Sunspot count is virtually unchanged from last month :
It seems possible that we’ve seen the double peak, and it will be downhill after this.
A similar status quo in radio flux – little change from last month.
The Ap magnetic index dropped 4 units from last month, suggesting a slowing in the solar dynamo.
On August 1st, solar scientist David Hathaway updated his prediction page but the text is identical to last month – no change in the forecast.
The current prediction for Sunspot Cycle 24 gives a smoothed sunspot number maximum of about 67 in the Summer 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. The smoothed sunspot number has been rising again over the last four months. 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.
About the only significant even in the last month is that the solar polar fields have begun their reversal, indicating we are at “solar max”, which seems like a misnomer given the low activity observed at the moment. That’s why I think we may have seen the “double peak” and it is downhill from here.
Solar Polar Fields – Mt. Wilson and Wilcox Combined -1966 to Present
Leif Svalgaard – Click the pic to view at sourceWatch the progress on the WUWT solar reference page
HenryP says:
August 19, 2013 at 2:54 am
How often, exactly, do the poles of the sun change sides?
They change polarity once per solar cycle [near solar maximum].
Have you ever heard of a double flip over?
The ‘flip’ is a period where the polar fields go to zero and they can vary a bit around zero during that. but once established the polar fields are steady and well-behaved until the next solar maximum, so no ‘double flips’.
Thanks, Leif
Did you notice that in your graph here
http://www.leif.org/research/Solar-Polar-Fields-1966-now.png
there is an extraordinary amount of variation around same zero from 1966 -1972 compared to the three solar cycles after that (when the poles flip over)
Do you perhaps know why?
HenryP says:
August 19, 2013 at 4:53 am
there is an extraordinary amount of variation around same zero from 1966 -1972 compared to the three solar cycles after that (when the poles flip over) Do you perhaps know why?
Two reasons: 1) measurement noise was larger then, and 2) there were 2-3 large surges of magnetic flux so the polarity was, indeed, fluctuating. We can also see that in the cosmic ray record, e.g. http://143.160.38.244/webfm_send/42735 but I would call those ‘fluctuations’ rather than ‘double flips’.
Leif says
I would call those ‘fluctuations’ rather than ‘double flips’
henry says
I think that that is the solenoid. I suspect it will also start kicking in now, 2010-2016.
Namely, if there were not something to reverse the process we are in now, as per your graph,
http://www.leif.org/research/Solar-Polar-Fields-1966-now.png
where would we end? No magnetic field?
HenryP says:
August 19, 2013 at 5:19 am
I think that that is the solenoid.
There is no ‘solenoid’.
Namely, if there were not something to reverse the process we are in now, as per your graph,
http://www.leif.org/research/Solar-Polar-Fields-1966-now.png where would we end? No magnetic field?
The polar fields do go to zero during a reversal, but then come back with opposite polarity. The new polarity is already there at lower latitudes, on its way to the polar regions. So the polar fields the next three-four years will rebuild. From its value 3-4 years down the road we should be able to forecast how strong cycle 25 will be.
@leif
I am sure you don’t understand what I am getting at
I am saying: your graph
http://www.leif.org/research/Solar-Polar-Fields-1966-now.png
in general shows a continuous weakening of the magnetic field of the sun, in every successive cycle, since 1972, and if it were to continue like this,unabated,
there would be no field in 40 years from now?
So something has to “switch” to get the sun’s field strength marching in the opposite direction again?
What switch then do you propose? When?
@Leif,
Do we have a reason the Sun’s poles switch every solar cycle? What happens in the Sun?
HenryP says:
August 19, 2013 at 6:32 am
in general shows a continuous weakening of the magnetic field of the sun, in every successive cycle, since 1972, and if it were to continue like this,unabated, there would be no field in 40 years from now?
Solar activity goes down, and goes up, and in general varies with time. Here you can see estimates of the polar fields back to 1910: http://www.leif.org/research/AMJ-100-Years-Polar-Fields.pdf
So something has to “switch” to get the sun’s field strength marching in the opposite direction again? What switch then do you propose? When?
