|
Post by socold on May 3, 2009 15:12:35 GMT
Of course that's rate of sea level change. The rise in sea level change itself doesn't correlate at all well with the solar cycle* *the recent warming that is
|
|
|
Post by jimg on May 3, 2009 15:39:06 GMT
Of couse your assumption is that there should be a correlation with the amplitude of the ssn, not the duration and time between cycles.
Back to that whole derivative or integral issue...
Sychronization between sea level and the amplitude of the ssn from the graph shows a loose correlation.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on May 3, 2009 17:15:00 GMT
Of couse your assumption is that there should be a correlation with the amplitude of the ssn, not the duration and time between cycles. Back to that whole derivative or integral issue... Sychronization between sea level and the amplitude of the ssn from the graph shows a loose correlation. It will be interesting to add the Ocean Heat Flux into this and see what correlations there are.
|
|
|
Post by jimg on May 3, 2009 21:10:19 GMT
I guess time and duration is a little redundant isn't it?
How about duration of the minimum and amplitude of the maximum?
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on May 3, 2009 21:25:10 GMT
I guess time and duration is a little redundant isn't it? How about duration of the minimum and amplitude of the maximum? Thats probably why when you put in longterm smoothing the temp and SSN curve converge.
|
|