From NASA News: Solar ‘Current of Fire’ Speeds Up
What in the world is the sun up to now?
In today’s issue of Science, NASA solar physicist David Hathaway reports that the top of the sun’s Great Conveyor Belt has been running at record-high speeds for the past five years.
“I believe this could explain the unusually deep solar minimum we’ve been experiencing,” says Hathaway. “The high speed of the conveyor belt challenges existing models of the solar cycle and it has forced us back to the drawing board for new ideas.”
The Great Conveyor Belt is a massive circulating current of fire (hot plasma) within the sun. It has two branches, north and south, each taking about 40 years to complete one circuit. Researchers believe the turning of the belt controls the sunspot cycle.
Above: An artist’s concept of the sun’s Great Conveyor Belt. [larger image]
Hathaway has been monitoring the conveyor belt using data from the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO). The top of the belt skims the surface of the sun, sweeping up knots of solar magnetism and carrying them toward the poles. SOHO is able to track those knots—Hathaway calls them “magnetic elements”–and thus reveal the speed of the underlying flow.
“It’s a little like measuring the speed of a river on Earth by clocking the leaves and twigs floating downstream,” Hathaway explains.SOHO’s dataset extends all the way back to 1996 and spans a complete solar cycle. Last year, Lisa Rightmire, a student of Hathaway from the University of Memphis, spent the entire summer measuring magnetic elements. When she plotted their speeds vs. time, she noticed how fast the conveyor belt has been going.
A note about “fast”: The Great Conveyor Belt is one of the biggest things in the whole solar system and by human standards it moves with massive slowness. “Fast” in this context means 10 to 15 meters per second (20 to 30 miles per hour). A good bicyclist could easily keep up.
Below: The velocity of the Great Conveyor Belt (a.k.a. “meridianal flow”) since 1996. Note the higher speeds after ~2004. credit: Hathaway and Rightmire, 2010. [larger image]
The speed-up was surprising on two levels.
First, it coincided with the deepest solar minimum in nearly 100 years, contradicting models that say a fast-moving belt should boost sunspot production. The basic idea is that the belt sweeps up magnetic fields from the sun’s surface and drags them down to the sun’s inner dynamo. There the fields are amplified to form the underpinnings of new sunspots. A fast-moving belt should accelerate this process.
So where have all the sunspots been? The solar minimum of 2008-2009 was unusually deep and now the sun appears to be on the verge of a weak solar cycle.
Instead of boosting sunspots, Hathaway believes that a fast-moving Conveyor Belt can instead suppress them “by counteracting magnetic diffusion at the sun’s equator.” He describes the process in detail in Science (“Variations in the Sun’s Meridional Flow over a Solar Cycle,” 12 March 2010, v327, 1350-1352).
The second surprise has to do with the bottom of the Conveyor Belt.
SOHO can only clock the motions of the visible top layer. The bottom is hidden by ~200,000 kilometers of overlying plasma. Nevertheless, an estimate of its speed can be made by tracking sunspots.
“Sunspots are supposedly rooted to the bottom of the belt,” says Hathaway. “So the motion of sunspots tells us how fast the belt is moving down there.”
He’s done that—plotted sunspot speeds vs. time since 1996—and the results don’t make sense. “While the top of the conveyor belt has been moving at record-high speed, the bottom seems to be moving at record-low speed. Another contradiction.”
Above: An artist’s concept of the Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO). Launched in Feb. 2010, SDO will be able to look inside the sun to study the conveyor belt in greater detail, perhaps solving the mysteries Hathaway and Rightmire have uncovered. [larger image]
Could it be that sunspots are not rooted to the bottom of the Conveyor Belt, after all? “That’s one possibility” he notes. “Sunspots could be moving because of dynamo waves or some other phenomenon not directly linked to the belt.”
