SWPC updated their solar cycle progression page…looks like the levels have held since the big uptick in March.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
SWPC updated their solar cycle progression page…looks like the levels have held since the big uptick in March.
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Don’t compare the sunspot number (made at 11 May 2011 00:30 UT) with a picture taken almost 24 hours later. THAT is ridiculous! And when you compare the SSN with a picture please use an SDO image. Soho has a low resolution.
vukcevic says:
May 11, 2011 at 12:21 pm
Phase difference is only minor 2pi/3 to 2pi/4.
Yet makes big difference:
http://www.leif.org/research/Vuk-Failing-10.png
E.g. SC25 overestimated by more than factor of two and SC14 by almost factor of three. Not too good for prediction, is it?
I have also placed this version underneath your 2003 version, so you can see they are the same. Bottom line: you cannot claim that you did not make any adjustments unlike ‘some renown solar scientists’ and you should not ask for apology for having been found out. Behave yourself now and be suitable humble. And get your plots and formulae cleaned up to regain a shred of credibility.
Jcarels says:
May 11, 2011 at 1:26 pm
Don’t compare the sunspot number (made at 11 May 2011 00:30 UT) with a picture taken almost 24 hours later. THAT is ridiculous! And when you compare the SSN with a picture please use an SDO image. Soho has a low resolution.
So you are saying that they announce the sunspot number at the start of the day, and the number remains the same for the entire 24 hour period, regardless of how it may change during the course of the day ?
Leif Svalgaard says: (all over the place)
…………….
Heh, ‘just leaning on the keyboard’, Chrome browser doesn’t work like that, a bit of ‘economy with accuracy’.
What you plotted is periodicity, not amplitude which on purpose you are mixing up; amplitude is the RED LINE in here .
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NFC7.htm
You got very good agreement for the periodicity, you just proved case for me.
Since you failed to do amplitude (red line), which determines non-smoothed cycles maxima, it would be nice if you can do that as well. In case you chicken out, readers can see amplitude calculation, shown as the red line and the red formula label:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NFC7.htm
Perhaps I should say thank you for proving superiority (above anything else available) of my calculations, and at same time giving it even valuable publicity.
If famous Dr. Svalgaard could not fundamentally fault anything of consequence (neither could Dr. Hathaway some years ago, except the 1800 phase shift; he would have done well if took note of SC24 extrapolation), the formula is here to stay.
Well done. Hope it was worth sacrificing your birthday.
And remember before next spiel: blue line is periodicity, the RED line is amplitude!
Mike Jonas says:
May 10, 2011 at 10:38 pm
the description for the data I posted is:
ftp://fenyi.solarobs.unideb.hu/pub/DPD/DPDformat.txt
where the data table we are talking about is the first paragraph on the page.
The project of Debrecen Photoheliographic Data
is a continuation of the work of Greenwich Royal Observatory which began photographing and measuring areas of sunspots and faculae in 1874.
It is a counterpoint to the # of sunspots, where if the total spot area declines and the sunspot number stays the same, you know that the spots are smaller.
Golly gee a CME, thought I was feeling it yesterday..but seriously..another comet gone into the corona of the sun. Here’s the report from http://www.spaceweather.com ..
“””AURORA WATCH: A coronal mass ejection launched from the sun’s eastern limb on May 9th could deliver a glancing blow to Earth’s magnetic field today. NOAA forecasters estimate a 40% chance of geomagnetic activity if and when the CME arrives. High-latitude sky watchers, be alert for auroras.
COMET AND CME: A comet dove into the sun on May 11th and seemed to trigger a massive eruption–emphasis on seemed. Watch the movie, then scroll down for further discussion.
http://www.spaceweather.com/images2011/12may11/cme.gif
A comet goes in; a CME comes out. Coincidence? Probably, yes, the sequence was coincidental. The comet disintegrated as much as a million kilometers above the stellar surface. There’s no known way that the wispy, vaporous remains of a relatively lightweight comet could cause a billion-ton cloud of hot plasma to fly away from the sun at 400 km/s (the observed speed of the CME). Moreover, NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory photographed the eruption that did propel the CME into space. There’s no comet in the field of view of this must-see movie.
