“If we are right, this could be the last solar maximum we’ll see for a few decades,” Hill said. “That would affect everything from space exploration to Earth’s climate.”
Update: see the official press release here – “All three of these lines of research to point to the familiar sunspot cycle shutting down for a while.”
It looks like Livingston and Penn are getting some long deserved recognition. See their graph below:
Graph above from the WUWT solar reference page. Note: when the B gauss reading of sunspots hits 1500, they will no longer have enough contrast to be visible. That may occur at or near the years 2015-2017. WUWT carried a story in 2008 warning of this.
The American Astronomical Society meeting in Los Cruces, NM has just made a major announcement on the state of the sun. Sunspots may be on the way out and an extended solar minimum may be on the horizon.
From Space.com reporting from the conference:
Some unusual solar readings, including fading sunspots and weakening magnetic activity near the poles, could be indications that our sun is preparing to be less active in the coming years.
The results of three separate studies seem to show that even as the current sunspot cycle swells toward the solar maximum, the sun could be heading into a more-dormant period, with activity during the next 11-year sunspot cycle greatly reduced or even eliminated.
The results of the new studies were announced today (June 14) at the annual meeting of the solar physics division of the American Astronomical Society, which is being held this week at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces.
…
Currently, the sun is in the midst of the period designated as Cycle 24 and is ramping up toward the cycle’s period of maximum activity. However, the recent findings indicate that the activity in the next 11-year solar cycle, Cycle 25, could be greatly reduced. In fact, some scientists are questioning whether this drop in activity could lead to a second Maunder Minimum, which was a 70-year period from 1645 to 1715 when the sun showed virtually no sunspots.
…
“We expected to see the start of the zonal flow for Cycle 25 by now, but we see no sign of it,” Hill said. “This indicates that the start of Cycle 25 may be delayed to 2021 or 2022, or may not happen at all.”
…
If the models prove accurate and the trends continue, the implications could be far-reaching.
“If we are right, this could be the last solar maximum we’ll see for a few decades,” Hill said. “That would affect everything from space exploration to Earth’s climate.”
More on this as it unfolds. This article will be updated as new information becomes available.
See also these previous WUWT posts leading up to this:
Solar activity still driving in the slow lane
Sun’s magnetics remain in a funk: sunspots may be on their way out
The sun is still in a slump – still not conforming to NOAA “consensus” forecasts
Livingston and Penn in EOS: Are Sunspots Different During This Solar Minimum?
Livingston and Penn paper: “Sunspots may vanish by 2015″.
Sunspots Today: A Cheshire Cat – New Essay from Livingston and Penn
=======================================================================
As I have been saying for some time:
The long term Ap (the solar geomagnetic index) has been on a downtrend, ever since there was a step change in October 2005.
Thanks to Leif Svalgaard, we have a more extensive and “official” Ap dataset (NOAA’s SWPC shown above has some small issues) that I’ve plotted below. The step change in October 2005 is still visible and the value of 3.9 that occurred in April of 2009 is the lowest for the entire dataset. The Ap Index was the lowest in 75 years then.
Click for a larger image
And I’ve also plotted the 1991 to 2009 from BGS/Svalgaard to compare against the NOAA SWPC data:
============================================================
Dr. Leif Svalgaard writes:
Here are the abstracts of the three studies referred to in the announcement:
P16.10
Large-scale Zonal Flows During the Solar Minimum — Where Is Cycle 25?13
Frank Hill, R. Howe, R. Komm, J. Christensen-Dalsgaard, T. P. Larson, J. Schou, M. J. Thompson
The so-called torsional oscillation is a pattern of migrating zonal flow bands that move from midlatitudes towards the equator and poles as the magnetic cycle progresses. Helioseismology allows us to probe these flows below the solar surface. The prolonged solar minimum following Cycle 23 was accompanied by a delay of 1.5 to 2 years in the migration of bands of faster rotation towards the equator. During the rising phase of Cycle 24, while the lower-level bands match those seen in the rising phase of Cycle 23, the rotation rate at middle and higher latitudes remains slower than it was at the corresponding phase in earlier cycles, perhaps reflecting the weakness of the polar fields. In addition, there is no evidence of the poleward flow associated with Cycle 25. We will present the latest results based on nearly sixteen years of global helioseismic observations from GONG and MDI, with recent results from HMI, and discuss the implications for the development of Cycle 25.
