Massive solar filament eruption captured by SDO

vukcevic, you’ll find the same flip in SOI. Be sure to look at integrals & rates of change by month.
Here’s some material to help sharpen thinking about seasonal NH temperature-precipitation correlation patterns (including sign reversals):
1) Figure 1c:
Meehl, G.A.; Arblaster, J.M.; Branstator, G.; & van Loon, H. (2008). A coupled air-sea response mechanism to solar forcing in the Pacific Region. Journal of Climate 21, 2883-2897.
http://www.cawcr.gov.au/staff/jma/meehl_solar_coldeventlike_2008.pdf
2) Figure 1:
Roy, I; & Haigh, J.D. (2010). Solar cycle signals in sea level pressure and sea surface temperature. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 10, 3147-3153.
http://www.atmos-chem-phys.org/10/3147/2010/acp-10-3147-2010.pdf
Thanks to the mountain spine (including vertical temperature profile) & shape of the coast, you only need to bend the jet a small angle to introduce dramatic hydrologic variations downstream. The Aleutian Low can be a highly strategic deflector. Careful reconsideration of AMOC’s supposed dominance in multidecadal NH variations is warranted.
Most of the North Pacific is warm during the cold phase of the PDO. PDO is related to SOI. SOI is related to LOD’ (which relates very tightly with GLAAM). LOD’ is related to solar cycling rate. Take a look at semi-annual contrasts of SOI integrals by month (on a color-contour plot) for a revelation about what coincided with the Chandler wobble phase reversal. (There was a 1/4 cycle [3 month] shift in seasonal persistence.)
I suggest blinking between the upper & lower panels of figure 6 here:
Trenberth, K.E. (2010). Changes in precipitation with climate change.
http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Trenberth/trenberth.papers/ClimateChangeWaterCycle-rev.pdf
“Fig. 6 Correlations between monthly mean anomalies of surface temperature and precipitation, grouped into the 893 months of November to March and May to September, for 1979 to 2002, adapted from Trenberth and Shea (2005).”
Bear in mind that these patterns are stationary in neither time nor space. Also note the use of anomalies even though temperature-precipitation relations are a function of absolutes. Regardless, the simple blend & contrast of these plain winter & summer summary maps illustrate a crucial point.
When assumptions of randomness fail, Simpson’s Paradox has sharp teeth & a nasty bite.
–
I should have included these links above:
Perry’s hub:
http://ks.water.usgs.gov/waterdata/climate/
More specifically:
Perry, C.A. (2007). Evidence for a physical linkage between galactic cosmic rays and regional climate time series. Advances in Space Research 40, 353-364. doi:10.1016/j.asr2007.02.079.
http://ks.water.usgs.gov/waterdata/climate/jasr8755.pdf
–
Leif, what is the current mainstream conventional explanation of the effect of solar activity on length of day (LOD)?

