Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Solar Activity Report for 8/11/05

Expand Messages
  • David
    The visible surface of the sun is about to be blank and devoid of sunspots again. After a rousing start as it crossed the eastern limb, sunspot region 792 has
    Message 1 of 16 , Aug 11, 2005
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      The visible surface of the sun is about to be blank and devoid of
      sunspots again. After a rousing start as it crossed the eastern limb,
      sunspot region 792 has rotated out of view, and regions 794 and 795
      are about to do the same. Barring any new sunspots coming into view,
      we could see the sunspot number go to zero again. Breaking the
      monotony is a small coronal hole that is now rotating into view. We
      could see some high speed solar wind gusts from it along about thhe 16th.

      The current solar and geomagnetic conditions are :

      NOAA sunspot number : 35
      SFI : 76
      A index : 6
      K index : 2

      Solar wind speed : 360.9 km/sec
      Solar wind density : 1.3 protons/cc
      Solar wind pressure : 0.3 nPa

      IMF : 4.7 nT
      IMF Orientation : 0.7 nT North

      GOES-12 Background X-ray Flux level : A4

      Conditions for the last 24 hours :
      No space weather storms were observed for the past 24 hours.

      Forecast for the next 24 hours :
      No space weather storms are expected for the next 24 hours.

      Solar activity forecast :
      Solar activity is expected to be very low.

      Geomagnetic activity forecast :
      The geomagnetic field is expected to be at quiet to unsettled levels.

      Recent significant solar flare activity :
      None
    • space1weather
      ... limb, ... Well a quieter-blank sun means we get hot here in the Washington DC area. Today was pretty warm. The forecast calls for mid 90 s the next few
      Message 2 of 16 , Aug 11, 2005
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "David" <b1blancer1@e...>
        wrote:
        > The visible surface of the sun is about to be blank and devoid of
        > sunspots again. After a rousing start as it crossed the eastern
        limb,
        > sunspot region 792 has rotated out of view, and regions 794 and 795
        > are about to do the same. Barring any new sunspots coming into view,
        > we could see the sunspot number go to zero again.

        Well a quieter-blank sun means we get hot here in the Washington DC
        area. Today was pretty warm. The forecast calls for mid 90's the next
        few days. I mentioned this to Mike a while back. ENSO related. The
        wave has turned negative...when it's positive the opposite seems to
        occur.

        So we can forecast solar activity by looking at our weather
        forecast...Or at least give us more confidence in forecasting a quiet
        sun.

        Let's see what happens.


        Jim
      • Mike Doran
        Jim, We have a rising SOI--and Irene probably headed near you. No doubt you will get wave rain features from this storm. As in you get the opposite
        Message 3 of 16 , Aug 11, 2005
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Jim,

          We have a rising SOI--and Irene probably headed near you. No doubt
          you will get wave rain features from this storm. As in you get the
          opposite

          9-Aug-2005 1014.11 1014.55 -12.50 -1.45 -5.12
          10-Aug-2005 1014.01 1014.00 -9.70 -2.05 -5.25
          11-Aug-2005 1013.99 1013.10 -4.40 -2.57 -5.29
          12-Aug-2005 1014.91 1013.20 0.50 -3.18 -5.13

          Think of it this way. When the oceans are roiled they lose their
          carbination--like a flat beer. That means tha surface lows can't
          deprressurize and roil the ocean and cause carbination to come out of
          solution and rise to the top and then increase the potential ion
          load --and thereby drop the conductivity for a surface coupling with
          the ionosphere. So if there be an organization brought about due to
          a LACK of solar activity, then it will be organized on the E. Pacific
          side and the tropical jet will behave accordingly.

          This time of year this kind of SOI reading means an increased
          probability of formation of a tropical storm. I predicted a storm to
          the Carolinas on March 31 right here and I think I should keep to my
          forecast. However, there are a number of signs that it may run a
          little further north. Either way Carolinas get substantial
          rainfall. Irene is going to be interesting to watch.

