This arrived in my email tonight from Bill Livingston. It is hot off the press, date June 11th. I believe WUWT readers will be some of the first to see this. – Anthony
Guest Essay by:
W. Livingston, National Solar Observatory, 950 N. Cherry Ave, Tucson AZ 85718;
M. Penn, National Solar Observatory, Tucson AZ
Physical conditions in the infrared at 1.5 microns, including maximum magnetic field strength and temperature, have been observed spectroscopically in 1391 sunspots 1990 to 2009 (1). We emphasize the quantitative difference between our IR sunspot measurements and the visible light results from most solar magnetographs employed world-wide. The latter are compromised by scattered light and measure flux, not field strength. A lower limit of ~1800 Gauss is required to form spot umbra. The umbral maximum field strength has declined over the above interval, perhaps because spots have on average diminished in size. The present condition of solar activity minimum has more spotless days than since the 1910s (2). The Cheshire Cat behavior is related to magnetic surface fields often appearing without accompanying dark spots.
Sunspots recently are behaving like a Cheshire Cat: the smile is there (magnetic fields) but the body is missing (no dark markings). We are unsure about past cycles but at present sunspots, with their usual umbrae and penumbrae, are failing to materialize. For hundreds of years the Sun has shown an approximately periodic 11-year alteration in its activity where the number of sunspots increases and then decreases. Sunspots are dark regions on the solar disk with magnetic field strengths greater than 1500-1800 Gauss. The last sunspot maximum occurred in 2001. Magnetically active sunspots at that time (Figure 1A) produced powerful flares, caused large geomagnetic disturbances, and disrupted some space-based technology.

At present, presumably leaving a deep solar minimum, nothing more than tiny spots, or “pores”, have been seen for some time (again
Figure 1B).

In the current solar minimum the number of spotless days has not been equaled since 1914 (2), see Figure 2. Some look at this figure and feel reassured; this has
happened before. Others sense abnormality.

Why is a lack of sunspot activity interesting? During a period from 1645 to 1715 the Sun entered an extended period of low activity known as the Maunder Minimum. For a time equivalent to several sunspot cycles the Sun displayed few sunspots. Models of the Sun’s irradiance suggest that the solar energy input to the Earth decreased during that epoch, and that this lull in solar activity may explain the low temperatures recorded in Europe during the Little Ice Age (3).
In 1990, working with S. Solanki, we began exploratory measurements at the McMath- Pierce telescope of the infrared magnetic field strength, temperature, and brightness in dark sunspot umbrae. These observations use the most sensitive probe of sunspot magnetic fields: Zeeman splitting of the infrared spectral line of Fe I at 1565 nm. This splitting yields total field strength not flux (see below). Because the splitting is always complete in sunspot umbrae the measurement is independent of atmospheric blurring, or seeing (providing the line is visible). Temperature was deduced from the depth of nearby molecular OH lines. Higher temperature meant brighter continuum intensity and weaker OH. Starting in 2000 this work became systematic, where each spot was measured only once at the darkest position in its umbra. The resulting data set of 1391 observations represents the longest time-sequence of total field strengths in sunspots. Figure 3 is a plot of these observations.

We believe most of the scatter is real; the errors are likely to be in intensity and not field strength. Sky transparency and image quality, or seeing, are of course somewhat variable and this affects intensity. Data with obvious clouds were discarded. Two conclusions: 1) there is not a unique relation between sunspot brightness and magnetic field and 2) the lower limit to the magnetic field to produce a dark marking is around 1500-1800 Gauss. This lower limit is uncertain because of noise in intensity (brightness) signals.
It was also found that the magnetic field strengths in umbrae were on average decreasing with time independent of the sunspot cycle. Or it may be that spots are simply getting smaller (4). OH has practically disappeared today. A simple linear extrapolation of our magnetic data suggests that sunspots might largely vanish by 2015, assuming the 1800 Gauss lower limit, see Figure 4.

The brightness and magnetic fields of large sunspots had earlier been discovered to change in-sync with the solar cycle as seen by ground-based telescopes (5). Automated solar magnetographs (e.g. Mt Wilson, Kitt Peak, SOHO) measure surface magnetic flux using spectral polarization signals from the Zeeman effect. Flux measurements are subject to scattered light; the fields they deduce in sunspot umbrae are much less, often by a factor of two, than the field strength given by the Fe 1564 nm splitting (6). The latter does not involve polarization sensing. Magnetograph instruments, however, are in wide use both in space and ground-based –with a time span going back over 50 years. They do record non-sunspot magnetic flux (which the simple non-polarized Fe 1564 nm splitting cannot do) and have detected the onset of the next solar cycle active regions. This deduction is based on the expected high solar latitude hemispheric magnetic polarity reversal, the “Hale cycle”. Yet all new cycle number 24 spots that we have observed have been tiny “pores” without penumbrae (e.g. Figure 1). Nearly all of these features are seen only on magnetograms and are difficult or impossible to see on white-light images. Thus the analogy to the Cheshire Cat [Roberts, 2009].
