|
|
Post by meemoeuk on Oct 10, 2011 23:11:21 GMT
Hi Leif, I've just browsed your research website. I couldn't quickly find your predictions for solar cycle actvity for the next 30 years.
I take it you agree with the concensus solar cycle 25 will likely be small like SC24.
But it's what going to happen after that that's interesting! Another strong glessburg cycle for the 21st century? Or a weak one?
It was about 2007 I got interested in this question, it was too speculative then. Have you, or the rest of the hardcore solar cycle scientists become anymore certain on what happens after SC25 in the last 4 years?
If not when do you think you'll have a confident idea on this?
Don't forget that old chinese saying, " to know, but not to apply, is to not know ". There no doubt you know more than most about the sun. But you never seem to answer the awesome questions. A scientist should be enthusiastic to apply his knowing to make predictions. You'll appreciate it's frustrating for the laymen here having a master of all the fiddly detail present, but who doesn't seem to answer the masterful questions. The only reason to to bother with such detail to better predict the sun.
Excuse that last paragraph if you've got you predictions near, but I haven't spotted them.
thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 11, 2011 1:00:10 GMT
Hi Leif, I've just browsed your research website. I couldn't quickly find your predictions for solar cycle actvity for the next 30 years. I take it you agree with the concensus solar cycle 25 will likely be small like SC24. But it's what going to happen after that that's interesting! Another strong glessburg cycle for the 21st century? Or a weak one? It was about 2007 I got interested in this question, it was too speculative then. Have you, or the rest of the hardcore solar cycle scientists become anymore certain on what happens after SC25 in the last 4 years? If not when do you think you'll have a confident idea on this? Don't forget that old chinese saying, " to know, but not to apply, is to not know ". There no doubt you know more than most about the sun. But you never seem to answer the awesome questions. A scientist should be enthusiastic to apply his knowing to make predictions. You'll appreciate it's frustrating for the laymen here having a master of all the fiddly detail present, but who doesn't seem to answer the masterful questions. The only reason to to bother with such detail to better predict the sun. Excuse that last paragraph if you've got you predictions near, but I haven't spotted them. thanks I think that confident prediction more than one cycle ahead is not possible with the knowledge we have today [and perhaps never]. Statistically, the situation is somewhat better, and it looks like we'll have several small cycles, since that is what we have had every 100 years or so in the past. |
|
|
|
Post by meemoeuk on Oct 11, 2011 11:11:19 GMT
Well I know you are cautious\reserved with predictions, so just by saying "Statistically, the situation is somewhat better, and it looks like we'll have several small cycles <after SC25>" , it means there is already substancial evidence mounting in favour of weak solar activity for the next 90 years.
Has there been any symposium amonght the top solar scientists on " whats the sun going to do after SC25 ? " recently? If not, whens the next one? What with so much more general interest in the solar cycles now, the conclusions from such an event, positive or uncertain, would be big news.
Ken Schatten seemed to do a lot of predicting 10 years ago, but I can't find any of his recent SC predictions on google.
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 11, 2011 14:37:50 GMT
Well I know you are cautious\reserved with predictions, so just by saying "Statistically, the situation is somewhat better, and it looks like we'll have several small cycles <after SC25>" , it means there is already substancial evidence mounting in favour of weak solar activity for the next 90 years. Has there been any symposium amought the top solar scientists on " whats the sun going to do after SC25 ? " recently? If not, whens the next one? What with so much more general interest in the solar cycles now, the conclusions from such an event, positive or uncertain, would be big news. Ken Schatten seemed to do a lot of predicting 10 years ago, but I can't find any of his recent SC predictions on google. I was just at one such symposium: iaus286.iafe.uba.ar/Conclusion: we don't know yet. Predictions themselves have an obvious 11-year cycle. Ken did make predictions some recently: adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009SPD....40.0808Sadsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008AGUFMSH51A1593Sadsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005GeoRL..3221106S |
|
|
|
Post by meemoeuk on Oct 11, 2011 15:25:07 GMT
ok, so based on " confident prediction more than one cycle ahead is not possible with the knowledge we have today" a reasonable time for 'confident predictions' won't be until SC24-25 minimum which is about 2018.
What a long time to wait. I'll have to find something else to think about for a few years.
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 11, 2011 17:14:55 GMT
ok, so based on " confident prediction more than one cycle ahead is not possible with the knowledge we have today" a reasonable time for 'confident predictions' won't be until SC24-25 minimum which is about 2018. What a long time to wait. I'll have to find something else to think about for a few years. yes. we have to wait until the solar polar fields after the current maximum become well established around 2015 or so. |
|
|
|
Post by justsomeguy on Oct 12, 2011 9:56:59 GMT
This has to be one of the least predictable periods, we have never seen a sun with so many variables changing from historic norms in modern times.
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 12, 2011 13:39:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by justsomeguy on Oct 12, 2011 22:59:43 GMT
Very nice! A couple minor thoughts.
1) When you refer to a drop in temp on earth you do mean, and account for, only the DIRECT effect of lower TSI and do not account for any possible secondary effects(e.g. cloud differences, etc.). Is that right?
