Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The sun is dead!! Mini iceage???

18911131432

Comments

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    Redsunset, you referred to a 2006 paper that predicted this current solar cycle was 'shaping' to be a Dalton Minimum type one. Is this the paper ??

    http://www.davidarchibald.info/papers/Solar%20Cycles%2024%20and%2025%20and%20Predicted%20Climate%20Response.pdf

    "Based on solar maxima of approximately
    50 for solar cycles 24 and 25, a global temperature decline of 1.5°C is predicted to 2020, equating to the experience of the Dalton Minimum."


    This critique of said 2006 paper (the critique is from 2007) concludes as follows. I am not commenting on it save to say that the facts on the ground in 2011 will tend to prove who was right at that time.

    Here it gets weird. Archibald goes on to conclude that based on solar cycles 24 and 25 with predicted amplitudes of around 50 (hardly anyone is actually predicting this, most predictions are much higher), the correlation equation from his second graph shows a declining temperature of 1.5C in the US!. But his second graph has a correlation based on solar cycle length, not solar cycle amplitude, so it isn’t applicable! He then claims in the next paragraph that the 1.5C figure actually comes from the temperature response to cycles 5 and 6, and not the correlation I guess.

    Archibald himself, it is fair to say, relies extensively on THIS 2001 paper mainly from a group of Russian Scientists connected with this research institute . They posited that one could look 10 years ahead...and seeing as they posited that in 2000 the prediction is coming to an end today....and is therefore worth revisiting today to see how accurate they were.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,693 ✭✭✭Redsunset


    Redsunset,


    I hope these links help.

    What is the AP index? How does it interact/correlate to the solar cycle?

    http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/geomag/ApStardescription.pdf


    The Oulu Neutron Count is a count of the number of neutrons hitting the earth, right? I presume that the weaker magnetic field of the sun allows more neutrons to escape its gravity. Is this right?

    http://neutronm.bartol.udel.edu//listen/main.html#intro

    http://ulysses.sr.unh.edu/NeutronMonitor/background.html



    A less active sun has shown increased solar cosmic ray particles.



    http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/cosmicrays/cratmos.html
    One theory is more cloud cover

    magnetic.svensmark.jpg


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,693 ✭✭✭Redsunset


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    Redsunset, you referred to a 2006 paper that predicted this current solar cycle was 'shaping' to be a Dalton Minimum type one. Is this the paper ??

    http://www.davidarchibald.info/papers/Solar%20Cycles%2024%20and%2025%20and%20Predicted%20Climate%20Response.pdf

    "Based on solar maxima of approximately
    50 for solar cycles 24 and 25, a global temperature decline of 1.5°C is predicted to 2020, equating to the experience of the Dalton Minimum."


    This critique of said 2006 paper (the critique is from 2007) concludes as follows. I am not commenting on it save to say that the facts on the ground in 2011 will tend to prove who was right at that time.




    Archibald himself, it is fair to say, relies extensively on THIS 2001 paper mainly from a group of Russian Scientists connected with this research institute . They posited that one could look 10 years ahead...and seeing as they posited that in 2000 the prediction is coming to an end today....and is therefore worth revisiting today to see how accurate they were.


    Yes that 2006 paper was of poor standard.The 2009 one i've posted on previous page is an improvement.
    All i can say is and i've being saying this all through the thread,make your own mind up of who is right or wrong because there is certainly false info intwinded on both sides along the way.
    Ah come back in twenty years and see who'll be waving the finger and saying i told you so.:D
    Whoever it may be.
    Im only trying to follow this side of it and see where it goes.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,693 ✭✭✭Redsunset


    This is a wonderful link that shows 6 different views of the last 48 hrs of the sun and is updated every 30 minutes.I must warn you that it may take a minute or so to fully load up on some slower internet connections but in my opinion it really is worth the wait.ENJOY.

    http://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/data/SDO_Self_Updating_6.htm


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,693 ✭✭✭Redsunset


    Joe talks about the solar cycles being ramped up for last couple of hundred years half way through the vid.

    http://www.accuweather.com/video/756131056001/bastardi-a-la-nina-that-is-k.asp?channel=vbbastaj


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,087 ✭✭✭Duiske


    An M-Class solar flare was recorded earlier today from the region of rapidly growing sunspot group 1158.

    From NASA.
    The active region is now more than 100,000 km wide with at least a dozen Earth-sized dark cores scattered beneath its unstable magnetic canopy. Earth-directed eruptions are likely in the hours ahead.


    xray1.gif?w=640&h=480


  • Registered Users Posts: 923 ✭✭✭wildefalcon


    Duiske,

    What does that mean? Does mean there is a risk of damage to sensitive space equipment?

    Or will this exposed HT power lines to overload?

    Thank you.


