|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Feb 20, 2012 2:17:11 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by norpag on Feb 20, 2012 16:48:48 GMT
Leif -- looks like a great project with just the people required to work together on it - congratulations on putting it together - I can hardly wait to see results. Regards Norpag
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Feb 20, 2012 19:08:05 GMT
Leif -- looks like a great project with just the people required to work together on it - congratulations on putting it together - I can hardly wait to see results. Regards Norpag You can follow the progress on the sunspot number on our Wiki: ssnworkshop.wikia.com/wiki/Home |
|
|
|
Post by jcarels on Feb 20, 2012 22:06:35 GMT
The presentation from Frédéric Clette about the History of the SIDC sunspot number is really interesting, espcially as an observer for SIDC.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2012 20:41:06 GMT
Hi Leif, I appreciate that you frequently update the valuable plot at www.leif.org/research/TSI-SORCE-2008-now.png . I see that the dotted average line for the F 10.7 flux decreases already, which is of course correct looking at the actual data - while all the well-known predictions say that the (low) maximum will be next year. Is this a pessimistic plot, or is it simply the short-term numerical average which might/should/will increase again within the next months? Thanks, Herb |
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Feb 22, 2012 1:54:00 GMT
Hi Leif, I appreciate that you frequently update the valuable plot at www.leif.org/research/TSI-SORCE-2008-now.png . I see that the dotted average line for the F 10.7 flux decreases already, which is of course correct looking at the actual data - while all the well-known predictions say that the (low) maximum will be next year. Is this a pessimistic plot, or is it simply the short-term numerical average which might/should/will increase again within the next months? Thanks, Herb The line is for entertainment only  and only shows the short-term trend. |
|
|
|
Post by elbuho on Mar 1, 2012 0:32:54 GMT
Dear doctor,
Do you think the Livingstone - Penn effect is always present in times of solar minimum?
Or maybe just during Maunder minima but not in Dalton?
Could you speculate a little?
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Mar 1, 2012 1:52:08 GMT
Dear doctor, Do you think the Livingstone - Penn effect is always present in times of solar minimum? Or maybe just during Maunder minima but not in Dalton? Could you speculate a little? The L&P effect is not present at every solar minimum and likely also not at the Dalton Minimum, but IMHO was present [the cause, actually] of the Maunder Minimum. |
|
|
|
Post by justsomeguy on Mar 1, 2012 14:54:46 GMT
Any chance we are near the maxima now and will drift to the minima pretty quickly?
The polar fields sure do look different this cycle, will the weakenss effec the time it takes to reverse? Do stronger fields reverse "quicker"?
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Mar 1, 2012 20:29:58 GMT
Any chance we are near the maxima now and will drift to the minima pretty quickly? The polar fields sure do look different this cycle, will the weakenss effec the time it takes to reverse? Do stronger fields reverse "quicker"? I don't think so. The reversal is a tug-of-war between two things: if the existing fields are weak they are easier to reverse, but if the fields now drifting to the poles are also weak, that may well mean that the reversal takes longer, so the net effect might be no change in behavior. |
|
|
|
Post by justsomeguy on Mar 3, 2012 14:04:50 GMT
Well, this is more wishful thinking that science, but... Is it possible we could be at or near the peak of this cycle and we will drift down to a minima from here? The thought goes that the original predicted cycle would peak about now (see higher of the two below, that was the original very poor NASA prediction, which Dr Svalgaard disagreed with):  And what we are really having is a somewhat normal cycle, with an L and P effect so we are not "seeing" all the sunspots. Thus, we should see things drift to a minima from here. The equatorial movement of sunspots could support this, but I have no stats on that:  This theory would of course require the L and P effect to cause downgraded radio flux (which Dr Svalgaard thinks believes should not be effected by L and P, making the thought more far fetched) |
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Mar 3, 2012 15:55:43 GMT
Well, this is more wishful thinking that science, but... Is it possible we could be at or near the peak of this cycle and we will drift down to a minima from here? The thought goes that the original predicted cycle would peak about now (see higher of the two below, that was the original very poor NASA prediction, which Dr Svalgaard disagreed with): And what we are really having is a somewhat normal cycle, with an L and P effect so we are not "seeing" all the sunspots. Thus, we should see things drift to a minima from here. The equatorial movement of sunspots could support this, but I have no stats on that: This theory would of course require the L and P effect to cause downgraded radio flux (which Dr Svalgaard thinks believes should not be effected by L and P, making the thought more far fetched) more likely that we are just seeing the wild swings often seen in weak cycles, e.g. cycle 14 |
|
|
|
Post by justsomeguy on Mar 4, 2012 15:39:04 GMT
You are likely correct, but there was no L and P effect in 14 thus we are in new territory, is that correct?
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Mar 4, 2012 16:58:36 GMT
You are likely correct, but there was no L and P effect in 14 thus we are in new territory, is that correct? If [as I believe] the Maunder Minimum was due to an extreme L&P effect, we have been there before... |
|
|
|
Post by chickenlittle on Mar 4, 2012 21:02:46 GMT
Dr. Svalgaard,
Is anyone trying to explain the cause of the L&P effect? Or would that be putting the cart before the horse? Is the effect due to a less active sun, and then makes the sun appear even less active than it already is by making the sunspots less visable?
Thanks
|
|
