Guest essay by David Archibald
The following is a series of graphs that depict the current and past state of the sun.
Figure 1: Solar Cycle 24 relative to the Dalton Minimum
Solar Cycle 24 had almost the same shape as Solar Cycle 5, the first half of the Dalton Minimum, up to about six months ago and is now a lot stronger.
Figure 2: Monthly F10.7 Flux 1948 to 2014
The strength of the current solar cycle is confirmed by the F10.7 which is not subject to observer bias. Solar Cycle 24 is now five and a half years long.
Figure 3: Ap Index 1932 to 2014
The biggest change in solar activity for the current cycle is in magnetic activity which is now at the floor of activity for the period 1932 to 2007.
Figure 4: Heliospheric Tilt Angle 1976 to 2014
Peak of the solar cycle has occurred when heliospheric tilt angle reaches 73°. For Solar Cycle 24, this was in February 2013. It is now heading down to the 24/25 minimum.
Figure 5: Interplanetary Magnetic Field 1966 to 2014
This looks like a more muted version of the Ap Index. The main difference between them is that the IMF was a lot flatter over Solar Cycle 20 than the Ap Index.
Figure 6: Sum of Solar Polar Field Strengths 1976 to 2014
This is one of the more important graphs in the set in that it can have predictive ability. The SODA index pioneered by Schatten is based on the sum of the poloidal fields and the F10.7 flux. This methodology starts getting accurate for the next cycle a few years before solar minimum. If Solar Cycle 24 proves to be twelve years long, as Solar Cycle 5 was, then the SODA index may start being accurate from about 2016. In terms of solar cycle length, the only estimate in the public domain is from extrapolating Hathaway’s diagram off his image. Hathaway’s curve-fitting suggests that the Solar Cyce 24/25 minimum will be in late 2022. If so, Solar Cycle 24 will be thirteen years long, a little longer than Solar Cycle 23.
It seems that Livingstone and Penn’s estimate of Solar Cycle 25 amplitude of 7 remains the only one in the public domain. The reputational risk for solar physicists in making a prediction remains too great.
David Archibald, a Visiting Fellow at the Institute of World Politics in Washington, D.C., is the author of Twilight of Abundance: Why Life in the 21st Century Will Be Nasty, Brutish, and Short (Regnery, 2014).
Carla, you have presented several lines of inquiry (your interpretation needs work though) related to solar mechanics. But I still do not see your connection to Earth’s temperature. Are you just bringing up as many things about the Sun as you possibly can hoping that something Solar-sourced sticks to the wall of Earth’s overall climate? What is your elevator speech “in a nutshell”?
Space.com has a Solar Update this week also..
Solar ‘Mini-Max’ Erupts As Quiet Sun Finally Hits Its Peak (Video)
By Elizabeth Howell, Space.com Contributor | June 19, 2014 07:29am ET
The sun is supposed to be at the height of its 11-year activity cycle, but for the most part things have been pretty quiet.
That might be starting to change, however. The sun unleashed a series of three huge flares last week. Scientists are dubbing the sun’s exploits lately a “mini-max” because the maximum period of activity is shorter than usual. Today the sun is a pretty active place. Sunspots are popping up all over and lower-density areas (“holes”) are appearing in the sun’s corona, or superheated envelope of gas that surrounds our nearest star. You can watch a video about the sun’s “mini-max” to learn more about the current Solar Cycle 24.
“The sun’s magnetic field has flipped, we are starting to see the development of long coronal holes, and, oh yes, sunspot counts are cresting,” Dean Pesnell, a solar physicist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, said in a statement. [See photos of the largest solar storms of 2014]
This situation demonstrates how hard it is to forecast a solar cycle. The average is 11 years, but it can take between 9 and 14 years for the sun to go from quiet to maximum and quiet again. Sometimes the cycle breaks, such as the infamous “Maunder minimum” that happened for 70 years in the 17th century, when few sunspots were visible. While this cycle is not quite that bad, it’s still a weakling.
