Guest post by David Archibald
In a presentation dated 22nd September, 2009, Dr Svalgaard produced a graphic which can be interpreted to predict the timing of the Solar Cycle 24 maximum.
That presentation is available here: http://www.leif.org/research/Predicting%20the%20Solar%20Cycle.ppt
That graphic is reproduced with my annotation:
Dr Svalgaard annotated Altrock’s orgininal figure with the red and aqua arrows. What is significant is that the Solar Cycle 24 arrow is 15 years after the Solar Cycle 23 arrow. With the maximum of Solar Cycle 23 in March 2000, that line suggests that the Solar Cycle 24 maximum will be in 2015.
With the timing of the next maximum established, we can compare the progression of the current minimum with the minimum that saw the beginning of the Maunder Minimum. Makarov and Tlatov in 2000 included a figure from Kocharov 1995. That figure follows, with my annotation:
Tree rings from the Urals have more uses than just making hockey sticks. Due to the paucity of sunspots in the Maunder Minimum (1645 – 1710), C14 data provides the evidence for the presence of solar cycles and their length. According to Makarov and Tlatov, solar cycles averaged 20 years long in the Maunder. In Figure 2 above, solar minima are associated with higher C14 content and are on the top side of the graphic. I have marked the solar minima with vertical blue lines. The blue figures along the x axis are the length of the solar cycles from minimum to minimum in years.
To compare the start of the Maunder Minimum to our current day minimum, I have marked where the maximum of Solar Cycle 24 would be in 2015 as 15 years after the peak of the preceding cycle. There is also a parallel in the way that the C14 count (reflecting the neutron flux and in turn the GCR flux) is climbing above the peaks of previous minima, as it is today with the Oulu neutron count. Neutron count tends to peak a year after solar maximum, so a neutron peak in 2010 is consistent with solar minimum in 2009.
From Figure 2, it can be expected that in a repeat of the Maunder Minimum, the neutron flux will remain well above the levels reached in the minima of the second half of the 20th century.
The Maunder Minimum was not completely devoid of sunspots, as shown by the following graphic using data from SIDC:
Lastly, the Heliospheric Current Sheet has flattened, one of the conditions for the solar minimum:
A ramp up in Solar Cycle 24 activity might not be expected though until the downtrend line in tilt angle from the peak in 2000 is broken, and that might be a year away.
Summary
Activity and timing of the current minimum, as well as the timing of the Solar Cycle 24 maximum in 2015, is paralleling the start of the Maunder Minimum. There is no data to date which diverges from the pattern of the start of the Maunder Minimum.
vukcevic (01:01:41) :
Not too many have predicted a grand minimum…if it comes to pass many will have to admit the science is far from settled.
matt v. (06:30:21) :
The graphs referenced correlate very closely with the 14c and 10Be records. The period from the MWP to recent times showing a cooling as a result of reduced solar output. Its a pity they didnt have thermometers back then, because if they did and the pattern was the same we would have no argument.
But it shows the Maunder was only one part of the cooling.
“Further to the Dalton/Maunder outcome, the late ramp up of Solar Cycle 24 is now just as late as the start of Solar Cycle 5 (relative to its inception at Solar Cycle 4 maximum). It is also a lot weaker in terms of sunspot activity.”
Continuing the thought: The perturbation of the solar dynamo dropped out on or about Oct. 2005(Anthony’s AP posts) when cycle 23 was nearly complete.
The dropout seems to have occurred much early during cycle 4’s progress.
Additionally, the Schwabe cycle this time around was in a bimodal state, as it was during cycle 11 during the immediately prior ‘minimum of significance’, i.e., 12-14, say. Tallbloke, I think, sometime back, noted these two modes as discretely hemispheric.
While the strength of the perturbing influence and its secular collapse may be an important ingredient of ‘Grand Minima’, the state of the solar dynamo itself needs further elucidation.
gary gulrud (05:01:22) :
The dropout that you keep bringing up, Anthony, is haunting.
Let’s see if we can tell why:
http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/EITNov1996_Nov2009.JPG
See anything on a yearly basis that says “Eureka, I have found it” ?
rbateman (10:36:04) :
Verry cool. No, can’t say I know what to look for. False color red absent, green virtually gone, polar corornal holes tiny, … The appearance benign, note spots irrelevant to whole.
Another hint?
gary gulrud (03:43:09) :
Try looking for the ‘windup’ of differential rotation (or lack thereof).
The ‘red’ is the EIT 284, and you are not seeing much of it because of the lack of large active regions.
Try also this page:http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/DeepSolarMin9.htm
At the bottom, you will find an image with sunspots superimposed at Solar Max (SC23) 10/28/03
and another one of SN11029 (SC24) 10/28/09.
Unfortunately, as of late, the SOHO EIT images have become very erratic in both quality and matched sets.
Likely on it’s last legs.
“or lack thereof”
Got it, thanks. I will plod thru.
rbateman (10:36:04) :
“The dropout that you keep bringing up, Anthony, is haunting.
Let’s see if we can tell why:
http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/EITNov1996_Nov2009.JPG
See anything on a yearly basis that says “Eureka, I have found it” ?
Thanks for some excellent composites of our sleepy neighbour.
I wonder if it’s the low magnetic field and lack of coronal holes which is more significant than the lack of sunspots?
Would be good to have better knowledge of how the sun really works – perhaps we’ll get some more clues as this, and the next cycle, unfold.
From all the things Leif has been telling us, the magnetic is the key element. It’s decidedly weak/absent for the greater part. There are a lot of very small active regions (small yellowish spots) that blink in and out, sometimes with sunspecks. Why is the magnetic so weak? I think it’s the lack of windup or differential rotation, but I cannot be sure of this.
What is apparent to me is that the Active Regions are progressing faster towards the equator than they are multiplying/growing. Is that a fair assessment?
A long, long rough road down into the Valley of Sorrows. Throw in a global nuclear war, a few major volcanic explosions … would make some of these disaster flicks seem sort of lame. Of course, the slow burn, less dramatic nature of the death dealing cooling would not be a woo wow as the visage of Christ toppling in Rio De Janiero.
“Is that a fair assessment?”
And well-distributed between hemispheres?
gary gulrud (09:35:37) :
And a ton of tiny AR specks, like freckles, along the equator.
Today we are treated to a SunSpeck O’rama.
1 year into SC23 shows Sunspot Areas exceeding 1,000 x 10E6 regularly.
Today, we are lucky to make 70 by SWPC/NOAA roughstimate, and about 25 x 10E6 by actual measurements.