|
|
Post by jcarels on Apr 13, 2010 20:07:34 GMT
If you can even see this one (1062) your telescope must be better than the ones on GONG. Perhaps its the way they take their pictures... I bet I can see more detail with my galileoscope. ;D I could see 1062 today with my telescope (another telescope  ). Most SIDC observing stations (mostly amateurs) have seen it (27) only 2 stations haven't seen it. Btw, the difference between an umbrae and a pore is very easy to see at the telescope. A spot without penumbra isn't always a pore! Ps. I have my copy of The Solar Astronomy Handbook with me and at p.142 I read that umbra are darker during a sunspot maximum than during a minimum... |
|
hank
New Member
Posts: 41 
|
Post by hank on Apr 21, 2010 15:22:25 GMT
> The 'arcing' is not significant. Straight lines fit just as well.
Are those lines the result of some statistical work, or are they hand-drawn to fit?
Honestly naive question -- I haven't been following this, just had a friend who did some solar magnetism measurements 30 years ago at Palomar, my only chance to visit and see the big telescope there, and I've been curious ever since.
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Apr 21, 2010 19:41:14 GMT
> The 'arcing' is not significant. Straight lines fit just as well. Are those lines the result of some statistical work, or are they hand-drawn to fit? Honestly naive question -- I haven't been following this, just had a friend who did some solar magnetism measurements 30 years ago at Palomar, my only chance to visit and see the big telescope there, and I've been curious ever since. They are statistical fits to the data, fitting a parabola, rather than a straight line. Not that is makes much difference. |
|
|
|
Post by annav on May 3, 2010 15:10:28 GMT
What price LP now, with all these tiny tims in groups?
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on May 3, 2010 16:42:31 GMT
White price LP now, with all these tiny tims in groups? The tiny spots are just another consequence of L&P. |
|
|
|
Post by skypilot on May 4, 2010 15:11:36 GMT
Dr. Leif,
Are you referring to L & P's waning Gauss measurements as a factor in having so many very small or speck sunspots.
Thanks, Skypilot
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on May 4, 2010 18:59:02 GMT
Dr. Leif, Are you referring to L & P's waning Gauss measurements as a factor in having so many very small or speck sunspots. Thanks, Skypilot Very likely, yes. A sunspot is formed by many smaller magnetic elements coming together. If the process that controls the moving together of these elements [for unknown reasons] does not work so well anymore, there will be fewer, smaller, and weaker sunspots. That is at least the general idea. |
|
|
|
Post by Peter Gurney on May 16, 2010 15:36:37 GMT
Dr. Svalgaard, I would like to ask you two questions pertaining to the Livingston & Penn Event observations. Question #1:Assuming that any set of observations made by Dr. Livingston can be described by a Normal or Gaussian distribution, as the distribution of observations approaches the 1500 Gauss threshold, below which sunspots can no longer be observed, the unobservable sunspots within the lower tail of the distribution can no longer be used to used to calculate the mean of the distribution. Depending on now the mean was calculated, this could create the impression that the onset of the L&P Event was slowing down when it fact it is not. Several posts on this forum have suggested that the L&P Event is slowing down and will occur at a date later than what was originally forecast by Drs. Livingston & Penn several years ago. Is there any validity to my concern and how is the mean calculated for each set of Dr. Livingston's observations? Question #2: Dr. Hathaway maintains a magnetic-butterfly graphic of Solar activity for Cycles 21, 22, 23 and 24, which he updates at three to fourth month intervals, the most recent update occurring on May 10, 2010.
Click to expand graphic.Hathaway's magnetic-butterfly graphic suggests that compared to Cycles 21 and 22, the transition between Cycles 23 and 24 is atypical and there is currently a magnetic asymmetry between the Northern and Southern Hemispheres of the Sun. Basically in the Southern Hemisphere Cycle 24 is not as advanced as in the Northern Hemisphere, if Dr. Hathaway's observations are correct. For the observations of Dr. Livingston, is there are breakout comparing the L&P Event in the Northern and Southern of the Sun and is there any significance for Hathaway's magnetic-butterfly in the context of the ongoing L&P Event? Thank you, Peter |
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on May 18, 2010 1:39:14 GMT
Dr. Svalgaard, I would like to ask you two questions pertaining to the Livingston & Penn Event observations. Question #1:Is there any validity to my concern and how is the mean calculated for each set of Dr. Livingston's observations? L&P simply report a magnetic field for every spot they can see. If there are 'invisible spots' there are not measured. If all the spots are gone by, say, 2018, they are just gone. I don't see any problems with this. Such is very common. The norm, actually. Compare with 1987. |
|
|
|
Post by annav on May 31, 2010 13:18:28 GMT
Looks more and more as if LP is right.
