The Sun has changed its character

Guest post by David Archibald

A number of solar parameters are weak, and none is weaker than the Ap Index:

image

Figure 1: Ap Index 1932 to 2026

Figure 1 shows the Ap Index from 1932 with a projection to the end of Solar Cycle 24 in 2026. The Ap Index has not risen much above the previous floor of activity in the second half of the 20th Century. It is also now far less volatile. With now less than a year to solar maximum in 2013, the Ap Index is now projected to trail off to a new low next decade.

image

Figure 2: Mean Field, TSI, F10.7 Flux and Sunspot Count from 2008

This figure is from: http://www.leif.org/research/TSI-SORCE-2008-now.png

What is evident from Figure 2 is that the spikes down in the F10.7 flux and sunspot count are almost to absolute minimum levels. The underlying level of activity is only a little above that of solar minimum.

image

Figure 3: Oulu Neutron Count 1964 – 2026

Similar to the Ap Index, activity is only slightly above levels of previous solar minima. The figure includes a projection to the end of Solar Cycle 24 in 2026 which assumes that the neutron count in the next minimum will be similar to that of the 23/24 minimum. Previous cold periods have been associated with significant spikes in Be10 and C14. Perhaps the neutron count might get much higher yet into the 24/25 minimum.

image

Figure 4: UAH Monthly Temperature versus Low Global Cloud Cover

The cloud cover data for this figure was provided by Professor Ole Humlum. There is a significant relationship between low global cloud cover and global temperature. Assuming that the relationship is linear and remains linear at higher cloud cover percentages, this figure attempts to derive what cloud cover percentage is required to get the temperature decline of 0.9°C predicted by Solheim, Stordahl and Humlum in their paper entitled “The long sunspot cycle 23 predicts a significant temperature decrease in cycle 24” available at: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1202.1954v1.pdf

Figure 4 suggests that the predicted result will be associated with a significant increase in cloudiness.

image

Figure 5: Low Level Cloud Cover plotted against Oulu Neutron Count

This figure, most likely repeating other people’s work, suggests that there is little correlation between neutron count and cloud cover. Higher neutron counts may be a coincident with colder climate than a significant causative factor. Perhaps EUV, the Ap Index and other factors are more significant in climate change. Also, on a planet with a bistable climate of either ice age or interglacial, it may be that accidents of survival of snowpack over the northern summer are also important.

Perth-based scientist David Archibald is a Visiting Fellow of the Institute of World Politics in Washington where he teaches a course in Strategic Energy Policy.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
pat

Ahh. Global Warming has cooled the sun. Just as the models show.

the Ap Index is now projected to trail off to a new low next decade
If history is any guide, smoothed Ap will reach 13 in cycle 24 [and probably in SC25 as well]:
http://www.leif.org/research/Ap-1844-now.png
so Archiebald’s ‘projection’ does not seem reasonable.
there is little correlation between neutron count and cloud cover
For once Archibald may be correct. The claimed correlation is between LOW clouds and cosmic rays, but as solar activity has decreases [and cosmic rays increased], the low clouds has not followed the claimed relationship: http://climate4you.com/images/CloudCoverAllLevel%20AndWaterColumnSince1983.gif

Rhys Jaggar

How much concensus is there that SC24 will finish in 2026? That’s a, what, an 18 year cycle??
I’m not saying Archibald is wrong, I’m saying it’d be interesting to know how certain physicists are on that one.

Henry says
Actually, figure 1 clearly shows the downfall of maxima as calculated by me, from 1994/5.
http://www.letterdash.com/henryp/global-cooling-is-here
I also predict the cooling will continue,
until at least 2025

Mark.R

The 1.5B$ New zealanders have paid in to the ETS have given us one of the coldest Junes on recorord.
Next thing they be saying is look the tax works.

Sun has changed its character
I doubt it.
Sun is doing what it has done many times before. As long as extrapolation of the past is confirmed by present, no major character change.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN.htm

crosspatch

“Ap Index is now projected to trail off to a new low next decade.”
Projected by whom, exactly?

Rhys Jaggar says:
July 2, 2012 at 11:26 am
How much concensus is there that SC24 will finish in 2026? That’s a, what, an 18 year cycle??
I’m not saying Archibald is wrong, I’m saying it’d be interesting to know how certain physicists are on that one.

I shall say that Archibald very likely is wrong. There is no evidence for such a long cycle, next minimum more likely in 2021.

vukcevic says:
July 2, 2012 at 11:29 am
Sun has changed its character
Sun is doing what it has done many times before.

