Guest post by David Archibald
Dr Svalgaard has an interesting annotation on his chart of solar parameters – “Welcome to solar max”:
Graphic source: http://www.leif.org/research/TSI-SORCE-2008-now.png
Could it be? It seems that Solar Cycle 24 had only just begun, with solar minimum only two and a half years ago in December 2008.
The first place to confirm that is the solar polar magnetic field strength, with data from the Wilcox Solar Observatory:
Source: http://wso.stanford.edu/
The magnetic poles of the Sun reverse at solar maximum. The northern field has reversed. There are only three prior reversals in the instrument record. Another parameter that would confirm solar maximum is the heliospheric current sheet tilt angle, also from the WSO site.
The heliospheric current sheet tilt angle has taken a couple of years to reach solar maximum from its current level.
If the Sun is anywhere near solar maximum, the significance of that is that it would be the first time in the record that a short cycle was also a weak cycle, though Usoskin et al in 2009 proposed a short, asymmetric cycle in the late 18th century at the beginning of the Dalton Minimum: http://climate.arm.ac.uk/publications/arlt2.pdf
Interestingly, Ed Fix (paper in press) generated a solar model (based on forces that dare not speak their name) which predicts two consecutive, weak solar cycles, each eight years long:
The green line is the solar cycle record with alternate cycles reversed. The red line is the model output. Solar Cycles 19 to 23 are annotated.
This model has the next solar maximum in 2013 and minimum only four years later in 2017. This outcome is possible based on the Sun’s behaviour to date.
P. Solar says:
May 8, 2011 at 6:30 am
Interesting. It’s good you question what it all means. You can fit part of a cubic curve with a parabola for a while….
See – owe to Rich says:
May 8, 2011 at 7:03 am
Thanks, I’ll check that out. Maybe I’ve rediscovered the wheel 😉
The quadratic is the integral of the straight line I found in the rate of change. An exponentially increasing CO2 level would produce linear increase in rate of change hence such a cubic temperature rise.
Part of the rise I noted is likely to be CO2 attributable, a bit should be TIR, there may be other elements to it.
I’ll have to look at what figures he gets for century long rise.
Thanks for pointing me to that paper.
John F. Hultquist says:
May 8, 2011 at 8:43 am
Alex says:
May 8, 2011 at 4:17 am
“So if you “remove” the sun there wouldn’t be much change?”
I think most folks will agree that the Sun has to stay in our solar system for it to exist.
some people [like Alex] may not know that and have to be told repeatedly.
onion2 says:
May 8, 2011 at 7:36 am
“DirkH says:
May 8, 2011 at 6:25 am
“And where’s the postulated, never observed, positive water vapor feedback that the AGW scientists need to maintain their catastrophe predictions in your cake analogy?”
It has been observed.”
Not by NOAA.
http://c3headlines.typepad.com/.a/6a010536b58035970c0147e2fc6895970b-pi
Comparing other star types with our star I’ve noticed similarities even with more exotic star types, take our star, it is less dense and it has an irregular pulse being less energetic over a longer time period than that of a Pulsar, neutron stars are very dense objects, the rotation period and the pulse interval between observed pulses are very regular (the regularity of pulsation is as precise as an atomic clock) compared to that of our star which appears to have a less energetic and irregular pulse over a much longer time frame.
So what are the (simplistic) comparable factors between our star and a pulsar?
1. Density (mass)
2. Energy (electromagnetic radiation)
3. Frequency (timing of pulses)
Using these factors a simple interchangeable equation can then be constructed and a more detailed picture of the behavioral similarities of different star types can formed, and once we understand the important similarities we can then understand the irregularities between star types, and with more complex additions to the equation a greater resolution and understanding can be achieved.
This is only a simplistic explanation from my own perspective of a much larger and complex subject that may be of some interest.
Dismiss it if you like but note:
Werner Becker of the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics said in 2006, “The theory of how pulsars emit their radiation is still in its infancy, even after nearly forty years of work.”
