The NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center has updated their monthly graph set and it is becoming even more clear that we are past solar max, and that solar max has been a dud. “The slump” continues not only in sunspot activity, but also other metrics. And, tellingly, Dr. David Hathaway has now aligned his once way too high solar prediction with that of WUWT’s resident solar expert, Dr. Leif Svalgaard. Of course, at this point, I’m not sure “prediction” is the right word for Hathaway’s update.
The SSN count remains low:
Note the divergence between the model prediction in red, and the actual values.
The 10.7cm radio flux continues slumpy:
The Ap geomagnetic index remains low, unchanged, and indicates a tepid solar magnetic dynamo. We’ve had well over 6 years now (and about to be seven) of a lower than expected Ap index.
From the WUWT Solar reference page, Dr Leif Svalgaard has this plot comparing the current cycle 24 with recent solar cycles. The prediction is that solar max via sunspot count will peak in late 2013/early 2014:
But, another important 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 indeed happened.
Image from Dr. Leif Svalgaard – Click the pic to view at source.
In other news, Dr. David Hathaway has updated his prediction page on 9/5/13, and suggests solar max may have already occurred. He says:
The current prediction for Sunspot Cycle 24 gives a smoothed sunspot number maximum of about 66 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 flat 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.
![ssn_predict_l[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/ssn_predict_l1.gif)
You can watch this video that shows 5 years of cycle 24 predictions from Hathaway, as they shrink from 2005 to 2010. Solar cycle 24 predictions were higher then, and exceeded the SSN max for cycle 23.
Dr. Svalgaard’s prediction in 2005 (with Lund) was for a solar cycle 24 max SSN of 75, and was totally against the consensus for solar cycle 24 predictions of the time. It looks like that might not even be reached. From his briefing then:
Source: http://www.leif.org/research/Cycle%2024%20Prediction%20Lund.pdf
We live in interesting times.
More at the WUWT Solar reference page.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
We need to stock up on thermal underwear before the rush starts or emigrate to countries closer to the equator.
Do I recall correctly that back in early 2007 WUWT reported a stunning and unexpected downward step shift in one of these metrics? Didn’t see it any of the figures shown here. Wonder if it would have presaged what’s going on in this report.
Lief can get your goat now and again (until you get used to his style) but I’ve come to appreciate his steadying influence in the global warming debate. He makes a good prediction as an odd man out in the solar field but doesn’t jump on any bandwagons. He harpoons bad science in the warming literature and in the skeptical stuff. He resists being a Maunder Mininum/solar influence star that many skeptics would like to see him be, and he calmly focuses on the science wherever, in his view, it leads. I have to grudgingly admit he’s taken considerable heat out of my thinking in the debate.
Could end up as a ”climate refugee” as things get colder.
Most of us said it was the sun not CO2. We are right, of course.
difference in solar insolation…sunlight reaching the earth…from the low to the high of the sunspot cycle…is 0.5%…and there is no match of the 11 year sunspot cycle with observed earthly temp variations…if low solar activity persists for a long period …like the maunder minimum…it may make a difference…the cosmic ray theory…which depends on the solar cycle…has the same problem of not conforming to observations…just like the now flat hockey stick…the only one that works is my theory of a thirty year cycle…warming 1919-1950…cooling 1950-1980…warming 1980-2010…cooling since then….very simple…..but it works perfectly with observations….i think it has something to do with ocean circulation…which is very poorly understood
Like ‘the pause’ in surface temperatures, ‘the slump’ in solar activity continues
an amazing coincidence. who’d have thunk.
My prediction was actually made in September 2004, submitted to a journal in October 2004, and published in January 2005: http://www.leif.org/research/Cycle%2024%20Smallest%20100%20years.pdf
I noted that “As we approach minimum and the new cycle gets underway, the solar polar field precursor method improves markedly … It is a strength of the polar field precursor method that the predictions improve in this manner” So with the polar fields measured after 2004 the prediction was lowered to 72 and then to 70 where it has stood since. The Livingston & Penn effect http://www.leif.org/research/apjl2012-Liv-Penn-Svalg.pdf if continued might mean that the sunspot number is becoming too small compared to other solar indices and that the SSN may not in future be a good measure of solar activity: Figure 13 and the discussion in http://www.leif.org/research/swsc130003p.pdf
I recall years ago (?) Leif made a prediction of a really low peak of 70-ish for SSN. How wrong he was! 🙂
A bit off-topic, but I was wondering the manner in which WUWT is paid for the video adverts between the posting and the comments. Does WUWT get paid only if we click on the adverts (which is the standard click-thru Internet model) or is there payment each time an advert appears?
gopal, that is a 60 year cycle, not 30.
