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

Re: Solar Activity Report for 8/11/05

Expand Messages
  • space1weather
    ... DC ... next ... The ... to ... quiet ... and ... periods ... seems ... you
    Message 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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 10 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 11 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.