  • Registered Users Posts: 921 ✭✭✭MiNdGaM3


    x-class flare last night with CME
    http://spaceweather.com/

    Chance of some mid-latitude auroras perhaps?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,315 ✭✭✭snowstreams


    What could be the most southerly point in ireland to be able to see these auroras? it would be great to see one.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,499 ✭✭✭Speak Now


    Sun back to life then :D

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12485104

    Sun unleashes huge solar flare towards Earth
    The bright source of the flare can be seen close to the centre of the Sun Continue reading the main story
    Related Stories
    Satellites sit either side of Sun
    Are solar flares a real threat?
    Plans for solar 'close encounter'
    The Sun has unleashed its strongest flare in four years, observers say.

    The eruption is a so-called X-flare, the strongest type; such flares can affect communications on Earth.

    Nasa's Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) spacecraft recorded an intense flash of extreme ultraviolet radiation emanating from a sunspot.

    The British Geological Survey (BGS) has issued a geomagnetic storm warning, and says observers might be able to see aurorae from the northern UK.

    The monster flare was recorded at 0156 GMT on 15 February and directed at the Earth. According to the US space agency, the source of this activity - sunspot 1158 - is growing rapidly.

    Preliminary data from the Stereo-B and Soho spacecraft suggest that the explosion produced a fast but not particularly bright coronal mass ejection (CME) - a burst of charged particles released into space.

    The unpredictable eruptions on the Sun can interfere with modern technology on Earth, such as electrical power grids, communications systems and satellites.

    On Wednesday, the BGS released a rarely seen archive of geomagnetic records that provide an insight into "space weather" stretching back to the Victorian era.

    BGS scientists say that studies of solar storms in the past could inform the prediction of future space weather and help mitigate threats to national infrastructure.

    Displays of the Northern Lights (Aurora Borealis) have already been seen further south than usual in Northern Ireland and elsewhere in the UK. And further solar activity is expected over the next few days.

    Researchers say the Sun has been awakening after a period of several years of low activity.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,016 ✭✭✭Elmer Blooker


    What could be the most southerly point in ireland to be able to see these auroras? it would be great to see one.
    I witnessed a fantastic display in South Wexford at the end of October 2003.
    Obviously I wasn't the only one to see the aurora, the next day there was a photo of the aurora in The Irish Times taken on Sherkin Island, W.Cork which is about as far south as you can get.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,789 ✭✭✭BEASTERLY


    I witnessed a fantastic display in South Wexford at the end of October 2003.

    Remember it well, prob never see something similar again:(


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,279 ✭✭✭✭M.T. Cranium


    Any Donegal or Mayo people on here tonight? I think you've got the best chance of seeing any displays of northern lights tonight, although moon will interfere (until after midnight). I don't think I've got much chance here (cloudy next 12h).

    On another front entirely, have been number crunching CET data against solar cycle past two days, and found some interesting patterns. Will post these in more detail, but basically, the idea that temperature varies with solar activity is a rather weak hypothesis during regular cycles, it only seems to kick in during extended slowdowns and weaker solar periods.

    However, there are stronger second-order signals during regular service (as would characterize the periods 1714-97, 1834-1874 and 1915-2003). During these regular, strong cycles, the temperatures show these patterns:

    coldest between cycles near minimum

    two pulses of modest warming about 3 and 1.5 years before maximum

    another cold period in the winter before maximum

    a very warm period near end of max year and following year

    a colder period around 2 years after the max

    a final surge of warmth around 3-4 years after max

    then reload

    I haven't had time to think about why this may be. Then I took the weaker cycles (the data were arranged so that solar max always fell in year 7 of a 16-year time segment), those that came around 1705, 1801-1830 and 1883-1905 peaks. I left out the Maunder very quiet spell because "peaks" there are more or less arbitrary. Those seven weaker cycles look about the same as the total data set but are generally depressed by half a degree except for the final surge of warmth which is stronger. Odd but true.

    What this suggests about the current situation, assuming we may be in a weaker cycle, is that we just passed the point between two modest peaks of warmth and now it's on to a final big cold winter and the eventual spike of warmth at and after the postulated 2013 maximum. Global El Nino in 2012-13 might enhance that. So, quite possibly, expect another very cold winter in 2011-2012 from all of the above, and perhaps even one more in 2012-2013 depending on how strong the El Nino proves to be.

    These "start of max" cold winters in regular service are not quite a perfect fit. Looking at those in the 20th century, they occur in 1917 (correct), 1929 (year late), not near 1937 (fail), 1947 (correct), 1956 (year early), 1969 (marginal, 68 used as max but 68 and 69 about equal), 1979 (correct), 1987 (two years early) or 1991 (two years late), and then with the 2001 max, not really anything. It seems about the same scatter in 18th and 19th centuries. However, the data averages move up and down in similar curves for all cases. So there is something buried in the data, the amplitude of these waves is about one-tenth of the actual variability of the climate.

