The sun is dead!! Mini iceage???

Evidence for solar forcing in variability of temperatures and pressures in Europe


FULL interesting PAPER
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/looknorthyorkslincs/sun_climate_connection.pdf



(Quote)
The solar signature is best reflected in the wintertime temperature disturbances


(Quote)
The role of the Sun in global and regional climate change should be re-assessed and reasonable physical mechanisms are in sight.

Something to think about from Joe. Interesting stuff.

http://www.accuweather.com/video/110914873001/more-on-the-coming-cooling.asp?channel=vbbastaj

WolfeIRE wrote: »

I am still somewhat confused about what this means for the UK and Ireland. According to his predictive chart, we will experience above normal temps this winter? Excuse my ignorance...

That chart won't play out exactly as shown as you know.

It takes the 3 month period as a whole so lets say jan is colder than normal but the other two months are somewhat above,then you would get slighty above average temps forecast,if that makes sense to you.

Overall global temps should be down so heres hoping that some cold blasts can rear its head far enough west to reach us from time to time.

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes, I agree, Much quieter, but a Dalton minimum type event is still on the cards?

Yes leaning toward something similar to a Dalton.

It more likely will surpass that too but im expecting sunspots at there peak to reach the 90 mark per day.

Well that was gas,i missed most of it but when Kevin asked Ger could he prove the link between Co2 and Climate change,he wormed his way out very well by just saying that he studies computer models and numbers,in other words NO.

Hey MT,went through that NW thread and tis very interesting indeed.

I was looking at something like that too but with

http://landscheidt.auditblogs.com/2008/11/06/are-neptune-and-uranus-the-major-players-in-solar-grand-minima/

Here's a taste of the website,

Neptune and Uranus Control Grand Minima & Solar Modulation?


———————————————-
Some time ago while researching some of my interests in areas such as meteorology, the cosmos and perceived man-made global warming I came across this website and in particular a very interesting graph which Carl Smith created showing an extension to Dr. Landscheidt”s work. After studying Carl’s graph it became apparent to me that Neptune & Uranus are responsible for Solar Grand Minima as well as Solar Cycle Modulation.
In this article I will present Solar System Charts and Sunspot charts which correspond with some of the Angular Movements below in Carl’s graph.
The basic theory on how Neptune & Uranus control Solar Grand Minima and Solar Cycle Modulation is as follows: Shown in Carl’s graph below is a wave modulation mainly created by Jupiter & Saturn together (top of wave)and Jupiter & Saturn opposing (bottom of wave) which effectively is the momentum engine of the Sun, the top of the wave is strong, the bottom is weak (weaker means stronger cycle). Every 179 yrs Neptune & Uranus gather behind Jupiter (the largest gravity source besides the Sun) giving it extra momentum force and IF Saturn is on the other side of the Sun, the “down” cycle is shortened and not as weak because of the reduced momentum to Saturn….this coincides every time with less sunspot activity for the last 1000 yrs at least. Just discovered in an extension I recently finished to Carl’s graph back to 900AD is another line up that also causes Grand Minima before the Medieval Warm Period, over time Jupiter and Saturn gather on the other side of Neptune & Uranus causing disturbance at the top of the “wave” and substantially shortening the “up” cycle. Neptune and Uranus are the controllers of the 2 main drivers creating angular momentum, they can add or take away that momentum. The sunspot cycle modulation follows that control or momentum curve as shown in a graph later in the report.
I believe we can now confidently predict Solar Grand Minima and Solar Cycle Modulation strength.

Fig.1 shows the 2 planetary positions that create the majority of angular momentum in our solar system. “A” corresponds with the bottom of the wave in Carl’s graph and “B” with the top of wave. The resonance created from large strength in “B” and near zero strength in “A” as Jupiter & Saturn balance each other out.

Fig.2 shows the 2 planetary positions capable of creating Grand Minima. “A” robbing Saturn at bottom of wave and “B” robbing Jupiter/Saturn at top of wave. Both positions responsible for the recurring “camels humps” in Carl’s graph

Oh where's Nostradamus when you need him eh!!!!!

And even he made his quatrains near impossible to get heads around.

Well i could say yes to your questions,

Yes a Dalton like minimum is possible,however we simply have to wait and see what manifests in that department.

Yes another cold winter could be on the cards and im leaning toward it myself but it's just so more complicated than saying that.

Thats why i feel the wheel was a great invention,CYCLES CYCLES CYCLES
And that all it ever will be i feel,bar that odd hiccup.

We're due cooler times ahead and i believe its coming.

