|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Dec 25, 2012 1:40:35 GMT
Merry Christmas, Dr. Leif, God JulWe are near SC-24 Maximum, but maximum what? All the time series data, with which I am familiar, seem near the low end of their ranges. Is there a datum that is near its maximum, perhaps some proxy for solar irradiation? Maximum is a rather f'fluid' concept, there is no well-defined maximum in most cycles. What we have is a couple of years with high activity, no definite marker. Perhaps the best is when the polar fields reverse, but even that happens at different times in the two hemispheres. |
|
|
|
Post by france on Dec 31, 2012 18:12:09 GMT
Dr. Isvalgaard, please take a look at following article (sorry for it is in Spanish) . It comments on new scientific support for the idea that planets could influence sun�s magnetic activity through cycles lasting for 88, 104, 150, 208, 506, 1000 or 2200 years. It refers to an article appeared in digital edition of Astronomy & Astrophysics. Results are from a multinational research team USA-SPAIN-SWITZERLAND and the article names J. A. Abreu and J. Beer del ETH from Zurich among others. Do you know about this? I find it most interesting... Please check and advise! Thanks! www.agenciasinc.es/Noticias/Los-p....gnetica-del-Sol Yes, I know about it. I was a referee on an earlier version which was rejected by the journal it was submitted to. Apparently, the authors found a more friendly place to submit their paper to. I don't believe their result has merit, but it has appeal among many people. Here is some of my thoughts about that subject in general: www.leif.org/research/AGU%20Fall%202011%20SH34B-08.pdfThanks for your thoughts dr Svalgaard. Rudolph Wolf is accountable of studies about planets theory in solar cycle. He asked future generation to find astronomical proof. Could you tell us if there are several cycles in solar cycle. I remember few called "small cycles" that last 2, 18 months, or something like that. And length cycles 11 and more 169 years for example. Have you already produced a paper about that ? Happy new year 2013 |
|
bigbud
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 180
|
Post by bigbud on Jan 7, 2013 13:38:46 GMT
hi france around summer 2013 is my estimate www.sibet.org/solar/index.htmlthe top so far in SC24 seems too early, so we should have another big top or two in 2013. (sorry, wrong thread) |
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Jan 7, 2013 18:19:47 GMT
Yes, I know about it. I was a referee on an earlier version which was rejected by the journal it was submitted to. Apparently, the authors found a more friendly place to submit their paper to. I don't believe their result has merit, but it has appeal among many people. Here is some of my thoughts about that subject in general: www.leif.org/research/AGU%20Fall%202011%20SH34B-08.pdfThanks for your thoughts dr Svalgaard. Rudolph Wolf is accountable of studies about planets theory in solar cycle. He asked future generation to find astronomical proof. Could you tell us if there are several cycles in solar cycle. I remember few called "small cycles" that last 2, 18 months, or something like that. And length cycles 11 and more 169 years for example. Have you already produced a paper about that ? Happy new year 2013 Short periods in solar activity is a murky subject. Solar activity occurs in 'episodes' of 1-2 years duration. But they do not seem to be strictly periodic. About planets and solar activity see www.leif.org/research/AGU%20Fall%202011%20SH34B-08.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by france on Jan 8, 2013 9:36:43 GMT
thanks Dr Svalgaard (I think bigbud take a wrong tread to answer my question about his own computation  I read your paper may be bigbud computations used formula you explain in it. Just a question, you told me by mail barycenter is an illusion of mind if it was not 2 persons sould be attracted. I answered that perhaps happened but it's so tiny we don't see it. After you wrote this paper, so I told me this assumption of barycenter could be good to follow. And other question came to me : could we know how much 2 persons should be attracted if they are separated from 10 meters for example, what score of tide is ? Is formulae the same you wrote on your paper ? example person A weighs 80 kg and person B 60 kg they are separated from 10 meters how much should be the score of tide with the barycenter ? to just have an idea. If the result is very lowly (what I presume) may be... more a person is far less one feels its presence as if we were less attracted, same with objects ... Bigbud, could you help to compute this example for me because I'm not able  |
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Jan 8, 2013 22:51:58 GMT
thanks Dr Svalgaard (I think bigbud take a wrong tread to answer my question about his own computation I read your paper may be bigbud computations used formula you explain in it. Just a question, you told me by mail barycenter is an illusion of mind if it was not 2 persons sould be attracted. I answered that perhaps happened but it's so tiny we don't see it. After you wrote this paper, so I told me this assumption of barycenter could be good to follow. And other question came to me : could we know how much 2 persons should be attracted if they are separated from 10 meters for example, what score of tide is ? Is formulae the same you wrote on your paper ? example person A weighs 80 kg and person B 60 kg they are separated from 10 meters how much should be the score of tide with the barycenter ? to just have an idea. If the result is very lowly (what I presume) may be... more a person is far less one feels its presence as if we were less attracted, same with objects ... Bigbud, could you help to compute this example for me because I'm not able Almost too tiny to measure [and impossible to notice by the persons]. Here is how to measure the force: perso.ens-lyon.fr/sergio.ciliberto/Teaching/Cours_physique_experimentale/gravitation.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by duwayne on Jan 8, 2013 23:30:32 GMT
