Solar, Terrestrial, & Lunisolar Components of Rate of Change of Length of Day

Paul L. Vaughan, M.Sc.

Without a good handle on its simple geometry, a seemingly complex time series can appear as a changeling yielding to the pressures of mysterious statistical manipulation.

For example, a fundamentally important seminal observation reported by Le Mouël, Blanter, Shnirman, & Courtillot (2010) revealed the quasistationary 11 year solar cycle in the rate of change of length of day (LOD’), but newcomers taking a preliminary look at daily resolution LOD’ are more likely to fixate on the 18.6 year lunisolar envelope.

Multiscale variance summaries highlight obvious envelopes:

Zooming in, a semi-annual envelope is also evident:

(WIDE GRAPH ABOVE –Click to view elongate graph^1 & then click again to magnify.)

(WIDE GRAPH ABOVE –Click to view elongate graph^2 & then click again to magnify.)

A parsimonious weekly-to-monthly timescale model of daily LOD’, explaining ~93% of the variance (r = 0.965), can be constructed using the following information (with model terms in bold italics):

(27.321582)*(27.212221) / (27.321582 – 27.212221)

= 6798.410105 days = 18.61343046 years

(6798.410105)*(13.6061105) / (6798.410105 – 13.6061105)

= 13.63339592 days

(27.55455)*(13.660791) / (27.55455 + 13.660791)

= 9.132933018 days

Noteworthy envelopes apparent in the variance structure of LOD’ relate to:

1) lunar nodal cycle (LNC) = 18.6 years

2) lunar apse cycle (LAC) = 8.85 years

3) terrestrial year (1 year)

4) harmonics (e.g. 0.5 years & 4.42 years)

Beat Period = (A*B) / ( |A-B| )

| | indicates absolute value

The model:

(WIDE GRAPH ABOVE – Click to view elongate graph^3 & then click again to magnify.)

eLOD’ = estimated LOD’

The above tables & figures, while certainly nothing new to science, have been summarized here for the benefit of those striving to efficiently develop the foundations necessary to appreciate and build upon the recent seminal work of Le Mouël, Blanter, Shnirman, & Courtillot (2010). From their conclusions:

“The solid Earth behaves as a natural spatial integrator and time filter, which makes it possible to study the evolution of the amplitude of the semi-annual variation in zonal winds over a fifty-year time span. We evidence strong modulation of the amplitude of this lod spectral line by the Schwabe cycle (Figure 1a). This shows that the Sun can (directly or undirectly) influence tropospheric zonal mean-winds over decadal to multi-decadal time scales. Zonal mean-winds constitute an important element of global atmospheric circulation. If the solar cycle can influence zonal mean-winds, then it may affect other features of global climate as well […]”

[Typos: 1) “evidence” should read “observe”. 2) “undirectly” should read “indirectly”.]

Caution

Exclusive &/or excessive focus on the first moment (the mean) should not be at the expense of attention to higher moments (such as the variance), as the following graph should emphasize:

SOI = Southern Oscillation Index (an index of El Nino / La Nina)

[ ] indicates boxcar averaging [applied here to highlight interannual variability]

When studying the preceding graph, it is important to understand that the blue line is the normalized interannual average of the black line. (Take a minute to think about this carefully.)

To reinforce this point, here is another graph of the normalized mean at the semi-annual to annual timescale:

The occurrence of such patterns in the mean despite the maintenance of stationary variance limits suggests a need to carefully consider which equators (geographic, celestial, magnetic, meteorological, etc.) are relevant to the phenomena under study. (See for example Leroux (1993).)

Multimoment multiscale spatiotemporal integration reveals nonrandom harmonic pattern-summary discontinuities, exposing the comedy tragically advocated by deceitful &/or naive theoreticians who are in part constrained by a dominant culture that clings seemingly religiously to maladaptive traditions such as unjustifiable assumptions of randomness, independence, uniformity, linearity, etc. that are routinely misapplied (for example to conveniently render abstract conceptions mathematically tractable).