          --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, space1weather
          <no_reply@y...> wrote:
          > --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "David"
          <b1blancer1@e...>
          > wrote:
          > > The visible surface of the sun is about to be blank and devoid of
          > > sunspots again. After a rousing start as it crossed the eastern
          > limb,
          > > sunspot region 792 has rotated out of view, and regions 794 and
          795
          > > are about to do the same. Barring any new sunspots coming into
          view,
          > > we could see the sunspot number go to zero again.
          >
          > Well a quieter-blank sun means we get hot here in the Washington DC
          > area. Today was pretty warm. The forecast calls for mid 90's the
          next
          > few days. I mentioned this to Mike a while back. ENSO related. The
          > wave has turned negative...when it's positive the opposite seems to
          > occur.
          >
          > So we can forecast solar activity by looking at our weather
          > forecast...Or at least give us more confidence in forecasting a
          quiet
          > sun.
          >
          > Let's see what happens.
          >
          >
          > Jim
        • David
          ... I ll have a Guiness, if it s OK with you. :-) ... If Irene follows the currently projected track, she ll miss us. The Outer Banks may get a light brush
          Message 4 of 16 , Aug 12, 2005
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            > Think of it this way. When the oceans are roiled they lose their
            > carbination--like a flat beer.

            I'll have a Guiness, if it's OK with you. :-)

            > This time of year this kind of SOI reading means an increased
            > probability of formation of a tropical storm. I predicted a storm to
            > the Carolinas on March 31 right here and I think I should keep to my
            > forecast. However, there are a number of signs that it may run a
            > little further north. Either way Carolinas get substantial
            > rainfall. Irene is going to be interesting to watch.
            >

            If Irene follows the currently projected track, she'll miss us. The
            Outer Banks may get a light brush of wind, but nothing bad. Looks
            like we dodged the bullet...this time.
          • David
            ... I certainly won t argue the point that the sun affects the climate, but I d be a bit sceptical of the fact that it happens on a one-day-to-the next basis.
            Message 5 of 16 , Aug 12, 2005
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              > Well a quieter-blank sun means we get hot here in the Washington DC
              > area. Today was pretty warm. The forecast calls for mid 90's the next
              > few days. I mentioned this to Mike a while back. ENSO related. The
              > wave has turned negative...when it's positive the opposite seems to
              > occur.
              >
              > So we can forecast solar activity by looking at our weather
              > forecast...Or at least give us more confidence in forecasting a quiet
              > sun.
              >
              > Let's see what happens.

              I certainly won't argue the point that the sun affects the climate,
              but I'd be a bit sceptical of the fact that it happens on a
              one-day-to-the next basis.

              Anyway, I'm of the opinion that an active sun means warmer temps, and
              vice-versa. Taking your hypothesis out through a much longer time
              period, shouldn't we see a really significant warm-up through periods
              of prolonged solar inactivity? It's the opposite, however, that seems
              to be true. Turn the sunspots down for a few thousand years, and you
              get an ice age.
            • space1weather
              ... DC ... next ... The ... to ... quiet ... and ... periods ... seems ... you
              Message 6 of 16 , Aug 13, 2005
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "David" <b1blancer1@e...>
                wrote:
                >
                > > Well a quieter-blank sun means we get hot here in the Washington
                DC
                > > area. Today was pretty warm. The forecast calls for mid 90's the
                next
                > > few days. I mentioned this to Mike a while back. ENSO related.
                The
                > > wave has turned negative...when it's positive the opposite seems
                to
                > > occur.
                > >
                > > So we can forecast solar activity by looking at our weather
                > > forecast...Or at least give us more confidence in forecasting a
                quiet
                > > sun.
                > >
                > > Let's see what happens.
                >
                > I certainly won't argue the point that the sun affects the climate,
                > but I'd be a bit sceptical of the fact that it happens on a
                > one-day-to-the next basis.
                >
                > Anyway, I'm of the opinion that an active sun means warmer temps,
                and
                > vice-versa. Taking your hypothesis out through a much longer time
                > period, shouldn't we see a really significant warm-up through
                periods
                > of prolonged solar inactivity? It's the opposite, however, that
                seems
                > to be true. Turn the sunspots down for a few thousand years, and
                you
                > get an ice age.
              • space1weather
                ... seems ... I am not referring to all areas here .... I believe earth responds- already knows what s going on ...I know the rule of thumb about higher
                Message 7 of 16 , Aug 13, 2005
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  > I certainly won't argue the point that the sun affects the climate,
                  > but I'd be a bit sceptical of the fact that it happens on a
                  > one-day-to-the next basis.
                  >
                  > Anyway, I'm of the opinion that an active sun means warmer temps, and
                  > vice-versa. Taking your hypothesis out through a much longer time
                  > period, shouldn't we see a really significant warm-up through periods
                  > of prolonged solar inactivity? It's the opposite, however, that
                  seems
                  > to be true. Turn the sunspots down for a few thousand years, and you
                  > get an ice age.