What was probably meant was that the change is with reference to the past few centuries. If so, the Livingston & Penn effect [if real] would be as significant change.
From Hugh Hudson’s summary of the 2nd SSN workshop http://www.leif.org/research/SSN/Hudson.pdf
“Livingston-Penn effect
• There’s no question that something is happening that
we have not seen before
– We should be proud of this, and exploit it
– We should ignore wild-sounding claims about
sunspots disappearing completely
• The data are weak, but the theory is weaker”

sean2829

What I’ve noticed over the last few years is an unusually high north south meandering of the jet stream leading to some very high temperatures and some very low temperatures. I realize a large part of this may be just the cold phase of the PDO but can the amplitude of the north south jet stream meandering be affected by the state of the sun or the change in state of the sun? We certainly seem to have stronger blocking patterns since solar minimum and there have been several times in the last few years where high pressures over the poles have led to strong cold spells in the temperate lattitudes of the northern and sounther hemisphere. In other words what I am trying to say is the weak sun’s signal more likely to be found in increased variability at certain latitudes rather than in changes in the averages.

I know that Dr. Hathaway occasionally looks at the WUWT solar threads, (banned his You Tube interview featured on my website), most likely is annoyed by my mocking of his SC24 forecast, I suspect he knows it was related to a comment in an email to the world renown solar scientist (definitely not our Dr. S), and I am calling an end to it.
So if Dr. Hathaway pops along to WUWT I would like him to know that I shell not again disparagingly refer to his SC24 prediction and eventually will delete references to it.
His prediction went wrong because he misunderstood results of Dr. Joan (sister of Richard) Feynman’s work.
Why I am doing it now ?
“We don’t know why this works,” says Hathaway. The underlying physics is a mystery. “But it does work.”
http://science.nasa.gov/media/medialibrary/2006/12/21/21dec_cycle24_resources/hathaway1_strip2.jpg
because I think I found out why it works.

Henry@sean2829
Keep ur eyes on maxima and you will know what the sun is doing…

daveburton
Scarface

Dutch scientist De Jager predicts: No big minimum like the Maunder Minimum expected
http://www.cdejager.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/2012-sudden-trans-JSWSC-2-A073.pdf
Found via: De staat van het klimaat ( http://www.staatvanhetklimaat.nl/2012/06/28/de-jager-geen-groot-minimum-in-het-verschiet/ )

KevinM

That chart-graphic looks OK to me up until the crazy brown-line appended projection.
Not saying I have a science argument, just an aesthetics one. How about some dotted min-max lines around a confidence interval or something.

speed

The Sun has changed its character … sounds like the first line of a Sci Fi thriller.

vukcevic says:
July 2, 2012 at 11:53 am
His prediction went wrong because he misunderstood results of Dr. Joan (sister of Richard) Feynman’s work.
Not true, it went wrong because he peaked the wrong peak: slide 25ff of http://www.leif.org/research/Predicting%20the%20Solar%20Cycle%20%28SORCE%202010%29.pdf
because I think I found out why it works.
It actually doesn’t work. What does work is the polar fields and proxies for those: slides 22 and 23 of the above.

Bloke down the pub

I suppose it was a foregone certainty that as soon as I bought solar panels the sun would go to sleep.

SteveSadlov

Thankfully ENSO is now into El Nino territory. It may counteract some of the negative effects.

Forget abt the clouds and jets. I think it is the sun and related to the activity of the sun: the amount of ozone, that determines the development of temperature on earth.

Coldlynx

Leif, I think You looked at wrong picture at Climate4you
Here is the one for tropical clouds and global temperatures:
http://climate4you.com/images/HadCRUT3%20and%20TropicalCloudCoverISCCP.gif

it went wrong because he peaked the wrong peak: slide 25ff
( rem- if he picked correct peak it would have worked )
It actually doesn’t work.
countratant ?

Luther Wu

Bloke down the pub says:
July 2, 2012 at 12:22 pm
I suppose it was a foregone certainty that as soon as I bought solar panels the sun would go to sleep.
______________________
Meanwhile, just think how you’re saving the planet.

commieBob

Off topic and late but perhaps amusing …
There’s a story on Slashdot blaming the failure of Rio+20 on Intellectual Property owners. http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/07/02/1738214/intellectual-property-rights-the-quiet-killer-of-rio20

“Richard Phillips, president of the Intellectual Property Owners Association, sent a powerful message … And the IPO’s chilly message set the tone for what many pundits and participants considered a disappointing Rio+20 conference yielding few substantive results.”

