From the Hockey Schtick: Paper finds another amplification mechanism by which the Sun controls climate (video follows)
A lecture by professor Hiroko Miyahara of the University of Tokyo provides additional support to the Svensmark theory of cosmoclimatology, finding that both solar geomagnetic activity and the polarity of geomagnetic activity have significant effects upon cosmic rays and cloud formation. The polarity of solar geomagnetic activity flips with a 22-year cycle, with periods of negative polarity [such as the current solar cycle] having a greater effect upon cosmic rays and cloud formation.
The authors also find a remarkable correlation between solar rotational signals, cloud height, and the Madden-Julian Oscillation [third figure below], which may represent yet another mechanism by which small changes in solar activity can be amplified to large changes in climate. Other amplification mechanisms include via ocean oscillations, ozone, and sunshine hours/clouds.
Watch:
Solar Activity and Climate
Hiroko Miyahara, The University of Tokyo
Abstract:
1. Introduction
Instrumentally measured or reconstructed past climate changes often show positive correlation with solar activity at the wide range of time scales, such as from monthly (Takahashi et al., 2010) to millennial (Bond et al., 2001). However, the mechanisms of their linkage have not been well understood. The possible solar-related parameters that can drive climate change are; total solar irradiance (TSI), solar ultra violet (UV), solar wind (SW) and the galactic cosmic rays (GCRs). The galactic cosmic rays are attenuated by changing solar magnetic field in the heliosphere; the region where the wind of solar plasma and magnetic filed expend. The observed flux of GCRs shows inverse correlation to solar activity. It is known that the change in the cosmic ray flux results in the change in the ionization rate in the atmosphere. It is suggested that it may cause the change in cloud amount.
2. Variation of Galactic Cosmic Rays during the Maunder Minimum
It is difficult to evaluate the exact role of each of solar-related parameters above, since most of them are more or less synchronized for the instrumental period. However, the variation of solar radiation and GCRs may be different at the Maunder Minimum (AD1645-1715). The Maunder Minimum is a period of sunspot absence lasted about 70 years. The Sun has shown periodic variation with ~11-year period since the beginning of the 18th century. However, the sunspots had almost disappeared and apparent ~11-year cycles had been lost during the Maunder Minimum. It means that solar activity had been extraordinarily weak and that the environment of heliosphere had been different from today. We found that the variation of GCRs was very unique during the time. The variation of GCRs has been revealed by the measurements of cosmic-ray induced radio isotopes such as carbon-14 and beryllium-10 in tree rings or ice cores. The content of radio isotopes have shown that solar cycle had been kept during the long-lasting sunspot absence, but with ~14-year period. It has been also revealed that the 22-year cycle; the cycle of periodic reversal of solar dipole magnetic field, had been also kept but with ~28-year period and had been amplified during the time. The polarity of the Sun reverses at the maxima of solar cycles, and thus holds ~22-year period. The ~22-year cycle is not observed in the changes in solar radiations; however it appears in the variation of GCRs consisting of mainly changed particles. The changes in the environment of heliosphere had probably resulted in the amplification of the 22-year cycle in GCRs.
3. Variation of climate and its relation to Galactic Cosmic Rays
We have found that reconstructed climate data show unique variations similar to that of GCRs during the Maunder Minimum. For example, the northern hemispheric temperatures are significantly dependent on the direction of solar dipole magnetic field. At the phases of negative polarity of dipole magnetic field, when GCRs show anomalous increase, we observe colder climate. The dependence of climate change on solar dipole magnetic field results in the manifestation of 22-year cycle in climate change. The cause of decadal to multi-decadal climate changes had not been well understood, however, our study suggests that GCRs may be the playing important role in climate change at those time scales.
Conclusion
More detailed studies are needed to reveal the mechanisms of solar influence on climate change; however, our study has suggested that not only solar irradiative outputs but also magnetic property is playing important role in climate change possibly through changing the flux of GCRs. The mechanisms how the cosmic rays change the cloud property should be clarified in the future studies.
References
G. Bond et al., Persistent Solar Influence on North Atlantic Climate During the Holocene, Science, 7, 294, 2130, 2001.
H. Miyahara, Y. Yokoyama & K. Masuda, Possible link between multi-decadal climate cycles and periodic reversals of solar magnetic field polarity, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 272, 290-295, 2008.
Y. Takahashi, Y. Okazaki, M. Sato, H. Miyahara, K. Sakanoi, and P. K. Hong, 27-day variation in cloud amount and relationship to the solar cycle, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1577-1584, 2010.
Related articles
- It’s the Sun stupid – The minor significance of CO2 (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Current solar cycle data seems to be past the peak (wattsupwiththat.com)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
![ScreenShot3388[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/screenshot33881.jpg?resize=640%2C471&quality=83)
Very interesting… Who would have though it, eh? It was the sun all along.
MJO’s mojo.
You mean to say that tiny variations in the output from that big bright ball in the sky, that provides all our light, heat and energy, might have some effect on the tiny meeting layer between the sun’s energy input and the oceanic energy battery storage and slow release output, which is known as our climate? Well who’da thunk it? /sarc.
They’ll be calling sunshine a pollutant next and try to tax or ban it….
Attached is a link to their paper.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/11/08/1000113107.full.pdf
Synchronized Northern Hemisphere climate change and solar magnetic cycles during the Maunder Minimum by Yasuhiko T. Yamaguchia, Yusuke Yokoyamaa et al.
