Study of electrons in space could help weather forecasting

Researchers have discovered a formerly undetected impact of space weather on the polar atmosphere, which may explain some previously unexplained variations in winter weather patterns. Their results, published today (Tuesday 14 October), in the journal Nature Communications could have important implications for seasonal weather forecasting.

The international team from the Finnish Meteorological Institute, Otago University and British Antarctic Survey (BAS) studied data from three different satellites over an 11 year period. They found that energetic electrons (highly charged particles created by the sun) from the hitting the Earth's atmosphere cause ozone loss high above the Earth.

Vast quantities of are found in the Earth's radiation belts, trapped there by the Earth's magnetic field. During magnetic storms, which are driven by the solar wind, the electrons accelerate to high speeds and 'rain' into the atmosphere at the poles. The temporary, but frequent, occurring as a result of these 'rains' may explain changes in wind patterns which affect regional winter temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere by a maximum of plus or minus 5 degrees centigrade. The variation in temperature is only seen during winter because of the complex linkages from space through to the Earth's surface.

BAS co-author Dr Mark Clilverd says, "This is an exciting piece of research because it shows us a key part of the chain-reaction of how electrons affect ozone at higher latitudes and can ultimately affect weather systems – a link that we didn't truly understand before. It could contribute to data for weather forecasting, for instance to show us when Europe is likely to experience an especially cold winter."


Explore further

NASA probes studying Earth's radiation belts to celebrate two year anniversary

Journal information: Nature Communications

Citation: Study of electrons in space could help weather forecasting (2014, October 14) retrieved 21 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2014-10-electrons-space-weather.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
0 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Oct 14, 2014
"This is an exciting piece of research because it shows us a key part of the chain-reaction of how electrons affect ozone at higher latitudes and can ultimately affect weather systems – a link that we didn't truly understand before.


This is only a surprise for those who refuse to acknowledge the Electric Universe. The above is the reason AGWites and their models are totally wrong, they fail to include all the variables.

Oh, and it also supports the notion the solar events such as flares and CME can affect weather patterns as well.

Oct 14, 2014
This is only a surprise for those who refuse to acknowledge the Electric Universe
@cd
and of course you can show us the prediction eu made of this in a peer reviewed paper published in a reputable journal, right?
or is this another one of your pseudoscience proclamations after the fact?
The above is the reason AGWites and their models are totally wrong
Please provide empirical proof that the published AGW papers are wrong
This means provide your eu (or whatever) papers refuting the AGW papers
they fail to include all the variables
and of course you have peer reviewed papers from a reputable journal of climate science showing where your eu has accumulated "all" the variables?

Quit posting PSEUDOSCIENCE
and unless you have empirical proof, your denigration of modern science is simply another means of proving you are promoting pseudoscience
You have nothing, you offer nothing but denigration
http://sci-ence.o...-flags2/

Oct 14, 2014
and of course you can show us the prediction eu made of this in a peer reviewed paper published in a reputable journal, right?


Of course, not problem. There is an entire book on the subject, with direct measurements and empirical lab results, written over 100 years ago. You can skip to page 449 if you'd like, I don't expect you have the ability to understand it anyway.

https://archive.o...mode/2up

Please provide empirical proof that the published AGW papers are wrong
This means provide your eu (or whatever) papers refuting the AGW papers

The onus is on you to provide papers that specifically include these mechanisms, good luck!

and of course you have peer reviewed papers from a reputable journal of climate science showing where your eu has accumulated "all" the variables?

Never made such claims, this is just your typical strawman nonsense.


Oct 14, 2014
You have nothing, you offer nothing but denigration

You're confusing me with you, you offer nothing but stupidity with a slice of denigration!

Oct 14, 2014
The onus is on you
@cd
apparently, you have serious issues with reading and comprehension
You made a claim
The above is the reason AGWites and their models are totally wrong, they fail to include all the variables
to which you have provided NO evidence
you have not provided evidence that ANY AGW paper is wrong in any way, shape or form, regardless of your conjectures
you can't even provide proof that the models are wrong, because they've all been within the error bars predicted
Never made such claims, this is just your typical strawman nonsense
you said
This is only a surprise for those who refuse to acknowledge the Electric Universe
which intentionally gives the impression that the eu has covered all the bases, especially when followed by your additional tripe above
it is NOT a strawman that I brought up, but YOU brought up (so glad you noticed it was a strawman... perhaps you would like to tell us about the other eu tactics?)