Dr. Svalgaard, on the WUWT blogsite, you commented that the new Met Office decadal forecast, given the error range, wasn't any different than the old one. Go to solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=globalwarming&action=display&thread=95&page=56Reply #833 to see the difference between the old and new predictions. The old prediction is from 2011 vs the new one from 2012. I can see a difference. For the most likely case the 2012 forecast is nearly 0.4C higher for 2012. Hopefully, I'm not totally out of place posting this message on this thread but I wanted you to see this since you had made a public comment concerning the forecasts. |
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Jan 9, 2013 5:25:05 GMT
Dr. Svalgaard, on the WUWT blogsite, you commented that the new Met Office decadal forecast, given the error range, wasn't any different than the old one. Go to solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=globalwarming&action=display&thread=95&page=56Reply #833 to see the difference between the old and new predictions. The old prediction is from 2011 vs the new one from 2012. I can see a difference. For the most likely case the 2012 forecast is nearly 0.4C higher for 2012. Hopefully, I'm not totally out of place posting this message on this thread but I wanted you to see this since you had made a public comment concerning the forecasts. But the error bars are wide enough to include both values, so the difference is not significant. |
|
timb
New Member
Posts: 45 
|
Post by timb on Jan 10, 2013 8:33:35 GMT
Is there a site that tracks rotational velocity of the sun at various latitudes. Maybw the sample set is too small but the sun seems to be producing some more high latitude sunspots. They seem to have very similar velocities as the more equatorial spots and the also seem to be flatter (i.e. less Joys law angle) to their components. Is there anyone looking at differential rotation and how it changes through a cycle? It would be interesting to see if the relationship between sunspot rotation rate and the actual surface rotation rate was affected by the magnetic field strength and reversals. Sort of like imagining a boat with a rubber band anchor line as the tide moves in and out. At some points the boat moves at the rate of tide but as the band tensions, the boat still moves but slower.
|
|
|
|
Post by france on Jan 12, 2013 2:44:49 GMT
thanks Dr Svalgaard (I think bigbud take a wrong tread to answer my question about his own computation I read your paper may be bigbud computations used formula you explain in it. Just a question, you told me by mail barycenter is an illusion of mind if it was not 2 persons sould be attracted. I answered that perhaps happened but it's so tiny we don't see it. After you wrote this paper, so I told me this assumption of barycenter could be good to follow. And other question came to me : could we know how much 2 persons should be attracted if they are separated from 10 meters for example, what score of tide is ? Is formulae the same you wrote on your paper ? example person A weighs 80 kg and person B 60 kg they are separated from 10 meters how much should be the score of tide with the barycenter ? to just have an idea. If the result is very lowly (what I presume) may be... more a person is far less one feels its presence as if we were less attracted, same with objects ... Bigbud, could you help to compute this example for me because I'm not able Almost too tiny to measure [and impossible to notice by the persons]. Here is how to measure the force: perso.ens-lyon.fr/sergio.ciliberto/Teaching/Cours_physique_experimentale/gravitation.pdfThank you very much Dr Svalgaard, so now ar we autorized to make measurements with sun not only earth and pendulum ? On gazes of the sun effect could be able to disturb atoms even if it's minimal that could affect convoyor belt for example. I think theses forces must have an influence so small they are. Bigbud could you help ? |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 19, 2013 18:29:44 GMT
Dr. Svalgaard:
I posted a link on Skeptical Science facebook page to your presentations on TSI, SSN etc.
The response was that being you don't publish, your expertise is only opinion and does not mean anything.
I did a google, and also looked on your ref page. I was pretty sure that you published updated TSI a few years ago, and that Dr. Lean was a co-author? Is my memory playing tricks on me?
I did not appreciate the dissing of your work as presented by the SKS folks.
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 19, 2013 19:27:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Jan 20, 2013 0:34:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Jan 20, 2013 0:35:43 GMT
yes, very valid. Dora [Preminger] and the late Steve Walton are respected scientists with a good track record. |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 20, 2013 3:30:19 GMT
Dr. Svalgaard:
Daniel Baily seemed to think that even tho you had presented your work, but not published it, that it was not valid.
They have now erased all my posts. Must have hit a nerve or something.
|
|
