Allan MacRae says: Thanks to Alberta Jacobs
A Gleissberg Solar Minimum?
475 Comments
August 15, 2014 8:19 am
JUNE 2014 MAGNETIC FIELD.
http://www.esa.int/var/esa/storage/images/esa_multimedia/images/2014/06/june_2014_magnetic_field/14582208-1-eng-GB/June_2014_magnetic_field_node_full_image_2.jpg
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Swarm/Swarm_reveals_Earth_s_changing_magnetism
“These changes are based on the magnetic signals stemming from Earth’s core. Over the coming months, scientists will analyse the data to unravel the magnetic contributions from other sources, namely the mantle, crust, oceans, ionosphere and magnetosphere.
This will provide new insight into many natural processes, from those occurring deep inside our planet to space weather triggered by solar activity. In turn, this information will yield a better understanding of why the magnetic field is weakening.”
August 15, 2014 8:23 am
August 15, 2014 9:00 am
vuk says:
August 15, 2014 at 6:02 am
being not man enough is a minor concern, it is finding the nearest exit for flight to safety that matters.
A coward’s excuse.
If Themis doesn’t contradict anything you written about in 1977, that it is fine with me
So, you [finding a way to the exit] retract your statements that the Themis team has discovered something that contradicts the data and my earlier finding. You are still not man enough to actually say so, but now you have another chance.
positive and negative sunspot magnetic field cycles in the north hemisphere, coinciding what we know as even and odd numbered cycles. The opposite is valid for the south hemisphere.
So combined there is no net effect.
Essential point here is that the 22 year magnetic cycles of open flux associated with sunspot occurrence in the two hemispheres do not mix, do not cancel out, they exist in parallel and are often shown as the north south solar activity asymmetry.
Your big mistake is to believe that the sunspot fields are the ‘open flux’. They are not. Sunspot magnetic fields are Closed Flux and do not map out into space.
Calling to the rescue on the cancellation across the solar equator, it does not occur with active sunspots, it is assumed that it happens somewhere deep down from the decayed (let’s say dead) sunspots remnants.
The cancellation is an observational fact as has been known for decades
http://solarphysics.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrsp-2012-6&page=articlesu1.html :
“This latitudinal separation combined with the effects of meridional flow and the dispersal of magnetic flux out from complexes of activity, leads to the preferential transport poleward of the following polarity. In contrast, the leading polarity in each hemisphere, which lies at lower latitudes, partially escapes the effect of meridional flow to disperse and cancel across the equator.”
http://sun.stanford.edu/LWS_Dynamo_2009/Wang_apj_707_2_1372.pdf :
“What happens is that the leader flux, being located at lower latitudes, preferentially diffuses across the equator and annihilates its opposite-hemisphere counterpart”
http://etd.library.vanderbilt.edu/available/etd-03212014-134603/unrestricted/Upton_Lisa.pdf :
“As the cycle progresses, the active regions emerge closer and closer to the equator, an
effect known as Sporer’s Law. Cancellation of polarity across the equator leaves behind an excess of following polarity that is transported to the poles.
This is a well-known, well-observed, and well-documented process.
even if it were, it wouldn’t matter for the Earth’s interactions, where the open flux is of the essence.
So, it is good that you realize that all your nonsense about sunspots was just a red herring.
The open flux has two components: the polar fields which reverse at solar maximum [i.e. have no even-odd parity] and the magnetic fields dragged by escaping CMEs. CMEs come from both hemispheres and so have no preferred magnetic configuration, so also do not obey any even-odd cycle. Hence the importance of the purported contradiction that you used to peddle, but have now abandoned [running for the exit].
There is 22 cycle all over the global, hemispheric land and ocean temperature records, but no statistically significant 11 year cycle in the same records.
No 22-yr cycle, but there may be a weak 25-yr quasi-cyclic multidecadal variation which may give the very weak signal in the LOD because of changing moment of inertia as the atmosphere ‘breathes’ following the temperature changes.
