Cosmic Rays Hit Space Age High

[nigelfr]

Not surprising given the low solar activity.

Story from Nasa here: http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/29sep_cosm...

[andymadmak]

Isn't there some sort of tax that could make this all go away?

[Eric Mc]

"In 2009, cosmic ray intensities have increased 19% beyond anything we've seen in the past 50 years," says Richard Mewaldt of Caltech.


We've only being measuring them for 50 years.

[Davi]

Eric Mc said:

"In 2009, cosmic ray intensities have increased 19% beyond anything we've seen in the past 50 years," says Richard Mewaldt of Caltech.


We've only being measuring them for 50 years.

But recording their changes using polar ice core samples, which shows it as even less to worry about.

[nigelfr]

To Eric Mc: And your point is...?

Edited by nigelfr on Wednesday 30th September 14:01

[Jasandjules]

So, Cosmic Rays on the increase (contrasted with the last 50 years) but is still far less than in the last thousand years. There is no danger, no cause for alarm. So why is this news?

[s2art]

Jasandjules said:

So, Cosmic Rays on the increase (contrasted with the last 50 years) but is still far less than in the last thousand years. There is no danger, no cause for alarm. So why is this news?

Possible links with climate change?

[nigelfr]

Jasandjules said:

So, Cosmic Rays on the increase (contrasted with the last 50 years) but is still far less than in the last thousand years. There is no danger, no cause for alarm. So why is this news?

Why is this news??? What a weird question. If NASA had announced: "Cosmic Rays reach Normal levels" you could perhaps question why they chose to mention it.

[nigelfr]

s2art said:

Jasandjules said:

So, Cosmic Rays on the increase (contrasted with the last 50 years) but is still far less than in the last thousand years. There is no danger, no cause for alarm. So why is this news?

Possible links with climate change?

Unlikely to be any links with climate change given the last 50 years record...

[Jasandjules]

nigelfr said:

Jasandjules said:

So, Cosmic Rays on the increase (contrasted with the last 50 years) but is still far less than in the last thousand years. There is no danger, no cause for alarm. So why is this news?

Why is this news??? What a weird question. If NASA had announced: "Cosmic Rays reach Normal levels" you could perhaps question why they chose to mention it.

Did you not read the rest of my post? Those levels are variable anyway, as they have been for as long as we can state. Those rates increase and decrease with no adverse effects upon our planet it seems. Furthermore, what are "Normal" levels?

Therefore, why is this news?

[s2art]

nigelfr said:

s2art said:

Jasandjules said:

So, Cosmic Rays on the increase (contrasted with the last 50 years) but is still far less than in the last thousand years. There is no danger, no cause for alarm. So why is this news?

Possible links with climate change?

Unlikely to be any links with climate change given the last 50 years record...

Now lets see a graph which plots high energy CRs.

[Davi]

Jasandjules said:

nigelfr said:

Jasandjules said:

So, Cosmic Rays on the increase (contrasted with the last 50 years) but is still far less than in the last thousand years. There is no danger, no cause for alarm. So why is this news?

Why is this news??? What a weird question. If NASA had announced: "Cosmic Rays reach Normal levels" you could perhaps question why they chose to mention it.

Did you not read the rest of my post? Those levels are variable anyway, as they have been for as long as we can state. Those rates increase and decrease with no adverse effects upon our planet it seems. Furthermore, what are "Normal" levels?

Therefore, why is this news?

wot this bloke said.

Utter non news story. It's reached "highest since space age" several times already, because it fluctuates. It's not even begun to approach a large shift, we've seen 100's of times greater before with no adverse effects... so again why is it news?

[s2art]

Davi said:

Jasandjules said:

nigelfr said:

Jasandjules said:

So, Cosmic Rays on the increase (contrasted with the last 50 years) but is still far less than in the last thousand years. There is no danger, no cause for alarm. So why is this news?

Why is this news??? What a weird question. If NASA had announced: "Cosmic Rays reach Normal levels" you could perhaps question why they chose to mention it.

Did you not read the rest of my post? Those levels are variable anyway, as they have been for as long as we can state. Those rates increase and decrease with no adverse effects upon our planet it seems. Furthermore, what are "Normal" levels?

Therefore, why is this news?

wot this bloke said.

Utter non news story. It's reached "highest since space age" several times already, because it fluctuates. It's not even begun to approach a large shift, we've seen 100's of times greater before with no adverse effects... so again why is it news?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090721090127.htm

[nigelfr]

s2art said:

Now lets see a graph which plots high energy CRs.

Yes please.

ETA BTW thanks for the link to the International Journal of Global Warming.
http://www.inderscience.com/sample.php?id=331

Edited by nigelfr on Wednesday 30th September 16:09

[nigelfr]

Davi said:

wot this bloke said.

Utter non news story. It's reached "highest since space age" several times already, because it fluctuates. It's not even begun to approach a large shift, we've seen 100's of times greater before with no adverse effects... so again why is it news?

I didn't realise that we've seen levels hundreds of times greater before: got a link?

You guys are so blasé... of course it's news. Is this symptomatic of the "Me, me, me" society? If it doesn't affect you directly, you're not bovvered?

[Davi]

nigelfr said:

Davi said:

wot this bloke said.

Utter non news story. It's reached "highest since space age" several times already, because it fluctuates. It's not even begun to approach a large shift, we've seen 100's of times greater before with no adverse effects... so again why is it news?

I didn't realise that we've seen levels hundreds of times greater before: got a link?

You guys are so blasé... of course it's news. Is this symptomatic of the "Me, me, me" society? If it doesn't affect you directly, you're not bovvered?

well it even mentions it in the article you linked to!

Not me me me, just accept there is st you can't do anything about without screaming and panic

[nigelfr]

S2Art did you mean Ultra-High Energy CR? If so, what's the significance? I would be interested if you could find a plot of flux for them. I think that it might be tricky, as their rate is estimated to be of the order of 10/km²/year. Yes that's right 10 per square kilometer per year.

[nigelfr]

Davi said:

nigelfr said:

Davi said:

wot this bloke said.

Utter non news story. It's reached "highest since space age" several times already, because it fluctuates. It's not even begun to approach a large shift, we've seen 100's of times greater before with no adverse effects... so again why is it news?

I didn't realise that we've seen levels hundreds of times greater before: got a link?

You guys are so blasé... of course it's news. Is this symptomatic of the "Me, me, me" society? If it doesn't affect you directly, you're not bovvered?

well it even mentions it in the article you linked to!

Not me me me, just accept there is st you can't do anything about without screaming and panic

The article only says "Hundreds of years ago, cosmic ray fluxes were at least 200% to 300% higher than anything measured during the Space Age. " That's 2-3 times higher.

But I'm not screaming and panicing and neither is NASA. I really don't understand why
a) people don't think it's news:
b)If they aren't interested, why bother to read the article and comment on it?

[s2art]

nigelfr said:

S2Art did you mean Ultra-High Energy CR? If so, what's the significance? I would be interested if you could find a plot of flux for them. I think that it might be tricky, as their rate is estimated to be of the order of 10/km²/year. Yes that's right 10 per square kilometer per year.

No, those are special. Turbobloke has posted on this several times, 10-20 GeV band IIRC.

[Eric Mc]

How do we know what the cosmic ray flux was before 1958?