Another anemic solar cycle 23 sunspeck, could 19th century astronomers have seen it?
From Spaceweather.com
SUNSPOT 1016: A ring-shaped sunspot numbered 1016 has emerged near the sun’s equator. Its magnetic polarity identifies it as a member of old Solar Cycle 23. Until these old cycle sunspots go away, the next solar cycle will remain in abeyance.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Doubtful that they would have seen the spot, but it does not change the fact that the sun has been very, very quiet. More of a records and numbers thing for those of us watching. Do we have history in the making, more than likely, but so far our government has not figured out how to tax the event so they stay with AGW.
A thought about defining the minimum.
The sunspots that got counted this year in some cases lasted less than 24h but still got a count and even a 2 day duration count.
If we have a sunspot that last for less than 24h and it overlaps 2 days it could get a duration of 2 days. If it would fit perfectly in a calender day it might get only a 1 day count.
Isn’t there a great risk of getting an inaccurate definition of a solarminum when shortlived sunspot count could vary with up to 100% depending on which hour on the day it starts and ends?
At what point would this solar cycle (if the solar inactivity continues at this level) become something extraordinary?
I propose a test…we should try to replicate as accurately as possible the methods by which the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th astronomers would have used to determine the existence of a sunspot. The data collected should then be used to calculate a “sunspot sensitivity” number by which we can attempt to ascertain the intensity of the sunspot these pioneers in the field of solar astronomy could actually resolve.
just a suggestion………
They would have seen the spot(s). Yesterday there was more than one. It was a little cluster of spots, much like a pubescent teenager’s forehead. The spots would have been just ho hum stuff if cycle 24 had begun (cycles overlap by many, many months). The fact that this cluster of spots has occurred in the absence of cycle 24 polarity spots is interesting. So it looks to me like cycle 23 is just being normal. Cycle 24 not so much. But let’s be clear, the Sun is not cooler for lack of spots.
Just a query, and I have no expertise on Solar Physics. Since SC23 has been mostly “over” a couple of years back and we have had some SC24 spots. Is there any possibility that this spot is SC25? I was thinking of the analogy of a human heart, each heartbeat being a regular cycle, when a heart goes into fibrillation the cycle is weak and “fluttery”.
During a Solar Minimum could we lose the average 11 year cycle and what we are seeing is a fibrillating sun with many rapid weak cycles?
Watching the Sun spot up and the Catlin team freeze up is a bit like watching grass grow.
What if the few cycle 24 spots were all we get and what’s being called remnant cycle 23 spots are cycle 25?
well, sunspots or not, cooling or not, here we go using a red herring to chase another red herring…..the Montreal protocol was an abomination. now, since we can’t pass cap-and-tax, we will use the Montreal tax-us-all to fight non-existent AGW. maybe, with enough data, we can prevent one bad boondoggle and repeal another….
Obama Administration to Push For Major Initiative to Fight Global Warming
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/30/obama-administration-push-major-inititative-fight-global-warming/
UNITED NATIONS — The Obama administration, in a major environmental policy shift, is leaning toward asking 195 nations that ratified the U.N. ozone treaty to enact mandatory reductions in hydrofluorocarbons, according to U.S. officials and documents obtained by The Associated Press.
“We’re considering this as an option,” Environmental Protection Agency spokeswoman Adora Andy said Wednesday, emphasizing that while a final decision has not been made it was accurate to describe this as the administration’s “preferred option.”
The change — the first U.S.-proposed mandatory global cut in greenhouse gases — would transform the ozone treaty into a strong tool for fighting global warming.
“Now it’s going to be a climate treaty, with no ozone-depleting materials, if this goes forward,” an EPA technical expert said Wednesday, speaking on condition of anonymity because a final decision is pending.
The expert said the 21-year-old ozone treaty known as the Montreal Protocol created virtually the entire market for hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, so including them in the treaty would take care of a problem of its own making.
I think it’s about time we all stand up and put an end to this eco-fascism before it destroys all of our liberties.
