First time visitor? Learn more.

Saturday Lecture Series: Leaving Solar Minimum

by coldwarrior ( 30 Comments › )
Filed under Academia, Open thread, saturday lecture series, Science, Weather at June 19th, 2010 - 9:00 am

As always, the most current Space Weather can be found here. Today’s Saturday Lecture Series is a primmer on Solar Cycles and the interaction of the Earth’s magnetic field to the charges particles that are emitted from the Sun.  So sit back, have a read and watch some videos and get ready for Solar Maximum!

April 1, 2009: The sunspot cycle is behaving a little like the stock market. Just when you think it has hit bottom, it goes even lower.

2008 was a bear. There were no sunspots observed on 266 of the year’s 366 days (73%). To find a year with more blank suns, you have to go all the way back to 1913, which had 311 spotless days: plot. Prompted by these numbers, some observers suggested that the solar cycle had hit bottom in 2008.

Maybe not. Sunspot counts for 2009 have dropped even lower. As of March 31st, there were no sunspots on 78 of the year’s 90 days (87%).

It adds up to one inescapable conclusion: “We’re experiencing a very deep solar minimum,” says solar physicist Dean Pesnell of the Goddard Space Flight Center.

“This is the quietest sun we’ve seen in almost a century,” agrees sunspot expert David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center…Deep calm was fairly common a hundred years ago. The solar minima of 1901 and 1913, for instance, were even longer than the one we’re experiencing now. To match those minima in terms of depth and longevity, the current minimum will have to last at least another year.

Oddly enough, global temperatures coincide with the below graphed averaged sunspot numbers…Maunder Minimum sure does line up just perfectly with the Little Ice age…but that’s a topic for later. Today we need to hear about the Sun and some Solar Physics before we get into that.

So, in the next year we will be entering the 6 year period of Solar Maximum, the period where the Sun has much more spots and throws off more flares into Solar System…Sunspots and their associated magnetic fields follow an 11-year activity cycle. This composite image shows ten magnetic maps of the Sun observed approximately one year apart, from one maximum of activity almost to the next. As activity fades, the large regions disappear and only small ones generated near the surface continue to emerge, creating a salt-and-pepper pattern of ephemeral magnetic regions that persists through time. As the next cycle of activity picks up, the magnetic polarities of the active regions that emerge from deep inside the Sun are reversed. This means that although the sunspot number and the coronal activity have an eleven-year cycle, the full magnetic cycle is actually twenty-two years. Images: Kitt Peak telescope of the National Solar Observatory.

Exploring Space Lectures 2008: The Day the Earth Caught Fire, From the Smithsonian:

NASA | Sentinels of the Heliosphere:

Solar Particles and Earth’s Magnetic Field:

As an aside for high latitude Northern Hemisphere observers, when at solar minimum (and at a period of no sunspots and low activity), Noctilucent Clouds are more likely to be seen.

ELECTRIC BLUE CLOUDS: Observers in Europe are reporting brightening displays of noctilucent clouds (NLCs). “On June 16th, a stunning display appeared in the skies over Northern Ireland,” reports Martin McKenna. “Here they are glowing over the famous ‘Toome Bridge’ in County Antrim.”

“The clouds stretched more than 160 degrees across the sky with wonderful electric blue colours,” he adds. “Well-formed bands and whirls could be seen moving in real time.”

Summer is the season for NLCs, and sightings should increase in frequency as the season unfolds in the weeks ahead. The solar cycle also favors a good show: There is a well-known correlation between noctilucent clouds and sunspots. NLC activity tends to peak during years of solar minimum, possibly because low solar activity allows the upper atmosphere to cool, promoting the growth of ice crystals that make up the clouds. With the sun slowly emerging from a century-class minimum, the stage is set for a good season of NLC watching.

more images: from John C McConnell of Maghaberry, Northern Ireland; from Michael Alexander of Galloway Astronomy Centre, Glasserton, Dumfries & Galloway, Scotland; from Peter McCabe of Dundalk, Co.Louth, Ireland; from Conor McDonald of Maghera, Ireland; from Pete Glastonbury of Avebury, Wiltshire, UK; from Stuart Atkinson of Kendal, Cumbria, UK; from George of Moscow, Russia;

Observing tips: Look west 30 to 60 minutes after sunset when the Sun has dipped 6o to 16o below the horizon. If you see luminous blue-white tendrils spreading across the sky, you may have spotted a noctilucent cloud. High-northern latitudes are favored.

Tags: , , ,

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

30 Responses to “Saturday Lecture Series: Leaving Solar Minimum”
( jump to bottom )

  1. huckfunn
    1 | June 19, 2010 9:47 am

    Is it OK to go OT now?


