> because that's what matters over the specific strength
... but the specific strength does come into play when discussing the costs of hardening and mitigation.
This event is twice as powerful as the previously known largest event.
... but the specific strength does come into play when discussing the costs of hardening and mitigation.
This event is twice as powerful as the previously known largest event.
This should not surprise us, by the way. I'd expect major solar storms to follow a Zipf's law distribution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipf%27s_law
That means that the power is inversely proportional to the frequency. This is common. You see it in word frequency, river length, population sizes of cities, etc.
So over a 15,000 year period, the biggest solar flare should be about 2x as big as the next biggest. And random Miyake events, which we've had 9 of over roughly 50,000 years, should be about 10x as big as a once every 160 year event like the Carrington event probably was.
All very rough, of course. But it may help give some intuition.