Oct 14, 2014
You're confusing me with you, you offer nothing but stupidity with a slice of denigration!
@cd
the only denigration i offer is to those who would publicly support known pseudoscience on a science site

much like zephir and his faith in aw/daw, you are an acolyte of eu and you post repeatedly about how eu explains this or that, but you've YET to offer any reputable evidence supporting your claims or offer any reputable evidence refuting the standard model and its claims
Your tactic is to post as much as possible as often as possible no matter how factually correct and hope no one notices the glaring obvious pseudoscience


Oct 14, 2014
There is an entire book on the subject, with direct measurements and empirical lab results, written over 100 years ago. You can skip to page 449 if you'd like, I don't expect you have the ability to understand it anyway
@cd
feel free to expound on how the Norwegian Aurora Polaris expedition (and specifically P442) where they start talking about the "perturbation-area of a negative polar storm"[sic] and how this is relevant to:
1- eu
2- predictions of eu and modern AGW
3- predictions of eu and stars
4- modern climate science, AGW and how this proves it is false and that eu has the answers

according to what i am reading, the only thing you can come up with is correlating your eu hysteria and faith with polar aurora and disturbances in the atmosphere

as you have specifically claimed
The above is the reason AGWites and their models are totally wrong
and alluded to eu superiority in prediction, i want to see some empirical evidence of it

Oct 14, 2014
Having said that, there ought to be a way of banning them from this site. Period
@FineStructureConstant
I had hoped this at one time as well
but if zeph can continually get back here with his bazillion sock puppets, then we should expect the eu acolytes to do so as well... that is how they spread their faith
jehovah's witnesses knock on doors, eu spams/trolls the science sites

what I hope to do, since the moderators will not actually remove the pseudoscience and perma-ban the idiots like cd, is to show anyone else who comes here and is new, or trying to learn, that there is real science and it works
and how to spot the eu pseudoscience
(which should help them as well as others in life... as it should prevent them from being taken advantage of by other con-men as well)


Oct 14, 2014
you're doing a great job there
@FineStructureConstant
Thank you
if you have the energy and determination to continue, carry on - I tried it for a while, but I just gave up in the end
I would still love to have help
I know it can be exasperating, especially given the availability of actual REAL knowledge out there, but I think if we continue, eventually we will succeed
the most tenacious will be the victor, and i don't plan on letting some pseudoscience hack ruin the minds of the less scientific minded and more gullible
these eu pests just don't know when to shut up, stop annoying users here, and just go away
This is true
but they also gain strength when they troll
actual working science and physics is anathema to them - it destroys their ability to sway the gullible and ignorant

I would ask you to continue, but I know how frustrated you likely are.
I just don't like letting a crook/con go free
comes from being an investigator!

Oct 14, 2014
There is an entire book on the subject, with direct measurements and empirical lab results, written over 100 years ago. You can skip to page 449 if you'd like, I don't expect you have the ability to understand it anyway
@cd
feel free to expound on how the Norwegian Aurora Polaris expedition (and specifically P442) where they start talking about the "perturbation-area of a negative polar storm"[sic] and how this is relevant to:

Just when I think you can't get any stupider, you go and top it. "Specifically", you should be concerned with page 449 you dolt. It reads';
"A Possible Connection Between Magnetic and Meteorological Phenomena"

The whole book, with the empirical and experimental approach is why it's pertinent to the EU and not the theoretical standard theory approach.

Oct 15, 2014
according to what i am reading, the only thing you can come up with is correlating your eu hysteria and faith with polar aurora and disturbances in the atmosphere

First off, the hysteria lies with you and your stalker troll behavior.

Secondly, Birkeland confirmed his findings of the expedition with his Terella experiments. It's not merely correlation but is the type of empirical evidence which supports EU.

and alluded to eu superiority in prediction,


The last thing you should be doing is trying to read between the lines, you can't even read the lines. There was nothing alluded, only what was said;

the reason AGWites and their models are totally wrong, they fail to include all the variables.

and
solar events such as flares and CME can affect weather patterns as well.


Both of which are obvious if the above article is correct.

Oct 15, 2014
Physic.org needs to add another icon to it's rating system. A single finger before the one, dedicated to the trolls like cantdrive.

yep
Oct 15, 2014
That would make your icon a sphincter .

They can't get rid of pseudoscience because it's considered standard theory.

These are amazing
http://apod.nasa....013.html
http://apod.nasa....014.html


Oct 15, 2014
"A Possible Connection Between Magnetic and Meteorological Phenomena"
@cd
yep
read that... but you said
There is an entire book on the subject
when i asked for
show us the prediction eu made of this in a peer reviewed paper published in a reputable journal, right?
Guess what, spark-boy, that is NOT a prediction from eu, nor does it
expound on how the Norwegian Aurora Polaris expedition (and specifically P442) where they start talking about the "perturbation-area of a negative polar storm"[sic] and how this is relevant to:
1- eu
2- predictions of eu and modern AGW
3- predictions of eu and stars
4- modern climate science, AGW and how this proves it is false and that eu has the answers
so, i guess the stupid prize is still boldly displayed in your corner and proudly worn as armor against actual science and physics

would you like to start over and offer some more evidence?
epic failure for you and eu

Oct 15, 2014
The whole book, with the empirical and experimental approach is why it's pertinent to the EU and not the theoretical standard theory approach
@cd
no, the whole book is a testament to how SCIENCE works
not your precious eu
there is NO eu in this book
in fact, the closest you can come to tying your eu into the book is the references you already gave... and the fact that scientists were looking into this a long time ago. Which only supports my assertions that modern science has a definite leg up on eu pseudoscience

you have failed miserably to make any connection other than the simple mentioning of EM etc
epic fail again

