Research ("space weather") driven severe weather forecasts

[Sunny and Warm]

This is kooky talk in terms of space physics, planetary science and meteorology. Even if there was a timing coincidence between something relating to Jupiter and weather phenomenon, that does not imply causation. Far from it. As far as I can tell, there is no timing coincidence anyway, so probably we should stop there. Trying to make pseudo-astrology sound "science-y" by throwing out science-like words and terminology does not lend any credence to batsh-t crazy ideas.

agree completely. The sun makes up 99.86% of the mass of the solar system. Everything else is a gnat on an elephant's backside with those numbers.

If you really want crazy, look at the Electric Universe hypothesis (I refuse to call it a theory) or the Iron Sun hypothesis.

[Roger Smith]

The problem for all "Sun is cause of all weather" theories is simply this, what then causes one year to be vastly different from another year? The Sun isn't changing very much from year to year. So, for me, the concept of variations from other sources in a solar system magnetic field is not really that counter-intuitive, especially when most research on sunspot cycles and weather yield such low-correlation results (granted, almost everyone is aware of the larger connections between long-term activity and long-term weather, but we're more interested in short-term variations here).

I would put the lack of research results down to a lack of searching so far, even for me as an original researcher into this postulated connection, I would certainly admit that I wasn't expecting this to be a factor and in particular not the second-order rotating elements. It was quite a few years between noticing a large-scale "field" effect and the observation of rotating effects.

Somebody was saying that a similar pattern does not imply cause and effect, which is of course true but not a refutation of any theory, in fact, the opposite would be a refutation, but this is simply not a proof which is different from refutation.

Meanwhile, have located the inner energy loops (always read this as postulated) near central KY but the field at present looks somewhat distorted westward and I think there are probably times when the field projection is degraded or out of focus, possibly with a set of overlapping partial images, then later it would become more unified and better focused again.

The next J-I/J-II event is timed for Tuesday at 23z after J-II is in heliocentric transit at 17z and J-I at 20z. By then, the inner loops will be almost at their opposite point in the 2.48 day cycle, and the GRS will overtake J-I at around 20z. Next report will be on postulated location of this energy peak.

Anyone trying to follow this (and not the chirping about non-science, astrology etc) should note that the retrograde portions of the energy flow will tend to show up as ripples of energy westward across linear (parallel to energy loop) features within which cells may be showing prograde motion, but energy fields show retrograde motion. Sometimes when upper level winds become more easterly in these zones, actual retrograde cell motion develops.

[Ellinwood]

I want more severe weather forecasts. Can't verify whether or not the method works if there's no predictions.

[icebreaker5221]

Did you also use Jupiter to come up with your 22/14/7 tropical forecast?

[Mallow]

The problem for all "Sun is cause of all weather" theories is simply this, what then causes one year to be vastly different from another year? The Sun isn't changing very much from year to year.

Internal variability due to the storage of heat in oceans, the motions and interactions (linear and nonlinear) between and among small-, medium-, and large-scale eddies, and other complex processes like transport and phase-changes in atmospheric water, atmospheric chemical reactions, etc, ad infinitum. There is no reason that one year SHOULD be exactly the same as the next. The sun is the "cause" of all weather only insofar as it provides the energy that gets the whole system in motion... and it's always providing a nearly-constant supply of that energy to a nearly-equal area of the Earth's surface, so by the logic you've used, since the sun is the "cause" of all weather and it's pretty much constant from hour to hour, day to day, one day should be pretty much the same as the next WRT the weather. Obviously that's not how it works.

[WxUSAF]

So, for me, the concept of variations from other sources in a solar system magnetic field is not really that counter-intuitive,

Except it's completely counter-intuitive since there is zero mechanism by which a very distant magnetic field would impact high-frequency, small-scale weather phenomenon over an extremely tiny part of our planet.

Somebody was saying that a similar pattern does not imply cause and effect, which is of course true but not a refutation of any theory, in fact, the opposite would be a refutation, but this is simply not a proof which is different from refutation.

Gibberish. It is not anyone else's job to refute your crazy idea. The burden of proof is 100% on you. So far, you've got 100% of the way to go still.

Meanwhile, have located the inner energy loops (always read this as postulated) near central KY but the field at present looks somewhat distorted westward and I think there are probably times when the field projection is degraded or out of focus, possibly with a set of overlapping partial images, then later it would become more unified and better focused again.

This is gibberish. You still haven't even said how you'd detect this "J-field" let alone know it is distorted in central Kentucky.

Anyone trying to follow this (and not the chirping about non-science, astrology etc) should note that the retrograde portions of the energy flow will tend to show up as ripples of energy westward across linear (parallel to energy loop) features within which cells may be showing prograde motion, but energy fields show retrograde motion. Sometimes when upper level winds become more easterly in these zones, actual retrograde cell motion develops.

This is uber-gibberish. "retrograde portions of the energy flow"?!?!? Retrograde with respect to Earth's rotation? Earth's movement around the Sun? What energy? What flow? "ripples of energy westward across linear features"?!?

Please stop posting this crap and let the mods delete this garbage thread.