Aggie,
There actually is a corrective constant for “observatory factor” in the calculation for relative sunspot number. I believe that this was the formula (see below) invented by Wolf (1816-1893), the “Father” of Sunspot counts. With disciplined parameterization, that could compensate for improved instrumentation.
However, I reckon that the discipline was elusive. 😉
The relative sunspot number is computed using the formula (collected as a daily index of sunspot activity):
R=k(10g-s)
where R is the relative sunspot number, s is the number of individual spots, g is the number of sunspot groups, and k is a factor that varies with location and instrumentation (also know as the observatory factor).
I believe this is the reference for that:
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/SOLAR/ftpsunspotnumber.html#international
…and with all due respect, Hook ’em Horns!
After months of research I have replicated how early astronomers would have viewed the sun. I propose that this method is the most accurate way to determine if a spot/spec should be counted.
From a distance of 3 feet view this image on your computer monitor, but for no more than a single second (you don’t want to burn your eyes!). If you can clearly see a spot, then it counts.
http://umbra.nascom.nasa.gov/images/latest_mdi_igram_thumbnail.gif
Perhaps we can get someone to host this image on a blog.
Trevor, new cycle spots always start at high latitudes. This is 23.
Cycle 23 is like the Energizer Bunny, it just keeps going and going and going, going, going, going, going, and going.
If the Sun really can affect Earth’s climate via affecting the SST’s we may see some rather cool oceans with the next La Nina comes around, considering SST’s have been dropping steadily since 2003.
WestHoustonGeo (18:08:27) :
Well, Mr. Horn, I think you miss my point 🙂
I was suggesting that the detection methods be compared, not the observed values. Using true-to-period replications of the types of equipment used, I was hoping to obtain correlations between the different types of equipment and observed sunspot values for each century. With all due respect and given your educational institution, I can understand how you missed my meaning 🙂
Gig ‘Em!
Whoop!
Last March three spots went by shouting the cry that cycle 23 still ruled. Now over a year later we have a SC23 region with several spots, putting most of the regions (specks) we’ve seen from cycle 24 to shame. Notably, from Febuary of this year, no cycle 24 region has reach a sunspot number of 15, but this region has. Where are your spots, cycle 24?
Sunspot numbers from:
http://www.solen.info/solar/
What is most important is that the sunspot was from cycle 23, which will be 13 years long now in May. The last cycle this long was in the 1790s, predating the Dalton Minimum. Cycle 24’s first sunspot was January 2008 and it has had very few spots. So a very long cycle 23, and an almost non existant cycle 24, bodes for a very cool 30 year period coming before us.
I nearly didn’t read this piece, because I don’t like Star Trek.
The spot did run away! It’s not visable in the latest SOHO image. Time to start another long spotless streak?
Trevor: No. The cycles last an average of 11 years. They have lasted as little as 9 years as well as longer than 13. I think there was a period where there were no sunspots during the Maunder Minimum, so one cycle was skipped, but that quiet period lasted over a decade.
The sun spots appear at the poles early in the cycle. The latitude at which they appear gradually decreases over the years until they only grow near the equator. There is no way that we can have a Solar Cycle 25 spot yet.
John M Reynolds
Global temperatures continue to run well above average and the sun remains quite. How much longer before we are willing to admit that this is entirely consistent with the enhanced greenhouse effect?
PS Awfully hot in Alaska ATM – http://www.wunderground.com/US/AK/Fairbanks.html . Perhaps worth a report?
NOAA counted 15 sunspots today:
http://www2.nict.go.jp/y/y223/sept/swcenter/sunspot.html
Looking forward to global warming update for April, what’s it going to be? Hottest April ever? Arctic to be ice free by June? Massive swing up in CO2 levels?
And isn’t that the real question. In order to have consistent data, I am surprised someone doesn’t have a reproduction instrument and see what spots can be observed.
We will never be 100%, but as with the hurricanes, the observation method is as important as the observed.
…..I saw a little black spot on the sun today!…… We are all going to be freezing are asses off for the next century!…..
My apologies to Sting and his music….
WestHoustonGeo (18:08:27) :k is a factor that varies with location and instrumentation
To be fair then “k” should be equalled to “0” 🙂