I got a tip by email from JohnA who runs solarscience.auditblogs.com about this NASA press release. John’s skeptical about it. He makes some good points in this post here.
What I most agree with JohnA’s post is about sunspots. While we’ve seen some small rumblings that the solar dynamo might be on the upswing, such as watching Leif’s plot of the 10.7 CM solar radio flux, there just doesn’t appear to be much change in character of the sunspots during the last year. And the magnetic field strength just doesn’t seem to be ramping up much.
He writes:
“Let’s check out the window”
On Solarcycle24.com they’ve got yet another sun speck recorded yesterday, that by today had disappeared. Exactly the same behaviour we’ve been having for 12 months with no end in sight.
I agree with JohnA, it’s still a bit slow out there. Leif is at the conference in Boulder where NASA made this announcement below, so perhaps he’ll fill us in on the details.
Here is the NASA story:
Mystery of the Missing Sunspots, Solved?
June 17, 2009: The sun is in the pits of a century-class solar minimum, and sunspots have been puzzlingly scarce for more than two years. Now, for the first time, solar physicists might understand why.
At an American Astronomical Society press conference today in Boulder, Colorado, researchers announced that a jet stream deep inside the sun is migrating slower than usual through the star’s interior, giving rise to the current lack of sunspots.
Rachel Howe and Frank Hill of the National Solar Observatory (NSO) in Tucson, Arizona, used a technique called helioseismology to detect and track the jet stream down to depths of 7,000 km below the surface of the sun. The sun generates new jet streams near its poles every 11 years, they explained to a room full of reporters and fellow scientists. The streams migrate slowly from the poles to the equator and when a jet stream reaches the critical latitude of 22 degrees, new-cycle sunspots begin to appear.
Above: A helioseismic map of the solar interior. Tilted red-yellow bands trace solar jet streams. Black contours denote sunspot activity. When the jet streams reach a critical latitude around 22 degrees, sunspot activity intensifies. [larger image] [more graphics]
Howe and Hill found that the stream associated with the next solar cycle has moved sluggishly, taking three years to cover a 10 degree range in latitude compared to only two years for the previous solar cycle.
The jet stream is now, finally, reaching the critical latitude, heralding a return of solar activity in the months and years ahead.
“It is exciting to see”, says Hill, “that just as this sluggish stream reaches the usual active latitude of 22 degrees, a year late, we finally begin to see new groups of sunspots emerging.”
he current solar minimum has been so long and deep, it prompted some scientists to speculate that the sun might enter a long period with no sunspot activity at all, akin to the Maunder Minimum of the 17th century. This new result dispells those concerns. The sun’s internal magnetic dynamo is still operating, and the sunspot cycle is not “broken.”
Because it flows beneath the surface of the sun, the jet stream is not directly visible. Hill and Howe tracked its hidden motions via helioseismology. Shifting masses inside the sun send pressure waves rippling through the stellar interior. So-called “p modes” (p for pressure) bounce around the interior and cause the sun to ring like an enormous bell. By studying the vibrations of the sun’s surface, it is possible to figure out what is happening inside. Similar techniques are used by geologists to map the interior of our planet.
In this case, researchers combined data from GONG and SOHO. GONG, short for “Global Oscillation Network Group,” is an NSO-led network of telescopes that measures solar vibrations from various locations around Earth. SOHO, the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory, makes similar measurements from Earth orbit.
“This is an important discovery,” says Dean Pesnell of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. “It shows how flows inside the sun are tied to the creation of sunspots and how jet streams can affect the timing of the solar cycle.”
There is, however, much more to learn.
“We still don’t understand exactly how jet streams trigger sunspot production,” says Pesnell. “Nor do we fully understand how the jet streams themselves are generated.”
To solve these mysteries, and others, NASA plans to launch the Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) later this year. SDO is equipped with sophisticated helioseismology sensors that will allow it to probe the solar interior better than ever before.
Right: An artist’s concept of the Solar Dynamics Observatory. [more]
“The Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI) on SDO will improve our understanding of these jet streams and other internal flows by providing full disk images at ever-increasing depths in the sun,” says Pesnell.
Continued tracking and study of solar jet streams could help researchers do something unprecedented–accurately predict the unfolding of future solar cycles. Stay tuned for that!
Anthony,
This statement is political, not scientific.
This statement is made to take the wind out of the sails of those politicians who argue against the Waxman Bill using the Solar Minimum to motivate their view.
The “Reds” are at it again.
Geoff Sharp (23:53:33) :
I did a report on this very topic back in Feb….not much has changed but notice Dr. Howe is now using a similar graphic to one I sent her.
http://landscheidt.auditblogs.com/2009/02/25/latest-solar-differential-rotation-information/
But interesting that Howe et al are leaning towards solar activity arising from activity at the Tachocline.
Geoff, Anthony,
This posting should be added to the article.
Yesterday upon the sun
I saw a pore but now it’s done.
I kept a note of this tiny mote
And a veritable spot it’s become.
Why 22 degrees? and not, for instance 42? Or is it a typo?
