|
Post by Bob k6tr on Oct 9, 2010 2:00:17 GMT
The labelling of the Y Axis is somewhat vague. I devise that it is Sunspot "Number" Assuming that the graph itself is puslling. Why would Sunspot count go down as umbral magnetic intensity increases ? Why would a magnetic intensity of 1500 Gauss yield a spot count of 90 for Cycle 24 yet render less than 10 for Cycle 25 and 0 for Cycle 23 ? shift SC23 to the left, then cut off at 1500 and you get SC24. Shift SC24 left, then cut off at 1500 and you get SC25... OK I can see that. It just seems like an odd way of drawing a graph. BTW does Bill Livingston furnish you with any more information than the updated graph? Specifically I'm wonder if he tells you how many regions he measures each month? Discerning those Xs and Os gets tiring on the eyes.
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 9, 2010 3:57:45 GMT
shift SC23 to the left, then cut off at 1500 and you get SC24. Shift SC24 left, then cut off at 1500 and you get SC25... OK I can see that. It just seems like an odd way of drawing a graph. BTW does Bill Livingston furnish you with any more information than the updated graph? Specifically I'm wonder if he tells you how many regions he measures each month? Discerning those Xs and Os gets tiring on the eyes. Yes I get all his data. They can be found here: www.leif.org/research/Livingston.txt
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Oct 9, 2010 18:38:50 GMT
OK I can see that. It just seems like an odd way of drawing a graph. BTW does Bill Livingston furnish you with any more information than the updated graph? Specifically I'm wonder if he tells you how many regions he measures each month? Discerning those Xs and Os gets tiring on the eyes. Yes I get all his data. They can be found here: www.leif.org/research/Livingston.txtThanks for the link Leif. Does Livingston derive the trend lines from a straight Linear Regression ?
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 10, 2010 2:57:40 GMT
Thanks for the link Leif. Does Livingston derive the trend lines from a straight Linear Regression ? on my plot of his data, the trend is a quadratic curve
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Oct 11, 2010 23:15:08 GMT
Thanks for the link Leif. Does Livingston derive the trend lines from a straight Linear Regression ? on my plot of his data, the trend is a quadratic curve Thanks Leif
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 12, 2010 3:32:07 GMT
You 'correction' is ad-hoc, not based on correct physics, and basically nonsense. The only way to proceed is to get new, better ice cores, not by ad-hoc monkey business with already shaky date.
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 12, 2010 20:39:04 GMT
You 'correction' is ad-hoc, not based on correct physics, and basically nonsense. The only way to proceed is to get new, better ice cores, not by ad-hoc monkey business with already shaky date. It is not only correct physics, but it is quoted and used by all scientists dealing with 14C and 10Be including yourself in your recent posts on the 10Be at these pages. It is no good blaming ice cores for poor science, better ice cores would not change anything. The original data is what is used and quoted. I don't think any of our 'corrections' fall in that category.
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 12, 2010 21:42:09 GMT
The original data is what is used and quoted. I don't think any of our 'corrections' fall in that category. I did not say ‘your correction’, in science one has to be more precise. My data is probably the most reliable for any physical variable going back to 1600 and before. Not a single proxy there, no estimate, just solid verifiable record. 10Be is not the goal, it is the CETs that I am after, but needed a non related confirmation, and McCracken obligingly provided it. Good night. If 'your data' does not match McCracken's or other direct ice core data it is not 'solid verifiable data'. 'Not a single proxy'? What does 'P' in NAP stand for?
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 12, 2010 22:08:52 GMT
If 'your data' does not match McCracken's or other direct ice core data it is not 'solid verifiable data'. You are making a wrong assumption, hence your argument is false. It is McCracken’s data which contains strong component of a physical process as described in my data, which is not result of the GCRs or the associated generation of 10Be, therefore my correction, although may not be perfect, it is fully justifiable from the science’s point of view. I shall not comment on this further. If 10Be is not the goal, then don’t distort that record by wishful thinking. There is no evidence for your supposition. You'll not comment further? Well, you should not have hijacked this thread by commenting earlier, so, good riddance.
|
|
|
Post by csspider57 on Oct 14, 2010 12:56:36 GMT
Ah...argh... Well Just one question Vuks. It is yes or no and then we let this go here from the L&P thread, ok. Does the planetary feedback theory use inward - outward IMF configurations. Just a yes or no thing. Been playing with tilt angles in the sheath and S. helio hemi weaknesses. 28 day movie for 10AU (hey France check it out and put on the 3D eyes, slow down the frames and enlarge the image. quite cool you too Dr. S. gse.gi.alaska.edu/recent/javascript_movie.htmlA superstitious woman with a superstitious mind .. there's Whitesnake again with so easy. ha
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 14, 2010 13:29:38 GMT
Ah...argh... Well Just one question Vuks. It is yes or no and then we let this go here from the L&P thread, ok. Does the planetary feedback theory use inward - outward IMF configurations. Just a yes or no thing. Been playing with tilt angles in the sheath and S. helio hemi weaknesses. 28 day movie for 10AU (hey France check it out and put on the 3D eyes, slow down the frames and enlarge the image. quite cool you too Dr. S. gse.gi.alaska.edu/recent/javascript_movie.htmlA superstitious woman with a superstitious mind .. there's Whitesnake again with so easy. ha Here is what the boundary between the red and the blue fields looks like:
|
|
|
Post by csspider57 on Oct 14, 2010 14:00:07 GMT
Yes, thanks Dr. S. but that movie sets your still in motion.
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 14, 2010 14:45:14 GMT
Yes, thanks Dr. S. but that movie sets your still in motion. If you like movies, then here is a typical cut along the North-South direction [rather than the equatorial movie]: The movies show the velocity [low at the boundary] and the density [high at the boundary] during a full rotation of the Sun. Here is a little mood music to go with it. Just click the link and minimize the new window.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeYUR4mud_M&feature=related
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Oct 14, 2010 16:48:35 GMT
marvelous!
|
|
|
Post by csspider57 on Oct 18, 2010 1:58:53 GMT
Not done yet Karlox check this out. Right: An artist's concept of the heliospheric current sheet. The rotating Sun is located in the center. Credit: Brian Grimm
|
|