Bear in mind that for some phenomena, such as ice-jacking freeze/thaw cycles, the properties of the variance play a critically fundamental role in dynamics.

Conclusion

With awareness of key wavelengths and a solid conceptual understanding of the effect of integration across harmonics, we arrive at something truly simple: Earth, Sun, Moon.

Both of the ~11 year waves summarize the semi-annual wave, which summarizes biweekly & monthly LOD’ variations bounded by lunisolar limits.

While the magenta wave is isolated via complex wavelet methods, the sky-blue wave is accessible to any member of the general public with an understanding of this article, 5 minutes to spare, & a spreadsheet.

Acknowledgement

Tim Channon generously shared LOD’ models developed using his synthesizer software. Access to Tim’s models facilitated expeditious cross-checking of lunisolar theory, mainstream literature, & data.

Suggestion

I encourage responsible readers to download & archive daily LOD data. Scientifically-engaged citizens can keep a vigilant watch on potentially-arising future data vandalism.

Data

LOD

International Earth Rotation Service (IERS)

http://www.iers.org/IERS/EN/DataProducts/EarthOrientationData/eop.html

Related Reading

Li, G.-O.; & Zong, H.-F. (2007). 27.3-day and 13.6-day atmospheric tide. Science in China Series D – Earth Sciences 50(9), 1380-1395.

http://www.scichina.com:8080/sciDe/fileup/PDF/07yd1380.pdf

Sidorenkov, N.S. (2007). Long-term changes in the variance of the earth orientation parameters and of the excitation functions.

http://syrte.obspm.fr/journees2005/s3_07_Sidorenkov.pdf

Sidorenkov, N.S. (2005). Physics of the Earth’s rotation instabilities. Astronomical and Astrophysical Transactions 24(5), 425-439.

http://images.astronet.ru/pubd/2008/09/28/0001230882/425-439.pdf

Gross, R.S. (2007). Earth rotation variations – long period. In: Herring, T.A. (ed.), Treatise on Geophysics vol. 11 (Physical Geodesy), Elsevier, Amsterdam, in press, 2007.

http://geodesy.eng.ohio-state.edu/course/refpapers/Gross_Geodesy_LpER07.pdf

http://geodesy.geology.ohio-state.edu/course/refpapers/Gross_Geodesy_LpER07.pdf

Schwing, F.B.; Jiang, J.; & Mendelssohn, R. (2003). Coherency of multi-scale abrupt changes between the NAO, NPI, and PDO. Geophysical Research Letters 30(7), 1406. doi:10.1029/2002GL016535.

Maraun, D.; & Kurths, J. (2005). Epochs of phase coherence between El Nino-Southern Oscillation and Indian monsoon. Geophysical Research Letters 32, L15709. doi10.1029-2005GL023225.

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~douglas/papers/maraun05a.pdf

Leroux, M. (1993). The Mobile Polar High: a new concept explaining present mechanisms of meridional air-mass and energy exchanges and global propagation of palaeoclimatic changes. Global and Planetary Change 7, 69-93.

http://ddata.over-blog.com/xxxyyy/2/32/25/79/Leroux-Global-and-Planetary-Change-1993.pdf

Trenberth, K.E.; Stepaniak, D.P.; & Smith, L. (2005). Interannual variability of patterns of atmospheric mass distribution. Journal of Climate 18, 2812-2825.

http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Trenberth/trenberth.papers/massEteleconnJC.pdf

Abarca del Rio, R.; Gambis, D.; & Salstein, D.A. (2000). Interannual signals in length of day and atmospheric angular momentum. Annals Geophysicae 18, 347-364.

http://hal-insu.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/32/91/24/PDF/angeo-18-347-2000.pdf

Abarca del Rio, R.; Gambis, D.; Salstein, D.; Nelson, P.; & Dai, A. (2003). Solar activity and earth rotation variability. Journal of Geodynamics 36, 423-443.

http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/adai/papers/Abarca_delRio_etal_JGeodyn03.pdf

Le Mouël, J.-L.; Blanter, E.; Shnirman, M.; & Courtillot, V. (2010). Solar forcing of the semi-annual variation of length-of-day. Geophysical Research Letters 37, L15307. doi:10.1029/2010GL043185.