  2. coldwarrior
    2 | June 19, 2010 9:51 am

    cant be off topic on an open thread.


  3. huckfunn
    3 | June 19, 2010 9:58 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    cant be off topic on an open thread.

    I guess that it’s always gone right by me that these lecture posts were open threads. I should be out power-washing the deck.


  4. coldwarrior
    4 | June 19, 2010 9:59 am

    @ huckfunn:

    yeah, its listed in the ‘file under’ in the heading

    these are meant for peeps to read later if they want.


  5. RIX
    5 | June 19, 2010 10:06 am

    Good morning. I am sure that it has been discussed already, but the Feds planning a law suit against Arizona for the new immigration law is fascinating.
    In essence ,they are suing over language already in the Federal statute.


  6. huckfunn
    6 | June 19, 2010 10:08 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    @ huckfunn:

    yeah, its listed in the ‘file under’ in the heading

    these are meant for peeps to read later if they want.

    Well, gee… that kinda obvious, man.


  7. huckfunn
    7 | June 19, 2010 10:13 am

    RIX wrote:

    Good morning. I am sure that it has been discussed already, but the Feds planning a law suit against Arizona for the new immigration law is fascinating.
    In essence ,they are suing over language already in the Federal statute.

    ‘morning RIX. Just like everything else these schlubs do, the lawsuit is not about the Arizona law; it’s about pumping up the lib base. That lawsuit will boost Zero’s negative nums by 3 or 4 points. Or at least that’s what they’re hoping for.


  8. coldwarrior
    8 | June 19, 2010 10:20 am

    RIX wrote:

    Good morning. I am sure that it has been discussed already, but the Feds planning a law suit against Arizona for the new immigration law is fascinating.
    In essence ,they are suing over language already in the Federal statute.

    so they are in a sense, suing themselves…why? to get all that language overturned everywhere maybe?


  9. snork
    9 | June 19, 2010 10:21 am

    RIX wrote:

    In essence ,they are suing over language already in the Federal statute.

    What they’re doing is claiming that the feds have to request that the states pick up violators before the states can do it. Next stop: the Twilight Zone.


  10. RIX
    10 | June 19, 2010 10:30 am

    huckfunn
    7 | June 19, 2010 10:13
    ‘morning RIX. Just like everything else these schlubs do, the lawsuit is not about the Arizona law; it’s about pumping up the lib base. That lawsuit will boost Zero’s negative nums by 3 or 4 points. Or at least that’s what they’re hoping for.

    Yeah, it is a sop to the base.


  11. RIX
    11 | June 19, 2010 10:35 am

    coldwarrior
    8 | June 19, 2010 10:20
    so they are in a sense, suing themselves…why? to get all that language overturned everywhere maybe?

    I think that the best case for the Justice Dept is that the borders are
    a Federal responsibility. But Arizona is talking about people already in the state.


  12. huckfunn
    12 | June 19, 2010 10:39 am

    Here’s a pretty good summation of how the world (particularly the mid-east world) view’s Obowmao’s foreign policy efforts:
    World Sees Obama as Incompetent and Amateur

    One Middle East authority, Fouad Ajami, pointed out that Obama seems unaware that it is bad form and even a great moral lapse to speak ill of one’s own tribe while in the lands of others.

    Or as one Middle East commentator put it, “There are always two chess games going on. One is on the top of the table, the other is below the table. The latter is the one that counts, but the Americans don’t know how to play that game.”


  13. coldwarrior
    13 | June 19, 2010 10:39 am

    RIX wrote:

    coldwarrior
    8 | June 19, 2010 10:20
    so they are in a sense, suing themselves…why? to get all that language overturned everywhere maybe?
    I think that the best case for the Justice Dept is that the borders are
    a Federal responsibility. But Arizona is talking about people already in the state.

    there should not be a differentiation there.

    if there were peeps that didnt hate america running the show


  14. RIX
    14 | June 19, 2010 10:40 am

    snork
    9 | June 19, 2010 10:21
    What they’re doing is claiming that the feds have to request that the states pick up violators before the states can do it. Next stop: the Twilight Zone.

    They will have a tough time with that assertion. Arizona should counter
    sue the Feds for misfeasance, for not enforcing Federal Laws & placing the citizens of Arizona in peril.


  15. snork
    15 | June 19, 2010 10:43 am

    RIX wrote:

    Yeah, it is a sop to the base.

    I think they’re operating on the theory that it’ll shore up their Hispanic vote. I don’t think the real wonks necessarily see it that way.


