Spotting the Solar Regime Shifts Driving Earth's Climate

Some people cite scientists saying there is a “CO2 control knob” for Earth. No doubt there is, but due to the logarithmic effect of CO2, I think of it like a fine tuning knob, not the main station tuner. That said, a new data picture is emerging of an even bigger knob and lever; a nice bright yellow one.

The ultimate power shifter - artwork by Anthony - click to enlarge

A few months back, I found a website from NOAA that provides an algorithm and downloadable program for spotting regime shifts in time series data. It was designed by Sergei Rodionov of the NOAA Bering Climate and Ecosystem Center for the purpose of detecting shifts in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.

Regime shifts are defined as rapid reorganizations of ecosystems from one relatively stable state to another. In the marine environment, regimes may last for several decades and shifts often appear to be associated with changes in the climate system. In the North Pacific, climate regimes are typically described using the concept of Pacific Decadal Oscillation. Regime shifts were also found in many other variables as demonstrated in the Data section of this website (select a variable and then click “Recent trends”).

But data is data, and the program doesn’t care if it is ecosystem data, temperature data, population data, or solar data. It just looks for and identifies abrupt changes that stabilize at a new level. For example, a useful application of the program is to look for shifts in weather data, such as that caused by the PDO. Here we can clearly see the great Pacific Climate Shift of 1976/77:

Another useful application is to use it to identify station moves that result in a temperature shift. It might also be applied to proxy data, such as ice core Oxygen 18 isotope data.

But the program was developed around the PDO. What drives the PDO? Many say the sun, though there are other factors too. It follows to reason then the we might be able to look for solar regime shifts in PDO driven temperature data.

Alan of AppInSys found the same application and has done just that, and the results are quite interesting. The correlation is well aligned, and it demonstrates the solar to PDO connection quite well. I’ll let him tell his story of discovery below. – Anthony

=================================

Climate Regime Shifts

The notion that climate variations often occur in the form of ‘‘regimes’’ began to become appreciated in the 1990s. This paradigm was inspired in large part by the rapid change of the North Pacific climate around 1977 [e.g., Kerr, 1992] and the identification of other abrupt shifts in association with the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) [Mantua et al., 1997].” [http://www.beringclimate.noaa.gov/regimes/Regime_shift_algorithm.pdf]

Pacific Regime Shifts

Hare and Mantua, 2000 (“Empirical evidence for North Pacific regime shifts in 1977 and 1989”): “It is now widely accepted that a climatic regime shift transpired in the North Pacific Ocean in the winter of 1976–77. This regime shift has had far reaching consequences for the large marine ecosystems of the North Pacific. Despite the strength and scope of the changes initiated by the shift, it was 10–15 years before it was fully recognized. Subsequent research has suggested that this event was not unique in the historical record but merely the latest in a succession of climatic regime shifts. In this study, we assembled 100 environmental time series, 31 climatic and 69 biological, to determine if there is evidence for common regime signals in the 1965–1997 period of record. Our analysis reproduces previously documented features of the 1977 regime shift, and identifies a further shift in 1989 in some components of the North Pacific ecosystem. The 1989 changes were neither as pervasive as the 1977 changes nor did they signal a simple return to pre-1977 conditions.”

[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V7B-41FTS3S-2…]

Overland et al “North Pacific regime shifts: Definitions, issues and recent transitions”

[http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/foci/publications/2008/overN667.pdf]: “climate variables for the North Pacific display shifts near 1977, 1989 and 1998.”

The following figure from the above paper show analysis of PDO and Victoria Index using the Rodionov regime detection algorithm. A regime shift is also detected around 1947-48.

The following figure shows regime shift detection for the summer PDO, showing shifts at 1948, 1976 and 1998.

[http://www.beringclimate.noaa.gov/data/Images/PDOs_FigRegime.html]

(For detailed information on the 1976/77 climate shift,

see: http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/The1976-78ClimateShift.htm)

Regime Shift Detection in Annual Temperature Anomaly Data

The NOAA Bering Climate web site provides the algorithm for regime shift detection developed by Sergei Rodionov [http://www.beringclimate.noaa.gov/regimes/index.html]. The following analyses use the Excel VBA regime change algorithm version 3.2 from this web site.