Vaughan, P.L. (2010). Semi-annual solar-terrestrial power.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/23/confirmation-of-solar-forcing-of-the-semi-annual-variation-of-length-of-day/

Technical Aside

For those interested in exploring LOD’ variance patterns that are not necessarily evident at first glance, another noteworthy envelope is the following:

(13.777275)*(13.63339592) / (13.777275 – 13.63339592)

= 1305.478517 days = 3.574281812 years

This polar-equatorial eclipse cycle is evident in the sequence of diagrams here:

http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLE/5MCLE-Figs-10.pdf (1733-2151)

From:

Espenak, F.; & Meeus, J. (2009). Five millennium canon of solar eclipses: -1999 to +3000 (2000 BCE to 3000 CE). NASA Technical Publication TP-2009-214172.

http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEpubs/5MCLE.html

h/t to WUWT commenter “lgl” for initially drawing attention to this pattern some time ago.

Earlier & Future Articles

I wrote the following articles before (a) acquiring access to Le Mouël, Blanter, Shnirman, & Courtillot (2010), (b) coming across Leroux (1993), and (c) re-reading Sidorenkov (2005) with consequently improved awareness:

1) http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/08/18/solar-terrestrial-coincidence/

2) http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/04/the-north-pacific-solar-cycle-change/

3) http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/11/solar-cycle-length-its-rate-of-change-the-northern-hemisphere/

Related articles could have been written on All India Rainfall Index & other variables, but the audiences’ handle on the solar, lunisolar, & spatiotemporal nature of interannual variations was revealed to be inadequate in comments here:

4) http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/11/atlantic-hurricanes-the-sun/

[Some audience members may benefit from careful consideration of issues raised by Tomas Milanovic at Dr. Judith Curry’s blog Climate Etc.]

Le Mouël, Blanter, Shnirman, & Courtillot’s (2010) game changing observation rendered earlier results much less mysterious:

5) http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/23/confirmation-of-solar-forcing-of-the-semi-annual-variation-of-length-of-day/

For capable individuals striving to render these & related findings disgestible by a mainstream audience, I strongly recommend:

A) gleaning the primary point made by Schwing, Jiang, & Mendelssohn (2003) about the effect of windowing parameters on apparent phase, which can be reversed by spatial patterns, not just temporal evolution.

B) heeding the advice of Maraun & Kurths (2005) about “periods of coupling which are invisible to linear methods.”

Future posts in this series (if it continues) may draw attention to:

a) nonrandom relations between interannual terrestrial oscillations and interannual [not to be confused with decadal] rates of change of solar variables.

b) the guaranteed potential for naive investigators to be irrecoverably derailed by Simpson’s Paradox due to stubborn &/or blind adherence to seriously misguided conventional mainstream statistical inference paradigms & malpractices that rigidly & dogmatically insist on falsely assuming independence when none exists.

c) the [counterintuitive &/or paradoxical for some] influence of grain & extent – & aggregation criteria more generally – on summaries of spatiotemporal pattern.

“Grain” & “extent“?…

Grain is another term for spatiotemporal resolution. Important: Extent is a term which concisely encompasses the properties of spatiotemporal summary windows. The vast majority of mainstream researchers are either absolutely ignorant or insufficiently cognizant of the effect of extent on integrals across spatiotemporal harmonics (including the nonstationary variety). The consequences are serious: blindness and rejection of valid findings on nonsensical grounds.

Best Regards to All.