    The inter-cycle cold winters are easier to align since inter-cycle is a broader definition. A rough census of them since 1940 would include 1943-45, 1952, 1963, 1974-5 case missing, 1983-85, 1995-96, 2009-11.

    The mild after peak winters and warm summers might line up as 1938, 1949, 1959, 1970, 1981, 1990, 2002-3.

    I've always felt that the standard explanation of solar variability influence on temperature is bogus. I don't think it is driven by changes in irradiance, but signals of some kind of field interference that drives the solar cycle. The role of irradiance variability is undoubtedly greater in long-term events like the Dalton or certainly the Maunder, but I tend to the belief that in regular activity, the main drivers are field segments and how they interact.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,349 ✭✭✭Jimmy Garlic


    I found this quite interesting..
    February 18, 2011
    NASA and the ESA agree, and so does the Russian space agency, Roscosmos—the sun is headed for a Grand Solar Minimum and a Grand Cooling will commence.

    The aptly named Grand Cooling is exactly what it implies: the sun is going to cool. That cooling will also cool off the Earth. It will last from 30 to 50 years.
    Full article available to read here;
    http://www.helium.com/items/2094726-scientists-suns-approaching-grand-cooling-assures-new-ice-age

    This raises serious questions as to why global warming theory is still being forcefully pushed along with carbon taxing. The Sun, our planets source of heat is by far the biggest factor that effects earths temperature and climate and there ain't much we can do about it, we can't tax it away.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,310 ✭✭✭Trogdor


    Threads merged.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    I found this quite interesting..


    Full article available to read here;
    http://www.helium.com/items/2094726-scientists-suns-approaching-grand-cooling-assures-new-ice-age

    This raises serious questions as to why global warming theory is still being forcefully pushed along with carbon taxing. The Sun, our planets source of heat is by far the biggest factor that effects earths temperature and climate and there ain't much we can do about it, we can't tax it away.

    http://www.helium.com/items/1882339-doomsday-how-bp-gulf-disaster-may-have-triggered-a-world-killing-event

    http://help.helium.com/earn-money-helium
    Helium pays members based on the value of each article, which is based on a combination of three market factors:

    Article quality: The best-written and highest-ranked articles earn the most money. Why? Because quality matters. Those ranked at the top will be read more often and are considered more valuable to Helium members, readers and advertisers.

    Traffic: How many readers are interested in the article’s topic? Some subjects draw more total viewers than others. Topics and articles with more page views earn more money.

    Advertiser interest: Some topics have higher-paying advertisers or more buzz than others. Each topic attracts a unique set of advertisers with varying budgets. For example, subjects in the area of personal finance will generally draw a higher ad rate than subjects like chess.

    You'll excuse me if I don't regard helium.com as a reliable source.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,216 ✭✭✭sharper


    I found this quite interesting..
    The article references a position which it asserts is held by NASA, the ESA and the Russian space agency and yet quotes nobody from those organisations.

    Of the two people it does reference one has been dead for 7 years and the other is 90 years old.

    Talk about scraping the barrel.


  • Registered Users Posts: 923 ✭✭✭wildefalcon


    I sometimes use formulae devised by dead people, I didn't realise that this was bad practice.

    New mantra:

    I must not use calculus, I must not use calculus.

    I won't use a computer that uses 3d rendering as it uses hamilton's formulae, as for using radio and it's dependence on the work by Marconi, darn!

    Hang on a minute, is the guy who invented the internal combustion engine dead?

    Ah, NOW I see the point.


  • Registered Users Posts: 923 ✭✭✭wildefalcon


    Oh, I just noticed - stuff by old people isn't allowed either.

    Now that makes it tricky... is Steve Jobs old? What's the cut-off? Is Bill Gates ok?

    Is James Lovelock too old?

    This is very worrying, perhaps I'm too old and shouldn't listen to myself? But what if I'm repeating what I thought when I was young enough?

    I think I'll go and lie down.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,216 ✭✭✭sharper


    I sometimes use formulae devised by dead people, I didn't realise that this was bad practice.
    Oh, I just noticed - stuff by old people isn't allowed either.

    The article made claims about a current event which it said was supported by NASA, ESA and the Russian Space agency.

    Then in place of those organisations it quotes someone long dead and a 90 year old who's long retired.
    Ah, NOW I see the point.

    No you're deliberately missing the point in order to cover for the fact that this is a shockingly terrible article which make no effort at all to support its own points.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 923 ✭✭✭wildefalcon


    I agree - the article is only a magazine piece - and not a scientific paper, and thus not a valid reference source.

    My point was that the article was rejected on the grounds that of the two sources quoted "one has been dead for 7 years and the other is 90 years old".