The following figure shows the regime analysis of the HadCRUT3 annual global annual average temperature anomaly data from the Met Office Hadley Centre for 1895 to 2009 [http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3/diagnostics/global/nh+sh/annual].

The analysis was run based on the mean using a significance level of 0.1, cut-off length of 10 and Huber weight parameter of 2 using red noise IP4 subsample size 6. Regime changes are identified in 1902, 1914, 1926, 1937, 1946, 1957, 1977, 1987, and 1997. Running the analysis based on the variance rather than the mean results in regime changes in the bold years listed above.

Regime Shift Relationship to Solar Cycle

The NASA Solar Physics web site provides the following figure showing sunspot area.

[http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/SunspotCycle.shtml]

The following figure compares the Hadley (HadCrut3) monthly global average temperature (from [http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3/diagnostics/global/nh+sh/]) overlaid with the regime change line (red line) shown previously, along with the sunspot area since 1900. The sunspot cycle is approximately 11 years. The sun’s magnetic field reverses with each sunspot cycle and thus after two sunspot cycles the magnetic field has completed a cycle – a Hale Cycle – and is back to where it started. Thus a complete magnetic sunspot cycle is approximately 22 years. The figure marks the onset of odd-numbered cycles with a vertical red line, even-numbered cycles with a green line.

From the figure above it can be seen that the regime changes correspond to the onset of solar cycles and occur when the “butterfly” is at its widest. The most significant warming regime shifts occur at the start of odd-numbered cycles (1937, 1957, 1977, 1997). Each odd-numbered cycle (red lines above) has resulted in a temperature-increase regime shift. Even-numbered cycles (green lines above) have been inconsistent, with some resulting in temperature-decrease regime shifts (1902, 1946) or minor temperature-increase shifts (1926, 1987).

An unusual one is the 1957 – 1966 cycle, which in the monthly data shown above visually looks like a temperature-increase shift in 1957 followed by a temperature-decrease shift in 1964 but the regime detection algorithm did not identify it. This is likely due to the use of annually averaged data in the regime detection algorithm.

The following figure shows the relative polarity of the Sun’s magnetic poles for recent sunspot cycles along with the solar magnetic flux [www.bu.edu/csp/nas/IHY_MagField.ppt]. The regime change periods are highlighted by the red and green boxes. Each one occurs on as the solar cycle is accelerating. The onset of an odd-numbered sunspot cycle (1977-78, 1997-98) results in the relative alignment of the Earth’s and the Sun’s magnetic fields (positive North pole on the Sun) allowing greater penetration of the geomagnetic storms into the Earth’s atmosphere. “Twenty times more solar particles cross the Earth’s leaky magnetic shield when the sun’s magnetic field is aligned with that of the Earth compared to when the two magnetic fields are oppositely directed” [http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/themis/news/themis_leaky_shield.html]

The following figure shows the longitudinally averaged solar magnetic field. This “magnetic butterfly diagram” shows that the sunspots are involved with transporting the field in its reversal. The Earth’s temperature regime shifts are indicated with the superimposed boxes – red on odd numbered solar cycles, green on even.

[http://solarphysics.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrsp-2010-1&page=articlesu8.html]

The Earth’s temperature regime shift occurs as the solar magnetic field begins its reversal.

Solar Cycle 24

Solar cycle 24 is in its initial stage after getting off to a late start. An El Nino occurred in the first part of 2010. This may be the start of the next regime shift.

