Our resident solar expert, Dr. Leif Svalgaard, sends word of this new discovery.
Stanford solar scientists solve one of the sun’s mysteries
The sun’s magnetic field can play havoc with communications technology. Stanford scientists have now described one of the underlying processes that help form the magnetic field, which could help scientists predict its behavior.
By Bjorn Carey
Stanford solar scientists have solved one of the few remaining fundamental mysteries of how the sun works.
The mechanism, known as meridional flow, works something like a conveyor belt. Magnetic plasma migrates north to south on the sun’s surface, from the equator to the poles, and then cycles into the sun’s interior on its way back to the equator.
The rate and depth beneath the surface of the sun at which this process occurs is critical for predicting the sun’s magnetic and flare activity, but has remained largely unknown until now.
The solar scientists used the Stanford-operated Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI) – an instrument onboard NASA’s Solar Dynamic Observatory satellite – to track solar waves in much the way seismologists would study seismic movements beneath the surface of the Earth. Every 45 seconds for the past two years, the HMI’s Doppler radar snapped images of plasma waves moving across the sun’s surface.
By identifying patterns of sets of waves, the scientists could recognize how the solar materials move from the sun’s equator toward the poles, and how they return to the equator through the sun’s interior.
“Once we understood how long it takes the wave to pass across the exterior, we determined how fast it moves inside, and thus how deep it goes,” said Junwei Zhao, a senior research scientist at the Hansen Experimental Physics Laboratory at Stanford, and lead author on the paper.
Although solar physicists have long hypothesized such a mechanism, at least in general terms, the new observations redefine solar currents in a few ways. First, the returning currents occur 100,000 kilometers below the surface of the sun, roughly half as deep as suspected. As such, solar materials pass through the interior and return to the equator more quickly than hypothesized.
More startling, Zhao said, is that the equator-ward flow is actually sandwiched between two “layers” of pole-ward currents, a more complicated mechanism than previously thought, and one that could help refine predictions of the sun’s activity.
“Considered together, this means that our previously held beliefs about the solar cycle are not totally accurate, and that we may need to make accommodations,” Zhao said.
For example, some computer models projected that the current solar cycle would be strong, but observations have since showed it is actually much weaker than the previous cycle. This inconsistency could be due to the previously unknown inaccuracies of the meridional circulation mechanism used in the simulations.
Improving the accuracy of simulations, Zhao said, will produce a better picture of fluctuations of the sun’s magnetic field, which can interfere with satellites and communications technology on Earth. The sun’s magnetic field resets every 11 years – the next reset will occur sometime in the next few months – and there is evidence that changes in the meridional flow can influence how the magnetic field evolves during a particular cycle.
“We want to continue monitoring variations of the meridional flow,” he said, “so that we can better predict the next solar cycle, when it will come and how active it will be.”
The report was published in the online edition of The Astrophysical Journal Letters. It was co-authored by three other researchers at the Hansen Experimental Physics Laboratory – senior scientists Rick Bogart and Alexander Kosovichev and research associate Thomas Hartlep – as well as NASA senior scientist Tom Duvall. Phil Scherrer, a professor of physics at Stanford, is the principal investigator of the HMI project and supervised the study.
=================================================================
Leif adds an excerpt from the paper in an email:
Meridional flow inside the Sun plays an important role in redistributing rotational angular momentum and transporting magnetic flux, and is crucial to our understanding of the strength and duration of sunspot cycles according to flux-transport dynamo theories. At the Sun’s surface and in its shallow interior to at least 30 Mm in depth, the meridional flow is predominantly poleward with a peak speed of approximately 20 m/s.
The poleward plasma flow transports the surface magnetic flux from low latitudes to the polar region, causing the periodic reversals of the global magnetic field, a process important to the prediction of the solar cycles. The speed and variability of the meridional flow also play an important role in determining the strength and duration of the solar cycles, and the unusually long activity minimum at the end of Solar Cycle 23 during 2007–2010 was thought to be associated with an increase of the meridional flow speed during the declining phase of the previous cycle. Therefore, an accurate determination of the meridional flow profile is crucial to our understanding and prediction of solar magnetic activities.
Although the poleward meridional flow at the solar surface and in shallow depths has been well studied, the depth and speed profile of the equatorward return flow, which is expected to exist inside the solar convection zone to meet the mass conservation, largely remains a puzzle. It is generally assumed that the return flow is located near the base of the convection zone, although no convincing evidence had been reported.
