|
Post by Ratty on Jul 7, 2020 12:49:34 GMT
This battle has been waging for some time in SC23/SC24 minimum a NASA web page appeared with the forecast that 24 and 25 were probably going to be low. It was 'un'published within a week. Since then occasional low forecasts slip out but the NASA thought police seem to get them within a few weeks. Some of them forecasted a long low cycle. I must admit those that just look at the solar internals are missing the plot. The solar internals are driven by the path and rotation of the Sun and they are themselves driven by the chaotic interactions of the planets and their mutual gravitation (yes I know bary). It is like modeling a cup of coffee being stirred and ignoring the input from the spoon. They are hoping to retire before their sleaze hits the fan. Sleazy for you to say ....
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jul 15, 2020 14:57:43 GMT
The Spoon's Spokesman has SpokenIn 2019, the sun went 281 days without sunspots, and 2020 is producing spotless suns at about the same rate. To find a year with fewer sunspots, you have to go all the way back to 1913, which had 311 spotless days. This makes 2019-2020 a century-class Solar Minimum; solar flares are rare, geomagnetic storms are almost non-existent, and Earth’s upper atmosphere is cooling. Some people worry that the sun could "get stuck" in Solar Minimum, producing a mini-Ice Age caused by low solar activity. There is no evidence this is happening. On the contrary, the next solar cycle (Solar Cycle 25) is showing unmistakable signs of life. On May 29th, the sun unleashed the strongest solar flare in years–an M1-class eruption that just missed Earth. The blast came from an active region belonging to Solar Cycle 25. Observers are also seeing a growing number of Solar Cycle 25 sunspots. So far in 2020, the sun has produced a dozen sunspots. Nine of them (75%) have the magnetic polarity of Solar Cycle 25. This compares to only 17% in 2019 and 0% in 2018. The sun is clearly tipping from one solar cycle to the next. A NOAA-led panel of experts actually predicted this behaviour. Last year they said that Solar Minimum would hit rock bottom sometime in late 2019-early 2020. Activity would then quicken in 2021-22, ramping up to a new Solar Maximum in 2023-26. So far, so good. spaceweather.com/
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Jul 15, 2020 15:16:11 GMT
Glad that's settled!
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jul 18, 2020 12:06:49 GMT
No thank you I've fine with two testicles, I don't need a third. Not necessarily a bad thing, Code. There is a shortage of good basso profondos, I hear.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jul 18, 2020 13:50:51 GMT
"Oxy and Moron are members of different species from the same planet. They make a great team and complement each other in their abilities – Oxy is smart but weak, while Moron is not so bright but physically strong." – Treasure Planet: A Voyage of Discovery treasure-planet.fandom.com/wiki/Oxy_and_Moron
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jul 20, 2020 1:07:14 GMT
Just For Reference - Solar Cycle Progression, SC4-6 (Dalton Minimum) Compared to SC23-25
Comparison: Both low-cycle periods were preceded by a strong, long cycle. SC4 was somewhat stronger (in terms of sunspots) and slightly longer than SC23. Solar Cycle 4 was followed by two very low cycles, the second of which was generally weaker, but more erratic than the first. Solar cycle 23 has had somewhat more sunspots than SC5, but this may not be significant if current techniques innumerate more small sunspots. Solar cycle 25 remains to be seen, but is widely predicted to be similar to SC24.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jul 20, 2020 2:05:56 GMT
It's no wonder Napoleon had so much trouble way back when.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Jul 20, 2020 5:25:54 GMT
speaking of balls
|
|
|
Post by neilhamp on Jul 20, 2020 7:20:15 GMT
Ratty, In his retreat from Moscow in the winter of 1812 he lost three quarters of his army
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jul 20, 2020 8:23:12 GMT
Ratty, In his retreat from Moscow in the winter of 1812 he lost three quarters of his army Napoleon's country retreat? Sorry ...
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jul 20, 2020 11:09:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jul 20, 2020 13:54:39 GMT
Historians still puzzle over Napoleon’s catastrophic Russian defeat, but materials scientists think the army’s buttons may be to blame.Me thinks that the French General may have been to blame. Blaming a lack of buttons for massive heat loss at -30F may be a bit like blaming a lack of CO2 for an ice age. Even French soldiers are more resourceful than that ( sorry).
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jul 20, 2020 14:28:17 GMT
Historians still puzzle over Napoleon’s catastrophic Russian defeat, but materials scientists think the army’s buttons may be to blame.Me thinks that the French General may have been to blame. Blaming a lack of buttons for massive heat loss at -30F may be a bit like blaming a lack of CO2 for an ice age. Even French soldiers are more resourceful than that ( sorry).[/quote] I was actually told of the Napoleonic button problem when I was at school (not long after it happened ) and being taught about isotopes
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jul 21, 2020 0:21:37 GMT
[ Snip ] I was actually told of the Napoleonic button problem when I was at school (not long after it happened ) and being taught about isotopes I seem to remember the story trending on Twitter.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jul 21, 2020 2:10:46 GMT
[ Snip ] I was actually told of the Napoleonic button problem when I was at school (not long after it happened ) and being taught about isotopes I seem to remember the story trending on Twitter. Twits are that old?
|
|