Normally, I run this post around the end of the first week of the month, but this month there was a problem. NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center (SWPC) botched the March SSN graph with incorrect data and was somewhat reticent to get it updated. Dr. Leif Svalgaard wrote to me on 3/7/12 after I asked him:
Why is there no Feb data on the NOAA graphs even though they show a March 6 update? Very odd. Are they holding out for better data?
He replied:
I have had a long email exchange with Doug Biesecker who is in charge of this. If you look at http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/weekly/RecentIndices.txt for December 2011, you see that the data there is that for February 2011. Apparently when they tried to enter data for February 2012 [which is 33.1] they lost that and instead dumped Feb. 2011 on December. Don’t ask how this is possible, we all screw up now and then. The bad news is they don’t know when it will be fixed [!!!]. I suggested just fixing it in the file and replot right now. But they want to find out exactly what the problem is. I suggested that if they just fixed manually right now, they would have all the time in the world to figure out what went wrong, but no cigar. As I said to him:
“your problem should not stop you from a temporary fix involving a few minutes of work, for the benefit of a waiting world that would like to think that NOAA produces reliable data”.
After some additional consideration on the part of NOAA, I’m happy to report they finally got it updated. What we see are three months of dropping sunspot numbers when they should be on the rise. While some variability is normal, compare this drop to the previous cycle.
Like the SSN, the 10.7cm flux is also down for the 3rd straight month:
And, the Ap Geomagnetic index, a proxy for the solar dynamo, is still bumping along the bottom portion of the scale where normally it would be approaching higher levels leading up to solar maximum:
Source: http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/
Has the current Forbush decrease resulted in any changes in day-night temperature differentials?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/11/new-paper-links-cosmic-rays-clouds-and-temperature/
Jurgen says:
March 14, 2012 at 5:25 pm
“It is not claimed that geomagnetic storm is a primary cause of any earthquake. However if conditions for an earthquake are ‘ripe’ i.e. tectonic fault ‘gone critical’, then solar storm could be a trigger (not the cause) for it, and bring it forward for few hours or days.”
So it’s about a few hours or days, and that signal is completely lost in Love’s comparison of 11 year periods.
That is taken care of by my superposed epoch analysis. If the storm controls the timing on a time scale of hours or days: http://www.leif.org/research/Earthquake-Activity.png that would cause an excess of storms at or just after the key time [the time of the storm], with a deficit a few days later, so both aspects are covered: no direct cause [because no 11-yr cycle] and no triggering.
As a layman looking at the solar storm vs seismic activity, can someone point out what’s wrong with this study (aside from their failed predictions of solar activity): http://khalilov.biz/pdf/About%20possible%20influence%20of%20solar%20activity%20upon%20seismic%20and%20volcanic%20activities%203.pdf
Jurgen says:
March 14, 2012 at 5:25 pm
It is not claimed that geomagnetic storm is a primary cause of any earthquake.
It would be good if we stay on topic, so let me close off the earthquake distraction with a discussion of that issue. There are several possibilities [that all have been researched extensively because of the potential usefulness]:
1) solar storms cause earthquakes. This would produce an 11-yr cycle which is not observed
2) solar storms trigger earthquakes that would have occurred anyway, but a bit later. This would produce a spike at or shortly after the storm in a superposed epoch analysis, which is not observed
3) there is a weak ‘precursor’ in that the geomagnetic field shows pulsations or ‘spikes’ just before the earthquake, e.g. created by the solar wind, or by the Earth itself. This has been claimed, but careful analysis fails to confirm the effect, e.g. http://www.leif.org/EOS/2009GL039020.pdf or http://www.leif.org/EOS/2010Nov22-Quake-Pre.pdf
4) when major earthquakes occur, the ground shifts and THAT influences the geomagnetic record, which has indeed been observed
5) The moon through tidal effects could trigger earthquakes. This would produce a lunar phase spike in a superposed epoch analysis, which is not observed.
So, enough of earthquakes, please.
Hey Leif
Still holding with 72 as the peak SSN for 24?
Dennis Ray Wingo says:
March 14, 2012 at 8:14 pm
Hey Leif, Still holding with 72 as the peak SSN for 24?
Yep. Although it is not clear what the Livingston & Penn effect will do
I do not expect SC24 to change it’s spots:
Tardy and half-hearted.
It wouldn’t be out of character for it to simply tail off over the next couple years to nothing.
MAVukcevic says:
March 14, 2012 at 5:11 am
Abdussamatov and Lockwood are in a guessing game, they have no solid hypothesis, see:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NFC7a.htm
and scroll down towards the end of the web page.
Dr. Svalgaard does, so do I, we differ in our methods but the final result may be the same or slightly different for the SSN 24 max.
L.S ~72 smoothed annual
MAV ~80 non-smoothed monthly
;———————————————————–
Is your hypothesis that given any data set, you and Leif are better at curve fitting than Abdussamatov and Lockwood?
chinese have monitored sunspot activity for 2000 years and noted the change in climate that goes with it and the effect on agriculture.
@ur momisugly Leif Svalgaard
http://translate.google.it/translate?hl=it&sl=it&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdaltonsminima.altervista.org%2F%3Fp%3D11690
Leif Svalgaard says:
March 14, 2012 at 6:27 pm
March 14, 2012 at 7:59 pm
– – – – – – –
Thanks for the more detailed explanation. I did check before on your link (http://www.leif.org/research/Earthquake-Activity.png) and was wondering about higher and lower resolution of the phenomena and this maybe causing a confusion of arguments. As the “trigger effect” is a pretty weak signal on a short time interval I was wondering about the scale of the graphs both for time and for strength of earthquakes. But you are right it is a bit OT.
Jurgen says:
March 15, 2012 at 5:18 am
was wondering about higher and lower resolution of the phenomena and this maybe causing a confusion of arguments
The time resolution is one day [really plus/minus half a day]. The Strength of the Earthquakes is as given in the official catalogs and is usually good to a tenth of a unit on the Richter scale. In any case they are the best we have.
“Practically, all mud (M-type) volcanoes of the world are located in the zones of subduction and collision and, consequently, reflect the activity of compression processes of Earth. As it was mentioned above, the attempt of detection the connection between the activity of the Sun and magmatic volcanoes activity was made by the number of scientists. However, there was not taken into consideration that the volcanoes are divided into geodynamical types and each type of volcano reflects the activity of various processes: C-type volcanoes characterize the compression processes of Earth (due to subduction); R-type volcanoes characterize the tension processes of Earth (due to spreading).”
http://i40.tinypic.com/25ahys0.png
richard says:
March 14, 2012 at 11:20 pm
chinese have monitored sunspot activity for 2000 years and noted the change in climate that goes with it and the effect on agriculture.
____________________________________
Here is a link: http://www.arrlmiss.org/press_release.html