The Jan 08 and other SC24 spots were really SOHO aided flyspecks, but the Sep 22, 08 spot was the first decent one. Meaning your mid 2009 to mid 2011 are the likely ranges. 13.5 to 14.5 yrs SC23 effective if we go with jan 97 SC23 start, 14-15 yrs SC23 effective if we go with May 1996 as SC23 start.
The start of SC23 is in of itself another fine disputed mess. Perhaps you could use your formula and see which SC23 start fits in?
Take a look at the Fourier spectrum I made of the monthly sunspot number. It hints of three cycles within the numbers, of ~9,99 yr, 11 yr and 11,81 yr. All though the data collection is small, I still think this hints that my assumption should be correct:
The solar cycle is synchronized by the three cycles of -11,08 year tidal max cycle of Jupiter, Venus and Earth -Jupiter sidereal period of 11,86 years -Half of Jupiter-Saturn synodic cycle, or 9,93 years
The solar cycles will try to fit to these cycles, and I am now working on what the mechanism might be
As Hung showed in his paper, solar flares often happen at certain planetary alignments. These should be planetary alignments that cause tidal waves, and lead to the most important cycle of tidal wave 11,08 years (Wood, Hung, Wilson, Desmoulins and more).
I think tidal disturbances can stimulate magnetic tensions to emerge to the surface of the Sun, and cause instability in the magnetic arches in the corona, which would lead to flares and CMEs from the sunspots.
But I haven´t started studying on such short terms, so I don´t know if the data will back up this assumption...
I struggle to come to grip with this. It is SC4 that is bothering me. I made an Excel with all the cycles SC1 to SC23. From this and from others there seems to be a large cycle (over a smooth SSN of 120) rises very quick from minimum to maximum. It did take SC4 to reach maximum 41 month from the minimum. That is 3 years and 5 month. Normally the decent to minimum shod have taken about 5 years 6 month or there about. But instead it took more than 10 years for it to drop to its minimum. What did happen there? Of course SC4 lead us into the Dalton minimum.
Is there any explanation why SC4 looked to be on a fast track cycle but ended up with a dragged out minimum?
Also is there the same thing happening now with SC23/24?
Hi Sven - here is a case study of SC4, from the perspective of my hypothesis of the three driving cycles.
To understand the situation one must look back a couple cycles, and I start from SC-3.
At first I would like to remind of this tendency:
This is how the minima have occurred relative to the tidal-max cycle of 11,08 years
This shows the situation of Ju-Angle vs JuSa-angle at the relevant minima (green vertical interval means JuSa in phase):
Now the analysis: At SC-3 the minima had been caught for many cycles in the AB-interval. There were many long cycles, and the solar minima got pushed closer and closer to the tidal max (solar "bear-market"). This would soon result in SCs being kickstarted by the tidal-max, and the minima start to move out of interval B and into C.
This kickstart-effect seem to have started around SC-3 and SC-2, neither starting at "optimal" Ju/JuSa-angles. The effect was enhanced at the begin of SC-1 by a favorable JuSa-configuration. This allowed SC-1 to begin in transition-interval to C, and started a solar "bull-market". SC0 was also let to begin in the transition-interval, by a favorable JuSa-configuration and a kickstart from the tidal-max.
The Ju-cycle was now out of phase, which means it would not influence the timing of the minima until they again were in interval AB. Now it was rather the JuSa-angle that would dictate the rhythm of minima, which means short solar cycles.
SC1 started at the most favorable JuSa-angle, while SC2 seem to have started a bit later than I would have expected. In the monthly SSN-data at this time there are many holes and interpolations. Could be that the minimum actually was a bit earlier...
SC3 began at a most favorable JuSa-angle, and also at the most favorable Ju-angle in the A-interval. The minima were now again in the AB-interval, and soon the Ju-cycle was expected to gain control.
All these short SCs also meant that the minima now were pushed far away from the tidal-max. Soon this would lead to SCs being prolonged, and the end of the solar "bull-market".
The Ju/JuSa-configuration for SC3 favored a quick rise to and fall from maximum. Indeed SC3 has one of the fastest climbs to max of 2,9 years. This meant that the decreasing part was prolonged by the tidal max, but the prolongation lasted not long enough to make JuSa get out of phase.