“This solar cycle continues to rank among the weakest on record,”stated Ron Turner of Analytic Services Inc., who is a senior science advisor for NASA’s Innovative Advanced Concepts program. Cycle 24, he added, is one of the weakest in the 23 cycles since 1755……………………………..
http://www.space.com/26287-sun-solar-cycle-mini-maximum-video.html
The sun’s bizarre peak has its roots in an odd time in 2008 and 2009, when sunspot numbers were far lower than scientists expected. Solar flares, which are associated with sunspot numbers and the sun’s magnetic activity, also fell quiet.
Pamela Gray says:
June 21, 2014 at 10:45 am
… Are you just bringing up as many things about the Sun as you possibly can hoping that something Solar-sourced sticks to the wall of Earth’s overall climate?…
——————————————————————————
Pam, are you cooking spaghetti? If it sticks to the wall its done..
What we know about other stars is important for our understanding of our own star. They all have similarities.
nut shell
All I know is that I know nothing, compared to what can be known.
Earth is unique Pam, because of its location in time. Newly found upwind crescent at 1 AU, as predicted over a decade before. Wow that’s special and unique to the Earth.
Carla says:
June 21, 2014 at 10:29 am
Gravitational focusing is direct evidence that accretion doesn’t end at some earlier time in a stars history.
again, you show a lack of perception of scale. It is not about ‘accretion’ as such, it is about ‘how much’ and if it ever reaches the Sun. Anything approaching will be heated and ionized and picked up by the solar wind and swept right back out again. For the last time: none of what you talk about has any influence on solar activity on time scales that matters.
Carla says:
June 21, 2014 at 10:47 am
This situation demonstrates how hard it is to forecast a solar cycle.
Not so, I and colleagues have forecast the solar cycle successfully the past four cycles.
lsvalgaard says:
June 21, 2014 at 11:08 am
For the last time: none of what you talk about has any influence on solar activity on time scales that matters.
—————————————————————————————————————————————
Blanket statement Dr. S., by use of the word none. Some, may have been a better choice.
The links speak for themselves.. many researchers involved..
The reconnection/accretion link for solar magnetic cycle phase shifts will be found somewhere around 3-5 solar radii, part of the extended corona. Hopefully some day soon..
Hmm should have a link for that somewhere. The accretion/reconnection that is.
Carla says:
June 21, 2014 at 11:18 am
Blanket statement Dr. S., by use of the word none.
Sometimes [and this is one one them] a blanket statement is appropriate.
Some, may have been a better choice.
If you know of a better choice: a link advocating that the accretion changes solar activity, please educate me. If not, continue over at Tallbloke’s.
lsvalgaard says:
June 21, 2014 at 11:10 am
Carla says:
June 21, 2014 at 10:47 am
This situation demonstrates how hard it is to forecast a solar cycle.
Not so, I and colleagues have forecast the solar cycle successfully the past four cycles.
—————————
You are an exception Dr. S.
Carla says:
June 21, 2014 at 11:24 am
You are an exception Dr. S.
It is by now generally accepted that the polar-field precursor method works, so the method is now ‘mainstream’, not exceptional.
lsvalgaard says:
“And likely helped along by very large volcanic eruptions in 1809, 1814, and 1815.”
1811 was very warm so I doubt that the supposed 1809 event did much. Mayon was only VEI 4. Tambora could have helped low summer temperatures in 1816, but there could easily have been some sharp Ap index drops in 1816 as it was at sunspot cycle maximum.
Ulric Lyons says:
June 21, 2014 at 11:34 am
but there could easily have been some sharp Ap index drops in 1816 as it was at sunspot cycle maximum.
Generally Ap is rather high at solar maximum, and ‘could easily be’ is not real data. And there is but very scant evidence that Ap as such has anything to do with global temperatures.
Carla says:
June 21, 2014 at 11:18 am
lsvalgaard says:
June 21, 2014 at 11:08 am
——————————————————–
The reconnection/accretion link for solar magnetic cycle phase shifts will be found somewhere around 3-5 solar radii, part of the extended corona. Hopefully some day soon..
Hmm should have a link for that somewhere. The accretion/reconnection that is.
CURRENT SHEETS AND MAGNETIC RECONNECTION IN ACCRETION DISK CORONAE
Carla says:
June 21, 2014 at 11:59 am
CURRENT SHEETS AND MAGNETIC RECONNECTION IN ACCRETION DISK CORONAE
1) is not a link and shouting does not help.