Bonus: The bright comet pictured above had a dim companion. Can you find it?”””
Huh, comet seemly stimulates a region in the corona above an already ripe surface region..
Can the mods or Anthony please create a private electronic playroom where Dr Svalgaard and Vukcevic can go to beat each other up?
[nope . . many here find them interesting and knowledgeable much of the time . . but you are not obliged to watch them if you find it tedious . . kb]
Mr Green Genes says:
Can the mods or Anthony please create a private electronic playroom where Dr Svalgaard and Vukcevic can go to beat each other up?
Although I understand little of it, and often don’t even pay a lot of attention, I personally very much like seeing their debates like they are – right out in the open. The way science SHOULD be done. I would hate to see such debates locked up in private discussions – we have too much of that already.
Mr Green Genes says:
May 12, 2011 at 5:43 am
🙂 Stay low, and don’t do anything stupid like volunteer for special missions.
I think the Leif – Vuk discussion is very informative and entertaining. I happen to think the planets – barycenter – sun -moon – earth climate connections and resonances are the key to earth climate prediction and Leif’s very knowledgeable and detailed challenge to Vuk and this type of approach in general is extremely useful- especially with such an open exchange.
My thanks to both participants. – Keep it up.
Vuk etc. says:
May 11, 2011 at 2:57 pm
Heh, ‘just leaning on the keyboard’, Chrome browser doesn’t work like that, a bit of ‘economy with accuracy’.
Lean on F5. I just did, as you can see.
What you plotted is periodicity, not amplitude which on purpose you are mixing up; amplitude is the RED LINE in here .
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NFC7.htm
Your Figure 1 in the 2003 paper and the blue curve you just showed is amplitude and phase. The red curve fails to show amplitude, e.g. for cycle 20 or cycle 10, and many others.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NFC7.htm
again, you are dishonest, not showing the results from the 2003 paper while claiming that you made no adjustments. Your upbringing in communist regime may have something to do with it: lying is OK if it serves a purpose.
the RED line is amplitude! and so wrong it clearly is. But that is not the point, which is your mendacity.
rbateman says:
May 11, 2011 at 6:57 pm
where if the total spot area declines and the sunspot number stays the same, you know that the spots are smaller.
As L&P will have it.
Carla says:
May 12, 2011 at 5:20 am
Huh, comet seemly stimulates a region in the corona above an already ripe surface region..
The material in the tail of a comet would fit in a small suitcase, and the rest of the comet evaporated long before it could have any effect.
Norman Page says:
May 12, 2011 at 7:16 am
I think the Leif – Vuk discussion is very informative and entertaining.
Entertainment there certainly is. It is fun to see his antics trying to wiggle out of being caught.
How big does a “spot” have to be before it is a countable spot?
mkelly says:
May 12, 2011 at 11:31 am
How big does a “spot” have to be before it is a countable spot?
It used to be 3 millionths of the total area of the Suns visible surface was the dividing line between a sunspot and a pore.
I don’t know what they are doing now.
mkelly says:
May 12, 2011 at 11:31 am
How big does a “spot” have to be before it is a countable spot?
Basically, it should be visible at medium seeing with a refractor of aperture 80 mm and magnification 64 times [Rudolf Wolf’s definition] and appear black [not grey]. This is actually a very small spot. Here are some of those small spots visible today: http://www.specola.ch/drawings/2011/loc-d20110512.JPG
Leif Svalgaard says:
May 12, 2011 at 11:48 am
Thank you. One last dumb question. Does the location north/south tell us much about the sun, spot or cycle. i.e. spot 94 is very far south.
Message to Dr. Leif Svalgaard
You are a pain. Fig 3 does if you bother to look. You have been told that at least one dozen times during last 3+ years (for last time: periodicity blue –amplitude red)
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NFC7.htm
You proved nothing, just getting paranoid.
