Sun unleashes jaw-dropping filament eruption — but Earth dodges the blast (photo)
A massive solar filament erupted today (May 7), producing a stunning display that spanned the sun's eastern limb and reached deep into the solar disk.
Filaments are cooler, dense ribbons of solar plasma that can hang suspended above the sun's surface by magnetic fields, according to NOAA. When these become unstable, they can erupt dramatically, sometimes launching coronal mass ejections (CMEs) into space — powerful blasts of solar plasma and magnetic fields that can trigger geomagnetic storms here on Earth. However, in today's eruption, the filament was oriented away from Earth, meaning it will have no direct impact on our planet.
"The sun is doing just enough to show that it still has what it takes to produce activity while also dodging Earth at all costs," space weather forecaster Sara Housseal wrote in a post on X.
The image was captured in remarkable detail by NOAA's GOES-19 spacecraft using its extreme ultraviolet (EUV) telescope called the Solar Ultraviolet Imager (SUVI) between around 6:30 a.m. EDT and 9:50 a.m. EDT (1030 and 1350 GMT). SUVI watched as the eruptive prominence showcased the sun's dynamic behavior in incredible detail.
Although this eruption won't affect Earth, forecasters are still keeping a close eye on solar activity this week. According to the UK Met Office, a combination of a weakening high-speed solar wind stream and possible glancing blows from previous CMEs could trigger auroras at high latitudes late Wednesday (May 7) or early Thursday (May 8), with another chance on Friday (May 9) when another high-speed solar wind stream is expected to strike.
Together, these space weather events could produce Minor Geomagnetic Storm (G1) conditions, meaning the aurora could become visible in northern parts of Canada, Alaska, Scandinavia, and other high-latitude regions.
You can keep up to date with the latest northern lights forecasts, alerts and geomagnetic storm warnings with our aurora forecast live blog.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
5 hours ago
- The Hill
Views from the front lines of Trump's war on the science community
The Trump administration has unleashed a tsunami of budget cuts to federal science programs. Mass firings have taken place at both the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education, part of a deliberate decimation of research staff across the federal government. Since January, the administration has systematically cut science funding to its lowest level in decades and issued a flood of budget plans and executive orders that are reshaping how the government uses and supports science. Some outcomes have been immediate and tragic, including staffing shortages that have left cancer patients stranded during experimental drug trials and delays in approving COVID-19 vaccines. The extent of these actions is unprecedented. The administration for a time froze all grant funding at the National Science Foundation and abruptly terminated thousands of the ongoing projects that it funds, as well as those of the National Institutes of Health. As scientists at leading research institutions, we have personally witnessed the effects of the administration's policies — including colleagues relocating overseas and students leaving research altogether. Undergraduate science internship programs have been canceled, and graduate programs in many research universities paused. As a result, scientists are increasingly seeking jobs abroad. The administration claims its goals are to increase efficiency and raise the standards of scientific research. In fact, thousands of programs and projects have been cut solely on the basis of ideologically motivated keyword searches, without any concern for their performance, design or conduct. That's not efficient. A Trump executive order issued in May underscores the purely political nature of these attacks. Titled ' Restoring Gold Standard Science,' the order puts hand-picked presidential appointees into every agency to review and 'correct' any evidence or conclusions with which they disagree. That's not scientific. Further, many of the administration's policies effectively punish researchers simply for asking discomfiting questions and punish institutions for teaching about unpopular ideas. Viewed together, these outline a political strategy toward science that is both systematic and dangerous: a full-scale war on the scientific community, the network of individual researchers across many institutions whose collaboration is essential for scientific progress. Despite the media stereotype of a lone genius in a lab coat, science is really a communal activity. As Isaac Newton, one of the most important scientists of all time, wrote: 'If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' Every research project builds on foundational theory, tested methods and vetted findings created and refined through previous research. And every scientist depends on the distributed efforts of an extensive community to vet and review manuscripts for publication and proposals for new research, maintain common journals, databases and tools needed to share and build upon knowledge and educate and train the next generation of talent who help operate their labs. Institutions of higher education are the traditional hosts for the scientific community in the U.S, providing an independent forum for developing and refining ideas, an environment for training students and infrastructure for labs and shared resources. For more than 80 years, U.S. society has partnered with these institutions to foster a healthy scientific community. Federal funding enabled universities to build and maintain the infrastructure necessary for scientific research and support the most promising students. The scientific community collaborated to evaluate proposals for research across fields, ensuring resources were directed to the highest-quality projects, independent of political and institutional bias. No system is perfect, but the external scientific community has successfully partnered with the government to provide independent guidance and vetting — balancing competing interests and perspectives to evaluate proposals, advise the agencies that set funding priorities, accredit the programs that train researchers, review research findings and publish research results. Scientists