The Sun perks up some real spots

There’s no guessing about these. They aren’t anemic sunspecks that may or may not have been visible a couple of centuries ago. They are the real deal.  Sunspot group 1026 on the lower left edge and newly formed group 1027 above the equator. While a couple of spots aren’t yet enough to end the solar drought we’ve seen, they are encouraging.

Image: MDI from SOHO
Image: MDI from SOHO

All of the spots are about the size of the Earth. You may recall that group 1026 was first, ahem, “spotted” by the stereo behind system which we covered last week on WUWT. The two groups have the potential to produce some solar flares.  Group 1026 produced a few B-Class solar flares, 1027 has been quiet. Here’s the SWPC report defining both regions:

:Product: Solar Region Summary

:Issued: 2009 Sep 23 0031 UTC

# Prepared jointly by the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA,

# Space Weather Prediction Center and the U.S. Air Force.

#

Joint USAF/NOAA Solar Region Summary

SRS Number 266 Issued at 0030Z on 23 Sep 2009

Report compiled from data received at SWO on 22 Sep

I.  Regions with Sunspots.  Locations Valid at 22/2400Z

Nmbr Location  Lo  Area  Z   LL   NN Mag Type

1026 S30E54   217  0030 Cso  09   02 Beta

1027 N24E32   239  0040 Dro  05   04 Beta

IA. H-alpha Plages without Spots.  Locations Valid at 22/2400Z Sep

Nmbr  Location  Lo

None

II. Regions Due to Return 23 Sep to 25 Sep

Nmbr Lat    Lo

None

Source: http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/latest/SRS.txt

The 10.7 cm solar radio flux took a jump to 75 today, it may go higher as 1026/1027 continues to grow. It remains to be seen whether this is just a temporary energetic burst, with a lapse back to spotlessness, or if it heralds a new more active period of solar cycle 24.

:Product: Solar Region Summary

:Issued: 2009 Sep 23 0031 UTC

# Prepared jointly by the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA,

# Space Weather Prediction Center and the U.S. Air Force.

#

Joint USAF/NOAA Solar Region Summary

SRS Number 266 Issued at 0030Z on 23 Sep 2009

Report compiled from data received at SWO on 22 Sep

I.  Regions with Sunspots.  Locations Valid at 22/2400Z

Nmbr Location  Lo  Area  Z   LL   NN Mag Type

1026 S30E54   217  0030 Cso  09   02 Beta

1027 N24E32   239  0040 Dro  05   04 Beta

IA. H-alpha Plages without Spots.  Locations Valid at 22/2400Z Sep

Nmbr  Location  Lo

None

II. Regions Due to Return 23 Sep to 25 Sep

Nmbr Lat    Lo

None
0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

203 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Roger Knights
September 22, 2009 9:34 pm

It would be funny if those spots were one day to clump and align so as to produce a “happy face” on the sun.

David Hoyle
September 22, 2009 9:37 pm

Oooo … I can feel the heat already… Don’t worry Al … you can start claiming a warming planet again soon…

Justin Sane
September 22, 2009 9:45 pm

If a sun spot remains on the face of the sun for a week does it count as one spot, 7 spots, or something else entirely? When multiple spots appear do they count as multiple spots or just one group, i.e. 1027 above is one group but it has 2 spots?

John F. Hultquist
September 22, 2009 9:47 pm

“All of the spots are about the size of the Earth.”
Which the following image confirms:
http://umbra.nascom.nasa.gov/eit/images/Sun_and_earth.jpg

rbateman
September 22, 2009 9:57 pm

MDI Continuum 20090922 23:26 UT Measurements.
1027 – Umbra – 5 x 10E6
– Penumbra – 117 x 10E6
– Whole Spot – 122 x 10E6
1026 – Umbra – 2 x 10E6
– Penumbra – 48 x 10E6
– Whole Spot – 50 x 10E6
White Light Facula – 450 x 10E6

Editor
September 22, 2009 10:07 pm

Its about dang time. Now lets see some real numbers up on the board. Note that the Team’s fellow travellers at NASA were predicting we’d be at solar max by now. There’s a long way to go for that to happen, or is this solar max?

rbateman
September 22, 2009 10:45 pm

The Sun is going to have to do better than 1 week of spots in 10 weeks.
I remain skeptical of any implications of ramp.

