Still no sunspots...

[Donk]

The Pacific El Niño, triggered by sunspot minima...

Sorry, I don't see it.

wiki: El Niño/Southern Oscillation

Major ENSO events were recorded in the years 1790-93, 1828, 1876-78, 1891, 1925-26, 1972-73, 1982-83, and 1997-98.

 

Recent El Niños have occurred in 1986-1987, 1991-1992, 1993, 1994, 1997-1998, 2002-2003, 2004-2005 and 2006-2007.

Solar minima 1784, 1798, 1823, 1833, 1843, 1855, 1867, 1878, 1890, 1902, 1913, 1923, 1933, 1944, 1954, 1964, 1976, 1986, 1996, 2008.

 

I've emboldened the (very few) dates which appear on both lists. I've even given you 1890, as it's close to 1891. Can you point me to somewhere that proves the correlation you're asserting?

[Turtle]

possible effects of no sunspots aside, the observable phenomena we currently have makes for unique opportunities. :eek: boldenation mine in the following quote. :eek2: :shrug: ;)

 

 

NASA - Are Sunspots Disappearing?

..."According to our measurements, sunspots seem to form only if the magnetic field is stronger than about 1500 gauss," says Livingston. "If the current trend continues, we'll hit that threshold in the near future, and solar magnetic fields would become too weak to form sunspots."

 

"This work has caused a sensation in the field of solar physics," comments NASA sunspot expert David Hathaway, who is not directly involved in the research. "It's controversial stuff."

 

The controversy is not about the data. "We know Livingston and Penn are excellent observers," says Hathaway. "The trend that they have discovered appears to be real." The part colleagues have trouble believing is the extrapolation. Hathaway notes that most of their data were taken after the maximum of Solar Cycle 23 (2000-2002) when sunspot activity naturally began to decline. "The drop in magnetic fields could be a normal aspect of the solar cycle and not a sign that sunspots are permanently vanishing."

...

If sunspots do go away, it wouldn't be the first time. In the 17th century, the sun plunged into a 70-year period of spotlessness known as the Maunder Minimum that still baffles scientists. The sunspot drought began in 1645 and lasted until 1715; during that time, some of the best astronomers in history (e.g., Cassini) monitored the sun and failed to count more than a few dozen sunspots per year, compared to the usual thousands.

 

"Whether [the current downturn] is an omen of long-term sunspot decline, analogous to the Maunder Minimum, remains to be seen," Livingston and Penn caution in a recent issue of EOS. "Other indications of solar activity suggest that sunspots must return in earnest within the next year."

 

Whatever happens, notes Hathaway, "the sun is behaving in an interesting way and I believe we're about to learn something new."

[Turtle]

possible effects of no sunspots to the fore, the observable phenomena we currently have makes for interesting speculation. B) the full article at the link has some graphs of the pertinent data sets. :eek2:

 

SpaceWeather.com -- News and information about meteor showers, solar flares, auroras, and near-Earth asteroids

September 5, 2009

 

SOLAR MINIMUM VS. GLOBAL WARMING: From 2002 to 2008, decreasing solar irradiance has countered much anthropogenic warming of Earth's surface. That's the conclusion of researchers Judith Lean (NRL) and David Rind (NASA/GISS), who have just published a new analysis of global temperatures in the Geophysical Research Letters. Lean and Rind considered four drivers of climate change: solar activity, volcanic eruptions, ENSO (El Nino), and the accumulation of greenhouse gases.

...

Volcanic aerosols are a source of cooling; ENSO and greenhouse gases cause heating; the solar cycle can go either way. When added together, these factors can account for 76% of the variance in Earth's surface temperature over the past ~30 years, according to the analysis of Lean and Rind.

 

Several aspects of their model attract attention: "The warmest year on record, 1998, coincides with the 'super-El Nino' of 1997-98," points out Lean. "The ESNO is capable of producing significant spikes in the temperature record." Solar minimum has the opposite effect: "A 0.1% decrease in the sun's irradiance has counteracted some of the warming action of greenhouse gases from 2002 - 2008," she notes. "This is the reason for the well-known 'flat' temperature trend of recent years." ...

