From NASA/GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER
NASA: Understanding the magnetic sun

The surface of the sun writhes and dances. Far from the still, whitish-yellow disk it appears to be from the ground, the sun sports twisting, towering loops and swirling cyclones that reach into the solar upper atmosphere, the million-degree corona – but these cannot be seen in visible light. Then, in the 1950s, we got our first glimpse of this balletic solar material, which emits light only in wavelengths invisible to our eyes.
Once this dynamic system was spotted, the next step was to understand what caused it. For this, scientists have turned to a combination of real time observations and computer simulations to best analyze how material courses through the corona. We know that the answers lie in the fact that the sun is a giant magnetic star, made of material that moves in concert with the laws of electromagnetism.
“We’re not sure exactly where in the sun the magnetic field is created,” said Dean Pesnell, a space scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. “It could be close to the solar surface or deep inside the sun – or over a wide range of depths.”
Getting a handle on what drives that magnetic system is crucial for understanding the nature of space throughout the solar system: The sun’s magnetic field is responsible for everything from the solar explosions that cause space weather on Earth – such as auroras – to the interplanetary magnetic field and radiation through which our spacecraft journeying around the solar system must travel.
So how do we even see these invisible fields? First, we observe the material on the sun. The sun is made of plasma, a gas-like state of matter in which electrons and ions have separated, creating a super-hot mix of charged particles. When charged particles move, they naturally create magnetic fields, which in turn have an additional effect on how the particles move. The plasma in the sun, therefore, sets up a complicated system of cause and effect in which plasma flows inside the sun – churned up by the enormous heat produced by nuclear fusion at the center of the sun – create the sun’s magnetic fields. This system is known as the solar dynamo.
We can observe the shape of the magnetic fields above the sun’s surface because they guide the motion of that plasma – the loops and towers of material in the corona glow brightly in EUV images. Additionally, the footpoints on the sun’s surface, or photosphere, of these magnetic loops can be more precisely measured using an instrument called a magnetograph, which measures the strength and direction of magnetic fields.
Next, scientists turn to models. They combine their observations – measurements of the magnetic field strength and direction on the solar surface – with an understanding of how solar material moves and magnetism to fill in the gaps. Simulations such as the Potential Field Source Surface, or PFSS, model – shown in the accompanying video – can help illustrate exactly how magnetic fields undulate around the sun. Models like PFSS can give us a good idea of what the solar magnetic field looks like in the sun’s corona and even on the sun’s far side.
A complete understanding of the sun’s magnetic field – including knowing exactly how it’s generated and its structure deep inside the sun – is not yet mapped out, but scientists do know quite a bit. For one thing, the solar magnetic system is known to drive the approximately-11-year activity cycle on the sun. With every eruption, the sun’s magnetic field smooths out slightly until it reaches its simplest state. At that point the sun experiences what’s known as solar minimum, when solar explosions are least frequent. From that point, the sun’s magnetic field grows more complicated over time until it peaks at solar maximum, some 11 years after the previous solar maximum.
“At solar maximum, the magnetic field has a very complicated shape with lots of small structures throughout – these are the active regions we see,” said Pesnell. “At solar minimum, the field is weaker and concentrated at the poles. It’s a very smooth structure that doesn’t form sunspots.”
Take a look at the side-by-side comparison to see how the magnetic fields change, grew and subsided from January 2011 to July 2014. You can see that the magnetic field is much more concentrated near the poles in 2011, three years after solar minimum. By 2014, the magnetic field has become more tangled and disorderly, making conditions ripe for solar events like flares and coronal mass ejections.
###
People in China are noticing it right now!
I love the way scientists never admit they have very little idea of what causes something, they’re just “not exactly sure”.
Well I guess that makes me a solar physicist too, because I’m “not exactly sure” how the sun works either !
Well that sounds like a pretty comprehensive declaration of ignorance rather than “not exactly sure. The only thing this statement seems to rule out ( although not explicitly, so they could backtrack ) is that the cause is not outside the sun.
Again, you overreach. If you knew just a little bit more of what is going on, you would know that the debate is about details of the well-known dynamo process which itself is not in doubt.
they have very little idea of what causes something, they’re just “not exactly sure”.
‘Not exactly sure’ means that they have very good ideas of what causes something, but are still debating the details, in this case, precisely at what depth the dynamo process [which is not in doubt] works. It does not mean they don’t anything at all.
“….precisely at what depth the dynamo process [which is not in doubt] works. ”
As I don’t have a scientific degree I took your advice made in another comment and used
my “friend” Google,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamo_theory
In physics, the dynamo theory PROPOSES a mechanism by which a celestial body such as Earth or a star generates a magnetic field
http://www.physics.iisc.ernet.in/~arnab/lectures.pdf
The first sentence of the abstract;
The cyclically varying magnetic field of the Sun is BELIEVED to be produced by the hydromagnetic dynamo process.