Any new plot?
|
|
clive
Level 2 Rank
Posts: 50
|
Post by clive on May 31, 2010 14:11:11 GMT
Looks more and more as if LP is right. Any new plot? Right? What exactly is the mechanism behind L&P. I am surprised so many of obvious intelligence subscribe to this voodoo incarnation. L&P are just measuring a solar grand minimum. |
|
|
|
Post by ncfcadam on May 31, 2010 19:43:52 GMT
Looks more and more as if LP is right. Any new plot? Right? What exactly is the mechanism behind L&P. I am surprised so many of obvious intelligence subscribe to this voodoo incarnation. L&P are just measuring a solar grand minimum. What are you talking about? Livingston has made very careful measurements over a period of many years and has observed a trend. He published this in 2006 long before the end of SC23. Since then the trend has continued. Why is that a "voodoo incarnation"? |
|
clive
Level 2 Rank
Posts: 50
|
Post by clive on May 31, 2010 23:08:59 GMT
Right? What exactly is the mechanism behind L&P. I am surprised so many of obvious intelligence subscribe to this voodoo incarnation. L&P are just measuring a solar grand minimum. What are you talking about? Livingston has made very careful measurements over a period of many years and has observed a trend. He published this in 2006 long before the end of SC23. Since then the trend has continued. Why is that a "voodoo incarnation"? What is the mechanism? There is no effect without some sort of mechanism, otherwise it is just a set of measurements showing a trend. This trend is probably just what you might expect when entering a grand minimum, measured mainly off the back of a down slope of the previous cycle. I am not convinced the trend has continued, too many of this years big groups were not measured, leaving the results open to question. The religious following is akin to those blindly following the AGW mantra. |
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Jun 1, 2010 1:03:25 GMT
What are you talking about? Livingston has made very careful measurements over a period of many years and has observed a trend. He published this in 2006 long before the end of SC23. Since then the trend has continued. Why is that a "voodoo incarnation"? What is the mechanism? There is no effect without some sort of mechanism, otherwise it is just a set of measurements showing a trend. This trend is probably just what you might expect when entering a grand minimum, measured mainly off the back of a down slope of the previous cycle. I am not convinced the trend has continued, too many of this years big groups were not measured, leaving the results open to question. The religious following is akin to those blindly following the AGW mantra. Sunspots form by the coalescence of smaller spots, specks, and pores. You can see some of that explained here www.leif.org/research/Percolation%20and%20the%20Solar%20Dynamo.pdfIf that process varies with time [and we don't know why, but see no reason to deny that it can] you would have an explanation for the L&P effect. Nobody is blindly following anybody. Solar physicists are reasonable people that look hard at the data. |
|
clive
Level 2 Rank
Posts: 50
|
Post by clive on Jun 1, 2010 2:08:04 GMT
What is the mechanism? There is no effect without some sort of mechanism, otherwise it is just a set of measurements showing a trend. This trend is probably just what you might expect when entering a grand minimum, measured mainly off the back of a down slope of the previous cycle. I am not convinced the trend has continued, too many of this years big groups were not measured, leaving the results open to question. The religious following is akin to those blindly following the AGW mantra. Sunspots form by the coalescence of smaller spots, specks, and pores. You can see some of that explained here www.leif.org/research/Percolation%20and%20the%20Solar%20Dynamo.pdfIf that process varies with time [and we don't know why, but see no reason to deny that it can] you would have an explanation for the L&P effect. Nobody is blindly following anybody. Solar physicists are reasonable people that look hard at the data. So what is the mechanism for the reduction in magnetic fields?? Lets have a good look at the data, do you have the up to date values so they can be plotted in the normal manner, which will also show us the missing groups in JAN/Feb/March? |
|
). Most SIDC observing stations (mostly amateurs) have seen it (27) only 2 stations haven't seen it.
