This gives a whole new meaning to “Total Solar Irradiance”. Instead of TSI, perhaps we should call the energy transfer that comes from the sun to the earth TSE for “Total Solar Energy” so that it includes the solar wind, the geomagnetics, and other yet undiscovered linkages. Jack Eddy is smiling and holding up the patch cord he’s been given at last, wondering how long it will be before we find all the connectors.
Scientists discover surprise in Earth’s upper atmosphere
From the UCLA Newsroom: By Stuart Wolpert
UCLA atmospheric scientists have discovered a previously unknown basic mode of energy transfer from the solar wind to the Earth’s magnetosphere. The research, federally funded by the National Science Foundation, could improve the safety and reliability of spacecraft that operate in the upper atmosphere.
“It’s like something else is heating the atmosphere besides the sun. This discovery is like finding it got hotter when the sun went down,” said Larry Lyons, UCLA professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences and a co-author of the research, which is in press in two companion papers in the Journal of Geophysical Research.
The sun, in addition to emitting radiation, emits a stream of ionized particles called the solar wind that affects the Earth and other planets in the solar system. The solar wind, which carries the particles from the sun’s magnetic field, known as the interplanetary magnetic field, takes about three or four days to reach the Earth. When the charged electrical particles approach the Earth, they carve out a highly magnetized region — the magnetosphere — which surrounds and protects the Earth.
Charged particles carry currents, which cause significant modifications in the Earth’s magnetosphere. This region is where communications spacecraft operate and where the energy releases in space known as substorms wreak havoc on satellites, power grids and communications systems.
The rate at which the solar wind transfers energy to the magnetosphere can vary widely, but what determines the rate of energy transfer is unclear.
“We thought it was known, but we came up with a major surprise,” said Lyons, who conducted the research with Heejeong Kim, an assistant researcher in the UCLA Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, and other colleagues.
“This is where everything gets started,” Lyons said. “Any important variations in the magnetosphere occur because there is a transfer of energy from the solar wind to the particles in the magnetosphere. The first critical step is to understand how the energy gets transferred from the solar wind to the magnetosphere.”
The interplanetary magnetic field fluctuates greatly in magnitude and direction.

“We all have thought for our entire careers — I learned it as a graduate student — that this energy transfer rate is primarily controlled by the direction of the interplanetary magnetic field,” Lyons said. “The closer to southward-pointing the magnetic field is, the stronger the energy transfer rate is, and the stronger the magnetic field is in that direction. If it is both southward and big, the energy transfer rate is even bigger.”
However, Lyons, Kim and their colleagues analyzed radar data that measure the strength of the interaction by measuring flows in the ionosphere, the part of Earth’s upper atmosphere ionized by solar radiation. The results surprised them.
“Any space physicist, including me, would have said a year ago there could not be substorms when the interplanetary magnetic field was staying northward, but that’s wrong,” Lyons said. “Generally, it’s correct, but when you have a fluctuating interplanetary magnetic field, you can have substorms going off once per hour.
“Heejeong used detailed statistical analysis to prove this phenomenon is real. Convection in the magnetosphere and ionosphere can be strongly driven by these fluctuations, independent of the direction of the interplanetary magnetic field.”
Convection describes the transfer of heat, or thermal energy, from one location to another through the movement of fluids such as liquids, gases or slow-flowing solids.
“The energy of the particles and the fields in the magnetosphere can vary by large amounts. It can be 10 times higher or 10 times lower from day to day, even from half-hour to half-hour. These are huge variations in particle intensities, magnetic field strength and electric field strength,” Lyons said.
The magnetosphere was discovered in 1957. By the late 1960s, it had become accepted among scientists that the energy transfer rate was controlled predominantly by the interplanetary magnetic field.
Lyons and Kim were planning to study something unrelated when they made the discovery.
“We were looking to do something else, when we saw life is not the way we expected it to be,” Lyons said. “The most exciting discoveries in science sometimes just drop in your lap. In our field, this finding is pretty earth-shaking. It’s an entire new mode of energy transfer, which is step one. The next step is to understand how it works. It must be a completely different process.”
The National Science Foundation has funded ground-based radars which send off radio waves that reflect off the ionosphere, allowing scientists to measure the speed at which the ions in the ionosphere are moving.
The radar stations are based in Greenland and Alaska. The NSF recently built the Poker Flat Research Range north of Fairbanks.
“The National Science Foundation’s radars have enabled us to make this discovery,” Lyons said. “We could not have done this without them.”
The direction of the interplanetary magnetic field is important, Lyons said. Is it going in the same direction as the magnetic field going through the Earth? Does the interplanetary magnetic field connect with the Earth’s magnetic field?