The polar fields [and therefore the size of the next cycle] are formed by a rather random process: 5-7 ‘surges’ of magnetic flux reaching the poles [see link below], being only about 1/1000 of the total flux erupting on the Sun during a solar cycle. Suppose you were to flip a coin and count heads; after, say, three heads your argument would say that there must be something that has to switch in order for the next toss to show tails. Actually, nothing needs to ‘switch’ in a random process.
MiCro says:
August 19, 2013 at 7:24 am
Do we have a reason the Sun’s poles switch every solar cycle? What happens in the Sun?
Yes we do: http://www.leif.org/research/ApJ88587.pdf “The solar polar fields reverse because magnetic flux from decaying sunspots moves towards the poles, with a preponderance of flux from the trailing spots”
The angular momentum theory if one goes back in past history has been very useful in showing when solar activity will be quiet and when it will be active.
The solar magnetic field is in a continuing weakening mode , and one can see by looking at the graph of the north /south polar fields (presented in this article) how much less pronounced the degree of maximum magnitude reached in the most recent past flip was, in comparisome to ALL of the earlier recent flips and can make a case that the current flip going on now may be even weaker.
The solar situation today is much different then it was from the end of the Dalton through 2005,and trying to extrapolate and use data from what the sun did (over the past recent several solar cycles prior to solar cycle 24) is a very foolish approach.
Solar cycle 24 is weaker then any of the forecast that were made by mainstream ,back in 2007 or so. In contrast those who heed the angular mometum theory were much more correct.
Salvatore Del Prete says:
August 19, 2013 at 10:28 am
In contrast those who heed the angular momentum theory were much more correct.
Actually not. Landscheidt failed regularly, and the AM ‘theory’ violates the laws of physics http://www.leif.org/EOS/Shirley-MNRAS.pdf. Of course, that matters little if you don’t know any physics…
Salvatore Del Prete says:
August 19, 2013 at 10:28 am
how much less pronounced the degree of maximum magnitude reached in the most recent past flip was
You do not know whereof you speak. At the ‘flip’ the magnitude of the solar polar field is always zero.
Not talking about that. Look at the graph presented in this presentation.
Dr. S., are polar fields now hung up at the solar equator or the magnetic equator? If magnetic equator, is this part of the HCS waviness as the magnetic equator is wavy.
Carla says:
August 19, 2013 at 1:01 pm
Dr. S., are polar fields now hung up at the solar equator or the magnetic equator? If magnetic equator, is this part of the HCS waviness as the magnetic equator is wavy.
The polar fields are measured on the solar surface around the solar rotation axis [the poles of the Sun]. The Hale magnetic polarity laws are controlled by the rotational solar equator which is thus the magnetic equator on the surface. The ‘magnetic equator’ of the HCS is created in the upper corona and there determines the waviness. The two magnetic equators are distinct. You can project the magnetic equator in the corona down to the surface to see what structures give rise to the waviness, see e.g. Slide 11 of http://www.leif.org/research/On-Becoming-a-Scientist.pdf
lsvalgaard says:
August 19, 2013 at 1:21 pm
—
Thanks Dr. S., good explanation. And I did check out the “On Becoming a Scientist,” pdf a couple days ago. Antarctica and Greenland Dr. S. talk about having been to the ends of the Earth. lol
But..
I think you need to take a closer look at the way the ISMF angle couples with HCS magnetic equator. And you also may want to reconsider the possibility of an Interstellar type current sheet that changes sign also.
And this might give your hair a curly cue..
Taken from:
THREE-DIMENSIONAL FEATURES OF THE OUTER HELIOSPHERE DUE TO
COUPLING BETWEEN THE
INTERSTELLAR AND INTERPLANETARY MAGNETIC FIELDS. III.
