Solar Orbiter spacecraft snaps first images of Sun's south pole
The first ever video and images of the Sun's south pole have been sent back to Earth by the European Space Agency's Solar Orbiter spacecraft.The new images will enable scientists to learn how the Sun cycles between periods of raging storms and quiet times.This is important because intense solar activity can affect satellite communication and knock out power grids on Earth.The new images show a shimmering bright atmosphere which in parts reaches temperatures of a million degrees Celsius. Interspersed are darker clouds of gas, which although much cooler, are still a searing one hundred thousand degrees.The pictures are the closest and most detailed ever taken of the Sun and will help scientists learn how the star that gives us life on Earth actually works, according to Prof Carole Mundell, ESA's Director of Science"Today we reveal humankind's first-ever views of the Sun's pole," she says."The Sun is our nearest star, giver of life and potential disruptor of modern space and ground power systems, so it is imperative that we understand how it works and learn to predict its behaviour".
From Earth, the Sun is so bright that it appears like a featureless disc. But at different frequencies and using special filters, scientists can see it in its true form: as a dynamic fluid ball, with magnetic fields twisting and turning on the surface and conjuring up flares and loops of gas into its atmosphere.It is these magnetic fields that determine when the Sun rages and spits out particles toward the Earth.Scientists know that the Sun has a quiet period when the magnetic fields are ordered, with our star having a fixed magnetic north and south pole. This is a phase when the Sun is not able to produce violent explosions, but these fields then become complex and chaotic as they reorientate with the north and south poles flipping approximately every 11 years.During the chaotic period the Sun tries to reduce its complexity and violence spills out, as bits of the Sun hurtle toward the Earth. These solar storms can damage communications satellites and power grids, though they can also cause beautiful auroras in the sky.According to Prof Lucie Green of UCL, it has been hard to predict this activity with computer models of the Sun because there has been no data on the migration of the magnetic fields towards the poles. But that has now changed"We now have the missing piece of the puzzle," she told BBC News."The reversal of the polar magnetic fields on the Sun has been one of the big open questions in science and what we will be able to do with Solar Orbiter is measure for the first time the really important fluid flows that grab pieces of the magnetic field across the Sun and transport them to the polar regions".
The ultimate goal is to develop computer models of the Sun so that this so-called space weather can be predicted. Accurate forecasts will enable satellite operators, power distribution companies, as well as aurora watchers, to better plan for intense solar storms."This is the Holy Grail of solar physics," says Prof Christopher Owen, who specialises in solar wind studies using data from the spacecraft."Solar Orbiter will enable us to get to the bottom of some of the basic science of space weather. But a little more work needs to be done before we get to the point where we see signals on the Sun that we can rely on to predict eruptions that might hit the Earth".
Solar Orbiter also has captured new images of chemical elements at different layers of the Sun and their movement. These have been taken using an instrument called SPICE, which measures the specific frequencies of light, called spectral lines, which are sent out by specific chemical elements hydrogen, carbon, oxygen, neon and magnesium at known temperatures.For the first time, the SPICE team has tracked spectral lines to measure how fast clumps of solar material are moving. These measurements can reveal how particles are flung out from the Sun in the form of solar wind.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Why there are so many aphids this year, and what to do about them
A surge in aphids is being observed in gardens across the UK. Warm spring weather has facilitated rapid aphid colony growth, with some species previously confined to glasshouses now appearing outdoors. Dr. Stephanie Bird from RHS notes that while aphid populations are expected this time of year, their numbers have increased, with 2025 being dubbed 'the year of the aphid'. Aphids can cause distorted plant growth and leave sticky excretions, but they are unlikely to kill established plants, and the RHS advises tolerating them where possible. Gardeners are advised to avoid pesticides, which harm biodiversity, and instead use methods like squashing colonies by hand or planting pollinator-friendly plants to encourage natural aphid predators.
