- #1
lemonstar
- 3
- 0
Just over half-way down this page:-
http://www.embedded.com/columns/technicalinsights/220301380?cid=RSSfeed_embedded_news
it says:-
"These sunspot counts show variation on a cycle of roughly 11 years. By overlaying Oulu neutron measurements with sunspot count data since 1964, we see that the neutron count measured at Oulu varies inversely with the sunspot count (Figure 3 below)."
Can someone explain this? I can't get a satisfactory clear explanation from Googling - AFAIK the solar magnetic (which affects the Earth's magnetic field) changes over the 11 year cycle. There are 2 main sources of "cosmic rays" several specific galactic sources (GCR's) and the sun (SCR's) itself.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/03/...uggest-we-may-not-have-hit-solar-minimum-yet/
is also helpful but I'm not clear about the mechanisms underlying this inverse relationship.
I don't know if I understand exactly what is happening during the the sunspot maxima. Does the solar magnetic field during the maxima offer more protection from the GCR's? What happens to the SCR's during the maxima? (I thought they increased - originating from the solar flares). This article does say:-
"Most solar cosmic ray events correlate relatively well with solar flares. However, they tend to be at much lower energies than their galactic cousins."
I assume the correlation is positive (not negative) but it seems to say that SCR's also increase but because they are less energetic does this mean that overall, taking into account the more important factor(?) that because there is an increase in protection from the GCR's(due to influence of solar magnetic fiel), there is a minima in the neutron flux at sea level? Shouldn't this correlate with a decrease in the number of failures in electronic equipment using FPGA's during periods of high sunspot activity? I thought the relationship was the other way around, i.e. more failures during high sunspot activity. As you can tell - I'm slightly confused.
cheers
Neil
http://www.embedded.com/columns/technicalinsights/220301380?cid=RSSfeed_embedded_news
it says:-
"These sunspot counts show variation on a cycle of roughly 11 years. By overlaying Oulu neutron measurements with sunspot count data since 1964, we see that the neutron count measured at Oulu varies inversely with the sunspot count (Figure 3 below)."
Can someone explain this? I can't get a satisfactory clear explanation from Googling - AFAIK the solar magnetic (which affects the Earth's magnetic field) changes over the 11 year cycle. There are 2 main sources of "cosmic rays" several specific galactic sources (GCR's) and the sun (SCR's) itself.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/03/...uggest-we-may-not-have-hit-solar-minimum-yet/
is also helpful but I'm not clear about the mechanisms underlying this inverse relationship.
I don't know if I understand exactly what is happening during the the sunspot maxima. Does the solar magnetic field during the maxima offer more protection from the GCR's? What happens to the SCR's during the maxima? (I thought they increased - originating from the solar flares). This article does say:-
"Most solar cosmic ray events correlate relatively well with solar flares. However, they tend to be at much lower energies than their galactic cousins."
I assume the correlation is positive (not negative) but it seems to say that SCR's also increase but because they are less energetic does this mean that overall, taking into account the more important factor(?) that because there is an increase in protection from the GCR's(due to influence of solar magnetic fiel), there is a minima in the neutron flux at sea level? Shouldn't this correlate with a decrease in the number of failures in electronic equipment using FPGA's during periods of high sunspot activity? I thought the relationship was the other way around, i.e. more failures during high sunspot activity. As you can tell - I'm slightly confused.
cheers
Neil