    I was concerned that the two individuals were considered unreliable sources purely because of their age/status.

    I hope I don't have to explain why this is concerning me.

    I should admit, in the spirit of an open rancour-free debate, that I am someone who is sceptical of the Global Warming Theory, and am very sensitive to the "bashing" that those who express their scepticism receive from some exponents of that theory. Not all, but some.

    I view scepticism as an essential part of the scientific mindset, for science to retain its objective perspective, and thus it's value to mankind. Otherwise it will take on the status of a religion.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,216 ✭✭✭sharper


    I view scepticism as an essential part of the scientific mindset

    That should include articles which claim "NASA believes..." and then quotes a 90 year old with no connection to NASA
    My point was that the article was rejected on the grounds that of the two sources quoted "one has been dead for 7 years and the other is 90 years old".

    They were rejected because they were presented as authorities on what's happening with current solar activity when they're clearly nothing of the sort.

    You'd think that if the claims of the article were true they could get someone actively involved in solar research to discuss it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 923 ✭✭✭wildefalcon


    I understand that, but that isn't what you rejected the researchers on, it was their age.

    Research is research, the age and status of the researcher should be irrelevant, what counts is the quality of the research, the hypothesis, the testing of that hypothesis, and the conclusion. And, of course, the peer reviews.

    Just because the research is 5 days old, 5 years old, or 5 decades old doesn't make it irrelevant or wrong.

    That article was a magazine piece - not a scientific paper. It is also highly likely that the only access the writer had was to older published material.

    Again, my point is that the age of the researcher is irrelevant, and the age of the research is relevant, but not a valid grounds to reject the research.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,693 ✭✭✭Redsunset




  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    On this subject NASA are trying to launch a new sat with a Total Irradiance Monitor payload. The existing TIM instrument is on the SORCE sat and a separate instrument on that Sat named SIM has thrown up interesting recent observations about PARTS of the spectrum.....wrong kind of sunlight sort of vibe.

    While the new sat, known as GLORY, will not confirm SIM observations it may confirm that the SORCE TIM data is correct or it may confirm some instrumental drift which has been inferred against the SIM data :)

    There won't be a new SIM for a few years, perhaps 5. Some comparisons between SIM data and an instrument called SCIAMACHY on Envisat have been made, eg

    http://www.iup.uni-bremen.de/UVSAT_material/papers/noel_ACVE3.pdf

    To my eye the correlation was quite tight in that data ( from 2004) and I would like to see the same data run again for the minimum. However if it diverges then that points to drift in SIM or SCIAMACHY ....or indeed both :)

    Another instrument named AATSR has been mentioned in that article

    http://envisat.esa.int/instruments/aatsr/faq/AATSR_FAQ_issue1.pdf


    The SIM controversy is that while total irradiance has not changed much the balance of irradiance between frequencies has changed rather a lot.

    There have been some anecdotal comments made (most frequently by AGW sceptics) on changes apparently logged by SIM in the UV bands.....namely that certain forms of UV radiation may have dropped sharply and that human flesh apparently takes longer to burn nodays.


  • Registered Users Posts: 921 ✭✭✭MiNdGaM3


    X-class flare and potential Earth directed CME last night.

    http://spaceweather.com/

    The sun has certainly woken up!


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    On this subject NASA are trying to launch a new sat with a Total Irradiance Monitor payload. The existing TIM instrument is on the SORCE sat and a separate instrument on that Sat named SIM has thrown up interesting recent observations about PARTS of the spectrum.....wrong kind of sunlight sort of vibe.

    While the new sat, known as GLORY, will not confirm SIM observations it may confirm that the SORCE TIM data is correct or it may confirm some instrumental drift which has been inferred against the SIM data :)

    Scratch that :(

    http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2011/mar/HQ_11-050_N0_Glory.html
    NASA's Glory Satellite Fails To Reach Orbit

    WASHINGTON -- NASA's Glory mission launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California Friday at 5:09:45 a.m. EST failed to reach orbit.

    Telemetry indicated the fairing, the protective shell atop the Taurus XL rocket, did not separate as expected about three minutes after launch.


  • Registered Users Posts: 83 ✭✭morticia2


    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/apr/05/arctic-ocean-freshwater-climate?INTCMP=SRCH

    Anyone seen this?? Seems like quite a high chance of effects on the gulf stream in the not-too-distant future.

    Might explain the last few winters?




  • Time to bump this, it appears that the sun is trying to catch up with the predicted path. ;)

    sunspot.gif


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 347 ✭✭desolate sun


    Time to bump this, it appears that the sun is trying to catch up with the predicted path. ;)

    sunspot.gif

    So I take it that that graph represents an increase in solar activity which could mean less cooler winters (than the previous two)??


Advertisement