[phil882]

The orbital dynamics of the three large inner satellites, Io, Europa and Ganymede, are locked into an interesting pattern that prevents them from all being in the same orbital longitude together. Each set of two overtakes the other one extra time in a complex 437.6-day (approx) cycle that repeats. In each case, the "overtaking" point moves slowly back around the orbital cycles as seen from earth (or the Sun's perspective which is the more significant) so that, as you can test out with the diagram in the link, every 3.55 days, J-I (Io) overtakes J-II (Europa) slightly earlier in the orbital cycle. We will soon reach a point where this occurs in our line of sight (and shortly after that in the Jupiter-Sun line which is currently angled off slightly to the left of our perspective as we swing around in our orbit towards a late autumn opposition with Jupiter). What this means to the energy system is that the periodic J-II and J-I energy reinforcement takes place a little closer to the most energetic position, the top of the loop, and this position is moving coutner-clockwise against the motion of the energy rotations. To set it into a terrestrial framework, the mutual energy peaks are moving west while the components are rotating clockwise. So visualize a system of rotating energy that has a strong flare or peak every 3.55 days with an irregular westward drift. This drift is irregular because positions of other players in the complex system are distorting the simplicity of the J-field's location, and leading to a rather jumpy sort of progression that over a 2-3 month J-field episode will eventually show an eastward component as the entire system tends to move from west to east as we move through. All things considered, there are enough compensating features to provide the illusion of a steady-state system that tends to lock in a storm track and place severe weather in a predictable zone (and with reference to my summer forecast, the zone was reasonably well predicted).

All things considered, I honestly have difficultly following what you are trying to say. All I can understand is that Jupiter has moons that rotate around the planet at various orbital periods. Sure they have their own magnetic field, but I fail to see how their magnetic field has a connection with mesoscale atmospheric phenomena on Earth. The Sun's magnetic field is far more intense and powerful, yet we still have yet to definitively unlock how it influences our tropospheric weather, especially at the small time scales you are attempting to predict here. With that in mind, I am very skeptical on how Jupiter could influence our weather in a reliably identifiable way.

You can't just say X happens therefore Y happens, you need to connect the two different features. For example, the Madden Julian Oscillation produces latent heat release in the middle and upper troposphere in the tropics. This effect can propagate into the extratropics in helping to enhance ridging in the midlatitues. Thus, knowing the position of where the MJO is located can give a forecaster some means for predicting where favorable positions for mid-latitude ridging might result.

The problem with your argument is that you don't have the internal dynamics that allow for you to make the connection. We have a magnetic field that has "energy" and then we have an MCS. What is connecting these two features? You haven't yet provided the "glue" that helps to connect these features in a reliable way that can be easily understood. My fear is that there isn't one, and your forecasting methodology is mainly based on luck.

[OSUmetstud]

Is there anywhere I can find current conditions for Jupiters magnetic field?

Also I believe that HM has posted that high solar activity and more particles actually decrease trospheric instability. Why would energy emmissions from Jupiter that reach our atmosphere result in the opposite?

bumpity bump bump bump

[Sunny and Warm]

bumpity bump bump bump

The difficult leap of faith is knowing that Jupiter's magnetosphere is only 10 times stronger than that of Earth and only stretches as far as ~4 million miles from the planet atmosphere until the solar wind pushes back. How something (Jupiter magnetism) can affect Earth when it comes no closer than many tens of millions of miles to Earth's magnetic envelop is beyond me.

[Ed Lizard]

I'm still waiting for credible links about 'The J-Field" and its measurement and prediction. I can wait on how a field from a large but distant planet can cause severe weather in a regionally specific region.

I actually sort of reached this conclusion days ago, but the refusal to discuss this, and just hand waving about various moon orbits, leads me to believe this isn't even a strange correlation someone noticed with no basis in actual fact, but just complete fiction from someone who saw an SPC Severe Weather Outlook and wanted attention.

[Roger Smith]

Some of the implied motives discussed above are actually quite funny (to me), especially how I did thirty years of research waiting for a favourable SPC bulletin to "get some attention." Okay, no comment on that. However, some of the criticism seems to be that there is no evidence for the theory except for some anecdotal statements. But I do have evidence to offer, as already mentioned, there are temperature profiles that somebody could replicate independently, showing temperature signals on the time scale of the Jupiter synodic year which averages 398.9 days. In the segment of data that applies to this year's position, the temperature curve shows a peak during July and August, and if I then align the data so that Ganymede is held within 1.0-day time intervals (the raw data scatters it) you can see peaks of temperature suggesting a second-order temperature signal that is slightly faster (about 6.8 days) than Ganymede, which suggests a prograde system motion accounting for the 0.3-0.4 day decrease in period of what would be a 7.17 day signal in a stationary system. Also, I have studied rainfall data and found peaks around times of J-I and J-II transit, so at least for the Toronto data there are indications of an actual process and not just a theoretical one.

However, I am still looking at all the data to try to construct a better theoretical proof, which would probably require more data and complexity than I can handle on my own time (research budget would not be a concern since I have everything I need here already). What I am trying to illustrate is the existence of a moving system affecting fixed grid points, and the only indication I can find so far would include such features as I have just described -- perhaps people could comment on whether they would consider these random or not -- temperature profiles that vary by 1-2 F deg around long-term daily averages and have second-order features that can be unravelled from the data on about the same scale, and precip peaks on the order of 3-5 times average amounts during peaks of the J-I / J-II cycles.