In the introduction ;
We BELIEVE that the magnetic fields of not only the Sun, but of all astronomical
bodies, are produced by a process called the hydromagnetic dynamo process
https://www2.mps.mpg.de/solar…/dynamo2013.pdf
talks about the dynamo HYPOTHESIS
This got me a bit confused.
Now , is Google not my friend , or is the Hydrodynamic Dynamo Process not a certainty
like you stated ,(:”which is not in doubt” ) but (merely) a theory/hypothesis like other theories about the Sun , although maybe believed by most of the ‘consensus’, ‘settled ‘scientists.?
That should be Hydromagnetic Dynamo process
lsvalgaard
You know 1 million times more about solar physics than I ever will, so I’ll never say I know better than you when you state that ‘variations in TSI are too small for the sun to affect long-term climate change’.
I will, however, ask a question as an innocent, perhaps deluded amateur:
How are you so sure that all radiative frequencies from the Sun are critical to any cascades which trigger significant ‘climate change’?
Let us suppose, without evidence, but simply hypothesising, that there are a few ‘golden frequencies’ which vary significantly (by which I mean in a way which can have measurable changes in effects on earth’s climate) through solar cycles and between solar cycles.
Would it then matter whatsoever what the TSI was?
I am arguing from the analogy of enzyme kinetics where you could have a ‘carbon soup’ of constant ‘carbon content’ which varied almost imperceptibly. However, let us assume that a key substrate for a key enzyme had a concentration which varied 3 fold in the range where substrate concentration was much less than saturating to the enzyme. In that situation, you can have measurably different outcomes in a linked enzyme system despite the ‘total carbon soup’ concentration being almost identical.
I am speaking from total ignorance and would be quite happy for you to point me and others to the literature which shows that you physicists thought about this long ago and have proven scientifically that this scenario does not pertain in the solar system and on planet earth.
The key ‘variables’ might be:
1. ‘Golden’ frequencies of radiation.
2. Magnetic pertubations.
3. Others.
Quite what the amplification systems might be would be for others to discuss.
As would be the ‘energy sink’ systems and how they store and release energy on different timescales which might manifest themselves in terms of climatic changes.
rtj1211
Sunspot numbers for January 2016 are out (down a bit on December) at around 41 in the old numbers
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN.gif
There is a mountain of science papers based on the old numbers, when there is a stream of new papers using ‘Svalgaard numbers’ than the above graph will change over
I noticed up further that the Dr said the sun or solar cycles do not effect our climate? The LIA occurred when the sun had a sabbatical, how can a Dr of the sun believe it was not the sun that caused it.
C’mon Vuk, stop misleading new readers. You know that the new numbers are not “Svalgaard numbers” but the results of a long process of scientific study and workshops that discussed and analyzed the way the count was being done. Are you afraid the new numbers will make your wiggle matching not so matching?
Hi Tom
Thanks for your comment, hope weather is good in Florida.
a) Various things in field of science are named after scientists who either discovered or made greatest contribution to a particular matter. After reading the relevant document, one could realise that other named persons are just token contributors. When I say ‘Svalgaard’s number’ everyone knows what is meant.
b) Your second point indicates to me that you are not familiar at all with the ‘new data’.,the recalculation increased 19th and reduced 20th centuriy SSN amplitude .
Now take a look at my graph, move up 19th and move down 20th century the red amplitude curve would present even better fit.
Contrary to your comment, I could jump on the ‘bandwagon’ and claim additional benefit of ‘Svalgaard et al’ recalculations, but as I said above, when the new data is in the contemporaneous solar papers the graph will change and consequently benefit visually from the change, but its substance stays the same.
This graph is for benefit of doubting Tom somewhere in Florida
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN-O&N.gif
Using what you again incorrectly call the Svalgaard numbers:
1820 – fail
1870 – fail
1885 – fail
1920 – fail
1960-1980 FAIL
“We’re not sure exactly where in the sun the magnetic field is created”
said Dean Pesnell
Svalgaard’s SS numbers improved a bit the original ‘fuzzy’ correlation. Sun does unexpected departures from a general trend, as far as we can tell from subjective estimate of the SSN count, but in long term it appears the trend is to build-up and run down its activity with periodicity of 100+ years. I have no advanced knowledge why this or another it might do, I just entered 10x and 24x well known orbit number into the equation.