“I sincerely hope that the increased interest in the study of double layers — which is fatal to this pseudoscience [“magnetic reconnection”] — will change the situation. Whenever we find a double layer (or any other E [electric field] does not equal zero) we hammer a nail into the coffin of the ‘merging’ pseudo-science.” — Hannes Alfven, 1970 Nobel Prize winner in physics
Highlight: “(or any other E [electric field] does not equal zero) we hammer a nail into the coffin of the ‘merging’ pseudo-science.”
Why is the, above, statement important?
Because you have statements like this:
Dr. Svalgaard: “It has also long been known that there are no electric fields in the rest frame of that plasma [it simply shorts out]. And that when plasma meets a magnetic field, transient electric currents are induced with all kinds of effects [e.g. aurorae].”
It’s a less adamant varient of “electricity doesn’t do anything in space”.
The papers presented and linked to, below, discuss electric fields and electrical currents, not as “transient” events, but as significant “large scale” and “driving” mechanisms in the solar flare phenomenon.
It is the development and propagation of electric fields which in turn accelerate charged particles and result in electrical currents. This is accomplished via the interaction of magnetic fields and charged particles’ electric force, which results in arrays of oppositely charged particles, thus, an electric field which causes charged particle acceleration.
Here is a recent peer-reviewed paper duscussing the electric circuit theory:
2009 peer-reviewed published paper: Central European Astrophysics Bulletin
GENERATION OF LARGE SCALE ELECTRIC FIELDS IN CORONAL FLAIR CIRCUITS
Abstract: “A large number of energetic electrons are generated during solar flares. They carry a substantial part of the flare released energy but how these electrons are created is not fully understood yet. This paper suggests that plasma motion in an active region in the photosphere is the source of large electric currents. These currents can be described by macroscopic circuits. Under special circumstances currents can establish in the corona along magnetic field lines. The energy released by these currents when moderate assumptions for the local conditions are made, is found be comparable to the flare energy.”
This paper presents the electric circuit theory championed by Hannes Alfven.
Quote from the above paper:
“Currently several different electron acceleration mechanisms in the solar corona are known. All of these mechanisms have the principle of acceleration due to electric fields in common, but differ in the processes leading to the generation of the electric field. In the present paper the generation of a large scale DC electric field is discussed in terms of electric circuits, which is related to a current generated due to photopheric plasma motion (e.g., Alfven and Carlqvist, 1967 [exploding double layers hypothesis presented]; Sen and White, 1972; Martres et al., 1973; Heyvarts, 1974; Obayashi, 1975; Akasofu, 1979; Kan et al., 1983; Melrose, 1997; Zaitsev et al., 1998; Yang et al., 2004; Zaitsev, 2005). Motivated by these papers, the electric currents are investigated in order to obtain a mechanism for acceleration of electrons to high energies. The basic idea of this mechanism is to generate the flare energy by photopheric plasma motion in active regions. This is in contradiction to the reconnectioon model in which the magnetic field energy in the corona is taken for the flare.”
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0908/0908.0813v1.pdf
To highlight: “This is in contradiction to the reconnectioon model in which the magnetic field energy in the corona is taken for the flare.”
Another peer-reviewed paper, Astrophysical Letters, 2005, cited in the above paper:
ELECTRON ACCELERATION BY ELECTRIC FIELDS NEAR THE FOOTPRINTS
OF CURRENT-CARRYING CORONAL MAGNETIC LOOPS
V. V. Zaitsev
Institute of Applied Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences
Abstract: “We analyze the electric fields that arise at the footpoints of a coronal magnetic loop from the interaction between a convective flow of partially ionized plasma and the magnetic field of the loop. Such a situation can take place when the loop footpoints are at the nodes of several supergranulation cells. In this case, the neutral component of the converging convective flows entrain electrons and ions in different ways, because these are magnetized differently. As a result, a charge separating electric field emerges at the loop footpoints, which can efficiently accelerate particles inside the magnetic loop under appropriate conditions. We consider two acceleration regimes: impulsive (as applied to simple loop flares) and pulsating (as applied to solar and stellar radio pulsations).We have calculated the fluxes of accelerated electrons and their characteristic energies. We discuss the role of the return current when dense beams of accelerated particles are injected into the corona. The results obtained are considered in light of the currently available data on the corpuscular radiation from solar flares.”
http://www.springerlink.com/content/d32j212710843216/
“INTRODUCTION
Much of the energy in solar and stellar flares is released in the form of energetic particles. The bulk of the electrons and ions in impulsive solar flares are accelerated to energies of 100 keV and 100 MeV, respectively (Miller et al. 1997) and produce hard X-ray and gamma-ray line emission.”
Many of these “energetic particles” eventually interact with the Earth’s magnetosphere and potentially effect Earth’s energy balance, one expression of which is climate.
Finally, here is another scientific paper:
DRIVING CURRENTS FOR FLUX ROPE CORONAL MASS EJECTIONS (2008):
Abstract: “We present a method for measuring electrical currents enclosed by flux rope structures that are ejected within solar coronal mass ejections (CMEs). Such currents are responsible for providing the Lorentz self-force that propels CMEs. Our estimates for the driving current are based on measurements of the propelling force obtained using data from the LASCO coronagraphs aboard the SOHO satellite. We find that upper limits on the currents enclosed by CMEs are typically around $10^{10}$ Amperes. We estimate that the magnetic flux enclosed by the CMEs in the LASCO field of view is a few $\times 10^{21}$ Mx.”
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0810/0810.4210v1.pdf
So, here, are several scientific papers which discuss electric fields, electrical current, and the acceleration of charged particles via electric fields (not via so-called “magnetic reconnection”).

Leif Svalgaard wrote, “We go by what we observe, not by what we expect.”
Agree. Thanks for the notes.

Dr. Svalgaard: “Here is another peer-reviewed paper [from 1978] that demonstrates the creation of electric fields [by the distorting solar magnetic fields] in the corona:”
Reviewing the paper, the term “electric field” is never used in the paper, “electric current” and “magnetic field”, yes, but not “electric field” or symbols denoting electric field such as “E”.

vukcevic, it’s just the series (x1), (x1+x2), (x1+x2+x3), …
[If the series is not already centered about zero, subtract the mean first.]
I’ll address your other point elsewhere another time. My attention to this thread has expired. Best Regards.