“We thought there could not be strong convection and that the energy necessary for a substorm could not develop unless the interplanetary magnetic field is southward,” Lyons said. “I’ve said it and taught it. Now I have to say, ‘But when you have these fluctuations, which is not a rare occurrence, you can have substorms going off once an hour.'”
Lyons and Kim used the radar measurements to study the strength of the interaction between the solar wind and the Earth’s magnetosphere.
One of their papers addresses convection and its affect on substorms to show it is a global phenomenon.
“When the interplanetary magnetic field is pointing northward, there is not much happening, but when the interplanetary magnetic field is southward, the flow speeds in the polar regions of the ionosphere are strong. You see much stronger convection. That is what we expect,” Lyons said. “We looked carefully at the data, and said, ‘Wait a minute! There are times when the field is northward and there are strong flows in the dayside polar ionosphere.'”
The dayside has the most direct contact with the solar wind.
“It’s not supposed to happen that way,” Lyons said. “We want to understand why that is.”
“Heejeong separated the data into when the solar wind was fluctuating a lot and when it was fluctuating a little,” he added. “When the interplanetary magnetic field fluctuations are low, she saw the pattern everyone knows, but when she analyzed the pattern when the interplanetary magnetic field was fluctuating strongly, that pattern completely disappeared. Instead, the strength of the flows depended on the strength of the fluctuations.
“So rather than the picture of the connection between the magnetic field of the sun and the Earth controlling the transfer of energy by the solar wind to the Earth’s magnetosphere, something else is happening that is equally interesting. The next question is discovering what that is. We have some ideas of what that may be, which we will test.”


Leif 4:59:20
You point out yourself a phenomenon of the sun which varies by a factor of 25. That variance is enough to explain climate variation, if it is the mechanism. Now, how is it damped, so as not to make the system hypersensitive?
====================================
It’s a mechanism not particularly sensitive to earthly feedback, stemming instead from seemingly chaotic solar phenomenon. That would damp hypersensitivity. Or am I just way off base with unquantified speculation?
========================================
Thanks Leif for confirming my intuition regarding the magnitude of this effect earlier in the thread!
Bob Kurtz 13:19
The atmosphere does not store heat, the ocean does. As Leif mentions, this “effect” is a thousand times smaller than the warming caused by CO2 thus it does not even have the capability to warm the atmo much less store heat in the oceans.
Robert Wood 12:11
I don’t believe in “catastrophic AGW” myself, but I do not believe you can produce a credible skeptic that does not believe that the 120 PPM of CO2 that has been pumped into the atmo has not increased global temperatures at all during the last 30 years. Even people like Roy Spencer and Lucia are “warmers”.
A more reasonable position is that there has been some warming but that it may not pan out to the 2-5C degree increases the alarmists are predicting.
Thanks
William
Mebbe integrate all these events somehow and see what ya get.
======================================
Hypothesis by vukcevic (previously regular contributor, recently absent) proposing an electro-magnetic interaction feedback between solar wind and major magnetospheres within confines of their heliospheric configuration may, after all, have reflection on physical reality despite its ambiguity and absence of a clear transfer mechanism. Perhaps we could hear more from vukcevic on the subject.
Leif (or anyone else for that matter),
Where can I get info on total energy transferred from the Sun to the Earth broken out by component? (e.g. EM power spectrum, B-field energy, etc)
Leif,
“The vertical electric field is generated by tropical thunderstorms that are hardly influenced by what goes on at the poles.”
What is the mechanism for the tropical storm to generate that much power??
Mike Lorrey (18:33:06) :
It seems a too simple explanation to justify entangled socio-politics, then CO2 scam is a far better explanation.
You, like Nikolas Tesla, are about to ruin a big business.
Robert Wood.
Carbon dioxide doesn’t just stay in th eatmosphere. It circulates between oceans, vegetation and air. If it did stay in the atmosphere, there would be a heck of a lot more than there is now. It circulates diurnally, seasonally, annually and even further timescales. The result is that the level of c02 in the atmosphere is not greater than it was during the earlier part of the 19th century when it was reputedly cooler. Even today when c02 is *reputedly* increasing, temperatures show a significant cooling: So no: c02 doesn’t drive the climate or act as a temperature elevator. Even water vapour which is 100 times the ghg of c02 doesn’t drive the climate. Both these feedbacks are dependent on the overall climate, whether that be a cool or a warm one.
Its therefore necessary to go to 1st principles and investigate what does drive the climate. Don’t worry: There’s a lot of peer reviewed papers on th esubject.