                  I am not referring to all areas here .... I believe earth responds-
                  already knows what's going on ...I know the rule of thumb about higher
                  activity...warmer temps but this is different.

                  I am referring to the relationship with steering currents. I believe
                  there are many out there but it depends upon the other variables
                  involved.

                  One example of many ....a large trans equatorial Positive recurrent
                  coronal hole (Seven times)from October 1999-April 2000. Played with
                  the steering currents. Started writing about it during occurrance.

                  Seven data groups...Eight days ...So this is 56 days out of the 90 day
                  winter...Seperated groups ...Three day cold period...Five day warm
                  period....Warm period starts when proton denisity level reached 10
                  p/cc while windstream/sector is arriving. So the three cold days occur
                  before the five warm days.

                  So cold days were actually occurring when the c-hole was making it's
                  central meridian crossing....Baliunas and Soon found a correlation
                  with cooler troposphere temperatures and C-holes...I sent it to her
                  and she wrote back asking if she could send it to Willie. I told her I
                  already had.

                  I forget what the Dec-Feb winter anomaly average at Reagan National
                  was but it was considerably above average. I think the mean
                  temperature difference between the 21 day and 35 day groups was almost
                  11.50 degrees.

                  The average high temperature anomaly for the warm period days
                  (35) ..post 10 p/cc... was around 6 degrees above average. (The nights
                  were warmer...clouds etc.. higher lows...raised the mean average
                  higher)

                  When you seperated the 56 days from the rest of the winter it ended
                  up being almost normal (within about one degree I think)

                  Major northeaster...in February ...which I believe was solar eruption
                  related.... skewed the warm days by pulling down very cold air or it
                  would have been even way higher.

                  I think in two or three consectutive C-hole appearances the anomaly
                  between the two different groups was around 15 degrees.


                  Jim
                • space1weather
                  ... doubt ... the ... Mike, I like to look at where the 30 day average is going or maybe even the 4 or 5 day smoothed. I will consider the daily average of a
                  Message 8 of 16 , Aug 13, 2005
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Doran"
                    <narodaleahcim@a...> wrote:
                    > Jim,
                    >
                    > We have a rising SOI--and Irene probably headed near you. No
                    doubt
                    > you will get wave rain features from this storm. As in you get
                    the
                    > opposite
                    >
                    > 9-Aug-2005 1014.11 1014.55 -12.50 -1.45 -5.12
                    > 10-Aug-2005 1014.01 1014.00 -9.70 -2.05 -5.25
                    > 11-Aug-2005 1013.99 1013.10 -4.40 -2.57 -5.29
                    > 12-Aug-2005 1014.91 1013.20 0.50 -3.18 -5.13
                    >



                    Mike,

                    I like to look at where the 30 day average is going or maybe even
                    the 4 or 5 day smoothed. I will consider the daily average of a
                    different anomaly (-/+) if it is very high...at least 20-25...The 30
                    day has been moving negative as you well know.