Climate Regime Shifts

[last update: 2010/07/04]

The notion that climate variations often occur in the form of ‘‘regimes’’ began to become appreciated in the 1990s. This paradigm was inspired in large part by the rapid change of the North Pacific climate around 1977 [e.g., Kerr, 1992] and the identification of other abrupt shifts in association with the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) [Mantua et al., 1997].” [http://www.beringclimate.noaa.gov/regimes/Regime_shift_algorithm.pdf]

Pacific Regime Shifts

Hare and Mantua, 2000 (“Empirical evidence for North Pacific regime shifts in 1977 and 1989”): “It is now widely accepted that a climatic regime shift transpired in the North Pacific Ocean in the winter of 1976–77. This regime shift has had far reaching consequences for the large marine ecosystems of the North Pacific. Despite the strength and scope of the changes initiated by the shift, it was 10–15 years before it was fully recognized. Subsequent research has suggested that this event was not unique in the historical record but merely the latest in a succession of climatic regime shifts. In this study, we assembled 100 environmental time series, 31 climatic and 69 biological, to determine if there is evidence for common regime signals in the 1965–1997 period of record. Our analysis reproduces previously documented features of the 1977 regime shift, and identifies a further shift in 1989 in some components of the North Pacific ecosystem. The 1989 changes were neither as pervasive as the 1977 changes nor did they signal a simple return to pre-1977 conditions.”

[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V7B-41FTS3S-2…]

Overland et al “North Pacific regime shifts: Definitions, issues and recent transitions”

[http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/foci/publications/2008/overN667.pdf]: “climate variables for the North Pacific display shifts near 1977, 1989 and 1998.”

The following figure from the above paper show analysis of PDO and Victoria Index using the Rodionov regime detection algorithm. A regime shift is also detected around 1947-48.

The following figure shows regime shift detection for the summer PDO, showing shifts at 1948, 1976 and 1998.

[http://www.beringclimate.noaa.gov/data/Images/PDOs_FigRegime.html]

(For detailed information on the 1976/77 climate shift,

see: http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/The1976-78ClimateShift.htm)

Regime Shift Detection in Annual Temperature Anomaly Data

The NOAA Bering Climate web site provides the algorithm for regime shift detection developed by Sergei Rodionov [http://www.beringclimate.noaa.gov/regimes/index.html]. The following analyses use the Excel VBA regime change algorithm version 3.2 from this web site.

The following figure shows the regime analysis of the HadCRUT3 annual global annual average temperature anomaly data from the Met Office Hadley Centre for 1895 to 2009 [http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3/diagnostics/global/nh+sh/annual].

The analysis was run based on the mean using a significance level of 0.1, cut-off length of 10 and Huber weight parameter of 2 using red noise IP4 subsample size 6. Regime changes are identified in 1902, 1914, 1926, 1937, 1946, 1957, 1977, 1987, and 1997. Running the analysis based on the variance rather than the mean results in regime changes in the bold years listed above.

Regime Shift Relationship to Solar Cycle

The NASA Solar Physics web site provides the following figure showing sunspot area.

[http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/SunspotCycle.shtml]

The following figure compares the Hadley (HadCrut3) monthly global average temperature (from [http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3/diagnostics/global/nh+sh/]) overlaid with the regime change line (red line) shown previously, along with the sunspot area since 1900. The sunspot cycle is approximately 11 years. The sun’s magnetic field reverses with each sunspot cycle and thus after two sunspot cycles the magnetic field has completed a cycle – a Hale Cycle – and is back to where it started. Thus a complete magnetic sunspot cycle is approximately 22 years. The figure marks the onset of odd-numbered cycles with a vertical red line, even-numbered cycles with a green line.

From the figure above it can be seen that the regime changes correspond to the onset of solar cycles and occur when the “butterfly” is at its widest. The most significant warming regime shifts occur at the start of odd-numbered cycles (1937, 1957, 1977, 1997). Each odd-numbered cycle (red lines above) has resulted in a temperature-increase regime shift. Even-numbered cycles (green lines above) have been inconsistent, with some resulting in temperature-decrease regime shifts (1902, 1946) or minor temperature-increase shifts (1926, 1987).

An unusual one is the 1957 – 1966 cycle, which in the monthly data shown above visually looks like a temperature-increase shift in 1957 followed by a temperature-decrease shift in 1964 but the regime detection algorithm did not identify it. This is likely due to the use of annually averaged data in the regime detection algorithm.

