Paper detail

The AD775 cosmic event revisited: the Sun is to blame

Miyake et al. (henceforth M12) recently reported, based on 14C data, an extreme cosmic event ca. AD775. Using a simple model, M12 claimed that the event was too strong to be caused by a solar flare within the standard theory. This implied a new paradigm of either an impossibly strong solar flare or a very strong cosmic ray event of unknown origin occurred ca. AD775. We show that the strength of the event was significantly overestimated by M12. Several subsequent works have attempted to find a possible exotic source for such an event, but they are all based on incorrect estimates by M12. We revisit this event with analysis of new datasets and consistent theoretical modelling. We verified the experimental result for the AD775 event using independent datasets including 10Be series and newly measured 14C annual data. We surveyed available historical chronicles for astronomical observations for the AD770s to identify potential sightings of aurorae or supernovae. We interpreted the 14C measurements using an appropriate carbon cycle model. We show that: (1) The reality of the AD775 event is confirmed by new measurements of 14C; (2) by using an inappropriate carbon cycle model, M12 strongly overestimated the event's strength; (3) The revised magnitude of the event is consistent with different independent datasets (14C, 10Be, 36Cl) and can be associated with a strong, but not inexplicably strong, SEP event (or a sequence of events), and provides the first evidence for an event of this magnitude (the fluence >30 MeV was about 4.5*10^{10} /cm2) in multiple datasets; (4) This is in agreement with increased auroral activity identified in historical chronicles. This point to the likely solar origin of the event, which is the greatest solar event on a multi-millennial time scale, placing a strong observational constraint on the theory of explosive energy releases on the Sun and cool stars.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access8 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.