                    Washington DC OCM Bob Ryan, of NBC, said Reagan National was at 86
                    degrees at 11pm last night ....Very hot already this morning.


                    Jim
                  • Mike Doran
                    http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/PS/TROP/DATA/RT/FLOAT2/IR4/20.jpg http://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/SeasonalClimateOutlook/SouthernOscil
                    Message 9 of 16 , Aug 13, 2005
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/PS/TROP/DATA/RT/FLOAT2/IR4/20.jpg

                      http://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/SeasonalClimateOutlook/SouthernOscil
                      lationIndex/30DaySOIValues/index.html

                      http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at4+shtml/024541.shtml?swath

                      Don't know how real time you are but if you can check out these links
                      what you will see is that the IR link shows a healthy blob of
                      convection BUT NO EYE. If you look below at the NHC link the wind
                      swath is pretty good HOWEVER that only describes the bottom of
                      coupling between ionosphere and ocean, not what the ionosphere is
                      doing. Then look at the Long Paddock link and the SOI fell back
                      negative somewhat. Again, I am not looking at space weather, just
                      what regional conductivities are doing to the cloud microphyiscs.

                      Okay.

                      Now, what the difference is between a longer range SOI reading and a
                      short range one is that the SOI over a short period of time is mostly
                      about roiling and depressurization in that region--out gassing of
                      CO2, which impacts momentary conductivies in the region. However, if
                      a wind between Darwin and Tahiti is SUSTAINED then you have moving
                      salt spray that starts to have an INDUCTION meaning to the impedence
                      values. In other words the sustained wind itself starts to have
                      electrical meaning and sometimes that overcomes, in terms of global
                      electrical circuit patterns, the significance of outgassing. You
                      see, the back and forth of the SOI can also be mostly about
                      discharging and recharging. Of course, such conductivity meaning can
                      occur in ALL the oceans, and such induction meaning can occur in all
                      the oceans, and SST changes, such as upwelling events, can also occur
                      in all of the oceans. But the Pacific is the largest expanse of ITCZ
                      and so electrical changes in the Pacific have significant global
                      significance . . .

                      This year was unique because while we may have had many features in
                      the Pacific electrically similar to an El Nino, the tidal wave's
                      impact on the conductivities in the Indian Ocean did not allow it to
                      form. So if you have some correlations with solar activity that
                      would have been more predesposed to an El Nino--it again points to
                      how important it is what the earth DOES with those inputs. I am not
                      saying that the solar inputs are not critically important, but rather
                      discussing mechanism. Ultimately, this is how you will connect
                      weather with climate, and how you reasonably explain to the
                      barotropical people how you are seeing over their event horizon.

                      So presently with the SOI falling there is less ability for the
                      tropical storm Irene to see a capacitive coupling from the ionosphere
                      down and the storm becomes less connected to the ITCZ and has a less
                      westward tendency as the ITCZ. Thermodynamic principals would have
                      it seeking the colder places such as Greenland, and so it is no
                      surprise that the models have it moving north.

                      But I still think the Carolinas are going to get hit, as there was
                      Fabian before they were hit two years ago.

                      There is a George Karlin joke about women, asking if five twos equals
                      a ten. I predicted 2 major fish storms and now we have three strong
                      tropical storms which were fish. We are getting closer to the time
                      when the Carolinas have the most to be concerned. However, the
                      patterns of strikes in the CONUS seem to a little more north with
                      things so I don't know. I shouldn't second guess my earlier forecast
                      as it is based on the biological things I see then. We shall
                      see . . .