The following figure shows the relative polarity of the Sun’s magnetic poles for recent sunspot cycles along with the solar magnetic flux [www.bu.edu/csp/nas/IHY_MagField.ppt]. The regime change periods are highlighted by the red and green boxes. Each one occurs on as the solar cycle is accelerating. The onset of an odd-numbered sunspot cycle (1977-78, 1997-98) results in the relative alignment of the Earth’s and the Sun’s magnetic fields (positive North pole on the Sun) allowing greater penetration of the geomagnetic storms into the Earth’s atmosphere. “Twenty times more solar particles cross the Earth’s leaky magnetic shield when the sun’s magnetic field is aligned with that of the Earth compared to when the two magnetic fields are oppositely directed” [http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/themis/news/themis_leaky_shield.html]

The following figure shows the longitudinally averaged solar magnetic field. This “magnetic butterfly diagram” shows that the sunspots are involved with transporting the field in its reversal. The Earth’s temperature regime shifts are indicated with the superimposed boxes – red on odd numbered solar cycles, green on even.

[http://solarphysics.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrsp-2010-1&page=articlesu8.html]

The Earth’s temperature regime shift occurs as the solar magnetic field begins its reversal.

Solar Cycle 24

Solar cycle 24 is in its initial stage after getting off to a late start. An El Nino occurred in the first part of 2010. This may be the start of the next regime shift.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
660 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
July 15, 2010 1:22 pm

First no current, now it is only local; radial current could be local, but here it is the AXIAL CURRENT; axial means along the axis. Axis is not local it is along the length of the magnetic rope!
I hope none of your colleagues are reading this, it could be rather embarrassing, digging yourself into ever deeper hole.
Go have some coffee, and see a bit of daylight.

tallbloke
July 15, 2010 1:27 pm

It’s very simple really. Dynamic balance between power supply and planetary feedback governing the power supply.
The Sun is prevented from going into runaway conditions and possibly going supernova by the planets which control it’s activity levels. The Sun contains 99.85% of all the mass in the system. The planets have 98% of the angular momentum.
When the sun follows it’s tendency towards runaway conditions with shorter, higher amplitude cycles, it gets out of phase with the planetary alignments. This causes the solar activity level to drop to below average levels. Then it slowly builds up a head of steam again.
Maunder minimum followed by 110 years of increasing activity. Dalton Minimum, followed by 100 years of increasing activity, the low cycles at the start of the C20th, followed by 110 years of increasing activity. Then the long minimum after solar cycle 23 followed by, you guessed it…
James Watt came up with the invention of the planetary Governor to control the speed of steam engines in 1724. The sliding collar is connected to the valve which controls the amount of steam allowed into the cylinder barrel.

I predict it will be discovered that more stars which have no planetary system will go supernova prematurely than those that do.
Luckily for us.

July 15, 2010 2:04 pm

REPLY: I agree, it is becoming tedious. And, you are all wrong, The sun is driven by vitamin enriched E. Coli with super powered mitochondrial elements that fuse hydrogen, all riding on a giant turtle. – A
My apologies, I am taking a brake from the matters solar.
Thanks for your generous hospitality, and I do mean it; it gave me unprecedented audience, particularly for some of my climate comments. Graphs and charts I produced are frequently downloaded by all sort of interested and curious, ranging from many of major world-famous universities and research institutions to rather odd ones like USIAC, US Supreme Court or CIA.
WUWT thanks again.
M. Vukcevic

July 15, 2010 2:10 pm

correction that should be USAISC

July 15, 2010 2:47 pm

tallbloke said:
“It’s very simple really. Dynamic balance between power supply and planetary feedback governing the power supply.”
Exactly right but we don’t need to go interplanetary.
Just propose a variable speed for the hydrological cycle and you’ve got the answer right here.
And the evidence for such a variable speed ?
Just shift all the air circulation systems 1000 miles or so poleward or equatorward as observed MWP to LIA to date.
It really is that simple even if the mechanism is still the subject of conjectures (mainly mine).
Cheers.