Telegraph
5 hours ago
- Telegraph
Miliband is wasting billions on the wrong nuclear technology
Ed Miliband first succumbed to his idée fixe on Sizewell C in 2009 and that is the problem. The concept is sixteen years out of date. The technological and commercial case for European pressurised reactors (EPR) has been diminishing ever since. It is not a question of whether you are for or against nuclear, or for or against renewables. That culture war absolutism does no favours to the nation. Nuclear technology is in a state of creative revolutionary ferment in America and China. Sizewell C is a throwback to another age. It is a very expensive refinement of 20th-century fission – Gen III in the jargon – with layer after layer of protective barriers, able to withstand an earthquake, a tsunami, a head-on crash by an A380, or a meltdown of the core. You pay to make this old technology super-safe. The International Energy Agency says the capital cost of Hinkley Point, the sister EPR plant to Sizewell C, works out at $16,000 (£12,000) per kilowatt (kW) of gross capacity, compared to $2,700 kW for the simpler Saeul 1 and 2 reactors in Korea. There are hidden subsidies in the Korean figures, but the gap is astonishing. By the time Sizewell C delivers its first watt to the grid in the late 2030s – or 2040 more likely – the world will already be humming with small modular reactors (SMRs) that can made in factories like Nissan Micras, shipped in parts by road and rail, and rolled out in a third of the time. Bill Gates started building his advanced SMR in Wyoming a year ago. If that does not make you stop and pause, it ought to. His TerraPower Gen IV Natrium plant is radically different from old light-water reactors. It is a pocket-sized 350 megawatt (MW) sodium-cooled reactor coupled with molten salt storage. It can ramp up to 500 MW when needed. It dovetails with a modern flexible decentralised grid. The project is built on the site of a coal-powered plant, which means that cables, roads and an eager workforce are all in place. That slashes the cost by 30pc and takes years off the development time. TerraPower originally hoped to supply dispatchable zero-carbon power at $50-$60 per megawatt hour (MWh). Inflation will have pushed up the cost but it is still likely to be a lot lower than Hinkley Point at a strike price of $178 (in today's money). The company is eyeing the UK market. I am willing to bet that TerraPower or something like it will be generating electricity for British data centres or industrial hubs years before Sizewell C fires up – if it ever gets that far, which I question. Or there is X-energy, co-owned by Amazon and able to tap the capital markets for near unlimited sums. It has applied to build its 80 MW, helium-cooled mini-reactors in Texas to supply Dow's petrochemical campus. Unlike the Hinkley-Sizewell reactors, its SMR generates both electricity and 'high-quality heat' (750 degrees) that can be used for heavy industries. It can flex up and down, does not need a vast containment dome and requires no refuelling halts. If not these two, it could be one of the 80 or so different SMR technologies in the global nuclear race, several funded by tech billionaires. Labour has selected the Rolls-Royce design for Britain's first batch of SMRs. They will supply the grid. I heartily applaud. It is home-grown technology and will have 80pc domestic content. It supports a defence company that is critical for UK rearmament and nuclear submarines. What worries me is that a) it is a small version of a standard light-water reactor, and b) the target date has slipped to the mid-2030s. If we are going to press ahead with an older Gen III technology, we had better get a move on. Great British Nuclear has ordered three of the 470 MW reactors; a good signal, yes, but too few to turbo-charge development and pull forward delivery. 'It is not enough to stand up commercial operations,' said the company's Dan Gould. Rolls-Royce is in SMR talks with the Czech Republic, Sweden, Poland and a host of other countries, as well as with a private energy group in the Netherlands. Nothing is yet firm. Mr Miliband would have done better with our money to order 10 or 12 Rolls-Royce reactors. That would have reached critical mass and crowded in hesitant buyers. Instead, Labour is committing a further £14.2bn to Sizewell C and blowing smoke in our eyes with its 'regulated asset base model'. 'They are not telling us how much this is going to cost. They are hiding behind the RAB model,' said Michael Liebreich, founder of BNEF. I would be more forgiving if the Government had not botched the 3.8 gigawatt (GW) Xlinks project, which has money lined up, requires no taxpayer subsidy and is offering to start supplying the UK with baseload power from southern Morocco by 2030. The plan combines Sahara solar power with desert winds that kick up every evening (a convection effect), generating electricity all year round. It would be transmitted to Cornwall via the world's longest cables. All that Xlinks needs is a standard contract for difference of circa £75 MWh and it can start building. Labour has sat on it. Nuclear fusion is further away than SMRs but it is no longer science fiction. High-temperature superconductors have suddenly made it possible to build a fusion plant 40 times smaller than once was the case. This radically changes the economics of fusing hydrogen isotopes to make power, either by squeezing super hot plasma inside a tokamak with magnets, or by inertial fusion with lasers. It has unlocked a torrent of investment funding. Britain is a world-class player in the field, the legacy of the Joint European Torus project at Culham. Mr Miliband did well to secure another £2.5bn to keep this country in the fusion race, funding both the Spherical Tokamak for Energy Production (Step) in Nottingham and the wider fusion ecosystem around Oxford. Britain should have valuable niches breeding tritium fuel and making superconducting magnets for the world market. Fusion ticks every box. It provides clean, constant baseload power. It creates almost no long-term waste. It is so safe that it can be regulated like a hospital. It uses almost no land and little water. I have no idea what it will cost but Bob Mumgaard, the head of America's Commonwealth Fusion Systems, told me that he was aiming for $80 MWh at his first plant in Virginia in the early 2030s. I have heard similar figures from other fusion companies. Where does Sizewell C fit in this new nuclear order? We know the track record of EPR reactors. The Flamanville project in France was 12 years late and six times over budget. The French Cour des Comptes says the final tally was €19.1bn (£16.3bn), calling it an 'operational failure', undertaken with hubris. Perhaps Flamanville was unlucky. The concrete pillars were 'pockmarked with holes'. Nobody noticed for nine months that the steel reactor vessel had unsafe levels of carbon content. We were told that lessons had been learnt, both there and at Olkiluoto in Finland. The next in the EPR series, at Hinkley Point, would be faster and cheaper. Dream on. I am not against bold industrial ventures. They lift the national spirit. Defenders say the costs of Hinkley and Sizewell are much lower than the nosebleed headline figures once you stretch the lifetime to 60 or 80 years. Realists say we need a large enough nuclear power industry to sustain our military nuclear deterrent. I get all that. But locking the country into yesterday's technology as far out as the 22nd century is a fateful step. It will not cut energy bills – ceteris paribus – and is not needed to tackle green intermittency. We can rely on cheaper gas peaker plants to buttress renewables for a few more years until SMRs, fusion and new fission come of age. Let me make a wager. Sizewell C will not survive real scrutiny or the next austerity crisis. It has HS2 written all over it.