The continuous Doppler observations by the Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager onboard the recently launched Solar Dynamics Observatory mission (SDO) allow us to measure and detect the long-sought equatorward flow. Our analysis, which takes into account the systematic center-to-limb effect that was recently found in the local helioseismology analysis techniques, gives a two-dimensional cross-section picture of the meridional flow inside the nearly entire solar convection zone, and reveals a double-cell circulation with the equatorward flow located near the middle of the convection zone.
Figure 1 shows the new picture suggested by the HMI data.
This new picture of the solar interior meridional circulation differs substantially from the previously widely believed picture of a single-cell circulation with the equatorward flow near the bottom of the convection zone [the Conveyor Belt Model]. Through removing a systematic center-to-limb effect that was only recently identified, our analysis corrects and improves the previous solar interior meridional flow profile given by Giles (1999) using a similar analysis procedure.
The new meridional circulation profile poses a challenge to the flux-transport dynamo models, but provides more physical constraints to these models creating a new opportunity to further understand how magnetic field is generated and how magnetic flux is transported inside the Sun. Past dynamo simulations have already demonstrated that a meridional circulation profile with multiple cells might not be able to reproduce the butterfly diagram and the phase relationship between the toroidal and poloidal fields as observed, unless the dynamo model was reconsidered. However, on the other hand, solar convection simulations have shown the possibility of multi-cell circulation with a shallow equatorward flow (e.g.,Miesch et al. 2006; Guerrero et al. 2013), demonstrating that our analysis results are reasonable.
Moreover, a recent dynamo simulation, with the double-cell meridional circulation profile incorporated, showed that the solar magnetic properties could be robustly reproduced after taking into consideration of turbulent pumping, turbulent diffusivity, and other factors (Pipin & Kosovichev 2013). All these studies, together with our observational results, suggest a rethinking of how the solar magnetic flux is generated and transported inside the Sun.
Abstract: http://iopscience.iop.org/2041-8205/774/2/L29
pdf here: http://www.leif.org/EOS/ApJL-2013-Meridional-Flow.pdf
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Bart says:
August 31, 2013 at 12:41 pm
It was completely relevant. Stating that hundreds of people have worked on a problem gives no indication of the quality of their work.
I have studied this for four decades and know most of the good work and personally many of the people and vouch for the quality. And also know which ones are junk.
No, those are merely rules. Rules can be derived empirically.
That was true for Quantum mechanism a century ago. Today those rules are derived from deeper principles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_formulations_of_quantum_mechanics
Science today is not a bunch of empirical rules.
But, understanding is often not necessary to make abundant use of empirically derived knowledge.
Except that modern science is not based on empirically derived rules. And to make progress and to expand the frontier of knowledge, old empirical rules won’t do.
Your claim is that they cannot be very accurate.
My claim is that with the modern understanding the rules are extremely accurate, an example is precision cosmology.
Carla says:
August 31, 2013 at 1:22 pm
Well then according to Voyager 1, instead of the gnats gyrating around the magnetic field like they had been, they are NOW running parallel.
No, they cannot. Electric charges ALWAYS spiral around magnetic field lines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyroradius
Carla says:
August 31, 2013 at 10:19 am
This ‘Super Halo’ out to 1AU is a consistent and persistent.
the ‘out to 1 AU’ is spurious. If we had a spacecraft at 15 AU, they would say ‘out to 15 AU’, and so on.
“This superhalo appears to be present at all times, even in the absence of solar or interplanetary activity, and thus appears to be the electron counterpart of the power-law-tail suprathermal ions above solar wind and pickup ion energies”
Thus is not part of the solar wind per se, but from a population of higher energy solar energetic particles, but with much smaller number density than the solar wind particles and playing no role in the general scheme of things.
Leif Svalgaard says:
August 31, 2013 at 2:19 pm
Your points do not say what you appear to think they say, but I am tired and see no point to further discussion on these matters.
Bart says:
August 31, 2013 at 2:38 pm
Your points do not say what you appear to think they say, but I am tired and see no point to further discussion on these matters.
Granted that a certain minimum level of knowledge is needed and the lack thereof makes discussion difficult.
So what about that hemispheric asymmetry? Maybe nothing out of kilter but do we know whither or wilter?
======
kim says:
August 31, 2013 at 10:40 pm
So what about that hemispheric asymmetry?
