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

Re: Solar Activity Report for 8/11/05

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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 10 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 11 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 12 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 13 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.