All things Solar

[AvantHiatus]

I question our ability to measure Earth's Energy Balance. We can try and do so through satellites, but the estimated imbalance is a magnitude too small for satellites to detect with any confidence. Thus, Energy Balance measurements mainly come from OHC measurements, which are more than uncertain at best.

Yeah, that's what I have been trying to get across on the forums lately. I have used it to argue for more warming but it could also be used for a cooling hypothesis. Good call considering the Earth is mostly water, one would want to direct their attention to Ocean Heat Content.

 

I think in the next decades it will become more obvious where and/or if all the heat is going and the hypothesized effects of global warming such as stronger hurricanes and substantial sea level rise will become more apparent. 

[GaWx]

 Well, right after I posted the above, the SESC dailies fell pretty sharply. 5/18-26 has been nearly 30% lower than 5/1-17 with numbers expected to be mainly on the lowish side for 5/27-31. With that being the case, the chances for May, 2013, to be 100+, officially, has dropped way down from how it looked just nine days ago. Now, it looks like it may not even reach the 11/2011 cycle high to date of 96.7.

Regardless, I'm still going with the highest 12 month average to be within the 2013-14 period. We'll see.

 Looking ahead based on prior weak cycles and other indicators, I'm expecting the moving multimonth sunspot average to start dropping off noticeably around 2016 (maybe starting as early as late 2015) with 2017 seeing the start of an even deeper minimum than 2006-10 (based on past patterns as well as current developments), which itself was the quietest since 1910-14. 2018-22 will be very interesting as far as how quiet it could end up being. There is a realistic possibility that it will be the quietest five year averaged period since one of the Dalton cycle mins, 1820-4, and there is even the chance for it to be the quietest since the deepest part of the Dalton dip, 1808-12! It still remains to be seen whether the current/anticipated mulitdecadal minimum will turn out to have had a sig. cooling effect on our planet. If that is going to turn out to be the case, I'd expect to see some indication of that by no later than ~2018 as that will have given us ~10 years since the prior cycle min.

 

 Monthly sunspots since 1749:

 

 ftp://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/STP/SOLAR_DATA/SUNSPOT_NUMBERS/INTERNATIONAL/monthly/MONTHLY

 

 After looking as if May of 2013 could slightly exceed Nov. of 2011 for the strongest yet of the current cycle based on May data through 5/17, the period since then has fallen off of a cliff and insures that May of 2013 will turn out to be a good bit weaker than Nov. of 2011. It may not even end up all that much stronger than April 2013's 72.4! Something only in the 70's is quite a realistic possibility for the official May of 2013 calculation although something in the low to mid 80's is also possible. Bottom line though is that whereas it actually looked as of 5/19 like May of 2013 could threaten to be near 100, it is going to verify much lower than that.

 

 I'm still looking for the 12 month averaged max. for the current cycle to end up verifying in 2013-14.

 

 http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/indices/DSD.txt

[GaWx]

 After looking as if May of 2013 could slightly exceed Nov. of 2011 for the strongest yet of the current cycle based on May data through 5/17, the period since then has fallen off of a cliff and insures that May of 2013 will turn out to be a good bit weaker than Nov. of 2011. It may not even end up all that much stronger than April 2013's 72.4! Something only in the 70's is quite a realistic possibility for the official May of 2013 calculation although something in the low to mid 80's is also possible. Bottom line though is that whereas it actually looked as of 5/19 like May of 2013 could threaten to be near 100, it is going to verify much lower than that.

 

 I'm still looking for the 12 month averaged max. for the current cycle to end up verifying in 2013-14.

 

 http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/indices/DSD.txt

 

 May of 2013 ended up at 78.7, well below the November of 2011 96.7 max. for this cycle.

[Quixotic1]

Don't look now but we're about to see a spotless sun for the first time in awhile as AR1765 rotates out of view.

 

http://www.spaceweather.com/images2013/12jun13/hmi4096_blank.jpg?PHPSESSID=khookalr124ojpp6o94ud2r655

[GaWx]

Don't look now but we're about to see a spotless sun for the first time in awhile as AR1765 rotates out of view.

 

http://www.spaceweather.com/images2013/12jun13/hmi4096_blank.jpg?PHPSESSID=khookalr124ojpp6o94ud2r655

 

Well, I looked lol. I had thought the exact same thing until I peaked at the latest (6/12) update from your link. I see what looks like a brand new group of two small spots at about 10 S in the middle. Do you see that new group? If so, it would probably keep the official count at a low # even after 1765 rotates off to the right within 1-2 days. Regardless, it has become awfully quiet out there just after having had the loudest 15 day period this cycle to date just back in early to mid May.