The sun always has such asymmetry: http://www.leif.org/research/ApJ88587.pdf
http://www.leif.org/research/Asymmetric-Solar-Polar-Field-Reversals-talk.pdf
Is it so that the asymmetry is more pronounced in the Grand Minimums, like the Maunder, and perhaps the soon to be Eddy?
================
What shifts these forces off the equatorial plane, and why more during the grand minima, and how might Earth’s climate be moderated? Now Leif, I expect a good answer because I know you’ve been thinking about this for two score years and more.
=====================
Hi Doc
You have reached semi-divine status (sais google transltor) in the far reaches of Scandinavia.
“PISTE kysy vaikka siltä puolijumalanasi pitämältäsi Leif Svalgardilta .”
vukcevic says:
September 1, 2013 at 6:37 am
You have reached semi-divine status (sais google transltor) in the far reaches of Scandinavia.
And I ain’t even dead yet.
kim says:
September 1, 2013 at 12:26 am
What shifts these forces off the equatorial plane, and why more during the grand minima
I’m not sure it has much to do with grand minima. Here are my thoughts on asymmetries:
http://www.leif.org/research/Asymmetric-Solar-Polar-Field-Reversals-talk.pdf
Mean period for a single rotation as observed from the Earth is given by Carrington number = 27.2753 days.
Idle mind asks :
Since there is existence of latitudinal differential rotation, why not then possibility of inner radial differential rotation? If so, what would be the rotation number for an inner sphere critical to the solar dynamo to give ‘22 year’ magnetic cycle
Idle mind calculates
27.183 days, the difference is only 0.34%
Idle mind asks:
Is the Stanford Doppler measurement system capable of such resolution?
henry@bart
note that p1 +p2 = 44 years
which indeed is relevant in terms of my collected data
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2012/10/02/best-sine-wave-fit-for-the-drop-in-global-maximum-temperatures/
vukcevic says:
September 1, 2013 at 11:22 am
Mean period for a single rotation as observed from the Earth is given by Carrington number = 27.2753 days.
No, this not correct. The Carrington period has no physical significance. It is derived by Carrington from a few years of observations as a convenient [and arbitrary] coordinate system.
why not then possibility of inner radial differential rotation?
To first approximation there isn’t any [in the convection zone], except for the fact that under a certain depth the differential rotation disappears altogether.You cam ;earn more there http://solarphysics.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrsp-2009-1/download/lrsp-2009-1Color.pdf
Idle mind calculates…
Idle minds rarely, if ever, know what they are doing, so no significance can be attached to what they spout.
Is the Stanford Doppler measurement system capable of such resolution?
Absolutely, see link above.
@Janice Moore
I just loved that comment that you made earlier, (it seems to have gone lost in this thread?)
just remember that LS is not a believer (in God), so he is also not getting your message.
Leif just believes that everything you see around you is just co-incidental
e.g.
if you believe there is no God (like Leif ls), you are actually saying that you believe that out of absolutely nothing and guided by absolutely nobody, an incredible intelligent and intellectual person (like yourself) with a material body came into being.
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2011/07/23/why-do-i-believe-in-god/
Idle minds rarely, if ever, know what they are doing, so no significance can be attached to what they spout.
Ah well, it is worth suffering degree of usual discourtesy considering the value of the link so I shall say tanks.
HenryP says:
September 1, 2013 at 12:02 pm
if you believe there is no God (like Leif ls), you are actually saying that you believe that out of absolutely nothing and guided by absolutely nobody, an incredible intelligent and intellectual person (like yourself) with a material body came into being.
A billion Hindues might disagree with your conception of a god, but WUWT is not the place to spout religious convictions, and I would think that if a creature like me [not to speak about you] is the best a god can come up with, she has not done a particularly good job to deserve elevation to a God, with the attendant worship, ritual, and idolatry.
That was Thanks
vukcevic says:
September 1, 2013 at 12:14 pm
That was Thanks
‘tanks’ from an idle mind will suffice.
Leif says
A billion Hindues
Henry says
What is a Hindues?
Why don’t you try a speller check?
HenryP says:
September 1, 2013 at 12:24 pm
What is a Hindues? Why don’t you try a speller check?
Proves my point about the failure of your god to produce in me [and you!] an incredibly intelligent being who needs a spellchecker and a grammar checker to realize that a ‘billion xxxs’ is not singular. To the feeble-minded failures of your god out there I offer a link, that might be helpful http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu or https://www.facebook.com/BangladeshiHindues
Please keep your god out of WUWT
vukcevic says:
September 1, 2013 at 11:22 am
Mean period for a single rotation as observed from the Earth is given by Carrington number = 27.2753 days.
