Should discussions on aurorae in this ng be marked [OT] as they are not
weather related ?

--
Gianna Stefani

www.buchan-meteo.org.uk

"Gianna Stefani" wrote in message
...
Should discussions on aurorae in this ng be marked [OT] as they are not
weather related ?

What height do aurorae occur? My understanding is that they are mostly
WITHIN the atmosphere.

Copy extract from this website:
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Study/ISSAurora/

"Most of the light is emitted by oxygen atoms excited from bombardment by
charged solar particles"

So on this basis aurorae are more of a weather (atmospheric) phenomenon than
an astronomical one.

But this is clearly open to much discussion.

Jack

"Gianna Stefani" wrote in message
...
Should discussions on aurorae in this ng be marked [OT] as they are
not
weather related ?

Hi, Gianna,

Not that silly, really and I've wondered that myself. The Met Office
asked climat. stations to not bother reporting aurora some years ago
IIRC. I no longer report them on my monthly return forms although I was
asked to when I began co-operating with the Met O in the 1960's.
Occurrences were also noted in the marvellous Monthly Weather Report.

I like the aurora, btw, and we are treated to quite a few beauties here
in the dark northern skies. It's always so cold when they are "on",
though.

HTH,

--
Ken Cook, Copley (5miles north of Barnard Castle), County Durham.
830ft
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/copley
(MO climat. site updated before 10Z and 19Z daily)
kencookATcopleydurham.freeserve.co.uk
(All times GMT)

Ken Cook wrote:
"Gianna Stefani" wrote in message
...

Should discussions on aurorae in this ng be marked [OT] as they are

not

weather related ?


Hi, Gianna,

Not that silly, really and I've wondered that myself. The Met Office
asked climat. stations to not bother reporting aurora some years ago
IIRC. I no longer report them on my monthly return forms although I was
asked to when I began co-operating with the Met O in the 1960's.
Occurrences were also noted in the marvellous Monthly Weather Report.

I like the aurora, btw, and we are treated to quite a few beauties here
in the dark northern skies. It's always so cold when they are "on",
though.

HTH,


Thanks Ken. I like them too and was saddened to have missed any that
may have been visible over recent days - I was not able to get out to
look. I did see the usual rash of posts here (after the event) and then
wondered my question ... I may get to see one again in the future and
would want to report it correctly.

--
Gianna Stefani

www.buchan-meteo.org.uk

Should this post be marked [ot] as its not weather related

Liam

"Gianna Stefani" wrote in message
...
Ken Cook wrote:
"Gianna Stefani" wrote in message
...

Should discussions on aurorae in this ng be marked [OT] as they are

not

weather related ?


Hi, Gianna,

Not that silly, really and I've wondered that myself. The Met Office
asked climat. stations to not bother reporting aurora some years ago
IIRC. I no longer report them on my monthly return forms although I was
asked to when I began co-operating with the Met O in the 1960's.
Occurrences were also noted in the marvellous Monthly Weather Report.

I like the aurora, btw, and we are treated to quite a few beauties here
in the dark northern skies. It's always so cold when they are "on",
though.

HTH,


Thanks Ken. I like them too and was saddened to have missed any that may
have been visible over recent days - I was not able to get out to look. I
did see the usual rash of posts here (after the event) and then wondered
my question ... I may get to see one again in the future and would want to
report it correctly.

--
Gianna Stefani

www.buchan-meteo.org.uk

Jack Harrison wrote:
"Gianna Stefani" wrote in message
...

Should discussions on aurorae in this ng be marked [OT] as they are not
weather related ?


What height do aurorae occur? My understanding is that they are mostly
WITHIN the atmosphere.

Copy extract from this website:
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Study/ISSAurora/

"Most of the light is emitted by oxygen atoms excited from bombardment by
charged solar particles"

So on this basis aurorae are more of a weather (atmospheric) phenomenon than
an astronomical one.

But this is clearly open to much discussion.


Yes indeed. I was using the logic that while rainbows and moon halos
are caused by earthly weather (rain and ice crystals) and their reaction
to sunlight (earth active, sun passive), aurorae are more directly
attributable to the sun and while the weather may allow us to, or
prevent us from, seeing them, they happen anyway whenever the sun
dictates (sun active, earth passive). Also 'weather' does not include
absolutely everything atmospheric (according to my dictionary anyway).

Reading that, I do not think I put that very well. I am not arguing a
case but trying to explain what I was thinking when I asked.

The nasa link made me laugh ...
"If Iris, the goddess of the rainbow, had a sister she would be the
goddess of Aurora."
As the aurora is named after Aurora, Goddess of the dawn ... sigh ...
good old nasa


--
Gianna Stefani

www.buchan-meteo.org.uk

lima wrote:
Should this post be marked [ot] as its not weather related


LOL
nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

(-:

--
Gianna Stefani

www.buchan-meteo.org.uk

"Gianna Stefani" wrote in message
...
lima wrote:
Should this post be marked [ot] as its not weather related


LOL
nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

(-:


Well you asked for that Gianna! ;-)

--
Rob Overfield
Hull
http://www.astrosport02.karoo.net/YorkshireWeather/

Gianna Stefani wrote:

Should discussions on aurorae in this ng be marked [OT] as they are not
weather related ?


Aurorae get two pages allocated to them, plus a photograph, in my Observers
Book of Weather (1955). End of argument I'd say. ;-)

Graham

In article ,
Graham P Davis writes:
Aurorae get two pages allocated to them, plus a photograph, in my Observers
Book of Weather (1955). End of argument I'd say. ;-)



I think I have three different editions of that book, though "edition"
is hardly the right word since they are all completely different books.
--
John Hall
"Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history
that man can never learn anything from history."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)