Method uses the Ap geomagnetic index, which has been in a slump since October 2005:
The Hockey Schtick tips us to a paper published today in Advances in Space Research predicts that if the current lull in solar activity “endures in the 21st century the Sun shall enter a Dalton-like grand minimum. It was a period of global cooling.”
The graph they produced with the paper:
The author uses a new “empirical technique invoking three-cycle quasi-periodicity (TCQP) in Ap index” of solar geomagnetic activity to predict sunspot activity several years in advance.
The author notes solar activity has been at a higher level in the 20th century saying”
“the Sun has emerged from a Grand Maximum, which includes solar cycle 19, the most active solar cycle in the last 400 years. Earth was cooler in Grand Minima. The trend line indicates we have entered a period of low solar activity.”
Note the red horizontal line on the graph show 50-year mean solar activity was at the highest levels of the past 300 years during the latter half of the 20th century.
The author also has a slide show that has some interesting elements. For example, here is their TCQP of the Ap Index:
They summarize:
The paper:
An empirical approach to predicting the key parameters for a sunspot number cycle
H.S. Ahluwalia University of New Mexico, Department of Physics & Astronomy
Abstract
The common methodologies used to predict the smooth sunspot number (SSN) at peak (Rmax) and the rise time (Tr) for a cycle are noted. The estimates based on geomagnetic precursors give the best prediction of Rmax for five SSN cycles (20-24). In particular, an empirical technique invoking three-cycle quasi-periodicity (TCQP) in Ap index has made accurate predictions of Rmax and Tr for two consecutive SSN cycles (23 and 24). The dynamo theories are unable to account for TCQP. If it endures in the 21st century the Sun shall enter a Dalton-like grand minimum. It was a period of global cooling. The current status of the ascending phase of cycle 24 is described and the delayed reversal of the solar polar field reversal in the southern hemisphere in September 2013 is noted.
Open access here: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273117713007473
Annual Mean Sunspot Numbers
Grand maximum in the 20th century?
w.
At least it won’t be like the Maunder Minimum… or, is everyone still just guessing right now?
Somebody please help the liberal arts major who’s got no statistics training. What’s different about their method, and is it legit?
Willis Eschenbach says:
December 2, 2013 at 4:45 pm
Grand maximum in the 20th century?
w.
>>>>>>>
Wait to check his celestial “math experts”. Then it will be okay….
If correct, it would be funny to see the AGW believers try to explain the Global Cooling.
Also, weren’t there other studies suggesting we’d be entering a cycle similar to the Dalton-like minimum?
Jim, if we look at the progression of Grand Minima after the Mediaeval Maximum, the Wolf and Spörer minima that preceded the Maunder were progressively deeper.
If (big ‘if’, that) the sequence repeats itself, we’ll not see another Maunder for some centuries, but will suffer lesser Grand Minima leading up to it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon14_with_activity_labels.svg
No amount of lipstick will make the curve fitted pig look attractive IMHO. I’m not saying there may be some merit in the method but it’s hardly hard empirical science is it? Lets face it, no-one has a frickin clue! Hedge fund anyone?
Inb4 “it’s the sun, stupid”.
Leif 3… 2…. 1…..
Russ in TX says:
December 2, 2013 at 5:19 pm
Somebody please help the liberal arts major who’s got no statistics training. What’s different about their method, and is it legit?
>>>>>
Russ, statistics mean you can spin the facts to your advantage. Avoid the “statistics” and go with the facts.
No charge.
(BTW, I sometimes live in TX also.)
Jeef says:
December 2, 2013 at 5:28 pm
Inb4 “it’s the sun, stupid”.
>>>>>
I love it….
I still find it difficult to believe this will have a major impact. Assuming the sun has these low points every couple of centuries, how does one explain the MWP, the RWP, the Holocene Optimum? Clearly, there’s more to the climate then solar sunspot cycles.
Year 2050
A little of this, a little of that, throw in something else and wham we’re in another LIA. Everyone will be looking for the “Missing Heat” just to stay warm.. All the while CO2 kept rising (so much for that amplification and sensitivity numbers).