What researchers really need is a good look deep inside the sun. NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory, launched in February 2010, will provide that when its instruments come online later this year. SDO is able to map the sun’s interior using a technique called helioseismology. SOHO can do the same thing, but not well enough to trace the Great Conveyor Belt all the way around. SDO’s advanced sensors might reveal the complete circuit.
And then…? “It could be the missing piece we need to forecast the whole solar cycle,” says Hathaway.
Stay tuned for that.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“It’s a little like measuring the speed of a river on Earth by clocking the leaves and twigs floating downstream,” Hathaway explains.
Hmmm, maybe he should be working with University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science oceanographer Dr. Lou Codispoti instead of studying the sun. Maybe he can help him figure out what’s really going on with the low oxygen river mouth zones.
I think we will eventually realize the instruments we have been measuring solar radiations are indeed inadequate to capture the true total solar irradiation (TSI) across the entire spectrum and we did, in fact, just went through a 66 year grand solar maximum which did cause a secular step rise in the TSI.
That active period seems over, right on time, nine cycles time three from ~Sept 1699. The physics behind this will have to follow proper science pathways to shed light in that area, but only if the correct questions are probed. Now a pause of up to nine sub-normal cycles should follow. If my calculations are correct, that would bring the earth back to the same thermal energy level it was in 1699, all the energy (360 years of sunspot information to gain a little glimpse of what is going on.
That is just from a personal standpoint. I keep trying to disprove myself but can’t to date.
I wonder if there will be discussions of alternative analysis of the sun structure here? I’m speaking of things like the iron sun idea, and the planetary effects on the center of solar system. Seems like a reasonable place for such to arise. Obviously, Hathaway doesn’t have much of a clue going for himself based on the last several years of missing the bottom.
Anthony/mods:
Drats! A less than symbol cut off half the comment again! If you can replace the previous with this total comment. Gotta remember never to use them!
I think we will eventually realize the instruments we have been measuring solar radiations are indeed inadequate to capture the true total solar irradiation (TSI) across the entire spectrum and we did, in fact, just went through a 66 year grand solar maximum which did cause a secular step rise in the TSI.
That active period seems over, right on time, nine cycles time three from ~Sept 1699. The physics behind this will have to follow proper science pathways to shed light in that area, but only if the correct questions are probed. Now a pause of up to nine sub-normal cycles should follow. If my calculations are correct, that would bring the earth back to the same thermal energy level it was in 1699, all the energy (greater 1ºC) deep as measured in bore holes and the depths of the oceans will have dissipated. I could very well be wrong but nothing seems to have shaken my view to date.
If this multi-century (9 cycles per 99.7 years x 4) beat should ever prove true, the next grand maximum should not kick over until around 2339-2340. The sun is in the prime of its life span, I have found no reason to believe that its beats and cycles don’t repeat like clockwork. The only thing is we have not had precision electronic components on telescopes or satellites long enough to tell if ours and other similar class G stars also have these extremely long beats, but more time will cure that. At least we have greater than 360 years of sunspot information to gain a little glimpse of what is going on.
This is just my personal view.
As a ham radio operator, I have been waiting a long time for cycle 24 to get going. Whimper at best – so far. I think I’ll look out the window & look at the thermometer in the morning to see how to dress – as I have been for 50 years. I’m growing weary of all these predictions.
It seems like an appropriate time to note NASA’s and David Hathaway’s impressively sensational and amazingly inaccurate solar predictions over the last 7 years. Dr. Tony Phillips of NASA gets credit for much of the unseemly sensationalism, but Hathaway gets credit for many of the shoddy predictions, especially this one from July 11, 2008, “Stop the presses! The sun is behaving normally.”
“So says NASA solar physicist David Hathaway. “There have been some reports lately that Solar Minimum is lasting longer than it should. That’s not true. The ongoing lull in sunspot number is well within historic norms for the solar cycle.”