within the government participate in the larger scientific community, reinforcing community standards as they move between jobs, and preserve the autonomy to ask scientific questions and share their findings. The administration's policies represent a three-fold attack on the scientific community. First, the administration aims to directly seize control over the key community functions that support scientific independence: Administrative actions have politicized the review processes for funding at National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, suppressed scientific data and withdrawn support for students. Second, the administration aims to subdue universities that provide an independent home for the community by weaponizing institutional accreditation and student visas, threatening individual institutions and their leadership when they are slow to align with the administration's ideology. Third, the administration is isolating scientists and scientific functions within the government. It does so by sidelining scientific expertise, firing entire independent expert advisory panels, canceling government access to scientific journals, preventing government scientists from publishing in them and, now, subjecting scientific analysis to systematic political modification and censorship. The government's war against science is a disaster for both. Without intellectual and political independence, the scientific community can't function effectively to discover new knowledge and solve hard problems. It's magical thinking for politicians to expect to receive truthful answers about the world when they poll to find the most popular answer, pay to get the answers they want or ignore data they dislike. And it's anti-democratic when political leaders dictate whether questions, data, and conclusions are appropriately scientific. Society needs science to tackle complex problems and to teach others how to do so. Science doesn't function without a healthy scientific community. As citizens, we should debate what problems are essential. As voters, we should decide which problems deserve public research funding. As free people, we should not tolerate political attacks on science and the scientific community. Micah Altman is a social and information scientist at MIT's Center for Research on Equitable and Open Scholarship, MIT Libraries. Philip N. Cohen is a professor of sociology at the University of Maryland, College Park.
Yahoo
14 hours ago
- Yahoo
Sharknado? The next generation of hurricane forecasters could be sharks
Researchers are deploying an unlikely ally in the effort to improve hurricane forecasting. Three sharks fitted with sensors are swimming in warm Atlantic Ocean waters to collect critical hurricane data, a contrast to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's usual flying Hurricane Hunters in the skies. 'The ocean is so huge, so enormous, that it's just inaccessible to anything, for the most part,' Aaron Carlisle, a University of Delaware marine ecologist leading the effort, told The Washington Post. 'But by instrumenting the animals that live out there,' he said, 'you can basically turn them into these ocean sensors that are constantly collecting data.' The sharks are collecting information on water conductivity and temperature. Record sea surface temperatures have fueled particularly large and strong hurricanes in recent years. The temperatures are the result of a warming planet and human-caused climate change. It's unclear whether the sharks will ever get close to the cyclones. But, by monitoring the temperature, the scientists can better understand what the U.S. is in for each hurricane season, including where the hurricanes will go and if they're supercharged. Sharks, a keystone species and an apex predator, have a unique access to data that has been hard to get. Weather satellites are unable to see past the ocean's surface and the robotic gliders that scientists send to the continental shelf are effective but slow and expensive to maintain. The tags on the sharks have the ability to collect that data more efficiently. Two mako sharks are tagged to measure temperature, depth, and conductivity. A white shark has a satellite tag to help evaluate if the species could be a good candidate for similar tagging in the future. They may also test hammerheads and whale sharks. 'Sharks are faster than [robotic] gliders. They can stay out for longer periods of time,' Caroline Wiernicki, a shark ecologist and Ph.D student working with Carlisle, told The Post. 'So the hope is that we can have these sharks go out and work in concert' with existing monitors, she said. The research is being led by Carlisle and fellow University of Delaware professor Matt Oliver. They are working with the NOAA's Mid-Atlantic Regional Association Coastal Ocean Observing System – the regional arm of the agency's Integrated Ocean Observing System program. In the future, the plan is to tag dozens of sharks a year and feed that data into hurricane computer models. So far, Carlisle told The Post that one of the two sharks has relayed temperature data back to them, but the other has been swimming in water too shallow for the sensor to turn on. The researchers said that they chose the makos because they often return to the surface, allowing the tags to send the data to satellites for the scientists to retrieve. Able to reach swimming speeds of over 40 miles per hour, shortfin makos are the fastest sharks in the ocean. Following a review, NOAA said in 2022 that it would not list them as a threatened or endangered species. They are listed as endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature. Right now, one in three species of sharks and rays are threatened with extinction. Overfishing has driven global shark and ray numbers down by more than 70 percent since the 1970s, according to the International Fund for Animal Welfare. The charity notes that humans kill around 190 sharks per minute and 100 million sharks each year in commercial fisheries. The researchers explained to USA Today that they did not expect the sensors to have much harmful impact on their test subjects and that they undergo a thorough permitting and review process. 'We do everything we can to minimize the impact of puncturing the animals' fins,' Carlisle told The Post. 'We all love the animals, so we don't want to hurt them.'