P17.21
A Decade of Diminishing Sunspot Vigor
W. C. Livingston, M. Penn, L. Svalgaard
s Convention Center
Sunspots are small dark areas on the solar disk where internal magnetism, 1500 to 3500 Gauss, has been
buoyed to the surface. (Spot life times are the order of one day to a couple of weeks or more. They are thought to be dark because convection inhibits the outward transport of energy there). Their “vigor” can be described by spot area, spot brightness intensity, and magnetic field. From 2001 to 2011 we have measured field strength and brightness at the darkest position in umbrae of 1750 spots using the Zeeman splitting of the Fe 1564.8 nm line. Only one observation per spot per day is carried out during our monthly telescope time of 3-4 days average. Over this interval the temporal mean magnetic field has declined about 500 Gauss and mean spot intensity has risen about 20%. We do not understand the physical mechanism behind these changes or the effect, if any, it will have on the Earth environment.
P18.04
Whither goes Cycle 24? A View from the Fe XIV Corona
Richard C. Altrock
Solar Cycle 24 had a historically prolonged and weak start. Observations of the Fe XIV corona from the Sacramento Peak site of the National Solar Observatory showed an abnormal pattern of emission compared to observations of Cycles 21, 22, and 23 from the same instrument. The previous three cycles had a strong, rapid “Rush to the Poles” in Fe XIV. Cycle 24 displays a delayed, weak, intermittent, and slow “Rush” that is mainly apparent in the northern hemisphere. If this Rush persists at its current rate, evidence from previous cycles indicates that solar maximum will occur in approximately early 2013. At lower latitudes, solar maximum previously occurred when the greatest number of Fe XIV emission regions* first reached approximately 20° latitude. Currently, the value of this parameter at 20° is approximately 0.15. Previous behavior of this parameter indicates that solar maximum should occur in approximately two years, or 2013. Thus, both techniques yield an expected time of solar maximum in early 2013.
*annual average number of Fe XIV emission features per day greater than 0.19
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Geoff Sharp says:
June 15, 2011 at 4:04 pm
one person who is […] involved with the research
That is the best person to discuss with as he knows what it is all about.
Stephen Wilde says:
June 15, 2011 at 1:41 pm
Being cold is a relative thing. A somewhat continuous downslope of temperatures takes it’s toll over time
Settled populations tended to adapt much more back then, and generation after generation would do it’s best to cope with progressively colder condition. To the point of no return, where weakened populations succumbed.
The more adventurous or enterprising migrated.
I would hope the next time around mankind would do a better job of things.
Do we have any data on Arctic ice extents during the Maunder minimum?
Dermot O’Logical says:
June 16, 2011 at 12:22 am
Do we have any data on Arctic ice extents during the Maunder minimum?
Some reports of eskimos arriving in Scotland along the edge of ice floes.
Leif Svalgaard says:
June 15, 2011 at 6:14 pm
Geoff Sharp says:
June 15, 2011 at 4:04 pm
one person who is […] involved with the research
That is the best person to discuss with as he knows what it is all about.
The reviewers who rejected the paper first time round might be worth talking to as well.
Leif Svalgaard says:
June 15, 2011 at 2:33 pm
tallbloke says:
June 15, 2011 at 2:29 pm
I’m going to get a wider variety of colours for your christmas crayon box.
You are missing the point. I was dead serious and have given this a great deal of thought.
I want to know how much the data jumps around. If your graph told me which year was which, I would be able to tell. It doesn’t so I can’t. End of story.
tallbloke says:
June 16, 2011 at 5:49 am
The reviewers who rejected the paper first time round might be worth talking to as well.
They rejected the paper because of the short interval of time with data. Now that we have twice as much that objection falls away.
tallbloke says:
June 16, 2011 at 5:52 am
I want to know how much the data jumps around. If your graph told me which year was which, I would be able to tell. It doesn’t so I can’t.
