Posted on 12/20/2010 3:05:33 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
The sun went spotless yesterday, the first time in quite awhile. It seems like a good time to present this analysis from my friend David Archibald. For those not familiar with the Dalton Minimum, heres some background info from Wiki:
The Dalton Minimum was a period of low solar activity, named after the English meteorologist John Dalton, lasting from about 1790 to 1830.[1] Like the Maunder Minimum and Spörer Minimum, the Dalton Minimum coincided with a period of lower-than-average global temperatures. The Oberlach Station in Germany, for example, experienced a 2.0°C decline over 20 years.[2] The Year Without a Summer, in 1816, also occurred during the Dalton Minimum. Solar cycles 5 and 6, as shown below, were greatly reduced in amplitude. Anthony
Guest post by David Archibald
James Marusek emailed me to ask if I could update a particular graph. Now that it is a full two years since the month of solar minimum, this was a good opportunity to update a lot of graphs of solar activity.
Figure 1: Solar Polar Magnetic Field Strength
The Suns current low level of activity starts from the low level of solar polar magnetic field strength at the 23/24 minimum. This was half the level at the previous minimum, and Solar Cycle 24 is expected to be just under half the amplitude of Solar Cycle 23.
Figure 2: Heliospheric Current Sheet Tilt Angle
It is said that solar minimum isnt reached until the heliospheric current sheet tilt angle has flattened. While the month of minimum for the 23/24 transition is considered to be December 2008, the heliospheric current sheet didnt flatten until June 2009.
Figure 3: Interplanetary Magnetic Field
The Interplanetary Magnetic Field remains very weak. It is almost back to the levels reached in previous solar minima.
Figure 4: Ap Index 1932 2010
The Ap Index remains under the levels of previous solar minima.
Figure 5: F10.7 Flux 1948 2010
The F10.7 Flux is a more accurate indicator of solar activity than the sunspot number. It remains low.
Figure 6: F10.7 Flux aligned on solar minima
In this figure, the F10.7 flux of the last six solar minima are aligned on the month of minimum, with the two years of decline to the minimum and three years of subsequent rise. The Solar Cycle 24 trajectory is much lower and flatter than the rises of the five previous cycles.
Figure 7: Oulu Neutron Count 1964 210
A weaker interplanetary magnetic field means more cosmic rays reach the inner planets of the solar system. The neutron count was higher this minimum than in the previous record. Thanks to the correlation between the F10.7 Flux and the neutron count in Figure 8 following, we now have a target for the Oulu neutron count at Solar Cycle 24 maximum in late 2014 of 6,150.
Figure 8: Oulu Neutron Flux plotted against lagged F10.7 flux
Neutron count tends to peak one year after solar minimum. Figure 8 was created by plotting Oulu neutron count against the F10.7 flux lagged by one year. The relationship demonstrated by this graph indicates that the most likely value for the Oulu neutron count at the Solar Cycle 24 maximum expected to be a F10.7 flux value of 100 in late 2014 will be 6,150.
Figure 9: Solar Cycle 24 compared to Solar Cycle 5
I predicted in a paper published in March 2006 that Solar Cycles 24 and 25 would repeat the experience of the Dalton Minimum. With two years of Solar Cycle 24 data in hand, the trajectory established is repeating the rise of Solar Cycle 5, the first half of the Dalton Minimum. The prediction is confirmed. Like Solar Cycles 5 and 6, Solar Cycle 24 is expected to be 12 years long. Solar maximum will be in late 2014/early 2015.
Figure 10: North America Snow Cover Ex-Greenland
The northern hemisphere is experiencing its fourth consecutive cold winter. The current winter is one of the coldest for a hundred years or more. For cold winters to provide positive feedback, snow cover has to survive from one winter to the next so that snows higher albedo relative to bare rock will reflect sunlight into space, causing cooler summers. The month of snow cover minimum is most often August, sometimes July. We have to wait another eight months to find out how this winter went in terms of retained snow cover. The 1970s cooling period had much higher snow cover minima than the last thirty years. Despite the last few cold winters, there was no increase in the snow cover minima. The snow cover minimum may have to get to over two million square kilometres before it starts having a significant effect.
