Major east coast snowstorms and lunar cycles

Roger Smith · January 3, 2011

Analysis of the dates of K-U storms by lunar cycles

__________________________________________

This report is an expanded version of the discussion that has been lost in the closing down of Eastern U.S. weather forum.

Introduction

From the paper entitled "A Snowfall Impact Scale Derived from Northeast Storm Snowfall Distribution" by Paul J. Kocin and Louis W. Uccellini, available on-line here

http://www.ncdc.noaa...n-uccellini.pdf

I followed the list of seventy storms mainly derived from 1951-2004 but with four earlier storms added in (by the authors), found on page 16 of the document. To their list, I added the major storms of last winter (2009-10) and the storm of March 1-2, 2009, as well as storms from 2005, 2006. This added a total of nine, and also I found a list of seven additional major snowstorms in years between 1900 and 1940 to add, seven in total, making a grand total of 86 snowstorms. There are no doubt a few others in the period 1900-50 (the Dec 1947 storm is in the K-U list) that could be added, and perhaps one or two from 2007 and 2008. Reader suggestions are welcomed. Except for the blizzards of 1888 and 1899 there are no 19th century storms in this study, but a further project might be to assemble a list (as Don Sutherland has already done) and study those dates independently to seek either similar results in that earlier period or some evidence of systematic changes.

From this data base of 86 storms, I analyzed where these high impact northeast U.S. storms fell during the 29.53-day lunar cycle from new moon to new moon, and then on the shorter 27.32 day cycle of the Moon's declination. The Moon's orbit brings it to a northern maximum of declination at the full moons of late December, and to a southern maximum of declination at the new moons of late December. By late February, these northern and southern maxes are about five days earlier than full moon and new moon, respectively.

The intent of this analysis is to provide some evidence that storminess is enhanced near the times of full and new moon, as well as near northern and southern max.

The evidence is presented in a graphical format that makes the frequency easy to visualize.

In the next section, each of the storms is placed in a graphical table so that both its seasonal position and position relative to lunar cycle of that particular winter can be seen. The date entered for each storm is the first date of however many days the K-U storm lasted, with one exception -- storm 25, given as Feb 22-28, 1969, was arbitrarily placed at Feb 26 as this was the date when pressures off the New England coast were lowest in this long period.

Readers of this analysis will need to consult the page cited in the Kocin-Uccellini paper, to determine the actual dates of the storms, which are listed by number.

My analysis can be augmented at a later date by any other storms that readers here might agree meet the criteria of a K-U storm.

Seasonal and Lunar Dates of Storms

The graphical table below is set up so that the winter season (the range of K-U storms is mid-November to early April) runs from top to bottom, and the actual lunar cycle dates run from left to right. The winter season portion of this graphical table is divided into five-day intervals. To give one example, storms that occurred Dec 26, Dec 27, Dec 28, 29 or 30 would be in the same row of this table. The thirty possible lunar dates are identified, and the left margin of the table is seven days before new moon. This places the new moon portion of the table one-quarter of the way into the graph from the left, and the full moon portion one-quarter of the way into the graph from the right. The letters n and f identify new and full in the table, and n-3 for example means three days before new moon.

To simplify the graph, storms cited on two or more consecutive days are placed on the date that follows these rules:

-- 2 day storms are placed on day one

-- 3 day storms are placed on day two

-- 4 day storms are placed on day two

-- 5 day storm was placed on day three

and as mentioned the Feb 22-28, 1969 storm is placed on Feb 26.

Also, note that the date of the new or full moon closer to the storm date is converted from UT with the protocol that storm lunar date starts at 06z and ends at 06z, therefore a new moon at say 0314z of March 2nd would be calculated as occurring on March 1st. A further refinement of this study could be contemplated with six-hourly time segments rather than daily segments but with the historical storm records this would involve a huge amount of work that might not greatly refine the overall basic structure of the process we are studying here. In any case, real-time case studies can be applied to these more exact details.

In a few cases in the following chart, two storms occupying the same data point are listed without a space between them, for example, storms 35 and KK.

TABLE OF K-U STORM DATES BY SEASONAL AND LUNAR DATES (numbers in graph refer to cited reference list of storms, for letters, see legend below)

DATES ... n-7. -6. -5. -4. -3. -2. -1. new. +1. +2.+3. +4.+5. +6.+7. f-7. -6. -5. -4. -3. -2 -1. full +1.f+2. +3. +4. +5.+6.f+7

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

11-26..............................................................................................51.....................................

12-01..............................................58..............................................................67..................

12-06.......................................................................................................................................

12-11.........18..............................................................................................................................42

12-16................................39.......................DD....................................................................

12-21.....................................................................................40........................28.........................66........21.

12-26........................................................................48.......................64...................35KK..........13

12-31......................................................52..56...................................................................

01-05....45...........................................47...................................................................................02....16.

01-10.......................................12...............................................................................................................43.

01-15............................................................36............................................................59........................

01-20....15...........................................19...................................24............11.AA................................QQ.

01-25.....................61..........................32...................................................................................................41

01-30..................................................................34........................14.......................57..EE..........09..............FF

02-04.....................GG..27........08............................70.........................................................NN........

02-09......................................07...17.....05.................................................................BB................................38

02-14.....................10......62........................................RR..............63........................03.................23.........55...20.

02-19................65...................................................22..49PP......................................................

02-24................25............................................................................................JJ.........................

03-01.......................................................................LL..06CC...30....33...........................................................37

03-06.............................................46............................68......................................................

03-11..........................54...............04...........31..........................................................................................01.

03-16.......................................26........................44......53.......................................................

03-21..........................................................................................................69..............................

03-26......................60..................................................................................................................

03-31....50........................................................................................................................................MM..

04-05.......................................................................................................................29...................

freq....03 , 01 ,02 ,04 ,02 ,02 ,04 ,04 ,03.,02. 04.,02 ,04 ,07 ,01 ,02 ,02. 03..02. 04. 01.,04.03. 01,.02. 04.,03. 04, 03 02

Key to added later major storms:

AA Jan 22-23, 2005

BB Feb 12, 2006

CC Mar 2 2009

DD Dec 19 2009

EE Jan 30-31 2010

FF Feb 5-6 2010

GG Feb 9-10 2010

HH Feb 25-26 2010

JJ Dec 26-27 2010

Key to added 1900-50 storms

KK Dec 25-26, 1909

LL Mar 1-2, 1914

MM Apr 3-4, 1915

NN Feb 4-7, 1920

PP Feb 19-20, 1934

QQ Jan 22-24, 1935

RR Feb 14-15, 1940

(source: "Great Storms of the Twentieth Century" which goes on to include most of the K-U storms)

Roger Smith · January 3, 2011

Having trouble with my edit function, the above graph will be copied and fixed up as the right side of the table at present time has scale problems (the left two-thirds of the graph has columns lined up). Also JJ on the graph should be HH and JJ should be added in the Dec 26 line at F+5. That will change the third last frequency from 4 to 5. As I am having some trouble getting the edit function to work, I will leave a final edit of the graph for tomorrow. The main features of the graph are as follows: -- peak frequency near new moon is most notable in February, but over the entire period amounts to an increase from 8.6 at random to 11 storms in the 3-day period n-1 to n+1. The period 4-5 days before new moon accumulates only 3 storms compared to 6 expected. The new moon storms include the blizzard of 1888. The period n+5 to n+6 becomes very active in late February and March, and has 11 storms compared to 6 expected overall. This cluster occurs in early spring when n+6 is close to N Max. - The period from about full minus 7 days to full moon minus 2 day is generally devoid of storms, in this seven day stretch, the total count is 15, compared to 20 at random. From there on, the count is either near random or somewhat above indicating that full moon is not quite as powerful as new moon although some of the more intense storms are on this side of the graph (the blizzard of 96 started right about the full moon although it falls into the column F+2). I will return to this analysis in more detail, if we count intensity as well as frequency, the relative strength of the new and full moon are somewhat clearer in the data. However, the graph (especially when fixed up on the right edge) displays another visually evident tendency, a clustering along diagonals running in two sets, one from about the center in December to the left edge in late February, and a second diagonal running from the right edge in December to the center in March after which it would likely continue if we plotted major coastal lows with rain instead of snow. These two diagonals are the southern max and northern max signatures. They intersect the vertical new and full moon columns around 12-21 to 12-26, and run ahead from that point on due to their shorter period. It is quite clear on the graph (and this was discussed on the Eastern US version) that by late winter, southern and northern max, occurring 4-5 days before new and full moon respectively, are actually the more likely times for severe snow storms. This is in my opinion because the energy peaks at northern and southern max, once they become independent of full and new moon, are stronger by 30-50 per cent. I also see this same stronger signature in storm analysis in the Toronto data. A few major coastal lows failed to make the K-U list because they dropped snow only near southeast VA such as the intense leap year day storm of 1980 (full moon was Mar 1 at 2100z). Now, one may ask, what happens when the weather is too mild for a snowstorm in winter? My research indicates that this set of strong storms then shifts northwest along timing line one in my geomagnetic grid. The timing line runs from approximately Duluth to Chicago to Charleston SC, and therefore the typical major east coast low has already crossed that timing line (presumably at event time) and takes a further 12-36 hours to reach a position east of NJ or the Delmarva where typically a major snowstorm will occur as the low travels northeast. Therefore, the milder weather patterns can have one of two results, either a coastal rainstorm similar in track to these snowstorms (this set should overlap the analysis here), or a low moving further inland (a lake cutter or Colorado low) and crossing timing line one in the Ohio valley or Great Lakes. Very few of these major east coast lows are also major snowstorms at Toronto (Jan 22-23, 1966 was one exception) but an analysis of major snowstorms at Toronto also reveals a tendency for peaks at northern and southern max, full and new moons. A variety of major weather events can be found associated with these winter energy peaks. For the Great Lakes, here is a very brief additional list: Blizzard of '99 ... full moon was Jan 2 at 0250z Superstorm of '78 full moon was Jan 24 at 0756z major Great Lakes storm close to the new moon of Jan 12, 1975 (1020z) the central Ontario blizzard of Apr 2-4 1975 was at southern max the major Chicago snowstorm was raging at the full moon on Jan 26, 1967 (0641z). ... this low also gave heavy snow in southern Ontario on the 26th-27th after the northern max low brought record warmth two days earlier. Toronto was paralyzed by the N Max - full moon event in Jan 1968 (N Max Jan 13 to full moon Jan 15 1612z). This period in mid-January is about the latest that N Max and full moon energy can combine into one weather system. Part of the reason behind the "January thaw" phenomenon is that every two or three years there is a set of N Max and full moon events somewhere around the 20th to 25th that have achieved the 3-day separation that is required in this theory to promote fully separated cyclonic storms. The timing of lunar perigee is always a factor in the actual separation time of events. This process of storminess at the winter full and new moons when augmented by N and S Max energy has been in place since records began, as I've found by analyzing data from various 30-year segments of Toronto's data which goes back to 1840, and in earlier records from U.S. sites in the 1780s and 1820s-1830s. Another example is that Toronto's lowest pressure was set on Jan 2, 1870 (new moon was at 0005z on that date which would tend to place a low near Lake Michigan at that time). In a day or two when I've had a chance to restore the graph, I can then go on to post some numerical evidence from the Toronto data series of the signatures of these events. From this study, the reader will probably see without much further discussion needed that there would need to be a more pattern-sensitive study made, since a cold pattern would produce one signature and a mild pattern a rather different one (storm track shifts northwest rather than due north by timing lines in this theory). This is probably the reason why earlier attempts to isolate the lunar effect on the atmosphere failed. The researchers did not realize that they were dealing with a process that could either hit their selected station, or in a different weather pattern, hit a site further northwest or southeast. But the general logic of the system is that storminess is at a peak near timing lines at event times, and then peaks at places between timing lines after event times (or before if they are fairly close but to the west of the lines). Another piece of the puzzle is that nine timing lines about 40 degrees apart can be identified, and if you take an energy wave and move it east around this grid, the average time separation if the energy wave is orbiting the hemisphere at the speed of the Moon's orbit (oblivious to the rotating earth) would be 3.1 to 3.3 days depending on which lunar event. Now that translates to 13 degrees of longitude per day. Have you ever noticed how regular the eastward motion of most low pressure systems is, and how this tends to repeat from year to year for similar types of systems, although there is also a range of perhaps 10-15 deg a day (obviously some systems go slower than this because they are occluding and dying or else are upper features that probably aren't induced by lunar-atmospheric interactions). I noticed this back around 1980 when I first thought of looking beyond the simple full and new moon approach to other gravitational peaks of energy. Anyway, I shall continue this discussion some time much later, and invite readers to pose any questions or submit any storms of interest that they feel should be added to the list, or storms that are of interest. I should note that the timing lines have been observed to oscillate east-west and that this can bring storms to the east coast a little before these peaks or as much as 1-2 days later than average. When you factor in that some storms are very slow-moving, this alone can produce a spread in dates but any reasonable analysis of long-term data will show a peak of activity related to the astronomical events.

