The NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center released their January 2014 solar data, and it has one small surprise, the 10.7 radio flux is the highest ever in cycle 24, the other metrics, not so much.
SSN has been about where the much adjusted prediction line says it should be for the last four months.
The 10.7cm radio flux hits a new high.
Meanwhile, the Ap magnetic index continues its slump as it has since October 2005, bumping along the bottom.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Sparks says:
February 3, 2014 at 8:41 pm
“My own prediction was 70, but the panel felt that it was easier to reach consensus on 90, and that the uncertainty is such that there is really no significant different between 90 and 70.”
Yet so far, the average of the solar peak seems to be about 60.
The peak so far in the smoothed number [which is what we predict has been 67 or ‘about 70’
John Day says:
February 3, 2014 at 8:45 pm
Leif, I wrote ranking not ratio.
Ranking means little [1000 is ranked higher than 999.9, but is hardly any different], the ratio is what is important, so I [wrongly] assumed that you meant ratio.
Brant Ra says:
February 3, 2014 at 8:46 pm
I said the sun indirectly caused the polar vortex. I was wrong. The sun is directly responsible in that the solar wind interaction with the IMF affects that magnetosphere and thereby affecting the polar vortex.
And you are still wrong. There is no evidence for that. On the contrary: the solar wind interaction is the same in both hemispheres, but breakdowns of the polar vortex almost exclusively happen in the northern hemisphere.
steven mosher,
you were a kid in 1962
lsvalgaard says:
February 3, 2014 at 8:52 pm
“The peak so far in the smoothed number [which is what we predict has been 67 or ‘about 70”
Are you getting a smoothed number 67 due to the two spikes before and after the magnetic field reversal? Which was my call two years ago, and you disagreed with me then too.
Sparks says:
February 3, 2014 at 9:14 pm
Are you getting a smoothed number 67 due to the two spikes before and after the magnetic field reversal?
66.9 is the official smoothed number which is calculated as the average of two yearly means one month apart. Cannot be cherry picked based on anything. If you go to the bottom of http://www.solen.info/solar/ you can see the run of the smoothed numbers [and of F10.7]. The projected smoothed maximum is 69.6 as you can see.
Oh, come on now! I respect your judgment, but I have got to ask you re-think this answer. Turn your desktop globe upside down: You know, the one with all the land surrounding a small almost-all-frozen tiny ocean at the top. 8<)
Now, replace that tiny ocean with a single continuous ice-covered land mass. (Antarctic area + permanent ice shelves = 17.5 Mkm^2, Arctic ocean = 14.0 Mkm^2. Both would cover the "top" from the pole to 70 latitude. Now, surround that 17.5 Mkm^2 with a varying band of ice or open ocean from 56 latitude to 70 latitude 20 Mkm^2 (max) AND then add a single continuous ocean + ocean water at a constant 4-6 degree C temperature.
Remove ALL of Canada, Greenland, Siberia, Russia, north Europe land masses – with their fronts and polar winds and widely varying temperatures completely, and have a constant 4-8 degree water bath circulating constantly in one direction all the time. Remove ALL of the temperature land masses except North Africa.
Now, looking at that geography, why would you expect the southern hemisphere to any relationship to the northern polar vertexes?
3 Feb: Forbes: Patrick Michaels: Will the Overselling of Global Warming Lead to a New Scientific Dark Age?
Will the overselling of climate change lead to a new scientific dark age? That’s the question being posed in the latest issue of an Australian literary journal, Quadrant, by Garth Paltridge, one of the world’s most respected atmospheric scientists.
Paltridge was a Chief Research Scientist with the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO). The latter is Australia’s equivalent of the National Science Foundation, our massive Federal Laboratory network, and all the governmental agency science branches rolled into one…
Climate scientists have been profoundly defensive about the known problems. Paltridge elegantly explains that this has to be the case, and describes the likely horrific consequences when the day of reckoning finally arrives.
That day is coming closer, because, as Paltridge notes, people are catching on:
“…the average man in the street, a sensible chap who by now can smell the signs of an oversold environmental campaign from miles away, is beginning to suspect that it is politics rather than science which is driving the issue.”
The scientific establishment has painted itself into a corner over global warming…
When the climate science tsunami breaks the shore, the destruction will be massive and universal. It’s fair to say that scientific seismologists like Garth Paltridge have already detected the P-wave of the earthquake, in the form of the lack of warming, which is now likely to extend to at least 23 years. The S-wave isn’t far behind. Scientists, run for cover. Now.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickmichaels/2014/02/03/will-the-overselling-of-global-warming-lead-to-a-new-scientific-dark-age/
Checks to forecast Vukcevic.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/PF-latest.gif
RACookPE1978 says:
February 3, 2014 at 9:28 pm
Now, looking at that geography, why would you expect the southern hemisphere to any relationship to the northern polar vertexes?