Meanwhile, update on the field analysis, Tuesday's energy loop analysis showed that the field has expanded while drifting slightly west (which in the logic of the system means that it has moved slightly forward in space) and the J-I energy track was across northwest ON while the J-II track was across east-central Manitoba into far northwest ON. The inner loops have been very sporadic and basically non-registering since the Monday peak in KY, I think they were represented today by scattered weak convection in northern IL.

Anyway, I hope that the field's performance now to end of August will make a better case for the theory, as I expect it will begin to intensify again (based on many similar cases I have watched previously) and the loops should return slowly southeast as a result, giving multiple outbreaks of severe weather in the Great Lakes and northeast U.S. regions later this month and through August, with the dates already implied (every 3.55 days from today's stated 23z peak). I have already mentioned some of these peaks and will continue to post locations of postulated events moving forward, as well as the inner loop energy with period 2.48 days.

(take a break from reading if you want, I am going to say a few things about how this strange effect might be generated, which is something that people have been asking about -- will post that separately in a few mins)

[Roger Smith]

Okay, this post is going to return to the difficult question, how does such a process even come into existence? You'll have to understand that I would have been very skeptical about it from first principles. The door opened to such a concept in two stages. The first stage was to believe that there were rotating solar system magnetic field segments that are modulated by Jupiter and to a lesser extent by other planets in the solar system (including our own, I would guess, but we are always in the same relative position to those sectors). Actually the last point might be technically in error, the earth-sector features may be moving relative to the earth because of the earth-Moon system but this would probably impact on the overall theoretical system mostly in the timing of events.

And as stated (several times now) this J-field theory as well as other field sector theories have been documented in temperature profile analysis, so from that, I got the basic theoretical structure that the J-field system seems to follow a regular four-field pattern (four field sectors that are encountered in the 398.9-day "J-year") so that there are field sectors on either side of the Sun in two pairs (the flex is almost large enough to make them four equal segments of time but they tend to come in two pairs on each side of the Sun).

Now this part of the theory is not totally at odds with current solar system magnetic field research, and it could open the door to an answer to the question about how the process at Jupiter can possibly extend its influence out beyond Jupiter. Perhaps in these field sectors, the magnetic fields are able to extend Sunward further than the conventional boundary of the "bow shock" and perhaps they are focused through that zone since what we receive here is more or less a mirror image of what you would see from above the north pole of Jupiter (actually what I sketched out is about the view of the J-moon and GRS system from a perspective well out into Jupiter's outer moon region and above the southern mid-latitudes of the planet, a perspective that you could imagine varying, and therefore introducing an oscillation to the projected results). It is not the perspective from above the equator or the south pole, either of those would be (a) linear or ( circular and what we have is ellipsoid. I have estimated that the perspective is from about twice the latitude of the GRS (which is in fact a semi-permanent anticyclone in Jupiter's subtropical southern latitudes, a rough analogy on earth would be the South Indian Ocean high, but the GRS is closer to the equator than our terrestrial subtropical highs.

Side note, the GRS has mystified planetary scientists even those who specialize in atmospheres, because it is apparently not exactly stationary, it tends to wander around relative to Jupiter's rotation, so if it is a response to some feature of the planet's structure beneath, much of which is supposedly gaseous anyway, then it isn't tightly connected to that feature, but if it is entirely atmospheric, then why is it so strong and why does it periodically wander around and sometimes weaken a bit? And from my research perspective, why is it interacting with the magnetic field? I have not isolated any research into Jupiter's magnetic field that answers this particular question.

Getting back to the main topic here, if one accepted that Jupiter's magnetic field had the sort of rotating energy waves that I postulate, then what's my reasoning for how those get projected all the way to the earth? Three possible steps to a theory of this process come to mind.

(1) The effects are strongly "laserized" and like signals from distant space-craft or quasars in deep space, they are not subject to large-scale degradation over distance. I have established (at least I theorize) that the effects are projected at or very near light speed. Thus what we have are laser-like projections of the pattern at Jupiter, and these have the capacity to imprint themselves on the earth's magnetosphere and therefore into the upper atmosphere.

(2) It would be necessary or at least interesting to investigate what happens when these signals reach the Sun. You might imagine that they might dissipate somewhere around Venus or Mercury orbit in the ever-increasing barrage of solar particles and energy flux. However, the theory already postulates that the signals reach earth in all field sectors including those with the Sun between us and Jupiter (as with the current set). They might reach the Sun and be detectable there (I have not attempted to research this and have no theories about it, the sunspots are probably independent of this process).

(3) We can rule out that the energy transfer is by conventional electro-magnetism and even more easily, gravitation. This is definitely a laser-type interaction. The scale of the projected field is about 0.1% of the size of the actual system (on a scale of 1:1000). That makes for some interesting observations. The signature of Io (J-I, a satellite about the size of our Moon) in such a scale model would be about 3.6 kms or 2.2 miles. This is very similar to a thunderstorm cell (linear development of multiple signals would be a process generated by conventional meteorology but the energy for the primary cell in the chain would be signal-generated). The size of a chain of cells that might resemble the GRS / J-I signal would be on the order of 1,000 kms, except that the system is projected at an angle so foreshortened to about 400 kms (250 miles). These are familiar dimensions to all forecasters.

