Although we’ve been covering this quiet sun issue for over a year on WUWT, the light bulb seems to have gone on for mainstream media right about now.
There is growing press coverage about the current state of the sun, most recently from Charles Osgood of CBS News as well as the BBC and other major outlets. While the sun slumbers deeper and has missed its cyclic snooze alarm, our media is finally waking up to the solar somnolence.
Here is a short roundup of news articles on this subject today:
‘Still Sun’ baffling astronomers
Scientists warn sun has dimmed
Sun ‘at its quietest for 100 years’
Has the sun gone in? Earth’s closest star ‘dimmest it’s been for a century’
So the question arises, now that this has been identified, what should we call it?
There have been some good ideas, such as naming it after Jack Eddy, who coined the phrase “Maunder Minimum“. There’s been some discussion of a “Gore Minimum”, but I don’t like the idea of giving Gore credit for something he has nothing to do with, or even likely understands. There’s been suggestion of “The Hansen Minimum” which makes a little more sense, since he’s an astronomer by training. On that note, Leif Svalgaard predicted this, so maybe it should be his honor.
So, I’ve decided to have a poll, and I’ll take suggestions for other names than what I’ve listed.
“Gore Minimum”. I’ll take an ounce of credit for that one http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/03/27/new-sunspot-but-still-a-solar-cycle-23-spot/#comment-9537
Not bad. But I’m gravitating toward ‘The Inconvenient Minimum’ now; it’s funny on so many levels.
However, I’m new to all this, so must defer to the regulars here and say that if this minimum turns out to be significant, and if this forum’s eminence griseDr. Svalgaard predicted it, then he should get the credit.
/Mr Lynn
Do NOT name it after any AGW scaremonger! It seems a nice ironic little insult today, but you will perpetuate their name long after the reason the minimum is named after them is forgotten. They deserve obscurity (or ignominy) but nothing else. Name it honestly after someone whom you respect. I suggest the McIntyre Minimum, as Steve has done so much slogging hard work on difficult stuff in order to get the truth out there.
The Pantless Emperor Minimum
Or just, The Substandard Cycle.
Landscheidt Minimum, hands down!
For fun: Gore Maximum Chutzpah
Some time ago, I started looking at Spectral, or wave analysis, of the available temperature data, to evaluate so-called “Global Warming”. So I took the Hadcet data from 1659 to see what, if any, long term waves or periodic cycles which might be present. In addition, evaluate any relationship between the Solar sunspot activity and temperature. This process involved using the FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) to see where the “wave energy” is located. Since I gave my Matlab program away long ago, the analysis was done on EXCEL using the Visual Basic capability. The Harcet data was downloaded from the http://www.Climate4you.com site.
The first step was to do a linear best fit of the yearly averages of the Hadcut data. This turned out to be an equation with the initial point of 8.69 and a slope of 0.003 deg/year. That is:
T_lin = 8.69 + 0.003*(Yr – 1659) where 1659 <= Yr < 2009
The top illustration (a) of fig. T_est_01 shows this:
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/t_est_01-JtVah.gif
The next step was to look at the error T_er = T_act – T_lin. This error is shown on the middle illustration (b) of T_est_01, labeled Input. It is noted that the data seems to stay around the line, indicating that there are no significant higher order terms to cause the error to grow in the 1980-2008 period. A Spectral analysis was then run on the Input, using the FFT to transform the Input into the frequency domain. The Spectral plot showing “energy” or signal strength, against frequency (cycles/yr) is shown in the bottom illustration (c). As a check on the computations, the signal was then transformed back into the real domain, as indicated by the Output signal in the middle illustration (b).
In looking at the spectral chart, a small break showed up about 0.12 cy/yr (8 yr.) point. So a second run was made “cutting off” all freq. above 0.12. Figure T_est_02 is the result. The upper illustration shows the before (Input) and after (Output) filtering. From the Output it can be seen there are definite periodic cycles in the 10 year period. There are some lower freq. also present. A peaking seems to be forming just after the year 2000.
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/t_est_02-XHCZp.gif
Another run was made to look at temperature variations in the 10 year period range. This involved blocking out the freq. not only above the 0.12 freq., but lower ones between 0.003 and 0.06 cy/yr. This allowed a better look at the ~10 year period cycles, as shown in T_est_03.
