hashrate = 14.5thash/sec, price = $4.22

[eldentyrell]

Anybody got an explanation for this?

The last time the network hashrate broke 14thash/sec the price was up in the high $20's.

[mcorlett]

It's probably just the bump in mining investments resulting from the price bump in January.

[notme]

Bitcoin never closed a week above $20, so price was never really "in the high $20s" for an amount of time that can effect mining power.

[gusti]

Network hashrate is calculated upon the number of blocks discovered, not measured.
Transient peaks may reflect variance regarding luck. 

[copumpkin]

Anybody got an explanation for this?

Sure: the numbers are mostly uncorrelated.

[RyNinDaCleM]

I don't see it!  



Looks like 10TH to me. Difficulty just changed too. So there is a couple days of wild estimates on network hashrate.

It's probably just the bump in mining investments resulting from the price bump in January.

This too.
Look at the high in the end of August '11, It's nearly three full months after the $32 high.

[notme]

I think he might have been misreading at the difficulty numbers.

[eldentyrell]

Looks like 10TH to me. Difficulty just changed too. So there is a couple days of wild estimates on network hashrate.

Best explanation yet.  I was just going by the number in the corner of the screen at bitcoincharts.com.

[the joint]

Interesting, I was just about to make a thread about this.

So, Bitcoinwatch  and Bitcoincharts simply reflect the "hashrate" according to how many blocks are actually solved, and not how much computational power is actually there?

That seems a little weird to me.  Definite patterns emerge on the graph at Bitcoinwatch, and it seems hard to believe that simple variance creates these patterns.

[Mushoz]

Interesting, I was just about to make a thread about this.

So, Bitcoinwatch  and Bitcoincharts simply reflect the "hashrate" according to how many blocks are actually solved, and not how much computational power is actually there?

That seems a little weird to me.  Definite patterns emerge on the graph at Bitcoinwatch, and it seems hard to believe that simple variance creates these patterns.

There is no direct way of measuring the hashrate of the network. The only thing possible is to guess the network's hashrate by looking at how fast blocks are getting solved, and what the current difficulty is.

[gusti]

Interesting, I was just about to make a thread about this.

So, Bitcoinwatch  and Bitcoincharts simply reflect the "hashrate" according to how many blocks are actually solved, and not how much computational power is actually there?

That seems a little weird to me.  Definite patterns emerge on the graph at Bitcoinwatch, and it seems hard to believe that simple variance creates these patterns.

For what I understand (I may be wrong) there is no way to measure hashrate.
Only reflect it as a calculation of difficulty and solved blocks in a certain period.

[the joint]

Ok, makes sense.  But there seriously have been very few slow blocks all day at Deepbit.  I'd say just by simply looking at the rate at which blocks are being solved its obvious that more hardware is being used today.

It was enough to make me change my Deepbit address for the first time in a while.

[RyNinDaCleM]

Looks like 10TH to me. Difficulty just changed too. So there is a couple days of wild estimates on network hashrate.

Best explanation yet.  I was just going by the number in the corner of the screen at bitcoincharts.com.

I've always found their estimate to be quite a bit higher than the Bitcoinwatch.com one.