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).
The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley says:
June 18, 2014 at 1:25 pm
Ah, I see. But you can understand why a layperson would take Figure 1 to be as it says it is.
Even laypersons should be above shit like this “that you snottily point out in others” [JJ at June 18, 2014 at 11:40 am].
J Martin
Just that you will follow the winter in the south, which is only just beginning.
http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/atmosphere/radbud/gs19_prd.gif
Lief,
Since you eat a certain amount of crap every time you post here, allow me to express my gratitude at least in part compensation. I know virtually nothing about the science of the sun, but I knew about the group sunspot numbers already only because this has come up in the threads with you here at WUWT before. In other words, I only already know this because you’ve already explained it.
Also, thanks for the links to your site. I splash in the shallow end of the pool over there and learn stuff from time to time. If I was dedicated I’d probably learn more, but let’s just work with what we have.
Anyway, thank you.
Dear Ghost, I think Leif is saying that David uses the SIDC for cycle 24 (which he clearly marked as being so) but group sunspot number (which appears to be a switch not clearly indicated – actually not indicated at all) for cycle 5. Leif refers to a comparison of the two data sets (SIDC and group sunspot number) for cycle 5 and is saying David’s graph appears to be using the group sunspot number, not the SIDC for cycle 5, instead of using the same data set for both cycles.
And I misspell your name. Lovely. I meant ‘Leif’ not Lief.
Well damn. I may have gotten it assbackwards.
Pamela, it might be a good idea if Anthony could get Mr Archibald back on here to explain why he did what he did.
Whether more important is the number of sunspots and their magnetic activity? Currently, the number of spots is 87 and their activity decreases rapidly again.
Mark Bofill says:
June 18, 2014 at 1:42 pm
And I misspell your name. Lovely. I meant ‘Leif’ not Lief.
‘Lief’ means ‘dear’ in Dutch [which we often speak in our home], so I don’t take offence 🙂
LOL. Even better. My wife is going to get a kick out of this one, can’t wait to tell her. 🙂
That makes for an interesting salutation in a letter:
“Lief Leif,…”
@Pamela Gray – Ode to Bambi – Dear Deer.
A reminder that David Archibald predicted nearly a 1 degree cooling by now, back in 2008.
http://www.warwickhughes.com/agri/Solar_Arch_NY_Mar2_08.pdf
I am interested in David A.’s explanation. If it was a mistake in the rushed effort to post, aka, what I call a speeding error (been there done that, which makes me get behinder the faster I go), then submit a corrigendum. He won’t be the first scientist to do this. The journals, from the lowly freeforall online version to the top of the heap, are filled with them.
PG, when you write a letter, it should look like this
Lieve Leif, fig. 01 is een misgreep en DA maakte met opzet de opmerking van “observer bias”.
De rest van zijn verhaal is ook niet belangrijk, bladvulling om reacties uit te lokken.
JJM Gommers says:
June 18, 2014 at 3:26 pm
Lieve Leif, fig. 01 is een misgreep
Opzettelijk.
Misgreep? Now that is one to remember! Thanks for the Dutch lesson.
No wonder Danny Kay was enthralled with the Dutch language. He could also “speak” German.
Could you define “soon” in this context.
lsvalgaard says:
June 18, 2014 at 1:29 pm
“Even laypersons should be above shit like this “that you snottily point out in others” [JJ at June 18, 2014 at 11:40 am].”
===========
This layperson seems to be lost, what was the shit anyway ?
i.e. define “shit”.
u.k.(us) says:
June 18, 2014 at 5:00 pm
This layperson seems to be lost, what was the shit anyway ?
i.e. define “shit”.
Like pornography: you know it when you see it.
JJ was being petulant, IE engaging in “shit”-ish behavior evidenced by JJ’s use of the word “snottily” in his dialogue with Leif. It is not uncommon when a person’s misunderstanding has been corrected to view the corrector as someone who is “snotty” or who corrected in a “snottily” fashion. Correction that is indeed a correction is a superior improvement on the misunderstanding. If one engages in petulant behavior they tend to reinterpret the correction as being “snotty” in tone, even when plainly spoken as fact.
Unfortunately I find that when correcting a person above your station, such as your boss or administrator, you place yourself at risk of being labeled a non-team player, someone who does not engage in supportive team behavior in your division. Yours truly has met that brick wall a number of times, even when I was speaking plainly and with facts.
Pamela Gray says:
June 18, 2014 at 5:10 pm
Unfortunately I find that when correcting a person above your station, such as your boss or administrator, you place yourself at risk of being labeled a non-team player
http://www.leif.org/research/down-and-up.jpg
Leif check your email please
lsvalgaard says:
June 18, 2014 at 5:02 pm
=========
I always thought it was something scientific, like that.
it is hard to undo mis information once it is spread.Like the BEST data and conclusion from a skeptical warmista Muller LOL
Leif that brightened my day tremendously! Your factual comments are ever appreciated, including the one I just read.
vukcevic says:
June 18, 2014 at 5:34 am
..I would estimate that Livingstone and Penn’s estimate of 7 for SC25 is far too low, and would go for a symbolic SSN=25 for the SC25.
———————————————————-
Unofficially, that’s pretty good Vuks.
Any clue if this is the new floor for solar magnetic field strength?
http://wso.stanford.edu/gifs/Multipole.gif
Heliosphere done shrinking yet?
Sun is gonna teach us all a few things next minimum.. Hope you are up for the journey Dr. Kryptonite. Your gonna need it..the kryptonite.