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/t_est_03-0KLEO.gif
The top illustration shows both the unfiltered and filtered temperature, and sunspot activity plotted below. It would appear that the 10 year solar cycle is reflected in some way to the temp., and existence of a strong correlation. A more detail analysis of this would be interesting in the future.
Figure T_est_04 shows the result of cutting off freq. above 0.06 cycles/yr ( 16 yr period). From the figure it appears there are a couple of harmonics present, one with about a about 25 year period and a longer wave.
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/t_est_04-QIVpI.gif
Figure T_est_05 shows this longer wave, with about a 50 year period.
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/t_est_05-NVRm1.gif
It also has a fairly strong amplitude. It also shows that there is a peaking about the year 2000. This peaking around the year 2000 of this and other wave would suggest that the recent warm up could be due to the re-enforcement of several waves such as the 50 and 10 year wave.
One last wave was very interesting, but not enough data is present to really make a case for it, is shown in T_est_06.
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/t_est_06-6LauH.gif
This one was found by cutting off all but the lowest frequencies. It shows a weak oscillation in the 600+ year period. One could wonder if it is part of the 1000 year cycle that shows up in the chronicles.
I guess in conclusion, to this rather simple analysis, there seems to be a very strong correlation of temperature to Solar activity, at this one point on the globe. The second point would be, if I were a gambling man, I would not bet the farm on man/CO2 causing global warming.
It will also be interesting add and correlate the North Atlantic Cycle & Pacific Cycles to this temperature data, similar to the sunspot graph.
Depending on how deep it gets:
The Mini-minimum
The Maxi-minimum
The Al -[uminium]
Seriously though I think the Eddy minimum is most appropriate.
The Science Minimum? I voted for Leif…
Anthony,
I don’t care how this Solar Minimum is called.
But if we really want to make a statement about “HONESTY and Skeptics honoring another Skeptic, there is only One NAME:
The Landscheidt Minimum
“In 2003, Landscheidt published his paper, ‘New Little Ice Age Instead of Global Warming’,[5] that refined his study of the sun’s baryocentric motion to the Gleissberg cycle which takes into account all the planets. It is here that he proposed the mechanism by which themotion of the planets affected Solar Activity. He calculated the change in torque on the sun caused by the planets over time and theorized this accelerated and decelerated the solar transport in the solar core which in turn affected the solar activity which manifested
itself in sun spots. He theorized the process of braking would start in 1990 and that solar cycle 24 would be of Maunder Minimum character (<80 Wolf number) and a number of solar cycles after with the Deep Minimum occurring in 2030. At this time Climate Scientists which were becoming known as Global Warming Skeptics found the work compelling enough to propose this Minimum be called the Landscheidt Minimum[14]”.
Leif Svalgaard (20:19:24)
We are not going there again. Plus I did not mean any offense, I was thinking you might have been playing dumb as it suited your cause.
I noticed you chose not to answer my earlier question.
So do you think you should have your name on the upcoming grand minimum?
Gore/Hansen Interruption!!!
It ought to be the Gore Cold Period or Gore Pessimum (if we get very cold) but the solar minimum ought not to be named for him.
IFF we don’t get cold, it ought to honor Eddy.
IFF we DO get cold, Landscheidt.
The Mann-Gore-Pig Minimum
I’m cereal!!
Geoff Sharp (21:55:04) :
I noticed you chose not to answer my earlier question.
So do you think you should have your name on the upcoming grand minimum?
I would be honored, but my preference is for the Eddy minimum. Doug Biesecker has already in NASA/NOAA circles referred to the Svalgaard Minimum [possibly a bit mocking a la Hoyle’s ‘Big Bang’]. But your question is somewhat odious it seems to me.
The CBC has already called it “Dim Sun”!!! 😉
Here was their broadcast from tonight. Shockingly mainstream mind icky ….
Dim Sun.
I have argued on my website for the Gore Minimum, but that has been mostly because it makes the AGW people go nuts.
On a more serious note:
I would argue for the Landscheidt Minimum.
I have seen many arguments on this website why the Sun’s movements around the barycenter are not the cause of solar grand minima.