July 15, 2010 2:56 pm

“Leif Svalgaard says:
July 15, 2010 at 1:07 pm
Stephen Wilde says:
July 15, 2010 at 12:58 pm
The other half is the sensitivity of the system to which it is applied
The sensitivity can also be estimated, at least, by order of magnitude, and does not help as the stimulus is just too small. Systems with extreme sensitivity tend to end in run-aways. This has not [yet] happened to the Earth.”
Now Leif, I’m getting the impression that winning debating points is more important to you than seeking truth.
The absence of a runaway effect is not evidence of any lack of high sensitivity. The high sensitivity I propose is one which efficiently returns the system to a background stability set by the properties of water and the density and pressure differentials between oceans air and space despite attempted external (solar) or internal (oceanic or volcanic or changes in atmospheric composition) system disruptions.
In my humble opinion your extremely detailed solar knowledge is blocking your ability to interpret real world climate observations.

tallbloke
July 15, 2010 3:41 pm

Stephen Wilde says:
July 15, 2010 at 2:47 pm
Just shift all the air circulation systems 1000 miles or so poleward or equatorward
Yes, the changing positions of the jets streams are the Earth analogue (and indeed linked) to the speeding and slowing sunspot production oscillations on the sun.
http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2010/07/15/solar-system-simplified/
It’s been a good debate, my thanks to everyone.
Rog Tallbloke

July 15, 2010 4:15 pm
July 15, 2010 5:44 pm

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 15, 2010 at 10:09 am
Here is Rachel’s data. From past data we see that the next cycle smoothly attaches to the current one, so let’s attach the graph of cycle 24 from 1998 onwards to the end of 2008 to give us a full cycle. the slanting cyan arrow highlights the TO. Tell us when that line begins and ends. To make it easy I have put a matching but horizontal line along the time axis.
Your not listening Leif, I am talking about the slower flows. I have drawn a line on your graphic to make it easy.
http://www.landscheidt.info/images/flow.png
Here is Howe & Hills version of my original graphic showing the sunspot overlay.
http://www.landscheidt.info/images/hill.png
And my original overlay.
http://www.landscheidt.info/images/comb2.gif
The Doppler images are taken some depth into the convective zone, there needs to be a slight allowance made for the residual drift of each flow as it rises to the surface which makes an even better agreement between the slow (green/blue) flow and the magnetic butterfly data.

July 15, 2010 6:10 pm

Stephen Wilde wrote, “Just shift all the air circulation systems 1000 miles or so poleward or equatorward as observed MWP to LIA to date.”
1000 miles? Weren’t you discussing a paper above that showed the ITCZ moved 500km? 500km is 310 miles the last time I checked.
Also, the reason the ITCZ traveled 500km is because SST varied, changing the latitude with the strongest convection. Keep in mind, the strongest convection follows the warm water. And that means for the ITCZ to travel northward, either the SST north of the ITCZ rose or the SST south of it dropped.

July 15, 2010 7:41 pm

Stephen Wilde says:
July 15, 2010 at 2:56 pm
Now Leif, I’m getting the impression that winning debating points is more important to you than seeking truth.
My truth is based on numbers, equations, models, and physics, not on ‘would could be’, ‘might not not be excluded, and other hand waving.
tallbloke says:
July 15, 2010 at 3:41 pm
Geoff Sharp says:
July 15, 2010 at 5:44 pm
Your not listening Leif, I am talking about the slower flows. I have drawn a line on your graphic to make it easy.
Your line does not represent the actual TO [and Rachel would consider the red/yellow to be the TO, not the green], and does not form any cycle [which was the starting point]. You are confusing ‘duration’ with ‘cycle. You can talk about the solar minimum lasting two or three years, but that does make it a 3 year ‘cycle’.

July 15, 2010 8:54 pm

Geoff Sharp says:
I am talking about the slower flows.
You are confusing ‘duration’ with ‘cycle. You can talk about the solar minimum lasting two or three years, but that does not make it a 3 year ‘cycle’.