Inudaw · January 3, 2011

Very interesting and a bit out there. o-o; A quick glance shows a wide spread. Be interesting to see the statistical analysis on this. Definitely not conventional by any means, but I always like the delve in to the scientific method of testing hypothesis.

What kind of statistical test you going to use on your data set?

Roger Smith · January 3, 2011

Oh boy, we are getting back to this editing hassle with the coding, perhaps this will self-correct after a while. Sorry, not my fault.

donsutherland1 · January 3, 2011

Oh boy, we are getting back to this editing hassle with the coding, perhaps this will self-correct after a while. Sorry, not my fault.

Roger,

I fixed your post for you. You can use the "other styles," select "HTML," then copy and paste the text in the box.

Your message follows:

Having trouble with my edit function, the above graph will be copied and fixed up as the right side of the table at present time has scale problems (the left two-thirds of the graph has columns lined up). Also JJ on the graph should be HH and JJ should be added in the Dec 26 line at F+5. That will change the third last frequency from 4 to 5.

As I am having some trouble getting the edit function to work, I will leave a final edit of the graph for tomorrow.

The main features of the graph are as follows:

-- peak frequency near new moon is most notable in February, but over the entire period amounts to an increase from 8.6 at random to 11 storms in the 3-day period n-1 to n+1. The period 4-5 days before new moon accumulates only 3 storms compared to 6 expected. The new moon storms include the blizzard of 1888. The period n+5 to n+6 becomes very active in late February and March, and has 11 storms compared to 6 expected overall. This cluster occurs in early spring when n+6 is close to N Max.

- The period from about full minus 7 days to full moon minus 2 day is generally devoid of storms, in this seven day stretch, the total count is 15, compared to 20 at random. From there on, the count is either near random or somewhat above indicating that full moon is not quite as powerful as new moon although some of the more intense storms are on this side of the graph (the blizzard of 96 started right about the full moon although it falls into the column F+2).

I will return to this analysis in more detail, if we count intensity as well as frequency, the relative strength of the new and full moon are somewhat clearer in the data.

However, the graph (especially when fixed up on the right edge) displays another visually evident tendency, a clustering along diagonals running in two sets, one from about the center in December to the left edge in late February, and a second diagonal running from the right edge in December to the center in March after which it would likely continue if we plotted major coastal lows with rain instead of snow.

These two diagonals are the southern max and northern max signatures. They intersect the vertical new and full moon columns around 12-21 to 12-26, and run ahead from that point on due to their shorter period.

It is quite clear on the graph (and this was discussed on the Eastern US version) that by late winter, southern and northern max, occurring 4-5 days before new and full moon respectively, are actually the more likely times for severe snow storms. This is in my opinion because the energy peaks at northern and southern max, once they become independent of full and new moon, are stronger by 30-50 per cent. I also see this same stronger signature in storm analysis in the Toronto data.

A few major coastal lows failed to make the K-U list because they dropped snow only near southeast VA such as the intense leap year day storm of 1980 (full moon was Mar 1 at 2100z).

Now, one may ask, what happens when the weather is too mild for a snowstorm in winter? My research indicates that this set of strong storms then shifts northwest along timing line one in my geomagnetic grid. The timing line runs from approximately Duluth to Chicago to Charleston SC, and therefore the typical major east coast low has already crossed that timing line (presumably at event time) and takes a further 12-36 hours to reach a position east of NJ or the Delmarva where typically a major snowstorm will occur as the low travels northeast. Therefore, the milder weather patterns can have one of two results, either a coastal rainstorm similar in track to these snowstorms (this set should overlap the analysis here), or a low moving further inland (a lake cutter or Colorado low) and crossing timing line one in the Ohio valley or Great Lakes.

Very few of these major east coast lows are also major snowstorms at Toronto (Jan 22-23, 1966 was one exception) but an analysis of major snowstorms at Toronto also reveals a tendency for peaks at northern and southern max, full and new moons. A variety of major weather events can be found associated with these winter energy peaks.

For the Great Lakes, here is a very brief additional list:

Blizzard of '99 ... full moon was Jan 2 at 0250z

Superstorm of '78 full moon was Jan 24 at 0756z

major Great Lakes storm close to the new moon of Jan 12, 1975 (1020z)

the central Ontario blizzard of Apr 2-4 1975 was at southern max

the major Chicago snowstorm was raging at the full moon on Jan 26, 1967 (0641z). ... this low also gave heavy snow in southern Ontario on the 26th-27th after the northern max low brought record warmth two days earlier.

Toronto was paralyzed by the N Max - full moon event in Jan 1968 (N Max Jan 13 to full moon Jan 15 1612z). This period in mid-January is about the latest that N Max and full moon energy can combine into one weather system. Part of the reason behind the "January thaw" phenomenon is that every two or three years there is a set of N Max and full moon events somewhere around the 20th to 25th that have achieved the 3-day separation that is required in this theory to promote fully separated cyclonic storms. The timing of lunar perigee is always a factor in the actual separation time of events.

This process of storminess at the winter full and new moons when augmented by N and S Max energy has been in place since records began, as I've found by analyzing data from various 30-year segments of Toronto's data which goes back to 1840, and in earlier records from U.S. sites in the 1780s and 1820s-1830s. Another example is that Toronto's lowest pressure was set on Jan 2, 1870 (new moon was at 0005z on that date which would tend to place a low near Lake Michigan at that time).

In a day or two when I've had a chance to restore the graph, I can then go on to post some numerical evidence from the Toronto data series of the signatures of these events. From this study, the reader will probably see without much further discussion needed that there would need to be a more pattern-sensitive study made, since a cold pattern would produce one signature and a mild pattern a rather different one (storm track shifts northwest rather than due north by timing lines in this theory).

This is probably the reason why earlier attempts to isolate the lunar effect on the atmosphere failed. The researchers did not realize that they were dealing with a process that could either hit their selected station, or in a different weather pattern, hit a site further northwest or southeast. But the general logic of the system is that storminess is at a peak near timing lines at event times, and then peaks at places between timing lines after event times (or before if they are fairly close but to the west of the lines).

Another piece of the puzzle is that nine timing lines about 40 degrees apart can be identified, and if you take an energy wave and move it east around this grid, the average time separation if the energy wave is orbiting the hemisphere at the speed of the Moon's orbit (oblivious to the rotating earth) would be 3.1 to 3.3 days depending on which lunar event. Now that translates to 13 degrees of longitude per day. Have you ever noticed how regular the eastward motion of most low pressure systems is, and how this tends to repeat from year to year for similar types of systems, although there is also a range of perhaps 10-15 deg a day (obviously some systems go slower than this because they are occluding and dying or else are upper features that probably aren't induced by lunar-atmospheric interactions). I noticed this back around 1980 when I first thought of looking beyond the simple full and new moon approach to other gravitational peaks of energy.

Anyway, I shall continue this discussion some time much later, and invite readers to pose any questions or submit any storms of interest that they feel should be added to the list, or storms that are of interest. I should note that the timing lines have been observed to oscillate east-west and that this can bring storms to the east coast a little before these peaks or as much as 1-2 days later than average. When you factor in that some storms are very slow-moving, this alone can produce a spread in dates but any reasonable analysis of long-term data will show a peak of activity related to the astronomical events.

DMADKAT · January 3, 2011

Cosmic forcing, imagine that ! Astrology has been around an awlfully long time to be totally bull crap! Sunspot cycles, tidal cycles,storm cycles, and maybe even emotional cycles even. SOMETHING IS HAPPENING! It ain't just poof, and there it is !!!

donsutherland1 · January 3, 2011

What would be interesting to know is how many "false alarms" there were e.g. a "false alarm" being defined as the absence of a significant storm in the eastern half of the U.S./southern Ontario/southern Quebec. Given the amount of work that would require, perhaps, one could limit the first analysis to the most recent decade to see if there is promise. If so, then one can expand the sample to the 1981-2010 timeframe. If the results hold up, then the sample could be further expanded. With such an analysis, one could determine whether the lunar cycles have more predictive power than let's say climatology. Another question might concern whether adding the lunar cycles into the mix of other variables e.g., teleconnection indices, improves the explanative power of that combination of variables

It should be noted that with many case studies, sample sizes are sorely lacking. That is a major shortcoming, whether one analyzes ENSO or PDO. The most recent example concerned La Niña-strong December blocking. There were just three cases, all with weaker Niñas and weaker blocks than the current one. While that sample correctly indicated that December would wind up on the cold side of normal (bolstered by the sufficient sample of December days on which the AO was -3 or below since 1950), it missed out on the duration of the current blocking (assuming the ensembles verify as I expect they will). The caveat noted was that superblocks (-5 or below December AO) typically lasted longer. That is exactly what's happening.

Another issue was KU storms with moderate/strong La Niñas. Even back to 1871, there were two such events (December 1909 and January 2000). There were more numerous "near misses" (changeover cases, interior snowstorms, out-to-sea misses). The December 25-27, 2010 event was much larger than both those events. Perhaps has La Niña records gone back several additional centuries, one might have been able to find more ENSO-blocking combinations similar to the December 2010 case and one might also have had better insight into the risk of a KU storm. What is still quite certain is that the recent blizzard was a rare event, no matter how one cuts it. First, unlike a moderate/strong El Niño-severe blocking combination (1957-58, 1986-87, and 2009-10) where the subtropical jet is active and opportunities for KU storms are thus higher, one typically can't rely on the subtropical jet during La Niñas. Second, the storm's impact was rare. It was the first storm since the Blizzard of February 1899 to bring 9" or more snow to Norfolk and 10" or more to NYC (both areas received more than a foot of snow).

