I’ve done some house cleaning and maintenance today to replace the aging SOHO image on the sidebar (which had not been updating since January 11th, thanks to Ric Werme for reminding me) with a new image from the Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) which provides stunning detail over the now 15 year old SOHO instrument.
We have a one-stop-shop for the most commonly used solar images and data in one place now.
See the WUWT Solar Images and Data Page here
Be sure to bookmark it or you can get it from the sidebar image or the pulldown menu under the WUWT header:
I’ve tried to include everything that I think might be interesting and pertinent, but I will entertain suggestions for new content below. Images and links only please.
Good job!!
How about some of the charts from http://www.solen.info/solar ?
The POES auroral activity level and cycle comparison charts may be of interest.
This one might be worth having on the solar page:
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/bfly.gif
vukcevic says:
January 22, 2011 at 3:29 pm
On the threads relating to the solar events it is often stated that magnetic flux ropes (magnetic clouds) do not contain net electric current.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Whenever there a boundaries and structures in a plasma there are electric currents, e.g. the Heliospheric Current Sheet, or the plasma sheet in the Earth’s magnetosphere.
Since magnetic clouds are magnetic loops that are rooted at both ends in the Sun, the above if correct, opens possibility for direct electric current link between the Sun and planets’ magnetospheres at reconnection times (e.g. during geomagnetic storms).
The currents are, however, local [that is determined by the magnetic field] and do not act back on the Sun [as your link says: the structure is ‘force-free’].
Michael Mann was on NPR tonight talking about natural climate change during the Roman period and the role of the sun. He also talked about the current La nina. It sounded like a joint effort by NPR and Mann to spin the coming decline as something they expected.
Anthony,
Thank you for the solar page. Of all the great topics here at your WUWT the solar are the ones I love most.
Hope all is well!
John
vukcevic says:
January 22, 2011 at 3:29 pm
On the threads relating to the solar events it is often stated that magnetic flux ropes (magnetic clouds) do not contain net electric current.
Have you thought about what ‘net electric current’ means?
Here is more on MCs:
The formation of large-scale current sheets within magnetic clouds
Owens, M. J. (2009) The formation of large-scale current sheets within magnetic clouds. Solar Physics, 260 (1). pp. 207-217. ISSN 0038-0938
DOI: 10.1007/s11207-009-9442-6
“Magnetic clouds are a class of interplanetary coronal mass ejections (CME) predominantly characterised by a smooth rotation in the magnetic field direction, indicative of a magnetic flux rope structure. Many magnetic clouds, however, also contain sharp discontinuities within the smoothly varying magnetic field, suggestive of narrow current sheets. In this study we present observations and modelling of magnetic clouds with strong current sheet signatures close to the centre of the apparent flux rope structure. Using an analytical magnetic flux rope model, we demonstrate how such current sheets can form as a result of a cloud’s kinematic propagation from the Sun to the Earth, without any external forces or influences. This model is shown to match observations of four particular magnetic clouds remarkably well. The model predicts that current sheet intensity increases for increasing CME angular extent and decreasing CME radial expansion speed. Assuming such current sheets facilitate magnetic reconnection, the process of current sheet formation could ultimately lead a single flux rope becoming fragmented into multiple flux ropes. This change in topology has consequences for magnetic clouds as barriers to energetic particle propagation.
Not strictly solar, but it might be worth having a neutron count on this page, given the Svensmark theory of solar moderation of galactic cosmic rays in the earth’s atmosphere and resulting climate impact. I look at this one from time to time: http://cosmicrays.oulu.fi/
A couple of other interesting connections to our environment are volcanic activity and the less interesting but very import, the earth’s magnetic field. Sprouting holes in the magnetic field obviously allow an increase in solar and galactic energy to reach the surface… a bad thing, unless you are a fish or cave dweller (cave men?) And, the great calderas are of the nasty sort of an event lurking to upset even the nicest people.
WUWT: the web site striving to meet the immediate need for constructive knowledge. Don’t leave home without it!
How about adding the Ecliptic Plane IMF plot here …
http://gse.gi.alaska.edu/recent/javascript_movie.html
Wang-Sheeley-Arge prediction model here …
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ws
Real-Time UAF Eulerian Parallel Polar Ionosphere Model here …
http://www.arsc.edu/SpaceWeather/MODEL.HTM
Polar Field Strength here …
http://wso.stanford.edu/gifs/Polar.gif
Real-time Ionosphere-Thermosphere Simulation here …
http://www2.nict.go.jp/y/y223/simulation/ion/index.html
CTIPe Electon Density here …
http://helios.swpc.noaa.gov/ctipe/plots/CTIPeElectronDensity.png
The NOAA count on the Layman’s count plot should be multiplied by 0.6 to bring it onto the Wolf scale. As it is now, it is like plotting Fahrenheit and Centigrade on the same graph.
REPLY: I’ll take it up with the proprietor of that graph. I thought the difference was oddly large, now I know why- Paging Geoff Sharp – Anthony
Add this one: http://www.solen.info/solar/images/solar.gif
Anthony, you have many fans and folks who genuinely appreciate the hard imaginative work that you do. WUWT is a goldmine of data sources. WUWT proves that many minds make large data bases of technical information. It also proves that science needs leaders just like business and government does. You are certainly a gifted leader of science.
Thanks, Anthony, Rick,
I updated my Solar images and links at “Observatorio ARVAL – Astronomy for South Florida” (http://www.oarval.org/astroFL.htm) and “Astronomía Caraqueña Actualizada” (http://www.oarval.org/ACCSxx.htm) [Spanish].