July 15, 2010 9:38 pm

Geoff Sharp says:
July 15, 2010 at 5:44 pm
Your not listening Leif, I am talking about the slower flows. I have drawn a line on your graphic to make it easy.
Your line does not represent the actual TO [and Rachel would consider the red/yellow to be the TO, not the green], and does not form any cycle [which was the starting point]. You are confusing ‘duration’ with ‘cycle. You can talk about the solar minimum lasting two or three years, but that does not make it a 3 year ‘cycle’.
Here is a plot with my green line through the red/orange, a blue line without the polar branch, and your orange line through the green. All of these last in excess of 22 years [the minimum was a bit longer than normal].
Rachel says about her plot: “The torsional oscillation pattern for cycles 23 and 24 can be seen as red/orange strips running from the poles to the equator.” From her slide at http://www.leif.org/research/TO_slide_gong.ppt
This should settle the matter, provided one could “have a reasonable exchange, but perhaps that is not possible?”

July 15, 2010 9:40 pm

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 15, 2010 at 9:38 pm
Here is the plot: http://www.leif.org/research/Torsional-Oscillation.png

July 15, 2010 10:16 pm

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 15, 2010 at 9:40 pm
Here is the plot: http://www.leif.org/research/Torsional-Oscillation.png
Nice try Leif, your attempt to construct the future is stretching things just a little? Not exactly a solid scientific method.
I will go with what Rachel says “around eighteen years”

July 15, 2010 11:06 pm

Geoff Sharp says:
July 15, 2010 at 10:16 pm
Nice try Leif, your attempt to construct the future is stretching things just a little? Not exactly a solid scientific method.
Yes it is, because we know from past cycles that the TO repeats itself tied to the sunspot cycle. And my plot shows the next solar max in 2014. Which is not going to be much wrong.
I will go with what Rachel says “around eighteen years”
First, Rachel is talking about the red/orange flow, not your green flow: “I am talking about the slower flows”
Second, “each equatorward-migrating flow band exists for about eighteen years” is not the whole TO, as there is also a poleward branch lasting several years to be added to the 18.
But, the whole thing is moot, as there is no 18-year cycle either, since the TO is tied to the sunspot cycle, and therefore repeats every 22 years. You confuse ‘duration’ with ‘cycle’.
If there were a 17-year cycle then there would be 6 cycles in a century, but here are only 5 solar cycles, so y=if you maintain there is a 17-yr cycle, you are postulating that the TO does not follow the solar cycle, does not correlate with the magnetic flux, etc.

tallbloke
July 15, 2010 11:11 pm

Ulric Lyons says:
July 15, 2010 at 4:15 pm (Edit)
SBC today !
http://gse.gi.alaska.edu/recent/ecimf.html

I wish those plots went out as far as Jupiters orbit! (currently SSE relative to the reference frame used).
It looks a bit ‘bunched up’ Ulric. What is your interpretation?

tallbloke
July 15, 2010 11:14 pm

Bob Tisdale says:
July 15, 2010 at 6:10 pm (Edit)
Stephen Wilde wrote, “Just shift all the air circulation systems 1000 miles or so poleward or equatorward as observed MWP to LIA to date.”
1000 miles? Weren’t you discussing a paper above that showed the ITCZ moved 500km? 500km is 310 miles the last time I checked.

Could Stephen be referring to the combined shift of the northern and southern jet streams?

July 15, 2010 11:29 pm

Geoff Sharp says:
July 15, 2010 at 10:16 pm
I will go with what Rachel says “around eighteen years”
She did not say that. She said: “each equatorward-migrating flow band exists for about eighteen years” This is only one part of the TO. In her slide at http://www.leif.org/research/TO_slide_gong.ppt
She is very specific about what is meant by the TO:
“The torsional oscillation pattern for cycles 23 and 24 can be seen as red/orange strips running from the poles to the equator”
Thus including the polar branch.
So, do not misrepresent her for your own purposes.

tallbloke
July 15, 2010 11:36 pm

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 15, 2010 at 8:20 am
the solar wind transfers angular momentum from the Sun to the planets via the magnetic field, thus causing the planets to recede from the Sun. This effect is at present negligible [but was not in the distant past].