Roger Smith · January 6, 2011

Edited version of table above, now lines up the dates (oo space-holders, no storms)

DATES

...... n-7. -6. -5. -4. -3. -2. -1.. new.. +1.+2. +3. +4. +5. +6. +7. f-7. -6. -5. -4. -3. -2 -1.. full.. +1. +2..+3. +4. +5. +6. +7

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

11-26...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..51..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

12-01...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...58..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..67..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

12-06...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

12-11...oo..18..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..42..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

12-16...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..39..oo...oo...oo..oo..DD..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

12-21...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..40..oo..oo..oo..oo..28..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..66..oo..21..oo..oo

12-26...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..48..oo..oo..oo..oo..54..oo..oo..oo..oo.35KKo..oo..13..oo..oo..JJ..oo..oo

12-31...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..52..56..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

01-05...45..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...47..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..02..oo..16..oo..oo..oo

01-10...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..12...oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..43..oo..oo

01-15...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..36..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..59..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

01-20...15..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...19..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..24..oo..oo..11AAo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..QQ.oo..oo..oo

01-25...oo..oo..oo..61..oo..oo..oo...oo...32..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..41..oo..oo

01-30...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..34..oo..oo..oo..oo..14..oo..oo..oo..oo..57..EE.oo..oo..09..oo..oo..FF..oo

02-04...oo..oo..oo..GG..27..oo..08...oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..70..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo.NN.oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

02-09...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..07...17...oo..05..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..BB..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..38

02-14...oo..oo..oo..10..oo..62..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..RR.oo..oo..oo..63..oo..oo..oo..oo..03..oo..oo..oo..23..oo..55..20

02-19...oo..oo..65..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..22.49PPo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

02-24...oo..25..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..HH..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

03-01...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..LL.06CCo..30..oo..33..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo.oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..37..oo

03-06...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...46...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..68..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

03-11...oo..oo..oo..oo..54..oo..oo...04...oo..oo..31..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..01..oo..oo

03-16...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..26...oo...oo..oo..oo..44..oo..53..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

03-21...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..69..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

03-26...oo..oo..oo..60..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

03-31...50..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..MM..oo..oo..oo..oo

04-05...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..29..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

04-10...............................................................................................................................................................................................................

freq...03 , 02 , 01 04 02 02 04 .04 ,03. 02. 04. 02 .04. 07. 01 .02 ..02. 03. 02 .04 . 01. 04. 03. 01 .02. 04. 03. 05 03 02

Key to added later major storms:

AA Jan 22-23, 2005

BB Feb 12, 2006

CC Mar 2 2009

DD Dec 19 2009

EE Jan 30-31 2010

FF Feb 5-6 2010

GG Feb 9-10 2010

HH Feb 25-26 2010

JJ Dec 26-27 2010

Key to added 1900-50 storms

KK Dec 25-26, 1909

LL Mar 1-2, 1914

MM Apr 3-4, 1915

NN Feb 4-7, 1920

PP Feb 19-20, 1934

QQ Jan 22-24, 1935

RR Feb 14-15, 1940

(source: "Great Storms of the Twentieth Century" which goes on to include most of the K-U storms

Ellinwood · January 6, 2011

Could you put your data into Excel and create some nice graphs and post them here?

Roger Smith · January 6, 2011

In this section, we take the same table (previous post) and re-define the horizontal axis as the 27.32 day cycle of lunar declination.

This is accomplished in three steps. First, each row is moved to re-set the columns. The dates before 12-21 are shifted to the left, so that new moon events appear 2.3 days before S Max in the 11-26 row. The shift is then 0.45 days less to the left until 12-21 remains in place. After that, each row is shifted multiples of 0.45 days to the right. This has the effect of keeping S Max and N Max in the appropriate columns, but would move new and full moon diagonally to the left as one moves down the graphical table. A third adjustment is needed since the declination cycle is 27.32 days, 2.2 days shorter than the synodic cycle of 29.53 days. One day is taken out of the central columns, the one that would change to N-7 (from F-7) is removed, and any storms in that column are shifted on to the right. The technique can move some storms off the grid, so these are replaced in the blank placeholder spaces that appear at the other end of the row (which remains defined by the same starting date protocols as with new and full moon storms). The left and right boundary columns are also removed and any storms in these are moved inward. This compensates for a slight error in the overall procedure related to different time increments within the 5-day rows. During that time, the declination shifts almost 0.6 days against the new and full moon cycles.

DATES

...... .S -6. -5. -4. -3. -2. -1.. SMAX.. +1.+2. +3. +4. +5. +6. +7.. -6. -5. -4. -3. -2 -1.. NMAX.. +1. +2..+3. +4. +5. +6

________________________________________________________________________________________

11-26.....oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..51..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo. oo. oo..oo

12-01.....oo..oo..oo..oo..58..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..67..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

12-06.....oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

12-11.....18..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..42..oo..oo..oo.oo

12-16.....oo..oo..oo..39..oo..oo..oo..oo..DD..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo.oo.oo..oo

12-21.....oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..40..oo..oo..oo..28..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..66..oo..21..oo

12-26... oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..48..oo.. oo..oo..54..oo..oo..oo..oo.35KKo..oo..13..oo..JJ.oo

12-31....oo. oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo..52..56..oo..oo. oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo .oo

01-05....oo. oo. 45..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...47..oo. oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo.oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..02..oo..16

01-10....oo. oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..12..oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..43

01-15....oo. oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..36..oo..oo..oo..oo .oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..59..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo.

01-20....oo. oo. 15..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo..19..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..24..oo..oo.11AAo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..QQ

01-25....oo. oo. 41. oo..oo..oo..61..oo..oo..oo..oo..32..oo..oo. oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo.

01-30....oo. oo. FF. oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..34..oo..oo..oo..14..oo..oo..oo..oo..57..EE.oo..oo..09

02-04....oo. oo. oo. oo..oo..oo..GG..27.oo..08..oo...oo..oo..oo..70..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo.NN.oo

02-09....oo. oo. oo. oo. oo. 38..oo..oo..oo..oo..07..17...oo..05..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..BB..oo

02-14....oo. oo. 23. oo. 55. 20..oo..10..oo..62..oo..oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..RR.oo..oo..oo..63..oo..oo..oo..oo..03..oo

02-19....oo. oo. oo. oo. oo. oo..65..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo..oo..oo..22.49PPo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo. oo

02-24....oo. oo. oo. oo. oo. .25..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..HHoo..oo..oo..oo..oo

03-01....oo. oo. oo. oo. 37. oo. oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..LL.06CCo.30..oo..33..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

03-06....oo. oo. oo. oo. oo. oo. oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...46..oo..oo..oo..oo..68..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

03-11....oo. oo. oo. oo. 01. oo. oo. oo..oo..oo..54..oo..oo...04..oo..31..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

03-16....oo. oo. oo. oo. oo. oo. oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..26...oo..oo..oo..44..oo..53..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

03-21...oo. oo. oo. oo. oo. oo. oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..69..oo..oo..oo

03-26...oo. oo. oo. oo. oo. oo. oo. .oo..oo..60..oo..oo..oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

03-31....oo. oo. oo. MM.oo. oo. 50..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo...oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo

04-05....oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..29..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo..oo. oo. oo. oo. oo.

04-10...............................................................................................................................................................................................................

freq ,,,,,,01..00..05..02..04..03..04..03..01..03..06..06..01..05..01..05..05..06..00..03..04..02...02..04..01..05..04

In this revised format, a quasi-regular cycle of (27.32/5) days appears, 5.46 days. The peaks occur at S Max, S+4-5, N-5 to N-3, N Max, and N+5.

More discussion of this will follow, but the basic reason for this cycle is postulated to be the transfer of energy from Pacific to Atlantic, as storms that satisfy timing requirements on active timing line 8 in the eastern Pacific would take about 6 days to arrive on timing line 1 (2/9 of 27.32d = 6.08d).

There are also standard energy peaks between S Max and N Max, and then between N Max and S Max, which are about 4-5 days apart.

This quasi-regular cycle is joined by another evident 6-wave harmonic with period 4.55d. These peaks are around S-4, S, S+5, N-5, N and N+5.

Further discussion to follow.

Roger Smith · January 9, 2011

With respect to the request for an excel file and graphs, I looked at the significance of the lunar cycle involving full and new moon. It appears that the greater significance lies in the revised table for declination. A better test of significance can be applied to the declination cycles, and this becomes increasingly apparent later in the season when the peaks are further away from full and new moon. The only part of the synodic (full-new) cycle that appears to be significant is the frequency of K-U storms at February new moons. This is part of the greater frequency of K-U storms in February. Before that, there are just weak peaks of significance at the new and full moon and somewhat more of a tendency towards full moon in early January. The Great Lakes storms cited seem to be more frequent around the January full moons than the K-U storms. All of this tends to confirm that the system being developed in the research is both event and time specific, that the grid shifts gradually south through the winter until late February and early March then shifts back north again.

Therefore, I've decided to concentrate on the significance of the sidereal 27.32 day cycle in the rest of this discussion. While I believe that my overall research has identified full and new moon as "events" in the system that I am developing, the somewhat stronger set of energy peaks are apparently related to lunar declination.

Let's review how declination leads to regular events on a 27.32(166) day cycle. Northern max occurs when the Moon crosses the galactic equator at 6h R.A., an event that coincides with full moon around Dec 21 in the modern era. It's interesting to note that this and all other declination events are very slowly moving later in the calendar year. If we had weather data from 2,000 years ago, we could test to see whether it's the fact of northern declination maximum, or the interaction between the Moon and the gravitational source of the galactic equator, that is really causing N Max. In that distant time, the galactic transit was taking place a month earlier, where the Moon would now be passing between Aldebaran and the Pleiades. The declination there is about +15 deg on average, on the way to the average maximum of +23.4 deg. (the range over an 18.6 year cycle is from +18.3 to +28.5 deg).

I suspect that the peak would occur with the transit rather than the declination maximum. This is because two other peaks occur in the data when I study storm frequency, temperatures or other variables at locations near timing lines. Besides northern and southern max, the two other peaks that show up are timed when the Moon is in alignment with Regulus and Spica. These two stars are the only massive gravitation sources very close to the ecliptic, and whether the Moon is in conjunction with them (which happens between N Max and S Max) or in opposition, there are peaks of storm frequency and temperatures on timing line one.

This leads to a six-wave frequency of storms in this study, based on lunar declination. The period would be (27.32166 / 6) = 4. 5543 days. A more exact timing would be gained from each month's actual timing of these six events, since lunar perigee (which advances forward around the declination cycle once every 8.85 years) can distort the actual periods. Basically we can count on one of these events every 4-5 days.

The following graph combines the two sets of 13.66 day periods from dec max to dec max, taken from the frequencies in the previous table. The half-period reduces to three waves as shown.

01 01 02 XX

00 05 05 XXXXX

05 05 10 XXXXXXXXXX Sp

02 06 08 XXXXXXXX

04 00 04 XXXX

03 03 06 XXXXXX

04 04 08 XXXXXXXX dec max

03 02 05 XXXXX

01 02 03 XXX

03 04 07 XXXXXXX

06 01 07 XXXXXXX

06 05 11 XXXXXXXXXXX R

01 04 (07) XXXXXXXX

05 --

Some principles that I have determined from the research include the following:

1. Events can be defined as various alignments of the Moon with other gravitational sources, including the Sun, the galactic equator, massive stars near the ecliptic (Regulus, Spica), and the planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Mars, Venus being the four that return significant signals in the research, the other signals are quite weak).