The mind boggles.

commieBob

Bloke down the pub says:
July 2, 2012 at 12:22 pm
I suppose it was a foregone certainty that as soon as I bought solar panels the sun would go to sleep.

LOL. I made the opposite bet last year. I bought a snow blower in the fall of 2010 and got lots of use out of it that winter. This winter, on the other hand, I didn’t get to use it even once. You could say that I bet $1000 that we would be in a cooling trend for the next few decades.

Henry@Wu
My solar panels save me on electricity.
Saving the planet or the end of this world is not in the hand of men

Coldlynx says:
July 2, 2012 at 12:43 pm
Leif, I think You looked at wrong picture at Climate4you
Here is the one for tropical clouds and global temperatures

Doesn’t make any difference, cloud cover has to be UP because solar activity is down and thus cosmic rays are up.
Vukcevic says:
July 2, 2012 at 12:45 pm
( rem- if he picked correct peak it would have worked )
There are several peaks and one would not know ahead of time which one to pick.
“It actually doesn’t work.”>
What works is the amount of geomagnetic activity near minimum [and that has a weak relationship to the recurrence peak] so it is not the recurrence peak that works, but geomagnetic activity as Wang and Sheeley point out.

Vukcevic says:
July 2, 2012 at 12:45 pm
( rem- if he picked correct peak it would have worked )
There are several peaks and one would not know ahead of time which one to pick.
“It actually doesn’t work.”
What works is the amount of geomagnetic activity near minimum [and that has a weak relationship to the recurrence peak] so it is not the recurrence peak that works, but geomagnetic activity as Wang and Sheeley point out.
Don’t try to pretend you know anything about this.

Richard Jenkins

1 Not enough data to draw any real conclusions about what will happen next.
1932 to today is not long for the sun which has been around a while.(4.5 billion years) Archibald really misuses data to create spurious scientific claims.
2 proxies go back further , so use them and then come back with some claims
(see http://blog.chess.com/Rickj/more-on-the-maunder-minimum , which uses ssn proxies)

Robert M

commieBob says:
July 2, 2012 at 1:19 pm
Bloke down the pub says:
July 2, 2012 at 12:22 pm
I suppose it was a foregone certainty that as soon as I bought solar panels the sun would go to sleep.
LOL. I made the opposite bet last year. I bought a snow blower in the fall of 2010 and got lots of use out of it that winter. This winter, on the other hand, I didn’t get to use it even once. You could say that I bet $1000 that we would be in a cooling trend for the next few decades.
————————————————————————————————————————-
In the fall of 2010 I also bought a snow blower. I guessed how big a one I needed and bought one size bigger. At the end of winter 10/11 I had 11 hours on it. Last winter I needed a bigger one. This spring I had 57 hours total. There was also a three week period when I got behind and couldn’t use it because the snow was too deep. I ended up paying a guy to plow it with a truck. You could say that I made a $5000 dollar bet and lost because I went too small. I am now entertaining the Idea of buying a $20,000 tractor to clear my driveway. Of course the better half… the one that does not clear the driveway, but demands it be cleared, had heartburn about the first $5000.

In the beginning of the 1950s when I was in my last few years of primary school education I learnt that we (or the Solar Physicists who study the Sun) knew very little about the Sun, it’s cycles and other behaviours.
However one theory’s correctness they were certain about back in those days was that The Sun was the primary driver of all happenings in the Solar System, hence the name.
If happenings like those forecast by the “The Milankovitch theory” was ever to be proved to be correct, then it was argued that it was likely to be “cycles in the Sun” – yet unknown – that was the driver that changes the elliptical path of the Earth’s orbit.
They admitted back then that they knew a little bit about “Sun Spot Cycles” but ziltch about any other possible “Cycles”.
However as I mentioned Milutin’s Theory, it was – back in those days – seen by many, as impossible that the shape of the Earth’s orbit could bring on an Ice Age. – After all, when the Earth is as far away from the Sun as it can be during the present orbital shape, it is “Summertime” in the Northern Hemisphere. – And if the clouds stay away Colorado can be a darned hot place at the moment – or in this orbital spot.
So, what has changed during the past 60 years? – Knowledge ways, that is?

Steve C

Leif Svalgaard says:
July 2, 2012 at 11:32 am
“I shall say that Archibald very likely is wrong. There is no evidence for such a long cycle, next minimum more likely in 2021.”
Although, if that claimed link between long sunspot cycles and reducing temperatures is anywhere near right, that’s still a (roughly) 12-13 year cycle and so potentially not good news. Don’t sell off that snow blower yet.

