|
|
Post by duwayne on May 8, 2023 15:07:54 GMT
The 13-month smoothed maximum sunspot number is clearly just an approximation of the maximum strength of a solar cycle. My guess is it's not that bad of an approximation, because the Solar scientists focus so much attention on the number. It will be interesting to see after the Cycle 25 max is reached whether anyone can make the case that another measure would change the relative strengths of Cycle 24 and 25.
|
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on May 8, 2023 16:39:11 GMT
The 13-month smoothed maximum sunspot number is clearly just an approximation of the maximum strength of a solar cycle. My guess is it's not that bad of an approximation, because the Solar scientists focus so much attention on the number. It will be interesting to see after the Cycle 25 max is reached whether anyone can make the case that another measure would change the relative strengths of Cycle 24 and 25. I think you're correct. It will be extremely interesting to see the final results for this cycle compared to 24. The accepted methodology is accepted for a reason and I'm definitely not a solar scientist. |
|
|
|
Post by ratty on May 9, 2023 1:27:10 GMT
The 13-month smoothed maximum sunspot number is clearly just an approximation of the maximum strength of a solar cycle. My guess is it's not that bad of an approximation, because the Solar scientists focus so much attention on the number. It will be interesting to see after the Cycle 25 max is reached whether anyone can make the case that another measure would change the relative strengths of Cycle 24 and 25. I think you're correct. It will be extremely interesting to see the final results for this cycle compared to 24. The excepted methodology is excepted for a reason and I'm definitely not a solar scientist. accepted? |
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on May 9, 2023 12:05:03 GMT
I think you're correct. It will be extremely interesting to see the final results for this cycle compared to 24. The excepted methodology is excepted for a reason and I'm definitely not a solar scientist. accepted? Dumb mistake, I fixed it  |
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on May 9, 2023 16:51:06 GMT
Dumb mistake, I fixed it Thank goodness for the grammar police Blu 😉 |
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on May 9, 2023 16:56:01 GMT
Dumb mistake, I fixed it Thank goodness for the grammar police Blu 😉 The only thing separating us from the uncivilized Acid! |
|
|
|
Post by ratty on May 10, 2023 1:07:15 GMT
Dumb mistake, I fixed it Thank goodness for the grammar police Blu 😉 Every forum needs a pedant. No need to thank me ....  |
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on May 10, 2023 11:59:13 GMT
Thank goodness for the grammar police Blu 😉 Every forum needs a pedant. No need to thank me .... It's the Smart A$$es that cause problems. |
|
|
|
Post by duwayne on Jun 26, 2023 15:59:30 GMT
Here’s an update of the Solar Dipole values through May 25, 2023 compared to the history of past Solar Cycles. For those who have forgotten, Svalgaard has shown that the Dipole Maximum reached during a given cycle has been a good indicator of the strength of the following Solar Cycle.
Simply put, the lower the peak in the red line below over the remaining years of Cycle 25, the lower the anticipated strength of Cycle 26.
The Dipole value is currently close to zero. What is interesting is that there has been a significant flattening of the curve in the past month unlike say, Cycle 21. This could lead to a slow uptick in the Dipole values in the coming months as they hit zero and begin their uptrend. The slow start could possibly be the slowest amongst the Cycles shown.
If that happens and continues into the future is it possible that Cycle 26 will be the lowest we’ve seen for several Cycles.
That’s a lot of if’s based on very preliminary data. On this flimsy evidence so far, dare I predict that Solar Cycle 26 will be lower than Cycles 24 and 25?
|
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jun 26, 2023 17:42:37 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jun 27, 2023 17:46:41 GMT
Where did you get your dipole data duwayne?
|
|
|
|
Post by duwayne on Jun 27, 2023 20:44:52 GMT
Where did you get your dipole data duwayne? I calculate it from the Wilcox data. It's the difference between the Solar North and South Pole "charges" which are shown in the second to last and third to last columns. The Dipole is always expressed as a positive number.
The North and South Pole readings for May 25, 2023 are -16 and -20 giving a Dipole of 4. The Dipole for January 5 based on the readings of 10 and -16 is 26.
The Dipole can also be calculated by doubling the number shown in the last column although there will be a slight difference in the answer sometimes due to roundoff.
|
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jun 28, 2023 13:21:07 GMT
Here’s an update of the Solar Dipole values through May 25, 2023 compared to the history of past Solar Cycles. For those who have forgotten, Svalgaard has shown that the Dipole Maximum reached during a given cycle has been a good indicator of the strength of the following Solar Cycle.
Simply put, the lower the peak in the red line below over the remaining years of Cycle 25, the lower the anticipated strength of Cycle 26.
