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

Re: Solar Activity Report for 8/11/05

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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.