must be in the universe if we haven't even finished understanding the ones right under our noses."

Well said. I think because so much is already in our books we forget how much miraculous things actually surround us and we forget to look at them and seek them.

Some biologist anecdotally said that the best place to hunt new species unknown to science is your own back yard.

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#19

Post by _2d30 »

clort wrote: post #16

I'm a bit surprised that no attempt was mentioned to determine which direction its coming from? A beam, 16 miles wide.. of course its trite, but could be exhaust from starships decelerating into the solar system, or residue from a solar flare perhaps?

It's probably exhaust from starships.

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#20

Post by Teev6Hul »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #15
jacobush wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but from the sun, not from the heat in the air molecules. And if you were not shielded from the near vacuum, you’d cool down from the evaporation of sweat on your skin.

This has got me interested now. At the equator, on the surface of Earth, solar radiation is about 1kW per square meter. According to this¹ wikipedia article 55-60% of solar energy is lost on its way through the atmosphere. So would ~2kW / square meter at thermosphere height be enough to make you feel warm-hot despite the heat lost to evaporative cooling from sweating? 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_sola…

Sweating would be a lot more effective in a near-vacuum, if we assume you'd wear one of those futuristic mechanical counterpressure space suite.
Post reply on HN