After an exciting encounter last week with some genuine sunspots that weren’t arguable as specks, pores, or pixels, the sun resumes its quiet state this week.
People send me things. Here’s the latest email from Paul Stanko, who has been following the solar cycle progression in comparison to previous ones.
Hi Anthony,
Out of the numbered solar cycles, #24 is now in 7th place. Only 5, 6, and 7 of the Dalton Minimum and cycles 12, 14, and 15 of the Baby Grand Minimum had more spotless days. Since we’ve now beaten cycle #13, we are clearly now competitive with the Baby Grand minimum.
Here’s a table of how the NOAA panel’s new SC#24 prediction is doing:
November 2008: predicted = 1.80, actual = 1.67 (predicted peak of 90 suggests an actual peak of 83.7)
December 2008: predicted = 1.80, actual = 1.69 (predicted peak of 90 suggests an actual peak of 84.7)
January 2009: predicted = 2.10, actual = 1.71 (predicted peak of 90 suggests an actual peak of 73.2)
February 2009: predicted = 2.70, actual = 1.67 (predicted peak of 90 suggests an actual peak of 55.6)
March 2009: predicted = 3.30, actual = 1.97 (predicted peak of 90 suggests an actual peak of 53.8)
April would require the October data which is still very incomplete. If this analysis intrigues you, I’d be happy to keep you updated on it. Please also find a couple of interesting graphs attached as images.
Paul Stanko
Here’s the graphs, the current cycle 24 and years of interest are marked with a red arrow:
And how 2008/2009 fit in:
Geoff Sharp (16:56:57) :
Dont be fooled by Leif’s response about the Earth’s varying geomagnetic field having an impact on the solar proxy records. This is once again not telling the whole truth. Both the 14C and 10Be records have had adjustments made to compensate for the geomagnetic field changes over time.
Not the record shown by Ed.
Leif Svalgaard (21:40:48) :said:
Douglas DC (20:53:24) :
How can we measure the Earth’s Albedo? Lunar surface reflectivity?
Yes, there is a long-term project running measuring Earthshine on the Moon’s dark side and in that way measuring the albedo. They find variations, but not linked to the solar cycle. Google: Earthshine Albedo Palle
Thanks, Lief.
Dang nabbit! _Leif_
Dyslexics of the world untie!
yes,I am…
Gene Nemetz (12:39:57) :
“about 1,000,000 Earths would fit inside the sun”
Hmmm curious about this one… so (and I am working this out as we type) we have the sun’s radius as approximately 6.955×10^8 m or 6.955×10^5 km.
Therefore with volume being 4/3*PI*r^3 we get a volume of 1.41×10^18 km^3.
Now the earth’s radius is approximately 6,371.0 km and again assuming a perfect sphere this arrives at a volume of 1.08*10^12.
Now spheres packed as closely as possible would have a pore space of 26%, so the available volume of the sun for perfectly spherical packed earths would be 1.04×10^18 km^3.
Whaddaya know? Pretty close to a million earths…. good to know for the next quiz night.
Leif 15:53:40 in response to madman.
Thank you for your knowledge of the timing of the vulcanic activity and the temperatures during the Maunder and Dalton Minimums. There is enough uncertainty to entertain several correlations as being causative. And by all means, The Eddy Minimum.
Correct me if I’m mistaken, but haven’t you also said that the Dalton Minimum sunspots were large, sparse and primarily southern hemispheric?
I think Erl Happ will find the ultraviolet contributions to the whole climate regulating mechanisms or stimulate its explication. Many of his ideas fit right in with others like Tisdale, Spencer, and van Loon.
The sun is very sultry and we must avoid its ultry-violet rays.
H/t Noel Coward.
==========
If indeed an Eddy Minimum is dawning then let us hope there will be few enough confounding factors, such as vulcanism or other variations in albedo, that we’ll be able to untie the Gordian Knot of climate regulation if there is a sun-earth climate effect. I suspect we are doing observing enough and calculating and cogitating enough to figure it out.
But really, send shysters, gats, and loot.
==========================
kim (18:10:08) :
Correct me if I’m mistaken, but haven’t you also said that the Dalton Minimum sunspots were large, sparse and primarily southern hemispheric?
Maunder, not Dalton
I think Erl Happ will find the ultraviolet contributions to the whole climate regulating mechanisms or stimulate its explication.
Except that Erl doesn’t deal with that. From de Haan’s quote:
“The upper atmosphere has an electrodynamic dimension (related to the increasing presence of plasma with elevation) that renders it susceptible to the influence of the flow of charged particles from the sun.”
