|
Post by Bob k6tr on Apr 17, 2013 5:24:13 GMT
hello, where is our sun ? Same place it always is. did the polarity reverse of its SSN already happened in south hemisphere ? No....that happens a couple of years prior to Solar Minimum. SM is some 7 years away. If you are referring to the overall magnetic orientation of the sun. The answer is we are still in a transition period. At the moment the Sun has 2 South Poles www.leif.org/research/WSO-Polar-Fields-since-2003.png
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Apr 10, 2013 13:07:52 GMT
It's an average of an average? It's a running average. An average that is constantly recalculated as new data comes in. The natural trend for me just by looking at the ups and downs will look totally different from what it is now? Huh ? ? ? I know we don't want it to go down but... hey guys we can't stop it with the trend? It's not about "what we don't want" it's about what we can prove. The sun has a reputation for throwing curveballs. Gaps in knowledge are revealed by the anomolies that can't be explained.
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Apr 10, 2013 12:03:58 GMT
I am still betting the L & P effect has reduced a normal cycle to a low cycle and the length will be shorter than expected (eg pretty normal length of 11-12 years), of course, only a guess. The mean length (for whatever its worth) of the Cycles on Record is 10.7 years
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Apr 9, 2013 1:53:39 GMT
The plots are hard to compare as they pertain to different wavelength bands (1-500A and 260-340A) and have different units (counts minus a background and photons) so you cannot just compare the numbers. I have not gone to the trouble (if it is even possible) to make put the numbers on the same scale, so can't really comments on your question. Leif the 1-500A is the ch2 trace which are in Blue.....Ignore them The 304A measurements are ch4 traces which are in Red. Look at the top of the SEM page for the description and then go to the historical page. One says 260A to 340A the other says 304A +/- 40A. They are saying the same thing stated in two different ways. The quantity measured on the Y Axis is photons/cm 2/second for both graphs. On the historical chart it's a linear scale. On the sem page it's a log scale. On the X axis they are measuring time. On the historical page they measure in years. On the sem page the units vary depending on which panel you are look at. The bottom panel shows a 14 day span. These are the same graph of the same quantity from the same instrument with different scales. The people at USC made this unnecessarily complicated. It took me a cou year to figure out what they were doing. I've been trying to get a hold of Darryl Judge or his staff for the last two years. The fire is pretty much out but I would like to know if they are archiving the data they receive during Cycle 24.
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Apr 8, 2013 23:26:53 GMT
Hi Leif I found something may or may not be significant. Check this out. Go to the Red Trace on the 4th Panel from the top The Panel entitled...... Latest 14 days of SEM ch2, ch4 data ending.... umtof.umd.edu/sem/This is the 304A uv trace from SOHO for the last 2 weeks Now go to the top panel of. www.usc.edu/dept/space_science/OLD_WEB/semdata.htmThis is the historical values for Cycle 23 Notice that the value of the peak of the current cycle. The Photon Count is slightly above 30. Now check out the peak values in 1999. They appear to be nearly the same. What is different is the values at the low portion of the 27 Day Cycle. In the second half of 1999 the photon count never dropped below 20 where as on March 27 th as well as for most 27 Day Roatation Minimums the photon count is down to 7. A resting count at Solar Minimum is 5 to 6. This scale is log. Would this validate the theory of "Blind Spots" ?
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Mar 24, 2013 1:32:11 GMT
And its position is at the 'middle' of the tine interval for which I have data for the year. To be exact: the average time is also calculated. OK got it ! Now for another question on a different topic. With a low peak for Cycle 23 pretty much established would it follow that Cycle 24 will be a particular long one. Specifically would it follow that Cycle 24 will be longer than Cycle 23 ? (Cycle 23 was 12.5 years long)
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Mar 23, 2013 20:40:07 GMT
So what are the dots then ? Are they the average of the monthly mean and medians ? Each little plus sign [+] is an observation. A given spot can be observed several times on consecutive days so the number of physical spots is about 10 times smaller than the number of plusses. There are no monthly means. What I meant was that I calculate a new yearly average [circles] and median [cyan dots] every time I get new data [once a month]. Ok I think I have it. So what you are saying is you keep a running average and the dots represent the average at the time you post it. Is that right ?
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Mar 23, 2013 0:13:14 GMT
Bill sends me his data every month and I calculate the mean and median as I get the data. For all of 2007 there were only 60 observations vs. 885 for 2012. So what are the dots then ? Are they the average of the monthly mean and medians ?
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Mar 22, 2013 6:24:11 GMT
It probably just means that there were so few sunspots that the error in determining the mean value is large. I'm assuming the dots are the average computation of the previous readings. Am I correct ? If so how often does Bill make those computations ? It appears somewhere in the 3 to 6 month range.
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Oct 13, 2012 6:38:49 GMT
If the magnetic fields of the Wind Stream and the earth connect it causes a geomagnetic storm. How long does it last. Anywhere from a few hours to 5 days depending on the size of the hole and if it is in a Geoeffective Position.
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Sept 27, 2012 17:30:02 GMT
10 is wide open to Europe and Asia. Gettem while their hot.
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Sept 21, 2012 4:27:02 GMT
One year after ? Is there any explanation for that ? One would intuitively think the highest production of spots would occur right at reversal as the magnetic flows would encompass the maximum "sweet area" between +/- 35 degrees lattitude where most spots form on the Sun. And the fields have not begun their migration back to the poles. Check out slide 21 of www.leif.org/research/Asymmetric-Solar-Polar-Field-Reversals-talk.pdfSo what I take away from the slide is not so much an attempt to explain the dynamics but to say this is what we measured and this is what we found. Am I reading that right ?
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Sept 20, 2012 23:40:03 GMT
The red line will go down below the zero mark and the blue line will move up above. This on average happens a year or so after maximum, so we are well on our way. One year after ? Is there any explanation for that ? One would intuitively think the highest production of spots would occur right at reversal as the magnetic flows would encompass the maximum "sweet area" between +/- 35 degrees lattitude where most spots form on the Sun. And the fields have not begun their migration back to the poles.
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Sept 12, 2012 5:45:38 GMT
Both Polar Coronal Holes are gone !According to WSO Readings the Cycle 23-24 Southern Hemisphere has taken a hefty dive over the last 4 months.It would appear the Sun's Poles are very close to doing their flip.
|
|
|
Post by Bob k6tr on Sept 7, 2012 23:56:18 GMT
Leif do you know of anyone that is making any attempt to find a pattern to the way Active Lines of Longitude develop ? That is is there any systemic pattern ?
Do they walk to adjacent lines or flip to the opposite side of the sun ? Or move to regions 90 degrees away ?
|
|