Physical explanations of this deep minimum are at present speculative. Modelers invoke flux transport, meridional flows, and other subsurface mechanisms. Whether this diminished vigor in sunspots is indicative of another Maunder Minimum, remains to be seen. We should mention, too, that the solar wind is reported to be in a lower energy state than found since space measurements began nearly 40 years ago (7). Will the Cheshire Cat Effect persist?
References:
1. Penn, M.J. and Livingston, W., Temporal Changes in Sunspot Umbral Magnetic
Fields and Temperatures, Astrophys. Jour., 649, L45-L48, (2006).
2. Janssens, J., Spotless days website, (2009)
http://users.telenet.be/j.janssens/Spotless/Spotless.html
3. Lean, J., A. Skumanich, and O. White, Estimating the Sun’s Radiative Output
During the Maunder Minimum, Geophys. Res. Lett., 19(15), 1591–1594 (1992).
4. Schad, T.A., and Penn, M.J. (2008), Solar Cycle Dependence of Umbral
Magneto-Induced Line Broadening, EOS Trans. AGU 89(23), Jt. Assem. Suppl. Abstract
SP41B-06 (2008).
5. Albregtsen, F. and Maltby, P., Solar Cycle Variation of Sunspot Intensity, Solar
Physics, 71, 269-283 (1981).
6. Private communication from J. Harvey, (2009).
7. Fisk, L.A., and Zhao, L., The Heliospheric Magnetic Field and the Solar Wind
During the Solar Cycle, in Universal Heliophysical Processes, Proceedings of the
International Astronomical Union, IAU Symposium, Volume 257, pp 109-120 (2009).
Acknowledgement:
Roberts, Harry, Sydney Observatory, private communication re. Cheshire Cat (2009).
A PDF version of this essay is available here: Livingston-Penn_sunspots4
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Pat,
Ah yes , the weekend footy. I seem to remember that in one of the games a player by the name of Anthony Watts was having a blinder.
I can’t remember the team he was playing for (perhaps someone can fill in the gap) but it appears he excels in this field of endevour as well.
Watt a guy 🙂
As promised, I have the graphs and the data to properly digest the “Tiny Tim” problem.
First, it’s SONNE, not Ergebrisse. My German is terrible, Ergebrisse means Results.
The page:
http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/DeepSolarMin4.htm
For a sample comparison of SONNE’s numbers vs SIDC and AAVSO, see here:
http://www.vds-sonne.de/gem/res/reslist.php?rf=provrel/rp0109.lst
Fractionalization works for me.
Get rid of that greasy Tiny Tim stuff today. No runs, drips or errors.
Smile, you’re on What’s Up With That camera.
Just Want Results… (18:42:21) :
I take you have nothing like C-SPAN, 24 hour political video.
The House of Representatives question time is recorded and I have just spent some time there going through recordings from the 3rd and 4th of June to see if I could find the time stamp of where the remark was made, no luck yet as interjections are hard to pick up out of a room full of snips.
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/house_news/Index.asp
Caution, use this link at you own peril. As an Australian I find this link incredibly embarrassing as our parliament question time is a joke. The bottom line is that both parties have managed to avoid any question of the science of AGW and have managed to turn it into an entirely economic argument in that Australia must have an ETS for business and economic security. It’s a George Orwell thing.
Pat (19:32:17) :
And it is exactly this “apathy” I see in Australia, New Zealand and the UK which allows our politicians to run roughshod over all of us in the climate change space. As long as the footy is on TV and they can get to beer and KFC, they don’t care and will allow any crackpot ponzi scheme to be implemented.
Pat I agree but is it all apathy or a fair bit of disgust? If you have a look at that parliament video I guarantee you’ll need something stronger than beer.
Pat (19:32:17)
“And it is exactly this “apathy” I see in Australia, New Zealand and the UK which allows our politicians to run roughshod over all of us in the climate change space. As long as the footy is on TV and they can get to beer and KFC, they don’t care and will allow any crackpot ponzi scheme to be implemented.”
Pat…Psych down, I was kidding.