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

I see hint of Polar Illumination....am I to expect brilliance should the rain finally let up here....also hear rumors of solar eclipse coming up (2 supposedly)....also aint there a meteor shower sposed to be round this time of year (prolly missed it but I ask anyway)....no sign of the sun here though so lookin fer spots is about as fruitful as a cement cherry tree:(

[Turtle]

I see hint of Polar Illumination....am I to expect brilliance should the rain finally let up here....also hear rumors of solar eclipse coming up (2 supposedly)....also aint there a meteor shower sposed to be round this time of year (prolly missed it but I ask anyway)....no sign of the sun here though so lookin fer spots is about as fruitful as a cement cherry tree:(

 

:QuestionM i don't know whether to laugh, cry, or just cut to the chase and check into the rubber room. whatever. ;)

 

we had a couple sunspots last week, cycle 24 type, but they didn't last long. back to blank. the deep solar minimum continues:smilingsun:

Daily Sun: 08 Oct. 09

SpaceWeather.com -- News and information about meteor showers, solar flares, auroras, and near-Earth asteroids

The sun is blank--no sunspots. Photo credit: SOHO/MDI

 

 

Sunspot number: 0

What is the sunspot number?

Updated 07 Oct 2009

 

Spotless Days

Current Stretch: 6 days

2009 total: 218 days (78%)

Since 2004: 729 days

Typical Solar Min: 485 days

[Moontanman]

Hmmm, maybe it's the Sun Gods way of telling us it's time to take that trip to Mars while we can?

[Turtle]

Hmmm, maybe it's the Sun Gods way of telling us it's time to take that trip to Mars while we can?

 

;) i was referring to dd's post and the fact that it has nothing to do with the topic in the wildest stretch of my imagination. have we thrown off talking about science even in the remotest fashion here!!!??? are you all friggin nuts!!!! wtf!!!??? good grief. :QuestionM

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

:) i was referring to dd's post and the fact that it has nothing to do with the topic in the wildest stretch of my imagination. have we thrown off talking about science even in the remotest fashion here!!!??? are you all friggin nuts!!!! wtf!!!??? good grief. ;)

Sorry mr turtle:D (actually solar spot/no spot seems to effect the northern lights with respect to how impressive if seen at all) also all are astronomic type thingies:hihi: again I apologize for cluttering your space.....oh yeah an eclipse might make sunspot spotting rather fruitless as well...(yeah... I know... I'm a jerk:doh: )

 

quoted by turtle Originally Posted by DFINITLYDISTRUBD

I see hint of Polar Illumination....am I to expect brilliance should the rain finally let up here....also hear rumors of solar eclipse coming up (2 supposedly)....also aint there a meteor shower sposed to be round this time of year (prolly missed it but I ask anyway)....no sign of the sun here though so lookin fer spots is about as fruitful as a cement cherrytree :(

a noteworthy bit from quoted quoted quote(:QuestionM)

.no sign of the sun here though so lookin fer spots is about as fruitful as a cement cherrytree :(

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

;) i was referring to dd's post and the fact that it has nothing to do with the topic in the wildest stretch of my imagination. have we thrown off talking about science even in the remotest fashion here!!!??? are you all friggin nuts!!!! wtf!!!??? good grief. :QuestionM

Nah just idiots....but we love ya anyways:hihi:

[Turtle]

Sorry mr turtle:D (actually solar spot/no spot seems to effect the northern lights with respect to how impressive if seen at all) also all are astronomic type thingies:hihi: again I apologize for cluttering your space.

 

alrighty thens. maybe i won't eat the rest of your hand and take my satisfaction with the two fingers. maybe.

 

now you seem to imply that low sunspots result in more aurora, but it is just the opposite. i have an idea! let's look it up! :P

 

Sunspots, Aurora, and Magnetic Disturbances

The Aurora

The aurora borealis ("Northern Lights") and aurora australis ("Southern Lights") have been a source of myth and awe since ancient times. When sunspots are plentiful, the aurora become more visible from populated regions on the earth. There are always aurora in rings around the north and south magnetic poles. Only during periods of high auroral activity do people in the warmer land areas well away from the poles begin to see them. Then the Northern Lights are visible to much of the northern United States and Europe. ...

 

we'll get to the rest in good time; perhaps when i'm better fed and sporting a sunnier disposition. :hihi:

[REASON]

.....sporting a sunnier disposition. :hihi:

 

:P Good one, Turtle. That pun was spot on. :hihi:

[Turtle]

:hihi: Good one, Turtle. That pun was spot on. :hihi:

 

thnx dude. just another aspect of my magnetic personality. ;) we now return you to our regularly scheduled broadcast.