The Dipole value is currently close to zero. What is interesting is that there has been a significant flattening of the curve in the past month unlike say, Cycle 21. This could lead to a slow uptick in the Dipole values in the coming months as they hit zero and begin their uptrend. The slow start could possibly be the slowest amongst the Cycles shown.
If that happens and continues into the future is it possible that Cycle 26 will be the lowest we’ve seen for several Cycles.
That’s a lot of if’s based on very preliminary data. On this flimsy evidence so far, dare I predict that Solar Cycle 26 will be lower than Cycles 24 and 25?
Some (many?) of us believe that solar output across its whole spectral-gravitational range (not just TSI) matters to our nested climate system(s) here on Earth. In that sense, it would be very useful for someone (you?) to take on the issue(s) of how (in the very broadest sense) a very low Solar Cycle 26 would effect us here on Earth. There may be people already doing this behind the scenes ... as it's not politically popular. CIA? NSA? But in the interest of strategic planning, this should be done very vocally ... as a counter to the CO2 Catastrophists. First step is your observation ... followed by the question "what if?"
So ... perhaps sometime before 2030. An early start would allow for the accumulation of effort. Useful exercise even if SC26 is not as low as feared ... as it forces Charles Oscar's proponents to lay their arguments and forecasts on the table early on in an attempt to save their lunch money. It really IS time for the Warmists to put their scientific faith on the line. With consequences.
|
|
|
|
Post by duwayne on Jun 28, 2023 17:03:57 GMT
Here’s an update of the Solar Dipole values through May 25, 2023 compared to the history of past Solar Cycles. For those who have forgotten, Svalgaard has shown that the Dipole Maximum reached during a given cycle has been a good indicator of the strength of the following Solar Cycle.
Simply put, the lower the peak in the red line below over the remaining years of Cycle 25, the lower the anticipated strength of Cycle 26.
The Dipole value is currently close to zero. What is interesting is that there has been a significant flattening of the curve in the past month unlike say, Cycle 21. This could lead to a slow uptick in the Dipole values in the coming months as they hit zero and begin their uptrend. The slow start could possibly be the slowest amongst the Cycles shown.
If that happens and continues into the future is it possible that Cycle 26 will be the lowest we’ve seen for several Cycles.
That’s a lot of if’s based on very preliminary data. On this flimsy evidence so far, dare I predict that Solar Cycle 26 will be lower than Cycles 24 and 25?
Some (many?) of us believe that solar output across its whole spectral-gravitational range (not just TSI) matters to our nested climate system(s) here on Earth. In that sense, it would be very useful for someone (you?) to take on the issue(s) of how (in the very broadest sense) a very low Solar Cycle 26 would effect us here on Earth. There may be people already doing this behind the scenes ... as it's not politically popular. CIA? NSA? But in the interest of strategic planning, this should be done very vocally ... as a counter to the CO2 Catastrophists. First step is your observation ... followed by the question "what if?"
So ... perhaps sometime before 2030. An early start would allow for the accumulation of effort. Useful exercise even if SC26 is not as low as feared ... as it forces Charles Oscar's proponents to lay their arguments and forecasts on the table early on in an attempt to save their lunch money. It really IS time for the Warmists to put their scientific faith on the line. With consequences.
I’d have trouble fitting this assignment into my schedule. There are a lot of golf courses in the world and so far I’ve only played 320. So I’m pretty busy.
I’d suggest looking to AI like ChatGPT or BARD for help, although I realize that on a quality basis they don’t stand up. |
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jun 28, 2023 18:15:44 GMT
Some (many?) of us believe that solar output across its whole spectral-gravitational range (not just TSI) matters to our nested climate system(s) here on Earth. In that sense, it would be very useful for someone (you?) to take on the issue(s) of how (in the very broadest sense) a very low Solar Cycle 26 would effect us here on Earth. There may be people already doing this behind the scenes ... as it's not politically popular. CIA? NSA? But in the interest of strategic planning, this should be done very vocally ... as a counter to the CO2 Catastrophists. First step is your observation ... followed by the question "what if?"
So ... perhaps sometime before 2030. An early start would allow for the accumulation of effort. Useful exercise even if SC26 is not as low as feared ... as it forces Charles Oscar's proponents to lay their arguments and forecasts on the table early on in an attempt to save their lunch money. It really IS time for the Warmists to put their scientific faith on the line. With consequences.
I’d have trouble fitting this assignment into my schedule. There are a lot of golf courses in the world and so far I’ve only played 320. So I’m pretty busy.
I’d suggest looking to AI like ChatGPT or BARD for help, although I realize that on a quality basis they don’t stand up. I see your point. There are still a number of coral reefs that need visiting.  |
|
