Cosmic Rays, especially X-Rays, The Solar System is Receiving Have been Increasing

originally posted by: Bedlam
I hate to say this, but x-rays are not only NOT streams of electrons, they're not even cosmic rays.

Part of the name of the title comes from this article.
news.spaceweather.com...

Cosmic rays are made up of electrons, protons and atomic nuclei.


Actually here.

Jerzy Michał Pawlak, PhD in High Energy Physics (experimental)
Written 28 Apr 2015
Gamma ray burst is a source of a particular type of cosmic rays.

Cosmic rays are high-energy particles arriving at Earth from sources that lie outside it. What exactly is "high energy" in this definition is not well defined. Practically any stable particle can be a cosmic ray. Thus you may have photons (gamma rays), electrons, protons, nuclei, neutrinos...

Cosmic rays are high-energy particles arriving at Earth from sources that lie outside it. What exactly is "high energy" in this definition is not well defined. Practically any stable particle can be a cosmic ray. Thus you may have photons (gamma rays), electrons, protons, nuclei, neutrinos...
...

www.quora.com...

The energy we are receiving from this mysterious source are high energetic x-rays.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Well redneck, the thing is that changes are occurring to the sun as well which is also releasing more soft x-rays even at a time when the Sun's activity is low.

I also posted this recently.

March 24, 2015
NASA-Funded Mission Studies the Sun in Soft X-Rays
...
The soft X-ray detector flew first on June 23, 2012, and again on October 21, 2013.

During both flights, there were only a few complex active regions on the sun's surface – indeed, very few during the 2012 flight. Yet, in both flights the detector saw 1000 times more soft X-rays than had been seen by another experiment in 2009. Even a slight extra amount of solar activity in the form of these active regions, led to substantially more output in the soft X-ray wavelengths.

Wavelengths of light correlate to particular temperatures of material on the sun, and this abundance of soft X-rays points to clouds of hot – 5 to 10 million degrees – gases above the active regions that wasn't present during the 2009 measurements when there were no active regions on the sun. That kind of information makes it clear that different heating mechanisms occur on the quiet sun and active regions, opening the door to determining the differences. One theory for the source of this mysterious heating is that numerous tiny explosions called nanoflares are constantly erupting on the sun. Nanoflares are too small to be seen by our telescopes, but powerfully energetic nonetheless. The soft X-rays might well be a result of nanoflares, thus giving us a way of investigating them.

The new soft X-ray data differed from previous data studies in another respect as well. By parsing out the amounts of each individual wavelength of light gathered, the team could identify what elements were present in the corona. Typically, the abundance of some of these atoms in the corona is greater than at the sun's surface. But not so in these recent observations. The mix of material in the corona was more similar to the mix seen at the solar surface, suggesting that some material from the surface was somehow rising up higher into the atmosphere.

"The difference we see in the abundances of the elements compared to previous studies suggest there may be a link between the heating mechanism and the coronal composition," said Caspi.

Untangling the elements present on the sun's surface and in its atmosphere during different events on the sun could offer another set of tools for interpreting what heats the corona.

Discovering that the soft X-ray emission was brighter than supposed has effects for understanding space weather events near Earth as well. Different wavelengths of light from the sun penetrate to different layers of Earth's atmosphere, causing different effects.

"The solar soft X-rays are deposited lower in Earth's atmosphere than the sun's extreme ultraviolet radiation," says Tom Woods, a co-author on the paper and the principal investigator for this experiment at the University of Colorado in Boulder. "The soft X-rays cause almost instantaneous changes in the ionosphere that can disturb radio communications and the accuracy of GPS navigation systems."
...

www.nasa.gov...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Electrons are 1 percent of the cosmic radiation coming at us. 90 percent protons as hydrogen nuclei.

a reply to: alphabetaone

Er, yes.

As it takes accelerated electrons to produce the effect of x-ray (magnetic waves are a cause)

It takes ENERGY to produce EM waves. Electron bombardment is used to produce that energy because electrons, being negatively charged, can be easily accelerated using present technology.

I'm sorry, but you really need to brush up on your physics...

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck

It takes ENERGY to produce EM waves. Electron bombardment is used to produce that energy because electrons, being negatively charged, can be easily accelerated using present technology.

I'm sorry, but you really need to brush up on your physics...

TheRedneck

And I'm sorry but you really need to brush up on your reading skills, as it seems you want to argue for the sake of it. Initially I SAID Accelerated Electrons hitting a target (unless we're being intentionally ignorant, there IS implied energy there)

And what is your point with it taking energy anyway, there IS no greater (for our purposes) source of energy available to us THAN the Sun which IS what is bombarding our planet with Cosmic Radiation....