2) Was there a Livingston and Penn effect 100 years ago? (e.g. lower mag per spot, can we deduce there was based on the area?)
3) Slide 39 and following are so neat, interesting times...have fun at the meetings!
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 13, 2011 0:08:13 GMT
Very nice! A couple minor thoughts. 1) When you refer to a drop in temp on earth you do mean, and account for, only the DIRECT effect of lower TSI and do not account for any possible secondary effects(e.g. cloud differences, etc.). Is that right? 2) Was there a Livingston and Penn effect 100 years ago? (e.g. lower mag per spot, can we deduce there was based on the area?) 3) Slide 39 and following are so neat, interesting times...have fun at the meetings! 1: The assumption is that TSI is sort of a barometer for all the other solar properties, so the temps should follow the same pattern as TSI even is not due directly to TSI. 2: I don't think there was a L&P effect 100 years ago as the relationship between sunspot area and number was not different. 3: It is papers like mine that make such meetings fun and interesting ;D |
|
AD6AA
Level 2 Rank
Posts: 82
|
Post by AD6AA on Oct 13, 2011 4:51:04 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sunspotboy on Oct 15, 2011 6:01:11 GMT
Polar Field Strength
NO MINOR CHANGE!
A few eeks ago i asked you why they changed their values
These are the recent
2011:08:06_21h:07m:13s -34N 28S -31Avg 20nhz filt: -13Nf 39Sf -26Avgf
2011:08:16_21h:07m:13s -38N 31S -34Avg 20nhz filt: -14Nf 39Sf -27Avgf
2011:08:26_21h:07m:13s -35N 29S -32Avg 20nhz filt: -14Nf 39Sf -27Avgf
2011:09:05_21h:07m:13s -31N 24S -27Avg 20nhz filt: -14Nf 39Sf -27Avgf
2011:09:15_21h:07m:13s -32N 23S -28Avg 20nhz filt: -15Nf 39Sf -27Avgf
2011:09:25_21h:07m:13s -37N 24S -30Avg 20nhz filt: -15Nf 38Sf -27Avgf
These from a few weeks ago
2011:06:27_21h:07m:13s -20N 33S -27Avg 20nhz filt: -8Nf 43Sf -26Avgf
2011:07:07_21h:07m:13s -25N 30S -27Avg 20nhz filt: -8Nf 43Sf -25Avgf
2011:07:17_21h:07m:13s -28N 29S -28Avg 20nhz filt: -7Nf 43Sf -25Avgf
2011:07:27_21h:07m:13s -27N 30S -29Avg 20nhz filt: -7Nf 44Sf -25Avgf
2011:08:06_21h:07m:13s -34N 28S -31Avg 20nhz filt: -7Nf 44Sf -25Avgf
A few weeks ago August 6 = - 7 Nf and know = -13Nf
So what is a minor change? Is this normal? Or are they just guessing?
Thank you!
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 15, 2011 11:27:49 GMT
Polar Field Strength NO MINOR CHANGE! A few eeks ago i asked you why they changed their values These are the recent 2011:08:06_21h:07m:13s -34N 28S -31Avg 20nhz filt: -13Nf 39Sf -26Avgf 2011:08:16_21h:07m:13s -38N 31S -34Avg 20nhz filt: -14Nf 39Sf -27Avgf 2011:08:26_21h:07m:13s -35N 29S -32Avg 20nhz filt: -14Nf 39Sf -27Avgf 2011:09:05_21h:07m:13s -31N 24S -27Avg 20nhz filt: -14Nf 39Sf -27Avgf 2011:09:15_21h:07m:13s -32N 23S -28Avg 20nhz filt: -15Nf 39Sf -27Avgf 2011:09:25_21h:07m:13s -37N 24S -30Avg 20nhz filt: -15Nf 38Sf -27Avgf These from a few weeks ago 2011:06:27_21h:07m:13s -20N 33S -27Avg 20nhz filt: -8Nf 43Sf -26Avgf 2011:07:07_21h:07m:13s -25N 30S -27Avg 20nhz filt: -8Nf 43Sf -25Avgf 2011:07:17_21h:07m:13s -28N 29S -28Avg 20nhz filt: -7Nf 43Sf -25Avgf 2011:07:27_21h:07m:13s -27N 30S -29Avg 20nhz filt: -7Nf 44Sf -25Avgf 2011:08:06_21h:07m:13s -34N 28S -31Avg 20nhz filt: -7Nf 44Sf -25Avgf A few weeks ago August 6 = - 7 Nf and know = -13Nf So what is a minor change? Is this normal? Or are they just guessing? Thank you! The values published every ten days are the average over the previous 30 days, so when new data are added they can potentially change the last three values. In addition, there are quality control issues that may cause certain newer values to be rejected later also leading to minor backwards changes. |
|
|
|
Post by vukcevic on Oct 15, 2011 19:26:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Oct 15, 2011 21:54:09 GMT
As this is not a question to me, please put it elsewhere |
|