I know some of you might seem confused now by saying,"well which is it Redsunset,one minute your raving about a blank sun and cosmic rays contributing to past and future climates and now your telling me the big boys in our solar system are actually really controlling matters".

Well i wasn't going to insert that info into this thread but when MT brought it up in another i said what the hell lets explore everything and see what this jigsaw puzzle creates.

So sit back and frazzle your little brains if you wish.Otherwise just look at the cool pics of our glorious Sun.

Ps
All opinions welcome.

Seriously though, i could have picked a less complicated hobby to enjoy,but its like a drug.

DAMN!!!






Spaceweather site still showing a blank sun so needs to be updated according to this chart.


EDIT; Spaceweather not counting that spot.Thats fine by me.

It's probably not large enough to be counted

Letter to the Director of SIDC

August 23, 2010

SIDC know the institution as prestigious and well known worldwide for determining official sunspot number ( NS) , daily and monthly .
Precisely for this reason , are writing to express our surprise and our doubts about the criteria for calculating the SN and respect the values that we read every day, compared with what we see from SOHO Continuum : for example, SN = 4 given , August 20 , a sun sincerely there appeared no stains, or the SN = 33 days of August 16 , with a Sun where little micromacchie .

We would be very useful for us and for all lovers of the subject, if you could give us some information about

1) the criteria for calculating the sunspot number, in particular the correction factor (K ) used ;

2) the names of the observers whose data were used to calculate the sunspot number, as well as Catania and Locarno;

3) the criteria for calculating the sunspot number in the presence of " steam "or whether or not the same as for the sunspots ;

4) Finally , how is possible to compare the sunspot number calculated by the SIDC recently ( during the last and least during the current cycle 24) with the calculated SN 50, 100, 200 years ago and intends to proceed with the SIDC such comparisons in the near future : it is a well known problem of continuity of the calculation of SN modern than the past, due to the increased resolution of the instruments used for observation of sunspots.
We believe that an official response on his part to further increase the prestige of the SIDC . For this , we thank you in advance for your response that will provide us and to all other lovers of this beautiful science.
Sincerely

---

SIDC is a worldwide well known and prestigious organization, for official daily and monthly sunspot number ( SN ) calculation .
For this reason we wish to express surprise and Our Doubts about SN SN calculation criteria and values we can read about Every Day , Compared with SOHO Continuum observation : g on August 20th SN = 4 But The Sun seemed to be absolutely spotless , or August 16th , SN = 33 But the visible solar surface just HAD Few microsunspots .
We Believe It Would Be Very useful , for us and for many other amateurs , if You Could Give Some information about

1) SN calculation criteria , Including the correction factor ( K) used ;

2) the names of the Observatories Whose data are used to calculate SNS, together with Those coming from Catania and Locarno;

3) When SN calculation criteria " pores " are visible , ie If They Are the Same as Those Used for sunspots ;

4) last but not least, how to appear SIDC recent SNS ( During the last minimum and During the current cycle 24) Calculated with SNS 50, 100 , 200 years ago and , furthermore , if the SIDC is going to proceed with Such a comparison in the future: in fact , it is well known the problem of continuity of modern calculations SNS Compared to past ones , two to higher resolution of the instruments used for Sunspot observation .
We Believe That an official answer from You Could INCREASE SIDC high reputation . For this reason , we wish to thank you in advance for the answer you will be going to give us and to all the other amateurs of this Fascinating science .
Best Regards.

---

SIDC 's response to the letter
published August 23

August 24, 2010

First , thanks for your deep interest in the " Sunspot index ( sunspot number, SN )).
Let me give short answer to your questions.
Find additional information in Annex I published very recently.
"Precisely for this reason , are writing to express our surprise and our doubts about the criteria for calculating the SN and respect the values that we read every day, compared with what we see from SOHO Continuum : for example, SN = 4 given , August 20 , a sun sincerely there appeared no stains, or the SN = 33 days of August 16 , with a Sun where little micromacchie .

Please note that the MDI instrument has a relatively limited spatial resolution ( 1Kx1K CCD), and lost many small spots that are easily detected by visual observation with a small amateur telescope . Thus, although functioning in space , MDI is not a good reference for counting the spots.