                      --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, space1weather
                      <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                      > --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Doran"
                      > <narodaleahcim@a...> wrote:
                      > > Jim,
                      > >
                      > > We have a rising SOI--and Irene probably headed near you. No
                      > doubt
                      > > you will get wave rain features from this storm. As in you get
                      > the
                      > > opposite
                      > >
                      > > 9-Aug-2005 1014.11 1014.55 -12.50 -1.45 -5.12
                      > > 10-Aug-2005 1014.01 1014.00 -9.70 -2.05 -5.25
                      > > 11-Aug-2005 1013.99 1013.10 -4.40 -2.57 -5.29
                      > > 12-Aug-2005 1014.91 1013.20 0.50 -3.18 -5.13
                      > >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Mike,
                      >
                      > I like to look at where the 30 day average is going or maybe even
                      > the 4 or 5 day smoothed. I will consider the daily average of a
                      > different anomaly (-/+) if it is very high...at least 20-25...The
                      30
                      > day has been moving negative as you well know.
                      >
                      > Washington DC OCM Bob Ryan, of NBC, said Reagan National was at 86
                      > degrees at 11pm last night ....Very hot already this morning.
                      >
                      >
                      > Jim
                    • David
                      I think I understand what you re getting at, Jim, and we re actually talking about two different things. What I was talking about is overall solar activity
                      Message 10 of 16 , Aug 16, 2005
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I think I understand what you're getting at, Jim, and we're actually
                        talking about two different things. What I was talking about is
                        overall solar activity associated with the solar max. If I understand
                        you correctly, you're talking about coronal holes in particular.

                        However, I'm still confused. You'll have more days of high solar wind
                        speed with the solar max than with the bottom of the cycle.
                        Therefore, it would seem that the connection between higher solar
                        activity and higher terrestrial temps would still work. As far as the
                        Earth is concerned, a high solar wind speed is a high solar wind
                        speed, no matter if the speedy wind is coming from a coronal hole or
                        the most recent really impressive X-class flare. That being the case,
                        I don't see how a high speed solar wind from a coronal hole can cause
                        cooling, while an active sun causes warming.

                        Unless you're saying that the overall increase in solar energy output
                        of an active sun is enough to offset the effect of the high-speed wind??
                      • space1weather
                        In this case I was referring to a specific area of the world that seems to be affected during the presence of certain space weather variables when certain
                        Message 11 of 16 , Aug 17, 2005
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          In this case I was referring to a specific area of the world that
                          seems to be affected during the presence of certain space weather
                          variables when certain atmopsheric oceanic teleconnections are in
                          place.

                          Steering currents...trough ..ridge etc...Where will the Bermuda high
                          be?

                          The Baranyi paper talks about the importance of different magnetic
                          field vectors etc...and it's relationship with corpuscular radiaton.
                          Everywhere is not effected the same. This has always been my thought
                          also.

                          As far as C-holes and CME's. These are two different ball games
                          unless the CME is a tranisient. The Earths environment reacts
                          totally different and it should. The wave action within a CME is
                          completely different than a C-hole.

                          Look at the neutron monitors yesterday. GCR level hardly changed
                          even though solar wind speed was near 700 km/sec. This is not going
                          to occur with a CME. The > 2 Mev Electron fluence levels stayed
                          above 0.0e+07. This also is not usually going to occur.



                          Jim


                          --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "David" <b1blancer1@e...>
                          wrote:
                          > I think I understand what you're getting at, Jim, and we're
                          actually
                          > talking about two different things. What I was talking about is
                          > overall solar activity associated with the solar max. If I
                          understand
                          > you correctly, you're talking about coronal holes in particular.
                          >
                          > However, I'm still confused. You'll have more days of high solar
                          wind
                          > speed with the solar max than with the bottom of the cycle.
                          > Therefore, it would seem that the connection between higher solar
                          > activity and higher terrestrial temps would still work. As far as
                          the
                          > Earth is concerned, a high solar wind speed is a high solar wind
                          > speed, no matter if the speedy wind is coming from a coronal hole
                          or
                          > the most recent really impressive X-class flare. That being the
                          case,
                          > I don't see how a high speed solar wind from a coronal hole can
                          cause
                          > cooling, while an active sun causes warming.
                          >
                          > Unless you're saying that the overall increase in solar energy
                          output
                          > of an active sun is enough to offset the effect of the high-speed
                          wind??
                        • Mike Doran
                          Jim, I didn t mean to avoid your question. It s just that it is a very difficult one: Here is a blog which one of the top posts features a bet regarding the
                          Message 12 of 16 , Aug 18, 2005
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Jim,

                            I didn't mean to avoid your question. It's just that it is a very
                            difficult one:


                            Here is a blog which one of the top posts features a bet regarding
                            the sun causing temperatures to fall:

                            http://timlambert.org/2005/07/climate-audiot/#comments

                            These fake skeptics continue to ignore what ELECTRICAL and BIOLOGICAL
                            orders are brought to the climate system. Note that in this
                            discussion there is not ONE WORD about electrical or biological order
                            to the climate system. NOTHING.

