The NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center has updated their monthly graph set and it appears as if the slow downside from what looks like the solar max for cycle 24. Though, it is still possible we could see a second small peak like is visible at the upper left in cycle 23.
The 10.7cm radio flux continues downward:
The Ap geomagnetic index remains low, being at the same value as it was in November 2006. We’ve had over 6 years now of a lower than expected (for solar max) Ap index.
From the WUWT Solar reference page, Dr Leif Svalgaard has this plot comparing the current cycle 24 with recent solar cycles:
Another indicator, Solar Polar Fields from Mt. Wilson and Wilcox Combined -1966 to Present show that the fields have flipped (crossed the zero line) indicating solar max has happened.
Image from Dr. Leif Svalgaard – Click the pic to view at source.
More at the WUWT Solar reference page.
In other news, Hathaway has updated his prediction page on 4/1/13. Perhaps he thinks a double peak might be in the cards:
The current prediction for Sunspot Cycle 24 gives a smoothed sunspot number maximum of about 66 in the Fall of 2013. The smoothed sunspot number has already reached 67 (in February 2012) due to the strong peak in late 2011 so the official maximum will be at least this high and this late. We are currently over four years into Cycle 24. The current predicted and observed size makes this the smallest sunspot cycle since Cycle 14 which had a maximum of 64.2 in February of 1906.
========================================================
UPDATE: From: http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=80572
Given the tepid state of solar activity now, a maximum in May seems unlikely. “We may be seeing what happens when you predict a single amplitude and the Sun responds with a double peak,” says Pesnell. He notes a similarity between Solar Cycle 24 and Solar Cycle 14, which had a double-peak during the first decade of the 20th century. If the two cycles are twins, “it would mean one peak in late 2013 and another in 2015.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Leif,
“Your question is not precise enough for a meaningful answer. A changing magnetic field in a conductor would produce an electric current that when dissipated would heat the conductor. I’m not sure that is what you have in mind.”
The line of thought I have on this is related to a planetary object (like earth) approaching and passing through large magnetic fields, as this object approached a large magnetic field wouldn’t activity on the object rise and as the object passed through the magnetic field and traveled away from it, wouldn’t activity on the object fall?
And if this object approached multiple large magnetic fields concentrated in one area wouldn’t this produce even greater activity on the planetary object? If this object was Earth, wouldn’t this occurrence produce activity capable of introducing a charge that the atmosphere would interact with?
Also, hypothetically; In your opinion, What would this charge consist of? energetic charged particles?
Sparks says:
April 19, 2013 at 12:48 pm
planetary object (like earth) approaching and passing through large magnetic fields, as this object approached a large magnetic field
The magnetic field that the Earth is ‘passing through’ is not large. In fact, it is 10,000 times weaker than the Earth’s own field [at the surface].
If this object was Earth, wouldn’t this occurrence produce activity capable of introducing a charge that the atmosphere would interact with?
As the neutral, but conducting solar wind plasma streams past the Earth’s [strong] magnetic field an electric field is in fact induced. See the text around Figure 1 of http://www.leif.org/research/suipr699.pdf
This electric field is influential in generating magnetic storms and aurorae.
Also, hypothetically; In your opinion, What would this charge consist of? energetic charged particles?
What is generated is not ‘charge’, but an electric field. If there are charged particles around [from the solar wind and also coming from the Earth itself] the particles will move in the direction of the electric field constituting an electric current. That current is the cause of the various effects that are seen. But the particles are not particularly ‘energetic’. The earth does from time to time get a dose of energetic charged particles from the Sun itself, accelerated by electric fields in the solar atmosphere. Such fields results from rapidly changing magnetic fields in the solar atmosphere, but that is another [lengthy] story.
Leif,
“The magnetic field that the Earth is ‘passing through’ is not large. In fact, it is 10,000 times weaker than the Earth’s own field [at the surface].”
I agree with your reply, I was suggesting the possibility of a large magnetic field for the scenario, one not yet discovered?, if a planetary object approached a multiple of these large magnetic fields concentrated in one area wouldn’t this produce even greater activity on the planetary object? When this large magnetic field is not interacting with anything it would be very hard to detect, other than mathematically, Not unlike a “Schwarzschild radius”.
If this Large magnetic field did exist wouldn’t the physics be plausible?
“What is generated is not ‘charge’, but an electric field.”
I was refraining from mentioning an electric field to avoid an obvious misunderstanding.