I don't understand your unnecessary cyclical argument. Turn the mirror inward...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

The sun is constantly changing... the question is to what degree. I will admit wondering many times in the past if the higher-energy waves are not increasing. Many responses I have seen from average people make me wonder if most would even be able to realize the sun puts out much more than visible light.

I have no problem believing that high-energy solar output could be increasing. However, I must point out one glaring misstatement in another post:

Cosmic rays are made up of electrons, protons and atomic nuclei.

That is simply not true. You may be referring to the solar wind, which is made up of such components. Cosmic rays are simply ultra-high energy electromagnetic waves, so high in energy as to be interesting. Lower-energy Cosmic Rays can be produced by the sun as a component of the solar wind, but the higher-energy Cosmic Rays cannot.

Cosmic Rays are what I work on every day. It's my job to detect them.

TheRedneck

a reply to: alphabetaone

I was simply pointing out an incorrect statement. You claimed that Cosmic Rays were "streams of electrons," a completely untrue, confusing, and misleading statement. Some on here are trying to understand the issue, and mixing a matter particle with an energy wave is not helping anyone.

As I mentioned to ElectricUniverse above, my position is studying and detecting Cosmic Rays. That's what I do every day. It's what I get paid for.

TheRedneck

the 'mystery'.... may just be the solar system location....

the whole solar system bobs up-&-down as it orbits the Galaxy Center

it's something like a 60+ million year sine wave action ~ ... so, 30 MY from peak to valley & 30MY more to next Peak (I am likely incorrect on the timespan)

the reason the Cosmic Rays & x-Rays would increase is because when our Solar System is at the peak -And-
the Orbit is closest to the outer edge of the Galaxy instead of in the denser Galactic Plane location
there is a lot of Un-blocked Inter-Galactic rays of all types out there from Trillions of Galaxies ...

But in the Inter-Stellar space within the Galaxy , is where many dense molecular clouds help to block out all those extra intense Gamma/Cosmic rays from just only 100s of millions of stars or sources


so, that's my guess as to the 'mystery' source...
we have several space based telescopes that track Gamma ray/X ray/ Cosmic ray sources

RE: An X-ray telescope (XRT) is a telescope that is designed to observe remote objects in the X-ray spectrum.
In order to get above the Earth's atmosphere, which is opaque to X-rays, X-ray telescopes must be mounted on high altitude ...
Chandra X-Ray Observatory is space based...
Wiki

if the Mystery is not the Earth & Solar System ever moving position (like a merry-go-round horse) within the Galaxy, then it's gotta be all them Wi-Fi repeater towers and them billions of $50 micro-wave ovens cooking bags of pop-corn


Chandra is an X-ray observatory in space... that telescope can't find the source?
then the source is not a target, the source is a vast region such as inter galactic space

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Since 2008?

Hmm. I find that timing to be oddly coincidental.


Perhaps there is a neutron star lurking somewhere near us.

I know that the Moon is a source of Gamma as cosmic radiation is somehow catalyzed by the Moons surface and goes gamma.

Perhaps a nearby red giant has gone supernova, or perhaps Jupiter or Saturn are doing something bizarre.

en.m.wikiversity.org...

a reply to: Chadwickus

Although solar cycles do influence the cosmic rays we receive that isn't the main reason. A few years back, in 2006, I gave evidence that the solar system was getting more interstellar dust (from outside the solar system of course), and what was strange to astrophysicists was the fact that even when the sun's magnetic poles changed positions and the magnetic strength of the sun returned to normal and got stronger in 2001 we were still seeing an increase in the influx of interstellar dust which was predicted would increase exponentially to 10 times what we were receiving before the magnetic flip of the sun.

ESA sees stardust storms heading for Solar System

PRESS RELEASE
Date Released: Monday, August 18, 2003
Source: Artemis Society

Until ten years ago, most astronomers did not believe stardust could enter our Solar System. Then ESA's Ulysses spaceprobe discovered minute stardust particles leaking through the Sun's magnetic shield, into the realm of Earth and the other planets. Now, the same spaceprobe has shown that a flood of dusty particles is heading our way.
...
What is surprising in this new Ulysses discovery is that the amount of stardust has continued to increase even after the solar activity calmed down and the magnetic field resumed its ordered shape in 2001.

Scientists believe that this is due to the way in which the polarity changed during solar maximum. Instead of reversing completely, flipping north to south, the Sun's magnetic poles have only rotated at halfway and are now more or less lying sideways along the Sun's equator. This weaker configuration of the magnetic shield is letting in two to three times more stardust than at the end of the 1990s. Moreover, this influx could increase by as much as ten times until the end of the current solar cycle in 2012.

www.spaceref.com...

That started happening at the beginning of solar cycle 23 back in 2001. Which would point to the fact the solar system was simply going into a region were there was more interstellar dust. The increase in insterstellar dust was predicted to continue exponentially until around 2012.