I have found all these arguments to be not valid and being the result of lack of knowledge of Classic Mechanics, the Gyroscopic Effect and of the Lagrange’s equation.
Subjects which I have studied.
These arguments also violate direct observations of variations of the different and varying rotations at different depths and latitudes.
It is the blocking and unblocking of magnetic activity caused by different angular rotations at different depths near the tacholine which is main cause of what we now are seeing.
Basta!
If this turns out to be a significant minimum, I feel the name for it should carry a warning to the future to beware hubris.
So I want to change my vote, after reading all the entries, including my own Mucahadoabout Minimum, to the best , by far:
Igno Minimum
which is priceless and I will use it from now on.
Ron de Haan (21:53:22) :
“In 2003, Landscheidt published his paper”
By 2003 it was clear which way the wind was blowing [as I said many a time my grandson Peter knew this]. So, it is not a unique achievement to ‘predict’ lower cycles to come.
Here is Ken Schatten’s version:
Solar Activity Heading for a Maunder Minimum?
Schatten, K. H.; Tobiska, W. K.
American Astronomical Society, SPD meeting #34, #06.03; Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol. 35, p.817, Publication Date: 05/2003
Abstract
Long-range (few years to decades) solar activity prediction techniques vary greatly in their methods. They range from examining planetary orbits, to spectral analyses (e.g. Fourier, wavelet and spectral analyses), to artificial intelligence methods, to simply using general statistical techniques. Rather than concentrate on statistical/mathematical/numerical methods, we discuss a class of methods which appears to have a “physical basis.” Not only does it have a physical basis, but this basis is rooted in both “basic” physics (dynamo theory), but also solar physics (Babcock dynamo theory). The class we discuss is referred to as “precursor methods,” originally developed by Ohl, Brown and Williams and others, using geomagnetic observations.
My colleagues and I have developed some understanding for how these methods work and have expanded the prediction methods using “solar dynamo precursor” methods, notably a “SODA” index (SOlar Dynamo Amplitude). These methods are now based upon an understanding of the Sun’s dynamo processes- to explain a connection between how the Sun’s fields are generated and how the Sun broadcasts its future activity levels to Earth. This has led to better monitoring of the Sun’s dynamo fields and is leading to more accurate prediction techniques. Related to the Sun’s polar and toroidal magnetic fields, we explain how these methods work, past predictions, the current cycle, and predictions of future of solar activity levels for the next few solar cycles.
The surprising result of these long-range predictions is a rapid decline in solar activity, starting with cycle #24. If this trend continues, we may see the Sun heading towards a “Maunder” type of solar activity minimum – an extensive period of reduced levels of solar activity. For the solar physicists, who enjoy studying solar activity, we hope this isn’t so, but for NASA, which must place and maintain satellites in low earth orbit (LEO), it may help with reboost problems. Space debris, and other aspects of objects in LEO will also be affected.
———–
As the polar fields in 2003 stabilized, the size of the next cycle could be predicted with reasonable accuracy.
Great observations are always named after the person who either predicted or observed an event first.
Mr Svalgaard has more than earned this age old right to be remembered for excellence in science.
World War III Minimum
(because without more honesty….)
It’s too early to name it, but it’s also great fun.
Perhaps in his travels, Al Gore will hitch a ride to the ISS and spend some time in space. Then when the Gore Effect causes the Sun to remain spotless, and perhaps even cool down some, then it would be most appropriate to name it after him.
So what should we name the actions of Sol?
Gore: We have the technology. We can control the climate. We must act quickly.
Sol: Oh no you don’t. Watch this ! Observe carefully, Earthling, as I pull your plug.
Certainly not after Gore. Sol is irritated enough as it is.
We should name it after one who respects it, and cares about what it does or does not do.
I’m fine with any Solar Physicist.
Gore and Hansen don’t deserve to have their names immortalized like this. Stick to real scientists names who have done real and useful work on this.
But in any case, I don’t think it deserves a name yet, there was no sign of anything five years ago and all this is right now is a very long quiet period between cycles. folk might end up with egg on their faces if the sun does something weird and ramp up. I say wait one or two more cycles.
it would be typical of humans in this day and age to name something and print a million column inches about it before it really is anything at all (like AGW for ex).