Experts tell us that hypothesis could be validated by its predictability power. Equation was devised in 2003 and published on 8/01/2004, subsequently SC24 peaked in 2014, so one could say so far so good, but it may take anther 10 cycles, and even then no certainty, but you and I wouldn’t be here even if WUWT is, to check it out, hence don’t take it too seriously.
My advice to you Tom in Florida, if your life expectancy is beyond 2025, you could expect down there, masses of new friendly northern neighbours, just joking.
Enjoy the sunshine.
As a real estate agent, I welcome them.
The sun is orbiting the center of the galaxy at ~486000 mph. The sun is also orbiting
the solar system’s center of mass with an average periodicity of ~11.862242 years.
As the sun races along it’s galactic orbit, it ‘writhes’ side-to-side to a number of frequencies.
For more on the side-to-side motion of the sun, visit us at Weathercycles.wordpress.com
TLMango The 11.862242 years is the same time it takes Jupiter to rotate the sun. Could there be a connection to sun spots and Jupiter (the suns biggest moon) Would Jupiter be big enough to block galactic cosmic microwaves when it pass through the suns line of direction ?
To envision the Sun’s presence in the Milky Way galaxy, think of a ship plowing through the ocean, being tossed by currents. As the ship sails ahead, a bow shock spreads around the vessel. http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/solarsystem/voyager-interstellar-terms.html
Jmorpuss,
You have some great ideas! A bow shock would explain why we haven,t been
struck by an asteroid traveling 486000 mph.
Not many are aware of the binary attribute that exists between Jupiter and
the Sun. At Weathercycles we’ve done some work in this area.
A stochastic model for the solar cycle based on data from 1818-2015
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288826889_THE_HURST_EXPONENT_OF_SUNSPOT_COUNTS_A_NOTE
Dr. Svalgaard :
Thanks again for both of your graphics :
http://www.leif.org/research/TSI-SORCE-Cycle-24.png
http://www.leif.org/research/TSI-SORCE-Latest.png
I was hopeful to catch you again here to ask one additional question about these two plots. I have looked quickly thru your files at your website, in hopes of finding a textual introduction to each of the solar parameters shown – most probably have missed it. Do you have a reference for the solar parameters shown OR could you suggest a document ? I greatly appreciate your work.
lsvalgaard
February 1, 2016 at 9:15 pm
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1512.05516.pdf
” We show that the Zh15 model fails to reproduce the well-established features of the solar activity evolution during the last millennium. This means that the predictive part for the future is not reliable either.”
—————————————————————————–
Got it … Thank you Dr.S.
Well back to thinking about pressure changes to the heliospheric bubble and solar differential rotation.
And how this might effect sunspot formation, buoyancy and now Height of magnetic canopies above sunspots.
Wish this current location allowed more time for brain relaxation. Adrenaline rich these days. Here comes the BA door slammer, not just once or twice but a gazillion times…eeeeeek
since the solar wind is supersonic, what happens at its out boundary has no impact on the sun….
Matter is made up of atoms, each consisting of electrically charged parts: a central nucleus, charged positively, surrounded by one or more negative electrons. The nucleus contains most of the mass, whereas the electrons are lightweight, nimble and relatively easy to separate from the rest of the atom. A glowing wire, for instance, emits electrons and can serve as an electron source for the beam used in TV tubes and computer monitors.
A iron ball surrounded by a electrified gas would create magnetism .
How to create magnetism with electrons and iron. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5A5ddgbQv0
Except that the Sun is not an iron ball and it is not surrounded by an ‘electrified gas’ [whatever that is – perhaps you mean like the gas inside a florescent light tube]
I forgot to post a link http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/Education/Ielect.html
lsvalgaard
February 2, 2016 at 6:28 pm
since the solar wind is supersonic, what happens at its out boundary has no impact on the sun….
——————————————————————————————————————–
The “Final Twist,” to this discussion comes from the Hubble.
If Parker could have seen this? What would he think? Take a good look at that twist, omg.
LL Orionis is our assignment today
http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/484695main_11_MO_RoxineAstrospheres.jpg
Finally, watched the Parker lecture from AGU. Wow, blew me away once Prof. Scherrer got into it. He had some great animations depicting current sheet structure over solar cycle and torroidal cycles and so much more. electrograms gotta watch this again. so much great info
From the Parker Lecture, at AGU on demand, channel Planetary Discovery, Prof. Scherrer talks about the “residual zonal flows after removing smooth constant rotation curve” graph he has depicted. bout 36min into video.
Not where’s the beef but:
WHERE’S THE FLUX ?!!!! (said loudly)
That same graph set I referred to above is also showing rotation speed at low and high latitudes.
And the polar regions since 2007 rotation rate is slow slow slow slow and slower…
No Flux Or compression not allowing movement from the lower lats?