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

Re: Solar Activity Report for 8/11/05

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 16 , Aug 12, 2005
    • 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 2 of 16 , Aug 13, 2005
      • 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 3 of 16 , Aug 13, 2005
        • 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 4 of 16 , Aug 13, 2005
          • 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 5 of 16 , Aug 13, 2005
            • 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 6 of 16 , Aug 16, 2005
              • 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 7 of 16 , Aug 17, 2005
                • 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 8 of 16 , Aug 18, 2005
                  • 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 9 of 16 , Aug 20, 2005
                    • 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 10 of 16 , Aug 20, 2005
                      • 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 11 of 16 , Aug 21, 2005
                        • 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 12 of 16 , Aug 25, 2005
                          • 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.