It appears to be negligible, because the planetary orbits are not getting higher as they were in the past. However, this does not mean that the force is negligible now, rather that the force pushing the planets outwards is in a dynamic equilibrium with the forces tending to take the planets inwards.
If you look carefully at JPL’s Horizon site, you will see that these forces are not included [too small].
The net motions are too small for JPL to bother including them, but this does not mean the forces are not there, just that they are in a dynamic equilibrium with opposing forces.
Everything in the universe oscillates. Why should our corner of the cosmos be any different, you would need some special pleading to claim that. The Sun has 99.87% of the solar system’s mass, the planets have 98% of the solar system’s angular momentum. If the sun was giving up a fraction of it’s energy to opposing the tendency for the orbits of the planets to decay (as they must, see the law of entropy), then the effect on it’s overall spin rate would be infinitesimal, and unmeasurable by JPL or anyone else over a short (space age) timeframe.
In any case, if the Sun gives energy via magnetic fields to the planets, it seems likely the galactic core is giving some energy to the Sun via magnetic fields too. Once again, you would need to make a special pleading to argue that the Sun isn’t affected by the same forces that affect everything else in the universe.

July 15, 2010 11:51 pm

tallbloke says:
July 15, 2010 at 11:36 pm
However, this does not mean that the force is negligible now, rather that the force pushing the planets outwards is in a dynamic equilibrium with the forces tending to take the planets inwards.
We can calculate the forces and they are found to be negligible now, so my statement is not based on some vague notion that something must balance. You are postulating that there is some other negligible force balancing the first negligible force. In any event, the effects are negligible.
Everything in the universe oscillates.
No. An oscillation requires a restoring force and there are no such forces out there trying to restore everything.

July 15, 2010 11:57 pm

tallbloke says:
July 15, 2010 at 11:36 pm
the orbits of the planets to decay (as they must, see the law of entropy),
You are misunderstanding that law. It does not say that everything decays [entropy increase], just that the entropy never decreases [it stay constant for instance]

tallbloke
July 16, 2010 12:15 am

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 15, 2010 at 11:57 pm (Edit)
tallbloke says:
July 15, 2010 at 11:36 pm
the orbits of the planets to decay (as they must, see the law of entropy),
You are misunderstanding that law. It does not say that everything decays [entropy increase], just that the entropy never decreases [it stay constant for instance]

You may continue to play Newtonian mind games with perfect billiard balls in perfect empty space if you so wish.
I’m more interested in the reality of the situation.

July 16, 2010 12:17 am

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 15, 2010 at 9:40 pm

I finally found their reference to seventeen years. This taken from their press conference and can be found here.
http://spd.boulder.swri.edu/solar_mystery/
“Drs. Rachel Howe and Frank Hill, both of the NSO, used long-term
observations from the NSO’s Global Oscillation Network Group (GONG)
facility to detect and track an east-to-west jet stream, known as the
“torsional oscillation”, at depths of ~1,000 to 7,000 km below the
surface of the Sun. The Sun generates new jet streams near its poles
every 11 years; the streams migrate slowly, over a period of 17 years,
to the equator, and are associated with the production of sunspots
once they reach a critical latitude of 22 degrees.”
This should settle the matter. The 17 year pattern/duration/cycle is waiting for us resolve.
“We still don’t understand exactly how jet streams trigger sunspot production,” says Pesnell. “Nor do we fully understand how the jet streams themselves are generated.”

tallbloke
July 16, 2010 12:21 am

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 15, 2010 at 11:51 pm (Edit)
We can calculate the forces and they are found to be negligible now, so my statement is not based on some vague notion

Genuinely, I’d be extremely interested to see that. Please do back up your claims with your maths. For those of us less gifted in the numerical arts, please annotate the calculations with notes on what each of the numbers represent in physical reality.
Thank you.