This report, that there’s nothing to report, is newsworthy because of a growing buzz in lay and academic circles that something is wrong with the sun. Sun Goes Longer Than Normal Without Producing Sunspots declared one recent press release. A careful look at the data, however, suggests otherwise.”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/11jul_solarcycleupdate.htm
Apparently Hathaway has re-thunk his prediction, given that he states in his current article that, “I believe this could explain the unusually deep solar minimum we’ve been experiencing,” says Hathaway.” Per the following summary of NASA solar press releases over the last 7 years it seems that Hathaway, Dr. Tony Phillips and NASA, at minimum are awful forecasters…
Nov 12, 2003: “The Sun Goes Haywire – Solar maximum is years past, yet the sun has been remarkably active lately. Is the sunspot cycle broken?”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/12nov_haywire.htm
Oct 18, 2004: “Something strange happened on the sun last week: all the sunspots vanished. This is a sign, say scientists, that solar minimum is coming sooner than expected.”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2004/18oct_solarminimum.htm
May 5, 2005: “Solar Myth – With solar minimum near, the sun continues to be surprisingly active.”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/05may_solarmyth.htm
Sept 15, 2005: “Solar Minimum Explodes – Solar minimum is looking strangely like Solar Max.”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/15sep_solarminexplodes.htm
Aug 15th, 2006: “Backward Sunspot – A strange little sunspot may herald the coming of one of the stormiest solar cycles in decades.”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/15aug_backwards.htm
Dec 21, 2006 “Scientists Predict Big Solar Cycle – Evidence is mounting: the next solar cycle is going to be a big one.”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/21dec_cycle24.htm
Dec 14, 2007 “Is a New Solar Cycle Beginning? – The solar physics community is abuzz this week. ”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2007/14dec_excitement.htm
Jan 10, 2008: “Solar Cycle 24 – Hang on to your cell phone, a new solar cycle has just begun.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/10jan_solarcycle24.htm
March 28, 2008: “Old Solar Cycle Returns – Barely three months after forecasters announced the beginning of new Solar Cycle 24, old Solar Cycle 23 has returned.”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/28mar_oldcycle.htm
July 11, 2008: “What’s Wrong with the Sun? (Nothing) – Stop the presses! The sun is behaving normally.”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/11jul_solarcycleupdate.htm
Sept. 30, 2008: “Spotless Sun: Blankest Year of the Space Age
– Sunspot counts are at a 50-year low – We’re experiencing a deep minimum of the solar cycle.”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/30sep_blankyear.htm
Nov. 7, 2008: The Sun Shows Signs of Life – I think solar minimum is behind us”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/07nov_signsoflife.htm
April 1, 2009: Deep Solar Minimum – We’re experiencing a very deep solar minimum – This is the quietest sun we’ve seen in almost a century”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/01apr_deepsolarminimum.htm
May 29, 2009: “If our prediction is correct, Solar Cycle 24 will have a peak sunspot number of 90, the lowest of any cycle since 1928 when Solar Cycle 16 peaked at 78,”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/29may_noaaprediction.htm
June 17, 2009: “Mystery of the Missing Sunspots, Solved? The sun is in the pits of a century-class solar minimum, and sunspots have been puzzlingly scarce for more than two years.”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/17jun_jetstream.htm
September 3, 2009: “Are Sunspots Disappearing? – The sun is in the pits of the deepest solar minimum in nearly a century. Weeks and sometimes whole months go by without even a single tiny sunspot. The quiet has dragged out for more than two years, prompting some observers to wonder, are sunspots disappearing?
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/03sep_sunspots.htm
September 29, 2009 “Cosmic Rays Hit Space Age High – In 2009, cosmic ray intensities have increased 19% beyond anything we’ve seen in the past 50 years,” says Richard Mewaldt of Caltech. “The increase is significant, and it could mean we need to re-think how much radiation shielding astronauts take with them on deep-space missions.”