[Quixotic1]

Well, I looked lol. I had thought the exact same thing until I peaked at the latest (6/12) update from your link. I see what looks like a brand new group of two small spots at about 10 S in the middle. Do you see that new group? If so, it would probably keep the official count at a low # even after 1765 rotates off to the right within 1-2 days. Regardless, it has become awfully quiet out there just after having had the loudest 15 day period this cycle to date just back in early to mid May.

 

Gotcha.  Was also looking on the eastern limb for new groups.  Oh well.  Two years and counting........SIDC agrees and says the new group is already capable of C flares.   

[SVT450R]

Just seen an article that the sun's magnetic field is about to flip in the next 3 to 4 months marking the peak of the solar cycle.

[Snow_Miser]

Just seen an article that the sun's magnetic field is about to flip in the next 3 to 4 months marking the peak of the solar cycle.

 

Looks like it already has.

 

 

That was a very weak Solar Cycle. Solar Cycle 25 may be even smaller.

[WXinCanton]

Livingston and Penn might be right.   Solar scyle 25 could be a complete dud. 

[calm_days]

Looks like it already has.

 

 

That was a very weak Solar Cycle. Solar Cycle 25 may be even smaller.

 

GaWx has sent me here to share this article which seems to confirm the magnetic flip has already happened, or, that when it happens it is a type of reconfiguration called a quadrupole field.

 

http://hinode.nao.ac.jp/news/120419PressRelease/index_e.shtml

 

I am also curious about the recent article.  Are articles ever published with misinformation just to pass the time?  I didn't think so, at least with regards to solar science, so, there must be some type of disagreement over what is happening behind the scenes.  The more recent article can be found here.  

 

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/sun-s-magnetic-field--is-about-to-flip---warns-nasa-131005894.html

[LakeEffectKing]

Solar activity starting to really get low again (during what was progged just last year to be the "maximum for 24" ....ie late 2013 or so):

(Current daily SSN in bold, below)

# Last 30 Days Daily Solar Data

#

# Sunspot Stanford GOES15

# Radio SESC Area Solar X-Ray ------ Flares ------

# Flux Sunspot 10E-6 New Mean Bkgd X-Ray Optical

# Date 10.7cm Number Hemis. Regions Field Flux C M X S 1 2 3

#---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2013 08 17 125 96 630 1 -999 B3.9 2 2 0 3 0 1 0

2013 08 18 126 134 840 3 -999 B5.4 1 0 0 4 0 0 0

2013 08 19 128 161 1030 1 -999 B4.2 3 0 0 5 0 0 0

2013 08 20 132 115 740 0 -999 B4.8 3 0 0 1 0 0 0

2013 08 21 130 149 730 3 -999 B5.0 4 0 0 9 0 0 0

2013 08 22 132 125 480 1 -999 B5.9 8 0 0 4 0 0 0

2013 08 23 124 127 420 1 -999 B5.0 3 0 0 8 0 0 0

2013 08 24 117 101 350 2 -999 B3.9 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

2013 08 25 113 46 260 0 -999 B3.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2013 08 26 111 35 210 0 -999 B3.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2013 08 27 110 61 390 1 -999 B3.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2013 08 28 108 44 440 0 -999 B2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2013 08 29 109 55 450 0 -999 B2.4 1 0 0 1 0 0 0

2013 08 30 108 62 390 0 -999 B3.1 1 0 0 3 1 0 0

2013 08 31 108 60 340 0 -999 B2.3 1 0 0 4 0 0 0

2013 09 01 104 71 320 0 -999 B2.0 1 0 0 3 0 0 0

2013 09 02 106 84 410 1 -999 B2.1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0

2013 09 03 106 74 360 0 -999 B2.9 1 0 0 12 0 0 0

2013 09 04 109 77 370 0 -999 B3.8 8 0 0 19 0 0 0

2013 09 05 110 75 320 1 -999 B3.7 2 0 0 4 0 0 0

2013 09 06 101 41 260 0 -999 B3.1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

2013 09 07 99 35 170 0 -999 B2.5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

2013 09 08 96 24 90 0 -999 B1.7 0 0 0 2 0 0 0

2013 09 09 94 13 10 0 -999 B1.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2013 09 10 95 23 10 1 -999 B1.3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

2013 09 11 93 53 80 2 -999 B1.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2013 09 12 93 58 81 1 -999 A7.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2013 09 13 92 40 90 0 -999 A9.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2013 09 14 93 24 60 0 -999 A7.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2013 09 15 93 12 30 0 -999 A8.3 0 0

[Geos]

We seemed to have leveled off.