THE EFFECTS OF SOLAR ROTATION AND ACTIVITY CYCLE
Nikolai V. Pogorelov1, Sergey N. Borovikov1, Gary P. Zank1, and Tatsuki Ogino2
The Astrophysical Journal, 696:1478–1490, 2009 May 10
http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/696/2/1478/pdf/0004-637X_696_2_1478.pdf
“””This plane is inclined at an angle of about 60◦ toward the ecliptic plane of the Sun,
as suggested in recent publications relating the local interstellar cloud properties to
the radio emission observed by Voyager 1.
It is assumed that the latitudinal extent of the boundary between the slow and fast SW
regions, as well as the angle between the Sun’s rotation and magnetic-dipole axes,
are periodic functions of time,
while the polarity of the interstellar magnetic field changes sign every 11 years at the solar
maximum.
The global variation of the SW–LISM interaction pattern, the excursions of the
termination shock and the heliopause, and parameter distributions in certain
directions are investigated. The analysis of the behavior of the wavy heliospheric current s
heet in the supersonic SW region shows the importance of neutral atoms on its dynamics.”””
Was this a typo.. But no, I re-read it in its context and thought, gee makes perfect sense to me.
the Very idea that the “Interstellar” Magnetic Field is changing sign .. every 11 years..
Then the asymmetry in the hemispheric sunspots of sunspot cycle would just be changes in the angle of the interstellar magnetic field as the sun orbits ..
Carla says:
August 19, 2013 at 7:35 pm
while the polarity of the interstellar magnetic field changes sign every 11 years at the solar
maximum.
Typo or not, it is just wrong. Try to search for ‘polarity’ in the paper. There are 9 instances:
1: while the polarity of the interstellar magnetic field changes sign every 11 years at the solar…
2: of opposite IMF polarity…
3: although the IMF polarity was changed to the opposite every 11 years…
4: the global IMF polarity pattern…
5: Variations in the IMF polarity should exist behind the shock…
6: the polarity of the Sun’s magnetic dipole has a 22 year period…
7: The changes in the IMF polarity pattern…
8: 22 year magnetic-dipole polarity cycle…
9: Polarity reversals related to the 22 year period are very distinct…
The last one is about how the SW extends a bit into the interstellar medium taking the polarity reversals with it.
Nowhere is there talk about an undisturbed interstellar medium changing sign every 11 years, just the HCS pushing itself a bit into the interstellar medium.
gee makes perfect sense to me.
A good example of confirmation Bias.
You would prefer an undulating interstellar current sheet, raising and lowering the solar current sheet better?
lol
Why is that wrong, “interstellar magnetic field changing sign?”
Carla says:
August 19, 2013 at 8:06 pm
You would prefer an undulating interstellar current sheet, raising and lowering the solar current sheet better?
No, and it doesn’t.
Why is that wrong, “interstellar magnetic field changing sign?”
Because it does not. What the paper describes is the solar wind changing sign and that change being pushed a bit into the interstellar medium. Take away the Sun and there is no change in the interstellar medium.
leif says
Suppose you were to flip a coin and count heads; after, say, three heads your argument would say that there must be something that has to switch in order for the next toss to show tails. Actually, nothing needs to ‘switch’ in a random process.
henry says
Random? What are are the chances of me throwing the dice 6 x and I get:
6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
in that order….
Not very likely random?
Same with my results for the speed of warming/cooling (maximum temps.)
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2012/10/02/best-sine-wave-fit-for-the-drop-in-global-maximum-temperatures/
All my results, found to be going on a downward trend….
The proposed best fit in my graph is confirmed by /can be correlated with
a) isotopes research
b) nile flooding
c) sunspots
d) ozone results
e) planetary movement, mainly Uranus/Saturn throwing the switch
f) historical holidays (every 49 years) / biblical
g) and now….the magnetic field from the sun…
If you do not see that, you must be blind.
So I can predict what will happen to this graph, here
http://www.leif.org/research/Solar-Polar-Fields-1966-now.png
Namely, from 2010-2016 we will see the same as what can be seen 1966-1972:
the magnetic field will be hovering between 100 and -100, as it does now.