When the tidal-max period was over, and SC23 down to minimum, there was an optimal configuration for begin of SC4 (with Ju ~330 and JuSa ~45 deg). This lead SC4 to begin quickly after SC3, and a minimum being even farther from the next tidal-max. In stock market terms "very overbought".
SC4 climbed fairly quick to max and then fell with a normal rate. But then it entered the tidal-max around late 1791, which kept the sunspot activity going until late 1796. At just that time there was a favorable configuration of Ju/Jusa, but instead of sparking a new cycle, SC4 was further prolonged. The Ju-cycle normally prevent minima to happen at its perihelion, which was in Oct 1797. This also made SC4 prolong.
After passing the Ju-perihelion, there was a favorable Ju-angle mid 1798 that allowed SC5 to begin. The JuSa-angle was however out of phase, indicating a long and weak cycle.
In addition I think such events like the prolongation of SC4 drains the solar dynamo of energy. Sunspots are being squeezed out like the last drops of a sponge, leaving a dry situation for the next cycle.
Right now we are seeing a similar situation in SC23 and SC24. I have seen some articles saying that the sun is just about to "stop"... and sunspots may not be visible in SC24.
To me the situation today looks normal compared to SC4. That cycle was even more extreme and "overbought" than SC23. So I think we are up to a weak SC24, but see no indication that the sunspots will disappear. We just need some time to make the sponge fill up
This is what the situation looks like when comparing with some typical cycles. See how SC4 begins as a B-class cycle, and is converted into a A-class bu the tidal-max
Greetings BigBud. I have been researching planetary cycles for 9 years, and in relation to solar activity, climate and weather, about 5 years. I had independently identified the relationship between the frequency and timing of J/E/V syzygies with sunspot cycle maximums, and the formation of sunspots at alignments of the inner planets and at least Jupiter, before I read the works of Desmoulin and Hung. I have posting forecasts for new sunspots here for several months: theweatheroutlook.com/twocommunity/forums/t/7881.aspx and have a forecast for C24 on the Landscheidt blog: landscheidt.auditblogs.com/2008/06/03/the-sunspot-cycle-and-c24/ I do recommend you getting TheSky astronomy software by Software Bisque, it will give you exact heliocentric longitude, and can animate over any length period. E/V syzygies versus J/S syzygies average out at around 194 years over a run of several thousand. E/V versus S/U gives initially a Gleissberg period, but has a slip in it that takes about 1100 years to return, with around a 400yr stronger phase, and a 400yr weaker phase. U/S/J versus E/V syzygies is interesting, it takes three 317.66yr returns of U, S and J to unite with E/V syzygies, yielding 953yrs. The 1100 and 953 year cycles are around the right period between occurrences of deep triplets of grand minimums, meaning the next set will start around 2450AD. E/V versus J/S/U/N is at 4628yrs, the 2225yr and 2403yr nodes of J/S/U/N do not fit with E/V. The 1500yr S/U/N cycle has also had some attention by other researchers. Incidentally, have you come across axial periods? the one for J + N is 11.08yrs, it should be in this link somewhere: www.cyclesresearchinstitute.org/ladma/cycles.htm
Mars is very interesting, it shows up strongly with syzygies of E and V in shorter term changes in solar activity, and Earth/Mars conjunctions are common at larger solar storms. This is curious as Mars has not enough gravitational influence to be considered for solar tidal, or SSB mechanisms, suggesting magnetic connections. The cycle of Earth, Venus and Mars is what I call a modal, rather than slipping cycle. It goes from all three in line, to E and V opposite Mars at the half cycle, and back to all three in line, over 299 years.
The JuSa-cycle does not favor strong sunspot activity from here. Similar cycles are SC6 and SC13. So SC24 is a cycle out of phase with JuSa, which produces weak SCs.
The 11,08 year VeEaJu-cycle does favor a rise in activity, but we are still in its early phase
The Jupiter-cycle is controlling the timing of the solar cycle, and has three main configurations. Looks like we are getting a pink type B cycle, which is the most common one.
If solar activity does not accellerate the coming year, there is a possibility that we are getting a yellow type-A cycle. But that seems unlikely (rather impossible, because that would imply solar minimum is still ahead of us)
looks like we got the ramp-up in SSN/flux around the syzygies. I think it is not over yet, but maybe 1-2 weeks pause. Actually the main effect should be ahead of us in October if my memory is correct...