Guest post by Guillermo Gonzalez
I recently happened upon the SORCE/TIM website and decided to look up the plot of the full total solar irradiance (TSI) dataset (http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/data/tsi_data.htm#plots)
The SORCE mission began collecting TSI data in February 2003.
I was curious to see if the variations in the TSI had begun to rise yet, perhaps indicating a start to cycle 24. Visual inspection of the SORCE TSI plot showed just the opposite – variations continue to decline in amplitude. If cycle 24 has started, there are no signs of it in these data.
We can be a bit more quantitative if we examine, instead, a plot of TSI variance with time. I produced such a plot using the daily average TSI data provided on the SORCE web site.
The red data are variance values calculated at two-week intervals. The blue curve is the smoothed data calculated in the same way as smoothed sunspot numbers (basically a 12-month running average). Note, the vertical axis is plotted on a logarithmic scale.
To compare the recent TSI variance trend with the previous sunspot minimum, I looked up the ACRIM2 daily average TSI data at: http://www.acrim.com/Data%20Products.htm
These data are plotted on the same scale as the SORCE data. The smoothed data show a minimum TSI variance near the beginning of 1996, some months before sunspot minimum (October 1996). Notice that the minimum value for the variance during the 1996 minimum was about an order of magnitude larger than the present TSI variance.
The SORCE web site quotes long-term 1-sigma precision (relative accuracy) of their TSI measurements to be 0.001%/yr. This corresponds to a variance of 2 ´ 10-4 W2 m-4. However, the precision should be considerably better than this on the 2-week timescale that I selected for calculating the variance. Unfortunately, I have not been able to locate a quote for the estimated precision of the ACRIM2 measurements. It would be worthwhile to know if the minimum TSI variance of the previous sunspot minimum measured by ACRIM2needs to be corrected for the instrumental precision.
Guillermo Gonzalez writes on his background:
I’m an astronomer, though my present title is associate professor of physics at Grove City College, PA. I wrote a paper (in Solar Physics) with Ken Schatten back in 1987 on predicting the next solar maximum with geomagnetic indices. That was my only contribution on anything having to do with the Sun-Earth connection, but I also got a letter published in Physics Today in 1997 wherein I urged readers to takethe Sun-Earth climate connection more seriously.
These days most of my research is on extrasolar planets.
UPDATE: I received a suggestion for an overlay via email from Terry Dunleavy and I’ve worked one up below. This was done graphically. I took great care to get the two lined up correctly. Note however that the datasets span different lengths of time, as you can note on the two timescales I’ve included on the combined graph. The vertical scale matches exactly between graphs though. – Anthony
UPDATE2: Here is another graphical comparison of the two TSI variance graphs, scaled to have a matching X-axis and appropriately aligned side by side. – Anthony
Leif Svalgaard (13:32:01) “Are you challenging my statement that temperatures the past 30 years are not comparable to what they were in 1845-1875?”
That’s not what I’m getting at. Perhaps whenever a story next appears about the long-term spatial mysteries of regional diurnal temperature range trends, we will have an opportunity to hear from some experts on the subject. My readings suggest that related knowledge is very seriously limited (and this is absolutely central to the whole climate discussion, even if it is off most radars & not the usual headline news). I hope the relevant experts will participate in such a discussion if it arises – and be honest about the limited understanding.
Comment for Micky C (MC) (14:35:31)
Thank you very much for sharing this example.
Note for others:
You can explore chaos independently using something as simple as the logistic equation, but be careful:
It you don’t look at the right resolution, you will completely miss the interesting transitions. (This is an example of an instance where even a painstaking step-search algorithm can fail.)
(Some) physical geographers & ecologists know very well about this stuff because they can substitute space for time (in some experiments) and achieve replication at a variety of resolutions and then investigate parameter estimate variations with scale.
….Of course we don’t get that particular type of replication in a lot of the time series we often like to discuss on this website and, as most who investigate natural time series know, the various standard assumptions about independence often arise more out of mathematical convenience than truth – people are just doing the best they can ….and not always admitting the limitations (that’s where the eye of scrutiny needs to focus).
– – –
Re: zolov (04:43:45)
Have you conducted nonlinear investigations of the variety suggested by Micky C (MC) (14:35:31)?….
“If the coupling is linked to geomagnetic or TSi it may not show up as a direct correlation; the dynamic evolution may need to be mapped.”
ralph ellis (13:45:05) :
You’re making this up as you go along, aren’t you?
Ralph, you’ve hit the nail on the head. The great thing about the Be 10 data is that it can’t be fiddled with, as compared to the aa Index, sunspot numbers and so on.
I strongly recommend reading Jasper Kirby’s “Cosmic Rays and Climate” which can be found at: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0804/0804.1938v1.pdf
The other thing I wanted to say was congratulations to Guillermo Gonzalez on a great original insight.
For what it’s worth, it is possible that solar minimum may not be until 2010.