Oct 15, 2014
the hysteria lies with you
@cd
i am not the one making grandiose claims and failing to back them up with hard science and empirical evidence, you are
I will always point out pseudoscience!
so that makes the hysteria yours, along with denial, stupidity and a rash of other mental issues
Birkeland confirmed his findings of the expedition with his Terella experiments. It's not merely correlation but is the type of empirical evidence which supports EU
& again, logical fallacy and blatant lie
this is how SCIENCE works. this is not specific to eu (and can be argued that eu ignores a great deal of empirical evidence given their continued pseudoscience like grand canyon/moon crater theory)
another epic fail
the reason AGWites and their models are totally wrong, they fail to include all the variables
and like i continue to say: you have yet to produce ANY empirical evidence supporting this conjecture
which makes you the LIAR yet again
this is a trend

Oct 15, 2014
Both of which are obvious if the above article is correct
@cd
you have made NO obvious statements nor have you been able to prove any conjectures you've posted thus far

this means that your assertion above is not only invalid, but unprovable

it also means that the only trolling here is being done by YOU and your continuing insistence on posting your pseudoscience religious belief in eu here with no evidence
They can't get rid of pseudoscience because it's considered standard theory.
@yep
standard theory is backed by empirical data, including your precious plasma physics

so your personal conjecture only reinforces what I have been saying about eu and your lack of empirical evidence

if it is against the laws of physics, it is NOT valid science
and most of the eu crap violates the laws of physics
(and a few other laws as well)


yep
Oct 16, 2014
Standard theory is big bang, black holes, dark matter, and other sputum that clearly defy the laws of physics. Empirical evidence is perspective based phenomena. And your perspective is so 19th century.

yep
Oct 17, 2014
As with the Captain, FSC you are very welcome to stay in the gaslight era. You can keep your faith in math as well.http://mathforum....=9611758
I am familiar with Maxwell and when his equations break down.
"they are not exact laws of the universe, but merely approximations. In some special situations, they can be noticeably inaccurate. Examples include extremely strong fields (see Euler–Heisenberg Lagrangian) and extremely short distances (see vacuum polarization). Moreover, various phenomena occur in the world even though Maxwell's equations predicts them to be impossible, such as "nonclassical light" and quantum entanglement of electromagnetic fields (see quantum optics). Finally, any phenomenon involving individual photons, such as the photoelectric effect, Planck's law, the Duane–Hunt law, single-photon light detectors, etc., would be difficult or impossible to explain if Maxwell's equations were exactly true"

Oct 17, 2014
Birkeland confirmed his findings of the expedition with his Terella experiments. It's not merely correlation but is the type of empirical evidence which supports EU

& again, logical fallacy and blatant lie
this is how SCIENCE works.

That's why it took over 60 years for mainstream science to accept Birkeland's empirically based theories of the aurora and and other planetary electricity. Oddly, Chapman's purely theoretical beliefs were "standard theory" while Birkeland's theories were actively suppressed.
http://www.agu.or...0022.pdf

"One man in particular, Sydney Chap- man, a British mathematician who became the leading scientist in the field of geomagnetism after dIe First World War, seemed to go out of his way to keep Birkeland in obscurity."
http://www.lucyja...welcome/

Oct 18, 2014
@Cap'n Stupid
Well, you had time to down vote the comment about how "science" really works, but no response. Typical.

Ironically, the acceptance of Birkeland's theories has wide reaching implications throughout the rest of astrophysics. Sadly for the rest of us and real scientific progress, the theoretical mathematicians refuse to grasp these implications in favor of their fanciful beliefs about DM, DE, and scary monsters such as BH's. It's really quite pathetic.

Oct 18, 2014
Having said that, there ought to be a way of banning them from this site. Period.

AGWites are morally equivalent to ISIS.

They can't deal with heretics and demand force be used to eliminate them.

Oct 18, 2014
"……energetic electrons (highly charged particles created by the sun)" 

MY VIEW: Electron is not created by Sun it appear to come from Sun

"..outer radiation belt hitting .... cause ozone loss high above the Earth"

MY VIEW: Electrons are not the real culprit, it is the friend of the culprit

http://swarajgrou...42629250

"energetic electrons ,,,, the Earth's radiation belts, trapped there by the Earth's magnetic field"

MY VIEW: is really? NO, egg 1st or chicken?

"...accelerate to high speeds and 'rain' into the atmosphere at the poles"

MY VIEW: AGREED but not all

"....latitudes and can ultimately affect weather systems – a link that we didn't truly understand before"

MY VIEW: In AUG'14

www.phys.org/news...les.html

ALL MY COMMENT is based on the "THEORY OF EVERYTHING"

Oct 18, 2014
It is not a single climate model from the AGW camp including any activity from the sun as far as i know.
To bad every penny in the research founds goes to the ones that is loudest aka AGW-religionists and not to real science.
And now when temperature not rising they looking for new creativ way to lay hands on the research founds
phys.org/news/2014-10-ditch-2c-goal-society-unattainable.html

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more