Back on December 12th 2009 I posted an article titled:
Solar geomagnetic activity is at an all time low – what does this mean for climate?
We then had a string of sunspots in December that marked what many saw as a rejuvenation of solar cycle 24 after a long period of inactivity. See December sunspots on the rise
It even prompted people like Joe Romm to claim:
But what Joe doesn’t understand is that sunspots are just one proxy, the simplest and most easily observed, for magnetic activity of the sun. It is the magnetic activity of the sun which is central to Svensmark’s theory of galactic cosmic ray modulation, which may affect cloud cover formation on earth, thus affecting global temperatures. As the theory goes, lower magnetic activity of the sun lets more GCR’s into our solar system, which produce microscopic cloud seed trails (like in a Wilson cloud chamber) in our atmosphere, resulting in more cloud cover, resulting in a cooler planet. Ric Werme has a nice pictorial here.
When I saw the SWPC Ap geomagnetic index for Dec 2009 posted yesterday, my heart sank. With the sunspot activity in December, I thought surely the Ap index would go up. Instead, it crashed.
Annotated version above – Source: http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/weekly/Ap.gif
Source data: http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/weekly/RecentIndices.txt
When you look at the Ap index on a larger scale, all the way back to 1844 when measurements first started, the significance of this value of “1” becomes evident. This graph from Dr. Leif Svalgaard shows where we are today in relation to the past 165 years.
Source: http://www.leif.org/research/Ap-Monthly-Averages-1844-Now.png
With apologies to Dr. Svalgaard, I’ve added the “1” line and the most current SWPC value of “1” for Dec 2009.
As you can see, we’ve never had such a low value before, and the only place lower to go is “zero”.
But this is only part of the story. With the Ap index dwindling to a wisp of magnetism, it bolsters the argument made by Livingston and Penn that sunspots may disappear altogether by 2015. See Livingston and Penn – Sunspots may vanish by 2015
Above: Sunspot magnetic fields measured by Livingston and Penn from 1992 – Feb. 2009 using an infrared Zeeman splitting technique. [more] from the WUWT article: NASA: Are Sunspots Disappearing?
The theory goes that once the magnetic strength falls below 1500 gauss, sunspots will become invisible to us.
Note where we are on this curve that Dr. Svalgaard also keeps of LP’s measurements:
Source: http://www.leif.org/research/Livingston%20and%20Penn.png
It appears that we are on track, and that’s a chilling thought.
NOTE TO COMMENTERS AND MODERATORS: No off-topic discussions of Landscheidt, “electric universe”, or “iron sun” will be permitted on this thread. All will be snipped. Stay on topic. – Anthony
Sponsored IT training links:
Planning to take on BR0-001 certification? Then try out our 646-364 prep resources and earn best score in 642-165 exam.
“Solar geomagnetic activity is at an all time low”
as a sceptic the inaccurate use of the phrase “all time” by warmers in cases where it is clearly not applicable has always bothered me.
observed low or recorded low or in recorded history, but all time low inaccurate
Leif Svalgaard (12:28:05) :
“The very low Ap values are an artifact…”
Thanks for your comments on this. It adds some needed clarity.
JonesII (12:34:17) :
“How is it going with those windfarms in England?, are they working providing green energy to the rather phlematic englishmen or in these interesting times they are becoming choleric instead.”
I believe they are being turned by hand by green activists.
Solar wind
speed: 283.2 km/sec
density: 2.1 protons/cm3
Sunspot number: 0
Updated 06 Jan 2010
Spotless Days
Current Stretch: 1 day
2010 total: 1 day (17%)
2009 total: 260 days (71%)
Since 2004: 772 days
Typical Solar Min: 485 days
I’ve noticed the solar wind has been relatively low for a long time.
http://spaceweather.com/
The second stage of the CERN CLOUD project has started. We should get results this year.
I am very worried about this.