 

NASA - Deep Solar Minimum

...In a way, the calm is exciting, says Pesnell. "For the first time in history, we're getting to see what a deep solar minimum is really like." A fleet of spacecraft including the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO), the twin STEREO probes, the five THEMIS probes, Hinode, ACE, Wind, TRACE, AIM, TIMED, Geotail and others are studying the sun and its effects on Earth 24/7 using technology that didn't exist 100 years ago. Their measurements of solar wind, cosmic rays, irradiance and magnetic fields show that solar minimum is much more interesting and profound than anyone expected. ...

 

 

[UncleAl]

BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | What happened to global warming?

 

Science 326(5949) 28 (2009) "What Happened to Global Warming?"

 

Graph from 1975 to 2009. 1999 to 2009 Officially averages to dead flat global temperature change with time. I eyeball the last five years as average decrease. The sun is dead quiet,

 

http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/ssn_predict_l.gif

http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/bfly.gif

 

Uncle Al stands by his old predictions:: Remarkably cold and wet 2010-2012. Green Revolution stalls, a billion people starve. Enviro-whiners deny a solar minimum cooling trend is upon us. In theory Mauna Loa is sampling the "well-mixed" lower stratosphere dozens of times/day, and with great care to get honest numbers. In practice, there would be boxes aboard commercial long haul airlines to get spatial as well as temporal data across huge swaths of the planet at ~30,000 feet. Mauna Loa is 11,000 feet. One suspects a political component lubricating funding of a single selected site.

 

THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT, REDUX

Journal of Chemical Education 74(3) 316 (1997)

Trends in Carbon Dioxide

File:Mauna Loa Carbon Dioxide.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mauna Loa Observatory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

There is a substantial academic industry pontificating upon and simulating the effects of increased carbon dioxide concentration in air upon agriculture and forestry. In the real world, certainly in California downwind of densely populated areas and freeways near ground level, 100+ years into the mystic future arrived 20+ years ago. No detectable negative effects.

[Turtle]

Science 326(5949) 28 (2009) "What Happened to Global Warming?"

 

Graph from 1975 to 2009. 1999 to 2009 Officially averages to dead flat global temperature change with time. I eyeball the last five years as average decrease. The sun is dead quiet,

 

 

http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/bfly.gif

 

thnx al. i don't think i've run across a graph that uses the total area of sunspots rather than the number of them. :hihi:

[abx-sun]

Since two years, the solar spots are no longer following the

predictions.

The so called "experts" at NOAA Space Weather Prediction

Center predicted in January 07 the beginning of the cycle 24

to occur in mid 2008. As this did not occur, they shifted the

prediction one year later to mid 2009.

Now we are at the end of 2009 and still no beginning of

the next sunspot cycle ...

Furthermore, they reduced the predicted maximum from

140 to 90 sunspots, and delayed the predicted peak also

one year.

Now have a look at the latest update of the preditions

(2009 Dec. 8), and you see that still the preditions are

way out of reality ... see:

sunspot-08-09.html

There you also see the previous predictions that were

revised and revised ...

I ask, why the "experts" still continue to make new

predictions, as the situation is so undecided, that we may

even enter a "maunder minimum" or any kind of solar

spot maximum between 25 and 150 ...

Would it not be wiser if the "experts" would say: We cannot

make any valid prediction, as the present behaving of the sun

is completely out of the our knowledge ?

 

 

Felix HB9ABX

[Turtle]

...I ask, why the "experts" still continue to make new

predictions, as the situation is so undecided, that we may

even enter a "maunder minimum" or any kind of solar

spot maximum between 25 and 150 ...

Would it not be wiser if the "experts" would say: We cannot

make any valid prediction, as the present behaving of the sun

is completely out of the our knowledge ?

 

 

Felix HB9ABX

 

hi felix. :hihi: the continuing changes have much to do with the new data from previously un-had sensing equipment. for example: >> ESA Science & Technology: SOHO confirms 36 year old solar theory

 

in fact the experts often do say they don't know. a review of this thread evidences that.

 

as it happens, today we have a new small cycle 24 sunspot. :) (Never look directly at Sol! )

 

Daily Sun: 11 Dec. 09

Sunspot 1034 is a member of new Solar Cycle 24. Credit: SOHO/MDI

 

SpaceWeather.com -- News and information about meteor showers, solar flares, auroras, and near-Earth asteroids

[abx-sun]

Hi Turtle,

 

thanks for your comment.

Yes, I have seen the small sunspot of today, even I have seen it yesterday.

And now, they call this "beginning of cycle 24" ...

this happend now several times in the last 12 months!!!

Each new spot was called "the beginning" - and then followed again a period of ZERO ...

 

I bet, now it will be the same :)

 

kind regards

Felix