Idle mind asks :
…Since there is existence of latitudinal differential rotation,..
—
Latitudinal differential rotatation that changes and evolves.
Vuk’s how bout an educated guess as to whether polar latitudes are rotating slower in this cycle 24 than in cycle 23?
THE HIGH-LATITUDE BRANCH OF THE SOLAR TORSIONAL OSCILLATION IN THE RISING PHASE OF CYCLE 24
R. Howe et al. 2013 ApJ 767 L20 doi:10.1088/2041-8205/767/1/L20
R. Howe1, J. Christensen-Dalsgaard2,3, F. Hill4, R. Komm4, T. P. Larson5, M. Rempel3, J. Schou5, and M. J. Thompson3,6
We use global heliseismic data from the Global Oscillation Network Group, the Michelson Doppler Imager on board the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory, and the Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager on board the Solar Dynamics Observatory, to examine the behavior, during the rising phase of Solar Cycle 24, of the migrating zonal flow pattern known as the torsional oscillation. Although the high-latitude part of the pattern appears to be absent in the new cycle when the flows are derived by subtracting a mean across a full solar cycle, it can be seen if we subtract the mean over a shorter period in the rising phase of each cycle, and these two mean rotation profiles differ significantly at high latitudes. This indicates that the underlying high-latitude rotation has changed; we speculate that this is in response to weaker polar fields, as suggested by a recent model…
Carla says:
September 1, 2013 at 1:43 pm
whether polar latitudes are rotating slower in this cycle 24 than in cycle 23? …
we speculate that this is in response to weaker polar fields
Because of the Maxwell stresses it would seem to me also that small variations in rotation is due to changes in the magnetic field strength, but this is basically uncharted territory. Here is the paper: http://www.leif.org/EOS/TO-Polar-Fields-Howe.pdf
A problem with their analysis is that their method forces the two hemispheres to rotate at the same rate. We know that they don’t as you can see on this plot from Mount Wilson: http://obs.astro.ucla.edu/images/smdopp.jpg The Northern Hemisphere is much too blue [slower] while the South is much too red [faster]. The velocities were measured relative to a symmetric average rotation curve. We do not know the reason for these asymmetries.
More about the evolution of solar rotation..
INTERNAL-CYCLE VARIATION OF SOLAR DIFFERENTIAL
ROTATION
K. J. LI1,2, J. L. XIE1,3, X. J. SHI1,3
17 May 2013
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.3970.pdf
Abstract
…The rotation rate at the solar Equator seems to decrease since cycle 10 onwards…
For the solar surface rotation rate at the solar Equator (the coefficient A),
there exists a secular decrease of statistical significance
even since Cycle 12 onwards (Javaraiah, Bertello & Ulrich 2005a, 2005b; Li
et al. 2013)…
This would sort of mess up those cycles we see being peddled around here.
Carla says:
September 1, 2013 at 4:57 pm
…The rotation rate at the solar Equator seems to decrease since cycle 10 onwards…
Old news, see Figure 1 of http://www.leif.org/research/ast10867.pdf but the change is small.
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 1, 2013 at 4:41 pm
Carla says:
September 1, 2013 at 1:43 pm
whether polar latitudes are rotating slower in this cycle 24 than in cycle 23? …
we speculate that this is in response to weaker polar fields
Because of the Maxwell stresses it would seem to me also that small variations in rotation is due to changes in the magnetic field strength, but this is basically uncharted territory. Here is the paper: http://www.leif.org/EOS/TO-Polar-Fields-Howe.pdf
—
Thank you very much, for the link to this paper Dr. S.
If structures on the surface, create resistance and rigidity in rotation to slow it down, why is this just the opposite for polar regions.?
In the case below what is meant by masking?
THE HIGH-LATITUDE BRANCH OF THE SOLAR TORSIONAL OSCILLATION IN THE RISING PHASE OF CYCLE 24
R. Howe et al. 2013
http://www.leif.org/EOS/TO-Polar-Fields-Howe.pdf
Introduction
…Rempel (2012) found that if the polar fields weaken—as has indeed been observed
in recent years (Hoeksema 2009)—
the overall rotation at high latitudes slows down,
masking the appearance of the poleward branch when the rotation-rate residuals
are formed by subtracting a long-term average…