It’s not just the footy we like. Netball is popular too.
deadwood (10:3:02) :
“With a reported population of over 21 million people, this means that this mass movement of concerned Aussies was able to turn out about 0.03% of the population to save the world from 0.03% CO2.
Turning Points?”
The odds are in our favour. We can do this on our own, just like Kev said.
And they thought he was just doubling down on stupid!!
Steve Fitzpatrick (06:02:42) :
Perhaps Leif (or someone else with solar science knowledge) could comment on current understanding of the constancy of the fusion reactions in the solar core and the time required for fusion energy to reach the solar surface.
As far as we know the energy production is constant [we know of no reason why it should vary] and it does take ~200,000 years for the radiation to reach the surface by a random walk which would completely smear out any short-term variations [e.g. of 11, 22, 172, 200, 1500, … year variations] should there be any.
Les Francis (06:04:09) :
Is a hour or two of a tiny tim now counted?
Sunspot counting has never been an exact science and the rules often vary from institution to institution, from person to person, and from time to time, so not surprising that somewhat different results are obtained. A much more physically meaningful is the F10.7 cm microwave radio flux from the Sun, which we have measured daily since 1947. The pink curve on http://www.leif.org/research/TSI-SORCE-2008-now.png show the most recent measurements [since start of 2008].
kim (06:19:50) :
So what changes the clouds, if not in direction from TSI?
Whatever the answer is, it seems premature to presuppose that it somehow must be the Sun. The evidence is weak and often of the wishful thinking art.
AnonyMoose (07:36:54) :
An alteration which seems unaffected by the 11 year Schwabe cycle,
Illustrates clearly the danger of showing smoothed data, the actual measurements [that I showed a graph of] does not clear;y hint at such variations and I would consider them just noise [not in the measurements but naural variations in the Sun].
reduce the possibility that the decrease is due to the instrumentation becoming less sensitive? Have any measurements been confirmed at other facilities, to reduce the chance that the decrease is due to something at one location?
Not really needed because Bill’s instrument is the best there is and Bill himself is the best observer there is. The data is beyond reproach and is not in doubt. What is not known is what causes it, how long it will last, or if it has occurred before in the historical record.
J. Bob (07:41:31) :
How well would a “camera obscura” work in counting sunspots and defining their parts?
It would certainly work if the spot was big enough. Large spots can even [and has been many times] seen with the naked eye.
Tom in Florida (07:42:50) :
how can we know if it wasn’t low Gauss that was simply “hiding” the spots rather than there actually being only a few spots?
We cannot, and the is the tantalizing speculation that precisely this happened during the Maunder Minimum.
cktheman (08:14:33) :
It has a very convincing arguement that the sun is electrical in nature, with a solid iron surface
None of the arguments have any value and the conclusion is completely wrong.
Mike Abbott (08:59:52) :
“A simple linear extrapolation of our magnetic data suggests…”
You are misusing the term. L&P are not extrapolating anything. They are simply saying that if anybody [e.g. the reader] would extrapolate the trend that … would happen, not that it does happen, or the data they show is the result of any extrapolation.
Mr Lynn (11:48:38) :
Salty ocean currents create the Earth’s magnetic field? Interesting, but could it be the other way round?
The ocean currents do not create the magnetic field, but do have a very small effect [less than 1/1000] on the [in themselves very small] variations we see in the field. The effect does not go the other way because the oceans are big, but the magnetic fields are tiny. An ant will have a hard time pushing a truck uphill.
Werner Weber (12:32:23) :
You indicated that data on small cosmic ray intensities during Maunder minimum exist
You are a bit vague on what you mean. Data from various sources show that there was significant comic ray modulation during the Maunder Minimum. See, e.g. this very recent paper: http://www.leif.org/EOS/2009GL038004.pdf of which, BTW, Beer is a co-author.
Robert Wood (14:32:17) :
That photo of large sun spots I find eery. We are looking into the Sun, through a hole in teh oputer layer, and it is dark!
No hole, but we are looking a bit deeper into the Sun because the Sun is a bit less opaque in a sunspot, but is spot is not ‘dark’. It is still thousands of degrees and shines very brightly [only the contrast with even brighter surroundings may the spot ‘look’ darker]. Here is an interesting trivia bit: suppose you remove all of the Sun except the smallest sunspot we can see and left than one hanging in the Sky [like the Cheshire Cat – just to stay on topic] as the only thing left form the Sun? How bright would it be? The answer is: ‘several times brighter than the full Moon”. So the spot is not dark at all.