John A: Solar physicists are ignoring the wrong predictions without explanation rather than dealing with their failures.
It ain’t science, folks. Its guessing. One day someone will get lucky and lead an entire science astray.
One of the more germane statements I have seen in quite some time. The more media lemmings that jump off the cliff, the more that are created.
Ron de Haan (00:49:28) :
That vanishing act yesterday was not worth more than a 3.
Spot count for month shoud be 2.8, not the 4.5 listed here:
http://www.solen.info/solar/
Half truth: Fractional sunspot activity with a paint job.
Activity has picked up, but it’s not back to normal by any means.
“Why 22 degrees? and not, for instance 42? Or is it a typo?”
Please, don’t panic
I wish that someone who is knowledgeable of sunsposts would post a comment that compared sunspot frequency and sunspot size between the initial periods of cycles 23 and 24. That would provide a benchmark for assessing just how unusual (if that turns out to be the case) the present sequence of tiny tims is. I’ve read a lot of complaints here about the tiny times, but haven’t seen much data.
Looking in the furture of a solarcycle is the same as gambling. The sun is very old and whe have seen just a little part of it. Whe don’t know anything other than there is a small cycle of 11 years. There could be another cycle or cycle’s
Unlike temp sensors gone bonkers in Honolulu, you cannot fake a spotted sun firsthand on the steps of the Capitol in Washington, D.C. Congressmen should be treated to a daily showing by some members of AAVSO.
There’s nothing like a level playing field of reality to make the game more interesting.
*”OUTSIDE THE NORM’
“This is a situation outside the norm.
We have all these programs in place, but this is outside what we would normally expect our agricultural insurance to protect, so we need the extra help,” he said, citing water hauling trucks, drought loans, acreage payments, and counselling as some of the aid measures he hopes governments will provide.”
“”We are in a one-in-25-year drought situation.
That’s how low the moisture is,” said Paul King, manager of agriculture and environmental services for the county. “Compounding the lack of moisture with a significantly cooler spring, the two frosts back-to-back at the start of seeding in June really set us back.””
…-
“Coldest Weather in 100 Years to Strike by 2012
Today, for the first time in over two years, the Director of the Space and Science Research Center (SSRC) in Orlando, Florida, has issued a new prediction of the next climate change intended to emphasize the imminent ill-effects of this new climate period in an important warning to the American people and their leadership in Washington.
According to Center Director John Casey, “The climate change predictions which I started to pass out to our government and media in early 2007 based upon the ‘RC Theory’ have now come to pass, exactly as forecast. Global warming has ended, conclusively, as predicted. The Earth’s average temperature has begun its steep decline within the time frame I said it would. And last but not least, the Sun has entered a state of ‘hibernation’ when I said it would. This new solar period is one of the most amazing events in the history of science. During solar hibernations, the Sun makes significant reductions in output which always, always, brings long cold climates to the Earth. Unbelievably, this historic phenomena is still largely and intentionally unreported by the media and our leaders and therefore unknown by the American people. The new cold climate will usher in global travail that will be amplified specifically because of the catastrophic climate change policies of the administration of President Barack Obama that will leave most citizens unprepared.”
As to when the ill-effects of the new cold climate will be felt, Director Casey added, “The most frequent question I am asked is how soon will it get cold and just how cold? The purpose of this press release is to give the people an answer to that fundamental question in a more refined schedule to plan their adaptation to the next climate change. It is now possible to make an estimate of the timing of the descent into the next cold climate depths based upon the past behavior of the these solar cycles that have ruled the Earth for at least the last 1,200 years. The forecast of these major cold eras and solar hibernations associated with these cycles shows them to be accurate to over 90% using the RC Theory. The good news is that the SSRC will do what ever it can to get this information out even though our own government will not.”
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12084#When:00:15:00Z
* Dry weather dire for canola farmers
By CLARA HO, SUN MEDIA
The Edmonton Sun
*http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2009/06/18/9835786-sun.html
Ian Cooper
Or even Rakiura (Stewart Island), the Land of Shining Skies. Much nicer than Invercargill.
On May 29 Nasa released an updated forecast for cycle 24 with far more conservative estimates than they were originally forecasting. To what extent this new press release is political rather than scientific will be very easily measured by the extent to which Nasa now modify or supercede their May 29 prediction.
I think we can expect to be kept in the dark, in all respects.
Lots of stuff gets announced at scientific meetings and conventions, but never ends up being published in peer-reviewed journals, for various reasons. Any conference-related press releases should be taken with a large dose of salt until the data is actually in print.
Leif,
I realize you doubt the hypothesis that solar activity is the principal driver of climate variation. Properly evaluating it will require a very long time series of data. As we go forward in time, we’ll be able to collect a lot of data on magnetic fields, solar wind, and broad spectrum irradiance (Gamma, UV, IR). However, that will have a limited time span. Going back and attempting to evaluate the hypothesis will require using sunspot as a proxy to infer values for fluctuations in solar energy (across the full spectrum), magnetic field, solar wind, etc. Thus the concern over whether the official sunspot count is consistent with past counting technique.