There's something of a break point here, people ask about "proof of the process" and all I can offer is a postulated description. But that begs the question, who on earth here could possibly detact a laser-like signal from Jupiter towards the earth (not saying that it is aimed at the earth, we just get in the way four times a year). I would think NASA might have the resources to investigate this further. The question is three-dimensional, Jupiter's orbit is tilted slightly to ours. When it's at perihelion (as in 2010) it is also below the earth's orbit (in the north-south perspective of above and below) and right now it is slowly rising towards our orbital plane, but still slightly below it. Thus we would be encountering field sectors at angles to our orbital path. Since we are currently in a field sector that curves through the Sun's environs towards the earth, that field sector is presumably tilted upward as it comes away from the Sun, although you could speculate that the far-side sectors are flattened or reflected.

The only proof I could hope to supply would be indirect in terms of forming a theory and making predictions from the theory, as well as investigating temperature and precip data to find signals on appropriate time scales. I have already done most of that. I'm hoping that there will now be a series of fairly obvious energy peaks that correspond to predicted times, and that it could stimulate further interest in the concept. Perhaps some agency with the right resources could investigate the signals in the space environment, obviously I won't be able to do that.

It would require scrapping the barrier presented by visualizing the magnetic field of Jupiter (and other planets to some extent) as being trapped out in the vicinity of the planet and unable to generate any strength beyond that barrier. To scrap that barrier would require observations of a process further into the inner solar system, perhaps by spacecraft in the vicinity of (for example) Mars or the asteroid belt where Jupiter's magnetic signals are not supposed to be detectable. Believe it or not, I have no spacecraft roaming around the solar system at this time. You might even now understand why I "seek attention" in the U.S.A. and not in some other country (perhaps I should try China, they also have a space program, or Russia, they might even believe this).

Not meant to be a joke, but what else do we have to do with our time?

[Ellinwood]

All that text and not one graph or link to a source where we can find out more about J-fields and how they could have any impact on the Earth's sensible weather. We've requested this information from you more than once... if you want anyone to take your thoughts seriously, providing some source material would get you a long way.

[WxUSAF]

Stop posting this nonsense. If this has taken you 30 years to discover, I'm sorry to say you've wasted that time.

[OSUmetstud]

not one ****ing graph on the current Jupiter magnetic data...after a asked twice.

[OSUmetstud]

there should be a way to detect jupiter's magnetic field...we have excellent data from space...we can detect em waves from things 15 billion light years away for god's sakes.

[WxUSAF]

there should be a way to detect jupiter's magnetic field...we have excellent data from space...we can detect em waves from things 15 billion light years away for god's sakes.

Of course there is. Jupiter's synchrotron radiation is easily detectable with a radio antenna...even a homemade one.

[Roger Smith]

Sorry about the rather long pause here, I started to work on some graphs to post and discovered that I needed to check the data file that would generate the relevant graphs for the current situation. This did not uncover any significant data errors but it has taken most of two days to manually cross-reference the math in the data program with actual values of Ganymede transits from the sources I linked.

In other words, I wanted to make sure the graph was 100% accurate because it will resolve some of the questions you have been asking. I will start posting these as soon as I can get them transferred from another computer (my old computer pre-internet vintage has all this data whereas I don't have enough storage space on the internet computer to handle more than transfer files).

What you're going to see on two graphs that I have available will document

(.a.) the 398.88-day cycle of temperature signal at Toronto over 172 years or about 150 "J-years" showing evidence for the four periodic warmings that occur; and

(.b.) ... this is the one that I needed to check for data reliability ... the details that emerge when the 7.166387-day period of Ganymede is isolated by moving columns of J-year data within a 3-day tolerance (read on for reasons) ... but before explaining why that's necessary, I can say that this second graph introduces very large variations in the first set of profiles, variations that are smoothed out for reasons to be explained below.

The 398.88-day cycle of Jupiter is a moving average, the actual situation is that Jupiter speeds up slightly every 11.86 years in its orbit, and produces a series of J-years (synodic years) that vary from 395 days to 405 days. However, I've found that whether I take equal chunks of data (399 days with every ninth column of data short one day to account for the fractional value) or if I assemble data of actual yearly lengths, the overall curves look virtually the same. What's more interesting is how the cases vary as Jupiter moves around its cycle of 11.86-years. That would take a lot of illustration and further discussion that at this stage I would postpone until a closer study of this current case.

However, 399 days is just about 5 days longer than a close-to-exact 394-day multiple cycle of Ganymede, which basically means that any effects of Ganymede will not be seen in the raw curve for the J-year cycle. Neither do they show up in any given segment of data, for example, every 12 years Jupiter returns to about the same orbital position (the filter used is 0,12,24,35,36,47,59,71 etc since after 83 years the position is almost identical ... the exact definition is that Jupiter returns to an identical opposition date after 83 years if there are 20 intervening leap years, and a day earlier if 21.) But this filter, which I used to generate the promised second graph, needs to be adjusted by 1-3 days in various cases to align the Ganymede transits.

