Leif Svalgaard writes:
Some speculation that solar cycle 25 has already begun:
http://xrt.cfa.harvard.edu/resources/pubs/savc0707.pdf
Graph source: NASA News
This would be stunning, because it suggests that the sun has skipped a solar cycle (#24) . Researchers, three from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and the other from Marshall Space Flight Center-NASA, have published a paper that suggests this possibility.
Does a polar coronal hole’s flux emergence follow a Hale-like law?
A. Savcheva1, J.W. Cirtain2, E.E. DeLuca1, L. Golub1
ABSTRACT
Recent increases in spatial and temporal resolution for solar telescopes sensitive to EUV and X-ray radiation have revealed the prevalence of transient jet events in polar coronal holes. Using data collected by the X-Ray Telescope on Hinode, Savcheva et al. (2007) confirmed the observation, made first by the Soft X-ray Telescope on Yohkoh, that some jets exhibit a motion transverse to the jet outflow direction.
The velocity of this transverse motion is, on average, 20 kms−1. The direction of the transverse motion, in combination with the standard reconnection model for jet production (e.g. Shibata et al. 1992), reflects the magnetic polarity orientation of the ephemeral active region at the base of the jet. From this signature, we find that during the present minimum phase of the solar cycle the jet-base ephemeral active regions in the polar coronal holes had a preferred east-west direction, and that this direction reversed during the cycle’s progression through minimum.
In late 2006 and early 2007, the preferred direction was that of the active regions of the coming sunspot cycle (Cycle 24), but in late 2008 and early 2009 the preferred direction has been that of the active regions of sunspot cycle 25. These findings are consistent with the results of Wilson et al. (1988) that there is a high latitude expansion of the solar activity
cycle.
Full paper here:
http://xrt.cfa.harvard.edu/resources/pubs/savc0707.pdf
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
To reveal my ignorance, why is the possibility of residual cycle 23 activity excluded?
There is also a paper that says solar cycle 5 (what would have been 5) in the middle of the Dalton Minimum was skipped.
http://spaceweb.oulu.fi/~kalevi/publications/non-refereed2/ESA_SP477_lostcycle.pdf
Total Solar Irradiance from SORCE almost looks like a very short cycle started and stopped (or there is just no start-up to Cycle 24 yet going on 16 months now).
http://lasp.colorado.edu/cgi-bin/ion-p?ION__E1=PLOT%3Aplot_tsi_data.ion&ION__E2=PRINT%3Aprint_tsi_data.ion&ION__E3=BOTH%3Aplot_and_print_tsi_data.ion&START_DATE=1900&STOP_DATE=2500&TIME_SPAN=6&PLOT=Plot+Data
Dr. Svaalgard, has it been possible to observe this kind of data before or is this a new kind of data collected with new techniques? Maybe it is possible that the signs of cycle 25 that they claim to be detecting are in fact normal processes for any cycle, but we simply have not been able to observe it… or perhaps didn’t think to look…?
Dr. Svalgaard. Svalgaard. I hate it when the idiots get my name wrong, too.
Leif,
as a Layman on this,
could it be that it’s something like “The Case of The Missing Cycle”
pdf from Jan Janssens:
http://users.telenet.be/j.janssens/MSCwebEng.pdf
Regards
KlausB
How can it “skip” a cycle? Is there some subtlety in how cycles are numbered that I don’t understand?
So any apparent #23’s (like the tiny spot on 07/23 that didn’t make the grade) *could* be #25’s, speculatively?
Saying that the sun may have skipped cycle 24 and gone to cycle 25, means, I guess, that you expect this cycle to now start.
What if the sun has gone back to cycle 23, meaning more minimum. before it eventually starts cycle 24.
And, what if the sun goes into a really long minimum, occasionally switching magnetic polarities? How was that in the Maunder minimum?
I mean, the idea that when the sun switches magnetic polarities, it starts the new cycle, is now dead in the water.
Ok, this paper is a bit out of my line, so I get lost pretty early on.
If it’s correct, what can we expect to see from the sun in the next little while? And how will things differ if it’s wrong?
Isn’t the most likely explanation not that conventional cycle 25 has arrived but that such reversal events occur without us having historic evidence?
Adjacent cycles make sunspots with differing polarities. So you’re choosing between placing a given spot in Cycle 23 or 25 if it has that orientation.
timetochooseagain (12:42:24) :
“How can it “skip” a cycle? Is there some subtlety in how cycles are numbered that I don’t understand?”
Dr. Svalgaard may conclude that my solar science is no better than my spelling, but I find myself waving my hand and shouting “Let me! Let me!”.
