|
|
Post by Ole Doc Sief on Mar 11, 2013 1:28:53 GMT
Still to this day can NOT understand why when NASA is asked about decrease in visible sun spots they keep talking about a double peak ans never mention the L&P dat and theories?!
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Mar 11, 2013 23:38:14 GMT
Still to this day can NOT understand why when NASA is asked about decrease in visible sun spots they keep talking about a double peak ans never mention the L&P dat and theories?! Inconvenient truth, I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 12, 2013 1:49:30 GMT
And that is REALLY the pits. Has Science in everything become so corrupted anymore that only a FEW can still think "outside" of the box?  |
|
|
|
Post by Doug Huffman on Mar 12, 2013 12:03:31 GMT
Inside the box is mere technology, outside the box is science and non-science nonsense. The difficulty is differentiating one from the other. If it was easy then everyone could do it. "A good man knows his limitations." I like to think that Karl Popper, Edwin T. Jaynes, Nassim N. Taleb, and Benoit Mandelbrot showed us that the map of sense and non-sense is fractally complex, recently validated by UCDavis cosmologist Albrecht's Origin of probabilities and their application to the multiverse. arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:1212.0953 |
|
|
|
Post by byz on Mar 26, 2013 20:24:09 GMT
What's the Box?  |
|
|
|
Post by Doug Huffman on Mar 27, 2013 9:46:16 GMT
It is the space bounded by the demarcation problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ole Doc Sief on Jun 5, 2013 4:34:07 GMT
Hope L & P are still following predicted trends. Been very absent lately but with this cold summer was trying to catch up on message boards.
|
|
AD6AA
Level 2 Rank
Posts: 82
|
Post by AD6AA on Jun 7, 2013 16:28:36 GMT
Any updated L&P information out there?
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Jun 8, 2013 13:06:03 GMT
Any updated L&P information out there?  year median mean 2001.77 2516 2539 2002.55 2447 2482 2003.80 2333 2373 2004.60 2277 2292 2005.63 2199 2230 2006.43 2180 2215 2007.33 2390 2451 2008.23 2217 2191 2009.81 2046 2040 2010.58 2026 2074 2011.58 2046 2087 2012.61 2007 2047 2013.29 2009 2037 |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 10, 2013 18:01:03 GMT
Thats not much of anything for the last 4 years
|
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Jun 11, 2013 1:30:03 GMT
Thats not much of anything for the last 4 years If you keep cutting off data points below 1500 G, the curve will flatten out |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jun 11, 2013 2:36:49 GMT
Thats not much of anything for the last 4 years If you keep cutting off data points below 1500 G, the curve will flatten out Why would they cut off the data points below 1500 G? Does it get so low that the measurement is not valid? |
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Jun 11, 2013 5:16:50 GMT
If you keep cutting off data points below 1500 G, the curve will flatten out Why would they cut off the data points below 1500 G? Does it get so low that the measurement is not valid? The sun does the cutting as sunspots do not form or become visible when the magnetic field is lower than 1500 G. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 11, 2013 6:33:45 GMT
Why would they cut off the data points below 1500 G? Does it get so low that the measurement is not valid? The sun does the cutting as sunspots do not form or become visible when the magnetic field is lower than 1500 G. So is the trend line shown since 2009 just the best fit of all of the available annual means? |
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Jun 11, 2013 17:55:46 GMT
The sun does the cutting as sunspots do not form or become visible when the magnetic field is lower than 1500 G. So is the trend line shown since 2009 just the best fit of all of the available annual means? No, it is the best fit to ALL the individual observations |
|
