An article in the New Scientist says:
But Dr. Leif Svalgaard, one of the worlds leading solar physicists and WUWT’s resident solar expert has this to say:
Solar max is a slippery concept. One can be more precise and *define* solar max for a given hemisphere as the time when the polar fields reverse in the hemisphere. The reversals usually differ by one or two years, so solar max will similarly differ. The North is undergoing reversal right now, so has reached maximum. The South is lagging, but already the polar field is rapidly decreasing, so reversal may be only a year away. Such asymmetry is very common.
Here is a link to the evolution of the polar fields as measured at WSO:
http://www.leif.org/research/WSO-Polar-Fields-since-2003.png
And here’s data all the way back to 1966, note there has not been a crossing of the polar fields yet in 2012, a typical event at solar max:
http://www.leif.org/research/Solar-Polar-Fields-1966-now.png
Here is a link to a talk on this: http://www.leif.org/research/ click
on paper 1540.
Dr. Svalgaard adds:
Solar max happens at different times for each hemisphere. In the North we are *at* max right now. For the South there is another year to go, but ‘max’ for a small cycle like 24 is a drawn out affair and will last several years. To say that max falls on a given date, e.g. Jan 3rd, 2013, at UT 04:15 is meaningless.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Fascinating! I wonder if this will lead to any cooling in a few years’ time? I know Leif doesn’t believe so (or at least his typical responses on these threads lead me to believe that), but what are some other thoughts? If so, how long will it take? Should we see cooling anyways during such a low “Max” for a cycle?
Ya must admit though, this correlation is better than ACO2:
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/mean:12/trend/plot/sidc-ssn/from:1880/mean:12/normalise/scale:5/trend
Why would the Sun care which way is North? (Question)
I do not think there is any argument about solar influence on climate. It is the only external heat source available and heat drives climate. It is not CO2, that trace gas so valuable to plants that without it we would all die PDQ.
Solar hibernation will cause temperatures to fall here. It might kick the alarmists into reality.
I agree that solar max is a slippery and somewhat arbitrary concept. Even solar min is, albeit less so. I disagree that the center of the plateau (the peak) has been and gone. The SC 24 is a long cycle (weak) and the peak will be around 2013-15.
I use solar data, then do a bit of a ‘curve matching’ with the astronomical parameters
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN.htm
to me it looks as good as SC24max (see the inset)
September SIDC SSN count will be around 60
New Scientist has become unreadable on climate change – pure scaremongering. We had the impression that Arctic ice was lower this summer than in the last 3 million years recently! Must be some editorial pressure.
I guess the unanswered question is what do we expect for the next sun cycle? Is there a known period of solar activity that matches the last few cycles that can serve a guide?
Related to some previous postings, do CMEs increase or decrease in conjunction with the level of solar activity?
From NS….
“Such a large asymmetry between hemispheres could be a sign of big changes ahead, says Steven Tobias, a mathematician at the University of Leeds, UK, who models what drives the sun’s magnetic field. According to his models, such a situation precedes an extended quiet phase called a grand minimum. “Changes in symmetry are more indicative of going into a grand minimum than the strength of the cycle,” he says.”
I hope he’s right, it will provide a real opportunity for the experts to gain a better understanding as to the effect the sun has on the Earth’s climate.
Anthony,
Studying the suns cycle of activity is data gathering.
Any comments are just suppositions to the data gathered.
The sun’s cycle NEVER duplicates exactly to many variables that occur such as slow down and size change over the years.
I do wish people would leave out the “we”! As in
” In the North we are *at* max right now.”
“We” are not at lunar max either right now or ever. Neither are “we” located on the northern hemisphere of the sun.
Come on guys, let’s have a little more scientific rigour in the way propositions are stated.
Very interesting Leif. Thanks.
Med venlig hilsen fra Island.
Agust
Hi Leif
Are we saying it would be a New thing if there were Science in the “New Scientist” ? 🙂
That’ll teach me to buying that solar filter for my telescope.
Just to be clear, I bought it back in 2007…
Thanks Dr. S., the turning of my calendar begins my anticipation of the posting of the SSN.