Mr. Alex (11:01:57) :
it appears that activity (at least monthly activity) is no longer identical to the 1901 dip as you have previously mentioned. It has gone below that level. The index for January 2010 is thus far at 1.42
There are no [official] Ap values before 1932. Ap less than 3 is meaningless as Aa less than 5 is. This has to do with the way these are measured. We can discuss that in detail, if needed. But I have a feeling that people don’t want to hear this, as it is much more fun to play with the nonsense-values, i.e. with “more humility and openness to data from all sources.” 🙂
Expect more satellites and space debris to fall out of the sky.
With regard to published observations of data and processes exhibiting events without historical precedent, the example that I find most intriguing is the Vostok Ice Core record.
http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/vostok.png
A nod to ‘correlation is not causation’ is in order here,
That portion of the record depicting the current warm cycle of earths paleoclimate history is remarkably different from the preceding cycles. If the recorded data is accurate, given pressure, chemical processes, and time of exposure to those variables, the earth in the current cycle is cooler, has remained so for a longer duration, and is considerably more noisy in its variability at the apparent peak of the cycle.
Which brings us to; today. A few writers have in recent times addressed the obvious question “Where are we in the process of the current cycle” to which they respond with a rather euphemistic ’due for a change’. As an uncredentialed observer standing here on the face of the planet I can only respond with, “Indeed”.
So with a Bleg for en enlightenment, I am petitioning the community of WUWT (we are a community, protagonist and antagonist alike) for thoughts, data, or links that might add illumination for the question, ”Where are We”.
Great thanks to Mr. Anthony Watts and crew for providing this forum. The cross correlation of disciplines and cross pollination of thought processes is an event truly without precedent. May you all enjoy the fruit of your place in history.
Dr Svaalgard previously posted a correlation between Aa index at minimum (which is about 3+ times the Ap index) and peak of next sunspot cycle. At the time the Aa index was about 8 and projected monthly sunspot maximum was about 75 for cycle 24, if I remember rightly. It would be interesting to see an update of that prediction- given the low Ap index, Aa ought to be between 3 and 4, and the sunspots might peak <50?
How is it going with those windfarms in England?, are they working providing green energy to the rather phlematic englishmen or in these interesting times they are becoming choleric instead?
Well the one near me in Scotland on the Fenwick Moor which is the biggest in the UK is becalmed and has been for 3 weeks and this must be the same for the whole of the UK. No power stations shut down because of them then. Gas is being rationed as the storage tanks only hold 7 days backup unlike in Europe where they hold several weeks, hence gas prices are higher in UK than Europe. Must stop or I will be accuseded of being a sad old git or SOG.
Mr. Alex (11:28:40) :
“1. Solar Polar Field Strength in a funk:”
Not a time to be troubled much about polar fields. See you around 2020-25, then we’ll have something to talk about. See Polar fields links on:
http://www.vukcevic.co.uk/GandF.htm
[quote Leif Svalgaard
The physical meaning of Ap and similar and how to calculate them from interplanetary parameters can be found here.
http://www.leif.org/research/suipr699.pdf [/quote]
Thank you for this paper, Dr. Svalgaard. Now I understand that the original article is saying the Ap index changes as a result of solar activity upon it, rather than the other way around.
With that clarification, the article makes sense to me now. 🙂
The very low Ap values are an artifact. There are two problems. The first [and glaring] is that Ap sunk to 1.9, but because SWPC truncates their values, it is plotted as 1 which is only about half of what it should be. The second problem has to do with the definition of Ap [and similar indices Aa and Am]. They simply cannot be measured when the values falls below about 3 [for Ap] and 5 [for Aa and Am]:
And even with that caveat the numbers seem really low.
“Solar geomagnetic activity is at an all time low – what does this mean for climate?”
2012? Melting crust? Ok…. let’s really hope not.
Wouldn’t it be safer to adjust the following to say: “As you can see, we’ve never had such a low value [since records started being kept], and the only place lower to go is ‘zero’.”
I also wonder what is happening on Mars as a result of this; are their any cooling trends in the wispy Martian atmosphere that are also impacted by the Sun’s magnetic field and solar winds and GCRs? Does this phenomenon even impact Mars or the other planets? It seems to me that if there are simultaneous and detectable impacts of Solar and Space Weather upon more than one planet we’d have a very strong piece of correlative or even hints of causal evidence that can’t be chalked up easily to distortions by man or Mann. Or am I grasping at interplanetary wisps?