The Sun is very active, energetic, and dynamic. I can well imagine that if the Sun even hiccups we here on Earth will notice it some how. And the way that cosmic rays can increase cloud cover, and all the various Solar cycles, surely the Sun has a big effect on our climate.
Beesaman, already done:
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e7a63de0-9b37-4447-a834-177c735c376a
@steveta-uk. Makes sense. I don’t think you can use solar reflectors on your property to turn my property into a solar furnace.
also magnetic property is playing important role in climate change
Don’t tell Dr. Svalgaard,
vukcevic has been ‘rattling’ about that kind of ‘nonsense’ for number of years now:
Phase relationship between SOLAR and the EARTH’s MAGNETIC VARIABILITY is of the fundamental importance, when in phase oceans warm, when out of phase oceans cool. Got it?
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/EarthNV.htm
Remember the Moons orbital period is also ~27 days.
Re: Beesaman comment to tax or ban the sun
See open letter by Frederick Bastiat, French economist, published in 1845, to the French Parliment on behalf of the candlestick makers, et al. Link: http://bastiat.org/en/petition.html
vukcevic says
also magnetic property is playing important role in climate change
Don’t tell Dr. Svalgaard,
Henry says
please
keep dr S busy somewhere else
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/16/the-msm-finally-notices-the-pause/#comment-1277829
I don’t really trust the eye to compare two time series plotted on top of one another. Why not show a scattergram, coloured if necessary by solar magnetic phase?
Ach. Wackelnszusammenbringen.
I wonder if it’s a coincidence that Jupiter orbits the Sun every 11.86 years, compared with the sun’s ~11 year cycles.
Is there a connection between solar influences and the jet stream? I read an article several months ago that was describing some aspects of solar dynamics. A section discussed an inner middle-latitude, cyclical flow that breaks up and disappears periodically. I had an immediate thought pop up, ‘ what if the jet stream is affected by that flow?’. Could that be due to harmonies between the magnetic fields of the Sun with the Earth? I am a complete amateur in anything regarding solar, but I do have a curious way of sometimes seeing how things fit together, and I am curious enough to ask the question.
You don’t want to go overboard with this solar stuff, Anthony. It’s still crackpottery in certain circles. About one in six or seven articles will do it. Myself, I’m into it.
Not sure why they are calling variation in OLR (outgoing longwave radiation) a variation in cloud height. Would seem to be more a measure of total cloudiness (combining both heat trapping by clouds and the albedo decrease in shortwave that is available to re-emerge as longwave). Anyone up on this?
In any case, a clear OLR signal of the rotation of the heliospheric current sheet is strong evidence for Svensmark’s GCR-cloud theory.
Understanding the lag time effect, the recharge and discharge cycles of energy absorbed and released due to solar cycles, will help us adapt more easily to climate changes. Knowing the weather is not our fault and you are not to blame for climate changes, will make you feel better as well.
In what way, how would the movement of (basically) ‘air’ be influenced by magnetic fields? Would not the (more or less) static mag field of the earth (about 1/2 Gauss at the surface) have more of an influence? Would not some ‘connection’ have been made by now between the jetstream and the earth’s mag field?
The relative permeability of air (μr) = 1.00000037 (one point zero zero zero zero zero zero three seven). Relative permeability is denoted by the symbol μr (mu sub r) and is the ratio of the permeability of a specific medium (air in our case) to the permeability of free space, μ0 (mu sub zero). Steel, by contrast has μr =100 (one hundred).
So, air comes really, really close to being as permeable as free space is the take-away; other effects (winds due to low/high pressure centers, orographic lift, solar, etc) will quite literally ‘swamp’ the very minuscule effects a mag field could yield …
Additional
.
References in the paper to “magnetic” all appear to mean that of Sun; not of Earth. Maybe I missed it.
Yet another paper pointing to the Sun having more of an influence on climate than is currently accepted by, well lets say the IPCC and others. This is hardly a surprise to me and many here, and if not scientific proven yet, it is certainly intuitive to believe the Sun has the major influence. My question is, are we near a stage yet where all these theories can be put in to a forecast so it can be tested in reality? it has to explain the late 20th century warming, the current standstill and the expected cooling, when these have been nailed so will AGW. How far off do you think we are to that, as it will certainly kill off any major AGW effect
Regards to all
Keith Gordon
I think that the following comment needs repeating:
lgl says:
April 17, 2013 at 10:12 am
Remember the Moons orbital period is also ~27 days.
Thanks lgl for not going with the herd.
A 27/54 day period between cloud height and AA index may just a result of the fact that ~ 27 day rotation period on the Sun matches the ~ 27 period of the anomalistic (Lunar perigee to perigee) or Draconic (Lunar node to node) Month.
Watch this space.
I hate to even suggest it but it seems increasingly probable that these phenomena are directly corrosponding with the cycles governing astrology. Gee, we might actually find a scientific basis for some of it. Oops.
My question is, are we near a stage yet where all these theories can be put in to a forecast so it can be tested in reality? it has to explain the late 20th century warming, the current standstill and the expected cooling
Thinking there is a single primary driver of climate change is the error the CO2 GHG crowd make. It’s entirely possible, and likely IMO, that there are multiple significant drivers of climate change.
Clouds seem to be the primary mechanism, and we are a long way from understanding clouds sufficiently that we can model and predict their effects.
Otherwise, my theory is that climate change results from factors that affect the phase changes of water.