Talk:K-index

message: The article is just a copy of that at http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/info/Kindex.html. I don't think any attempt has been made to edit it. The examples is the same. It's just a ripoff, which I'm sure is against the rules - though which one I don't know. Drkirkby (talk) 22:16, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget that works of the U.S. Government are in the public domain.  The article is properly attributed, using the  template.  —Grollτech (talk) 01:55, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ripoff of http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/info/Kindex.html 

message: The table included in this article inaccurately portrayed direct equivalents between the K-index, Boulder's nT readings, and the NOAA G Scale. The G scale is based on Kp, which is a planetary reading, whereas K represents one local reading. Representing a direct relationship between K and it's associated "a" value, and NOAA's G-scale, is faulty. For example this table equated K 7 = a 140 = G3. However the G-scale is based on Kp, which has equivalents in Ap, the relationship of which is more murky than this table describes. On this list of Kp - Ap equivalents  , it is clear that each Kp value constitutes a range of Ap values, thus there is no value in having a table that picks one "a" value and associates that with the G scale. Assuming "140 a" is the same thing as "140 Ap" (which it isn't), it still wouldn't appear on the linked description of equivalents. There would appear to be no value in selecting precise a/Ap numbers and attaching them to the G-scale when no such precise relationship exists. A G 3 storm can constitute a wide range of Ap, which neither begins nor ends at 140. 
That's just an example of why it is flawed to relate K and a to G, because they are different systems. G is based on Kp and Ap. The table also included Boulder nT equivalents for the G-scale. Again, what is the value of this, Kp is a planetary estimate, Boulder nT is a local measurement. If the Boulder magnetometer records 200 nT that does not mean a planetary G3 storm is occurring. That is why the G scale is based off of Kp, which is based off of multiple magnetometers sprinkled across the globe. It's a planetary scale based on planetary readings and planetary estimates. Providing a table that will make readers think that what happens in Boulder is indicative of the planet seems rather pointless.
I think this table could be put back up if the G-scales are removed from it, as it is a good table for displaying the K index. However, without a reference to support it, there should be no correlation to the G-scale included. Jozsefs (talk) 01:24, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed inaccurate/misleading table 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on K-index. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20061107140346/http://sec.noaa.gov:80/rt_plots/kp_3d.html to http://www.sec.noaa.gov/rt_plots/kp_3d.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:05, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on K-index. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130220101908/http://spidr.ngdc.noaa.gov/spidr/help.do?group=geomInd to http://spidr.ngdc.noaa.gov/spidr/help.do?group=geomInd
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:11, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This section does not describe the relationship. It just says why the NOAA G-scale was developed. Could this be re-written?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.90.243.186 (talk) 14:46, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The relationship between the NOAA G-scale and Kp 

message: Why was the letter "K" used to describe this index? 76.88.173.70 06:51, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [Untitled]