The updates from NOAA’s SWPC are now available, and there are big jumps all around in February 2014.
Sunspot number reaches the highest ever for SC24:
10.7cm radio flux reaches the highest ever for SC24:
Ap magnetic index, while up, has not surpassed previously higher values in SC24
In other news, Davis Archibald offers this update:
==============================================================
Solar Update March 2014
David Archibald
Figure 1: Oulu Neutron Count 1964 – 2014
With Solar Cycle 24 maximum in March 2013 (see the heliospheric current sheet tilt angle in Figure 5 below) and a one year lag between solar activity and neutron count, we have probably seen the minimum neutron count for this cycle. The minimum count is well above the minimum value for Solar Cycle 20.
Figure 2: Oulu Neutron Count for Solar Cycles 20 to 24 aligned on month of minimum
In terms of neutron count, Solar Cycle 24 isn’t much weaker than the previous four cycles at a similar stage of development.
Figure 3: Solar Wind Flow Pressure 1971 – 2014
What is really interesting is what has happened to the solar wind flow pressure. Despite a high sunspot number and F10.7 flux for this cycle, in January 2014 the solar wind flow pressure fell to a new low of 1.2 nPa for the instrumental record. With another 10 years of solar cycle fall time ahead of us, this suggests that the neutron count is going to be impressive by the end of the decade.
Figure 4: Ap Index 1932 – 2014
Similarly, despite high sunspot numbers and F10.7 flux values, the Ap Index appears to be in a new regime with current values around the previous apparent floor level of activity for the instrumental record.
Figure 5: Heliospheric Current Sheet Tilt Angle
Based on the heliospheric tilt angle, Solar Cycle 24 maximum was in Carrington rotation 2134, which is March 2013. With the Solar cycle 23/24 minimum in December 2008, Solar Cycle 24 rise time was 4 years and three months.
Figure 6: Monthly F10.7 Flux 1948 – 2014
The F10.7 flux is having a new peak of activity.
Figure 7: Interplanetary Magnetic Field 1966 – 2014
As with the solar wind flow pressure and Ap Index, the interplanetary magnetic field appears to be in a new regime in Solar Cycle 24 in which peak activity is at about the level of the previous floor of activity.
Figure 8: Solar Cycle 24 relative to the Dalton Minimum
Solar Cycle 24 had been tracking Solar Cycle 5, the first half of the Dalton Minimum, quite closely in terms of monthly sunspot number. It is now somewhat stronger at the same stage of the cycle.
Figure 9: Solar Cycles 1749 – 2040
Livingstone and Penn’s forecast of a Solar Cycle 25 maximum amplitude of 7 is still the only prediction of the size of that cycle from the solar physics community. We are still a few years out before solar poloidal field strength can be used to estimate the size of the next cycle.
Figure 10: Predicted Solar Cycle 24 peak sunspot number
Of 54 predictions of Solar Cycle 24 peak amplitude, the six at the bottom of the range could be considered to be in the ball park of the achieved result. This suggests that the solar physics community’s understanding of the Sun, and thus climate, has the potential to evolve further. From: Pesnell, W.D., Predictions of Solar Cycle 24, Solar Phys., 252, 209-220, 2008
http://climategrog.wordpress.com/?attachment_id=781
Looking at the pretty regular short term bumps/cycles: the last one would peak just about the beginning of this year. Even allowing for the fair broad spacing between the double peaks which is the current pattern, I don’t see it going much higher from here on.
Next bump will peak around 2014.7 and the current spike will be done by then.
@Steele……I feel the same way. Time will tell….I’ll wait for the call.
I’m interested to see what this summer brings as far as temps go. Also, I wonder how the Arctic will look after the melt season is over. Again….in time.
Looking closer at short cycles: last 5 cycles =3.15 years : 0.63y period.
Next peak 2014.62 , 0.62*12=7.44 mo , mid July.
By the end of the year we’ll be into the steep drop.
Kenny: “Also, I wonder how the Arctic will look after the melt season is over. ”
More recovery , but less dramatic than last year. I will have more on that later.
“With another 10 years of solar cycle fall time ahead of us, this suggests that the neutron count is going to be impressive by the end of the decade.”
Pretty much clinched at this point. Winter in Central MN is looking past the 1930’s to the 1880’s for comparison. Last year saw all time record late ice-out in many northern lakes. That was just weather.
