|
Post by lsvalgaard on Jul 22, 2015 14:41:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Jul 21, 2015 14:21:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Jul 21, 2015 14:11:33 GMT
One part of the reason is that your disordered part is much wider than the ordered part. And why are there no Grand maxima during Jose cycles 30-42? Why do you leave out the last 200 years? Looks like a carefully doctored plot to me.
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Apr 17, 2015 3:45:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Mar 29, 2015 9:28:47 GMT
The Cameron paper cites our 1978 paper as giving the best method for prediction of the sunspot number. The physical bases has already long been firm: Leighton, Choudhuri, etc. Cameron et al. agree with this which is nice. As for prediction of the next cycle, it is a bit too early. The polar fields should first stabilize and the North polar fields are not quite there yet.
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Mar 24, 2015 6:52:04 GMT
Some people think there is. I'm more skeptical. The evidence is too weak to reach judgement, IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Feb 19, 2015 22:05:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Feb 19, 2015 22:04:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Dec 24, 2014 15:05:05 GMT
3% of all sunspots have reversed polarity. This is due to the group having rotated and has no further significance.
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Aug 31, 2014 0:28:27 GMT
Yes, although the maximum is broad and multipeaked.
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Aug 31, 2014 0:28:05 GMT
Dr. Svalgaard, do you think solar max is behind us regarding this cycle ?
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Aug 31, 2014 0:26:45 GMT
Yes, and especially near maximum of the cycle.
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Aug 31, 2014 0:26:13 GMT
Dr. Svalgaard: The solar wind seems to be staying very slow. Is this a normal occurrence during a weak solar cycle?
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Aug 3, 2014 4:02:06 GMT
No, I don't think the timing is important.
|
|
|
Post by lsvalgaard on Jul 30, 2014 3:07:26 GMT
UV and everything else vary with the solar cycle, so if this cycle is smaller than the previous [which it is] the UV is proportionally smaller too.
|
|