 

[SVT450R]

Have to say the next decade and beyond will be quite interesting with whats going on with the sun and how things will unfold.

[WXinCanton]

Looks like the smoothed max # will be around 60.  Hathaway at one point was predicting 130 or so if I remember correctly.   This next minimum should be very interesting, wouldn't be suprised to see some blank days before the end of the year

[WXinCanton]

X2.1 flare, looks like it could be earth directed as well

[GaWx]

I'm still leaning to the 12 month averaged max. quite possibly not being until 2014 to early 2015 based on past cycle timing.

[NC_hailstorm]

Anyone notice the solar flux number today?

 

213.3

Wow I haven't seen a number that high in over 10 years at least.

[GaWx]

I'm still leaning to the 12 month averaged max. quite possibly not being until 2014 to early 2015 based on past cycle timing.

Folks,

Followup: Indeed, we just passed the highest 3 month SIDC (~92-95) as well as highest 12 month period cycle to date (~75). Although the 12 month avg. may very well sneak up a bit higher between now and Sep. to ~80-85 due to a pretty quiet 6-9/2013 coming off the calc. by Sep., it is my feeling that we very likely are finally maxing out for the three month average and that we just passed the highest level of activity for this entire cycle. Due to this big spike that just passed, I now think the 12 mo. max. will NOT go into early 2015.

After the highest SESC (inflated scale) sunspot count this cycle on both one day (296 on 4/17) as well over a 4 day period (4/16-9), the count suddenly plunged to 71 on 4/24, the fastest weekly drop since Nov. The 71 is also the lowest count since the 70 of 1/28. However, it looks like it may fall further as spot #2042 rotates off the vis. face. If another new spot doesn't emerge soon, it may fall to the lowest level since Nov.

Flux: is now at the lowest since 1/16 and is forecasted to get down to the lowest point since 10/6/13 before rising back in cyclical form.

So, it appears we're finally about to start the big slide down toward the next quiet period, which should be during 2017-23. I still think it has a very good chance to be quieter than the previous cycle min. and to end up as the quietest since at least the early 1800's Dalton.

Aside: I mentioned my expectation of the max being within 2013-14 as opposed to the already past late 2011 peak back on 5/18/13 (see prior page in this thread). So, I feel I have been pretty consistent on my max timing prediction and am keeping with it. This is mainly based on past cycles. Late 2011 was way too early in the cycle for a max per past cycles. OTOH, 2014 is not too early to peak.

 

Edit: The 46 of 4/26 is lowest since the 42 of 9/30/13.

 

[GaWx]

Folks,

Well, the lowest daily flux since 10/6 mentioned in my post above this did not materialize in late April as forecasted. The flux then dropped only to 118, which was then the lowest since 11/26.. However, the lowest since 10/6 was just reached on 5/22 with that day's 111. It is still my feeling that we likely maxed out for the three month average and that we just passed the highest level of activity for this entire cycle. (The 12 month avg. may very well sneak up a bit higher between now and Sep. to ~80-85 due to a pretty quiet 6-9/2013 coming off the calc. by Sep.)

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/indices/DSD.txt

So, it appears we're finally started the big slide down toward the next quiet period, which should be during 2017-23. I still think it has a very good chance to be quieter than the previous cycle min. and to end up as the quietest since at least the early 1800's Dalton. We'll see.

Assuming that happens, it would be "put up or shut up" time imo as regards the potential cooling from a grand solar minimum to counter longer term overall global warming trends. I'm giving it til ~2018 for the globe to finally show a significant cooling trend or else I'll likely finally give up on the grand sun cycles as being a major forcing factor for global temperatures.

[GaWx]

Folks,

 I've been saying that I'm giving it til ~2018 to see if the globe would finally see evidence of a clearcut trend toward cooling that is related to the quieter sun. I had been suspecting a possible lag of 5-10 years vs. the sun based on what happened globally in the late 1800's when the sun quieted down.

 Also, based on the most active 50 year period for the sun in 350+ years, I have had a lot of question in my mind about how much of the late 1900's warming may have been due to the strong sun.