2. Alignments include conjunctions and oppositions, and research shows little variation in intensity between the two sets.

3. Note that planetary events in the model will have periods between 27.32 days and the synodic period of 29.53 days (except for Venus which being an inner planet has a mean position near the Sun). These intermediate periods are approximately 27.4 days for the Saturn events, 27.5 days for the Jupiter events, and 28.0 days for the Mars events.

4. Major weather events tend to occur when there are several of these energy peaks within 24 hours to create a complex peak of energy considerably greater than a single isolated event. Full and new moon events become stronger in the period Dec 8 to Jan 5, and June 8 to July 5, when the time separation of the N and S Max events is less than 30h. Another peak occurs when full and new moon overlap the R and Sp events in Feb/Aug and in Apr/Oct respectively.

5. Weather events will occur near each of nine timing lines, but intensity partly depends on how supportive the large-scale circulation is in that region, at event time. Weather events in similar flow regimes at event time on different timing lines will show a similarity of shaping and intensity.

6. The process is believed to be a result of some gravitational wave physical interaction. The scaling of this interaction is unlike Newtonian gravitation, and the best fit equation for the intensity as a function of mass and distance of the source (with which the Moon apparently interferes) is approximately as follows:

INT = f (M)^(1/6) / R ^(1/6)

A more precise equation would await a more complete analysis of global data. It is interesting that the two exponents are the same but the final form of this equation might have them slightly different. From the studied intensity levels of various events, the value now cited as one-sixth probably lies between 0.14 and 0.18. This implies that the actual value once the research is more fully developed could bring the exponents down to one-seventh, or up to almost one-fifth. At its present values, what does this equation imply?

(warning, this is totally new territory we are entering, you will never have considered any process like this)

Intensity is a function of the sixth root of mass divided by the sixth root of distance.

(compare, gravitational energy is M/R, and force M/R^2, so this new postulated energy interaction takes place at the sixth root of gravitational energy).

This means that intensity is not greatly increased by additional mass of the source, and not greatly reduced by distance from that source.

Here's one example of the math. A full or new moon event involves the Sun as source, whereas the "JC" event is the Jupiter conjunction. These have been researched and found to be about one-quarter as intense as full or new moon events.

So the math on that comparison, in the equation being used, can be solved giving 1.0 as values for Solar mass and distance.

Jupiter has a mass about .001 solar masses, and a distance about 4 times that of the Sun from the earth at closest approach.

Taking those two values, the intensity should be the sixth root of .001 divided by the sixth root of 4.

These numbers are ,318 and 1.33 ... the intensity should be .318/1.33 or .24

Does Jupiter's range of distance from 4 to 6 A.U. mean much? Not really because that only reduces the value from .24 to .23.

Now, what about a star 100 light years away with 50 solar masses?

This star would give values of 50 for mass and 6.4 million for distance. The sixth roots of these are approximately 1.9 and 13, giving 0.15 as the intensity relative to the new or full moon events.

Regulus is a star with mass only 3.5 solar masses, 77 light years from earth. Those values give an intensity estimate of (1.2/12) or 0.10. The measured intensity in the research model is closer to 0.2 -- whether this indicates additional mass from other nearby sources, or some sort of residual energy in the events being only 4-5 days after northern max, remains to be determined. Spica is a binary star with total mass 17 times that of the Sun, at a distance of 260 light years. Those values reduce to 1.6/16 or .10 also. Here again this is a little lower than the average intensity of Sp events.

Now, if the galactic centre events are somewhat stronger than full and new moon, is this also consistent? For mass here, I take 10 to the eleventh power, and for distance, 2 billion. The sixth roots of these numbers are close to 68 and 34, giving an intensity of 2 times full or new moon for this source.

The sixth power scaling places Mars almost equal to Jupiter, since the mass relative to Jupiter is (1/3000) and the distance (1/8) at close approaches. Reduction for mass in the order of 1/4 is offset by augmentation for less distance, about 1.4 times, so that the net reduction is only to 1.4/4 or .35 the intensity for Jupiter, or about .08. Mars events would have the greatest range of distance and might be the best set to study for validation of the distance function in this intensity equation. For Venus near close approach, the values relative to solar are 2x10^(-6) and .28. Sixth roots are therefore .12 and .81, giving an intensity of .15.

Two final points about this theoretical construct, what about angle of separation as the Moon moves past a potential source, and what about the summation of two or more intensity figures for one event?

I am currently using the concept that intensity peaks at a separation of 2 degrees, has a slight reduction at alignment, and extinguishes to zero at about 12 degrees of separation. There is no "separation" concept for northern and southern max but with local stars near the northern max position mainly to the south of the Moon's lower declination range, it is possible that low-dec N Max (and therefore S Max) events might be stronger than average. This seems to be the case in the data (full moon events in Jan 78 and 96 for example were very strong, dec min occurred in 1977.1 and 1995.7.). As to the addition of intensity values, the peak is taken as the numerical sum of intensity curves peaking at theoretical values and having a total period of 48 hours. In practice, this means that two energy peaks separated by 24 hours will create a flat-topped energy peak about 1.5 times their actual sum, a 12-hour separation will produce a peak about 1.75 times the sum and a totally overlapping pair can just be added. Events about 1.5 to 2 days apart will have some but not much shared energy.

And to what do these intensity estimates refer? I have used the convention of applying them to the known range of low pressure central pressure values at the time of year for the event, and then location-sensitive. A strong energy peak in a zonal flow pattern over the Great Lakes might be estimated at 970 mbs in January and 990 mbs in July.

----------------------------

In conclusion, the theory still needs a component of more reliable "pattern" prediction so that it would be possible to apply these statistical peaks to the correct pattern for long-range forecasting results. Since the theory holds that steering patterns are not controlled by aspects of the lunar orbit, this work is proceeding in part from application of the other parts of the theory, and partly through any feedback from other research including all conventional teleconnection type research. In other words, this lunar event intensity guidance is a tool waiting to be more effectively deployed in a future situation where we have reliable pattern forecasting available. When that happens, the lunar timing and intensity should provide the details within the pattern.

Will post this now and extract some "signals" or specific-event profiles from my 170-year data set from Toronto to illustrate some of the concepts here. The intensity numbers are supported by these data sets.

Ellinwood · January 9, 2011

tl;dr after the first paragraph... Never mind I actually read through it...

With respect to the request for an excel file and graphs, I looked...

Post the graphs. POST THE IMAGES. PLEASE. I want to see the data plotted. Why are you not posting images? It probably takes 10% of the time to plot the data in Excel and upload a file compared to typing out the "graphs" into a post like you have been doing.

And to what do these intensity estimates refer?

I would like to know.

6. The process is believed to be a result of some gravitational wave physical interaction. The scaling of this interaction is unlike Newtonian gravitation, and the best fit equation for the intensity as a function of mass and distance of the source (with which the Moon apparently interferes) is approximately as follows:
INT = f (M)^(1/6) / R ^(1/6)

You use this equation to calculate the influence of distant stars and planets, but how large are those influences compared to the Moon and the Sun? What about EARTH'S number? How much influence do these other celestial bodies have on the Earth's atmosphere compared to the Earth itself? It seems like a star that's 77 light years away wouldn't do jack to squat to our atmosphere as far as influencing tropospheric/stratospheric activity.

Roger Smith · January 9, 2011

But the point is that we are talking about variations within a system here. The system itself contains most of the answers to your objections.

For example, without the Sun (let's say for sake of argument, Sun was a dark object giving no heat) all of this would presumably be happening on a frozen earth with atmosphere very close to absolute zero. So if some of the variations I have identified have signals of 1-2 C deg, then those signals are really much smaller than the main signal of solar heating. As to internal processes of the earth-atmosphere system, these already drive the general circulation and therefore form large-scale variations but remain relatively constant (El Nino and La Nina could be seen as variations of one portion of that complex system). I am not ignoring those, I am seeking variations within those signals. I don't think anyone in conventional meteorology believes that individual low pressure systems have their cause within the closed system of earth-based processes, maybe the storm tracks do, and therefore the location and intensity of storms, but taking the current situation as an example, why would there be a low pressure center southeast of Cape Hatteras at 12z Jan 11 rather than on the 10th or 12th? What causes this particular low pressure system to develop and move at the exact time that it does so? That can't have anything to do with La Nina or the sun, which have almost identical characteristics on all three days. What does change is the Moon's position relative to gravitational energy sources. These include Jupiter, Saturn and Spica for the event being described. The mean timing of three energy peaks would be Jan 11 at 12z. This places the low pressure system over timing line one at that time.

Your last point mentions the comparison to Moon and Sun. I should point out that the whole discussion in the previous post of mine was scaled to 1.0 for new and full moon. In other words, all the ratios discussed for other sources are comparable to 1.0 for new and full moon. A ratio of .24 would imply 24% as strong as those events.

By the way, there is an interesting second application here, looking at annual singularities which might be related to interactions between the Sun and these distant gravitational sources, as well as providing some rationale for the second part of the theory involving field sectors (Sun-planet resonances). One can see from any long-term annual temperature series that, superimposed on the annual curve due to the earth's axial tilt, there are subtle variations from week to week establishing warmer and colder periods -- these may be related to interactions between the Sun and the galactic equator and other sources discussed in the previous post.

Then you mention "numbers for the earth." This makes me suspect that you haven't fully grasped the concept being studied here, which is the Moon's interference patterns in the atmosphere as it encounters various sources of gravitational energy (scaled as per the equation I have developed). The Moon may well be encountering gravitational waves from the earth in this system also, but the effects are directed outward. Or, possibly, some are reflected but this would be a constant process so that it would just revert back to the original discussion to get variations in that constant process.

As to the excel files, I can work on those, I have a program in my home computer network here that stores data and converts to excel but when I try to upload these I keep finding my labels shifted in the computer program transfer, but as I've already stated, the main application of the data in this study would be to declination and not lunar phase, therefore an excel file would not be expected to show anything there beyond a slightly non-random distribution. It is really the second table that establishes the more significant distribution, and this is very clear from my graph in the previous post, you can easily see three regular waves over the 14-day period there.

The fact that the energy relationship is at such a low exponent value tends to equalize all sources and reduce both their mass and distance differentials. It does not totally eliminate them, but it suggests an interaction or process that is not currently known to science. Since we have been searching for gravitational waves since the mid-20th century, I suspect that this is a demonstration of their existence and a measurement of how they propagate. I've grown used to the apparent paradox involved, much as people in the 17th century would have grown used to what must have seemed an absurd proposition when first mentioned, that the planets are tied to the Sun by a force that cannot be seen and relates to mass and distance. The only thing that is different here is the value of the exponents.

There's another point about the research which I should make here, and that is a tendency for results to be case-specific. If I average out all the cases for full and new moon in 170 years of temperature data, I get very weak signals. If I divide the data into mild and cold months then the signals are much stronger and look out of phase with each other, suggesting two different processes spatially. Since I am trying to develop this partly as stand-alone physical research and partly as an aid to long-range forecasting, I have two different challenges to meet given this fact. One challenge is to show phyiscal significance. The other is to make accurate forecasts. To some extent, in the second of these challenges, I am somewhat at the mercy of the state of development of the science of meteorology in general. If there were a known method for predicting flow patterns at all time scales (say within one year at least) then I could take the analogues in the data to derive these second-order variations.