                            Anyway, to this idea of an event horizon. Obviously, when a study
                            shows that tropical storm intensity and frequency has increased, that
                            is a sign of low entropy. Really low entropy. Or put another way a
                            lot of order. That order tends to go to disorder. Warm goes to
                            cold. Clouds in a circle or line fuzz out to no pressure differences
                            in no patterns. That is the way of the closed system, which, of
                            course, is not closed. The problem is that the orders imposed on
                            cloud microphysics differ from that brught about by heat and
                            pressures alone. And those orders, as you point out, are complex
                            from the input end. I am here to say they are also complex from the
                            dampening side as well--what the biosphere as a whole does with what
                            comes in.

                            The confusions are there across all the horizons.

                            So there are event horizons like the sun coming up from night to day--
                            but then there is the electrical part---how the sun can heat and
                            cause thunderstorms on one side of the earth in the afternoon and
                            those thunderstorms can connect electrical conditions to the dark
                            side of the earth.

                            There is the sun going through the solar cycle, and what changes in
                            lumenosity may have different electrical conditions that cause the
                            way fronts and air currents move, just as you suggest, in different
                            manners. That is because the microphysics changes mean different
                            viscosity values, different ways that order moves toward disorder.

                            When I have looked at my long range hurricane forecast, I have been
                            looking for the solar cycle and hurricane history for climatology to
                            see if I can spot what occurs globally with different solar inputs.

                            When I look at what you and David are doing, I have a more complex
                            set of ideas. There isn't much time for modulation to occur, either,
                            other than the basic stuff, like where are the hydrate fields and
                            microbial blooms and so forth. Plus the barotropic trends, where the
                            SOI, NAO, PDO, ENSO is, and so forth. Then I have been looking at
                            strikes, of course.

                            In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, space1weather <no_reply@y...>
                            wrote:
                            > In this case I was referring to a specific area of the world that
                            > seems to be affected during the presence of certain space weather
                            > variables when certain atmopsheric oceanic teleconnections are in
                            > place.
                            >
                            > Steering currents...trough ..ridge etc...Where will the Bermuda
                            high
                            > be?
                            >
                            > The Baranyi paper talks about the importance of different magnetic
                            > field vectors etc...and it's relationship with corpuscular
                            radiaton.
                            > Everywhere is not effected the same. This has always been my
                            thought
                            > also.
                            >
                            > As far as C-holes and CME's. These are two different ball games
                            > unless the CME is a tranisient. The Earths environment reacts
                            > totally different and it should. The wave action within a CME is
                            > completely different than a C-hole.
                            >
                            > Look at the neutron monitors yesterday. GCR level hardly changed
                            > even though solar wind speed was near 700 km/sec. This is not going
                            > to occur with a CME. The > 2 Mev Electron fluence levels stayed
                            > above 0.0e+07. This also is not usually going to occur.
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > Jim
                            >
                            >
                            > --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "David"
                            <b1blancer1@e...>
                            > wrote:
                            > > I think I understand what you're getting at, Jim, and we're
                            > actually
                            > > talking about two different things. What I was talking about is
                            > > overall solar activity associated with the solar max. If I
                            > understand
                            > > you correctly, you're talking about coronal holes in particular.
                            > >
                            > > However, I'm still confused. You'll have more days of high solar
                            > wind
                            > > speed with the solar max than with the bottom of the cycle.
                            > > Therefore, it would seem that the connection between higher solar
                            > > activity and higher terrestrial temps would still work. As far
                            as
                            > the
                            > > Earth is concerned, a high solar wind speed is a high solar wind
                            > > speed, no matter if the speedy wind is coming from a coronal hole
                            > or
                            > > the most recent really impressive X-class flare. That being the
                            > case,
                            > > I don't see how a high speed solar wind from a coronal hole can
                            > cause
                            > > cooling, while an active sun causes warming.
                            > >
                            > > Unless you're saying that the overall increase in solar energy
                            > output
                            > > of an active sun is enough to offset the effect of the high-speed
                            > wind??
                          • David
                            ... If this is true, it just made things a whole lot more complicated. On a global scale, we know that an absence of sunspots, even for a relatively short
                            Message 13 of 16 , Aug 20, 2005
                            View Source
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, space1weather
                              <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                              > In this case I was referring to a specific area of the world that
                              > seems to be affected during the presence of certain space weather
                              > variables when certain atmopsheric oceanic teleconnections are in
                              > place.
                              >
                              > Steering currents...trough ..ridge etc...Where will the Bermuda high
                              > be?