David Archibald
December 2010
Don’t be surprised to learn this carbon global climate warming and or change crap didn’t fund those pensions. A look at the books is next. The TEA party is not done.
Crap, there goes 10 and 6 meter DX down the commode. B-P I sure hope 20 meters will still be OK.
That's the sound my bass boat makes when it bounces over the floating ice in Lake Havasu, during the July thaw!
Thanks for the ping. I had been looking for a reliable update on what the sun is [isn’t] doing.
I’m aware of how some of large corporate pension funds are now taking a hit. A few of the British news papers come to mind, just to name one victim.
The 1816 “Year without a summer” was principally caused by atmospheric effects from the huge Tambora eruption in 1815. The fact that there was also a minimum going on probably just made it worse, but it was more the volcano that year than the sun.
I am not clear on what your point is with this weather from 1850 to the 1870s, interesting thought it may be. The Dalton Minimum was from 1790 to 1830.
I was saying the same thing to people last winter when the mid-Atlantic area was getting such record snows. I have lived in the area since 1961, and winters were a lot colder then. So, hopefully, if there is actual global warming, increased snow in the Antarctic will make up for melting in Greenland.
That's probably true. In solar minimums incoming solar energy (TSI) doesn't drop very much. But a bigger effect is the drop in UV (IIRC about 15% right now). This creates blocking patterns by cooling the stratosphere. In another effect the reduced solar magnetic field allows more GCR to hit the earth with at least two effects: uneven stratospheric warming which again creates blocking and low cloud increases from ionization (also geographically uneven).
All of those latter effects are what trigger changes in the weather like we see now and will help to amplify any cooling that might come through reduced TSI. In our case now, those weather changes will help to deamplify warming from CO2. "Sensitivity" defined by the alarmists is nonsense. Physical reality is that amplification (e.g. of CO2 warming or solar changes) always varies because it depends on weather.
Bottom line is right now there will be little or no amplification of CO2 warming. If TSI drops enough or a volcano hits, then there could be cooling.
Don't worry. Scientists have said that the coming global warming will solve that
problem. Or maybe make it worse. Or something.
Anyway, it's all caused by global warming because the warm air rises, and the
cold air falls down on the ground. We need to put our cities up in the air on
giant balloons.
I'm applying for a grant to study that. I'll make billions!
</idiotic AGCC moron>
And yet, it seems to be replayed on TV almost constantly. Mostly on the “Men Suck” channels.
1853 A.D. In the United States in 1853, the Mississippi River froze solid enough to walk 200 miles from St Louis, Missouri to La Claire, Iowa
Changes in carbon-14 concentration in the Earth's atmosphere, which serves as a long term proxy of solar activity.I find this graph vaguely worrying:Note the Medieval Max coinciding with the Medieval Warm Period. Note the scale in calibrated in years before present time.
Notice how the three factors are in sync in the earlier two cycles, and fall out of sync in the last cycle. This gives me a feeling that something odd is happening now.
The current estimated peak is in the range of the Dalton Minimum, and the last three months of sunspot data have been trending down, which means that they may adjust it down even further.
I'm hoping that Watt is wrong. Global Warming means that some people lose their Malibu beach houses. Global Cooling means widespread crop failures, global famine, and civil unrest.
Is it permissible to ask a Nobel Prize winner about the faux science that is rapidly being exposed?
>>Look at how the clowns in California...<<
I’ve been boycotting that state, and the latest madness examplifies the reasons. And sometimes it hurts.
This morning my wife and I were discussing a perfect gift to give our three young adult daugters for Christmas. The bunch of us would go to Disneyland for the weekend. I love flying into Burbank.
Then I read this article and said, DOH!
I just got off the phone with my wife and said we’re gonna have to come up with something else because we will not be entering that state again.
As John Adams said, and it is true, we have to give up our “comfort”. That is the first step. Of course, we know what that led to for a lot of americans last time.
I can’t find an example online but Roadhouse has one of the cheeziest camera close-up zoom-ins of all time. Happens at the part where Swayze breaks up his first fight in the Double Duce and the singer (forgot his name) tells the crowd “the name is Dalton”...right after that the zoom closeup of the blond bimbo’s face is hilarious.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.