Solar cycle will only really start taking off in 2016, and in the end it will be the same strength of solar cycle 24
Only the cycles after that will become stronger again….In fact, successive cycles will mirror the previous 4 cycles, or two cycles, whatever (I think we should rather count 22 years for a single solar cycle)
So, from 2016-2027, it will be cold, very cold.
And it will be dry, at the higher latitudes, i.e. no weather, as is already becoming apparent from the decrease in tornado’s and storms
From 2021-2028 there will be severe droughts on the great plains.
Be aware.Be worried.
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/ocp/drought/dust_storms.shtml
More CO2 is not going to help us. You know that that is just a myth. 7 billion people depend on us, now here, you and me, to get it right now. Will you help me get this message out? I pray that you will.
WHAT MUST WE DO?
1) We urgently need to develop and encourage more agriculture at lower latitudes, like in Africa and/or South America. This is where we can expect to find warmth and more rain during a global cooling period.
2) We need to tell the farmers living at the higher latitudes (>40) who already suffered poor crops due to the cold and/ or due to the droughts that things are not going to get better there for the next few decades. It will only get worse as time goes by.
3) We also have to provide more protection against more precipitation at certain places of lower latitudes (FLOODS!),
Henry
HenryP says:
August 19, 2013 at 11:40 pm
Random? What are are the chances of me throwing the dice 6 x and I get: 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
in that order…
It is exactly the same as getting any other combination, e.g. 5, 1, 6, 3, 2, 4
.
leif says
It (the chance) is exactly the same as getting any other combination, e.g. 5, 1, 6, 3, 2, 4
henry says
if that is the order that you specify, before you roll the dice, then, indeed, it is the same, namely
1 / 6tothepower6
As I said, a very small chance. Something happening like that in front of your eyes is very NOT likely to be random or from a random process.
Anyway, I found your micro tesla graph interesting, so what I did is print it and set out the solar cycle number against the maximum micro tesla measured during that cycle
I got:
21 – 356
22 – 300
23 – 264
24 – 180
Trending on this, a linear trend gave me a correlation of 97.4 % and we will hit no maximum field (i.e. zero) in the middle of solar cycle 27.
A binomial trend gave me a correlation coefficient of 0.986 and we will hit no maximum field at the end of solar cycle 26…..
I then fitted a polynomial on this of the third order and got 100% correlation (can you believe this? what are the chances of this happening to me a such a random take of data) and we will hit zero maximum field before the end of solar cycle 25.
If you take these fits forward in time they will go negative, but you and I know that that will not be possible.So, there has to be a switch. It must be an abrupt switch. And it will happen during solar cycle 25, which as I said before, will be very slow to start up. I am convinced the switch will occur just before solar cycle 25 takes off.
Do you still maintain your untenable position here now that there will be no switch?
HenryP says:
August 20, 2013 at 7:06 am
if that is the order that you specify, before you roll the dice, then, indeed, it is the same, namely
1 / 6tothepower6
But since you look at the result after you have rolled [or the sun has] the chance is exactly ONE.
the maximum micro tesla measured during that cycle
Wrong way as there is noise and small random variations. You should measure the average value over, say, two years around the maximum values and plot that.
If you take these fits forward in time
Those fits have no predictive power [are just curve fitting]
I then fitted a polynomial on this of the third order and got 100% correlation (can you believe this?
A third order fit to four points will always give you 100% no matter what the points are, so, yes I can believe that.
So, there has to be a switch.
No, if you have tossed three heads in a row, no ‘switch’ is needed for the fourth toss to be tails.
HenryP, I can’t believe you proposed your 654321 roll as a significantly difficult role. This type of statistical chance question is now part of middle school problem solving. And the answer the students discover is exactly as Leif stated. You need to up your game.
HenryP, your argument suffers from the Ludic fallacy.
From Wikipedia: “Ludic fallacy – the belief that the outcomes of non-regulated random occurrences can be encapsulated by a statistic; a failure to take into account unknown unknowns in determining the probability of events taking place.”
My fingers type without my brain engaged. difficult “roll”, not difficult “role”.