Ellinwood · January 9, 2011

You seem to be able to manually type the data into a "graph" on here easy enough.... just do the same thing in Excel, create useful labels (the second graph that has the 3 numbers in front of the X's... what do they indicate?), and post the images.

The argument I was trying to get across in my previous post was "how much do these events actually affect our weather?" Can you allude that these correlations are not coincidental and perhaps related to something else? It is also hard to determine the relative correlation of these line-ups of features... you mention "significant signals," but how significant are these signals really in relation to the atmospheric processes as a whole? Would such correlations indicate that I could see a 0.01 mb adjustment in the central pressure, a few minutes to hours in changing the storms' location and intensity, or is it something much more/less significant? How would these effects from other celestial bodies ultimately affect the atmosphere?

These questions lead back to how to relate it to the Earth's and Sun's own effects on the atmosphere. Is there really a way to determine a "background state of the atmosphere" in a dynamic pattern and correctly decipher other celestial influences?

I know that all of this is a lot to ask for considering you are still in the early stages of your research. However, I feel that these are things one should be asking before trying to asses the true influence of the Moon and stars beyond the Sun and drawing forecasts from the data you have collected and interpreted so far, especially when trying to issue a forecast.

Roger Smith · January 10, 2011

Okay, can give you some answers there.

The numbers in front of the Xs ... if you go back to my previous post (before that chart or graph), you'll see the storms depicted against lunar declination and a frequency count at the bottom of the graph (the one in post 10 of this thread). Now the smaller graph in post 11 takes these 27 frequencies in the two halves of the data set and adds them together, so the three numbers would be (data point 1, data point 15, sum) etc. Because there an odd number the 14th data point is left over and I scale the last row of Xs to the value of 2/3 of the sum of the last three frequencies.

The reason for combining them into two sets of 13-14 days is to show the basic 4.55 day rhythm. If I graphed the 27 day data set it would show six peaks instead of three. This presentation makes the 4.55 day cycle quite clear.

We should remember that this is taking the coldest half of the data, as snowstorm frequency is obviously highly correlated with negative temperature anomaly.

I have found similar correlations for Toronto temperature and the same 4.55 day cycle, indicating that in milder winters, the storm track hits the same frequency peaks but further north.

To the question about significance, I am not claiming that the lunar effects are in the background of existing low pressure systems, I am claiming that these interference patterns create the low pressure systems. With the exception of a small subset of events postulated to be from non-lunar sources, this theory postulates that all low pressure systems in the mid-latitudes travelling east have this lunar interference process as their ultimate cause. Lows travelling west at higher latitudes are connected to a separate part of the theory involving disturbances in field sectors.

This winter, the energy peaks are conveniently clustered which reduces the complexity of how many lows we might need to track. But I will keep a record in this thread of lows crossing timing line 1 (running from DLH to ORD to CHS into the Atlantic) and what event in this system caused them. To reduce the claims of hindsight, I will list the agenda of astronomical events likely to produce systems. I may also make notes on events on timing lines 2 and 3 which are in the Atlantic, and timing lines 8 and 9 which lie to the west. Events from timing lines 4 to 7 could await some future discussion.

This is the simplified version of the event agenda for Jan, Feb and Mar, ending with a strong event on April 3rd.. I would propose following the systems to the end of March and then having a recap of how the timing worked out. I have kept this fairly simple by leaving out most of the hourly timing unless I see it near either end of the UT day, which is worth noting as very early events would be peaking previous calendar day, very late events, towards the evening of calendar day. I have broken down the complex March 19-21 set of events that I suspect may produce a major coastal storm with multiple energy centers.

Date ... Event ... Results near timing line 1

JAN 2 ... S Max ... strong cold front (4)

JAN 4 ... new ...... weak low inland northeast (2)

JAN 8 ... RO ....... moderate low offshore LI (3)

JAN 11 ... JC+SO+SpO .... strong coastal low (7)

JAN 15 ... A ... weak-mod GL low (3-4) ... as event time 23z, is slightly ahead of schedule

JAN 17 ... N Max (21z) ... complex lows (4) near Lake Michigan, IA and n FL to e NC, generally showing main energy at timing number 40 indicating westward shift of timing line one, with weaker events (not in agenda) such as VO further east and across timing line at event time. Discussion in today's post.

JAN 19 ... full (21z) + MaO ... very weak for this event (3) low in MB phased with frontal waves western L Superior and southeast coast, generally near timing number 45 today. Discussion in today's post.

(JAN 20 06z MaO) ... added from event identified above, MaO crossed timing line at TN 35 and combined low has now developed rapidly offshore, intensity was 3 at event time and is now 7 (est 5 for 12z 21st). Low will become RC event for timing line 2.

JAN 22 (01z) ... RC ... weak events (int 2) at TN 30 from SD s.s.e. to eastern Gulf of Mexico into c FL

JAN 24 (notes) ... some weak events including UO (24:16z) have moved across timing line one and are gradually forming the next event downstream on timing line two. Intensity was only 1-2.

JAN 25 ... JO (00z) + SC (10z) + SpC (23z) ... complex lows forming between 00z and 10z with timing numbers near 25 in terms of the SC event, in e SK to the northeast Gulf of Mexico. These events are now progged to form a stronger storm by late Jan 26, but intensity at event time is assessed at 3 (should reach 6 by early 27th).

JAN 27 (notes) ... The above storm probably reached intensity 7 for a short time south of Long Island then continued northeast at about 5-6 intensity. Meanwhile, weak lows have been trailing it through the GL region, intensity 2-3, and these are analyzed as developing events below for timing line 2, as timing line 1 is still postulated to be at the timing number of about 30.

JAN 28 ... A (23z) ... as of 06z in SK, progged to be near central MN by event time, timing number about 40 ... a check on this will be added later.

JAN 30 ... VC (03z) + S Max (09z) ... these events have timed closer to TN 50 through the Ohio valley but are unusually weak, intensity around 2.

FEB 1 .... MeC (18z) note, this one was added to the usual list because it is rare for a MeC event to have this separation from other events, making it possible to assess the event. ... verified at TN 55 as "front end" event of major storm.

FEB 3 .... new (03z) + MaC (03z) if current progs accurate, this may demonstrate further rise in timing number as the position will be south of Long Island. This may be a reason to suspect a slower evolution. ... UPDATE ... event will time better at upper support than surface wave, but as of 00z is at TN 62 near NYC-ALB. Considerable energy ahead of center, likely due to rapid downstream increases in TN accelerating the flow.

FEB 4 ... RO (15z) ... validation for this split flow, NW Ontario, east of Georgia, TN generally near 45. This may indicate that Feb 2-3 storm was a larger disturbance affecting more than just the timing line. High energy peak now being monitored for 7th.

FEB 7-8 ... JC (7:10z) +SO (7:16z) +SpO (8:03z) ... these events at about intensity 3 have been moving through the TN and OH valleys towards southern New England and each wave has been crossing timing line one at about TN 55 which corresponds to KY-WV border. This event much weaker than last analogue in January. A stronger event with intensity 6 was observed on timing line three crossing Ireland today. Analysis -- timing line one may be partially blocked at present, but not enough to split the flow around a cut-off feature. Event may intensify to 4-5 on Tuesday 8th.

FEB 12 ... A (02z) ... event is the remnant of stronger system from upstream timing line 9 that gave heavy snow in OK and AR on 9th-10th. Currently only intensity 2 located southeast of NC coast and at timing number 55 (this is fairly steady over past week to ten days).

FEB 14 ... N Max (06z) ... slowly developing open wave near MQT moving rapidly east-south-east, crossing timing line one at timing number 55. Intensity 4.

FEB 15 ... VO (06z) ... this event broke away from the developing western trough and headed northeast across the timing line in n.w. ON near TN 55 at event time, now (16th) in Hudson Bay. The next event is slowly developing over WY-MT-wND/SD and looks to be heading for a path through northern ON into central QC. Timing remains stuck on about 55 looking at the models.

FEB 18 ... MaO+Full (09z) +RC ... strong events on numerous timing lines at event time ... ongoing solar CME and auroral displays, often correlates with storm enhancement ... low intensity 6 on timing line one in n/c ON near TN 55 (still holding that value) ... will post some other storm longitudes (these vary from exact 40 deg differences due to curved timing lines and secular changes in timing number, but pattern is fairly evident ...

(from 06z maps, event time probably 1 deg further east for most of these. Showing lat, central pres, and derived timing number and intensity factoring in climatology

1 ... 89W (48N) ... 987 ... TN 55 int 6

2 ... 48W (50N) ... 966 ... TN 60 int 4

3a ... 19W (55N) ... 982 ... TN 48 int 4

3b ... 15E (38N) .... 998 ... TN 48 int 3 (further east due curvature towards eq, SMP)

4 ... 53E (40N) ... 1000 ... TN 55 int 3 (phased with inv trof to 40E 50N)

5a... 90E (35N) ... 995 ... TN 50 int 4 (strong cf Afghanistan)

5b ... 80E (60N) ... 997 ... TN 50 int 6 (snowstorm w Sib) timing line heads N across pole to NMP

6a ... 125E (23N) ... 1002 ... TN 40 int 3

6b ... 110E 52N ... 1002 ... TN 40 int 3

7 ... 146E (42N) ... 992 .. TN 30 int 5

7b ... 173W (70N) .. 975 TN 30 int 7 (further east due curvature towards NMP)

8 ... 169W (41N) ..1001 .. TN 33 int 3

9 ... 125W (49N) .. 995 .. TN 35 int 4 (TRW unusual YVR)

Analysis of global structure ... divergent near timing line one, blocking northern parts timing line four, split flow near three and six-seven ... westward displacement greatest in location consistent with retrograde Venus field (centered on 7 from 6 to 9) ... eastward displacement 1-2 due to ripple effect ahead of retrograde Me block 3-4 and larger scale progression due approach to center of solar system mass ... intensity dependent on jet stream concentration and large scale flow vectors, absence of blocking etc ... Prognosis ... sector 3-4 retrograde very sluggish and may split into 2 parts, flow may pierce and shatter block before it reforms early Mar ... V block mainly reflected in eastern Siberian high, q.s. slow west drift, depressed Pac flow should lift slowly in response to seasonal warming and Me retrograde diving southwest ... eastern US ridge should collapse as S-field rotation sweeps core northwest into western arctic where it will omega block to developing Pac ridge.

next event now 3 days away, ideal intensity and timing for well organized frontal systems and large intervening highs ... expecting some drop in TN soon, due to Me retrograde second-order effects, slowing progression.

Feb 20 note ... retrograde energy (S-VI loop) can be seen near 60N at 55W and 110W, look for back-building jet streak for the second case in n BC ... these establish positions of S-2 and S-1 field sectors linking Sun to Saturn, and earth's position is between these now. Prognosis here ... spring likely very active severe weather season as S-1 field with its cyclonic energy loops will be over central NA and tornado alley in April-May as earth transits field sector. Meanwhile, strong complex event approaching timing line one today, current timing number still near 55.

FEB 21 ... (UO 00z) + JO (10z) +SC (17z) +SpC (22:04z) ... moderately strong waves of low pressure crossing the timing line in eIN-OH with tn 55 and intensity levels near 4-5.