AGW is buried in a coffin of her native carbon sequester with a bristlecone stake thru her hypertrophic heart.
There has been no displacement of polar air into NA this winter. Siberia has been just as frigid as ever. As fraudulent as surface temperature data has self-evidently become, satellite measurements are not telling us anything relevant. Global average temperatures are worthless.
Jai Mitchell,
“Our results suggest that the onset of the LIA can be linked to an unusual 50-year-long episode with four large sulfur-rich explosive eruptions, each with global sulfate loading >60 Tg,”
Where were they, and when? Pretty precise information from 800 years ago. Looked for your name in the list of authors, didn’t see it, or did !?
John Finn says @ur momisugly March 4, 2014 at 1:24 am
You stated “There wasn’t any 1970s cooling.” (Based on the Central England Temperature record)
England isn’t the whole world any more than the US. The “1970s cooling” I referred to was indicated in four of the graphs above. Perhaps the author of those graphs could explain the source of those captions.
A temperature plot superimposed on these solar charts would be useful, but which temperature plot do we use that will satisfy everyone, if such a plot exists? A better plot would be temps vs the integral of SSN or flux.
What is the explanation for the very last negative-going temperature bar (in green) on your link
http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Hos_1.png ? In your opinion, what caused the temps to drop so much if we supposedly live in a CAGW world with little to no solar influence on temperature change? If CO2 is driving temperatures upwards then why would the temps go down at all in an era of increasing yet miniscule CO2 concentrations?
Experience shows the weather and climate vary regionally, this winter being no exception.
Bob Weber says:
March 4, 2014 at 8:32 am
A better plot would be temps vs the integral of SSN or flux.
This is a common misconception, which seems to be impossible to eradicate [so I shall not even try].
Michael Moon says:
March 4, 2014 at 8:24 am
Next year it’ll be two centuries since the last VEI 8 eruption. I’m thinking we’re about overdue.
Freezing rain on the LA Gulf Coast, in March. How unexpected!
Richard M says:
March 3, 2014 at 7:05 pm
It really is elementary, ain’t it? In an era of 404Care you’d think AGW shamans would take care throwing just anything against the wall with emphasis. Untreated, tendinitis is debilitating.
My statement was based on all (local and global) observational data.
None of those graphs above represents a temperature series. The author of those graphs constantly appends solar data graphs with the “1970s cooling” label. I assume he thinks it will support his claims for a strong solar effect. One of those claims, incidentally, was that we would see a 2 degree decline in temperatures in “a few short years” which later became “over the course of solar cycle 24”.
Well, the oceans seem to be integrating something.
===============
highflight56433 says:
March 3, 2014 at 3:58 pm
Certainly has been interesting watching this cycle 24. And not just the sunspot number.
…..Reduction in UV. Is there an increase in GCR (Galactic Cosmic Radiation), is there going to be a corresponding increase in cloud coverage?…..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
For what it is worth Earthshine Albedo inflection point: % Change in Earth’s Albedo – GRAPH around 1997 -1998
See Figure 7: Interplanetary Magnetic Field 1966 – 2014 in the post above and note the changes in the interplanetary magnetic field began with cycle 23.
Calmly Such are the up to date.
http://oi60.tinypic.com/1zz6ip4.jpg
lsvalgaard says:
March 4, 2014 at 9:02 am
Bob Weber says:
March 4, 2014 at 8:32 am
A better plot would be temps vs the integral of SSN or flux.
This is a common misconception, which seems to be impossible to eradicate [so I shall not even try].
================
Eradicating misconceptions is a pretty tall order. Coming up with a credible physical explanation should be less so.
In fact, it would seem incorrect to think either SSN or a straight integral would be correct unless some unstated assumptions become stated and justified.
If SSN is taken to be a proxy of some kind of power output variation that may act as a “forcing” on climate. Then one would not expect it to correlate directly to temperature unless climate equilibrates to such changes on a time scale much shorter than the circa 11y period.
Equally, unless climate takes centuries to equilibrate, then the integral would not be correct either.
Assuming the climate system takes somewhere from a few years to a few decades to equilibrate some kind of response function needs to be determined. The simplest response to a change in input power is probably a linear relaxation response. In this case an exponentially weighted integral would be a suitable approximation. The time constant of the exponential needing to be determined.