Here in Brussels for our daily activities , mainly used images collected from the ground of our stations ( uset , Uccle ) or Kanzelhöhe or Catania , but the images and SOHO MDI images . Remember too, that capture visual observation spots in a different way than the CCD ( Charge Coupled Device - electronic light detector ) .
Until recently , the visual observations was better than the CCD image .
Only with the recent CCD , higher resolution of 4 megapixels and techniques in real-time image selection , it became possible match and sometimes exceed the visual observations.
In space, the images from the new missions SDO and PICARD , launched very recently , will be among the best available in the years to come.
"We believe it would be very useful for us and for all lovers of the subject, if you could give us some information about
1) the criteria for calculating the sunspot number, in particular the correction factor (K ) used ; "

Although I do not understand what you mean by that criteria , let me explain the whole process schematically : the index Ri is based on global statistics on a network of 80 stations distributed around the world.
The index is usually the simple average of all daily Wolf numbers from all the stations .
The dispersion of these values is plotted ( standard deviation) and outlier (values far from the mean) isolates ( errors, poor observation) are detected and discarded efficiently because we can count on a typical 40- independent values each day.

Each station is plotted over time individually and the average ratio between the station and the entire network of stations is computed each month , giving the coefficient K scale of the station. This coefficient takes into account the different instruments and observing conditions of the observers , as well as seasonal effects ( monthly values of K ) . Any deviation of a station can be readily identified , so the deviation does not affect many or all network stations .

A further protection against secular deviations is to use a station pilot , currently Locarno ( base station of the original network of Zurich) .
The Ri network is compared with the value of Locarno , which benefits from a constant term ( the same instrument , same site and also the same observer over the last 50 years ) . Again , any deviation that affects the network or station of Locarno will not be the same for both and lead to a discrepancy . However, this has never been detected.

Finally, note that the value Ri result is multiplied by a constant factor 0.6. This value was applied to Zurich for recent values of Re , to lead them back to the same scale compared to previous values , by Rudolph Wolf. This is an agreement that prevented the complete recalculation of previous values ( a long and boring back in the 19th century).
Like that when we observe a single spot (Wolf = 11), do not be surprised to see that Ri is instead of 7 .

2) the names of the observers whose data were used to calculate the sunspot number, as well as Catania and Locarno;
At this moment I have with me the list of observers, but remember that they are approximately 80 ( 1 / 3 professional and 2 / 3 amateur ) worldwide.

Thus , each individual station can not itself constitute ' a big difference and divert Ri in case of error . In addition, the observation stations must qualify before being included in the computation of Ri . First, we require that you provide values for more than 30 % of days each month and systematically (not occasional untrained observers are accepted ) . We assess the stability of the station compared to the entire network for a whole year before the station is incorporated in the calculation of Ri .

3) the criteria for calculating the sunspot number in the presence of " steam "or whether or not the same as for the sunspots ;

The definitions of " steam "vary even among different scholars. Counting of Ri, we must be consistent with the observations of the distant past and thus, the criterion " Sunspot - pore "is regarded as purely empirical and dependent on the acuity and perception of each observer
This border variable , linked primarily to the resolution, is thus translated in the coefficient K for each station ( scale) and daily loss of all stations (noise ) .
Note that many other factors play a role in this dispersion. For example, small spots or steam always have a short , amounting to a few hours. Once each station makes its observations in a different time interval of 24 hours (Re is thus a time average over 24 hours ) , some stations will see a spot while others will see it and so are both correct !

4) Finally , how is possible to compare the sunspot number calculated by the SIDC recently ( during the last and least during the current cycle 24) with the calculated SN 50, 100, 200 years ago and intends to proceed with the SIDC such comparisons in the near future : it is a well known problem of continuity of the calculation of SN modern than the past, due to the increased resolution of the instruments used for observation of sunspots.

Really, when you consider comments before the 19th century , the scale is less accurate ( less advanced tools but also more rare comments by observers less ) , on the other hand , in the last 125 years , the index of the spots is quite well validated (several other series of solar observations allow to check every deviation , many observers simultaneous)
The search continues in that field and historical data are restored and help improve the reconstructions past (maybe here refers to the reconstruction of sunspot number before 1849)
A good example is the number of sunspot group ( Group Sunspot Number) provided by Hoyt and Schatten , that ensures good stability , 5% of Ri on the last 125 years ,
that grows to a maximum of 25% going further back in time.
This is because , for centuries past , in addition to Ri, many scholars now use the group number , the more primitive but more stable, integrated by the ( more indirect ) index aa index of geomagnetic activity .
We believe that an official response on his part to further increase the prestige of the SIDC . For this , we thank you in advance for your response that will provide us and to all other lovers of this beautiful science.
Well ! This is our response
The attached document , which is a call for an international meeting , already provides a fair and complete view of heredity and methods relating to the Ri, but space was limited on the page . So much of this information will place on our website in the future.