Short NASA vid showing the entry of solar wind particles to Earths atmosphere when the solar field is north.
Leif Svalgaard (06:10:31) :
Ok, so the Earth has a strong vertical electric field. Would change in charged particles at the poles affect this field globally?
The vertical electric field is generated by tropical thunderstorms that are hardly influenced by what goes on at the poles.
An electric field at, sea level, of ~ 100v/m, across the entire planet is produced by tropical thunderstorms?
I don’t think so.
————————————————————————————————————————-
Variable magnetic fields influencing charged particle flow…
That would be Electromagnetic Induction.
There’s your “power source”.
Except there is no massive power to be turned on as the energy [kinetic, magnetic, electric, whatever] in the solar wind is absolutely negligible compared to TSI. As I type this, the solar wind delivers 25 million times less power to the Earth system than TSI. During rare geomagnetic storms, the factor drops to about a million.
savethesharks (20:55:44) :
It was January 21st and a HUGE and historic Suddent Stratospheric Warming event occurred in conjunction with the large GRB of the same date.
And on the same date, this:
Massive bowshock on magnetosphere
Coincidence?
Leif Svalgaard (23:59:39) :
tallbloke (23:43:39), “wrote:
Yes this is small in comparison to the TSI; but not so small in comparison to the vaunted 2W/metre^2 supposedly due to CO2.”
Svalgaard: “It is more than a thousand times smaller…”
Does this mean, Dr. Svalgaard, that you subscribe to Man-made Global warming?
Energy transfer from the solar wind is too small to be relevant for climate.
And the energy applied to a DC motor’s field coils is too small to affect the motor’s output. And yet the field in such a motor actually controls the motor output. Does such an idea work for climate: TBD.
“Svalgaard: “It is more than a thousand times smaller…”
Oh dear.
I suppose that means a thousandth of the size ?
M. Simon (09:29:29) :
“And the energy applied to a DC motor’s field coils is too small to affect the motor’s output. And yet the field in such a motor actually controls the motor output. Does such an idea work for climate: TBD.”
Like an “Insulated-Gate Bi-Polar Transistor” effect. The electromagnetic induction produced by the fluctuating magnetic field, acts as the “gate” on the system, controlling the “switching” and total power output. The magnetosheath as the emitter, the ionosphere as the collector. The magnetosphere as the epitaxial drift region.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulated-gate_bipolar_transistor
Scaled up to a Sun/Magnetosphere/Earth system? Something to think about.
My choice for post of the week: Mike Lorrey (18:33:06)
It deserves to be commented in detail.
solrey (08:37:55) :
Ok, so the Earth has a strong vertical electric field.
The vertical electric field is the so-called ‘fair weather electric field’. this field is different from the polar cap electric field in the ionosphere.
tallbloke (08:53:02) :
It was January 21st and a HUGE and historic Suddent Stratospheric Warming event occurred in conjunction with the large GRB of the same date.
Coincidence?
My car had a flat tire on that day. coincidence?
James F. Evans (08:59:23) :
Svalgaard: “It is more than a thousand times smaller…”
Does this mean, Dr. Svalgaard, that you subscribe to Man-made Global warming?
It means that the solar wind energy in a thousand times smaller than the 2W/m2 that was mentioned. You be the judge. To me it shows that the solar wind is not the cause of ‘global warming’.
Stephen Wilde (09:43:35) :
“Svalgaard: “It is more than a thousand times smaller…”
Oh dear. I suppose that means a thousandth of the size ?
It means that the solar wind energy in a thousand times smaller than the 2W/m2 that was mentioned. Why the ‘Oh dear’?
kuhnkat (07:20:08) :
What is the mechanism for the tropical storm to generate that much power??
http://dev.space.fmi.fi/~makelaa/fairw.html
tallbloke (05:08:11) :
As Tenuc alludes to above, the relatively small wattage changes in solar wind
which is less than 0.001 W/m2. Mighty small thorn.
It could be that Jupiter’s effect on the heliospheric current sheet and interplanetary magnetic field turn out to be more important than the Jupiter shine on sun or earth.
You brought up the Jupiter shine. Anyway, electromagnetic effects from Jupiter cannot propagate upstream in the solar wind, because the solar wind is a conductor moving away from the sun at 11 times the Alfven speed that determines the speed with which magnetic effects can propagate in a plasma.
edt (07:12:58) :
Where can I get info on total energy transferred from the Sun to the Earth broken out by component? (e.g. EM power spectrum, B-field energy, etc)
An old calculation [which is still good] can be found here:
http://www.leif.org/research/Geomagnetic-Response-to-Solar-Wind.pdf
Leif Svalgaard (11:25:58) :
tallbloke (08:53:02) :
Savethesharks:
It was January 21st and a HUGE and historic Suddent Stratospheric Warming event occurred in conjunction with the large GRB of the same date.