Back then I had already shown that it was my opinion this was happening because we were approaching an interstellar cloud which had already been predicted at least since 1978 which would change our climate in many drastic ways.

Title:
Is the solar system entering a nearby interstellar cloud
Authors:
Vidal-Madjar, A.; Laurent, C.; Bruston, P.; Audouze, J.
Affiliation:
AA(CNRS, Laboratoire de Physique Stellaire et Planetaire, Verrieres-le-Buisson, Essonne, France), AB(CNRS, Laboratoire de Physique Stellaire et Planetaire, Verrieres-le-Buisson, Essonne, France), AC(CNRS, Laboratoire de Physique Stellaire et Planetaire, Verrieres-le-Buisson, Essonne, France), AD(Meudon Observatoire, Hauts-de-Seine; Paris XI, Universite, Orsay, Essonne, France)
Publication:
Astrophysical Journal, Part 1, vol. 223, July 15, 1978, p. 589-600. (ApJ Homepage)
Publication Date:
07/1978
Category:
Astrophysics
Origin:
STI
NASA/STI Keywords:
ASTRONOMICAL MODELS, DEUTERIUM, HYDROGEN ATOMS, INTERSTELLAR GAS, SOLAR SYSTEM, ABUNDANCE, EARLY STARS, GAS DENSITY, INTERSTELLAR EXTINCTION
DOI:
10.1086/156294
Bibliographic Code:
1978ApJ...223..589V

Abstract
...
Observational arguments in favor of such a cloud are presented, and implications of the presence of a nearby cloud are discussed, including possible changes in terrestrial climate. It is suggested that the postulated interstellar cloud should encounter the solar system at some unspecified time in the 'near' future and might have a drastic influence on terrestrial climate in the next 10,000 years.

adsabs.harvard.edu...

However, back then it was believed we would encounter this interstellar cloud in 10,000 years. Now we know that we could be well within this cloud in the next 100 years. However, the fact that we were receiving more interstellar dust, and we started receiving more energy in the solar system is imo evidence we have been encountering small sections of this cloud. Think of it as real clouds. Clouds are not always uniform. Sometimes wisps of the cloud break from the main cloud and that's what I think our solar system has been encountering.

I made a premise back then that this would mean we would receive more energy from outside the solar system. We then started seeing increases in energy entering the solar system.

Daily news

29 September 2009
Space radiation hits record high

By David Shiga


Now, the influx of galactic cosmic rays into our solar system has reached a record high. Measurements by NASA's Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) spacecraft indicate that cosmic rays are 19 per cent more abundant than any previous level seen since space flight began a half century ago."The space era has so far experienced a time of relatively low cosmic ray activity," says Richard Mewaldt of Caltech, who is a member of the ACE team. "We may now be returning to levels typical of past centuries."

www.newscientist.com...

This energy has even warmed the Earth's atmosphere when the Sun's activity lowered to a crawl back in 2006-2009 or so.

Surprise In Earth's Upper Atmosphere: Mode Of Energy Transfer From The Solar Wind

Date:
September 11, 2009
Source:
University of California - Los Angeles
...
www.sciencedaily.com
"Its like something else is heating the atmosphere besides the sun. This discovery is like finding it got hotter when the sun went down," said Larry Lyons, UCLA professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences and a co-author of the research, which is in press in two companion papers in the Journal of Geophysical Research.
...

www.sciencedaily.com...

a reply to: TheRedneck

You should remember we are not only receiving more energy from this mysterious source. The sun seems to be changing and according to NASA when the soft X-ray detector flew in 2012, and 2013, it recorded an increase in the amount of soft x-rays coming from the sun 1,000 times more than in readings before in 2009. (at least until 2013. Would have to check if there are any new readings to see if the Sun has continued this trend)

(btw, yes I know the sun's activity is supposed to increase, but not by that much. In that article it is explained they never expected the results they got)

So we are receiving more energy from the sun in the form of soft-xrays, even when the sun's activity is low, and at the same time we are receiving more high energy x-rays from this mysterious source.

a reply to: alphabetaone

I troubleshot avionics equipment that required a security clearance with said equipment and yes sometimes it was as simple as a blown fuse....but a skilled technician is also concerned why the fuse blew....

Do you not believe the spike in CO2 levels we are observing are NOT mostly from human activity? Does CO2 NOT play an important role in our climate?

Also, we have terraformed this planet and continue to do so.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: TheRedneck

Er, no.

Er, yes.

Nope. No, not at all. You're confusing the product with the producer.

x-rays are very blue light, if you want to look at it that way. They are EM. Period.

Electrons are charged particles. Not EM.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

Cosmic rays are made up of electrons, protons and atomic nuclei.