Last winter was marked by little snowfall, but just previously I had to buy a roof rake to remove too much snow. What wonder will this winter bring?
Anthony,
There are many areas of science NEVER studied. But we have a consensus of the like minded to ignore anything NOT of their liking.
Compression is one area that has not been looked at which would account for the material of our sun to be able to keep producing it’s corona and spew out massive material.
Again, this is NOT data gathering and statistics.
It’s the New ‘s’cientist…what do you expect, accuracy?
omnologos wrote:
He’s talking about the Sun’s North and South poles and hemispheres — not Earth’s. The Sun’s magnetic field is a lot more dynamic than Earth’s. Earth’s field flips every 200,000 to 300,000 years, the Sun every 11 years or so.
David Ross – my question is in fact…why would the Northern and Southern hemispheres of the Sun behave differently? What tells the Northern part that it is “North”, and the Southern “South”?
AFAIK gravity doesn’t care direction…
Yo, dudes at New Scientist. You need to spend more time reading stuff here. You did say something about Livingston and Penn, right?
Doug Huffman says:
September 28, 2012 at 5:09 am
From tracking snowfall and “snow depth days” around New England, it’s very clear that snow seasons really say very little about climate and how it’s changing. See http://wermenh.com/sdd/index.html They do say something about that particular season and the similarities and differences between here (Penacook NH) and Derry NH, 40 miles south are striking. Some years I’d have the same snow as them, other years the storm track often brought them rain and me snow.
I can say with great confidence that this winter will bring weather. I feel sorry for people who “have” to make seasonal forecasts for New England. OTOH, people who do it for sport enjoy a good challenge.
Wouldn’t it be nice to have an amateur global temperature network for the next 20 years to verify the ” Real Scientists ” data? Then again I would be happy with data from NASA or NOAA that doesn’t have someones finger on the scale.
Dr. Leif thanks for providing your input here. It does give balance to the conversation even though I personally believe that the big glowing thing in the sky does have some impact on the climate.
A small occasion for some, but important one for my graphs, at 13:48:33 (Friday, UK time) my stat counter recorded 150,000th visitor, who came from Columbia, Maryland, United States.
Thanks to all who followed my graphs during last 3-4 years, and my gratitude goes to Anthony and the WUWT for the hospitality and open-mindedness.
It is tempting to assume that this ‘hibernation’ that Dr. Svalgaard alludes to will lead to global cooling , because the last hibernation (“Maunder Minimum”) occurred during a cooling of the climate.
But I don’t believe that we’ve seen any causal evidence of this link. The typical explanations run “It has to be solar! What else could it be?” So, not much different than the typical “CO2 causes global warming” rationale.
But just to be sure, Dr. Svalgaard, is there any causal evidence to back up the claim that solar hibernation caused the Maunder cooling?
Learning is a constant process…..my 2 cents
I’m usually in disbelief at people who dismiss how important our Sun is in regulating climatic conditions here on Earth and the Solar System, when the Sun is very active it can produce a lot of energy in the form of CME’s, Solar wind and geomagnetic activity, the Earth responds with storms and higher electrical activity, more Auroras and ENSO goes positive to form El Nino and temperatures have a tendency to rise, When activity is low on the Sun geomagnetic activity and Solar wind is low and there are less or no CME’s, the Earth has less energy to form large storms and there’s less electrical activity, less Auroras and ENSO goes negative to form La Nina and temperatures have a tendency to fall. There is a complex planetary relationship with the Sun and it should never be over looked or even dismissed, I think the overall activity of an 11 year cycle plays a much larger role than when solar maximum will be reached, so far this has been a weak cycle in terms of activity.
Also, just a thought! What is the current theory (if any) on the solar wind effecting comets? could a prolonged minim and low solar wind bring comets into the solar system? The C/2012 S1 comet (‘Ison’) is on it’s way in, coinciding with recent low activity, also Comet PANSTARRS will be in the sky in march 2013. It may be worth looking into.
@vuk: Congratulations! 150,000 visitors following your graphs it´s a lot.