And on the same date, this:
Massive bowshock on magnetosphere
Coincidence?
My car had a flat tire on that day. coincidence?
Dunno Leif, were you driving in the vicinity of the Van Allen Belt at the time?
Just apply the “Right Hand Rule” (RHR). Determine the direction of H+ or the direction of e-, apply the RHR and you’ll get the direction of the magnetic Field. Don’t forget that v (velocity of the particle) and B (magnetic force per moving charge) are perpendicularly to F (Magnetic Field).
In the bow shock of the solar system, some nucleons can penetrate –crosscurrent- the solar wind and they increase the load of energy that they transport. When the magnetic field of giant planets doesn’t deflect them, they would travel obliquely (θ 90 °) to the plane of the terrestrial magnetic field, so few would be diverted towards the outer limits of the solar system.
Contrarily to what we could think, the speedy nucleons (v > 400 Km/s) with a low energy density (E 10^9 eV) penetrate the barrier and travel countercurrent with respect to the trajectory of the solar wind, i.e. straightly to the Sun.
We could think that the amount of energy of anomalous cosmic rays is quite low as to be considered on the Earth’s climate; nevertheless, we have to consider that it is not a lonely intergalactic wave which strikes against the Earth’s magnetic field, but trillions of particles which interact with the upper atmosphere of the Earth. Perhaps, I could evade a ball thrown against me, but it would be very-unlikely that I could evade a billion balls thrown against me. Similarly, the damage that I could receive from a single hit would be much lower than the damage that a billion hits could cause to me. This is called Nahle’s rule.
🙂
tallbloke (12:33:40) :
“My car had a flat tire on that day. coincidence?”
dunno Leif, were you driving in the vicinity of the Van Allen Belt at the time?
I have steel-belted radials, so should have been Ok, but more to the point, geomagnetic activity and solar wind data were not unusual at that time: http://hirweb.nict.go.jp/sedoss/solact3/do?d=2009%2C1%2C20 so nothing happened in the magnetosphere at that time.
Lief,
Thankyou for putting this research into perspective.
All to often quantitative perspective is lost on many.
I noticed right away that the original article provided no quantitative information, and certainly made no attempt to compare the energy transfer involved with known amounts of energy transmitted by standard means. Your analysis that this is miniscule compared to other transfers of energy is important, no vital for people to keep in mind.
As an engineer, I have to put things into perspective. Being excited about an amount of energy 3 or more orders of magnitude smaller than the total energy transfer is just silly.
PS. Thanks for updating your solar cycle transition web page earlier this week:
http://www.leif.org/research/Most%20Recent%20IMF,%20SW,%20and%20Solar%20Data.pdf
I enjoy your analyses there and in these blogs.
Gary, aka NucEngineer
Haha… I forgot to include the next data which is important for understanding how the Interstellar Cosmic Rays penetrate the solar system magnetic barrier:
These data is for Solar Wind:
Velocity: Fast wind = 500-800 km/s. Slow wind = 250-400 km/s
Density: Fast wind = 3×10^6 m^-3. Slow wind = 10×10^6 m^-3
Proton flux temperature: Fast wind = 2×10^5 K. Slow wind = 4×10^4 K
Electron flux temperature: Fast wind = 1.2×10^5 K. Slow wind = 1.5×10^5 K
Magnetic field: Fast wind = 2^-10 nT. Slow wind = 2^-10 nT
Sources:
http://tmo.jpl.nasa.gov/progress_report2/42-50/50R.PDF
http://www.ips.gov.au/Solar
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/03/030321075236.htm (very important you read this one).
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ace/
Nasif Nahle (12:50:04) :
In the bow shock of the solar system, some nucleons can penetrate –crosscurrent- the solar wind and they increase the load of energy that they transport. When the magnetic field of giant planets doesn’t deflect them, they would travel obliquely (θ 90 °) to the plane of the terrestrial magnetic field, so few would be diverted towards the outer limits of the solar system.
I don’t know what you are trying to say, but I have rarely seen anything this muddled. The anomalous cosmic rays are simply ordinary neutral atoms that have exchanged an electron with solar wind protons lingering near the termination shock and can now be accelerated, but generally to much lower energies than the ‘regular’ galactic cosmic rays. Their energy density is so low that they have even less effect than the ‘regular’ solar wind. Please, how about some perspective here.