Righty-right! In order to be a cosmic ray, it has to be a high energy particle. Not EM.

originally posted by: alphabetaone
And I'm sorry but you really need to brush up on your reading skills, as it seems you want to argue for the sake of it. Initially I SAID Accelerated Electrons hitting a target (unless we're being intentionally ignorant, there IS implied energy there)

And what is your point with it taking energy anyway, there IS no greater (for our purposes) source of energy available to us THAN the Sun which IS what is bombarding our planet with Cosmic Radiation....

I don't understand your unnecessary cyclical argument. Turn the mirror inward...

You also said, and continue to maintain, that x-rays ARE electrons, which is not true. You can get x-rays from other sources. Hell, you can even get them more than one way from electrons.

In addition, it's sort of problematic to say Sol is a major source of cosmic rays. It isn't. Solar wind is too low energy to really qualify. And x-rays and gamma radiation are NOT cosmic rays. Cosmic rays are fairly isotropic - you get them from all directions. What's producing them is sometimes obvious, sometimes not.

originally posted by: OneGoal

I know that the Moon is a source of Gamma as cosmic radiation is somehow catalyzed by the Moons surface and goes gamma.

Red giants don't go supernova.

I think you missed what the article you cited was trying to tell you. The moon isn't a big source of gammas. The article was talking about being able to detect the different types of elements on the lunar surface by using a gamma ray spectrometer. As the moon doesn't have much of an atmosphere, the cosmic rays whack into the lunar surface pretty much unimpeded. When they do, they excite the atoms they hit. The electrons in the atoms make transitions characteristic of the element (and to some extent, although it's hard to separate the tiny differences with a small satellite borne instrument, the isotopic type). These transitions produce EM at very particular wavelengths. By binning this out using the spectrometer, you can get an elemental analysis both qualitative and quantitative.

But it's very low level. It's not like the Moon is lit up with major gamma flux.

originally posted by: moebius

As stated by others, cosmic ray intensity is strongly correlated with solar activity (11 years cycles). If cosmic rays had an effect on global temperature it would be clearly visible.

And it is visible... Look at all the changes Earth is going through. Even Pluto and it's Moon Charon keep warming up, even as Pluto kept orbiting away from the Sun it kept warming up. Now even Pluto's moon Charon is somehow gaining heat we can't understand from where this heat is coming from. Other planets are going through similar transformations that the Earth is going through.

originally posted by: moebius
The amount of radiation required to increase temperature directly would be deadly.

Care to corroborate your claim? Because we are seeing a massive increase in high energetic x-rays from an unknown source, and the Sun is releasing more soft x-rays than we have recorded to date yet we are not dying...

originally posted by: moebius
There is the idea that the primary effect would be not heating but cloud formation, means with increasing radiation the amount of clouds would increase, reducing global temperature. But this is not observed either.

X-rays also heat Earth's atmosphere and the additional energy is bound to cause changes on Earth.

You also have to remember that Earth's magnetic field has been weakening, which further exacerbates the amount of x-rays and cosmic rays we are receiving.

originally posted by: Bedlam
You also said, and continue to maintain, that x-rays ARE electrons, which is not true. You can get x-rays from other sources. Hell, you can even get them more than one way from electrons.

Not only did I not say that, I absolutely do not continue on maintaining it. But since we're on the subject, a simple yes or no question - can a stream of electrons striking an object (lets say a metallic object) cause x-rays from the resulting electromagnetic waves? (I would appreciate it if you simply answered yes or no)

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: alphabetaone

Do you not believe the spike in CO2 levels we are observing are NOT mostly from human activity? Does CO2 NOT play an important role in our climate?

Also, we have terraformed this planet and continue to do so.

I'm sure its off-topic as this is a thread about solar activity, but I will answer simply for the sake of answering this, No, I don't believe the warming is due primarily to human activity but yes I do believe that the CO2 measurements are elevated more quickly then they would otherwise have been without anthropogenic influence.

But that statement needs to be taken with a grain of salt because, in reality, you can add an eyedropper full of water to a 55 gallon drum barrel and rightly claim the drum would not have been as full if you hadn't added that eyedropper full of water.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

Cosmic rays are made up of electrons, protons and atomic nuclei.

That is simply not true. You may be referring to the solar wind, which is made up of such components.

If it's what you do, and it's your job to detect them, why does the space world in general disagree with your conclusions?

We know today that galactic cosmic rays are atom fragments such as protons (positively charged particles), electrons (negatively charged particles) and atomic nuclei. While we know now they can be created in supernovas, there may be other sources available for cosmic ray creation. It also isn't clear exactly how supernovas are able to make these cosmic rays so fast.

Source


Or maybe, its a simple communication problem on your part.