OK…60 …30…take your pick…but you get the general idea
johnmarshall says: @ur momisugly September 13, 2013 at 6:06 am
Could end up as a ”climate refugee” as things get colder. Most of us said it was the sun not CO2. We are right, of course.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Dr. Leif Svalgaard and Pamela Gray should be here soon to tell you that the sun doesn’t influence the climate.
The other thing that I find strange is the recent lack of Earth directed solar flares and CMEs. Promising spots appear on the left limb as viewed from earth, but seem to become weaker and more disorganised as the move across the surface.
The Livingstone and Penn effect is also a puzzle and I wonder how this will effect sunspot complexity and subsequent flaring.
I disagree that we are past solar max, there will be more peaks, but the timing of solar max is somewhat arbitrary anyway. I think both 2013 and 2014 will have higher annualy averaged sunspot numbers than 2012.
Tenuc says:
September 13, 2013 at 6:26 am
The other thing that I find strange is the recent lack of Earth directed solar flares and CMEs.
The number of CMEs in this cycle [24] is actually a bit higher than in the previous cycle [23] even with the sunspot number being only half of what it was at the previous maximum.
Hey madman 2001. The way to be safe and make sure Anthony gets paid is to click on the ad as you scroll past it, but hit the volume button on the ad window to shut the sound off and let it run while you read through the comments.
> Of course, at this point, I’m not sure “prediction” is the right word for Hathaway’s update.
One term I’m not very fond of is “nowcasting.” In the northeast it’s frequently used when a nor’easter or tropical storm has arrived, and predictions are based on little more than current conditions – track, speed, radar, and current steering conditions.
We’re in an analogous phase of the solar cycle, we know we’re on the downslope, we know what it looks like, the only uncertainty is how long it will be before solar minimum, but it’s still worth tracking current conditions.
Gary Pearse says: September 13, 2013 at 6:06 am …
Yeah, totally agree, as I’m sure 97% of all WUWTers would.
Certainly you people do not understand the severity of the situation. It’s clear that the sun is burning out and only massive international action can save us. We must find environmentally-sensitive ways to store sunlight with a program that will be funded by a tax based on how much sunlight strikes you and your property – um, except for the property owned by the federal government, of course – and recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize… 😉
Svensmark: “Global warming stopped and a cooling is beginning” – “enjoy global warming while it lasts”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/09/10/svensmark-global-warming-stopped-and-a-cooling-is-beginning-enjoy-global-warming-while-it-lasts/
In Danish: »Vi anbefaler vores venner at nyde den globale opvarmning, mens den varer«.
For BobW in NC: The “step change”, as he called it, was noticed by Anthony as having occurred in mid-2005, as I recall. Although that particular graph/indice that he was discussing is not reproduced in this post, you can see the effects of what he noticed in the IES Solar Cycle AP Progression graph, above. Note especially what happens between 2005 and 2006 – in all the years since, that indice has never gotten close to pre-2005 levels.
Agust Bjarnason says:
September 13, 2013 at 6:45 am
Svensmark: “Global warming stopped and a cooling is beginning”
It has actually not cooled either.
I have a question for you Anthony and others. I’m a firm skeptic of the AGW scam and the evidence against it is just too overwhelming (MWP hotter globally than today, no tropospheric hotspot, CO2 lags 800 years behind Temperature rise, no sea level rise increase, no significant sea temperature increase, no warming in the past 17 years etc)
My question is can local concentrations of CO2 emissions in Urban areas for example create temperature differentials and change circulatory patterns?
My guess is very little as it could not be cumulative as gaseous equilibrium dispersion would make the bulk relatively homogenous over time with just the latest emissions localised.
It’s probably a silly question but the Alarmists have turned to extreme weather as global temps have stalled and the only two ways CO2 can have an impact are hidden heat(of which none has been found to account for the stall) and localised circulatory influences as global temps have not significantly increased in recent times.
EricH says:
September 13, 2013 at 5:44 am
“We need to stock up on thermal underwear before the rush starts or emigrate to countries closer to the equator.”
My prediction: When Mini-Ice-Age2 settles in, PETA raises money selling furs.
Chris Marrou says:
September 13, 2013 at 6:44 am
Quick! Send Cillian Murphy with a REALLY big bomb…..
Chris Marrou, I assume that if I place those black sunlight-catching panels on my roof, and convert sunlight to electriciy and send it down the wires to share with everyone else, that I won’t be taxed as much? Maybe even given a bit of a rebate?