When that's done, the original rather bland looking curve takes on more of a "weather" appearance with frequent variations of about 2-3 F deg on either side of the long-term curve, all of which can be related to a theory of rotation of the field system.

So anyway, watch for these two graphs to appear within a day or two, I must apologize for the difficulty in getting this together, but it requires about four time-consuming operations to transfer the graphs from computer to computer and then to make sure they are readable on line.

Meanwhile, I had enough time left over to check for positions of field elements in the past day, and saw a weak signal of the inner loop phenomenon around eastern SD, with best fit to a J-I transit earlier today (this is the only one out of four each week that is not aligned with another satellite) in central SK. This demonstrates that the field has continued to drift west which is equivalent to forward drift in space (relative to earth). From the data in the graphs in front of me here, I would say this westward drift is about to end and the core of the heat wave should begin to move back towards the Great Lakes in second half of July.

I am heading back now to fiddle with these graphs and bring them across the great divide between pre- and post- Gatesian technology that expands in many directions in my mad scientist workshop here.

NEXT MAJOR EVENT -- J-II hel-tr at 06z Sat 14th, J-I hel-tr at 09z Sat 14th, overtake at 12z ... both J-III and J-IV are near "eastern elongation" which being a mirror image of surface directionality means the energy on these outer loops will be near the western ends of the loops moving northward (monsoon alert) ... the next inner loop overtake peak is timed for 18z Saturday.

UPDATE on INNER LOOP PERIOD ... A review of current data and research files has revealed a slight error in the timing given for the inner energy loop energy peak. This is now set at 2.44 days, which is faster by a slight margin but also reverses the gradual turn of the events to counter-clockwise. Thus the next peak on Saturday 14th will occur about 25% of the loop after transit(s) meaning that the inner loops will rush past the slower-moving J-I and J-II peaks at about 17z after their transits around 1530z to 16z.

CONJECTURE on SATURDAY SEVERE POTENTIAL ... Model charts reveal a good set-up in the western Great Lakes and upper Midwest. The J-field analysis suggests a rapid flare of activity rather early in the day against the diurnal cycle which normally would peak around 21z to 02z in the central time zone. All of the J-field energy peaks occur between 12z and 18z. I expect this will interact with the diurnal cycle to bring about a long-lived event starting late morning rather than developing afternoon, and hopefully this event will be a good one to illustrate tracks of the four elements in play.

NEXT POST ... graphs, won't be back to comment before the graphs are done.

[WxMidwest]

Roger, you have to show some sort of scatterplot correlation graph, you need to show the data that X variable leads Y, if it's not linear, show the polynomic/log relationship. You will never be taken seriously until that data is shown, especially in the research world. That's just reality. All The Best...

[Roger Smith]

Graphs are coming, you'll see the detail is quite interesting. I would say look in tomorrow, it's boiling hot here for a change and I am heading out this evening, so probably working on the transfer of files at the midnight to 0300 cool period before I recharge my batteries for another fun-filled 18 hours of scientific dissidence.

[Roger Smith]

Posting the long-delayed charts and graphs now ...

First up, a diagram of the J-field system in space, necessary for explanation of the graph that follows.

This is not to scale, but shows the current situation. Two field sectors connect Jupiter to the Sun, labelled 1 and 2. The numbers follow the development of the theory, in an early stage, it was postulated that one field sector rotated with Jupiter around the solar system; later, it was derived from temperature data that there were two on each side of the Sun in a four-field-sector system. Fields 3 and 4 are the extensions of 1 and 2 through the vicinity of the Sun. We are currently in the J-3 field sector. We were in the J-4 field sector in March and early April. These field sectors are rotating with Jupiter's forward speed which is always in the range of 7 to 9 per cent of earth's forward speed (in terms of angular motion).

Notice in the diagram that Venus is shown exiting the same field sector as it overtakes the earth (this occurred on June 5-6 but the field is about a 2-month sector of space). I will refer to this later.

Next up, the temperature profile of all J-years in the Toronto temperature data. Just a quick note, I compiled this temperature data in F deg (anomalies from long-term averages 1841 to 1980) from original published records that were pre-metric thus in F deg. The data refer to daily means from 1841 to 1980 and then daily max from YYZ as compared to their long-term normal values, when the downtown station stopped producing reliable climate data. I have compared most of the products in terms of pre-1980 and post-1980 and found little change in profiles, so I consider the data set reasonably homogeneous. The data set has been updated as recently as end of May, 2012. The "entire data set normal" has drifted up from zero to 0.08 F deg as a result of the recent warmth in most climate data, but has been spared the more extreme versions of UHI since 1980 by changing from downtown to suburban data and by using daytime rather than 24-hour data.

This data set crunches the 398.88-day "J-year" which you can compare to the chart above, note the position of Jupiter in 1841 shown lower left. This fixes the data series with a Jupiter opposition (when we pass Jupiter, basically, on the inside track), at day 156 (June 5, 1841). There are two ways of deriving a signature for the "J-year" of 398.88 days. You can take every 399 days and drop one day each ninth set to maintain an average of 398.88' days. Alternatively, you can take actual J-years from astronomical data. These run between 395 and 405 days. I have tried both methods and found the derived signal almost identical (correlation .99) so for simplicity I have maintained this 399-day method (with the specified dropped day). The raw data can be shown on a daily scale but it looks rather chaotic that way, so I have shown it in 5-day averages over the 399-day period (the last data point averages 3.88 days). This is the graph of the J-year temperature profile at Toronto:

Some notes on this graph ...

