wd7z
New Member
Posts: 41 
|
Post by wd7z on Apr 7, 2011 0:30:59 GMT
I haven't been following very close, so I don't remember your views. According to this graph (http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/Zurich_Color_Small.jpg), 23-24 seems to look most similar to 11-12 at this point. I'm sure it would be easier to know on the down hill side, but I am impatient. After this, I am back to the background. Thanks for the replies.
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Apr 7, 2011 1:25:38 GMT
I haven't been following very close, so I don't remember your views. According to this graph (http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/Zurich_Color_Small.jpg), 23-24 seems to look most similar to 11-12 at this point. I'm sure it would be easier to know on the down hill side, but I am impatient. After this, I am back to the background. Thanks for the replies. My own view is that 23/24 most resembles 13/14, but such comparisons don't have much meaning to begin with. |
|
|
|
Post by vukcevic on Apr 7, 2011 9:26:14 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Maui on Apr 7, 2011 14:55:05 GMT
From Dr. Isvalgaard's graph, it appears that southern excess at the end of cycle 23 caused the current northern excess. I have developed a computer dynamic model which proves this. Here is the algorithm: "You put your right foot down You pick your left foot up." But in my model, it gets very confusing from there on. Nevertheless, the model is illustrative because it shows there must be balance even in asymmetry, it cannot be ignored or one will fall over and that's not what it's all about. Who am I to question the greats of solar terrestrial physics? Who are they to sell me an 8.9-year "solar cycle?" This study uses other well-defined units, such as "year, " "day," and "meters per second." If one of the parameters is off, shouldn't they all be corrected? This, it seems, is as valuable as most models of late. Problem is, it seems backwards. It should be "you put your left foot up" first. Left = North. That seems to be what the graph shows happened more often than not and is happening again. There is a question in there somewhere. You just have to figure out where it is. I like Dr. Isvalgaard's answer, "The Sun is a messy place." It is likely messy on the interior also. And also--I guess a dance model should be described as "dynamic." |
|
|
|
Post by france on Apr 7, 2011 20:08:56 GMT
thank you Vukcevic. Does Dr Svalgaard agree with it ? |
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Apr 7, 2011 20:55:32 GMT
thank you Vukcevic. Does Dr Svalgaard agree with it ? The sunspot curves are OK. The other curves are numerology and basically nonsense. |
|
jebbo
New Member
Posts: 5
|
Post by jebbo on May 3, 2011 8:26:40 GMT
Leif,
This is not so much a question, rather it is thanks for sharing some of your work-in-progress! The HMI / Livingston comparison is fascinating, particularly to see you and your colleagues almost "thinking out loud".
Assuming the correlation between Livingston, HMI and HDI holds up, it will be very interesting to see the combined data, particularly as MDI data should extend back to ~1995/6 (not sure when the instrument was online and calibrated).
--- Tony Jebson
|
|
bradk
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 199
|
Post by bradk on May 12, 2011 5:32:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on May 12, 2011 19:04:15 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by jcarels on May 12, 2011 20:56:09 GMT
Leif,
Do you happen to know a website with solar drawings made during the maunder minimum? Seems impossible to find drawings made between 1645-1715. I know there where few sunspots (even large) visible at that time but I can't find the drawings online.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on May 12, 2011 21:46:52 GMT
Leif, Do you happen to know a website with solar drawings made during the maunder minimum? Seems impossible to find drawings made between 1645-1715. I know there where few sunspots (even large) visible at that time but I can't find the drawings online. Thanks. There are very few [and not really from the depth of the minimum. Pierre Gassendi [1592-1655] observed 1618-1672 and published his results in 1658 [Opera Omnia, Lyon] I don't know where to find those. Hoyt and Schatten list 1662-1664 Weigel 1660-1665 Picard 1642-1684 Hevelius 1661-1671 Fogel 1682-1718 La Hire 1676-1694 Flamsteed 1675-1690 Siverus 1677-1703 Eimmart 1703-1715 Derham But where all the drawings [if any] are is a different matter. Here is one by Bion, 1672:  |
|
jebbo
New Member
Posts: 5
|
Post by jebbo on May 13, 2011 10:44:08 GMT
On Gassendi, apparently his 400 page notebook covers 1618 to 1652 and his complete works were published posthumously by Henri Louis Habert de Montmor in 1678 (Gassendi died in 1658).
The Catholic Encyclopedia (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06391b.htm) refers to the notebook but doesn't give a reference for where it is kept.
I'm guessing you must have seen "The Sun Recorded Through History
Scientific Data Extracted from Historical Documents", M. Vázquez and J.M. Vaquero which apparently discusses early solar drawings on pages 103-173. Perhaps that gives a location for the notebook
--- Tony Jebson
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on May 13, 2011 13:37:34 GMT
On Gassendi, apparently his 400 page notebook covers 1618 to 1652 and his complete works were published posthumously by Henri Louis Habert de Montmor in 1678 (Gassendi died in 1658). The Catholic Encyclopedia (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06391b.htm) refers to the notebook but doesn't give a reference for where it is kept. I'm guessing you must have seen "The Sun Recorded Through History Scientific Data Extracted from Historical Documents", M. Vázquez and J.M. Vaquero which apparently discusses early solar drawings on pages 103-173. Perhaps that gives a location for the notebook Yes I know that book [and Vaquero too]. No location is given. |
|
bradk
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 199
|
Post by bradk on May 14, 2011 6:07:40 GMT
Thanks for your opinion. As for WUWT, if I want the opinions of true believers and crackpots I will go to WorldNetDaily or PrisonPlanet, not a site masquerading a science discussion but really aimed at a singular biased goal. |
|
bradk
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 199
|
Post by bradk on May 16, 2011 0:02:11 GMT
Do the SIM and TIM SORCE data when coupled with L & P make you think twice about TSI and other broad effects, historically? Even re-visit, truths?
|
|
