Scientists discover what I’ve known all my life
Here’s news, via Yahoo:
Scientists think they have discovered the energy source of auroras borealis, the spectacular color displays seen in the upper latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere.
This is just weird. I grew up with a huge world atlas published in 1972. Before the actual maps, all of which came in in several varieties to illustrate political, commercial, geographical and natural features of the earth, it contained lots of useful information on geography, ecology, astronomy, the environment (yup, environmental pollution was a major chapter even then), and demographics. It was a staple of my general knowledge education as a child.
One of the most fascinating images in the atlas was of the Van Allen Belts, radiation fields created by the interference of the solar radiation with earth’s magnetic field. It illustrated to me a whole range of things that would later prove useful, from fluid dynamics and lines of magnetism to the actual scale of our planet in space and the notion of a solar “wind” in a vacuum. It also explained the phenomenon of auroras, the spectacular northern and southern lights that appear so magical: the Van Allen Belts shield the Earth from some forms of solar radiation, but near the poles, the magnetic field permits gamma radiation to impact with the ionosphere, creating excited charged particles that emit visible light.
The Van Allen Belts were discovered by James Van Allen, who died last year. It was a highlight of the International Geophysical Year of 1957, and he made it to the cover of Time’s “Man of the Year” issue of 1960 as a result. They were observed directly in 1958 by the Explorer I and Pioneer missions. Images of auroras from space have also long been taken by satellites, as have images of the magnetosphere and ionosphere. If there is such a thing as settled science, I’d have thought auroras are a fairly good example.
(I’d also have thought that any discovery about the energy source of aurora borealis would also apply to aurora australis, the southern hemisphere equivalent of the northern lights. Guess we southerners don’t exist in Yahoo’s world of news.)
So how is something I’ve known for as long as I could follow the pictures in “the atlas” a discovery? It isn’t. Whatever the source of this news article (it’s not bylined, nor credited to an agency) it’s wrong. Here’s NASA’s version:
NASA’s Time History of Events and Macroscale Interactions during Substorms (THEMIS) mission observed the dynamics of a rapidly developing substorm, confirmed the existence of giant magnetic ropes and witnessed small explosions in the outskirts of Earth’s magnetic field. The findings will be presented at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco in December.
Ah, so it’s not about the energy source of auroras at all! There really is something new here! This just goes to show: when it comes to news, caveat emptor. Especially if it’s free.
PS. I’ll admit, a major motive for posting this rant is to publish Pederson’s photograph and link to a cool space exploration story. I’m weak that way.
Ummm… Please pardon my density, but was there a conclusion to be drawn from your post?
It sounded like an innuendo at the end, but I really have no idea what you were alluding to. Could you elaborate a bit please?
The point was to record my surprise — and sound a note of caution — over the incompetent science reporting. The opening of the news story wasn’t just a gross over-simplification, which is bad enough in science reporting aimed at a lay audience, but it was flat out wrong. It claimed scientists had discovered something that had in fact been known for half a century. I had to go to NASA for an explanation of what exactly had been discovered, and to clear up the confusing reporting in the remainder of the piece. Less seriously, but no less of an insult to the reader’s intelligence, the article spuriously specified aurora borealis, as if auroras only appears in the northern latitudes.
Many readers rely on science reporting in the popular press to make political decisions — such as advocating global carbon taxes, supporting emissions caps, or condemning the US of A’s masterful neutering of the Bali conference. The scientific sources themselves are often enough tainted by vested interests, policy advocacy and political bias. Nevermind the journalistic ideal of protecting the interests of readers by keeping sources — corporate, political and scientific — honest. It would help if the news media at least proves to be smarter than a fifth-grader.