Robert Wood (16:59:21) :
This is due to the direction of the solar magnetic field, which in one dirction favours cosmic rays entering the Earth system from the polar directions, and every other cycle, entering from the equatorial regions … where any cloud formation would have a dramatic impact on albedo, right where it hurts.
You misunderstood whatever source you are quoting. the polar/equatorial regions mentioned are those of the Sun, not the Earth.
MattB (18:06:20) :
Anyone else see the massive spike on the Oulu neutron monitor.
No, there ain’t any ‘massive’ spike.
Walter Dnes (18:20:49) :
There is a definite curvature, moreso for the black line. Straight lines would intercept around the year 2020 in both cases. Comments?
The slopes are just the average slope of the curves [as if they had been straight] to give a feeling for the rough size of the effect. The scatter is so large that the difference between straight and curved is not really meaningful.
cktheman (20:31:08) :
But I don’t see anything pseudo science there – all he did was take the running images (from NASA) in the iron spectrum
If you look in an iron line you’ll only see iron, so no small wonder that you see iron. This site is complete garbage, which is as harsh as it needs to be. We should not combat the garbage of AGW with even worse garbage.
rbateman (22:06:16) :
First, it’s SONNE, not Ergebrisse. My German is terrible, Ergebrisse means Results.
Ergebnisse. The SSN should be on average 12 times the Group number. Try to multiply the group number by 12 and plt with the SS.
Robert Wood (14:32:17) :
That photo of large sun spots I find eery. We are looking into the Sun, through a hole in teh oputer layer, and it is dark!
No hole in the ordinary sense, but we are looking a bit deeper into the Sun because the Sun is a bit less opaque in a sunspot, but is spot is not ‘dark’. It is still thousands of degrees and shines very brightly [only the contrast with even brighter surroundings makes the spot ‘look’ darker]. Here is an interesting trivia bit: suppose you remove all of the Sun except the smallest sunspot we can see and left than one hanging in the Sky [like the Cheshire Cat – just to stay on topic] as the only thing left form the Sun? How bright would it be? The answer is: ’several times brighter than the full Moon”. So the spot is not dark at all.
Gerard (01:42:49) wrote: “Did you not know, Aussie PM Kevin Rudd is the modern equivalent of King Canute.”
No he ain’t, Gerard. King Cabute enthroned himself on the seashore to prove to his foolish people he could not hold back the tide.
Kevin will not be King until he has the wisdom and humility of Canute.
Leif Svalgaard (23:01:57) :
Ergebnisse. The SSN should be on average 12 times the Group number. Try to multiply the group number by 12 and plt with the SS.
Done.
day GP# SSN derived (GP#*12)
7 0.2 2 2.4
8 0 0 0
9 0.4 6 4.8
10 0.7 14 8.4
11 0.8 13 9.6
12 0.4 5 4.8
13 0.2 2 2.4
Graph added & page updated.
http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/DeepSolarMin4.htm
Just want results 18:42:21) and Paul R (22:09:18): Thanks for the clues re the “We don’t care about the science!” remark. I’ll stay on the this for two reasons. 1) If she didn’t say it I’d hate to tell untruths about her. 2) Assuming she did say this, it’s more evidence that points to a social engineering rather than environmental motivation re ETS. As for Aussie parliament? Sigh, it is an embarrassment at times. There can be more ham acting there than a local high school production of Shakespeare. Sadly, science is often an uncredited bit player in the chorus.
rbateman (23:39:00) :
“The SSN should be on average 12 times the Group number. Try to multiply the group number by 12 and plot with the SSN.”
Done.
Looks like a pretty good match, so the simple ‘multiply by 12’ rule holds up well, even with minimal activity, where one would expect it to fail the most.
Well, so far so good. I still have to go over 2006-2008.
We’ll see.
The whole idea, really, is to end this nonsense of assigning unrealistic numbers to glorified pores. They are best treated as fractional spots in time – space.
rbateman (00:49:12) :
Well, so far so good. I still have to go over 2006-2008
That´s great. So we are going to have the real spotless days count!
Leif Svalgaard (01:56:58) :
“It was thought some years ago that a survey of ’sun like’ stars showed that they [and presumably the Sun] spend about a third of the time in ‘quiet mode’. Later research has shown that this ‘result’ may be spurious as the star sample only included a couple of ‘truly’ sun-like stars, the others were more evolved than the Sun. So the bottom line is that we don’t know.”
A skeptic’s perspective to Betelgeuse shrinkage: http://blogs.discovery.com/space_disco/2009/06/warning-betelgeuse-is-shrinking-supernova-or-supernothing.html
” Crops are late in the northern USA and parts of Canada this year as they were last year. While food crops are important I pay attention to the budding, flowering and growth of wine grapes. Growers and wine makers care about such things and keep close track of what the vines are doing each Spring.”