I show every year; that tells you how much the data is jumping around. The jumping from year to year is mostly noise and has no further significance. In fact, the spread within each group shows you what the noise is [trying to draw conclusions from the noise is not productive]. For the crucial most recent interval [red curve] each year is marked differently anyway.
Stephen Wilde says:
June 15, 2011 at 1:41 pm
Only if one ignores the downslope from the peak of the MWP 500 years before. Thus by 1550 (the LIA) we were in the final 100 years of a 500 year downslope so no surprise that it started to bite then.
= = = = =
Stephen Wilde,
Thanks for your observation. It seems to support the idea I had that the MM was way too late to be the prime cause of the LIA. Thanks.
John
And how does Auntie Beeb report this?
Mr. Black gives us his words of wisdom here …
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13792479
Methinks that the appropriate epithet is unsuitable for publication here or anywhere else.
The BBC have picked it up, finally.
I rather like this: “Secondly, the predictions made about the next solar cycle would have to turn into reality – which might not happen, however sound the science.”
As one commentor put it in the comments, funny how you can substitute “AGW” for “the next solar cycle” and it still makes sense – well, apart from the “sound science” part.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13792479
“Thanks for your observation. It seems to support the idea I had that the MM was way too late to be the prime cause of the LIA. Thanks.
John.”
I don’t think so. My observation points out that the LIA commencing in 1550 could well have been a result of declining solar activity on the downswing even though the maximum reduction in solar activity was not until 1645 or so.
I sometimes wonder if MM is more related to lack of data collection than actual counts . . .
“1633 – NICK GRIMM: The Inquisition’s most famous victim was Galileo in 1633”
The Inquisitions
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&biw=1004&bih=594&tbs=tl%3A1&q=The+Inquisitions&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=g3g-v7&aql=&oq=
In response to news inquiries and stories, Dr. Frank Hill issued a follow-up statement:
“We are NOT predicting a mini-ice age. We are predicting the behavior of the solar cycle. In my opinion, it is a huge leap from that to an abrupt global cooling, since the connections between solar activity and climate are still very poorly understood. My understanding is that current calculations suggest only a 0.3 degree C decrease from a Maunder-like minimum, too small for an ice age. It is unfortunate that the global warming/cooling studies have become so politically polarizing.”
http://www.nso.edu/press/SolarActivityDrop.html
That seems worth posting here due to many of the comments being incorrectly based on Hill.
Moderate Republican says:
June 16, 2011 at 7:16 pm
In response to news inquiries and stories, Dr. Frank Hill issued a follow-up statement:
“We are NOT predicting a mini-ice age. We are predicting the behavior of the solar cycle. In my opinion, it is a huge leap from that to an abrupt global cooling, since the connections between solar activity and climate are still very poorly understood.
I can live with that. My calcs project a moderate cooling at about the same rate as the moderate warming when the sun was more active than usual.
tallbloke says:
June 17, 2011 at 1:13 am
My calcs project a moderate cooling at about the same rate as the moderate warming when the sun was more active than usual.
Except that the Sun in the 20th century was likely not significantly more active than in the two preceding centuries.
Shall we say ‘a moderate cooling without sunspots at about the same rate as the moderate warming with sunspots’? Still no mechanism here, alas, but I’m assured top drawer people are ransacking the socks looking for it.
==============
Leif Svalgaard says:
June 17, 2011 at 5:47 am
tallbloke says:
June 17, 2011 at 1:13 am
My calcs project a moderate cooling at about the same rate as the moderate warming when the sun was more active than usual.
Except that the Sun in the 20th century was likely not significantly more active than in the two preceding centuries.
Doesn’t need to be for my calcs to work, The second half of the C20th was more active in solar terms than the first half. And your back proection beyond 1840 isn’t on firm ground yet. What counts is the amount of time the solar activity is above the ocean equilibrium level. That level will need to be adjusted if your reconstruction pans out, but it won’t make the correlation go away unless you flatten the Sun’s variability completely.
Kim: astute comment. TSI is not the whole story.
