We covered this story about solar magnetic field strength and sunspot contrast months ago on WUWT, and for a couple of years now I have been pointing out that the Ap Interplantary magnetic index took a dive, and has stayed at low levels. For example, this month, it remains stalled:
Late last year I ran this story:
In June 2008, WUWT published a wake up call, which had at that time, been mostly ignored by mainstream science:
Livingston and Penn paper: “Sunspots may vanish by 2015″.
But the rest of the world is now just getting around to realizing the significance of the work Livingston and Penn are doing related to sunspots. Science just ran with a significant story that is getting lots of press: Say goodbye to sunspots
Here’s a prominent excerpt:
The last solar minimum should have ended last year, but something peculiar has been happening. Although solar minimums normally last about 16 months, the current one has stretched over 26 months—the longest in a century. One reason, according to a paper submitted to the International Astronomical Union Symposium No. 273, an online colloquium, is that the magnetic field strength of sunspots appears to be waning.
…
Scientists studying sunspots for the past 2 decades have concluded that the magnetic field that triggers their formation has been steadily declining. If the current trend continues, by 2016 the sun’s face may become spotless and remain that way for decades—a phenomenon that in the 17th century coincided with a prolonged period of cooling on Earth.
Meanwhile, both the sunspot count and the 10.7 cm solar radio flux continue to lag well behind the prediction curves:
These three indicators, taken together, suggest the solar magnetic dynamo is having trouble getting restarted for solar cycle 24, which so far is not only late, but groggy.
But back to the Livingston and Penn article from Science. The most telling graph is one that Dr. Leif Svalgaard keeps updated:
Here’s the issue, which WUWT summed up when we printed excepts of Livingston and Penn in EOS. As WUWT readers may recall, we had a preview of that EOS article here.
L&P write in the EOS article:
For hundreds of years, humans have observed that the Sun has displayed activity where the number of sunspots increases and then decreases at approximately 11- year intervals. Sunspots are dark regions on the solar disk with magnetic field strengths greater than 1500 gauss (see Figure 1), and the 11- year sunspot cycle is actually a 22- year cycle in the solar magnetic field, with sunspots showing the same hemispheric magnetic polarity on alternate 11- year cycles.
In a nutshell, once the magnetic field gets below 1500 gauss, sunspots won’t have enough contrast to be visible.
Now maybe with the Science magazine article, the powers that be at the National Solar Observatory will give them more telescope time.They’ve had a lot of trouble getting time because the “consensus” of solar science didn’t embrace their idea. That may be about to change. With something this important, one would hope.
Vuk etc. says:
September 21, 2010 at 10:58 am
‘huge’ and ‘resonance’ etc are explained on the graph.
Not huge and not resonance, and not ‘hit’ by anything. The Earth’s magnetic field is generated by convection and dynamo action in the core and have nothing to do with eggs. The nonsense remains.
ps.
That’s better. I think you are in Brugge, West-vlaanderen, Belgium
And, do you have some hits from Belgium now?
Vuk etc. says:
September 21, 2010 at 11:03 am
It’s true!
I don’t think your little story is true
( Some) Scandinavians have no sense of humour.
You mean that your other claim was also an attempt of humor?
Hard to tell them apart, I tell you.
Leif Svalgaard says:
The Earth’s magnetic field is generated by convection and dynamo action in the core and have nothing to do with eggs.
To paraphrase your own words: Report back when you done the egg experiment.
Vuk etc. says:
September 21, 2010 at 11:11 am
I think you are in Brugge, West-vlaanderen, Belgium
Complete nonsense
Vuk etc. says:
September 21, 2010 at 11:19 am
To paraphrase your own words: Report back when you done the egg experiment.
Complete nonsense
I used to think it was odd that Leif always had a smiley face on his postings over at SolarCycle24.com. I’ve come to interpret that as the “spoonful of sugar to make the medicine go down”.
Leif Svalgaard
—————–
When my kids were little, I use to make up all sort of stories for them, now they are grown up, so I have turned my ‘talents’ to the solar activity, magnetic fields, world climate etc. equally entertaining subjects. Not much difference really.
‘Its true’ refers to: (some) Scandinavians…..
L.S.
Complete nonsense.. Complete nonsense… Complete nonsense
Quote: Subconsciously you block your mind by verbal repetition.
JCarels says: September 21, 2010 at 11:13 am
And, do you have some hits from Belgium now?
Number of hits from:
Host Name d51A4E53B.access.telenet.be , IP Address 81.164.229.59
Country Belgium, Region West-vlaanderen , City Brugge
Browser Firefox 3.6 , Operating System WinVista , Javascript Enabled
Vuk etc. says:
September 21, 2010 at 12:34 pm
“Complete nonsense.. Complete nonsense… Complete nonsense”
Subconsciously you block your mind by verbal repetition.
