[HN Gopher] A Multiwavelength Look at Proxima Centauri's Flares
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A Multiwavelength Look at Proxima Centauri's Flares
        
       Author : JPLeRouzic
       Score  : 51 points
       Date   : 2025-04-03 07:07 UTC (4 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.centauri-dreams.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.centauri-dreams.org)
        
       | lifeisstillgood wrote:
       | I sometimes liken our civilisation as a reed mat floating across
       | the pacific but with ants on it who have invented telescopes, and
       | are trying their best to work out what sales are on at 5th Avenue
       | - I love that we are "concerned" about atmospheric stripping
       | millions of miles away - it gives me hope for those ants floating
       | around
        
         | wil421 wrote:
         | What if we are the only ants in the ocean?
        
           | imglorp wrote:
           | Isn't that super unlikely?
           | 
           | It seems like there are planets in most star systems. Even
           | given what's been called a "gross underestimation" of 10^24
           | stars in the (observable) universe, even if you define some
           | habitable zone based on our n=1 experience, even if you take
           | some away based on the OP paper saying flares might make
           | things a little harder at Prox, then that's still many
           | Sagans* worth of planets, each of which gets a shot at
           | growing telescope builders. That's a lot of chances.
           | 
           | * "billions and billions"
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | Even if...we'd still be too far away to communicate in any
             | meaningful way. If today we were to send a message
             | equivalent to a signal flare, it would not be received
             | within any of our lifetimes and some within any of our
             | species' lifetime.
        
               | Alive-in-2025 wrote:
               | That's true. But there's a separate question, why no
               | radio frequency evidence of other stars. I want to see
               | some estimates of the liklihood of radio freq of some
               | kind of communication in just our galaxy. How many stars
               | might have earth-distanced planets from a sun - 6 billion
               | in just our galaxy! Details below from a paper.
               | 
               | If there were this many, I hope in my lifetime we hear
               | from some, just evidence of other intelligent life.
               | 
               | Here's a paper that estimates the presence of these
               | planets from the Kepler space observatory.
               | https://www.icds.psu.edu/how-many-earth-like-planets-are-
               | aro...
               | 
               | From 2019, it says using data from Kepler, they estimate
               | that a close to earth sized planet (3/4 to 1.5 size of
               | the earth) was in an orbit that could potentially have
               | water vapor from a sun, orbital periods 327 to 500 days,
               | with fairly large error bars:
               | 
               | * somewhere in the range of 1 of every 33 stars to as
               | high as one such planet for every 1 out of 2 stars in our
               | galaxy.
               | 
               | That's a large range, but given we have at least 200
               | billion stars in just our own Galaxy, that lower bound is
               | about 6 billion stars with somewhat close to earth-
               | distance planets, in just our galaxy. If this is over
               | estimating by a million times, that's still 6 million
               | planets in the earth like orbiting range. So let's make
               | some noise, aliens.
               | 
               | This source says estimates are 200 to 400 billion stars
               | in the milky way. https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-
               | bang/how-many-stars-milky...
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | The universe is ~14 billion years old. We didn't come
               | along until a few million years ago, and then it took
               | just until a hundred to two hundred years ago to be able
               | to actually broadcast our existence. So if some other
               | civilization had a similar timeline but much earlier,
               | their signal could have come and gone by the time we
               | could detect it. Their star could have also already
               | reached the point where it destroyed its planet the
               | civilization was located, so we'd never know about them.
               | It's the same fate our planet has in store for it as
               | well. If there's any civilization that comes after
               | Earth's demise, they'd never know we were here either.
        
               | Alive-in-2025 wrote:
               | Agree that other people could well have vanished by the
               | time we randomly wander into their signals. The same is
               | true for our radio.
               | 
               | But I'm trying to focus on something else, the existence
               | of other intelligent life is the key thing I hope to see.
               | And we could destroy ourselves this afternoon of course.
               | 
               | I don't care as much about do they exist still - that's
               | icing on the cake. It's the idea that we aren't alone,
               | that's the key to me. I'm certain there have been other
               | intelligent civilizations in the universe because of the
               | size, etc. We need evidence to know for sure.
        
               | leptoniscool wrote:
               | > _why no radio frequency evidence of other stars_
               | 
               | unless the radio beam is aimed directly at us, we may not
               | be able to detect the radio communication of other
               | civilizations.
        
             | pfdietz wrote:
             | > Isn't that super unlikely?
             | 
             | We don't know enough to say whether it is unlikely or not.
             | Pointing to lots of stars and waving your hands doesn't
             | represent an argument.
        
       | indoordin0saur wrote:
       | Been reading this gem of a blog for years. Happy to see it get
       | some attention here.
        
       | 0hijinks wrote:
       | > Small M-dwarf stars ... operate through convection ... likened
       | to what we see in a boiling cauldron of water.
       | 
       | > Larger stars like the Sun show a mix of radiative transfer -
       | photons being absorbed and reabsorbed as they make their way to
       | the surface - and convection.
       | 
       | > That enhances M-dwarf flare activity as their plasma is twisted
       | and rotated, producing magnetic fields that snap open only to
       | reconnect.
       | 
       | This is the first post I've seen targeted toward generic geeks
       | that explained it that way. It makes total sense, is really cool,
       | and I'm glad they wrote this article.
        
         | pfdietz wrote:
         | M dwarf stars, being fully convective (at least, the ones
         | lighter than 0.35 Msun), cycle their entire material content
         | through their cores. This is unlike the Sun, where the core is
         | effectively isolated from overlying layers, and will run out of
         | hydrogen while those outer layers still contain a great deal of
         | it.
         | 
         | As a result, and due to their low luminosity, M dwarf stars can
         | go on burning hydrogen for a very long time, perhaps as long as
         | 12 trillion years for a 0.1 Msun star, much longer than the
         | universe has existed so far.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-04-07 23:01 UTC)