P16.10
Large-scale Zonal Flows During the Solar Minimum — Where Is Cycle 25?13
Frank Hill, R. Howe, R. Komm, J. Christensen-Dalsgaard, T. P. Larson, J. Schou, M. J. Thompson
..The prolonged solar minimum following Cycle 23 was accompanied by a delay of 1.5 to 2 years in the migration of bands of faster rotation towards the equator. During the rising phase of Cycle 24, while the lower-level bands match those seen in the rising phase of Cycle 23, the rotation rate at middle and higher latitudes remains slower than it was at the corresponding phase in earlier cycles, perhaps reflecting the weakness of the polar fields..
P17.21
A Decade of Diminishing Sunspot Vigor
W. C. Livingston, M. Penn, L. Svalgaard
..From 2001 to 2011 we have measured field strength and brightness at the darkest position in umbrae of 1750 spots..
..Over this interval the temporal mean magnetic field has declined about 500 Gauss and mean spot intensity has risen about 20%..
P18.04
Whither goes Cycle 24? A View from the Fe XIV Corona
Richard C. Altrock
Solar Cycle 24 had a historically prolonged and weak start. Observations of the Fe XIV corona from the Sacramento Peak site of the National Solar Observatory showed an abnormal pattern of emission compared to observations of Cycles 21, 22, and 23 from the same instrument. The previous three cycles had a strong, rapid “Rush to the Poles” in Fe XIV. Cycle 24 displays a delayed, weak, intermittent, and slow “Rush” that is mainly apparent in the northern hemisphere..
New Insights on How Solar Minimums Affect Earth
..Observations have shown, however, that magnetic effects on Earth due to the sun, effects that cause the aurora to appear, did not go down in synch with the cycle of low magnetism on the sun. Now, a paper in Annales Geophysicae that appeared on May 16, 2011 reports that these effects on Earth did in fact reach a minimum — indeed they attained their lowest levels of the century — but some eight months later..
..First, the researchers noted that in 2008 and 2009, the interplanetary magnetic field was the lowest it had been in the history of the space age. This was an obvious contribution to the geomagnetic minimum. But since the geomagnetic effects didn’t drop in 2008, it could not be the only factor.
..
The team found a culprit in something called coronal holes. Coronal holes are darker, colder areas within the sun’s outer atmosphere. Fast solar wind shoots out the center of coronal holes at speeds up to 500 miles per second, but wind flowing out of the sides slows down as it expands into space.
“Usually, at solar minimum, the coronal holes are at the sun’s poles,” says Giuliana de Toma, a solar scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research whose research on this topic helped provide insight for this paper. “Therefore, Earth receives wind from only the edges of these holes, and it’s not very fast. But in 2007 and 2008, the coronal holes were not confined to the poles as normal.”
Those coronal holes lingered at low latitudes to the end of 2008. Consequently, the center of the holes stayed firmly pointed towards Earth, sending fast solar wind in Earth’s direction. Only as they finally appeared closer to the poles in 2009 did the speed of the solar wind at Earth begin to slow down. And, of course, the geomagnetic effects and sightings of the aurora along with it.
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2011-181&cid=release_2011-181&msource=11181&tr=y&auid=8505861″
Thanks Dr S. and others for their commens. I don’t like reading about rotation rate changes on the sun because sooner or later..eeeek..
tallbloke says:
June 17, 2011 at 11:25 am
Doesn’t need to be for my calcs to work, The second half of the C20th was more active in solar terms than the first half.
The increase of temps during the first half was a big as during the last half.
Kim: astute comment. TSI is not the whole story.
As far as we know TSI is a proxy for all other activity, so as TSI goes, so does the rest.
“Earth-dwellers can expect more of these coronal mass ejections, with the number peaking in 2013. Over a course of 11 years, the sun’s magnetic poles shift, with the north pole eventually becoming the south and vice versa.”
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_18334239
Lief S: This is not an exact accurate statment, correct? As I am reading this, it implies the poles shift every 11 years . . . I have never heard this . . . I am of the understanding it takes longer than that!
Most estimates for the duration of a polarity transition are between 1,000 and 10,000 years
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagnetic_reversal
[reply] Geomagnetic reversal refers to the Earth’s magnetism, not the Sun’s, which reverses every ~11 year cycle TB-Mod