 Today I read the following (which I think was originally written in 2012), which claims about a 11 year lag between sun and earth temp.'s from the following link:

 

 http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/13/new-study-suggests-a-temperature-drop-of-up-to-1c-by-2020-due-to-low-solar-activity/

 

  "A lag of 11 years [the average solar cycle length] is found to provide maximum correlation between solar cycle length and temperature. On the basis of the long sunspot cycle of the last solar cycle 23, the authors predict an average temperature decrease of 1C over the current solar cycle 24 from 2009-2020 for certain locations."

 

"The authors also find 'solar activity may have contributed 40% or more to the last century temperature increase' and 'For 3 North Atlantic stations we get 63–72% solar contribution [to the temperature increase of the past 150 years].''

 

 Any thoughts? IF this were to turn out to be right, there'd almost surely be a sig. drop by 2018.

[nflwxman]

Folks,

 I've been saying that I'm giving it til ~2018 to see if the globe would finally see evidence of a clearcut trend toward cooling that is related to the quieter sun. I had been suspecting a possible lag of 5-10 years vs. the sun based on what happened globally in the late 1800's when the sun quieted down.

 Also, based on the most active 50 year period for the sun in 350+ years, I have had a lot of question in my mind about how much of the late 1900's warming may have been due to the strong sun.

 Today I read the following (which I think was originally written in 2012), which claims about a 11 year lag between sun and earth temp.'s from the following link:

 

 http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/13/new-study-suggests-a-temperature-drop-of-up-to-1c-by-2020-due-to-low-solar-activity/

 

  "A lag of 11 years [the average solar cycle length] is found to provide maximum correlation between solar cycle length and temperature. On the basis of the long sunspot cycle of the last solar cycle 23, the authors predict an average temperature decrease of 1C over the current solar cycle 24 from 2009-2020 for certain locations."

 

"The authors also find 'solar activity may have contributed 40% or more to the last century temperature increase' and 'For 3 North Atlantic stations we get 63–72% solar contribution [to the temperature increase of the past 150 years].''

 

 Any thoughts? IF this were to turn out to be right, there'd almost surely be a sig. drop by 2018.

I'm very interested on the sun's effect on the NAO and local climates, but I just don't believe it could spur a statistically significant cooling trend in the face of so much human made climate forcing.  We generally know the variability between the solar min and max on the incoming radiation and that disparity is I believe only about 2/10 of a watt per meter.  Our planet is currently has a measured energy imbalance of 5 or 6 tenths of a watt during a generally quiet solar period.

 

The sun may have played a small role in global warming, but it would be very hard to claim it was much without a better physical mechanism explaination.

[StudentOfClimatology]

I guess the good news about this is that it's a testable hypothesis.

[Kelathos]

I guess the good news about this is that it's a testable hypothesis.

 

If CO2 warmed us by 1c, and the sun cooled us by 1c, then the sum would be 0 change. Not entirely testable if we cannot pick out the moving parts.

[GaWx]

6/27/14: "New solar theory predicts imminent global cooling":

 

http://joannenova.com.au/2014/06/big-news-viii-new-solar-model-predicts-imminent-global-cooling/

 

 This is from a skeptic's website. Per this website, "carbon dioxide is responsible for less than 25% of the global warming of the last six decades, so presumably the Sun is mainly responsible." (Bad grammar, but I digress.) I, myself, have been wondering about a lagged cooling from weaker solar radiation. I'm giving it til ~2018 to see if we finally see sustained cooling get going due to the weaker sun. I'm still wondering how much of the late 20th century's warming was a result of the strongest 50 year period of solar radiation in 350+ years. We should know a lot more over the next 20 years.

[Cory]

6/27/14: "New solar theory predicts imminent global cooling":

 

http://joannenova.com.au/2014/06/big-news-viii-new-solar-model-predicts-imminent-global-cooling/

 

 This is from a skeptic's website. Per this website, "carbon dioxide is responsible for less than 25% of the global warming of the last six decades, so presumably the Sun is mainly responsible." (Bad grammar, but I digress.) I, myself, have been wondering about a lagged cooling from weaker solar radiation. I'm giving it til ~2018 to see if we finally see sustained cooling get going due to the weaker sun. I'm still wondering how much of the late 20th century's warming was a result of the strongest 50 year period of solar radiation in 350+ years. We should know a lot more over the next 20 years.

 

I've been following the developments of this, and the related battling. I'm not sure how well-grounded his hypothesis/model is yet, but at least he was confident enough in his findings to put out a falsifiable prediction with it. Unlike many people who put out these solar-based forecasts, Evans has the science credentials, so I've been paying attention to it. It'll be more interesting once he releases his model and code and others can tear it apart (I'm skeptical of his "atmospheric bomb test" fudge factor). 