FEB 24 ... A (17z,05z 25) ... note ... research this winter showing A energy peak closer to Pleiades than A,A which are offset slightly at times shown here ... this has resulted in A events crossing timing line early ... low with intensity 5 and several waves, timed near 50 for the times given above, heading through Ohio towards PA, NY and New England. (note some low pressure forming 22-23 ahead of timing line conforms to S-field energy).

FEB 27 ... S Max (00z) ... leading wave of developing plains low crossing timing line with TN 50 at this time.

(Feb 28) ... strong low int 5-6 crossed timing line (tn 50) around 28:00z and was located near BUF at 15z ... conforms best to J-field analysis assuming J-field near timing line 2. alternate reasoning to be researched further, S Max events need finer tuned placement of energy field as moon near apogee transits broad galactic equator rather slowly and so will be looking at analogue cases to see if events lagged timing structure in similar way.

MAR 1 ... VC (04z) ... this was analyzed as the trailing wave (int 2) of the strong low discussed above, in phase with energy moving through northern ON, crossing timing line 1 to give continued support for tn 50. Timing number may be dropping very slightly at this point. All eyes west now as strong events develop and the March 7 peak seems to be (as predicted) developing towards a coastal storm for possible blizzard conditions inland northeast. The March 4 peaks should play out as leading waves for this stronger event.

MAR 4 .... RO (00z) + MaC (03z) + new (21z)

This month in general should be very interesting to follow as we are now at the point where Jupiter and Saturn are exactly aligned with the Sun and the earth moves through that direct alignment (around the April new moon event). Note that while aligned, the two planets are on opposite sides of the Sun. We are moving between Saturn and the Sun at this time. Anyway, the exact date of alignment is not the main point, the close energy peak overlapping lunar syzygy is the main story. This current situation is basically the last of several events this winter where the lunar syzygy is 3-4 days ahead of the J/S alignment events. The time differential is now down to about 2.3 days and ahead into the March full moon and the April new and full moons, the time differences will become slight enough to combine the events into complex low pressure. In fact the current situation is almost doing that, with the analysis as follows:

Today's three-part event can be seen crossing timing line 1 in a position approx TN 50 (so at equilibrium as per the map provided later in this thread). The two leading waves (RO + MaC) are represented by the warm frontal wave near eastern Lake Ontario, and the main wave developing near southern Lake Michigan is the new moon event. Intensity for these are set at 3 and 5 respectively. Also, note that the whole complex itself forms a leading wave for a developing system now over Texas, so the same events back on timing line nine but totally linked into the timing line one events. These waves from Texas will move east-north-east and resolve the next energy peak on March 7 crossing timing line one presumably in the area between KY and SC. Note the very strong phased energy peak at 06z on March 7th below. Had this been a somewhat colder pattern over timing line one, we might have seen these leading waves heading across NY and southern New England rather than the lower Great Lakes, and then a more classic setup for a coastal storm when the next event hit the Delmarva region. This could still develop to some extent but more as an inland snowstorm due to the large-scale tracking of these events.

Once again, I am pointing to the March 20-21 period for possible major development.

MAR 7 .. UC (6:21z) +. JC (05z) +SO (06z) +SpO (15z)

The major energy peak at 06z verified at TN 63 in central NJ with a deepening low heading northeast, intensity about 5-6. This gave heavy rains to parts of the east coast and heavy snows inland. The trailing weaker event is reflected in the hangback trough near central PA at 06z that should be in a similar position for timing at event time 15z.

MAR 11 ... A (16z 11th, 03z 12th) ... slow moving low pressure across Ontario, timing number 70 continues the eastward trend this month ... int 4. system is becoming N Max event for timing line 2.

comment added for Mar 11-12 ... major Japan earthquake occurred with Moon near Pleiades, but perhaps of more significance, we have just passed the J-S alignment as the two major planets were opposite one another in the solar system, a cycle that takes 19.86 years ... in 9.93 years, the two will be aligned on the same side of the Sun (towards the S Max position). The earth is approaching the alignment axis and will transit between April 3 and 7.

MAR 13 ... N Max (17z) ... located in ND - MN region on 11th, MI-ON 12th, heading for a timing line 1 tn=70 transit on Sunday. ... update -- this system has been absorbed by the previous (11th) system over s Quebec, but frontal waves continue to ripple across New England and the MA, timing number may be in the process of falling back now, event is set near TN=68 with int 2 (falling from 4 pre-event). This is a low value for N Max and indicates developing blocking but models indicate this will not last more than 1-2 days.

(note -- very weak event Mar 15 17z for timing of any weak waves) ... waves evident in satellite imagery between timing line 9 and timing line 1. ... weak lows crossed timing line one at TN 55 on 15th

MAR 17 (17z) ... RC (+NO) ... Timing line one has evidently moved back west now in response to full moon, as it did generally in Jan and Feb ... event is near northern MN nw ON border and int 4, timing number back to 50 (equilibrium position restored), event shows signs of expanding to double centered low for its future activity near timing line 2 on 19th to 21st.

We now await the activity 19th to 21st on timing line one and from model charts this appears to be a further westward drift of timing line one for validation.

MAR 19 (18z) ... full moon at perigee ... identified as frontal waves timing number 35 in SD to MO, as expected the main energy of the complex is with the Mar 21 events below, the earlier discussion from theory has this storm too far southeast and its eventual track will be across the Great Lakes rather than up the east coast. A fairly strong disturbance is developing today, int of the event (leading wave) is set at 2 for event time. The progged intensity of the next event is 4-5 and it already has intensity 4.

Comment on "supermoon" -- around the hemisphere, full moon events are on average about their normal intensity with a wide range, the strongest event is near timing line 7 east of Siberia. There are several rather large highs on the map, and this indicates more validation for the research theory that lunar perigee is not an independent event causing low pressure interference waves, but a trigger for higher pressures to form in highs.

MAR 21 (00z) ... SC + (03z) JO + (09z) ... SpO ... frontal waves near Benton Harbor MI and Chicago IL at 00z, with weaker frontal wave IA/MO border, represent the three events ... radar signatures are further east than pressure minima, so timing number set at 42 (radar strongest at 50). Intensity of main events set at 4, secondary at 2.

MAR 24 (00z, 16z) ... A ... the two waves of low pressure crossed timing line one in the Ohio valley and WV around timing number 52-55. The leading wave had intensity 4 and the trailing wave intensity 2.

MAR 26 (22z) ... S Max ... weak series of waves in southeast states, event identified as wave near Huntsville AL and timing number has fallen back to 35 as a result. This establishes a further trend of faster (higher timing number) A events for the season. Intensity of this event set at 2 to 3.

MAR 31 (00z) ... RO + NC, (13z) VC ... these events are developing into a coastal storm today, and give a value of timing number 55 for the timing line at this time, but analysis further east shows timing number has been dropping near timing line 2. This storm will develop into the Apr 2-3 events for timing line 2. A corresponding drop in timing number is likely for timing line 1 past today, in response to the rapidly approaching Me-IC event. This event had intensity 3 at event time but will likely reach 5-6 later in its cycle.

APR 2 (14z) ... MaC ... analyzed as leading wave for event below, timing number 40, position west of MSP, nitensity of this feature alone about 2-3.

APR 3 (15z) ... new + JC + SO (very close alignments) + SpO (23z) ... powerful plains low near DBQ at event time (primary) with trailing wave near TOP at that time, advancing to near PAH at event time. Intensity of overall complex low near 6 at event time and as high as 7-8 on April 4. timing number derived from event 38.

With these final positions and comments, will be posting some overall period analysis in the next few days, plus an agenda for April for those interested in following the action and positions of the timing line.

This table will be updated at regular intervals. The intensity numbers at the end of each entry are subjective on a ten-point scale where a minimal K-U storm would be a 7 and a major K-U storm a 10 (recalling that we are tracking all kinds of lows here and not only snowstorms).

This table, as it updates, will provide a good check of the theory and any events that are additional or totally missing can be noted. Note, one set of events added to the agenda, not previously explained -- the "A" events represent a third stellar source of energy from the combination of Antares and Aldebaran. These are virtually opposite and they create an event about 2 days before northern and southern max. This event shows up in the Toronto research but has not formed a peak in the K-U (augmented) storm data. Sometimes the A event shows up as a leading wave of either N or S Max. Other times it shows up as a separate system that is strengthening to become the Max event on timing line 2.

I reserve the right to allow timing line 1 to oscillate east-west but such changes will be noted as we go. So far, the position of timing line 1 has appeared to be just very slightly east of equilibrium. The intensity numbers are peak intensity within 24 hours of timing line transit, not instantaneous on the timing line.

Another principle to test here: the longer gaps between events (such as Jan 30 to Feb 3) should see high pressure cresting over timing line 1 between events. There may also be some cases where one event stalls and fills, with another event replacing it in some irregular sequence.

For your reference, timing line 2 runs essentially parallel to the east coast of Canada and just offshore. Timing line 3 runs from western Iceland to southwest Ireland and then into France. Timing line 8 is offshore the west coast of North America by about 300 miles. Timing line 9 can be visualized as the lee trough of the Rockies into the TX panhandle thence southeast into the Gulf of Mexico.

So as to avoid any charges of "hindsight" commentary, I will mention that I also track disturbances in J-fields and S-fields as part of my analysis of low pressure systems, and that I may also mention one or two cases of field sector interactions (these are more important in tropical storm analysis).

Retrograde peaks are predicted in the S-field on the following dates:

High latitude retrograde lows (weak) 70-75 deg N around Jan 10, 31, Feb 21, Mar 15, Apr 5

Major retrograde lows (strong) around 55-60 deg N around Jan 18-19, Feb 3-4, Feb 19-20, Mar 7-8, Mar 23-24.

Weak-mod retrograde lows around 48-52 deg N around Jan 13 00z and every 4.52d ... these become strong when in phase with either of the first two sets.

The above form a non-lunar energy set and may rotate around into prograde energy peaks that will be analyzed as "S-field energy peaks" in the discussions to follow.

The storms around March 20 and April 3 are likely to be very strong energy peaks. For this reason, based on the climatology of such peaks in the past, one could speculate that there might be severe weather outbreaks in the 2-3 day periods before these peaks, across the south central and southeast U.S. If the storms track towards the Great Lakes and not up the east coast, then these severe weather peaks will extend into the Midwest around event times. Given the current long-range forecasts, I suspect the tracks will be coastal and not inland.

Ellinwood · January 10, 2011

Date ... Event ... Results near timing line 1

Table depicting storms on average every 3-4 days

I reserve the right to allow timing line 1 to oscillate east-west but such changes will be noted as we go. So far, the position of timing line 1 has appeared to be just very slightly east of equilibrium. The intensity numbers are peak intensity within 24 hours of timing line transit, not instantaneous on the timing line.

Another principle to test here: the longer gaps between events (such as Jan 30 to Feb 3) should see high pressure cresting over timing line 1 between events. There may also be some cases where one event stalls and fills, with another event replacing it in some irregular sequence.

Describing timing lines instead of just plotting them on a map for easy visualization and understanding.

The storms around March 20 and April 3 are likely to be very strong energy peaks. For this reason, based on the climatology of such peaks in the past, one could speculate that there might be severe weather outbreaks in the 2-3 day periods before these peaks, across the south central and southeast U.S. If the storms track towards the Great Lakes and not up the east coast, then these severe weather peaks will extend into the Midwest around event times. Given the current long-range forecasts, I suspect the tracks will be coastal and not inland.