                              If this is true, it just made things a whole lot more complicated. On
                              a global scale, we know that an absence of sunspots, even for a
                              relatively short time, can cause a striking effect. From what I've
                              seen, though, I don't believe coronal hole frequency changes with the
                              sunspot cycles.

                              >
                              > The Baranyi paper talks about the importance of different magnetic
                              > field vectors etc...and it's relationship with corpuscular radiaton.
                              > Everywhere is not effected the same. This has always been my thought
                              > also.
                              >

                              I hadn't really thought about it in that way before, but I could see
                              the possibility.

                              Okay, so if we have a case of different parts of the world being
                              affected in different ways by a high-speed solar wind, would the same
                              hold true for CME impacts and solar radiation storms?
                            • space1weather
                              ... complicated. On ... the ... I asked that coronal hole question to a well regarded SEC solar expert years ago. She said she did not have the answer. Well
                              Message 14 of 16 , Aug 20, 2005
                              View Source
                              • 0 Attachment
                                , "David" <b1blancer1@e...> wrote:
                                > --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, space1weather
                                >
                                > If this is true, it just made things a whole lot more
                                complicated. On
                                > a global scale, we know that an absence of sunspots, even for a
                                > relatively short time, can cause a striking effect. From what I've
                                > seen, though, I don't believe coronal hole frequency changes with
                                the
                                > sunspot cycles.

                                I asked that coronal hole question to a well regarded SEC solar
                                expert years ago. She said she did not have the answer. Well if the
                                aurora was not seen for decades in the northern latitudes during the
                                Maunder minimum then the coronal holes had to have been absent
                                during the lulls.

                                Now I know you can have very low geomagnetic activity...like the
                                latest ...with some fairly strong 700 km/sec winds but something odd
                                would have to happen with the IMF-earth's magnetic field for us to
                                have no high latitude storming everyone once in a while.

                                People may not have known what the northern lights actually wereback
                                then but they were written about all the time. I have a book with
                                historical sightings that goes back several centuries...with
                                specific dates.. for the big ones

                                Now if you believe like I have for quite some time and some recent
                                papers are saying that the changes in the pole's polarities are
                                related to the cyclical nature of their presence...espeically
                                around maximum..when the poles reverse polarities (10/99-5/2000 C-
                                hole one example) than this would make sense.

                                I would imagine that the poles must get extremely weak...magnetic
                                wise... or one pole completely dominates over the other and you
                                almost just have one polarity.



                                > I hadn't really thought about it in that way before, but I could
                                see
                                > the possibility.
                                >
                                > Okay, so if we have a case of different parts of the world being
                                > affected in different ways by a high-speed solar wind, would the
                                same
                                > hold true for CME impacts and solar radiation storms?


                                Absolutely and I have seen relationships with them. I believe the
                                truth about these relationships have alluded us for so long because
                                what seemed like an obvious relationship...ones investigated...
                                didn't hold much water ... and what most likely is a relationship...
                                never entered most peoples mind.