If the time constant is longer than a couple of years, there will be phase lag in the response. The longer the response time, the less will be the magnitude of the direct correlation to the 11y variations and the most the result will reflect the multi-decadal scale variations, ie grand maximum and extended lows like the Maunder minimum.
Anyone with a preconceived position intent on dismissing any possible link between surface temperature and SSN will insist of seeing a direct correlation to short term cycle, with zero phase lag and ignore any correlation on a longer time scale.
This is equivalent to an unstated assumption that climate reacts and equilibrates to any change almost instantaneously with respect to the basic period of circa 11 years.
That is an unwarranted assumption but will likely not be a problem in climate science where unwarranted assumptions are trade stock.
Someone, last year, looked at a more sophistical response with an active feedback which is possibly a more realistic model but I can’t find a link to his blog now.
So concluding there is no link to SSN based on the absence of a trivial correlation of the two time series is simplistic to the point of deliberate misdirection from anyone with a knowledge of physics.
On climate change, the greatest impact has the power of the magnetic field of the Sun, and this is clearly decreasing from 23 cycle. It is closely related to the detention temperature increase, and soon notice a drop. The temperature does not drop sharply through the oceans.
Greg Goodman says:
March 4, 2014 at 10:18 am
So concluding there is no link to SSN based on the absence of a trivial correlation of the two time series is simplistic to the point of deliberate misdirection from anyone with a knowledge of physics.
Time to wash your mouth out with soap. The integral idea is worthless without specifying [and justifying] the interval over which to integrate.
Every time there is an article on the sun it is begging for a punch line like “… and this means that the solar radiance receiver at the earth will be xyz watts/meter.”
However the punch line never comes, so we non-helio types are left wondering if this all mean anything real here on the third planet?
Can someone “splain it?” 🙂
Hi everyone,
I’ve built a solar app for windows that I personally use for keeping up to date with current solar activity, it’s packed full of features that give ease of access to many sources of on-line data and more, in one place, which I’m adding to all the time, before I release a version of it (for free) for educational purposes and for solar enthusiasts at the end of the month, does anyone from the WUWT community have any suggestions? is there any data, images or solar related links you would like to have integrated into this program?
Here are two screen shots which includes a viewer, complete with zoom, scroll and drag of near real time solar images.
http://thetempestspark.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/001013.jpeg
http://thetempestspark.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/001014.jpeg
Also let me know of any features you would like to see added.
Walter Allensworth says:
While I certainly have no answer to your precise quey perhaps I can explain the silence with an analogy. Let’s compare radiant energy in watts per meter squared with US GDP, the goods and services produced plus government spending minus imports, etc.
We know despite all the revisions, US GDP rises inexorably roughly 2% every year. Yet we also know the Federal Reserve is currently printing 10% of GDP from thin air.
http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/federal_budget_estimate_vs_actual_2013
Despite the fact that your taxes did not decrease the economy is obviously not growing. I respectively suggest you forget BLS and BEA statistics and just believe your unsophisticated eyes.
The trend is for less all over.
Walt Allensworth says:
March 4, 2014 at 11:21 am
Every time there is an article on the sun it is begging for a punch line like “… and this means that the solar radiance receiver at the earth will be xyz watts/meter.”
However the punch line never comes, so we non-helio types are left wondering if this all mean anything real here on the third planet?
Can someone “splain it?” 🙂
If you ever invent time travel, travel back in time and ask all those futurists who claimed that our current solar cycle would be the most active ever, which would exacerbate Global warming.
Don’t forget to come back and give us all a good laugh!!
OLD SUNSPOT: The lifespan of a typical sunspot is two to three weeks. This one is about to turn three months: Carried around by the sun’s 27-day rotation, AR1990 is making its third transit of the visible solar disk. In previous apparitions it was known as AR1944 and AR1967. Each time it has appeared, the sunspot has unleashed at least one strong flare, the most recent being the X4.9-class blockbuster of Feb. 25th.
Because it changes daily, click on archives and change to March 5.
http://spaceweather.com/
ES says:
March 4, 2014 at 7:18 pm
Sunspots during last month were small, weighted the same as huge sunspots, but there were more small sunspots for a period. A typical sunspot should only be recorded on terrestrial instruments, viewing more of the solar disk is another cheat. btw sunspots are an indication of activity and not what you think they are. 🙂