The Earth’s core has nothing to do with anything solar.
As I said, you have no clue and your ‘paper’ has no value.
Salvatore Del Prete says:
August 15, 2014 at 7:33 am
“Especially their key finding [which you say you subscribe to] that ‘there was no little ice age’.”
More denial. Oh well..
Yeah so much for Lockwood and Owens’ denial. Here are some screenshots from one of their recent presentation: http://www.leif.org/reseach/No-LIA-Lockwood-2014.png
It might be an excellent idea to invite Lockwood to explain to us that there was no LIA.
August 15, 2014 9:11 am
Checking in on you folks once in a while is so interesting. Re: Our buddy from Poland posting about the magnetic fields. How much has earth’s magnetic field weakened and should we be concerned about it? Does this have an effect on ozone and then pressure anomalies at the polar areas? I’m kind of getting it, Ren.
August 15, 2014 9:52 am
Salvatore Del Prete says:
August 15, 2014 at 7:33 am
“Especially their key finding [which you say you subscribe to] that ‘there was no little ice age’.”
More denial. Oh well..
Yeah, so much for Lockwood and Owens’ denial. Here are some screenshots from one of their recent presentation: http://www.leif.org/research/No-LIA-Lockwood-2014.png
It might be an excellent idea to invite Lockwood to explain to us that there was no LIA.
August 15, 2014 10:00 am
One of thousands of studies that show beyond a doubt the LIA was real.
http://muller.lbl.gov/pages/iceagebook/history_of_climate.html
My main interest with h Lockwood is his views on the extent of solar variability the Little Ice Age takes care of itself.
That is 100% provable.
August 15, 2014 10:27 am
@vuk
3 days before June 3rd 2007: http://snag.gy/36Wm1.jpg
3 days before Sept 1st 2012: http://snag.gy/4JpNj.jpg
Of course a lot of folk here won’t like it, but there are too many stelliums and syzygies of Venus Mercury and Ceres at high solar activity events for it to be chance.
August 15, 2014 10:32 am
Ed Martin
For example, the South Atlantic Anomaly is an area where the magnetic field is particularly weak – in fact, it is only half as strong as in Europe. This is problematic for satellites orbiting Earth, and the majority of technical faults occur when they pass through this region.
The difference in location between magnetic north and true north is called the magnetic deviation; not only is the gap getting bigger, it is shifting at an increasing rate. Prior to 1994, it was estimated that the magnetic north pole was moving at about 10 km a year, but since 2001 this has increased to around 65 km a year.
In June 2014, after just six months collecting data, Swarm confirmed the general trend of the field’s weakening, with the most dramatic declines over the Western Hemisphere. But in other areas, such as the southern Indian Ocean, the magnetic field had strengthened since January. The measurements also confirmed the movement of magnetic North towards Siberia. These changes are based on the magnetic signals stemming from Earth’s core.
Magnetic field changes:
http://www.esa.int/var/esa/storage/images/esa_multimedia/images/2014/06/magnetic_field_changes/14582173-1-eng-GB/Magnetic_field_changes_node_full_image_2.jpg
August 15, 2014 10:35 am
Salvatore Del Prete says:
August 15, 2014 at 10:00 am
My main interest with h Lockwood is his views on the extent of solar variability the Little Ice Age takes care of itself.
Clearly he believes that solar variability is not large enough to cause a LIA. And you subscribe to his ideas.
August 15, 2014 10:41 am
Ed Martin
“Full name: Swarm
Objectives: To offer a unique view inside Earth to study: core dynamics, geodynamo processes and core–mantle interaction; magnetism of the lithosphere and its geological context; 3D electrical conductivity of the mantle related to composition; magnetic signature related to ocean circulation. In addition, Swarm data will be used to study the Sun’s influence on Earth system by: analysing electric currents in magnetosphere and ionosphere; understanding the impact of solar wind on dynamics of the upper atmosphere.”