No UV there. The UV bit comes in because he believes that the atmospheric ‘thickness’ [controlled by solar wind] or some such absorbs the UV. But, as I have said so many times, his writings are so incohenrent that it is really hard to suss what he proposes.
Dr. S, you forgot to mention those ‘in the know’ who can predict a 100 year forecast with such accuracy that governments should destroy their economies based on them.
Ok, so let’s go with the idea that nothing with respect to the sun caused the LIA. So what IS the best theory its cause? And if there is no other smoking gun, then how much faith can be put into theories that CO2 must be the cause of global warming BECAUSE THEIR ISN’T ANY THING ELSE to explain it? If you can’t explain the LIA by any KNOWN processes, then you CAN’Tjustify CO2 warming simply because those same known processes can’t explain the warming. We obviously don’t know what all can cause climate changes.
Mann, et al, screwed up. They shouldn’t have tried to get rid of the LIA; they should have claimed that CO2 levels were lower during that time (and higher during the Holcene Optimum). That would have solved all their problems (well, except for them being up a tree at the moment, so to speak).
But back to sunspots. Anyone care to explain Herschel’s observations? He wasn’t exactly a hack, or motivated by funding issues. Yet more coincidences?
Bear in mind that Leif is not saying definitively that the sun has nothing to do with the LIA.
If I’m not mistaken, he’s saying that the TSI difference between then and now can’t account for it.
He also questions the actual correlation of temperatures with sunspots (which is something I am looking at). For now, I think there is some relationship, perhaps in the solar wind if not irradiance. But I am not sold on the notion. And I definitely think oceanic-atmospheric patterns play a role, regardless.
jtom (19:35:29) :
But back to sunspots. Anyone care to explain Herschel’s observations? He wasn’t exactly a hack, or motivated by funding issues. Yet more coincidences?
There probably is [and should be] a solar cycle variation in temperature of the order of 0.1K. To explain the correlation with the price of wheat, you would have to assume that wheat can sense this small difference and react to it by yielding more when it is 0.1K warmer. Now we moved the problem from the Sun and the climate to the wheat. Do you have an explanation for this extreme sensitivity of wheat to temperature?
As for not being a hack, Herschel believed the Sun was inhabited.
Leif Svalgaard (17:53:52) :
Not the record shown by Ed.
You are inferring the graphs arnt accurate because of geometric influences. Ed should be using the Solanki or Steinhilber graph which shows his point more succinctly. The two deep lows of solar inactivity are accurate.
Ed, look here: http://www.landscheidt.info/images/solanki_sharp.png
Lief,
I would be interested in the geomagnetic data you refer to. Does it have a 6200yr cycle? And a compensated dataset as well if you have it. Thanks.
Geoff,
How is the angular momentum calculated, and the variation around the Solar system barycenter? Would you happen to have an excel model of some form? I’ve seen a pseudo 3d models that show an 11yr variation of the sun getting pulled around the center of the solar system. Haven’t had the patience to try it on longer time scales. Would love to be able to pull numbers from it but it doesn’t support that, more just a physical visual of the solar system.
What an awesome website and resource for one to attempt to come up with your own conclusions on the Earth’s climate system. Many thanks Mr. Watts and all who contribute, no matter their LOSU.!
Ed
Ed (20:40:26) :
Geoff,
How is the angular momentum calculated, and the variation around the Solar system barycenter?
The distances and AM involved is extremely accurate and is based of JPL horizons data and it has been cross checked by many including Leif. Carl Smith is the founder of the AM graph that now gives us so many answers. His raw data is available from:
http://plasmaresources.com/ozwx/SSB/ephemerides/cSun_tSSB_6000y_x5d.tsv.zip
Solanki’s raw data (geomagnetic leveled) plus some of my own is available from here: http://www.landscheidt.info/images/solanki_sharp.xls
Steinhilber’s report is available here: http://www.leif.org/EOS/Holocene-TSI.pdf
There is no point hiding data.
John Finn:
“Have you any data which shows the “recorded drops in temperature ” during the Dalton Minimum.”
Mr. Finn, surely you accept that the temperatures during the Dalton Minimum (ca. 1796 – 1820) were lower than the period preceding and following the Minimum. Er, don’t you?? If so, what’s your point?
Craig
Gene Nemetz (12:39:57) :
“Sun big. Earth small.
Small change on big sun big change on small earth.”
NICE!
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Leif Svalgaard (15:53:40) :I suspect that you would not like to publish the new HMF B data here All my work is fully public and the data can be found at http://www.leif.org/research/IDV09HMF.xls and IDV09HMF.txt [for a text version].
Thanks. However, I cannot find any reliable temperature data going back to 1835, so I cannot do my least squares fit between temperature and HMF B. Note that when you are using the equation, the initial temperature is given by the HADCRUT3 data set.