Leif,
A while back – back when I actually had a little bit of time, I ran the Goode & Palle albedo against the MSI-RSS (?) mean T record. My best result was a correlation of 0.73 over the 20yrs of G&P data between the T and albedo associate delta power with a delay of 7 months or so. A sensitivity of around 0.12 K per W/m^2 was determined. I’m sure someone with some skill at data analysis could do even better than my almost back of the envelope version. I’d think that several % variation in albedo around 1998 makes for a great sensitivity measurement.
L Bowser (11:25:09) :
You responded to LS as follows:
How about my shot at this. You mention there being no difference in temperature due to solar variation (well that’s not exactly what you said, but is maybe how I am reading it), when in fact there is. Throughout the year, there is a difference and the order of ~4K between the high global mean and the low global mean . So there is an anual oscillation that coincides with distance from the sun.
I’d like to clarify this point. Where is the data for the ~4k difference. I’m not saying there isn’t a difference I’m just not sure it correlates with the distance form the sun. I could be wrong, though.
Leif Svalgaard (21:01:17) :
MartinGAtkins (20:32:14) :
Think of a saucepan of water. If you put a lighted candle underneath it, it will almost certainly warm the water but will probably not cause it to boil.
That is not a feedback situation but a directly driven process. I have a feeling that ‘feedback’ is not being used in this discussion in its correct meaning, …
I agree Leif. Feed back would be to take the expanding water heated by gas and use it to contol the flow of gas.
If expansion causes the flow of gas to increase then this is +ve feed back
heat=expand=greater heat=even greater gas flow etc. Intability
If expansion causes the gas flow to decrease then this is negative feedback
heat=expand=less heat=contract=moreheat etc. Stability
Basil (07:01:02) :
Do your fft on monthly HadCRUT3 data since 1850 and tell us what you find.
http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/3982/hadcrut3vfft.jpg
No 11 year cycle and no 22 and no 33 and no 44
but 9.1 15 21 and a biggy at 68 years
http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/3982/hadcrut3vfft.jpg
Just Want Truth… (05:49:07) responded to Bruce Armour (01:25:54)
=
This article is interesting Bruce!
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2009/04/23_keiling.shtml
=
I agree.
I’m still hoping a qualified expert will address Bruce’s interesting (some might say provocative) questions ….It seems we may be left to speculate that there are no credible answers available at the present time….
vukcevic (14:08:38) :
Ron de Haan,
Thanks for your research. Well, well I would never…
You have to forgive my macabre sense of humour, I was trying to put fear of God into some of AGWs (in case they got this global warming lark wrong), but never suspected that someone did attempt to do real science on a possible link.
I have to be more careful in future.
vukcevic,
If we leave the fear of God out of the picture and perform research on any hint possible, in the end we will get our answers.
Don’t forget that Al Gore used Malaria in support of his Global Warming scare and it took a person like Moncton to debunk his story.
Pat (19:44:01) :
“Robert,
No dramas. Fortunately I live nowhere near the snow when it falls here in New South Wales.
January is when the Earth is closest to the Sun. We’ve had a cool summer here, humid, but cooler than last year. Cool summer, cool autum, winter will be too.
One thing I have noticed about the summer just past. We have something called the “Aussie wave” here, and it relates to flying insects, you have to continuously swipe them away from your face, hence the “Aussie wave” as it looks like you are waving to someone all the time. The summer before last was normal, ie, it was hotter than the summer just past. Lots of flies. The summer just gone, there was almost none. Too cold for them? Damn straight!”
Pat,
What do you tell me, no flies in Australia anymore?
I think I am going to book a ticket!
ralph ellis (13:45:05) :
Your very own 2008 paper said that the Zurich data was correct from 2000 back to 1875, but now you cite evidence that it was incorrect between 1915 and 1945.
It won’t hurt you to actually read that paper. To ease you over the hump here is a statement from the paper:
“we must ascribe the artificial increase of Rz after 1945 to Waldmeiers inexperience [Friedli, 2005] as he struggled with learning how to construct the sunspot number. Subsequent observers have striven to match Waldmeier, so in order to remove the 1945 discontinuity [and be consistent with modern counts] we must increase the pre-1945 Rz by 17.5%”.
Other evidence [Ca K and geomagnetic data] suggest a jump of 20% and 23%. So a good average is about 20%. Going further back in time [as also described in the paper] shows that a 40% increase in called for before ~1890.
So, this is not ‘made up as we go’.
cba (16:06:35) :
A while back – back when I actually had a little bit of time, I ran the Goode & Palle albedo against the MSI-RSS (?) mean T record. My best result was a correlation of 0.73 over the 20yrs of G&P data between the T and albedo associate delta power with a delay of 7 months or so.
Yes, there is no doubt that albedo and temperature are [causally] correlated. The albedo is, however, not correlated with the solar cycle.
“Ron de Haan (16:57:59) :
Pat,
What do you tell me, no flies in Australia anymore?
I think I am going to book a ticket!”
