Guest essay by David Archibald
One of the most accurate ways of predicting the amplitude of the next solar cycle is to derive it from the strength of the solar polar fields at solar minimum. And you don’t have to wait for solar minimum. An accurate assessment can be made four years before minimum, which is where we are at the moment. This graphic shows the last 40 years of solar polar field strength data:
Figure 1: Solar Polar Field Strength 1976 – 2016 (source Wilcox Solar Observatory)
And this graph shows that data averaged and all converted to a positive sign:
Figure 2: Solar Minima relative to Solar Polar Field Strength 1976 – 2016
It is evident from Figure 2 that solar polar field strength has an early peak and then relaxes by an average of 12 units to solar minimum before falling away. The recent peak value was 53 in 2016. Therefore the field strength is likely to be 40 at the 24/25 solar minimum. How that value translates to peak amplitude of Solar Cycle 25 is shown in the following graphic:
Figure 3: Deriving peak amplitude of the following cycle
A monthly smoothed maximum sunspot number of 62 is derived for Solar Cycle 25. This would probably be around 2025. This is almost down to Dalton Minimum levels.
In terms of other interesting aspects of solar behaviour, the F10.7 flux has settled into a narrow range:
Figure 4: F10.7 Flux 2014 – 2016
The F10.7 has been in a narrow range over the last two months and is now only just above the immutable floor of activity of 64, though it may be three years to solar minimum.
Figure 5: Oulu Neutron Count 1964 – 2016
The neutron flux caused by galactic cosmic rays is at a rate equivalent to that three years prior to the 23/24 solar minimum. Skies should be getting cloudier according to Svensmark’s theory which will ameliorate the Earth’s “fever.”.
My prediction for the peak sunspot number of Cycle 25 is a monthly count of 62.
David Archibald’s next book is American Gripen: The Solution To The F-35 Nightmare.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Many Things New around Our Electric Sun
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Many_Things_New_Around_Our_Electric_Sun.php
On-going in situ measurements and sky mapping are revealing new and hidden structures in the magnetic plasma bubble around our Sun. Dr. Mae-Wan Ho
……Hidden structures of the heliosphere unveiled
Beginning in the early 1960s, numerous spacecrafts and missions have been launched to study the Sun and the solar system [9, 10]. But the most amazing observations have come lately from NASA’s Voyagers launched 38 years ago and the IBEX (Interstellar Boundary Explorer) launched in 2008. They are overturning long-held assumptions of what the heliosphere is like and raising important new questions…………..
…The flux of TeV galactic cosmic rays varies as a function of look direction in the sky. The large-scale structure in the TeV GCR sky consists of two broad asymmetries with flux variations of ~0.2 %: a deficit of GCR flux at high galactic latitudes and an excess of flux in the heliotail direction. Small-scale TeV anisotropies (<~10 %) in cosmic-ray arrival direction possibly arise from cosmic-ray propagation in a turbulent magnetic field. Because TeV GCRs have radii of gyration ~700 AU (astronomical unit, the mean distance from the centre of Earth to the centre of the Sun, 1 AU = 149.6 million kilometres) in the LISM, the observed GCR asymmetries must originate in the immediate interstellar environment of the Sun.
Cosmic rays are largely guided by the interstellar magnetic field. In their model, a small ratio of perpendicular to parallel diffusion of 0.3 % is assumed, given an interstellar flow nearly perpendicular to the magnetic field direction on the basis of IBEX observations. The LISM magnetic field is further modelled to be deflected around the heliosphere. A sky map is then constructed of cosmic ray flux as viewed from the Sun. The result of the simulation is broadly comparable with the observations (Figure 7).
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/graphics/Many_Things_New_Around_Our_Electric_Sun8.jpg
IBEX has also mapped the boundaries of the heliotail for ENAs [15]. There are two lobes of slower particles on the sides and fast particles above and below, with the entire structure twisted (Figure 8). This pattern is consistent with the fact that the Sun has been sending out mostly fast solar wind near its poles and slower wind near its equator for the past few years.
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/graphics/Many_Things_New_Around_Our_Electric_Sun9.jpg
Heliosphere much smaller than previously thought
Another big surprise is that the heliotail is much shorter than previously thought. For decades, the heliosphere was believed to be shaped like a comet with a very long tail extending some 747 billion km, and a nose protected by a bow shock as it comes up against the interstellar magnetic field. The latest study, however, suggests that the heliosphere is dominated by two giant jets emanating from the Sun’s north and south poles and curving round in two relatively short tails toward the back, confined by interaction with the interstellar magnetic field [16]. The two jets are similar to other astrophysical jets seen in space, which are usually bipolar streams of matter ejected along the axis of rotation of bright compact bodies at the centre of certain galaxies, quasars and stars. This observation is also consistent with the IBEX ENA map of the heliotail (Fig. 8).
Thank You Anthony, for your hospitality and Happy New Year………………………………
You have everything completely backwards.
The cosmic rays you are referring to are the ultra-high Teraelectronvolt particles that are so energetic [and extremely rare] that hhere don’t even see the heliosphere [their gyro-radius is much larger than the heliosphere]. The changes in the size of the magnetosphere is controlled by the Sun, not the other way around. So, for the gazillionth time, your comments are irrelevant and have nothing to do with controlling solar activity. You are beginning to display the same learning disability as Vuk. It is sad that the general public is sinking into the swamp of science ignorance, especially when fueled by pseudo-science and cult adherence.
Sorry, DR S., went off on a tangent today.
This all started because of Plasma Depletion Layers and Piled Up ISMF’s.
How might that look, over a solar cycle?
