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
lsvalgaard says:
December 4, 2013 at 8:09 pm
Carla says:
December 4, 2013 at 7:38 pm
Current sheets like the heliocurrent sheet (sheath), contains Double Layers or is made up of? That must be fluctuating over solar cycle?
No, such current sheets a ‘drift currents’. Charges gyrate [circles with arrows] around magnetic field lines, and where the is a change of the direction of the field lines, charges will move in the same direction and a current [big arrow] results:
[ http://www.leif.org/research/Current-Sheet-Cartoon.png ]
Near the heliopause many currents sheets are bunched up against each other:
http://www.leif.org/research/Heliospheric%20Current%20Sheet%20Cartoon.pdf
No double layers involved
————-
Thank you Dr. S..
More interactions than you can shake a stick at..
What about multiple current sheets..interacting with each other.
As in the helios current sheet interacting with the Saturns current sheet. Or if we confirm them (it is suggested) that the heliosphere is located inside of a rotating interstellar current sheet near a boundary of another rotating current sheet of interstellar size proportion. Now that’s some layers.. specially since the solar sheet rises and falls, creating special boundarys during its course..orbit..
Another solar related thread started about some “Giant Convection Cells Found on the Sun,” here at WUWT today.. on my way..
Carla says:
December 5, 2013 at 5:50 pm
What about multiple current sheets..interacting with each other.
They don’t. If a current sheet runs into a stronger magnetic field the current sheet is basically locally destroyed.
Thanks Dr. S.
And I am not trying to be you over the head with this, but did just happen upon this..now back to that other solar topic..
1982: Disruption of a neutral current sheet[18]
18^ Stenzel, R. L., “Double layer formation during current sheet disruptions in a reconnection experiment” (1982) Geophysical Research Letters, vol. 9, June 1982, pp. 680–683.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_layer_(plasma)
Carla says:
December 5, 2013 at 6:46 pm
18^ Stenzel, R. L., “Double layer formation during current sheet disruptions in a reconnection experiment”
Yeah, double layers are Nature’s way of discharging currents and disrupting magnetic structures.
So Leif you are saying everything is fine . We are not headed for a grand minimum and Sun is behaving as expected?
crystal says:
December 7, 2013 at 2:47 am
We are not headed for a grand minimum and Sun is behaving as expected?
The Sun is behaving as expected [at least by some of us], and that includes the possibility of a Grand Minimum.
Allan said:
It’s like this – the warming on Earth actually causes increased activity of the Sun!
Same principle as “CO2 drives temperature” – when we know that CO2 LAGS temperature at all measured time scales.
Do I need to say sarc off?
(Not directed at you Phil – rather my observation on the obviously false and foolish global warming “crisis”, the ECS debate, etc.)
P.S. I suggest global cooling starts by 2020 or sooner. Bundle up.
philjourdan says:
December 4, 2013 at 6:55 am
@Allan MacRae – Well, I was actually looking for a serious answer, but then I did not really expect one. Your satire was still well worth the read. Thanks.
lsvalgaard says on December 4, 2013 at 7:04 am
Well, it is not a GIVEN that the sun has been the most active in the past 300 years during the latter half of the 20th century. It is very likely not true, so there is really no ‘coincidence’ to speak of.
Allan again:
Jeez Leif – what a relief!
I mean, if Earth gets any warmer, then the Sun might, like, explode or something! :-}
Regards to all, Allan
P.S. Global cooling has started in Calgary.
Record cold for the year to date today: -28.7 °C on 2013-12-07… and its not even January or February…
lsvalgaard says:
December 5, 2013 at 12:44 pm
“I think you are trying to push your theory and don’t like what you are hearing.”
I have no issue with how 10Be is deposited or the method used to assign ice-core depth to date, it seems very straight forward, and I am not “pushing a theory”, You appear to be making up suggestions for the benefit of WUWT readers that I am.
There was an assertion you made that a 50% increase in 10Be concentration is a result of “weather, climate“, which my immediate response is to question and discuss.
I have three specific points of inquiry,
1. Can 10Be be produced in our solar system other than Earth?
2. Can 10Be exist in space, or anywhere else other than Earth in our solar system?
3. Can 10Be be produced extra-terrestrially and be deposited on Earth?
But also,
Regarding the 50% increase in 10Be concentration it is thought this is a result of precipitation and glacial melt depositing accumulated layers of 10Be down to lower layers.
If a period of higher solar activity lasting between 50-65 years produces a warmer climate on Earth and the conditions favorable for glacial melt, this will show up as a lag between the SSN and the 10Be proxy correct?
Sparks says:
December 7, 2013 at 12:02 pm
1. Can 10Be be produced in our solar system other than Earth?
Yes in any planetary atmosphere that contains O, N, C. But you can’t get that into to the ice on Earth.
2. Can 10Be exist in space, or anywhere else other than Earth in our solar system?
Absolutely, but again you can’t get that into to the ice on Earth.
3. Can 10Be be produced extra-terrestrially and be deposited on Earth?
In principle, yes. E.g. in meteorites, but in practice that would not be dispersed into atoms in the ice caps.
Regarding the 50% increase in 10Be concentration it is thought this is a result of precipitation and glacial melt depositing accumulated layers of 10Be down to lower layers.
No, more likely a result of changed patterns of circulation of air in the atmosphere, but this has not been quantified or modeled in detail.
If a period of higher solar activity lasting between 50-65 years produces a warmer climate on Earth and the conditions favorable for glacial melt, this will show up as a lag between the SSN and the 10Be proxy correct?
Ah, there is the real rub. I think the answer is no. The lag between the SSN of 10Be is of the order of 1-2 years.
Just for interest, here are two graphs, the first one is of 10Be (orange) and 10Be with a 70 year offset (blue), the second is 10Be 1600-1994 vs SSN 1600-2012.
1. http://thetempestspark.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/10be-70-year-offset.gif
2. http://thetempestspark.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/10be-001-v-ssn.gif
Sparks What is the source of the !0 Be data you are showing?
Sparks how about plotting a say 21 year centered moving average though the 10 Be data- might illustrate your point better – though I think I can eyeball what you’re getting at.
Norman,
I used the NGRIP Ice Core 600 Year Annual 10Be Data, It can be found here ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/greenland/summit/ngrip/ngrip-10be.txt