Paging Dr. Svalgaard… Dr. Svalgaard please pick up the nearest white courtesy phone….
Since no one else has said it:
“…but the source of the energy would have to be massive, on the order of our own sun!”
UnfrozenCavemanMD says:
December 2, 2013 at 5:40 pm
Paging Dr. Svalgaard… Dr. Svalgaard please pick up the nearest white courtesy phone….
>>>>>
The groupies come out after dark.
“If it endures in the 21st century the Sun shall enter a Dalton-like grand minimum.”
I suppose if it endures longer than a Dalton-like grand minimum, the Sun shall enter a Maunder-like grand minimum.
Perhaps the full paper has more beef.
I’ve found Dr Leif Svalgaard’s arguments against a Grand Maximum in the 20th century convincing. If he’s right, then I wonder what the impact will be on the conclusions of this paper, because it’ll mean they’ve been using incorrect data as input to their empirical approach.
James Allison says:
December 2, 2013 at 5:29 pm
Leif 3… 2…. 1…..
UnfrozenCavemanMD says:
December 2, 2013 at 5:40 pm
Paging Dr. Svalgaard… Dr. Svalgaard please pick up the nearest white courtesy phone….
=========================
I’m with you guys. I’ll have to look in the morning to see if he’s weighed in.
Graeme W says:
December 2, 2013 at 5:54 pm
I’ve found Dr Leif Svalgaard’s arguments against a Grand Maximum in the 20th century convincing. If he’s right, then I wonder what the impact will be on the conclusions of this paper, because it’ll mean they’ve been using incorrect data as input to their empirical approach.
>>>>>>>>
Sycophants are so amusing.
Graeme, if it gets colder then you are an ice cube. If it get warmer, you will fry.
Hint: Think for yourself.
Given the sun was the most active in the past 300 years during the latter half of the 20th century, and that “coincided” with the rapid warming that seems to have abated, how does the theory work (I heard Gavin Schmidt voice it) that the warming of the latter half of the 20th century could NOT be due to the sun?
I am curious how that was ruled out given the studies that show the sun activity was very active.
I saw a graph somewhere of global temperatures plotted against AP and it looked a better correlation than ssn, but I can’t find it now
geran, if Graeme says “I’ve found Dr Leif Svalgaard’s arguments against a Grand Maximum in the 20th century convincing…” that means that he is thinking for himself. Specifically evaluating an argument rather than taking it on faith. I also find Dr. Svalgaard’s arguments convincing, not because I am a “groupie”, and not because I fail to “think for myself,” but because he has done the hard work of evaluating the methodology and validity of sunspot numbers as recorded, and found a problem that has yet to receive a refutation that I find convincing. If you have a refutation of Dr. Svalgaard’s conclusion against a 20th century “grand maximum” I am quite sure he would like to know it.
According to Penn & Livingston’s paper, if the Umbral Magnetic Field falls below 1,500 gauss (currently at around 2,000 gauss and falling at around 35 gauss/year), there will be insufficient magnetic force to hold any sunspots together by around 2025.
Although there are many people I respect that don’t believe there is a clear causation/correlation between sunspots and global temperature trends, there are many respected scientists that believe such a causation/correlation exists.
As luck would have it, it’s likely the debate will be settled one way or another in around 10 years. If temperature trends continue to fall during low sunspot activity, while CO2 emissions continue to accelerate, it’ll be impossible for CAGW to survive.
It’s now been 17 years and 1 month with a -0.000C/decade global tropospheric temperature trend, with falling HADCRUT4 temperature trends since 2001, despite 1/3rd of ALL manmade CO2 emissions since 1750 made over the last 17 years…. Oh, my….
I can’t believe CAGW is still taken seriously. It’s become such an awful joke.
And so it goes….until liberty and reason are restored…..
UnfrozenCavemanMD says:
December 2, 2013 at 6:26 pm
“…If you have a refutation of Dr. Svalgaard’s conclusion against a 20th century “grand maximum” I am quite sure he would like to know it.”
>>>>>>
OK, this is the 21st century.
(Like I said, sycophants are so much fun.)