Latest News (hidethedecline)

Is Solar cycle 24 going to surprice us again?
Posted by Frank Lansner (frank) on 4th October, 2011
Latest News (hidethedecline) >>

Fig1 The well known situation where predictions of sunspotnumbers from NASA has been changed repeatedly, normally when absolutely everyone could see for themselves that earlier predictions appeared unrealistic.

However, will the ongoing Solar cycle give us even more surprices?

For now as seen on fig 1, Solar activity is on the rise although not that much activity still. We are awaiting a solar max in the coming years?


Fig2. Here, a “Butterfly diagram”.  In the beginning of each Solar cycle, Sunspots are normally seen far from the Equator – In the end of Solar cycles, most sunspots are seen close to the Equator.
On fig 2, I have illustrated typical Solar Max periods with the blue boxes.

So!

Fig 1 tells us, that earlier predictions suggested Solar max to occur around 2010-11, but later predictions has postponed this to around 2013-14.

Fig 2 tells us, that Sunspots mostly near the Equator indicates that Solar max is over, and that sunspots appearing both near Equator and far from the Equator indicates an ongoing Solar max.

That is:

Sunspots near the Equator does NOT indicate a Solar max in front of us, certainly not a year or two in front of us.

 

Fig3. Recently I have noticed plenty of Sunspots as near the Equator as Sunspots normaly shows:
On fig 3 we see the situation 3 October 2011.
We have plenty of sunspots near the Equator (In Butterfly diagrams, small sunspots sounts less).
If this goes on, the Sun is indeed teling us, that the modest activity we see now is in fact part of Solar cycle 24 max – period.
 

Last changed: 5th October, 2011 at 10:38:10

Back

Comments

Hi Baa! By Frank Lansner on 12th October, 2011 at 10:10:54
Thanks for reply!

I tried to eat my way through the Daly-Landscheidt article you linked too, and... yes you realy need some time available to come through that :-) But in general The ideas that the suns movement in the centre of the Solar system plays an important role for sun activity appears reasonable.

See you later!
Baa Humbug By Unknown on 9th October, 2011 at 06:08:09
Hi Frank. sorry for the late reply. I do shift work.

I don't know enough to be able to explain in detail but the hypothesis makes sense to me. This is the work of Theodor Landscheidt. If you have a couple of spare hours, the links are below.

p.s. Landscheidt is not very popular among the consensus scientists, but he seems to have a good track record to me.

http://www.john-daly.com/sun-enso/sun-enso.htm

http://www.john-daly.com/solar/solar.htm

The theory tries to answer the question "how can the solar system, with the various size planets revolving around the sun, be so stable for billions of years?"
Think of a hammer thrower in the Olympics. The weight that the athlete rotates at the end of a chain, exerts enormous force on the athlete, the longer the chain, the bigger the force. Now imagine that athlete rotating 9 heavy objects with different weights with different lengths of chain. That's what the sun does. The forces on the Sun are enormous. It's centre of mass and angular momentum shifts considerably, yet the solar system is inherently stable, how come?

Landscheidts answer seems to be what's called the "Golden Section" which is a structure if inherent stability (used in Roman and greek buildings). Read more at the links.

As for why the ascending part of a solar cycle seems to have a bigger effect on Earths climate, my understanding is best described as say a loud sound coming from an object which is coming towards you as opposed to the same sound from the object as it moves away from you. Cumulative effects one might say (or accelaration vs decelaration).

regards
Interesting, Mr Humbug By Frank Lansner on 5th October, 2011 at 10:55:35
I have more comments to your input:
1) I think that the 2009 and 2010 predictions actually do show some assymitri? (The others are cut off)

2) Very interesting input concerning flares, and especialy your point that the ascending part of a Solar cycle has the most impact on the climate. I would very much like to hear more about that, howcome?

3) I have updated the graph fig 1 with the september numbers. These seem to confirm that we are in fact in the Solar max now?

K.R. Frank Lansner
Baa Humbug By Unknown on 4th October, 2011 at 23:20:22
Hi Frank

Those predictions surprise me as they show the solar cycle as symmetrical, when it is not.
The ascending half of the cycle is always shorter than the descending half (if the ascending half is 4.2 yrs long, the descending half is 6.8 yrs long making a total of 11 years)

Of course not all cycles are 11 years long. The longer the cycle, the weaker it's effects on earths climate (so it is postulated by Theodor Landscheidt)
The cycle max also happens around about the time when solar flares reduce in frequency. We are still getting frequent flares. Once these flares slow down in frequency, we can assume that max has been reached.

To determine the length of the whole cycle, we divide the length of the ascending half by 0.618, this will give us the length of the descending half.

Also, the ascending half of the cycle affects earths climate more strongly than the descending half. So if this cycle continues to be weak to it's max, we can (almost) guarantee cool times for us earthlings until at least the next cycle.

Add Comment