September 22, 2009 10:51 pm

\o/ I hope I don’t freeze at work this winter. On the other hand I hope it doesn’t get too warm til January after the U.N. Danish group hug at the end of the year. ^^
I still not hopeful we can avoid the political Armageddon that is about to happen next year as the AGW forces become more integrated into our daily lives with their plans on global (control) governance.
Back to the sun, lets say a prayer for Henrik Svensmark’s cloud experiment and the final death of AGW >:)

p.g.sharrow "PG"
September 22, 2009 10:55 pm

SOLAR MAX;
This is it, is that all there is?
Big AL needs a lot more then this
I am curious as to why the spots seem to tend to hide on the back side, somewhat out of sight, are they bashful ?

September 22, 2009 11:17 pm

I read from David Archibald that there is a lag of about one year from the time of sunspots activity (or inactivity) to feel its impact on the Earth’s climate. The solar wind travels far away into space and push away some galactic cosmic rays. When solar wind is weak (which also corresponds to few or zero sunspots), more cosmic rays reach the Earth’s atmosphere, more low-lying clouds, global cooling.
Is my understanding of Dr. Archibald’s explanation correct?

jeroen
September 23, 2009 12:02 am

why does it say
SunSpots: 26

Richard111
September 23, 2009 12:04 am

Is there a tutorial for the Solar-Terrestrial Data on the right of this page?
How come 26 spots already?

Jean Meeus
September 23, 2009 12:26 am

Justin Sane (21:45:11) :
If a sun spot remains on the face of the sun for a week does it count as one spot, 7 spots, or something else entirely? When multiple spots appear do they count as multiple spots or just one group, i.e. 1027 above is one group but it has 2 spots?
What counts is the situation at a given day. Also, what is most important is the number of sunspot *groups*. Solar “activity” can be given either as the number of groups, or as the so-called Wolf number Zurich sunspot number). The latter is the “sunspot relative number” R introduced by Wolf in the 19th century. The formula for R is R = k*(10*g+f), where g is the number of groups, and f (from the German “Fleck” = spot) is the number of individual spots. One isolated spot counts as a “group”, hence 11 (= 1 group + 1 spot). The factor k has been introduced to remove systematic differences between values determined by different observers.
Neglecting the factor k (that is, putting it equal to 1), on the SOHO MDI image of Sept. 22 at 23:26, we see one group with 2 spots (1 big and 1 very small), and the newer group with 4 spots (2 big and 2 small ones). So the Wolf number is 10*2 + 6 = 26.

Ben
September 23, 2009 12:29 am

O/T But does anyone know why those Danish thermometers are twitching on the DMI Polar graph?

tallbloke
September 23, 2009 12:47 am

Hey Leif, looks like my prediction of a month or two ago about the cycle getting going in a month or two is coming to pass!

Tenuc
September 23, 2009 12:53 am

Typical. You spend all this time hanging around waiting for one, then two come along together!
Let’s hope these spots hang around for a bit, rather than fading out like previous ones have.

Ed Zuiderwijk
September 23, 2009 1:03 am

Are sun spots like London buses?
You wait for ages and then several turn up at the same time …

el gordo
September 23, 2009 1:27 am

As a layman its hard to fathom solar physics and the effect of solar minimum on our climate.
http://www.solen.info/solar/cycl3.html
In the northern hemisphere winter of 1779-80 the US suffered one of its worst winters on record. The two winters between 1783-86 saw the Thames freeze over and again in 1788-89 there was a Frost Fair on the river.
This all happened before the Dalton Minimum. Solar cycle 3 began in June 1775 with a smoothed sunspot number of 7.2 and ended in September 1784.