T_est = c(1)*cumsum(Data(:,3)-c(2)) + Data(1,2);
Leif Svalgaard (11:12:30) : I think you are trying to say that any set of values of B below your chosen equilibrium will mean runaway down and any set of values above will mean a runaway up, so should B fall to and stay for a thousand years the range 4.0-5.5 nT, the Earth would freeze up. I think that invalidates your model.
Yes. However, I think it is the sensitivity you are criticizing, not the idea that a _significant_ change in the sun’s output should turn our planet into one large desert or one large snowball. You are stating that the quite significant oscillation in HMF B should not impact our planet significantly at all. What makes you think it is so?
Madman (21:29:37) :
John Finn:
“Have you any data which shows the “recorded drops in temperature ” during the Dalton Minimum.”
Mr. Finn, surely you accept that the temperatures during the Dalton Minimum (ca. 1796 – 1820) were lower than the period preceding and following the Minimum. Er, don’t you?? If so, what’s your point?
As a matter of fact, I don’t agree that temperatures in the 1796-1820 period were significantly lower than the periods preceding and following the Dalton Minimum. I’ve looked at a number of the the long term records that are available (e.g. CET, DeBlilt, Uppsala) and cannot see anything particularly unusual about the Dalton period.
I don’t always agree with Tamino (hardly ever actually) but this plot seems a about right.
http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/17temps.jpg
This show the average temperatures at 17 stations between 1770 and 1850. There is a dip in ~1815 but this was around the time of the huge Tombura eruption and, in any case, this was no greater in magnitude than the dips in the mid-1780s and in ~1840.
That’s my point.
John Finn (01:17:31) :
Your temperature sample is based on an average of 17 stations….do you think that is enough to go on when determining world temperature trends?
Leif Svalgaard (20:07:47) :
Wheat needs good weather to mature. Consistentcy is key.
Throw in rainy & wet conditions and it rots before it can be harvested.
A dry spring or unexpected frosts are just as bad.
What Herschel observed has it’s place in unseasonal spats of weather that affected yields.
You plant the variety of wheat that is suited to the climate of the area.
When that area gets unseasonable weather and enough of it, it fails.
Wheat just happens to be a main staple crop. High demand. Weather went askew.
Yields suffered. Priced soared. A prosperous Europe could afford to import, and it did.
The current agenda is travelling down a path that will hugely exaggerate any such repeat, and the way the Solar Cycle is progressing, abberant crop weather is to be expected.
Is this making sense to you?
Ed (20:40:26) :
I would be interested in the geomagnetic data you refer to. Does it have a 6200yr cycle? And a compensated dataset as well if you have it. Thanks.
There are data ‘out there’ on this. I’ll do some digging, in the meantime, here is an [old] plot of the 14C production and of the Earth’s dipole moment. You can see how they vary opposite to each other: http://www.leif.org/research/CosmicRays-GeoDipole.jpg
Invariant (23:13:43) :
You are stating that the quite significant oscillation in HMF B should not impact our planet significantly at all. What makes you think it is so?
What makes you think there should be significant impact? The energy in the magnetic field of the solar wind in 10 million times less that of simple sunlight
John Finn (01:17:31) :
There is a dip in ~1815 but this was around the time of the huge Tombura eruption and, in any case, this was no greater in magnitude than the dips in the mid-1780s and in ~1840.
I agree with john, that there is no evidence for a Grand Minimum type temperature minimum during the Dalton. Whatever temperature variation [such as we have data for] there was can be explained as due to volcanism [there were other large eruptions besides Tambora, e.g. Majon].
rbateman (04:12:55) :
the way the Solar Cycle is progressing, abberant crop weather is to be expected.
Is this making sense to you?
No
Geoff Sharp (04:07:44) :
Your temperature sample is based on an average of 17 stations….do you think that is enough to go on when determining world temperature trends?
People who claim that there was a significant temperature minimum during the Dalton will have to produce their worldwide records to show us. I think the 17 European studies are about the only good data we have. Loehle’s reconstruction of global temps: http://www.leif.org/research/Loehle-Temp.png does not show a sharp dip during the Dalton, and BTW shows the lowest LIA temperatures near 1600 at a time of high solar activity.
How about the correlation of Nile River levels with aurorae?
===================================
kim (04:51:52) :
How about the correlation of Nile River levels with aurorae?
Yeah, how about it?
Leif Svalgaard (04:17:34) : What makes you think there should be significant impact? The energy in the magnetic field of the solar wind in 10 million times less that of simple sunlight.
Good point. Do you have a similar time series for simple sunlight that goes back to 1850? What do you recommend?