If the solar wind were the primary cause of breakdowns of the polar vortices, I would expect such breakdowns to occur in the southern hemisphere as well, but they don’t.
lsvalgaard says:
February 3, 2014 at 9:20 pm
“66.9 is the official smoothed number which is calculated as the average of two yearly means one month apart.”
The smoothed monthly numbers look closer to 60.
Would it not be appropriate for WUWT to offer a better prediction for SSN and add a green line reflective of a less Stalinist adherence to collective consensus? Or are you just being polite?… Leif? I say the green WUWT line should be at ~70 now, sliding to zero at 2019. Can we have a consensus?
Cosmic rays well shows a solar activity.
http://cosmicrays.oulu.fi/webform/query.cgi?startday=13&startmonth=01&startyear=1989&starttime=00%3A00&endday=04&endmonth=02&endyear=2014&endtime=00%3A00&resolution=Automatic+choice&picture=on
Sparks says:
February 3, 2014 at 9:38 pm
“66.9 is the official smoothed number which is calculated as the average of two yearly means one month apart.”
The smoothed monthly numbers look closer to 60.
We have to go with what the data actually says, rather than with what think looks closer. Here are the official numbers: http://sidc.be/silso/DATA/monthssn.dat
201202 2012.123 32.9 66.9
201203 2012.205 64.3 66.8
201204 2012.289 55.2 64.6
201205 2012.372 69.0 61.7
201206 2012.456 64.5 58.9
201207 2012.539 66.5 57.8
201208 2012.624 63.0 58.2
201209 2012.708 61.4 58.1
201210 2012.791 53.3 58.6
201211 2012.875 61.8 59.7
201212 2012.958 40.8 59.6
201301 2013.043 62.9 58.7
201302 2013.124 38.1 58.4
201303 2013.205 57.9 57.6
201304 2013.288 72.4 57.9 *
201305 2013.372 78.7 59.9 *
201306 2013.455 52.5 62.6 *
201307 2013.539 57.0 65.5 *
201308 2013.624 66.0
201309 2013.707 37.0
201310 2013.791 85.6 *
201311 2013.874 77.6 *
201312 2013.958 90.3 *
201401 2014.042 82.0 *
Paul Westhaver says:
February 3, 2014 at 9:38 pm
Would it not be appropriate for WUWT to offer a better prediction for SSN and add a green line reflective of a less Stalinist adherence to collective consensus?
David Hathaway’s forecast is pretty good http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/Cycle22Cycle23Cycle24big.gif
My own count of active regions is also nice: http://www.leif.org/research/Active%20Region%20Count.png
Maybe such a line?
http://www.solen.info/solar/images/cycles23_24.png
ren… Yes I would say that such a line is better. Thanks.
Leif, Thank-you…. Yes the NASA graph is more like what I imagined.
I remember seeing a different prediction in 07. Another high cycle. They have moved the goalposts so many times I have lost count.
ren… that was very amusing…seriously.
Leif,
“SSN has been about where the much adjusted prediction line says it should be for the last four months.”
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/sunspot.gif
The smoothed monthly numbers look closer to 60. The red prediction line says 80.
*The red prediction line says 80+
Those double peaks remind me of two side by side hills along the Columbia River, East of the gorge on the Oregon freeway (Interstate 84). Many decades ago, someone put a burn barrel on the top of each little peak, clearly visible to your right when traveling in the west bound lanes.
Pamela Gray,
My mind just went somewhere else. The San Onofre reactor buildings came to mind. Damn sunspots. Out damn’d spot. I say!
Pamela, you just beat me to the double peak point. Northern Hemisphere in 2012, and Southern Hemisphere this year. Forget the jaggedy other little “peaks”. This is the solar max reprise. The question now is how long until the minimum. Beyond 2020? I’d tend to say yes because the double peaks suggest stretching out the cycle, S following N by two years. But Nature surprises.
Hoser,
re:”Northern Hemisphere in 2012, and Southern Hemisphere this year. ”
I went through the WUWT (Leif’s) solar data looking for graphs splitting the SSN etc into North and south sets. I found the butterfly charts but which ones were you referring to?
Hoser says:
February 3, 2014 at 10:21 pm (replying to)
Pamela! Shame for you for (not) bringing up the pair of Grand Tetons further up river!
Sparks says:
February 3, 2014 at 10:04 pm
The smoothed monthly numbers look closer to 60. The red prediction line says 80.
You are not paying attention. Here are the official numbers: http://sidc.be/silso/DATA/monthssn.dat
201202 2012.123 32.9 66.9 <======