It seems you all the sudden you lost your sense of humor, ah well, humor only goes so far…
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 21, 2010 at 10:19 am
========================
Tom Rowan says:
September 21, 2010 at 9:50 am
NOAA is counting no spots as 10*1=11
0(10*1+1) = 0. It does not equal “11.”
If they count 10*1+1=11 it is because the observed 1.
You can undoubtedly find days [2009/11/13, 2009/11/14 perhaps] where NOAA reported 0, but other observers [e.g. Brussels] report a spot. This is a natural consequence of the short life time of small spots.
=========================
Okay, what are the spotless moments in time for this historic period?
You are the expert around here. (So tell us, pretty please with sugar on it,)
===================================================
Seems to me we have the technology to count such spotless moments in time. According to expert sunpot counters, these times must be inflated to “11″ no matter if the sun is blank.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
We can make a sunspot number every five seconds, but that is meaningless as we use the sunspot number as a measure of long-term variability.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I see, so moments in time where the sun goes spotless, these times are not worth “counting.”
Open Letter to Leif:
Tell that to Yankee fans compaining about the umpirer.
This is the moment you admit checkmate or are deemed a fool:
Choose wisely.
Go to Layman’s Sunspot Count and see for yourselves. Compare it with Spaceweather, (if they keep history online.)
0(10*1) + 1 does not = “11.” At best it equals “1” spot nobody ever saw, even with today’s best telescopes.
Accounting, like Chess, like counting sunspots, have certain rules.
In accounting we may never inflate numbers. The law penalizes those who do.
In chess we may never say “checkmate” until the opponent can acknowledge it for himself. I am asking you to acknowledge that you have no idea how many times our sun has been spotless, even for a moment, during this solar cycle.
So far, you have not.
Prove me wrong sunspot beancounter.
Again. You can believe me, believe Joe, or believe Leif.
Who do you want to be stuck in a coal mine with?
(Remember, NASA cut off cigarettes to trapped coal miners.)
http://store.math.com/ConsoleGames-11846801-B0007ZNN48-Lego_Star_Wars.html
Tom Rowans says: Is there anyone on this site worth arguement’s sake?
Vuk etc. says:
September 21, 2010 at 12:34 pm
When my kids were little, I use to make up all sort of stories for them […] I have turned my ‘talents’ to the solar activity, magnetic fields, world climate etc. equally entertaining subjects. Not much difference really.
Perhaps this forum would be better off with your made-up stories… Some modicum of science might better be required.
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 21, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Perhaps this forum would be better off without your made-up stories…
some slip there 🙂
Tom Rowan says:
September 21, 2010 at 12:44 pm
you have no idea how many times our sun has been spotless, even for a moment, during this solar cycle.
37[NOAA]-40[SIDC] days.
You can’t count moments. How many moments in an hour? 3? 123967565? tell me?
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 20, 2010 at 2:41 pm
Tom Rowan says:
September 20, 2010 at 1:33 pm
During 3 consecutive spotless days, our government counted 1 spotless day.
===============================================
Because these were not all spotless, here is Locarno in Switzerland [not your government]: http://www.specola.ch/drawings/2010/loc-d20100910.JPG
=========================================
With that impeccable logic, our next total solar eclipse will occur in September of 2081, Zurich time.
=+=+=+=+=+=+
Notice how logic must be taken to the memory hole and disgarded.
Meanwhile, expert sunspot counters cannot tell you how many times the sun flickered out for days, hours, or minutes.
This is called “check” Leif.
You tell us, (as an expert,) how many times our dormant sun has gone spotless during solar cycle 24.
This is called “checkmate” Leif.
Do you confess?
L.S.
Perhaps this forum would be better off with your made-up stories… Some modicum of science might better be required.
I got an invitation from From National Center for Atmospheric Research and the University of Colorado for a PhD research.
Carl Drews starts with:
“CU is a great place to do research, professors never said no to any crazy research ideas.”
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 21, 2010 at 12:58 pm
===========================
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 21, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Perhaps this forum would be better off without your made-up stories…
some slip there 🙂
==========================
Tom Rowan says:
September 21, 2010 at 12:44 pm
you have no idea how many times our sun has been spotless, even for a moment, during this solar cycle.
========================
“Leif says:”
37[NOAA]-40[SIDC] days.
You can’t count moments. How many moments in an hour? 3? 123967565? tell me?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yes or no sir? My clients demand to know when their bank accounts are at zero.
So does the IRS.
So tell us Leif: How many times has the sun been spotless during solar cycle 24?
