4
$\begingroup$

https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/604/is-it-possible-to-get-pregnant-through-natural-means-in-space indicates cosmonauts are at risk of irradiation whilst in space.

What little I know about space is that planets, and inhabitants are largely protected from deep cosmic rays by - Sun's magnetic sheath - Solar Wind - Planet's own magnetic sheath

When in orbit, a cosmonaut and satellites are periodically in the Sun. At other times, they are in the dark. On the sunward side, any body is directly in the Solar wind, whereas in shadow the planet/body probably acts as a shield against the Solar Wind; I may be wrong!

  1. Where is the deep-space radiation higher - on the Sunward side of Earth, or on the side in Earth's shadow? I guess this may also be rephrased to read - what fraction of shielding from deep cosmic rays within the Solar System is provided by the Solar wind?

  2. Is a cosmonaut at greater health risk on the Sunward Side, or in Earth's shadow? (This second part may fit better on Biology SE but since it is contingent on the former I post it here)

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

Where is the deep-space radiation higher - on the Sunward side of Earth, or on the side in Earth's shadow? I guess this may also be rephrased to read - what fraction of shielding from deep cosmic rays within the Solar System is provided by the Solar wind?

I think you are confusing a few things.

Radiation is a generic term that applies to lots of different things. For instance, all forms of electromagnetic waves are a type of radiation, but not all electromagnetic waves are harmful (most harmful radiation is called ionizing radiation... I say most because microwaves can still kill you if intense enough but they are not a form of ionizing radiation). Free particles moving in space are also a form of radiation. Thus, all the particles comprising the ionized gas, called a plasma, that is the solar wind is considered radiation.

Thus, the solar wind itself does not shield us from anything. The interaction of the solar wind and the incident interstellar medium produces a termination shock, heliosheath, and heliopause at the edge of the heliosphere. These boundaries can have large gradients in the magnetic field, which can deflect charged particles (e.g., most types of cosmic rays are comprised of charged particles). However, none of these boundaries are even seen by most forms ionizing electromagnetic radiation (i.e., UV light and higher energies). Meaning, these boundaries are (mostly) transparent to energetic electromagnetic radiation.

To answer part of your question, you would be shielded from many forms of ionizing solar radiation if immediately behind the Earth, but not all. Some of the intermediate energy charged particles would actually bend around Earth because of Earth's magnetic field. However, the fractions of particles that can do this are infinitesimal compared to the fluxes found in the radiation belts. Thus, just because you are near Earth does not mean you are safe.

Is a cosmonaut at greater health risk on the Sunward Side, or in Earth's shadow? (This second part may fit better on Biology SE but since it is contingent on the former I post it here)

I think the biggest issue for space travel is not direct irradiation at LEO from the sun but the significant increase in solar radiation one would experience if outside Earth's magnetosphere.

While inside, say, the international space station (ISS) astronauts are protected from most forms of ionizing electromagnetic radiation. In fact, most areas in the ISS are pretty good at stopping protons below ~1-10 MeV and there are shielded areas used during solar storms (e.g., solar flares) that provide protection to higher energies. It is, however, impossible to stop all radiation so they compromise based upon flux levels, expected dose rates, and mass considerations.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ What fraction of the irradiation is not from the Sun at all? $\endgroup$
    – ProfRob
    Commented Aug 3, 2019 at 6:00
  • $\begingroup$ @RobJeffries - It's difficult to distinguish except for some heavy ion species like oxygen because you can use the charge state. Nearly all singly ionized oxygen comes from Earth's atmosphere while most of the solar oxygen is +5 to +7. There is no way to distinguish electrons, as you know, but we can measure from where they came because we have directional information. Galactic cosmic ray fluxes are much lower than things like SEPs or anything in the terrestrial magnetosphere, as you might expect owing to the power-law profile. So the short answer is it depends on the type and location. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 3, 2019 at 14:35
  • $\begingroup$ It seems to me that it's a crucial part of an answer, since whether the earth is in the way of the Sun wouldn't affect this component too much. $\endgroup$
    – ProfRob
    Commented Aug 3, 2019 at 16:21
  • $\begingroup$ @RobJeffries - I agree but did I not address this in the last paragraph of before the second yellow-highlighted text and in the text after? That is, the Earth itself shields objects from EM radiation and SEP-like particle enhancements if the object is close to the Earth, e.g., LEO. The problem is that during geomagnetic storms, the radiation belt is enhanced and parts of LEO suddenly become dangerous. Regardless, the region immediately behind the Earth relative to the sun is still hit by high energy cosmic rays all the time but their fluxes are very low. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 3, 2019 at 16:57

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.