So, a few questions if and when you get the time.
1. Is there any objective standard, such as seconds of subtended solid angle and duration, that is used to determine what constitutes a spot (based on observation in the visible spectrum)?
2. If not, why not?
3. Could the historical record be examined to develop a lower boundary for observability?
4. Would that allow us to review current sunspot counts and address the concern that some parties may be “cooking the books?”
C Colenaty (03:27:19) : I wish that someone who is knowledgeable of sunsposts would post a comment that compared sunspot frequency and sunspot size between the initial periods of cycles 23 and 24.
Whats wrong with all of the other cycle transitions. You should know that the transition is not well defined, each new cycle starts pretty much independent of the precious finishing. http://www.solen.info/solar/ has plots of each previous cycle, http://users.telenet.be/j.janssens/Engwelcome.html has some analysis of the evolution of SC23 compared with previous cycles. Google will find you much more, without relaying on the selected information provided here.
C Colenaty ( 03:27:19)
I wish that someone who is knowledgeable of sunsposts would post a comment that compared sunspot frequency and sunspot size between the initial periods of cycles 23 and 24. That would provide a benchmark for assessing just how unusual (if that turns out to be the case) the present sequence of tiny tims is. I’ve read a lot of complaints here about the tiny times, but haven’t seen much data.
—
I’m perplexed about the complaining going on with these smaller groups all the time. And it makes no sense to me and it reminds me of what happens when someone puts out a seasonal forecast and then only hypes what he or she has forecasted.
The community has been counting these small groups, of about 10 millionths, for as long as all of us have been around and this is nothing new. And while their region percentage is higher now, do to the lower activity level, it is not more numerous sunspot number wise. And this is technically what this all about.
And if you go back and look at other years, not even at solar maximum, like 1999, you will see countless daily groups of 10 millionths being added to the daily tally. (150 + in the year probably. )
So the prior averages would not be quite at the same level if we were to dismiss them altogether….basically a push then differential wise.
And the Cycles from the 1600’s or 1800s’ would be slighly different than also. Or stronger I should say because you would then have to add these groups that most say were being unaccounted….again a differential push.
So none of this tinkering will help those who want to “solely” equate sunspot numbers with global temperatures. And I’m a strong advocate of the solar – climate relationship.
This latest NASA release reminds me of a breathlessly delivered fashion report on the emperor who had no clothes.
When I was in school… “The sunspots visible even with solar telescopes are the size of the whole USA or larger”
Not too long ago… “In order to be counted as a sunspot it has to be the size of Texas or larger.”
Now…. “In order to be counted the smudge or pour needs to be the size of a large building.”
Sooo.. To me, we are still in a minimum period. As little as we know, we sure seem to think we know a lot.
Ron de Haan (00:55:52) :
Geoff Sharp (23:53:33) :
I did a report on this very topic back in Feb….not much has changed but notice Dr. Howe is now using a similar graphic to one I sent her.
http://landscheidt.auditblogs.com/2009/02/25/latest-solar-differential-rotation-information/
But interesting that Howe et al are leaning towards solar activity arising from activity at the Tachocline.
Geoff, Anthony,
This posting should be added to the article.
Seconded, well said Ron.
C Colenaty (03:27:19) :
The sun is not that simple. The problem of overcounting comes to the forefront when all that you have are tiny tims. Where do you stop? Increased ability to detect ever-smaller spots all the way down to pores makes for mayhem when the rules are stretched by imagination.
Examine this list: http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/latest/DSD.txt
Compare the SESC sunspot number to the 10E-6 area (size)
On June 1st, 2009, you have a sunspot number of 23, and a size of 80.
On June 5th, 2009, you have a sunspot number of 13, but a size of 10.
Do the math.
By dead reckoning, if counting were relational, the sunspot number for June 5th would be
23/80 * 10 = 2.8 if we go by June 1st count. But it’s 13.
It gets worse:
On June 3rd, 2009, the spot number was 17, but the area is 10.
On June 4th, 2009, the spot number is again 17, but the area is 20.
Counting is messed up. Not even in the ballpark.
That’s just for starters.
Throw in spots that vanish in an hour and spots that nobody ever saw and you have the makings of a 3-ring circus.
Loose rules, sloppy counting and unanswered monkeybusiness.
That sun speck Spaceweather labelled 1021 didn’t even last 24 houts; one had to look hard to see it.
taking three years to cover a 10 degree range in latitude compared to only two years for the previous solar cycle.
let’s do some cipherin’ (…3 guzinta 2…carry the one…) that’s approx 33.33% longer than “normal” for this (admittedly) short analysis period.
Continuing that on would make cycle 24 about 14 years long?
for AEGeneral – congratulations! You’ve begun to realize that, as far as NASA or anyone in officialdom is concerned, Ethics went out the window a long, long time ago.
We now live in the world of policy-based ‘evidence’.
After reading the press release I leave with the impression that they’re trying to justify their new satellite and the paychecks required by the scientists whom will be interpreting it.
The nice thing about this ‘prediction’ is that we can observe it and determine if it’s correct sooner rather than later.