Sparks says:
May 8, 2011 at 9:41 am
Comparing other star types with our star I’ve noticed similarities even with more exotic star types, take our star, it is less dense and it has an irregular pulse being less energetic over a longer time period than that of a Pulsar, neutron stars are very dense objects
Pulsars are not like the Sun and any comparison will be rather meaningless. Now, people are trying to find stars just like the Sun [called solar analogs] and see how they behave. Here is a report from a recent workshop on this: http://www.lowell.edu/workshops/SolarAnalogsII/program.php
Re DirkH:
Try:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/Dessler_2010_2.gif
Solar Activity Forecast: Solar activity is expected to be very low to low during days one through three (08-10 May). Thanks to the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA, Space Weather Prediction Center and the U.S. Air Force.
Long term, Henrik Svensmark theory will play out. Combine his work with the current solar output being low for who knows how long, but at least another cycle. When is the solar system to break out of the current galactic spiral arm?
Assuming solar maximum has been reached, and the length of solar cycle 24 continues out to another 6 to 8 years and solar cycle 25 be as low or lower in energy as current solar cycle 24, what happens to climate? Can we correlate climate changes on other planets such as Mars with changes on earth to support the changes in solar effects?
Think about the long term (another 14 years minimum) meaning of Dr Svalgaard’s work.
Gary Krause says:
May 8, 2011 at 10:10 am
Long term, Henrik Svensmark theory will play out. Combine his work with the current solar output being low for who knows how long, but at least another cycle. When is the solar system to break out of the current galactic spiral arm?
It hasn’t going back in time. We’ll stay in the current galactic arm for thousands of years.
Assuming solar maximum has been reached, and the length of solar cycle 24 continues out to another 6 to 8 years and solar cycle 25 be as low or lower in energy as current solar cycle 24, what happens to climate? Can we correlate climate changes on other planets such as Mars with changes on earth to support the changes in solar effects?
If solar max for SC24 is close [speculation at this point] then there is a good chance that SC25 will be large. There is no evidence of correlated changes of the climate on other planets [lots of claims, but nothing with legs].
onion2 says:
May 8, 2011 at 9:58 am
“Re DirkH:
Try:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/Dessler_2010_2.gif
”
Thanks, but Dessler is not a scientist but a mass hypnotist who tries to persuade the public by repeating the term “heat-trapping gases” as often as he can:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/6900556.html
How much of this is consistent with the theory proposed by Livingston & Penn?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/06/02/livingston-and-penn-paper-sunspots-may-vanish-by-2015/
“State what is the mechanized and mathematically reasonable driver of measureable and observed temperature CHANGE. ”
I would say there are at least two things. The first is the solar wind variation resulting in the variation of cosmic rays and resulting changes in cloud cover. The second would be a change in spectral energy distribution. While TSI might be nearly constant, if the spectral balance change, it can have a significant change. Less ultraviolet, for example, could result in a significant change in how a given amount of solar energy heats (or doesn’t heat) the planet. UV can penetrate thin clouds (ever get a sunburn in a cloudy or foggy day? I have.) and it penetrates deeper into the ocean than visible light does. If there is less UV but more of some other wavelength, then how the Earth system responds when cloud cover changes is also different.
I think it is more complex than many people seem to think.
Clearly Astronomy by Blue Oyster Cult.
I have owned the vinyl LP since ~35 years ago or so. Great stuff.
So could this mean that Hathaway was right all along about a Solar Max in 2011?
Granted, if you say it’s going to be in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013…. you’re bound to get it right by default.
From 2006 article:
http://www.universetoday.com/8039/next-solar-max-will-be-a-big-one/
Although there is that issue of it being really big.
The cool factor of all this…
We’re starting to identify some of the unkown unknowns.
So now we know what we don’t know??
Total spot area isn’t that great (so far) and the umbral extent is right along that line:
http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/TempGr/uSC24vs13_14.GIF
The butterfly diagram below:
http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/TempGr/uvp2324a.PNG
shows a decidedly weak cycle with the Southern Solar Hemisphere component stalled.