Thanks for answering some of my previous questions, though I was not trying to lump the lunar stuff into the background atmospheric processes. I want to know just how much influence they ultimately have on our atmospheric processes (i.e. what percentage/significance), which is more of a long-term question since that is likely very difficult to actually measure. Also, you have yet to produce an actual image with data/results from your research... please spend some time in doing so. People like easy-to-read images.

Considering the first three bold areas: It seems like you give yourself quite a bit of wiggle room with these storms when passing timing line one. Can you predict when this line will move or when the pattern will stall? That seems pretty critical in keeping your system from falling apart. Are there some latitudinal restraints to your forecast, or is it simply based on any type of ("regular" W-E or SW-NE or NW-SE) system passing over the line?

Concerning the last bold area... I wouldn't bank on it being a coastal storm. We're talking March/April here, which is the start of a big transition period in the mid-latitudes, and it would be very ballsy to favor one type of storm versus another at this point.

Roger Smith · January 10, 2011

I will get some graphs up on this thread in the next day or two, these will be signals derived from the Toronto data.

The point about the drift of timing line one is in anticipation of an expected westward drift to late February or early March, and a possible reset mid-March. These should not be very disruptive to the flow of event validations, but expect to see a drift west during the main winter season, making the timing lag a bit larger relative to the MA (which is slightly east of the equilibrium position to begin with). If the timing line swings far to the west (which would be something like STL to MGM) then timing line 2 may back up towards New England and we'll have events on two different timing lines affecting the weather in the northeast. If that happens it would most likely be in early to mid March.

The point about track for March 20 and April 3, I agree it becomes less likely to have a coastal track but there are indicators in my research that these two events will both be coastal storms. The S Max event between these, timed for March 27, is more likely to be a Midwest-Great Lakes track.

Beside posting some graphs, I will keep the agenda in the previous post (of mine) up to date with recorded positions of actual events as they occur.

Roger Smith · January 15, 2011

Well, the events continue to demonstrate conformity to the model agenda (as per post 15). I will continue to edit that page as long as the forum edit function allows, then copy and edit in further posts. Have updated for Jan 11-12 event and current Jan 15 event.

Noting also that retrograde activity was noted as per the list of retrograde energy peaks, on Jan 13 in central Quebec. These retrograde peaks will continue to be monitored and comments added for each. The next predicted retrograde event is a more intense one for Jan 17-18 around northern Hudson Bay.

Later this winter I will unveil the reasoning for this retrograde series, it is not connected to the lunar-atmospheric theory directly. The retrogrades are energy pulses in the S-2 field sector (for future reference).

Meanwhile, and this should please faithful readers, I have finally succeeded in uploading an excel file to the internet (but not here, American Wx does not like my version of Excel). The link is here:

(post 11 of this thread on Net-weather)

http://forum.netweather.tv/topic/67964-evidence-of-a-link-between-the-moon-and-weather/page__gopid__2031229

I posted my data on a discussion of moon-weather links on the U.K. forum Net-weather.

If you look into this excel file, you'll see a profile for the temperatures at Toronto in analogue years to 2011. The data for January are graphed, and you can take the file and look at each subsequent month, but would suggest you note carefully, the labels will only apply if you take time in chunks of 27.32 days forward from January 1 (you can take 30-day chunks as the labels go 2 days into the next cycle). And when you do that, the position of new moon and full moon will need to be changed 2.2 days for each time increment you select in your graphical update. Example, you want to look at October, so you calculate, 273 days ahead of day 1 ... since day 1 is in row 8 to allow for the data titles, day 274 (which is October 1, remember this for your Jeopardy appearances in 2040, January and October have similar lunar declination dates) will be row 281, so you want to look at days 281 to 311 to see October analogue data. The lunar events will be correctly labelled but the new moon will be (10X2.2) 22 days later than shown, and the full moon therefore off the end of the graph but five days earlier than shown also. In other words, with reference to the graph and labels, in October you should realize that full moon will have moved left far enough to coincide with the event labelled SpC, while new moon has moved to the right far enough to be around SpO. Those events in 2011 pick up additional energy peaks.

The excel file also contains a column not graphed, that shows the data averages for the first half of the period (years before 1930). The only years that get into this data set are those with similar dates for lunar perigee relative to January's northern max and full moon (2-5 days later). This filters out all the cases where the lunar orbit distorts the pace of the events, and also sets things so that lunar distance is approximately equal for all cases. The cases are lined up by this convention: take the first new moon after Dec 21 in CST rather than GMT, and set that as day 4. The data getting into the set are mostly from January but can range from Dec 19 to Feb 14. Since we're taking anomalies and not absolutes, this won't affect the profiles in transitional months.

The anomalies for anyone wanting further information are derived from 1841-1980 long-term averages at Toronto City (downtown) with the values from 1981 to present taken from YYZ using the same smoothed set of daily normals. This allows the data set to generate a measure of secular warming in the past thirty years but since we're taking maximum temperatures from a very slightly cooler site, the anomaly trend is more or less zero. The average anomaly of this entire data sub-set for the excel file is around +0.2 F deg. The data sets are in F not C because Toronto's records were taken in Fahrenheit in all of my existing hard-copy records transcribed to computer and carefully checked 1992-94 and year by year since then converting back to F from C. I've eyeballed the data on hard copy and in graphical format to ensure there are no errors.

Roger Smith · January 18, 2011

The expected gradual westward shift in timing line one has begun to appear with today's N Max events (see update in post 15). This also happened last year towards the end of January with N Max and full moon events, and the timing is similar for an unrelated (to lunar) reason in the solar system timing structure. Of the four main second-order influences on the magnetic field set-up, three have now reached about 2/3 of their western extreme of westward pull on the system while a fourth is balancing with an eastward extreme (if all four were pulling west we could see the timing lines falling back to almost the half-way point between their equilibrium positions). The forecast is for continued slow westward drift of timing line 1.

Timing number is a concept used to define the local instantaneous position of a timing line. All nine do not necessarily move in sync, as the system reflects the orbital situation and timing line one represents the near-earth environment in that 1 A.U. ring. At present timing line eight appears even further west of equilibrium while timing lines 2 and 3 seem to be at equilibrium, so a ripple effect is underway. Timing number of 50 indicates that a timing line is at equilibrium. Timing number of zero would indicate that it had shifted west to the half-way point between timing lines. This is rarely seen, the range is usually something like 30-70. At present I have reset timing number from about 53 at start of January to about 45. Predicting that it may fall to 35 in February.

This means that events will cross the equilibrium timing line one (DLH-ORD-CHS) late, as the actual timing line is now closer to DSM-BNA-JAX.

Last winter the late Jan N Max event was stronger and brought an end to the mild spell, was followed by 2-3 days of severe cold and then the first of the winter storm parade from the Gulf (Jan 30-31) which was the full moon event with timing number about 30 at that point. Something broadly similar may occur this year but with the perigee now offset from full moon to the later RC event, the actual energy center may fall to the later RC event.

January 20-31 full moons have seen some powerful storms in the past, including but not limited to the Jan 25-26 1978 Great Lakes superstorm and the strong low of Jan 26-27, 1967. With no strong ridge available and a slack semi-blocked flow, this year's weak to moderate storm events are all that the Moon can accomplish with the raw material available. In other words, I think the timing and position depends on lunar interference patterns, but the intensity is in large part controlled by the conventional meteorology, with the moon's contribution being a foundation to build on in that regard.

One more note, the S-field retrogression peak expected about now is showing up with the stationary low in the east-central Canadian arctic being slowly absorbed by the second low in the western arctic. People might want to examine satellite imagery for any evidence of actual retrograde flow but the pressure pattern is retrograde at about the expected latitude.

This S-field energy peak now at the top of a counter-clockwise loop should ripple through the existing systems and fire up near the east coast around Jan 23 to 24.

Roger Smith · January 19, 2011

Have updated the agenda in post 15, adding some time details for events next week. Today's full moon events are relatively weak on timing line one, and the event on timing line 2 is revealing a rapid fall in TN (timing number) there to about 30. Meanwhile, timing line nine has become more active, a development that I have come to associate with a stormy period to follow across the east-central US.

The timing of the next event, RC is Jan 22 01z, about 52h from the full moon. This is considerably less than the "standard evolution" 78h event separation and points to rapid development potential especially with timing line two backing up faster than timing line one (the grid is being squeezed around the east coast of the U.S. now, a good sign for storm development). Another factor pointing to rapid evolution is lunar perigee (timed for 22:00z) which should speed up forward movement of waves from 13 deg of longitude per day to 15 on average.

Also in favour of large storm development, the event following RC is a strong multi-centered peak on the 25th, so progression should slow down and events should expand to form multi-centered lows 23-24th January.

A further factor noted in storm evolution potential is that the S-field which is analyzed to lie just east of timing line 1 (therefore the western part of its energy loops between 9 and 1) has an energy peak around Jan 23 12z near the bottom of the counter-clockwise energy loops, this should be visible in real time as the east coast storm develops (watch for energy to phase from the northwest in the upper support zone of the storm).

I think all of these factors give potential for this storm to undergo explosive deepening as the conventional meteorology becomes favourable later 22nd.

JBG · January 20, 2011

Another issue was KU storms with moderate/strong La Niñas. Even back to 1871, there were two such events (December 1909 and January 2000). There were more numerous "near misses" (changeover cases, interior snowstorms, out-to-sea misses). The December 25-27, 2010 event was much larger than both those events. Perhaps has La Niña records gone back several additional centuries, one might have been able to find more ENSO-blocking combinations similar to the December 2010 case and one might also have had better insight into the risk of a KU storm. What is still quite certain is that the recent blizzard was a rare event, no matter how one cuts it. First, unlike a moderate/strong El Niño-severe blocking combination (1957-58, 1986-87, and 2009-10) where the subtropical jet is active and opportunities for KU storms are thus higher, one typically can't rely on the subtropical jet during La Niñas. Second, the storm's impact was rare. It was the first storm since the Blizzard of February 1899 to bring 9" or more snow to Norfolk and 10" or more to NYC (both areas received more than a foot of snow).

At the risk that this was "covered" while 1/12/2011 didn't reach KU criteria it came damn close.

Roger Smith · January 21, 2011

Have updated post 15 and identified east coast storm today as departing 19th-20th event from timing line one on its way to TN=28 timing line two arrival at next event peak (22:01z) estimated position at that time east coast NB. Meanwhile as per edited post 15, the RC event timed for 22:01z will be resolved by various weak waves on timing line one at TN approx 30.

The next energy peak after that is the same one as the Dec 26-27 snowstorm, the JO+SC+SpC cluster, timed for Jan 25 (see post 15 for exact times). With the timing lines now so far west, storm timing will be lagging by at least one day for New York and New England which lie at about TN=80 and thus are halfway between timing lines.

The weak waves mentioned above will be strengthening also as they build to become timing line two events. However, track forecasts take these well north and south of the northeast U.S. region and the potential now is all about development from timing line one towards two for the Jan 25 energy peak, which then has a three-day period for intensification. Due to lunar perigee on 22nd, wave motion is likely to be fast for 2-3 days but with the lengthening event time separation and the Moon's slower motion at perigee+4d, the period 26-27 Jan should provide a good overall scenario for all these forcing activities to favour offshore q.s. development. Given the conventional set-up looking so promising, this may be a major storm event in the making. Timing line two is backing up quite rapidly in recent days and we may get a very low reading on its TN from this storm as it becomes the "A" event later.