Steve C says:
July 2, 2012 at 2:41 pm
Although, if that claimed link between long sunspot cycles and reducing temperatures is anywhere near right
It isn’t: http://www.leif.org/research/Cycle%20Length%20Temperature%20Correlation.pdf

Dr Burns

From the geniuses in the Australian government, in justification of our shiny new carbon tax :
“those who argue that “it’s the Sun” fail to comprehend that we understand the major mechanisms by which the Sun influences the global climate, and that they cannot explain the current global warming trend. ”
http://www.carbontax.net.au/category/climate-change/
Our Department of Hot Air copied it from here http://www.skepticalscience.com/big-picture.html

MattN

What is the lag time associated with this? We’ve been beating the solar-drum for a while now, certainly the last 4-5 years. When are we going to start seeing the effects?

Dr Burns says:
July 2, 2012 at 3:01 pm
From the geniuses in the Australian government, in justification of our shiny new carbon tax …“it’s the Sun” fail …
And they are likely correct, but that does not prove it is CO2.

Keith

If L&P are right and if the trends of umbral intensity and magnetic field are linear in the short-to-medium term, the sunspot minimum may well appear to arrive in 2021 or 2022 as we wouldn’t be able to see any. Ap is another matter…

Steve C

@Lief, I did say if, and I’m far too much of a mere amateur to go head to head with an expert like you. (As a radio amateur, too, I’m pretty unimpressed with this weedy maximum’s minimal effects on the ionosphere and propagation, btw.)
OTOH, there’s one thing I really rather envy you: as the Sun gets weirder, the interestingness of your work must be following something very much like a hockey stick curve. It has to be fun.
PS – Have d/l-ed the pdf, for which thanks.

Steve C

Oops, sorry for the misspelling, Leif. I blame learning German at school. I have the same trouble with ‘Neil’.

Steve C says:
July 2, 2012 at 3:20 pm
It has to be fun.
It certainly is!

Julian Flood

Leif Svalgaard says July 2, 2012 at 1:47 pm
quote
[]cloud cover has to be UP because solar activity is down and thus cosmic rays are up.
unquote
Unless we have disturbed low level cloud formation by some means. So your statement should be ‘all things being equal — pollution, aerosols, biological activity etc — cloud cover has to be UP because solar activity is down and thus cosmic rays are up’.
HTH
JF

noloctd

Am I the only one amused by Leif Svalgaard showing up like clockwork to once again point out that, in his opinion at least, he is the most knowlegable man in the world?

Eric Webb

It is quite sad to have this solar maximum having comparable activity to many of the last solar minimums, doesn’t bode well for AGE believers. If those predictions are indeed correct, the earth could very well enter the icebox that it was during the Little Ice Age and Maunder Minimum, but only time will tell. Certainly with one major climate factor, the sun, beginning to drastically change it’s energy output something significant is bound to happen.

Julian Flood says:
July 2, 2012 at 3:29 pm
Unless we have disturbed low level cloud formation by some means.
such as CO2? 🙂
More likely, the correlation has just failed.

AnonyMoose

Voyager, get ready! You’re going to go through the heliopause soon!

Bright Sunshine is down a little in the UK (1.4 hours a month) over the last 5 years compared to the previous 5. But it is still the 2nd highest amount.
http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2012/07/02/uk-met-bright-sunshine-5-year-averages-plotted-using-all-monthly-anomalies/

Doug Jones

“It is an edged cliché that the world is most pleasant in the years of a Waning Sun. It is true that the weather is not so driven, that everywhere there is a sense of slowing down, and most places experience a few years where the summers do not burn and the winters are not yet overly fierce. It is the classic time of romance. It’s a time that seductively beckons higher creatures to relax, postpone. It’s the last chance to prepare for the end of the world.”
-_A Deepness in the Sky_, Chapter 4, Vernor Vinge, 1992

Re Solar Cycle 24 length, Altrock’s green corona emissions diagramme, and the man himself, says that the equatorward progression of this cycle is 40% slower than the previous cycle. 40% slower than 12.5 years makes it 17 years long. Add 17 years to the start date and you get 2026. For this not to happen requires an acceleration of that equatorward movement at some point. In the nature versus nurture arguement, the Sun is definitely in the former camp. It seems that the characteristics of the cycle are set at conception which is the maximum of the previous cycle. We have another 14 years-odd of this cycle to go. If the Earth’s atmosphere has shrunk 25% in volume, what will the heiliopause shrink to?

Thank you Leif. I enjoy reading your concise and logical pin pricks to the balloon-headed solar “theorists”. You keep us laymen from getting carried away by fanciful plausible-sounding stories.