(.1.) The four field warmings are identified by large green numbers.

(.2.) The time scale (horizontal axis) is divided into four periods of 100 days. Also, time "windows" for opposition and conjunction dates are shown. Opposition dates tend to drift mainly later than the first case (day 156, 1841) to about day 165 then back towards day 156. Conjunction dates (defined as Jupiter on other side of Sun from earth) fill the range days 355 to 370.

(.3.) Some general comments on the J-year temperature profile ... the J-3 field warming on average is in the first 100 days of the series, which is where we are now (the latest J-year began June 19, 2012). The J-2 field warming begins around opposition, following a colder period. The J-1 field warming occurs 2-3 months after opposition and refers to the curved or flexed field sector ahead of Jupiter that was encountered last winter. It will not move as far forward as Jupiter by next winter, because as Jupiter slows, the flex decreases. This introduces an important point ...

(.4.) What you see here is the average of all cases of the J-year in 172 years of data (about 155 J-years). But to study the phenomenon more carefully, it is necessary to study segments of data, which means, isolating cases where Jupiter is in similar position. The following rules apply to Jupiter orbital positions:

** Every 12 years, Jupiter is encountered about 5 days later at opposition. This makes the closest analogues from time zero, years 12, 24, 35, 36, 47, 59, 71 and then at year 83 Jupiter is at the same position (within a day).

** With reference to the first graph, note July 1 is bottom and Jan 1 top of the circle for earth's orbit. This makes "EOD September" (earth-opposition September) a sector in space corresponding to the right side of the chart (between 3 and 4 o'clock if you like). This is where Jupiter is moving fastest due to its perihelion approach, at this time it is only 5 A.U. from the Sun. In E.O.D. March on the other hand, it is moving slowest and almost 5.5 A.U. from the Sun. The earth has a less elliptical orbit but is moving slightly faster in January than at aphelion in July.

** In 12-year time segments (that require a shift back at some point to reach year 83), you're likely to find opposition dates about a month apart from JAN to JUN then more like 35-42 days apart from JUL to NOV after which the separation slows to about 33 days. This is where we are now in the cycle. We will pass Jupiter around Dec 4 but at the moment it is located at "EOD Nov 25" so in five months, Jupiter will plod forward the equivalent of ten days of our orbital arc. Being five times further from the Sun, it isn't moving as slowly as that sounds.

** The general principle for establishing segment data for Jupiter is to take all cases of opposition within 15-20 days depending on orbital speed. Thus, for the current year and for index values to be used in my seasonal forecasts, I took the analogue years in this list:

1846, 1858, 1870, 1881, 1882, 1893, 1905, 1917, 1929,

1941, 1953, 1964, 1965, 1976, 1988, 2000

but also looked at years where Jupiter was located across from those years in "EOD May" including 1911 (which produced strong J-2 and J-1 heat waves) -- the reason for that is the symmetry of field structure every half-orbit of Jupiter. This symmetry is not perfect and some adjustments to the May EOD data can be made.

This post being quite long, I will start a new one to post two more graphs that will show more evidence of a Jupiter signal in our atmosphere.

(Natural question already asked and answered -- why does the warming or rotation hit North America when earth is in a field sector? ... Theory says, strongest part of magnetic field located here in trough SSE of NMP, but residuals of other field events then drift downstream and still exist elsewhere around the hemisphere(s), and research on that is proceeding, for example, J-field signals can be seen in the UK "CET" daily and monthly data.)

[The_Global_Warmer]

I am not sure what to make of this yet.

But I for one applaud you Roger for trying to push the envelope with your ideas and putting your ass out there to take the heat for trying to put more pieces to this puzzle.

[Roger Smith]

Segments of data (similar J-years) tend to show larger variability than the overall set, as might be expected. But even in the raw data, there are days that achieve 2 to 2.5 F deg anomalies -- in segment data, there are some cases reaching 4-6 deg. The J-3 and J-4 (encountered in the order J-4, J-3) field sectors are usually warmer than J-2 and J-1, although a lot of record highs occur in J-1 field passages. All of the following heat waves or warm spells occurred in the period of 30-60 days after Jupiter oppositions ... July 1936, August 1948, May to early July 1911, Oct-Nov 1963 and 1975, March-April 1945, and late August 1973.

For now, I am going to try to concentrate on the current situation, so the J-year segment of interest contains the analogues mentioned in the previous post, and generates a particular signature that looks fairly similar to the long-term (all data) signature although the J-3 field segment is stronger. There are all sorts of details that can be found by studying these segments of data, for example, the perihelion warmings are wider, the March-April EOD warmings are strong relatively for J-1 and J-2, the February and August EOD warmings are weaker than most other years (on average).