Solar Cycles are distinguished from each other by a number of things, including the magnetic polarity of sun spots. If high-latitude sunspots were to start forming with polarity opposite to that of Cycle 24 sunspots, then they would have to be considered Cycle 25 spots. The authors of this paper seem to be detecting similar signals in other solar processes, indicating that Cycle 24 may be ending even before it has really begun.
Am I too far off, Doc?
Interesting observations. If, big “if” assumed herein, this is an indication that the next rise is Cycle 25 (not remnents of cycle 23 magnetic direction sunspotss) would that indicate that 25 would be far smaller, or about the same, or larger than “average”?
The direction of the transverse motion, in combination with the standard reconnection model for jet production (e.g. Shibata et al. 1992), reflects the magnetic polarity orientation of the ephemeral active region at the base of the jet.
Aaaaaa, What?
Interesting from a couple of angles. 1. The pure scientific aspect of finding out something about the sun that we hadn’t known, and 2. What can we expect from the various media and the general public regarding the supposed skipped cycle? No doubt the Ice Age contingent will be out in force. 😉
timetochooseagain (12:42:24) :
How can it “skip” a cycle? Is there some subtlety in how cycles are numbered that I don’t understand?
The Sun did not skip a cycle, but a cycle from a modeling prediction was missed. Nature is the reality; models are our suppositions on what the next step of nature could be. The Sun is behaving as always, but this cycle has been different from other observed cycles; to be precise, the Sun is working normally.
The main difficulty is that astrophysicists and solar physicists do not count on reliable data for periods before the advent of satellite measurements. Perhaps the observation of other stars would help us to understand the mechanics of our own star because we are capturing cosmic events that happened in the past, as if the stars, galaxies, and other celestial bodies were cosmic fossils; unfortunatelly, we have not yet the capability of registering such changes in stars because we only perceive them as dots, even with high resolution telescopes.
As I understand things, solar cycles are marked by changes in the polarity of the magnetic field lines around the sunspots. This abstract states that the direction of travel of “transverse jets” (presumably, jets of plasma) follows the direction of sunspot magnetic polarity. The direction of travel of the jets in 2006-7 was that predicted for cycle 24, while the direction of travel for 2008-9 is the direction predicted for cycle 25 (or 23). Presumably this would not be considered a continuation of cycle 23, since the flow was briefly in the direction of cycle 24.
I downloaded, printed and read the paper. To say it is rather technical is an understatement. I must admit that I don’t understand exactly why this paper suggests SC24 is skipped or “failed”, except it has to do with an unexpected switch in polarity of “emerging flux regions” (EFR) near the polar coronal holes, to be that expected of SC25 (why not SC23?).
A short and popularized description of what new this paper is saying about what is currently happening with our sun would be very welcome I think. I am hoping you can make some informed comments aimed at lay people, Leif. Then I promise to read the paper again, possibly understanding more.
In any case, this could not be more exciting.
“Curiouser and curiouser!”, cried Alice. Perhaps the white rabbit should be persuaded
“How can it “skip” a cycle?” – Maybe the sun is pregnant.
So far, this is only a speculation based on very little data and a model of the ‘jets’. It is fun to see how some people will go off on a tangent on this and deduce all kind of weird things, and ‘what did I tell you’-stuff. All this is, is a suggestion that we observe this phenomenon [which we couldn’t have before] carefully. Perhaps the model is not quite right, perhaps the noise is too big. Just like with the Livingston-Penn finding. Like with L-P, I know some of the authors and can vouch for them [not that they need it].
On how a cycle can be skipped… it seems intuitive that if the reason for solar cycles is gravitational forces in motion, a change in the direction of that motion could explain a reversal of the cycle’s natural progression.
Tom (13:24:46) :
The direction of travel of the jets in 2006-7 was that predicted for cycle 24, while the direction of travel for 2008-9 is the direction predicted for cycle 25 (or 23).
One assumption that may be wrong is that the small bipolar regions have a preferred direction [polarity change]. When one plots the angle between the line connecting the two spots [or specks], one finds that for large regions that line is pretty much East-West [with a small tilt – Joy’s law], but with decreasing size of the region this tendency becomes smaller and the line is more and more randomly oriented. For the smallest one [like we see in the polar regions] the orientation may be random enough that we can see almost what we want. The only way out of this is to wait and build up more statistics. But interesting, nevertheless.
Nasif Nahle (13:23:02)
Tom (13:24:46) :
Thanks.
Speaking of Livinston-Penn – How is that progressing? I haven’t heard anything in some time. I.e., does the (limited) data from current sunspots track?