If it is a moon effect it will have to do with the rotational period of 27.3 days. A sort of tide of the ionosphere, so it is only the daylight that connects the phenomenon to the sun, but maybe does not exclude the moon, since it might be an effect that needs the extra boost of the incoming sun ionisation of all frequencies.
I am speculating, of course, but as we know that all these phenomena are complex it seems very simplistic to just think of the sun.

1.) The 27 day periodicity was detectable only on the dayside of the earth
2.) The moon orbit has a sidereal periodicity of 27.23 days, while it’s synodicperiod is 29.53 days.

Well, it is all a bit of a guessing game. In my view J is a main driver while S is a main distracter, others E, U & N are minor ones. E is important since it is close enough, its magnetosphere can take significant amount of power from ‘solar current’ before it spreads out. Saturn much further away is large enough to provide main secondary effect, while U & N although strong are too far out, so if you take square law dispersal into account, their influence becomes minor. If you consider that SC4 had SC4a appendage (http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/LostCycle.gif), than with variability of the heliosphere we can see certain logic to it.

Unfortunately, as you know, it is never as simple as that. There is continuous drift back and forth over period of a sunspot cycle or two.

Perhaps the Jupiter-Saturn synodic period affects this too. I agree with you that magnetic resonances are a more likely a fruitful area of investigation than gravity/tidal effects.

Unfortunately, as you know, it is never as simple as that. There is continuous drift back and forth over period of a sunspot cycle or two. This is one of the reasons I believe that gravity is not a factor (except maintaining the orbits), leading me to conclude that whole process might be to do with magnetospheric feedback. If takes 8-14 months for ‘solar current’ to hit boundary of the heliosphere, and as much again to come back, hence phase drift of the subcycle, as well as variability in the duration and strength of the main 11y cycle.

If Leif were here…

Observations of the spectrum of light given off by the sun give a good indication that the sun is still primarily hydrogen. In fact the physics behind stars is understood well enough that they have an fairly close estimate on the age of the sun and about how long it will be before it finishes fusioning, 4 1/2 billion years old and about 5 1/2 billion to go, if memory serves.

Information about star formation, composition, and life cycle is available in any good textbook concerning astronomy, there’s no need to speculate on that account.

That is why swallows’ nests are only half built and they have to be under a roof or an outcropping. The swallow never had the patience to listen to the end of the demonstration.

The period of observation is too short, there exists another approximate 27 day cycle (the moon one)that distorts with that period the whole atmosphere. Are these addressed? Or is it “I know, I know” and rushing merrily along to publication?

Number of Solar Cycles show presence of a strong subcycle with a period of 399 days or 1.0928 years). I analysed all 23 cycles individually, you can see here result for SC17 & SC23.
http://www.vukcevic.co.uk/SC17-SC23.gif
Complete analysis:
http://www.vukcevic.co.uk/solarsubcycle.pdf

Thanks Vuk, very interesting. Does the trough in the negative subcycle align with a particular phase of the earth-jupiter synodic period? Like opposition maybe?

Whatever the answers to the above questions are, it does appear that for whatever reason, the suns subsurface acts at least semi solid, and has a rotaion of 27.3 days, which is consistant with other data such as this lightning strike data, and it suggests that we really don’t know a whole lot about the interior of the sun and it’s makup and workings.

The moon’s orbit is slowly increasing in radius due to the tidal forces slowing the earth’s rotation, which lowers it’s angular momentum; so the moon’s angular momentum about the earth has to increase to keep the sum constant; well cosntant other than for solar effects, and the continuous influx of materials from outer space, in comets, and meteorites; but who knows what that does, since there is a mass increase due to the material landing on earth; but also there is an angular momentum imparted to the earth in completley random directions depending on the trajectory of the incoming.

One way of looking at it is that the Earth and Moon are tethered together by a gravitational “string”. As the seas rotate with the Earth due to its gravity they are also pulled and dragged back by the Moon which rotates around the Earth at a much slower rate. Thus there is a slight drag on the Earth as the seas pile up on the rigid land and a corresponding flick on the Moon, pushing it further away.

The slowing of the Earth due to its increase in mass from objects from space and impacts from them would be negligible compared to this.

The Moon is moving away from the Earth at about 4 cms/ year? Considering that the Moon is about 384,000 Kms from the Earth a billion years ago the moon would have been 40,000 kms closer to the Earth. (Maybe closer still as the increase is not linear, it would have been greater the closer the distance). It would have been much bigger in the sky and the tides would have been huge.

Number of Solar Cycles show presence of a strong subcycle with a period of 399 days or 1.0928 years). I analysed all 23 cycles individually, you can see here result for SC17 & SC23.
http://www.vukcevic.co.uk/SC17-SC23.gif
Complete analysis:
http://www.vukcevic.co.uk/solarsubcycle.pdf

Interesting. I wonder if there’s a second order modulation at around 13 months (396 days) frequency.

Here is a link to the original pdf:-

A new approach for monitoring the 27-day solar rotation using VLF radio signals on the Earth’s surface
(Don’t think this has been posted here yet).

In Figure 3, the data computation length of this power spectrum is 220 days (7 months), so more data is clearly needed to address your point.

George E. Smith (17:28:57) :
…
These very low audio frequency radio waves actually propagate across the earth along paths that are guided by the earth’s magnetic fields.

‘fraid not … (now, how those magnetic fields may affect the ionophere which affect radio waves is another issue) “”"

Well I guess we must have been listening to alien transmissions then. Last time I checked, the ionosphere that affects electromagnetic wave propagation; was so-called because it has a lot of ions floating around up there, which includes free electrons, as well as other charged particles.

And somewhere I learned that these charged particles can and do spiral around the earth’s magnetic field lines; along with charged solar particles and cosmic rays, so that those directed ion streams end up creating auroral displays near the magnetic polar regions, so the earth’s field gives all the signs of creating ion pathways, that simply would not be there in the absence of a magnetic field on earth.

The radio signals that we were studying chirped from subaudible (few Hertz) to a few khz at most. I could easily hear to 20KHz in those days, and I never heard anything that high; maybe 3 kHz at best.

At those frequencies it would be pretty much ground wave anyway.

But obviously we were being fooled by Hams or aliens spinning the knob on an audio oscillator, just to keep us busy.

Or maybe I just imagined the whole experience.