Now the segment profiles can be developed into studies of rotational elements. As I explained earlier, the raw data don't show the rotational elements because these are scattered at random in the data. But it's relatively simple to isolate such elements as J-III (Ganymede) and J-II (Europa) in the data, as I show in the following example. This is the segment data (Nov 15 to Dec 20 oppositions) for the current situation, but adjusted so that each of the sixteen cases in the data set are aligned with the first in the series (1846) where the J-year begins June 19th and the first Ganymede transit occurred on June 20, or day 2. All other cases were shifted so that they began on whatever first date would place a Ganymede transit on day 2. For this year, that adjusts the "signal" or index value to a start date of June 24 to give Ganymede transits on June 25, July 2, 9, 16, 23 and 30 (after which they skip one day forward and run August 7, 14, 21, 28).

I have isolated just the data for July 2012 from this index curve, and it shows quite clearly that the field warming is predicted, and that it is modulated by Ganymede (as the energy from that satellite rotates around the system as shown a few posts back in my first graph of energy loops).

The graph shows output from the temperature series as defined, in F deg anomalies over the period 1846-2000. The red dots are the raw data, the vertical lines are days with Ganymede transits (each one is four hours later) and the blue line is a sketch of where I would estimate the "modern climate adjustment" would run for this signal (from experience, I have found that the index peaks are more conservative than the rest of the data, in other words, the recent warming applies more to the colder output).

Now, please be clear that this is not a temperature forecast for July, 2012, it is the J-field adjusted signal that goes into a more complex model of many other variables. There are other identified field sectors in the research model, as well as several lunar signals. All of these are derived in similar ways from analogue data sets and constant refining of results from forecasts.

In the current case, as illustrated by the long-range forecast (published separately in a thread on this forum), it was anticipated in May from the research that severe heat waves would develop in central and then eastern North America. The J-field dynamics were an important part of that consideration but not the entire story. The retrograde signal of Venus in the temperature data was also important. In very non-scientific terms, what was expected (and delivered, I would say) was that a retrograde signal of warmth would push WSW against a slowly advancing heat dome, intensify the heat dome around Kansas, then partially detach later in the summer allowing for separate eastern and western heat regimes. The WSW motion (due to southward motion in orbit of Venus) would concentrate extreme heat in the desert southwest.

From what I've observed, the field reinforcement and overlap occurred when the record highs were achieved around June 20-25 in Kansas. Since then, Venus has begun to emerge from the J-3 field and this may (speculation) be the reason why some of the J-field rotation and warming has drifted forward in space (thus westward in our magnetosphere) -- important principle of this research, events in space AHEAD of the earth appear west of the prime timing line, and events in space BEHIND the earth (in orbital terms) appear east of the timing line. Thus Venus and Mercury effects are retrograde and capable of moving north or south as well as west due to large inclinations of field sectors.

Mars field sectors are also quite large in the temperature data and follow the same logic as Jupiter, except that there is no rotational energy, just a large expanse of higher pressure (in the upper atmosphere) -- the current case has some warming from the Ma-4 field segment.

Note that the Venus-Jupiter interaction has only one recent analogue, 1988, and the Venus-Mars interaction also one recent analogue, 1980.

My original forecast for intense heat peaking later in July and early August was based on the total research model output and I still fear that another very intense heat wave will develop, because the J-3 field is evidently beginning to reconsolidate after being somewhat diffused by events this past week, and also, a retrograde Mercury warming is due in late July moving WSW across the eastern US. This will be seen in the form of enhanced 500-mb height building over the east coast later this month as a similar interaction to the Kansas event in June takes place (Mercury-Jupiter reinforcement). The best analogues are 1952 and 1953. Severe heat developed in both cases.

I was asked earlier about the hurricane forecast which has appeared to be well out of the conventional ball park of estimates for this year -- despite the fact that we have logged four named storms already, I can see the potential for the El Nino suppression concept winning out, but the analogue years pointed towards a possible strong season like 1995 or 2005 and the J-field analysis suggested a very hot summer which is often accompanied by above average tropical storm activity. That is the only major connection of the Jupiter research concepts to the hurricane forecast, I would say that elements of the retrograde field segments are more significant there. In the developing theory, I note that tropical storm activity can be viewed as interference patterns of inner (retrograde) planet field sectors moving through warm environments created by prograde fields. There are also correlations to the Moon's north-south declination cycle and to aspects of the S-field analysis (which I won't even touch here, maybe after the autumn if people are still interested, we should have a good example of S-field rotation which is cyclonic rather than anti-cyclonic, in the autumn months, right now those elements are not active in the North American sector).

But the tropical outcome is still very much of a mystery, I am not going to be too surprised if the count is much lower than I estimated, because I respect the research done on the teleconnections and seek to understand how to blend the two approaches, this is not some alternative theory of meteorology, it is just a search for working processes in the background and then let conventional meteorology take the energy and circulation elements from the basic theoretical foundation. So, I hope this has at least begun to satisfy the requests for charts and data. I am working on a similar application of the segment data to J-II (Europa) temperature cycles and this already looks promising (the period is 3.55 days). I also have (somewhere on an even older computer) a data analysis of rainfall at Toronto that shows the J-I signal very well, but that computer needs a new monitor, I can't see the files properly today (although I have notes on them, but we want to see graphs and charts, so ...).

[Roger Smith]

I am not sure what to make of this yet.

But I for one applaud you Roger for trying to push the envelope with your ideas and putting your ass out there to take the heat for trying to put more pieces to this puzzle.