Dim Sun | Cold Earth?
http://pathstoknowledge.net/2009/04/22/dim-sun-cold-earth
Jones11
it isn’t just the windbag farms. how are the Chinese solar users going today??
how will solar perform if this situation worsens?? will you get your money back??
start stocking up on your favourite canned food, and remember Valley Forge.
regards
brad tittle (10:49:15) :
Whilst in general I agree with you about chartmanship, when plotting small changes on a large scale it is often difficult to actually see the change.
Here, where we should be aware of such things, I consider it OK.
DaveE.
Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) is in a nosedive not seen since 2008.23:
http://leif.org/research/TSI-SORCE-2008-now.png
Don B (10:18:57) :
Yes I have. I gave Anthony two graphs showing my work a few months ago and he said ‘very interesting’ and passed them to some solar scientists.
Solar geomagnetic activity tightly correlates with the sunspot index for which we have records by true scientists back to 1700, really dating back to Galileo but records during the Maunder minimum (pre 1700) were spotty and index would be below 10 for these seventy years. I gave an explanation on http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/30/14673/#more-14673 at wayne (09:14:10) describing how to build a simple spreadsheet to view this alternate way to look at the solar connection of temperature changes to magnetic activity.
As I told Anthony, this may be only a mere coincidence, but it is curious how you can build a graph totally from the sunspot index and get one basically showing a curve that fits the temperature anomalies which have occurred in the past.
It show the rise after 1700 to about 1790 then the deep decrease to early 1800s. Then rise again to about 1870 with small decrease to about 1930. Then a big climb to peak at early 2000s. Since this is strictly from sunspot proxy of magnetic activity, how can this be?
Take a moment to build the spreadsheet. Extend into the future to do ‘what if’ scenarios by plugging in the SS index for 2010 onwards. Place all tens for 1630 to 1700 to roughly include the Maunder minimum. If anyone posts back for more insight, I will describe the science behind this curious view.
Would be worth your time. When I first saw it I said, wow, what’s this?
etudiant (10:15:19) :
The Sun’s magnetic field flips every elevn years
Joe Romm is a joke. He has a blog post in which he speculates about “What scientists were saying privately for years.” I pointed out that we didn’t need his speculation, because we have ClimateGate emails, and that clearly shows what has been said for years privately. He did not publish my comment.
I *hate* this cover up by alarmists. They truly are just repeating lies over and over and over until people believe them.
“JonesII (12:34:17) :
How is it going with those windfarms in England?, are they working providing green energy to the rather phlematic englishmen or in these interesting times they are becoming choleric instead?”
In my area in northern Germany we have lots of wind turbines. ATM they’re standing still. Nearly no wind.
BTW don’t believe all the things about bird chopping. We have plenty of Milans, Buzzards and whatnot. It’s only that every time a hunter shoots a bird of prey because the beast went on killing his chicken one by one he would drop the carcass under a wind turbine because it’s prohibited to shoot them.
Real story told by a friend who’s father was a hunter.
The 2004-2009 smoothed drop in the AP index is the most pronounced in the entire record since 1844. If you look at the drop in TSI, it represents the biggest 5 year drop since the beginning of the Maunder (scroll down in the link below).
http://chartsgraphs.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/solar-trends-total-solar-irradiance-since-1611/
From the thread on the linked (9/12/09) post: Leif Svalgaard said “Vo cannot drop below 2.5 and B seems to have a floor about 4 nT [both should be taken over a solar rotation] so Aa cannot go below ~4, corresponding to Ap = 1.6. In practice, Vo would not go as low as 2.5 for a whole rotation, so Ap won’t drop below ~3”
Does this make Leif look a tad foolish, or have I misunderstood something?
Leif at 12:28:05 said: “The very low Ap values are an artifact. There are two problems …”
To summarize the case subject to your concerns: the Ap value has fallen, for the first time since 1844, to a value sufficiently low (1.9, 1.0 whatever) such that it is either impossible and/or meaningless to compute/measure.
Is this accurate?