Sunspot formula isn’t what bothers you, it is this
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/LFC2.htm
since it puts your next cycle prediction out of business.
You consider ‘Sunspot formula’ as a weak link so you are trying to use back door to discredit me as the autor of polar formula.
Well you failed. Go and do something useful!
Insults from you are nothing new, but I am surprised that you trying to bring my web page down.
Here is today’s records of hits from your computer
———————–
Number of Entries: 345
Entry Page Time:12th May 2011 18:43:39
Visit Length: Multiple visits spread over one day
Browser: Chrome 11.0
OS: Win7
Location: Petaluma, California, United States
IP Address: Comcast Cable (24.5.150.53) [Label IP Address]
Entry Page: http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NFC7.htm
Exit Page: http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NFC7.htm
…………………
UK time, which is UTC+1
Not something to be expected from scientist of word stature.
So kindly leave my website alone.
I shall ignore all your further remarks be it science, polite or uncivilised!
Note to everyone else :One more single hit on my webpage from Dr.Svalgaard I am closing it down.
If you wish a copy request and I shall email it.
Now I have closed my web page, if interested details of attack are here:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/WEB-Page%20attack.htm
mkelly says:
May 12, 2011 at 12:34 pm
i.e. spot 94 is very far south.
Actually not as you can see at the upper right-hand listing. Its latitude is 19 degrees south. The solar image [and hence the drawing] is rotated in the sky by 21.8 degrees [changes from day to day], so on the image it looks like 94 is way to the south, but it isn’t.
vukcevic says:
May 12, 2011 at 12:48 pm
If you whish a copy request and I shall email it.
So you join the people that ‘disappear’ their past failures.
vukcevic says:
May 12, 2011 at 1:13 pm
Now I have closed my web page, if interested details of attack are here
Vuk etc. says:
May 11, 2011 at 2:57 pm
Heh, ‘just leaning on the keyboard’, Chrome browser doesn’t work like that, a bit of ‘economy with accuracy’.
“Lean on F5. I just did, as you can see.”
Just proving to you that ‘leaning on F5’ can be very effective.
rbateman says:
May 12, 2011 at 7:10 am
Mr Green Genes says:
May 12, 2011 at 5:43 am
🙂 Stay low, and don’t do anything stupid like volunteer for special missions…
~
hahahahaha
Check this out..don’t tell Vuks and Leif though..oops but first..
Not without the acronym.
CNM Cold Neutral Medium
“””CNM components with N(Ho) <∼
10¹⁸ cm⁻² and densities ∼20 cm⁻³, similar to values found by Welty et al.
towards 23Ori, would have thicknesses of <0.02 pc and if
at rest in the LSR would perturb the heliosphereboundary conditions
on timescales of ∼100 yr."""
Hmm..looking more and more like an atmosphere out there in the Very Local Interstellar Medium. Maybe should just finish this article..
Word just made a mess of those math symbols..
link better..
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0607/0607600v1.pdf
Pg. 5
Carla says:
May 12, 2011 at 1:30 pm
would have thicknesses of <0.02 pc and if at rest in the LSR would perturb the heliosphere boundary conditions on timescales of ∼100 yr.
Remember that influences cannot travel upstream against the solar wind tsunami.
SSN will also decline because of the L&P effect, just not as fast as the area number. Less spots (f) in a single group, and the “normal” small (A type or higher) groups will be invisible. So also less groups to count. Complex groups will be rare.
That is if the L&P effect continues off course. We’ll have to wait and see.
Leif Svalgaard says:
May 12, 2011 at 11:48 am
A number in millionths of the Solar disc area would be greatly appreciated.
Carla says:
May 12, 2011 at 1:30 pm
Interesting. At one time, galaxies looked like homogenous clouds. Upon further examination, however, the nature of the beast changed remarkably.
The universe never fails to reveal marvelous variance, upon closer scrutiny.
Why should interstellar space be any different?