2) does not apply to the Sun, but to stars that are still forming [T Tauri stars] where there is a LOT of accretion [the whole star has to form]..
Ulric Lyons says:
June 21, 2014 at 9:19 am
1804 and 1806 were warm in Europe, most of the cold in Dalton was during the following decade.
Not particularly: the average CET for 1800-1809 was a 9.14C and for 1810-1819 it was 8.82C, not much difference.
While we’re tossing out space-related questions, does anyone know what really is the propagation speed of gravity? I had thought since gravity is inherent there was no speed, it just is. But now I’m reading they believe it travels at c, speed of light in a vacuum, which to me brings up the possibility of a relative speed of gravity as it propagates through matter.
But now there is new work at arXiv, originally published in Chinese Physical Letters in 2011 but arXiv has up to v8 from Nov 2013, which Wikipedia described as:
If gravity is faster than light, then we have faster than light communications when we figure out how to safely modulate gravity.
It looks like it’ll be awhile until we have gravity detectors coupled with telescopes that can tell us if the gravity from an ancient galaxy billions of years old is sensed before or when the first light from it reaches us.
So what are the current believable thoughts about the speed of gravity?
@lsvalgaard
Most of the colder years in Dalton were in the period 1807 to 1817:
http://snag.gy/Dj0Yj.jpg
i.e in the decade following 1806, not the one starting in 1810.
lsvalgaard says:
June 21, 2014 at 11:52 am
“Generally Ap is rather high at solar maximum, and ‘could easily be’ is not real data. And there is but very scant evidence that Ap as such has anything to do with global temperatures.”
And yet you know that there is typically a local minima in the Ap index at sunspot cycle maximum. Short term drops in regional temperatures would be the result, global temperatures could go up if there is an El Nino in response.
It continues to be my speculation that Quaternary volcanic explosions, of which there are very few that match the extent of the recently located but long identified Samalas 1257 eruption, have an important role to play related to the oceanic/atmospheric teleconnected ENSO processes, especially eruptions that occur in important equatorial regions. During this Quaternary period, the locations of the land masses have been just about where they are today, so the global circulation patterns in the ocean and in the air would all be similar during this time span.
I speculate that significant disruptions in the normal course of ENSO heat energy discharge/recharge and oceanic surface circulation processes have long term affects that extend beyond the fall-out period and probably have step functions up and down as the ENSO system works its way back to normal energy discharge/recharge and surface circulation patterns that were in place prior to these large eruptions. I think this is one of the main sources of global temperature proxi fluctuations that were out of whack compared to pre-eruption proxies. That there were deeper solar minimums during identified Quaternary cold spells is more coincidence that cause. And I speculate this because aerosol loading is a far greater source of significant reduction in solar insolation than the Sun itself. Volcanic aerosols also have a far greater capacity to reduce ozone than the Sun itself.
For those trying to find a gnat’s hair sized needle in a solar barn full of hay, you fail at step one. You must rule out these far greater intrinsic sources of significant temperature change catalysts. Something I have yet to see you give anything but a blink of an eye attempt towards, if that.