2.1.5. Time-dependent Heliosphere Results
In Figure 3 we show cross sections of plasma density computed using our time-dependent, 3D MHD/kinetic code, taken during solar minimum (left) and solar maximum (right). Notice the features similar to Pogorelov et al. (2009a), such as the transition between fast and slow SW near ±35° at solar minimum and ±80° at solar maximum, the sectored fast and slow SW densities in the heliotail, and the fluctuations in plasma density propagating through the OHS. We will discuss the effects of these fluctuations on the simulated ribbon flux in Section 4.
http://cdn.iopscience.com/images/0004-637X/804/1/5/Full/apj510437f3_lr.jpg
How do the IBEX fluxes measure up over part of a solar cycle now?
All-sky Maps of Flux Simulated from 2009.5 to 2013.5 are available, below is 2009-2013
Figure 11 shows the percent change in simulated flux for passband 5 (~2.73 keV). Similarly to 1.74 keV, the ribbon flux increases as the source of fast neutral SW opens up toward solar minimum. The largest increase in flux occurs near the simulated ribbon knot, which appears in our simulation near (340°, 35°) at this energy and time. Notice that this is lower in latitude than the observed knot, possibly due to our use of simplified SW profiles that determine the outward-propagating ENA speeds. Nevertheless, the knot increases in flux over this period of time, more so than the ribbon flux at negative latitudes. The average fast SW speed is near 2.7 keV; therefore, passband 5 is a good indicator for the evolution of the fast SW at mid- to high latitudes.
http://cdn.iopscience.com/images/0004-637X/804/1/5/Full/apj510437f11_lr.jpg
As your link reminds you, the ENA is outward-propagating.
The outer heliosphere is controlled by the changing geometry and strength of the outward-propagating supersonic solar wind [as we pointed out 40 years ago] so has no influence whatsoever on what the Sun does and is hence irrelevant for the topic at hand: “solar cycle 24 prediction”.
On slides 22-23 of http://www.leif.org/research/Another-Maunder-Minimum.pdf you can see what the heliosphere look like during a solar cycle. If you can open it the powerpoint presentation http://www.leif.org/research/Another-Maunder-Minimum.ppt shows you the movies on those slides.
On pg. 24 of the pdf there is a statement
” Cosmic ray counts are also influenced by the earth’s magnetic field. We can account for that ”
Is that direct or indirectly? One of the great things about fiber optics is you can run a magnetic field through it all day long and nothing will happen. Cosmic rays shouldn’t be influenced at all by magnetic fields. It’s further up on the spectrum.
The reason I’m asking this, is when I was looking at the solar cycles and co2 levels, from minima to minima in a solar cycle the co2 levels went with it and the cosmic ray activity. What was interesting was 1962/1963 cosmic ray activity and co2 levels (ppm/year) that didn’t follow the solar activity. That was one of the rare times co2 ppm/ yr didn’t follow exactly along with the temperature anomolies for the year.
Carla has made some interesting points. There are some other theories, like However, I think I agree with you on the sun not being influenced by incoming rays. I used to think I knew something about nuclear fusion. I may not know as much as I thought I did. I can’t balance the new information and this information. Yet..
Cosmic rays shouldn’t be influenced at all by magnetic fields.
Yes they should, because they are charged particles [mostly protons] and a charged particle gyrates around magnetic field lines: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyroradius so the Earth’s magnetic field bends the cosmic rays such that some of them does not impact the Earth:
http://www.geomagsphere.org/index.php/test-link
Cosmic ‘rays’ are actually not ‘rays’, but particles.
The name ‘rays’ is kept for historical reasons as people did not know 100 years ago [when they were discovered] that they were nor rays.
Carla has made some interesting points
But they are completely irrelevant for the topic at hand.
That would mean that the light portion of the spectrum is in a notch, much like a filter. Since gravity affects light, it started me thinking about all the frequencies in the spectrum are affected by magnetic fields and gravitational ones. I was probably thinking about all frequencies in the spectrum as just that frequencies. I think I was thinking the particles themselves were in essence frequencies. Which gives me an insight as to how the link up between some particles and magnetism. They’d have to be out of phase by 90 degrees.
Since the magnetic field of the earth has declined, the effects should be apparent. In the course if I think about it, it is already being done. A side by side comparasion of a planet that has a magnetic field, ours, and one that doesn’t, Mars. ( a very sporadic one) or Venus.
That would be really important if we sent a manned mission to another planet. We’d have to generate a magnetic field for protection. By the way, if asked, the weight of the ship has to be exact down to the molecular mole. The metal should be bonded at the atomic level and not molecular. I can make it go, I don’t know how to stop it.
Thank you, and fear the tree.
Since gravity affects light, it started me thinking about all the frequencies in the spectrum are affected by magnetic fields
The cosmic rays are not part of the spectrum as they are not ‘rays’ but protons.
How could I have forgotten that 90% were protons? I probably put them in with the energy levels as cosmic particles are 1 MeV to 1000 TeV. The next group is alpha is 2 to 10 MeV.
Which raises other interesting questions I’ll take up another time. And the rest of the field is below… in ev terms…
Of all the graphs shown above, the most important graph is that on Page 615 of the National Geographic Magazine article quoted above…
http://sealevel.info/NatGeo_1976-11_whats_happening_to_our_climate/
…..which shows temperatures over the last 850,000 years. It clearly shows we are likely at the end of a short interglacial warming period which was actually warmer during Minoan times, Roman Times and Medieval times (including the time of Chingiis Khan) than now. Warming is not the monster….. cold is! Cold weather lessens moisture in the air, creates droughts, causes crop failures and famines. The greatest human expansions occurred during times of plenty….. in warm periods.
We are now facing increasingly cold winters leading to another ice age and need to prepare for THAT …NOT warming.