The Active Region composite for today:
http://sidc.oma.be/images/combimap800.png
shows much the same (they do have the EIT image upside down …psstt), and you can see how the apparent view of the Sun is heading towards summer solstice looking at a rather limp southern component of SC24.
What do we get from here on out? … a double low maximum? … a single long max or a single short max?
Perhaps David has chosen the correct scenario.
Just thought of this. If only one pole reversed, does that mean we have a magnetic monopole? An exceptionally large one, too.
thanks very interesting. After the revelations of how climatology works as a science, astrology must be a mature branch of modern science. I appreciate the observations put forward by Fix and will wait with interest.This is science as I was taught, things that make you go hmmm.
Leif Svalgaard says:
May 8, 2011 at 8:36 am
The issue is that tidal effects from Jupiter are about half a millimeter [proportional to the mass]. If Jupiter had the mass of the Sun [1000 times larger than it has], the tidal bulge would be 1000 times larger, i.e. half a meter. This is still insignificant. You have to move the perturbing body closer to the Sun. So let us move it ten times closer [to half an AU], now the effect is a thousand times larger [as it scales with the cube of the distance], or half a kilometer [which is still less than a millionth of the solar radius]. You have to move the body REALLY close to have any effect.
~
You say..let us move it ten times closer to half an AU, now the effect is a thousand times larger..
Perfect Leif, for an introduction to Ion Cyclotron Waves ICW. What if any is your opinion on the role of ICW in the heating and expansion of solar wind? I’m reading they’re ubiquitous in the INTERPLANETARY SYSTEM and the closer you get to the solar corona, the more there is..
Ion Cyclotron Waves ICW..
Ion Cyclotron Waves in the Solar Wind from 0.3 to 1 AU
Lan K. Jian1, C.T. Russell1, J.G. Luhmann2, A.B. Galvin3, B.J. Anderson4, S. Boardsen5,
T.L. Zhang6, A. Wennmacher7
Dublin, IrelandMarch 22‐26, 2010
Summary
Strong narrow‐band ICWs are detected extensively and discretely from at least 0.3 to 1 AU in the solar wind, far away from the influence of any planet. They are strongest when the field is more radial than the nominal Parker spiral. They propagate close to the magnetic field direction, and are below the local fpcand close to the He+gyro‐frequencies in the plasma frame
The waves are both LH and RH in the s/c frame, but are intrinsically LH in the plasma frame. The comparison of the LH and RH waves in the s/c frame, and the radial variation of the frequency and wave power of the ICWs, is consistent with our closer‐to‐Sun generation and outward propagation scenario
As the ICWs approach local fpcat a greater heliocentric distance, they can provide an energy source for extended solar wind heating
A mission flying closer to the Sun should be able to see many more such ICWs with stronger wave power. More observations and coordinated models are needed to better understand these ICWs..
http://stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov/meetings/SWG/SWG_Mar_2010/Lan%20Jian-2010%20March%20SWG-ICWs%20in%20the%20Solar%20Wind-Updated.pdf
Follow so far..ICWs as part of solar wind expansion..But..Seth Redfield et al (member Seth and the Cloud Cloud interactions and morphology spectral lines dude)
What the team he is on, has learned is that there no ICWs in the Very Local Interstellar Medium. Too much damping going on because of NEUTRAL collisions. They also reiterated that there are 15 clouds within 15 parsecs of the sun. And that we are on border of the current cloud we are embedded..And that the cavity and clouds we are in IS NOT HOMoGENOUS throughout..
Continued..
Ion-Neutral Collisions in the Interstellar Medium: Wave Damping and Elimination of Collisionless Processes
Steven R. Spangler∗, Allison H. Savage∗ and Seth Redfield†
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1012/1012.4121v1.pdf
..Introduction
..This paper will deal with two topics involving the interaction of ions with neutrals in the interstellar medium.