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Swarm/Facts_and_figures
August 15, 2014 10:55 am
Ed Martin, compare the number of counts of neutrons depending on the latitude.
http://neutronm.bartol.udel.edu/~pyle/RTPlots.html
August 15, 2014 10:57 am
Not only was there a Little Ice Age at high confidence, but also previous cold spells at roughly regular intervals during the Holocene & all prior interglacials & glacials. Here’s the Holocene (the 8.2 Ka event is mislabeled as the “Egyptian Cooling”; “Mesolithic” or “Chalcolithic” would fit better):
http://c3headlines.typepad.com/.a/6a010536b58035970c013482e6a00e970c-pi
August 15, 2014 11:10 am
Leif Svalgaard says: August 15, 2014 at 9:00 am
……….
Relating to futile, undignified and self-demeaning ‘ad hominem’:
It is not any intention of mine to get involved or answer to a never-ending line of inappropriate provocations, always employed when short of convincing argument.
On items discussed::
Relating to Earth:
the Earth’s rotation: slows down during even cycles
the Earth’s rotation speeds up during odd cycles.
Relating to solar hemispheric magnetic cycles:
The sun’s north hemisphere has 22 year magnetic cycles, made of 11 years of positive magnetic field orientated pairs of sunspots, and 11 years of negative magnetic field orientated pairs of sunspots, coinciding what we know as even and odd numbered cycles. The opposite is valid for the south hemisphere.
Magnetic field of active sunspots pairs does not close and neutralise with opposite pairs across solar equator.
Relating to NASA:
NASA’s statement is on the record on their official website:
For reasons not fully understood, CMEs in even-numbered solar cycles (like 24) tend to hit Earth with a leading edge that is magnetized north.
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/16dec_giantbreach/
None of the above, despite of hundreds of words dispensed, you manage to disprove.
August 15, 2014 11:20 am
Henry P
“This study has focused on ionospheric electric currents flowing on the nigh side at low and
mid latitudes. Their magnetic field signatures cannot be neglected by main and crustal
magnetic field modellers. These are in particular small- and larger-scale pressure gradient and
gravity-driven currents.”
http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/EarthObservation/FR_20943_Swarm_Iono.pdf
August 15, 2014 11:45 am
@ren
I think that magnetic field story will also turn out to be a red herring.
[In my opinion] the declining solar polar fields [until 2016] is causing a very small shift in the TSI’s chi-square distribution, more towards the release of the most energetic particles. The sun is brighter now, even somewhat hotter, with less spots. Ironically, a brighter sun causes a cooler earth. Our lives depend upon earth’s defense system to protect us from this very harmful radiation of the shortest SW. Hence we have more oxygen and H-O and nitrogen reacting to form more ozone, peroxides and nitrogenous oxides.
More of these compounds TOA means less UV into the oceans. Hence we are cooling,
August 15, 2014 11:46 am
vukcevic says:
August 15, 2014 at 11:10 am
It is not any intention of mine to get involved or answer to a never-ending line
May I remind you who started this never-ending line, and who is not man enough to admit he was wrong.
Magnetic field of active sunspots pairs does not close and neutralise with opposite pairs across solar equator.
I gave you several references to the fact that they do as this image from today shows http://sdowww.lmsal.com/sdomedia/SunInTime/2014/08/15/f_HMImag_171pfss.jpg . But that this is actually irrelevant as sunspots are closed flux which is not the open flux that exists in the heliosphere and that you think is the important element.
NASA’s statement is on the record on their official website:
“For reasons not fully understood, CMEs in even-numbered solar cycles (like 24) tend to hit Earth with a leading edge that is magnetized north.”
You have not shown any papers that corroborate that. And the data contradicts the claim as there is no difference in geoeffectiveness between even and odd cycles which there would be if the ‘giant breach’ only occurred in even-numbered cycles http://www.leif.org/research/Even-Odd-Dst.png
None of the above, despite of hundreds of words dispensed, you manage to disprove.