This s/b an easy question for “professional” sunspot counters as yourself.
This ought to be pertinent. We have the technology to photograph spotless moments in time.
Leif swears we do.
So Leif, (professional sunspot bean counter,) pretty please with sugar on it; How many spotless moments in time during solar cycle 24?
(For those you who do not play chess, this is known as “checkmate.”)
Tom Rowan says:
September 21, 2010 at 2:07 pm
So tell us Leif: How many times has the sun been spotless during solar cycle 24?
~40 days. Do you have a reading disability?
Vuk etc. says:
September 21, 2010 at 1:30 pm
“CU is a great place to do research, professors never said no to any crazy research ideas.”
Big difference between crazy ideas and plain old nonsense.
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 21, 2010 at 7:06 am
“So, the changes are different from place to place. This means that you can always find some changes that matches anything. This is what is meant by ‘cherry picking’.”
No you have the wrong end of the stick. The changes will be largely in unison, but of different range or extent, as would be expected.
There were 2 examples I gave in my previous post; 1) early Jan 2010, which alone could constitute cherry picking, but I also pointed out that 2) solar wind speed and N.H. winter temp`s in ALL winters since 2002/3 were higher until the last two. Our latest discussion is about how the drop in the solar wind velocity in early Jan 2010 would play out in different regions of the globe, it has nothing to do with cherry picking at all. In fact you decided to cherry pick Australia, assuming that as it was summer there, it would not be colder. The decisive proof for an Australian temp` dropping in early Jan, would be a positive rainfall anomaly for that fortnight, as a drop in summer temp`s always drives up rainfall volume, ask Erl Happ, he clued me in on it.
Ulric Lyons says:
September 21, 2010 at 2:27 pm
solar wind speed and N.H. winter temp`s in ALL winters since 2002/3 were higher until the last two.
So of 8 times it failed twice in a row. To have any validity your statement should have been: ‘in ALL [or a statistically significant number] winters since 1963-4 they were higher’. And is N.H. the average Northern Hemisphere? And does this hold for the S.H. too? and why not?
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 21, 2010 at 2:17 pm
Tom Rowan says:
September 21, 2010 at 2:07 pm
So tell us Leif: How many times has the sun been spotless during solar cycle 24?
Leif ~40 days. Do you have a reading disability?
Tom Rowan asks;
Do we all see how Leif, (expert sunspot counter at WUWT AND SolarCycle24 AND Layman’s Sunspot Count,) avoids ansering actual scientific questions?
During what could be the start of a grand minimum, Leif will not give us the spotless moments.
For those of us who declare “checkmate;” we are asking why?
Leif seems ill prepared to answer how many times our sun has flickered out.
Leif still insists that he is an “expert” sunspot counter.
So, again Leif, pretty please with sugar on it;
Tell us the number of times our sun went blank during the current solar cycle.
An anxious world awaits……………
(do we have a “crickets chirping” avatar at WUWT?)
Tom Rowan says:
September 21, 2010 at 2:53 pm
Tell us the number of times our sun went blank during the current solar cycle.
Ah, getting away from moments now. Counting each stretch of blank days as ‘one time’ the answer is 11 times [NOAA] or 14 times [SIDC].
Chirp
Chirp
Chirp
> Tell us the number of times our sun went blank during the current solar cycle.
There’s a jillion websites that can answer that question, for any arbitrary period. Just Google ‘spotless days’. For example,
http://users.telenet.be/j.janssens/Spotless/Spotless.html
During the last minimum between 23-24 I believe the record for the consectutive days was around 800.
Since the sun has become more active again, it’s more interesting to analyze the runs of ‘spotfull days’. Currently we’re at 55 (http://www.solarcycle24.com)
😐
Ulric Lyons says:
September 21, 2010 at 2:27 pm
solar wind speed and N.H. winter temp`s in ALL winters since 2002/3 were higher until the last two.
The correct way of deciding this is to do the math. Here are two plots:
http://www.leif.org/research/NH-Temps-Solar-Wind-Speed.png
The top one shows for every winter [Dec-Jan-Feb] where we have spacecraft data, the NH land anomalies [blue], and their detrended values [red]. The green dots show the solar wind speed during these winters. You can see there is no correlation of the kind you claim. In the bottom plot you can see a scatter plot of the winter temp anomalies versys the solar wind speed. The R^2 values is ~0.1 which means no correlation for this number of data points. If anything there is a [insignificant] ‘correlation going the other way [faster wind = lower temp]. This should end your claim for good, don’t you think?
Tom Rowan says:
September 21, 2010 at 3:40 pm
Chirp Chirp Chirp
Tom has decended to cricket level, it seems. Watch out for the birds now.