1. Ion-neutral collisions constitute a damping mechanism for magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) waves and turbulence in the interstellar medium. As a result, turbulence propagating from a central source of turbulence, such as a supernova remnant, is limited in how far it can go before being attenuated. In the case of the Diffuse Ionized Gas (DIG) component of the ISM [6, 9], which is probably the most extensive in terms of volume and contains the best-diagnosed interstellar turbulence, the dissipation lengths are short and place interesting constraints on the sources and mechanisms for interstellar turbulence. Alternatively, this damping length calculation could point to odd features of turbulent dispersal in the interstellar medium. This issue was discussed four years ago [25]. It remains an interesting topic worthy of attention, and there have been some developments in the last four years which are relevant to this topic.
2. The nearest parts of the interstellar medium are the clouds of the Very Local Interstellar Medium (VLISM) [8, 21]. There are 15 of these clouds within 15 parsecs of the Sun [20], and they have typical dimensions of a parsec to several parsecs. The reason for discussing them in the present context is that astronomical spectroscopic observations [e.g. 18] have provided very good plasma diagnostics, including information on turbulence in the clouds. An obvious exercise is to compare the turbulence in these clouds with the paradigmatic turbulence in the solar corona and solar wind. As we will see, there may be important differences between heliospheric turbulence and turbulence in the Local Clouds. The strongest result is that signatures of collisionless plasma processes in the solar wind and corona are absent in the Local Clouds. As we discuss below, it is plausible that ion-neutral collisional processes are responsible for this difference.
..A COMPARISON OF SOLAR WIND AND VERY LOCAL INTERSTELLAR TURBULENCE
The vicinity of the Sun is dominated by a “Local Cavity” in the interstellar medium, characterized by much lower than average densities [13, 29], and perhaps higher temperatures. However, in the immediate vicinity of the Sun there are many small, tenuous clouds [8, 21]. These clouds do not seem to extend beyond the vicinity of the Sun. Redfield and Linsky [20] report 15 of these clouds within 15 parsecs of the Sun. There are a number of interesting aspects of these clouds, such as the fact that the Sun is within, though close to the edge of one of them, the Local Interstellar Cloud (LIC) [20].
Observations that show the existence of these clouds and provide diagnostics for their properties come from very high resolution astronomical spectroscopy [18]. The spectrometers used in this study, primarily the STIS instrument on the Hubble Space Telescope, have resolving powers of .. This allows absorption lines in the spectra of nearby stars to be resolved.
..Reasons for the absence of collisionless plasma processes in the Local Clouds
The turbulence in the Local Clouds of the ISM, as diagnosed by spectral line widths, appears to differ in a number of respects from coronal and solar wind turbulence [26]. In particular, the characteristics attributed to collisionless processes for the interaction of charged particles and turbulence, such as ion mass dependent temperatures and large perpendicular-to-parallel temperature ratios, are not present. These properties have generally been attributed to ion cyclotron resonance processes in wave-particle interactions [10, 7]. In this section, we briefly consider possible explanations for this. The simplest answer is probably that the Local Clouds are collisional via the ion-neutral collision processes discussed in Section 1, whereas the solar corona at heliocentric distances ≥ 2.0R⊙ and the solar wind at 1 astronomical unit are collisionless plasmas.
To accept this suggestion, we need to convince ourselves that the partially ionized plasma media of the Local Clouds are collisional. Following the suggestions of Uzdensky [27], we can define a collisional plasma in two ways.
1. We can first ask if the ion cyclotron frequency greatly exceeds the ion-neutral collision frequency. If this is the case, processes which involve ion-cyclotron resonances can proceed throughmany cyclotron periods before being disrupted by a collision. For example, a distribution function which is unstable to the growth of Alfvén or Fast Mode waves will generate the unstable waves, or large amplitude, resonant waves will substantially modify an ion distribution function on time scales shorter than the collision time. According to this way of defining things, a plasma in which an ion cyclotron frequency is much higher than the ion-neutral collision frequency would be collisionless for that ion.