I have probably mentioned this title before, but __Times of Feast, Times of Famine__ by the French historian Emmanuel LeRoy Ladurie, a must-read text for those interested in the effects of climate on human history, depends heavily on vintage records from France beginning with the 14th c.
Outstanding work Bill Livingston.
Agreed.
“the white-light facular counts are and have been on a footing of a full magnitude fainter than 1911-14.”
As significant as spotlessness, IMHO.
Adolfo Giurfa (05:58:21) :
rbateman (00:49:12) :
That´s great. So we are going to have the real spotless days count!
I don’t know about real, and my 2 proposals for correcting haven’t generated so much as a single vote.
Do you like option (1) or (2) ??
Correct by rounding for (1) fractional group # or
Correct by rounding for (2) fractional SSN
I cannot do anything about a Tiny Tim once it is part of a group #>1 or SSN >4, nor do I wish to.
So, without any feedback, I’ll treat you all to Shock & Awe by blowing the most Tiny Tim grit out of the water as possible. Option #1 and spotless day runs.
I hate weeds.
Must ster-il -ize im-per-fec-tion…..No-Mad.
” there is not a unique relation between sunspot brightness and magnetic field”
Money quote.
gary gulrud (10:19:01) :
” there is not a unique relation between sunspot brightness and magnetic field”
Money quote.
You misinterprete this cautious remark. What he means is that there is very strong correlation between the two [as the Figure so clearly shows], but that there is also some scatter because the Sun is a messy place, and that that scatter is solar in nature and not due to the instrument or the seeing.
[snip – lots of ad homs and some personal accusations here. You are welcome to resubmit minus the ad homs against Dr. Svalgaard. You might also want to consider posting using your real name, if your truly believe in what you say. I don’t have much respect for people that attack people who are fully open with their name and opinions, as Dr. Svalgaard has done, while attacking from the position of anonymity- Anthony]
Nomad is back. He’s weeded 2008 of Tiny Tim Invasive using option #1 (kill all SONNE G# below 0.5 for each hemisphere (and the attendant ssn’s)) Nomad Major.
Jan6-30_________________(25)
Feb2-Feb25_____________(24)
Apr21-Jun9_____________(20)
Jun23-Jul18_____________(26)
Jul20-Sep21_____________(64)
Nov17-Dec9_____________(23)
Dec12-Jan9_____________(29)
Shocking.
61 spotted days out of 366
305 spotless days puts 2008 just behind 1913.
Jul20-Sep21 (day202-265 inclusive) is #3 on the spotless day runs list.
I’ll run it the other way, just to be nice. Option #2: Kill all SONNE SSN’s below 5 for each hemisphere. Nomad Minor.
Option #2: Remove all ssn’s<5 from SONNE list.
Jan6-29_________________(24)
Feb4-Feb25_____________(22)
Apr21-Jun9_____________(20)
Jun23-Jul17_____________(25)
Jul20-Sep21_____________(64)
Nov17-Dec9_____________(23)
Dec12-Jan8_____________(28)
Still Shocking.
68 spotted days out of 366
298 spotless days and 2008 is just behind 1913.
Jul20-Sep21 (day202-265 inclusive) stands as
#3 on the spotless day runs list.
The F 10.7 flux is down to 67. The Sun is still flatlining.
Tregonsee (06:32:23) “Livingston-Penn_sunspots4 comes up with a 404 file not found error.”
W. Livingston & M. Penn (2009). Sunspots Today: A Cheshire Cat.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/livingston-penn_sunspots4.pdf
Leif, 22:56:31
Thanks and yes, even if it is the sun, we must not presuppose it so. It is a lovely little problem. I hope to live to see the solution, but it may well be a matter of very great complexity.
==========================================
@ur momisugly Anthony:
“…if your truly believe in what you say.”
It is not a matter of “belief” just being aware of the scientific evidence and following where it leads. Some call that “compulsion”, in other words, if the scientific evidence is “X”, “Y”, and “Z” then one is “compelled” to come to conclusion “A”.
The, above, is a primarily an example of laboratory science.
The results of experiments and testing speak for themselves, there is no dispute.
In field sciences, this is more diffcult to apply (but still applicable in many circumstances), this leaves deduction which is more problematic.
But once a deduction has been acclaimed by “consensus” it is much harder to change as group-think takes over and self-justification of the group overwhelms other contradicting evidence, as a result there is a tendency to ignore contradicting evidence.
Surely, you are aware of this dynamic.