  16. RIX
    16 | June 19, 2010 10:44 am

    coldwarrior
    13 | June 19, 2010 10:39
    there should not be a differentiation there.

    if there were peeps that didnt hate america running the show

    Yeah, there should not be a difference, but you know that Holders lawyers will try to make the case that Arizona is usurping Federal
    authority.
    But Arizona is talking about traffic stops etc. not border enforcement.


  17. snork
    17 | June 19, 2010 10:45 am

    RIX wrote:

    They will have a tough time with that assertion. Arizona should counter sue the Feds for misfeasance, for not enforcing Federal Laws & placing the citizens of Arizona in peril.

    Exactly. The feds are in default of their responsibility to defend the border.


  18. RIX
    18 | June 19, 2010 10:48 am

    snork
    15 | June 19, 2010 10:43
    I think they’re operating on the theory that it’ll shore up their Hispanic vote. I don’t think the real wonks necessarily see it that way.

    Progressives are doing a good job of clouding the difference between legal & illegal immigration.
    They are sending a demagogic message that Americans just don’t like Mexicans.


  19. RIX
    19 | June 19, 2010 10:52 am

    snork
    17 | June 19, 2010 10:45
    Exactly. The feds are in default of their responsibility to defend the border

    Right, the AG’s of the affected states & it is not just border states should en masse file suit.


  20. huckfunn
    20 | June 19, 2010 10:53 am

    RIX wrote:

    Progressives are doing a good job of clouding the difference between legal & illegal immigration.
    They are sending a demagogic message that Americans just don’t like Mexicans.

    They’re trying but the public isn’t buying it.
    56% Oppose Justice Department Challenge of Arizona Immigration Law


  21. coldwarrior
    21 | June 19, 2010 10:56 am

    huckfunn wrote:

    RIX wrote:
    Progressives are doing a good job of clouding the difference between legal & illegal immigration.
    They are sending a demagogic message that Americans just don’t like Mexicans.

    They’re trying but the public isn’t buying it.
    56% Oppose Justice Department Challenge of Arizona Immigration Law

    this wont matter to the 0 one iota.

    hopefully, the right will use stuf like this for a relentless media attack on the ALL dems starting in early october


  22. RIX
    22 | June 19, 2010 11:00 am

    huckfunn
    20 | June 19, 2010 10:53
    They’re trying but the public isn’t buying it.
    56% Oppose Justice Department Challenge of Arizona Immigration Law

    Right, but they are appealing to Hispanics, a large part of their base.


  23. huckfunn
    23 | June 19, 2010 11:02 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    this wont matter to the 0 one iota.

    hopefully, the right will use stuf like this for a relentless media attack on the ALL dems starting in early october

    Exactly. He and the dems will continue to govern against the will of the people until we shove them out the door. He acts just like any other popcorn-fart dictator.


  24. coldwarrior
    24 | June 19, 2010 11:05 am

    huckfunn wrote:

    coldwarrior wrote:
    this wont matter to the 0 one iota.
    hopefully, the right will use stuf like this for a relentless media attack on the ALL dems starting in early october
    Exactly. He and the dems will continue to govern against the will of the people until we shove them out the door. He acts just like any other popcorn-fart dictator.

    we wil see if the right has the guts to go nasty and relentless with the commercials and talking points. the left has given the right a TON of ammo.

    stop being gentlemen, attack attack attack,and then get power and roll the communism back.


  25. 25 | June 19, 2010 12:26 pm

    @ coldwarrior:
    not with wimps like Steele, McCain, Kyl (yes, KYL too; he;’s just like mccain), graham, etc at the top of the shitpile.


  26. 26 | June 19, 2010 1:30 pm

    The emergence from the Solar Minimum will by necessity cause global mean temperatures to rise, and the AGW/ACC crowd will feel vindicated they were right all along. And the average uninformed person on the street will yet again fall for the Big Con.


  27. coldwarrior
    27 | June 19, 2010 3:37 pm

    FurryOldGuyJeans wrote:

    The emergence from the Solar Minimum will by necessity cause global mean temperatures to rise, and the AGW/ACC crowd will feel vindicated they were right all along. And the average uninformed person on the street will yet again fall for the Big Con.

    mark those words.


  28. The Osprey
    28 | June 19, 2010 5:44 pm

    I saw noctilucent clouds over Greenland while flying from San Francisco to London in 1999. Amazing sight.


  29. 29 | June 20, 2010 7:37 am

    [...] Saturday Lecture Series: Leaving Solar Minimum › 2.0: The Blogmocracy [...]


  30. 30 | June 22, 2010 5:04 am

    [...] Saturday Lecture Series: Leaving Solar Minimum › 2.0: The Blogmocracy [...]


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David