Anthony
Some of these links will duplicate what you already have (prune this list at will):-
Various solar images can be found at the Big Bear Solar Observatory
The Belgium Solar Influences Data Center
The Australian Space Weather Agency Solar Page
The Mauna Loa Solar Observatory in Hawaii
The National Solar Observatory
The NASA Solar Dynamics Observatory
The NASA Solar and Heliospheric Observatory
The Solar Radiation and Climate Experiment
The NASA Solar Terrestrial Relations Observatory
The NOAA Solar and Terrestrial Physics Division
The Ulysses Solar Polar Mission Solar Wind Ion Composition Spectrometer
The NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center
The Indian Udaipur Solar Observatory
Also from the Sodankylä Geophysical Observatory in Finland:
The Winter All-Sky Aurora Camera
Terrific, thank you Anthony. Maybe already mentioned somewhere on WUWT but there is a natty iPhone app called 3D Sun that sends new Sol stuff direct to your phone including vids.
Leif Svalgaard says:
January 22, 2011 at 6:54 pm
The NOAA count on the Layman’s count plot should be multiplied by 0.6 to bring it onto the Wolf scale. As it is now, it is like plotting Fahrenheit and Centigrade on the same graph.
REPLY: I’ll take it up with the proprietor of that graph. I thought the difference was oddly large, now I know why- Paging Geoff Sharp – Anthony
The NOAA value is the raw value that they post all over the world. Even on this website Anthony’s widget displays this raw value. I think this needs to be pointed out to the majority who are not aware (which I have done on the Layman’s page)
Thanks Leif for giving it some airtime. When NOAA start publishing a discounted value my graph will reflect the same.
vukcevic says: January 22, 2011 at 3:29 pm
. . . Since magnetic clouds are magnetic loops that are rooted at both ends in the Sun, the above if correct, opens possibility for direct electric current link between the Sun and planets’ magnetospheres at reconnection times (e.g. during geomagnetic storms).
Yet another source of renewable energy in case our fusion reactor research comes to nothing.
Great sun shots. The size of the earth on the 1024 images is about 7½ pixels, 30 pixels on the big 4096 images.
Gee that didn’t work out well. Make that 7 ½ pixels on the 1024 images.
½
½
and if none of the above prints out correctly –
one half
Holy ripped nylons, Batman !
Fantastic addition to WUWT’s already “uber-informative-database” !
I’d say this place has become the Wally-Mart of climate news, science, and discussion…
(… now if only Anthony can figure out how to get this website contraption thingy to make us mocha cappucinos whilst we read through all these great posts and pages…)
Geoff Sharp says:
January 22, 2011 at 8:11 pm
When NOAA start publishing a discounted value my graph will reflect the same.
They won’t. The argument still goes that it is like plotting Fahrenheit and Centigrade on the same graph [which is bad, no matter what]. You could plot a ‘NOAA*’ which is NOAA*0.6 and tell people that this is what it is. That would make the comparison fair [unless you some reason for not making it fair].
There are considerations that perhaps it is better not to discount SIDC as well and go back to the original Wolf definition. What will you do then? It is silly to be formal about it and say ‘they publish this or that’ and I’ll do the same. The purpose should be to make it easy for the reader to do the comparison. To help him in that, not requiring him to do a mental multiplication by 0.6.
Geoff Sharp says:
January 22, 2011 at 8:11 pm
When NOAA start publishing a discounted value my graph will reflect the same.
I agree with Leif. Why not simply show a “base” count and an adjusted count with two traces. It is certainly no worse than looking at some climate data graphs we’ve seen.
I think it would help NOAA begin to see the light. You’d be surprised how many times things that have been done here end up being changed at NOAA. No attribution of course, they can’t admit to such things, getting ideas from the unclean private sector, but they do read WUWT and act on things pointed out here.
Many thanks Antony. This is great!
re Anthony’s reply: REPLY: And there won’t be because the story is 2012 related nuttiness – Anthony
Ah, but utterly aside from any 2012 nuttiness – if Betelgeuse is to go supernova, god would I love to see it and so hope it does so far sooner rather than later – although I have a fond spot for Betelgeuse and so in some respects would hate to see it go so to speak…
Besides, I wonder if anyone knows or can figure out if there would be enough cosmic ray increase from it to cause significant cloud cover changes as per the ‘cosmic ray/cloud relationship’ theories? Wouldn’t it be sweet if something occurred that could definitively prove that one way or the other without doing any significant damage to us/the earth in the process?
Anthony Watts says:
January 22, 2011 at 10:40 pm
Geoff Sharp says:
January 22, 2011 at 8:11 pm
When NOAA start publishing a discounted value my graph will reflect the same.
I agree with Leif. Why not simply show a “base” count and an adjusted count with two traces. It is certainly no worse than looking at some climate data graphs we’ve seen.
I think it would help NOAA begin to see the light. You’d be surprised how many times things that have been done here end up being changed at NOAA. No attribution of course, they can’t admit to such things, getting ideas from the unclean private sector, but they do read WUWT and act on things pointed out here.
That sounds fair Anthony, I will add the extra line, if NOAA take notice then something might be achieved. The NOAA “adjusted” value will be useful when watching the monthly variation with the SIDC value. Could I suggest you add a comment under your widget values that display the NOAA sunspot count and F10.7 flux value, that both values are unadjusted.
REPLY: Sure, I’ll also add a similar explanation under your graph. – Anthony