Crickey no! We still get plenty of bugs and a fair number are splattered across the front of my car, but what I saying is that this last summer was noticeable for the absense of flies, even the natives (I didin’t have to steal a loaf of bread to get to Australia) I work with commented on it too. During summer this year we had a cold snap a little before the summer peak. The summer was pretty weak (Cooler, poor weather, ie, no “blue dome sunny hot days” etc) compared to previous summers. We had about a two week period where we had “normal” hot days, they were humid due to weather patterns further north, but no way near as hot the previous few years indeed. Coincidence (With NH record colds)? Not sure, we’ll find out very soon and much sooner than Al Gore’s prediction that the Arctic will be ice free in 5 years.
David Archibald (15:56:14) :
For what it’s worth, it is possible that solar minimum may not be until 2010.
Looks very probable to me, Dr. Archibald. Very probable.
The white-light faculae from Greenwich and the latest from Ergebrisse indicate a bar to me of at least 2010.
I am waiting for someone to dig into this with me.
Any takers?
Paul Vaughan (14:42:05) :
“Are you challenging my statement that temperatures the past 30 years are not comparable to what they were in 1845-1875?”
That’s not what I’m getting at.
Then where is the challenge? All I said was temperatures the past 30 years are not comparable to what they were in 1845-1875, and you challenge that…
Be specific, for once.
Re: Leif Svalgaard (18:12:50)
To reiterate:
“Perhaps whenever a story next appears about the long-term spatial mysteries of regional diurnal temperature range trends, we will have an opportunity to hear from some experts on the subject. My readings suggest that related knowledge is very seriously limited (and this is absolutely central to the whole climate discussion, even if it is off most radars & not the usual headline news). I hope the relevant experts will participate in such a discussion if it arises – and be honest about the limited understanding.”
Leif Svalgaard (18:00:07) “Yes, there is no doubt that albedo and temperature are [causally] correlated. The albedo is, however, not correlated with the solar cycle.”
The more interesting questions involve dynamical nonlinear relations.
Leif Svalgaard (18:00:07)
“[…] we must increase the pre-1945 Rz by 17.5% […]
Other evidence [Ca K and geomagnetic data] suggest a jump of 20% and 23%. So a good average is about 20%. Going further back in time [as also described in the paper] shows that a 40% increase in called for before ~1890.”
My reading list is long, but I am curious (in the meantime while I plow through it) to know if these proposed adjustments are as linear as this quote makes them sound.
Paul Vaughan (18:30:05) :
To reiterate:
“Perhaps whenever a story next appears about the long-term spatial mysteries of regional diurnal temperature range trends, we will have an opportunity to hear from some experts on the subject. My readings suggest that related knowledge is very seriously limited (and this is absolutely central to the whole climate discussion, even if it is off most radars & not the usual headline news). I hope the relevant experts will participate in such a discussion if it arises – and be honest about the limited understanding.”
I can read, reiterating doesn’t do anything for me. Maybe it works for you, so:
reiterate:
“Then where is the challenge? All I said was temperatures the past 30 years are not comparable to what they were in 1845-1875, and you challenge that…
Be specific, for once.”
You seem to be saying that your reading suggests to you that temperatures in 1845-1875 were similar to what they have been the past 30 years. Yes or No?
Paul Vaughan (18:40:28) :
My reading list is long, but I am curious (in the meantime while I plow through it) to know if these proposed adjustments are as linear as this quote makes them sound.
Calibration errors are usually linear and this one in particular is. The Figure on page 18 of http://www.leif.org/research/Napa%20Solar%20Cycle%2024.pdf
shows the linear relationships. Linear within the limits of the noise [and that is all we can say].
Does anyone have any data regarding the solar output of neutrinos over the last decade?
Nancy Smith (19:32:19) :
Does anyone have any data regarding the solar output of neutrinos over the last decade?
You may find some pointers in Peter Sturrock’s recent paper:
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0810/0810.2755.pdf
The Sun is not quite asleep, there is a SC23 spot just south of the solar equator, and some SC24 spots on their way in the North…
Leif Svalgaard (20:11:39) :
The Sun is not quite asleep, there is a SC23 spot just south of the solar equator, and some SC24 spots on their way in the North…
And another [or perhaps more] at disk center…
Re: Leif Svalgaard (18:51:04) & (19:42:56)
My definition of “temperature” is broad – i.e. cognizant of spatiotemporal heterogeneity & the effects of summary methods – not only as a result of rigorous formal training, but also as a result of continuous hardening through practical experience.
Perhaps the best way to achieve resolution is to ask you to put forward evidence that geomagnetic activity has no effect on “temperature”.
–
I would also be curious to hear of any comments you might offer regarding possible connections between insights from Sturrock’s work (on neutrinos & solar core rotation) and the intermittent large-scale HMF pattern you (& Wilcox) found.
I recently had a look at Sturrock’s 2009 Solar Physics article [similar to the arxiv paper in your response to Nancy Smith (19:32:19)] and found it interesting. I also dug up the following [sci-news article with a rather interesting twist] when tracing some of the history of related developments:
Stanford Online Report – News – Jan. 28, 1998
“Twenty-eight day cycle found in ghostly solar neutrinos, team says”
http://www.stanford.edu/dept/news/news/1998/january28/neutrinos.html
A spot on whose radar?