Roger Smith · January 28, 2011

I have updated the agenda regularly in post 15. Note that the two J-S events this month (12th, 26th) have been the strongest so far. The K-U analysis points to February southern max and new moon events as being fairly high-frequency major storm dates, followed by northern max and full moon (see agenda post 15 for the dates this year). But with the way these J-S events have been performing, I will suggest the two February dates (7th, around 20-21) as ones to watch as well.

As predicted, the system has demonstrated a westward shift of timing line one so that it has recently been located about 200-300 miles west of the equilibrium position, or at timing number 30 instead of equilibrium 50. This displacement may fade out soon but predicting this aspect has not always been easy, which can lead to a one-day timing error when incorrectly predicted.

The next system to cross the timing line will be later today (23z) and this will be the clipper heading through MN.

For those who may have been away, I added an excel file showing analogue data sets for this year's lunar positions. I had to link to another forum to get this into the thread as I could not load it directly here. This file is in post 18 of this thread, and in post 11 of the linked thread.

It will probably open up with a chart showing January, but to keep the events lined up for February, you would need to follow the instructions in post 18 and/or in the linked thread.

I feel that this record of events vs agenda is going quite well and demonstrates the near 1:1 correspondence between weather events and the astronomical agenda, at least for timing line one. Sometimes there is more blocking than we've seen this past month and the events are pushed well to the northwest or southeast along the timing line. This has been the case recently for timing line three near Ireland.

Roger Smith · February 17, 2011

The winter agenda in post 15 has been continuously updated as various events cross timing line one. This has been going quite well and the timing "number" (meaning the secular or instantaneous position of timing line one) remains stuck on 55 which is basically about 2-3 deg east of the equilibrium position of the timing line.

What would make this system a real deal-maker for long range forecasting and understanding global climate would be a fail-safe method of predicting large-scale features which guide these energy waves. As I've explained, the energy doesn't create the flow, it ripples along in the flow (like kayaks in white water, so to speak).

Anyway, I am starting to think the augmented new moon event on March 4 (21z) with the strong JO+SC event (March 7 06z) almost phasing could provide the ideal time and upper support frame for a very significant if not KU worthy storm near the northeast U.S. -- the colder it gets in late February, the better the chances for this to be a two-part developing offshore bomb (with the main event around March 6). We shall see. I also continue to think the March 19-21 storm could be a blockbuster and more likely offshore than inland.

Pohopoco · February 17, 2011

The March 19th,19:10hrs. timeframe is the closest Perigee of the year at 356,577km with a Full Moon just 59 minutes earlier at 18:11hrs,...I know Roger is delving much deeper into many more posibilities...for me knowing that the Moon's influence in that particular timeframe on tides will be significant ,no matter what...Just think of the possibilities IF we can get an EC Storm around that timeframe...

Roger Smith · February 18, 2011

Check out the update in post 15, which is updated every day or thereabouts to comment on the systems as they develop and cross timing line one.

The update from earlier today lists all nine "full moon (+RC+MaO)" events around the northern hemisphere and gives positions, intensities and derived timing numbers. I have plotted all this on a map to establish where the nine timing lines are now. Timing numbers vary around the hemisphere in a systematic way, but going around the hemisphere at 50N you can sketch this on your own base map if you wish, the nine timing lines are close to 90W (1) and every 40 deg east of that downstream and around the Pacific back to timing line 9 at 130W. The system's north pole is near the NMP which is now at 85N 135W. To locate the nine timing lines beyond the 50N positions, radiate them outward from that polar position first taking timing line one SSE through western Lake Superior and Chicago then southeast (curve the line steadily) througth CHS and across the equator near the Greenwich meridian. From there, locate the other nine timing lines at regular 40 deg intervals as far north as 75-80 N then with the distortion of the high latitudes in mind, bring them in to the system north pole in a reasonably evenly-spaced way (you'll find that timing line seven in this system moves up the IDL and almost to the north pole then back south towards the NMP.

This complex system has always exhibited the nine timing lines with some sort of minor rippling effect of timing number (east-west displacement) variations, since I first "discovered" it in the 1980s. The southern hemisphere analogues are more or less mirror images in antipodean configurations. Timing line one comes out of Africa north of Madagascar and heads SSE near Kerguelen Island towards the SMP but I use the convention of an "adjusted SMP" further inland in Antarctica to balance the hemispheres and account for probable displacement of the SMP due to high elevations in the area it would reside if directly antipodean to the NMP. In any case, since I only track systems to about 65S it really doesn't factor into the research very much where the SMP or "south met-grid pole" is located. (note, both NMP and SMP can be read as either north/south magnetic or met-grid poles, same concepts in play). In the system, if you want to have your own tracking base map, draw in the mean position of the ITCZ as the "met equator" then using the topographic barriers as second-order features you can plot a base system of "meteo-latitude" that goes along with the timing lines to complete a timing and positional system.

The meteo-latitude I have labelled 50N hits the nine timing lines at the following terrestrial latitudes: 43, 46, 50, 54, 57,56,55,54,50. Lower meteo-latitudes need to be adjusted for the Tibetan plateau and Himalayas between 4 and 6. Now realize that these are mean positions then field sector distortions create the actual flow patterns that distort this mean zonal pattern with its primary "geomagnetic trough" (a.k.a. central Canada trough, Rockies lee trough, whatever) oriented to maximize on timing line one. As the NMP has moved 25 degrees north and 40 degrees west since discovery in 1831, at a fairly slow pace to 1910 and an accelerating pace since then, the grid is presumed to have shifted but 19th century data analysis from Toronto and elsewhere imply that the shift has been mainly in meteolatitude, as the timing lines seem to be "retracted" along their long-term positions rather than having shifted west. Clearly the motion of the NMP in recent years has been most significant for Siberia since meteolatitudes in eastern Siberia were rising earlier in the century but are now falling in response to the gradual approach of the system's forced polar vortex. Climatology distorts the actual polar vortex position frequencies but this background shift is probably (in my view) responsible for most of the observed warming of the northern hemisphere since 1980. At some point (possibly 2007) the system may have over-corrected and has now moved into a period of no further warming possible since you can't get the NMP any closer to the cold pole enforced by land-ocean distribution. In fact it may now cool significantly in Asia and northern Europe if the NMP continues its rapid west-north-westward drift at almost one degree per year along 85-86N -- it could be about to start dropping more WSW then SW towards Wrangel Island. That would probably start to shift the timing lines west.

Since timing line one is more than just a convention of naming (it is also the defined location of direct responses of earth's atmospheric-magnetic field-SSMF interactive system, whereas other timing lines indicate positions of SSMF features around the inner solar system) this might tend to drag the trough west as well, and one could speculate that once a critical position was reached, the jet stream might shift dramatically south to move around the southern end of the Colorado massif rather than through the relative gap of southern Montana as is now the preferred route. This might have happened in past climatic periods when rainfall increased in the southwest United States. It would certainly lead to a major and perhaps quite glacial chill across the northern Rockies (Denver should bid for the 2050 winter olympics).

On a longer time scale, if the NMP were ever to return west through Europe into Greenland or even worse (from what I am about to say) Ungava in northern Quebec, the hemispheric flow might then distort around a vast polar vortex over the North Atlantic and that would clearly be a glacial episode of major proportions in the making. Note that besides volcanic dust, years from 1780 to 1830 had some of the most severe winters and cold years known in eastern North America and at those times the NMP was likely on the Canadian mainland drifting east. It is theorized but not conclusively proven that the NMP was over Victoria Island in the 17th century. Well before that it may have been drifting east across Eurasia. I saw one study that gave evidence of a location in northern Scandinavia in the early Roman period. As far as I know, there are no postulated theories that even attempt to predict these position shifts but clearly the NMP can theoretically be anywhere north of about 60 deg N. Its average latitude over a long period is probably 72-74 N. I also have no idea whether it has ever been closer to the north rotational pole than it is now.

Finally, here are some principles of the timing system that might help you visualize how to apply the grid to real-time weather patterns, historical weather patterns and any links to teleconnection theories.

You must always think in terms of anomalous features relative to the grid. There is nothing to be gained from finding a mean trough over western Hudson Bay, that is already in the system. With that in mind, anomalous ridges or cut off highs at any timing position have their solar system analogues around the earth's orbital path such that if you move east from timing line one, they are behind the earth's current position and features west of timing line one are solar system field segments ahead of the earth. If these are moving faster than the earth (likely produced by interactions of Venus or Mercury with the solar flux) then they will be retrograde. Their latitudes will vary with the celestial latitude of the planets involved. Look for strong, cold-centered highs as signals of these. Cut-off highs are frequently found but more southerly blocking will need more of a Hovmuller approach to spot easily. Meanwhile, any features moving slowly east (prograde) are likely field segments related to outer planets. The J-field and S-field segments (usually in sets of four) are key to this system. Weaker Ma(rs)-fields are often very slow moving and sluggish. These prograde field sectors will play out in weather patterns as 3-10 dm height positive anomalies but within their large circulations there can be second-order low height features. In J-fields these rotate clockwise and in S-fields they rotate counter-clockwise. There are no second order features in Mars field segments or in the retrograde blocks. Temperature data analysis shows the existence also of U-field segments and N-field segments but these are very weak and hard to find on weather charts.

Then once you have followed this system for a while you can begin to see how lunar interference waves, generated by the agenda as per post 15, are constrained to move along in the distorted resultant flow that follows from the interaction of the default circulation and the geomagnetic forcing. This is obviously a hopeful foundation for accurate long-range forecasting. I believe that if somebody can add in teleconnections as an independent variable to all of the above, a large proportion of variability might be nailed down and very long-range maps might become feasible.

Such as this call for a 980 mb low moving northeast near Long Island around March 20-21 (00z), or as elsewhere described the Ginx gale II (or is it III?).

Closer to today, be on the lookout for signs of a major east coast storm around March 4-6 probably closer to the 6th as two strong energy peaks occur during a period when blocking is indicated over timing line two near Labrador.

Ellinwood · February 18, 2011

I have plotted all this on a map to establish where the nine timing lines are now.

Show us the map.

Roger Smith · February 18, 2011

Show us the map.

Working on an update to suit the internet age. I have graphics issues, can draw them on my computer but then the software is not recognized as an attachment.

Anyone with a blank map that could sketch out my verbal description, would give me something I could suggest editing or just say it was as described.

My chances of getting some help with the map improve over the weekend as most smart people are working today in my time zone.

(if you catch my drift -- and I am wondering about the word drift)

AtticaFanatica · February 18, 2011

Yeah, this is work in desperate need of graphics, plots, illustrations, etc. Otherwise, it's just a sea of endless text.

Ellinwood · February 18, 2011

Working on an update to suit the internet age. I have graphics issues, can draw them on my computer but then the software is not recognized as an attachment.

Anyone with a blank map that could sketch out my verbal description, would give me something I could suggest editing or just say it was as described.

My chances of getting some help with the map improve over the weekend as most smart people are working today in my time zone.

(if you catch my drift -- and I am wondering about the word drift)

SCREENSHOT -> MSPaint -> crop and save -> upload. This can be done in less than a minute.

ta-friggen-da

Member Statistics

Major east coast snowstorms and lunar cycles

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Archived

Recently Browsing 0 members