2. The second criterion of collisionality according to Uzdensky considers the mean free path for collisions and the size of the plasma. If the mean free path for collisions is much larger than the size of the cloud, the typical ion in the medium would not have undergone a collision, and one would expect collisionless physics to be applicable.
In the opposite limit of the mean free path being much smaller than the size of the cloud, the typical ion would have undergone numerous collisions. It seems plausible that collisions would redistribute the energy gained from collisionless processes among different parts of the distribution function, and indeed different species in the plasma. Support for these ideas may be found in [11], where it is noted that collisional parts of the solar wind at 1 AU, such as dense parts of the interplanetary current sheet, lack the collisionless indicators of temperature anisotropy and mass-dependent temperature.
We have enough information about the Local Clouds to apply the above criteria. In Table 2 we list the proton ion cyclotron frequency, ion-hydrogen collision frequency, and mean free path, which are calculated from the plasma parameters listed previously in the table..
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1012/1012.4121v1.pdf
It’s a good thing the Sun has nothing to do with climate or the weather, or it’s erratic behaviour would worry me. Co2 will keep us warm ! sarc/
Mike McMillan says:
May 8, 2011 at 11:34 am
Just thought of this. If only one pole reversed, does that mean we have a magnetic monopole? An exceptionally large one, too.
Or a Maunder Monopole?
I’ve been seeing above the correlation with elliptical orbit and Milankovitch cycles. So then is Pluto’s orbit our first hand example within the system like now! of what an elliptical orbit might look like?
rbateman says:
May 8, 2011 at 12:16 pm
Mike McMillan says:
May 8, 2011 at 11:34 am
Just thought of this. If only one pole reversed, does that mean we have a magnetic monopole? An exceptionally large one, too.
Or a Maunder Monopole?
~
Great sense of humor..Rob..
One more thing for the cosmic ray enthusiasts,
A, P.Frisch et al fairly recent revision of fairly recent paper (I’ll be back)
Was talking about how when you increase the density in the Very Local Interstellar Medium VLISM, that density increases the Anomalous Cosmic Rays ACR, being produced in the heliosphere by solar wind interactions. I gotta go back .. something about energy levels between the two species of Cosmic Rays CR. Galactic cosmic rays being of higher energies..but both should be in the record..but a higher population of the ACR type..with density increase..
Carla says:
May 8, 2011 at 12:07 pm
And that the cavity and clouds we are in IS NOT HOMoGENOUS throughout..
Ok. Any known properties of the present cloud we are in that thin down the incoming GCRs/ACRs, so that when we are breaking free of this cloud, we get more as a direct consequence?
Carla says:
May 8, 2011 at 12:17 pm
I’ve been seeing above the correlation with elliptical orbit and Milankovitch cycles. So then is Pluto’s orbit our first hand example within the system like now! of what an elliptical orbit might look like?
Not sure what you mean.
Carla says:
May 8, 2011 at 12:17 pm
I’ve been seeing above the correlation with elliptical orbit and Milankovitch cycles. So then is Pluto’s orbit our first hand example within the system like now! of what an elliptical orbit might look like?
Not sure what you mean.
~
Pluto’s orbit puts the ‘lip’ in elliptical..
“””The orbit of Pluto is unusual in several ways. It is inclined more than 17° from the ecliptic (the plane in which the orbits of the planets lie). The orbit is also more eccentric (far from circular) than any other planetary orbit. At times, Pluto is closer to the Sun than the orbit of Neptune.
Every 228 years, Pluto’s orbit brings it closer to the Sun than Neptune for a period of 20 years. From 1979 to March 1999, Neptune was the farthest planet from the Sun.”””
http://www.nasm.si.edu/etp/pluto/pluto_orbit.html
Pluto and Uranus having similar dipole configurations. The lie down and roll over kind..lol
Your question, myself thought increases of cosmic rays due to that overlap ..
LIC to MIC to G clouds. Our Local ..
But thinning..I don’t know other than they can become trapped in the magnetic fields of many for long times.