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

Solar storm of 1859

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 46 posts

Re: Solar storm of 1859

#31

Post by hef19898 »

yitchelle wrote: post #27
TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Further to the parents comment, do you use a personal knowledge base? I keep a flat text file, but have been pondering whether it might be worth moving to something a bit more structured.

From practicality perspective, how do you use your personal knowledge base? Do you review it on a regular basis? I have thoughts of keeping a similar database, but I kept thinking "will I ever use the collected details in the future". When I first started in computers on the Atari 8bit in Australia, I would collect as many of its software as possible, due to its scarcity. Looking back on it, I would ever only used 1%…

I don't use anything writen down myself. Most of the time I try to focus on basic principals and the connection of things to remember stuff. Downside is that the concrete data points I know on top of my head a) come without a definitve source (I try to work on that lately) and b) can be interpreted as anecdotal evidence (an issue I see lately with people not from my field and I have to find a solution for sometime).

Re: Solar storm of 1859

#33

Post by danieltillett »

shubhamjain wrote: post #21
Animats wrote: post #15

Oh, the Carrington Event again. This has been on HN several times. It ought to be on a list of common misconceptions. - This has nothing to do with "EMP". That's a big but brief RF pulse with a rise time around 1ns. This is induced DC in long wires over a period of hours. - The basic effect is that a current is induced in the earth's crust, resulting in a DC voltage between grounds at widely separated points. This is…

Potentially off-topic, but you how do you know so much? It seems that from law to physics to computer science, you have an absurd level of detailed knowledge. It's incredulous that someone can talk at such great depth about an obscure topic from the top of his head.

What amazes me even more is that John spends so much time here on HC chatting with us hoi polloi.

Re: Solar storm of 1859

#34

Post by Naga »

yitchelle wrote: post #27
TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Further to the parents comment, do you use a personal knowledge base? I keep a flat text file, but have been pondering whether it might be worth moving to something a bit more structured.

From practicality perspective, how do you use your personal knowledge base? Do you review it on a regular basis? I have thoughts of keeping a similar database, but I kept thinking "will I ever use the collected details in the future". When I first started in computers on the Atari 8bit in Australia, I would collect as many of its software as possible, due to its scarcity. Looking back on it, I would ever only used 1%…

I've started using Anki for this. It's basically flash cards that are shown to you at increasing intervals in order to keep it fresh in your memory. It's made the HN front page a few times over the last year.

https://apps.ankiweb.net/

Re: Solar storm of 1859

#35

Post by yesenadam »

shubhamjain wrote: post #21
Animats wrote: post #15

Oh, the Carrington Event again. This has been on HN several times. It ought to be on a list of common misconceptions. - This has nothing to do with "EMP". That's a big but brief RF pulse with a rise time around 1ns. This is induced DC in long wires over a period of hours. - The basic effect is that a current is induced in the earth's crust, resulting in a DC voltage between grounds at widely separated points. This is…

Potentially off-topic, but you how do you know so much? It seems that from law to physics to computer science, you have an absurd level of detailed knowledge. It's incredulous that someone can talk at such great depth about an obscure topic from the top of his head.

Definitely off-topic, sorry. Incredulous means

(of a person or their manner) unwilling or unable to believe something.

Think you meant incredible/unbelievable etc.

Re: Solar storm of 1859

#36

Post by LeonM »

kylegordon wrote: post #29
Animats wrote: post #15

Oh, the Carrington Event again. This has been on HN several times. It ought to be on a list of common misconceptions. - This has nothing to do with "EMP". That's a big but brief RF pulse with a rise time around 1ns. This is induced DC in long wires over a period of hours. - The basic effect is that a current is induced in the earth's crust, resulting in a DC voltage between grounds at widely separated points. This is…

> Bitcoin mines Did not expect to see them in a conversation about electricity infrastructure and aluminium smelters. Interesting times we live in.

Bitcoin mines are measured in MW (megawatt) these days, it's incredibly depressing to realise we are wasting our resources on finding useless numbers. I hope the cryptocurrency craze dies quickly.

Re: Solar storm of 1859

#37

Post by wallace_f »

ridgeguy wrote: post #7
dmix wrote: post #3

> Some telegraph operators could continue to send and receive messages despite having disconnected their power supplies. What a fascinating read. It really makes you happy that this type of solar/planetary stuff affecting the earth only happens on such a long timescale where it doesn't commonly affect our day-to-day lives as much as earthborn issues such as severe storms or other extreme meteorological events. But it…

It's stochastic. Could happen tomorrow. We got lucky in 2012. [1] [1] https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/2...

> On July 23, 2012 a "Carrington-class" solar superstorm (solar flare, coronal mass ejection, solar EMP) was observed; its trajectory missed Earth in orbit. Information about these observations was first shared publicly by NASA on April 28, 2014

Why would NASA not share this with the public?

Re: Solar storm of 1859

#38

Post by macca321 »

altitudinous wrote: post #13

Hmm, we always have a science fiction meme that says that says any civilisation that gets to our level of technology will wipe itself out with nuclear weapons or something. This seems like a more real risk, the technology gets sufficiently advanced that it cannot withstand any external shock. 1859 = fine, 2018 it would destroy capitalism and commerce. The same dark abyss we were staring down at the time of the GFC.

Would it 'destroy' capitalism and commerce, or just set it back some number of years?

Re: Solar storm of 1859

#39

Post by lolc »

wallace_f wrote: post #37
ridgeguy wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's stochastic. Could happen tomorrow. We got lucky in 2012. [1] [1] https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/2...

> On July 23, 2012 a "Carrington-class" solar superstorm (solar flare, coronal mass ejection, solar EMP) was observed; its trajectory missed Earth in orbit. Information about these observations was first shared publicly by NASA on April 28, 2014 Why would NASA not share this with the public?

Oh NASA did share the event at the time:

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/stereo/news/fast-cme.html

They just didn't realize the magnitude.

Re: Solar storm of 1859

#40

Post by api »

starbeast wrote: post #17
api wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If laser efficiency were good enough for this we would have laser fusion.

I didn't realise that the laser's inherent inefficiency was the main loss in laser fusion, though it would make sense.

Laser fusion is not over-unity because lasers are horribly inefficient. If lasers were significantly better we could generate fusion power by repeatedly laser-imploding pellets of D-T fuel. We can already generate fusion this way but it takes more power to run the lasers than you get from the fusion (after conversion losses).
Post reply on HN