Yahoo
15 hours ago
- Yahoo
Sharknado? The next generation of hurricane forecasters could be sharks
Researchers are deploying an unlikely ally in the effort to improve hurricane forecasting. Three sharks fitted with sensors are swimming in warm Atlantic Ocean waters to collect critical hurricane data, a contrast to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's usual flying Hurricane Hunters in the skies. 'The ocean is so huge, so enormous, that it's just inaccessible to anything, for the most part,' Aaron Carlisle, a University of Delaware marine ecologist leading the effort, told The Washington Post. 'But by instrumenting the animals that live out there,' he said, 'you can basically turn them into these ocean sensors that are constantly collecting data.' The sharks are collecting information on water conductivity and temperature. Record sea surface temperatures have fueled particularly large and strong hurricanes in recent years. The temperatures are the result of a warming planet and human-caused climate change. It's unclear whether the sharks will ever get close to the cyclones. But, by monitoring the temperature, the scientists can better understand what the U.S. is in for each hurricane season, including where the hurricanes will go and if they're supercharged. Sharks, a keystone species and an apex predator, have a unique access to data that has been hard to get. Weather satellites are unable to see past the ocean's surface and the robotic gliders that scientists send to the continental shelf are effective but slow and expensive to maintain. The tags on the sharks have the ability to collect that data more efficiently. Two mako sharks are tagged to measure temperature, depth, and conductivity. A white shark has a satellite tag to help evaluate if the species could be a good candidate for similar tagging in the future. They may also test hammerheads and whale sharks. 'Sharks are faster than [robotic] gliders. They can stay out for longer periods of time,' Caroline Wiernicki, a shark ecologist and Ph.D student working with Carlisle, told The Post. 'So the hope is that we can have these sharks go out and work in concert' with existing monitors, she said. The research is being led by Carlisle and fellow University of Delaware professor Matt Oliver. They are working with the NOAA's Mid-Atlantic Regional Association Coastal Ocean Observing System – the regional arm of the agency's Integrated Ocean Observing System program. In the future, the plan is to tag dozens of sharks a year and feed that data into hurricane computer models. So far, Carlisle told The Post that one of the two sharks has relayed temperature data back to them, but the other has been swimming in water too shallow for the sensor to turn on. The researchers said that they chose the makos because they often return to the surface, allowing the tags to send the data to satellites for the scientists to retrieve. Able to reach swimming speeds of over 40 miles per hour, shortfin makos are the fastest sharks in the ocean. Following a review, NOAA said in 2022 that it would not list them as a threatened or endangered species. They are listed as endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature. Right now, one in three species of sharks and rays are threatened with extinction. Overfishing has driven global shark and ray numbers down by more than 70 percent since the 1970s, according to the International Fund for Animal Welfare. The charity notes that humans kill around 190 sharks per minute and 100 million sharks each year in commercial fisheries. The researchers explained to USA Today that they did not expect the sensors to have much harmful impact on their test subjects and that they undergo a thorough permitting and review process. 'We do everything we can to minimize the impact of puncturing the animals' fins,' Carlisle told The Post. 'We all love the animals, so we don't want to hurt them.'