The Independent
6 hours ago
- The Independent
Six tips for using wearable fitness trackers to help you stick to your workouts
The hardest part of any workout regime is sticking with it. Around half of those who start an exercise programme stop within six months. But our recent study found that using wearables (such as a smartwatch) not only makes people more likely to start working out, they're also seven times more likely to still be active after six months compared to those who didn't use a smartwatch. Our study focused specifically on adults who had recently been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. Physical activity is a cornerstone of type 2 diabetes management, as it helps regulate blood sugar, supports cardiovascular health and improves quality of life. Yet around 90% of people with type 2 diabetes fall short of weekly physical activity recommendations. Common barriers include low motivation, uncertainty about what activity is safe and a lack of tailored support. Our study tested a new approach using wearable technology and remote coaching to overcome these barriers. We found that people who followed a smartwatch-supported remote coaching programme were ten times more likely to start a workout regime than those who received remote coaching alone. The study involved 125 adults aged between 40 and 75 from the UK and Canada who had recently been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. All participants worked with an exercise specialist to co-design a personalised six-month physical activity plan. The focus was on gradually increasing both moderate-to-vigorous exercise (with a target of 150 minutes per week) and daily lifestyle activity. Support was delivered remotely through phone or video calls. Half of the participants were randomly assigned to use wearable technology to support their personalised activity plans. The smartwatch had movement and heart rate sensors, a mobile app to track activity and personalised text messages based on their recent progress. They could also message their coach, receive real-time feedback and adjust their activity plans accordingly. The results were striking. Compared to the control group, those who were given a smartwatch were ten times more likely to start working out regularly, seven times more likely to still be active after six months and three times more likely to remain active one year later – even after support had ended. At the end of the programme, over 50% of the smartwatch group were meeting recommended activity levels. In comparison, only 17% of the control group were. Feedback from participants showed that the flexibility of plans, personalised messages and smartwatch data were key motivators. While some faced early challenges with the technology, most adapted quickly. These findings support growing evidence that wearable technology can help people become – and stay – more active. While our study focused on people with type 2 diabetes, similar benefits have also been observed in the general population. For example, one trial found that inactive adults (aged 45-75) who were given pedometers and walking advice increased their daily step count by around 660 steps after 12 weeks compared to a control group. Those given a pedometer were also more active three years later. Since then, wearable technology has advanced. Modern smartwatches now capture a wider range of metrics beyond steps – such as heart rate and activity intensity. A 2022 systematic review and meta-analysis, which analysed more than 160 randomised controlled trials, found that fitness trackers and similar devices were effective at increasing physical activity by an average of around 1,800 steps per day. Importantly, the most sustained improvements occurred when wearables were paired with personalised feedback or behavioural support. Together, these studies suggest that wearables can be powerful tools for long-term behaviour change and may help us better stick to our fitness goals. Wearable fitness trackers can extremely helpful – but only if you use them purposefully. Our research, along with findings from other studies, shows that wearables are most effective when they help you apply proven behaviour-change strategies. Here are some evidence-based tips to help you get the most out of your device: 1. Set realistic, specific goals Plan exactly when and how you'll move. Apps can help you set daily or weekly targets. Research shows that breaking down big, vague intentions – such as 'get fit' – into small, concrete steps makes it easier to stay motivated and avoid feeling overwhelmed. 2. Schedule activity and stick to it Use reminders or calendar prompts to build a regular routine. Consistency builds habits, and scheduled activity reduces the chance of skipping workouts due to forgetfulness or lack of planning. 3. Track your progress Monitoring your activity helps you stay motivated and accountable. This feedback boosts motivation by showing that your efforts are making a difference, increasing your sense of control and accountability. 4. Use small rewards Many devices include features such as badges or streaks, which reinforce progress. Celebrating small wins triggers feelings of accomplishment, which encourages you to keep going and helps build long-term habits. 5. Share with others Whether it's a friend or coach, sharing your progress can boost commitment. Knowing others are aware of your goals can increase motivation, provide encouragement, and help you overcome challenges. 6. The tracker is a tool, not the solution It won't change behaviour on its own. Its value lies in how it supports your goals and helps you build lasting habits. These techniques don't just encourage short-term change – they build motivation, self-belief and routine, which are key for maintaining healthy habits over time. Our research shows that when wearable tech is used as part of a structured, supportive programme, it can make a real difference – especially for people managing health conditions such as type 2 diabetes. By combining wearable technology with personalised coaching and proven behaviour change techniques, you might just have a better chance of sticking with your physical activity goals. Matthew Cocks is an Reader in Exercise Physiology at Liverpool John Moores University. Katie Hesketh is a Assistant Professor in Exercise Prescription at the University of Birmingham.