Mr. Alex
September 23, 2009 1:29 am

Whilst these two new regions are indeed welcome, I am still suspicious of ramp up having truly started yet. If you take a look at the SC 4/5 minimum transition (Dalton begins) : http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/DeepSolarMin.htm
Notice that activity from August 1798 to May 1799 appeared to be ramping up well, however a crash occurred in August 1799 (= false start) causing the smoothed curve to dip slightly ( although not lower than in May 1798 ).
The current minimum is fairly identical (see comparison graph) given that similar crashes have occurred (Dec 08, March 09, August 09).
Although it is still to early to determine if a double minimum is occurring, it is possible that we may see more crashes and a slow ramp up to smoothed max +- 70.

david alan
September 23, 2009 2:09 am

I think its a beautiful sight to behold. 2 emerging sunspots, one in each hemisphere. Only thing missing is a S.C. 23 sunspot, emerging in the middle. Though I doubt one will emerge, and these two will surely fade in a few days. That has been the trend.
Have we seen the last of S.C. 23 sunspots? Its been some months since we’ve seen one. Its been 13 some years since the last minimum and it was bound to come to an end, regardless how NOAA or SIDC record this. I’m sure debates will arise regarding minimum this go around just as the one in ’96. This solar minimum has frustrated David Hathaway & Co. to no end, much like the stooges over at NSIDC over Arctic Sea Ice. The Sun and the Earth just will not cooperate with their global warming ( sorry, climate change) agenda. I can only speculate that both the Sun and the Earth have done enough minimizing to thwart their efforts regarding alarmism.
What I would like to see now is some predictions regarding total spotless day numbers for this minimum, leading up to the next solar maximum. Can the spotless day figures reach 900 or greater. I think it has a 80% chance or greater to do so. Could someone here in the WUWT community work on that? I would love to see something along those lines.
-David Alan-

rbateman
September 23, 2009 2:16 am

Mr. Alex (01:29:37) :
The scene is like Charlie Brown trusting Lucy one more time to hold the place-kick.

RhudsonL
September 23, 2009 2:20 am

They need to be told at the UN.

September 23, 2009 2:46 am

el gordo (01:27:02) :
As a layman its hard to fathom solar physics and the effect of solar minimum on our climate.

Don’t worry – some of the ‘solar physicists’ seem a bit confused also.
http://www.solen.info/solar/cycl3.html
In the northern hemisphere winter of 1779-80 the US suffered one of its worst winters on record. The two winters between 1783-86 saw the Thames freeze over and again in 1788-89 there was a Frost Fair on the river.

Your anecdotal evidence is supported by several long term records. Temperatures were declining long before the Dalton Minimum cycles. Few places actually experienced cooling during the Dalton. It’s a bit like the “1970s cooling period”. There wasn’t one. The cooling began in the 1940s and had pretty much bottomed out by the mid-1950s. Of course this doesn’t fit in with the solar cycle activity theory. SC19 which was the strongest cycle recorded began in ~1954 and ended in ~1964. SC20, the ‘weak’ cycle, ended in ~1976 just about the time the late 20th century warming began.
This all happened before the Dalton Minimum. Solar cycle 3 began in June 1775 with a smoothed sunspot number of 7.2 and ended in September 1784.
Correct. If solar cycle activity (sunspots) is the main driver of climate and if the current sequence of cycles is mimicking the Dalton period, then current global temperatures should be below 1970s levels. There certainly shouldn’t be discussion on the possibility of record high UAH anomalies as was taking place recently on Lucia’s blog.

September 23, 2009 2:50 am

tallbloke (00:47:44) :
Hey Leif, looks like my prediction of a month or two ago about the cycle getting going in a month or two is coming to pass!
If you say every day it will rain tomorrow, sooner or later it will.

September 23, 2009 2:59 am

Talk of a return of stronger solar activity it a bit premature. three of the five longest periods since 1849 without a sunspot have occured in the last several years. If you do not count the small microdot sunspot of 20 days ago we went over 70 days in a row without any sunspots, which is the second longest period since 1849 without them.
Solar activity just doesnt change on a dime from what I see.

1 2 3 9