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/29sep_cosmicrays.htm
I still can’t believe that I’m paying for this crap. NASA, I want a refund. And I’d like to use it to pay Leif for his thoughts on the subject…
wayne (22:13:31) :
I think we will eventually realize the instruments we have been measuring solar radiations are indeed inadequate to capture the true total solar irradiation (TSI) across the entire spectrum
You thinking is rooted in ignorance. We do measure the total energy of solar radiation across the entire spectrum.
And Leif gives further detail here:____________
Thanks in advance, Leif…
Look at that chart!
The sun’s conveyor belt is at it’s highest levels in recorded history! It could be we have past the point of no return and we are in for a devastating period of runaway solar conveyor belt change.
We are reasonably confidant that earth bound carbon emissions are the cause of the acceleration since we can confidantly say that the increased speed is unrelated to (earthly) volcanic forcings.
It may not end up helping, but just to be safe, we should cut back emissions to 1980s levels and hope it is not too little too late to slow down the devastating conveyor.
James
the sun and Earth are gradually moving apart. It’s not much – just 15 cm per year – but since that’s 100 times greater than the measurement error, something must really be pushing Earth outward. But what?
According to their explanation, the distance between the Earth and sun is growing because the sun is losing its angular momentum.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17228-why-is-the-earth-moving-away-from-the-sun.html
Still waiting for an explanation. How can you get theory right when you can’t even measure within an order of magnitude?
May 10, 2006: The Sun’s Great Conveyor Belt has slowed to a record-low crawl, according to research by NASA solar physicist David Hathaway. “It’s off the bottom of the charts,” he says. “This has important repercussions for future solar activity.” Normally, the conveyor belt moves about 1 meter per second—walking pace,” says Hathaway. “That’s how it has been since the late 19th century.” In recent years, however, the belt has decelerated to 0.75 m/s in the north and 0.35 m/s in the south. “We’ve never seen speeds so low.”
——
A note about “fast”: The Great Conveyor Belt is one of the biggest things in the whole solar system and by human standards it moves with massive slowness. “Fast” in this context means 10 to 15 meters per second (20 to 30 miles per hour). A good bicyclist could easily keep up.
Steve Goddard (20:39:50) :
More from Hathaway’s 2006 article. His numbers are off by more than order of magnitude from what he is saying now.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/10may_longrange.htm
Normally, the conveyor belt moves about 1 meter per second—walking pace,” says Hathaway. “That’s how it has been since the late 19th century.” In recent years, however, the belt has decelerated to 0.75 m/s in the north and 0.35 m/s in the south. “We’ve never seen speeds so low.”
=============
Two key sentences:
“Hathaway has been monitoring the conveyor belt using data from the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO).”
“SOHO’s dataset extends all the way back to 1996 and spans a complete solar cycle.”
Perhaps he wasn’t yet using the SOHO dataset when he wrote the 1996 article. That might explain the difference.
Leif Svalgaard (22:33:41) :
I expected your comeback. I’ve read the user and calibration radiometer manuals. I know to you the machines data is truth, any measurement of the sun output is already known, you have said it to me many times.
However, my experiences in life with machines, especially when measuring, have left me with a different view of their absoluteness, performance, and best design.
Leif Svalgaard: “It is honorable to learn and to change your mind when evidence does not support your ideas. David Hathaway is doing this right [there is no better believer than a reformed sinner 🙂 ].”
I remember you defending Hathaway one time when my [premature] criticism discounted him. Lesson learned on my part.
Hathaway is a good scientist. He is just reporting what he sees.
I think those errant spaceweather charts from 2009 and 2008 might have been influenced by some marketing guru.
But boy was that person ever wrong….
I’m on to Hathaway. He just reports and analyzes what he observes.
So…regardless of slowed down conveyor belt or sped up one….he reports it.
That is good science.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Mark.R (22:43:50) :
the sun and Earth are gradually moving apart. It’s not much – just 15 cm per year – but since that’s 100 times greater than the measurement error, something must really be pushing Earth outward. But what?