                                The meteorological and climatological community have been in charge
                                of most of this research...somewhat...and they just could not
                                comprehend or admit as to how some areas could be effected and not
                                others. I have had this exact discussions with many individuals
                                within the field over the years.

                                That was their biggest obstacle with them believing in my forecasts.
                                Even after they occurred. They said that it could not effect us and
                                not....maybe Colorado etc...

                                Jim
                              • David
                                ... Even a blank sun can have a coronal hole make an appearance, as we ve seen, so I ll assume they were around during the Maunder Minimum. Then again, there
                                Message 15 of 16 , Aug 21, 2005
                                View Source
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  > I asked that coronal hole question to a well regarded SEC solar
                                  > expert years ago. She said she did not have the answer. Well if the
                                  > aurora was not seen for decades in the northern latitudes during the
                                  > Maunder minimum then the coronal holes had to have been absent
                                  > during the lulls.

                                  Even a blank sun can have a coronal hole make an appearance, as we've
                                  seen, so I'll assume they were around during the Maunder Minimum.
                                  Then again, there was obviously something odd happening to suppress
                                  the sunspots to such a degree for a long (from our perspective) period
                                  of time, so who knows?

                                  >
                                  > Now I know you can have very low geomagnetic activity...like the
                                  > latest ...with some fairly strong 700 km/sec winds but something odd
                                  > would have to happen with the IMF-earth's magnetic field for us to
                                  > have no high latitude storming everyone once in a while.

                                  Agreed.

                                  >
                                  > People may not have known what the northern lights actually wereback
                                  > then but they were written about all the time. I have a book with
                                  > historical sightings that goes back several centuries...with
                                  > specific dates.. for the big ones
                                  >
                                  > Now if you believe like I have for quite some time and some recent
                                  > papers are saying that the changes in the pole's polarities are
                                  > related to the cyclical nature of their presence...espeically
                                  > around maximum..when the poles reverse polarities (10/99-5/2000 C-
                                  > hole one example) than this would make sense.
                                  >
                                  > I would imagine that the poles must get extremely weak...magnetic
                                  > wise... or one pole completely dominates over the other and you
                                  > almost just have one polarity.
                                  >

                                  I dunno, maybe. Or, the solar magnetic field could become really
                                  convoluted with north and south poles popping up in all sorts of odd
                                  places until it settles down into the new polarity.
                                • space1weather
                                  ... we ve ... period ... Well I would tend to think you are right at first but if you think about it for a second we are only going by what has occured the
                                  Message 16 of 16 , Aug 25, 2005
                                  View Source
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- In methanehydrateclub@yahoogroups.com, "David" <b1blancer1@e...>
                                    wrote:

                                    >
                                    > Even a blank sun can have a coronal hole make an appearance, as
                                    we've
                                    > seen, so I'll assume they were around during the Maunder Minimum.
                                    > Then again, there was obviously something odd happening to suppress
                                    > the sunspots to such a degree for a long (from our perspective)
                                    period
                                    > of time, so who knows?



                                    Well I would tend to think you are right at first but if you think
                                    about it for a second we are only going by what has occured the past
                                    few decades.

                                    The poles are strongest towards minimum and they can wax and wane
                                    almost throughout the whole cycle except for the short stint right
                                    after solar minimum and during the rise towards maximum.

                                    If the sun is extremely quiet than the poles have to be also....or
                                    at least out of character from what they have been behaving like for
                                    the past few decades.

                                    Almost everything... flares, c-holes, sunspots , geomagnetic
                                    storming...etc... follow the polar changes.

                                    Could they pop up everywhere like you mentioned? I don't know...
                                    maybe....but in a way they do already...with sunspot regions and
                                    coronal holes. I could not disregard any theory with what little we
                                    know about it. I seem to recall a similar theory regarding the
                                    earth's magnetic flip..although different.



                                    Jim
                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.