 

His temperature forecast will be easy to check in a relatively short time. 

 

[Harry]

0 is the sunspot number. When was the last time we had 0?

 

http://spaceweather.com/

[The_Global_Warmer]

Spotless Days

Current Stretch: 0 days

2014 total: 0 days (0%)

2013 total: 0 days (0%)

2012 total: 0 days (0%)

2011 total: 2 days (<1%)

2010 total: 51 days (14%)

2009 total: 260 days (71%)

Update 17 Jul 2014

 

[GaWx]

0 is the sunspot number. When was the last time we had 0?

 

http://spaceweather.com/

 

1) 8/14/11 was the last spotless day prior to 7/17/14.

 

2) We also had the lowest flux (89) on 7/17/14 since 6/25/12.

 

3) To compare, the first spotless day in the prior cycle decline was on 1/27/04. I don't want to place too much stat. importance on the first spotless day in the current decline, but I will say that it having come only 10.5 years after the prior one (which went into steep decline to the quietest minimum in early 2009 in ~100 years) does mean it came a year or more early vs. the prior cycle based on the idea of a bit longer than 11 year cycles right now due to weaker cycles (weaker cycles usually longer). So, if anything, that is consistent with the idea that the next cycle minimum will be even weaker than the prior one and quite possibly the weakest since at least the Dalton Min. of the early 1800's. The next cycle min. probably won't be til around the late 2020 to 2021 period. So, we quite possibly have a good 6.5-7 or so years between now and the next cycle min. In contrast, the 1/27/04 first spotless day of the prior cycle's decline was only about 5 years before the subsequent early 2009 min. In other words, we look to have more time (say ~1.5-2 years) to go deeper into minimum than last time. I'll be following the decline very closely. Look out below!

[Harry]

 

Spotless Days

Current Stretch: 0 days

2014 total: 0 days (0%)

2013 total: 0 days (0%)

2012 total: 0 days (0%)

2011 total: 2 days (<1%)

2010 total: 51 days (14%)

2009 total: 260 days (71%)

Update 17 Jul 2014

 

 

 

 

1) 8/14/11 was the last spotless day prior to 7/17/14.

 

2) We also had the lowest flux (89) on 7/17/14 since 6/25/12.

 

3) To compare, the first spotless day in the prior cycle decline was on 1/27/04. I don't want to place too much stat. importance on the first spotless day in the current decline, but I will say that it having come only 10.5 years after the prior one (which went into steep decline to the quietest minimum in early 2009 in ~100 years) does mean it came a year or more early vs. the prior cycle based on the idea of a bit longer than 11 year cycles right now due to weaker cycles (weaker cycles usually longer). So, if anything, that is consistent with the idea that the next cycle minimum will be even weaker than the prior one and quite possibly the weakest since at least the Dalton Min. of the early 1800's. The next cycle min. probably won't be til around the late 2020 to 2021 period. So, we quite possibly have a good 6.5-7 or so years between now and the next cycle min. In contrast, the 1/27/04 first spotless day of the prior cycle's decline was only about 5 years before the subsequent early 2009 min. In other words, we look to have more time (say ~1.5-2 years) to go deeper into minimum than last time. I'll be following the decline very closely. Look out below!

 

 

Thanks guys!

[WXinCanton]

1) 8/14/11 was the last spotless day prior to 7/17/14.

 

2) We also had the lowest flux (89) on 7/17/14 since 6/25/12.

 

3) To compare, the first spotless day in the prior cycle decline was on 1/27/04. I don't want to place too much stat. importance on the first spotless day in the current decline, but I will say that it having come only 10.5 years after the prior one (which went into steep decline to the quietest minimum in early 2009 in ~100 years) does mean it came a year or more early vs. the prior cycle based on the idea of a bit longer than 11 year cycles right now due to weaker cycles (weaker cycles usually longer). So, if anything, that is consistent with the idea that the next cycle minimum will be even weaker than the prior one and quite possibly the weakest since at least the Dalton Min. of the early 1800's. The next cycle min. probably won't be til around the late 2020 to 2021 period. So, we quite possibly have a good 6.5-7 or so years between now and the next cycle min. In contrast, the 1/27/04 first spotless day of the prior cycle's decline was only about 5 years before the subsequent early 2009 min. In other words, we look to have more time (say ~1.5-2 years) to go deeper into minimum than last time. I'll be following the decline very closely. Look out below!

Thanks Larry! SC25 is going extremely interesting to follow for many reasons.