The Sun is losing its mass:
1) by radiating away 4 million tons per second
2) by emitting a similar amount as solar wind
Thus the gravitational force that binds the Earth to the Sun is decreasing and the Earth recedes.
Re- brand Mann’s GCM. I suggest calling it the Solar Climate Uber Model or SCUM and having Mann take Hathaways’s data, let Phil digest and process it and run it through Mann’s SCUM so that he can project a Great Solar Hockey stick showing Anthropogenic Spasmodic Solar Wind Intergalactic Periodic Excursions. The UN can then expand the purview of the IPCC to at least the solar system. I am sure that we will find that we have to produce a plan for Solar Climate Control to prevent anthropogenic solar warming involving transfer of trillions of dollars to Martians and Venusians
This solar conveyor bely system seems interestingly analagous to the earth’s Hadley cell circulation away from the equator:
http://www.atmosphere.mpg.de/enid/3sj.html
How fast does the sun rotate (if at all)? Does this affect the conveyor belt in a way similar to the effect of earth’s rotation on the Hadley cells?
I agree with savethesharks. You must admit that this is refreshing:
Hathaway says “The high speed of the conveyor belt challenges existing models of the solar cycle and it has forced us back to the drawing board for new ideas.”
Going back for fresh ideas when reality “challenges existing models.”
That’s starting to sound more like real science. Its the people who claim to be correct all the time who are the problem. The debate is never over.
I do not pretend to be a scientist, but nothing I read in this post shocked me – he’s not making any wild predictions, as far as I can see, just observing the satellite data, asking questions and envisaging possible interpretations. That’s the way it should be and I for one don’t begrudge a scientist being funded to do so and will be “staying tuned for that”.
What I do find depressing here is that the antics of rent-seeking bad climate scientists aggressively defending their patch and claiming that their science is settled are now giving rise to a depressing dog-in-the-manger attitude prevalent in many of the comments above.
Thank goodness for the voice of reason from people like Leif and Richard Holle.
Mark.R (22:43:50) :
something must really be pushing Earth outward. But what?
They suggest tides raised by the Earth on the Sun.I have not studied the article so I don’t know, but I’ll assume that they have some estimate of the size of the effect and that it matches the observations. But the other planets [especially Venus and Jupiter] also raises tides on the Sun, in fact, combined seven times as high as the Earth tides, so something doesn’t match up here. I’ll go with the mass loss. The solar wind also slows the Sun a tiny bit through it magnetic field, so there are many things that could work together to produce those subtle effects.
“The high speed of the conveyor belt challenges existing models of the solar cycle and it has forced us back to the drawing board for new ideas.”
This is why people should not listen to Al Gore when he says that the science is settled, the debate is over.
Mark.R (22:43:50) :
Think it is not so directly the angular momentum as the loss of mass. As the mass drops (is converted to energy) the orbit expands due to decrease in the gravitational field, the angular momentum would then be affected in that it is the radius vector crossed by the velocity vector (L = r X v). So the mass loss is causing the orbit change which is changing the loss in angular momentum.
However, the change in orbit cannot circularly change without also a change in orbital velocity. I have often been curios on that exact aspect, is it the solar head wind the earth plows through which slows the earth’s orbital velocity and therefore counters increase in the distance from the earth to the sun? Must be but don’t know that as a fact.
Michael D Smith (22:36:35) :
And Leif gives further detail here:____________
Asked and answered 🙂
Thank you wayne,leif, and just the facts and all the rest of you for the most interesting subject. A drop in world temps would be catastrophic for the planet, but in a weird way im longing for it just to see all the warmists squirm, although leif often bursts my bubble with inconvenient facts and science,Grrr!
Please, more sun stuff from you educated types!
P S is there a site i can go to for this stuff?
“dynamo waves”
Sounds like a great name for a song. Too bad Zappa’s gone.