damn. Proxy, not “proxi”
Centennial variations in sunspot number, open solar flux and streamer belt width: 3. Modelling
J. Geophys. Res., in press, doi: 10.1002/2014JA019973 (open access early view) 2014
307.M. Lockwood, M.J. Owens, and L. Barnard
Centennial variations in sunspot number, open solar flux and streamer belt width: 2. Comparison with geomagnetic data
J. Geophys. Res., in press, doi: 10.1002/2014JA019972 (open access early view) 2014
306. M. Lockwood, M.J. Owens, and L. Barnard
Centennial variations in sunspot number, open solar flux and streamer belt width: 1. Correction of the sunspot number record since 1874
J. Geophys. Res., in press, doi: 10.1002/2014JA019970 (open access early view) 2014
2014
305. C.J. Scott, R.G. Harrison, M.J. Owens, M. Lockwood, and L. Barnard
Evidence for solar wind modulation of lightning
Env. Res. Lett., 9, 055004, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/9/5/055004, 2014
304. S.R. Thomas, M.J. Owens, M. Lockwood and C.J. Scott
Galactic Cosmic Ray Modulation near the Heliospheric Current Sheet
Sol. Phys., 289 (7), 2653-2668, doi: 10.1007/s11207-014-0493-y, 2014
303. M. Lockwood, H. Nevanlinna, L. Barnard, M.J. Owens, R.G. Harrison, A.P. Rouillard, and C.J. Scott
Reconstruction of Geomagnetic Activity and Near-Earth Interplanetary Conditions over the Past 167 Years: 4. Near-Earth Solar Wind Speed, IMF, and Open Solar Flux
Annales. Geophys., 32, 383-399, doi:10.5194/angeo-32-383-2014, 2014
►open access, reprint available here
►supplementary data file (pdf format)
►supplementary data file (ascii text)
(contains IMF, solar wind speed and OSF reconstructions for 1845-2012, with full 2σ uncertainties computed using a Monte-Carlo technique, plus the IDV(1d) and corrected aa geomagnetic indices)
302. M. Lockwood, H. Nevanlinna, M. Vokhmyanin, D. Ponyavin, S. Sokolov, L. Barnard, M.J. Owens, R.G. Harrison, A.P. Rouillard, and C.J. Scott
Reconstruction of Geomagnetic Activity and Near-Earth Interplanetary Conditions over the Past 167 Years: Improved representation of solar cycle 11
Annales. Geophys., 32, 367-381, doi:10.5194/angeo-32-367-2014, 2014
►open access, reprint available here
301. M.J. Owens, N.U. Crooker, and M. Lockwood
Solar cycle evolution of dipolar and pseudostreamer belts and their relation to the slow solar wind
J. Geophys. Res. Space Physics, 119, doi:10.1002/2013JA019412, 2014
Some good reading which all need to be aware of.
Pamela Gray said on June 21, 2014 at 12:44 pm:
I thought is was proxies, not proxii. 😉
Ulric Lyons says:
June 21, 2014 at 12:36 pm
Most of the colder years in Dalton were in the period 1807 to 1817
You mean just including the years of 1809, 1814, 1815. I thought so 🙂
Ulric Lyons says:
June 21, 2014 at 12:42 pm
And yet you know that there is typically a local minima in the Ap index at sunspot cycle maximum.
Typically a shallow minimum. If that has any effect, then sunspot minimum should have a much larger effect, and none is found.
It is amazing that some people keep repeating the same stale non-effects in every post.
kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
June 21, 2014 at 12:30 pm
But now there is new work at arXiv, originally published in Chinese Physical Letters in 2011 but arXiv has up to v8 from Nov 2013, which Wikipedia described as:
In November 2013, Y. Zhu announced that he observed the speed of gravitational force, calculating the variations of the orbit of the geosynchronous satellites perturbed by the Sun. It is shown that the gravitational force of the Sun acting on the satellite is from the present position of the Sun. It indicates that the speed of gravitational force is larger than the speed of light in a vacuum.
————————————————————————————————————————
I suppose it one subscribes to the theory that what we call gravity is just mass warping space, then there is no need to worry about that. If all other masses within the confines of the Sun’s gravity well are constantly affected there is no time differential involved.
lsvalgaard says:
“Typically a shallow minimum. If that has any effect, then sunspot minimum should have a much larger effect, and none is found.”
The local Ap minima at maximum are there on cycles 21 and 19, hardly shallow minimums:
http://www.leif.org/research/Ap-1844-now.png
As you know the larger Ap drop is just after minimum, and there is plenty of evidence for negative AO/NAO, El Nino, and cold in the mid latitudes in these periods.
Salvatore Del Prete says:
June 21, 2014 at 12:56 pm
Some good reading which all need to be aware of.
Indeed. After a Decade of Struggle, Lockwood et al. (2014) are Fast Approaching the Svalgaard et al. Reconstructions of 2003. This is a healthy development and Lockwood at al. should be congratulated for their achievement
Ulric Lyons says:
June 21, 2014 at 1:19 pm
As you know the larger Ap drop is just after minimum, and there is plenty of evidence for negative AO/NAO, El Nino, and cold in the mid latitudes in these periods.
Not that I know of. Plenty of flimsy claims, though