Thanks, I am almost resigned to the idea that mainstream (academic) publication will be next to impossible for a variety of reasons, complexity being one, my age and sheer volume of data, unorthodox subject (although really when you think about it, signals on time scales that are in the background of a lot of discussion, a lot of electrical energy coming down rather than up, makes me wonder which part of this is really so unconventional).

And also, the system seems to work at least more so than random chance might suggest. The data sets tell their own story, but the signals are not huge, it takes a large number of them interacting to build up to anything resembling real-time weather patterns. If Jupiter was the only other object in the field of play, all of this might have been noticed a long time ago. But my research indicates that total Jupiter signals are in the range of 15 to 30 per cent of total variability observed at the places I've had time to study, and I have of course chosen places close to the jet stream, it's quite possible that a similar analysis for a lower or higher latitude location might show much weaker signals (and stronger ones for other variables).

[OSUmetstud]

I can't believe someone said that something will be almost impossible to publish due to complexity. Have you read scientific papers before? Some of them are incredibly complex and difficult to understand.

[WxUSAF]

But I for one applaud you Roger for trying to push the envelope with your ideas and putting your ass out there to take the heat for trying to put more pieces to this puzzle.

Why do you applaud glorified astrology? If you respect science (which you should if you're on this board) then you should decry this. Publically stating your "ideas" doesn't give them automatic validity and make them worthy of thought.

this thread is still free of actual scientific content.*

*apart from the fact Jupiter exists.

Ganymede, Europa and Io exist too. As does Jupiter's synchrotron radiation.

I can't believe someone said that something will be almost impossible to publish due to complexity. Have you read scientific papers before? Some of them are incredibly complex and difficult to understand.

It's unpublishable because it's fantasy.

The figure of the "J-field sectors" is fundmentally impossible if this "J-field" is supposed to be part of/due to the magnetic field. Magnetic field lines do not CROSS the Sun and then extend out the other side. It fundamentally doesn't work that way. Open magnetic field lines from the Sun do connect to the Earth and Jupiter, but that figure is a joke.

[Roger Smith]

Okay the predictable hostile critics have come and gone, I will continue to post more evidence and make some forecasts of upcoming events. I'm not sure why some people challenge you to post data and then say the data is irrelevant, that would obviously not be my conclusion and who else was predicting major heat waves this summer in April or May? I've given an absolutely clear explanation of my reasoning and would frankly say some of the hostile critics are in advanced denial.

[Roger Smith]

From previous poster ...

"The figure of the "J-field sectors" is fundmentally impossible if this "J-field" is supposed to be part of/due to the magnetic field. Magnetic field lines do not CROSS the Sun and then extend out the other side. It fundamentally doesn't work that way. Open magnetic field lines from the Sun do connect to the Earth and Jupiter, but that figure is a joke."

Comment ...

Solar system space is three-dimensional. The field sectors could theoretically wrap around the Sun or any space within 0.2 A.U. of the Sun and continue on. How do you explain the temperature signals and the rather obvious correlations to Jupiter's orbital positions?

While the diagram may give the impression of flat features in our orbital plane, they should be visualized as cylindrical. Some of the details in data suggest stronger effects at edges and weaker effects within the "tubes" as the earth traverses the space. Also, at peak inclinations, some field sectors can largely miss the earth north or south. I have some evidence of Mercury field sectors overshooting the north polar regions at peak inclinations of inferior conjunctions in Jan-Feb.

Also, I would ask any critic this question, how would you explain a fivefold increase in daily precip in the 6-12 hour time frame after J-I transit, observed over 100 years of data? What other process operates on a time scale of 1.8 days and just happens to be active at this part of a distant satellite's orbital cycle? At some point, high correlations and strength of signal are more than coincidences. They must at least point to related processes.

A TV set would be a fantasy to a New Guinea jungle dweller.

[phil882]

Posting the long-delayed charts and graphs now ...

Its going to be very hard to disprove your skeptics if all you are going to provide is plots created in microsoft paint. These are not professional quality figures.

I honestly don't know if you are on to something or not here. I don't have a background in astronomy and most of this information you have provided is way over my head. Thats ok as long as the presenter is able to "speak" to his audience in terms that they can understand. The main problem with this thread is that you haven't done that. You need to simplify your argument in order for us to understand what you are trying to say. Graphs and figures help, but not when they are very busy with a lack of labels (other than the annotations you have provided in your write-up)

I love it when new people publish new findings that make you completely change the way you view things. But with that, you need to obtain some form of understanding of the concept being given for you to understand its importance. Your research might be groundbreaking, but if nobody can understand it, it might as well be rubbish.

[Ed Lizard]

So is the J Field measurable, or do you just assume something based on various moon orbits around Jupiter?

Also, I would ask any critic this question, how would you explain a fivefold increase in daily precip in the 6-12 hour time frame after J-I transit, observed over 100 years of data? What other process operates on a time scale of 1.8 days and just happens to be active at this part of a distant satellite's orbital cycle? At some point, high correlations and strength of signal are more than coincidences. They must at least point to related processes.

Five fold increase where? "100 years of data", that seems to imply this is pure astronomy. And the few images are crude Paint handwaving exercises, best I can tell.