The above plot is direct disproof. But you have not managed to find any support for your false claim, not are man enough to admit you are wrong.
Salvatore Del Prete says:
August 15, 2014 at 11:15 am
In denial. It is laughable. .
It seems that your hero is now ‘laughable’, as he denies the existence of the LIA.
August 15, 2014 12:00 pm
sun – global surface temperatures
NASA THEMIS space project:
CMEs in even-numbered solar cyclestend to hit Earth with a leading edge that is magnetized north initiating powerful geomagnetic storms.
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/16dec_giantbreach/
Vukcevic:
the Earth’s rotation rate as measured by the change in the Earth’s length of day – LOD., slows down during even-numbered solar cycles
http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/01/05/59/16/PDF/LODvsSSN.pdf
JPL-NASA:
Earth’s surface temperature is correlated with the changes in Earth’s length of day – LOD.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/earth20110309.html
August 15, 2014 12:21 pm
milodonharlani
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/08/11/a-gleissberg-solar-minimum/#comment-1709824
henry says
I like your graph there
but I am a bit puzzled about the description “degrees Centigrade”
You mean degrees Celsius? Kelvin?
[maybe it is because I am not USA?]
August 15, 2014 12:22 pm
This plot prepared by Ron Turner of Analytic Services, Inc., shows the smoothed sunspot number of Cycle 24 (red) vs. the previous 23 cycles since 1755.
http://science.nasa.gov/media/medialibrary/2014/06/10/plot.jpg
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/10jun_solarminimax/
August 15, 2014 12:27 pm
Leif Svalgaard says: August 15, 2014 at 11:46 am
………..
Tedious, irrelevant and best ignored.
REPLY: Dear Mr. Vukcevic, regarding your comment above.
Take a time out until Monday of next week. I grow tired of your tedium in comments You cause extra work for everyone. – Anthony Watts
In a recent paper “The Centennial Gleissberg Cycle and its Association with Extended Minima”, to be soon published in JGR/Space, Feynman and Ruzmaikin discuss how the recent extended minimum of solar and geomagnetic variability (XSM) mirrors the XSMs in the 19th and 20th centuries: 1810–1830 and 1900–1910.
Edited abstract:
Such extended minima also were evident in aurorae reported from 450 AD to 1450 AD. The paper argues that these minima are consistent with minima of the Centennial Gleissberg Cycles (CGC), a 90–100 year variation observed on the Sun, in the solar wind, at the Earth and throughout the Heliosphere. The occurrence of the recent XSM is consistent with the existence of the CGC as a quasi-periodic variation of the solar dynamo. Evidence of CGC’s is provided by the multi-century sunspot record, by the almost 150-year record of indexes of geomagnetic activity (1868-present), by 1,000 years of observations of aurorae (from 450 to 1450 AD) and millennial records of radionuclides in ice cores.
The “aa” index of geomagnetic activity carries information about the two components of the solar magnetic field (toroidal and poloidal), one driven by flares and CMEs (related to the toroidal field), the other driven by co-rotating interaction regions in the solar wind (related to the poloidal field). These two components systematically vary in their intensity and relative phase giving us information about centennial changes of the sources of solar dynamo during the recent CGC over the last century. The dipole and quadrupole modes of the solar magnetic field changed in relative amplitude and phase; the quadrupole mode became more important as the XSM was approached. Some implications for the solar dynamo theory are discussed.
* Says The Hockey Schtick: If it is true that the current lull in solar activity is “consistent with minima of the Centennial Gleissberg Cycles,” and the Gleissberg Cycle is a real solar cycle, the current Gleissberg minimum could last a few decades before solar activity begins to rise again.
* Solar physicist Habibullo Abdussamatov predicts the current lull in solar activity will continue until about the middle of the 21st century and lead to a new Little Ice Age within the next 30 years.