Category Archives: Solar Cycle 24

Svalgaard Discusses How He Forecasts Solar Cycle Activity–Cycle 25 Will Be Up Soon


Before Solar Cycle 24 began, estimates of how active it would be were made by many experts. Because the Sunspot counting system has changed, the estimates have to be translated from the predictions made before the change. NASA’s top Expert using Sunspot as a proxy for activity, estimated it would be in the well over 160 (new system number ca. 265). Most of the estimates at the time were like NASAs. However, Cycle 24 has been much less active than most of the experts expected. The count using the new numbering system for Cycle 24 peak Sunspots at the Solar Maximum is 117. On the other hand, Leif Svalgaard and his partners estimated about 70 (new system ca. 117) which turns out to be as good as it gets. Estimating what Solar Cycle 25 will look like is already underway with many expecting Cycle 25 to be less active that has been the case with Cycle 24.

Because Svalgaard had forecast that Cycle 24 would be much less active and the forecast came reasonably close to the actual number count, it makes me curious about how he did it and what is he is predicting about Cycle 25 now. Well, I have already given that away in my 22 March 2016 blog titled “Dr Svalgaard makes a preliminary prediction of Cycle 25 size.” He thinks it will be close to the size of Cycle 24 and prehaps a little bit bigger. Once again he seems to be the contrarian.

So, how does he make these predictions. This blog will let you see the method he uses.

Continue reading

Solar Cycle 24 Update—-October 2016


Solar Cycle 24 continues on its way to a Sunspot minimum. The thirty day average Sunspot number for September (Ri) was 44.7, a little less than the August number of 50. The black line of the chart Ri is the sum of the north and south solar magnetic fields. While a year or so ago, the southern magnetic field (Rsouth) was creating the majority of the Sunspots, the north magnetic field (Rnorth) is dominate now. In April the Sun had a period of low activity with a thirty day average of 20.9.

cycle24

Looking at a comparison of Solar Cycles 23 and 24 shows that the Cycle 24 has been much less active than 23. This, of course, has prompted many to declare we are on our way to another minimum with corresponding cooling of global temperatures. But first a few comments on the difference one of the ways that Sunspots numbers are reported.

cycles23_24

Looking at the far right of the chart, the black line is the monthly average Sunspot number and it is 44.7 as noted above. The red line is the official Sunspot number. It is a thirteen month lagging calculation. It is always 6 months behind the current date. It is the means by which the number is smoothed. The green line is a forecast of what it will probably be when the official smoothed number arrives at September 2016 . The green lines forecasts the September Sunspot number at 34.5. It will probably not be exactly 34.5 at that time but the difference will likely be small..

A comment on my blog by azleader@yahoo.com provided a concise summary of the official number calculation methodology. It can be seen at the at the end of this blog.

Lastly as a reminder of how Cycle 24 looks in comparison to the preceding Cycles, the chart below gives the needed perspective:

 

This chart illustrates how much more active recent Solar Cycles have been in comparison to Cycle 24. Cycle 21 began in March of 1976. The peak International Smoothed Sunspot number for Cycle 21 was 232, Cycle 22 was211,Cycle 23 was 180 and Cycle 24 was 117.

 

 

A look at a Solar Cycle 25 projection is on my list of topics to post—hopefully soon.

 

All Charts a courtesy of Soleninfo/solar

cbdakota

International Smoothed Sunspot Number calculation.

The smoothed count is a 13-month averaged sunspot count using this Belgium’s formula:
Rs= (0.5 Rm-6 + Rm-5 + Rm-4 + Rm-3 + Rm-2 + Rm-1 + Rm + Rm+1 + Rm+2 + Rm+3 + Rm+4 + Rm+5 + 0.5 Rm+6 ) / 12

Rs = smoothed monthly sunspot count
Rm = One month’s actual sunspot count

The “-6” through “+6” appended to each Rm is the number of months before or after the month whose smoothed count is being calculated. The beginning and ending months in the formula are only given half the value of the others.

 

Indian, Japanese and Chinese Scientists Publish Research That Predicts Little Ice Age or Maunder Minimum Coming Soon.


The Times of India posted “Sunspots point to looming “little ice age” quoting scientists and astronomers from Physical Research Laboratory in India and their counterparts in China and Japan have fresh evidence that Earth may be heading for another “little ice age” or maybe even another Maunder Mimimum.

Their findings are very similar to those of our scientists. They report that:

“….our blazing sun has been eerily turning quiet and growing less active over the last two decades.”

Continue reading

Solar Cycle 24 Activity Report- Mid-May 2016


Solar Cycle 24 activity has peaked and it is on its way to a minimum.   Of course the exact date of the minimum and the start of Solar Cycle 25 is not known.  Because normal Cycle life is nominally 11 years,  start of Cycle 25 should be in 2019,   The Sunspot number   (Wolf number 30 day average) for April was 38!!  The chart below shows the rather sharp drop from March’s 54.9.

The black line (Ri) is the 30 day average—if you look carefully you will see it is the sum of the green line (Rsouth) and the red line (Rnorth).   The dashed blue line is the “official Sun Spot number.  It is the smoothed count of a 13 month average monthly Sunspot count divided by 12. The oldest and newest monthly count are reduced to half and the other numbers are given their full count.  And is always 6 months behind the most recent month.  This is the way it has been done for many years; hence it has a history record to use for comparing Solar Cycles.

May is showing an up-tick in the Sunspot count.  This up and down, mostly down, will countinue  for several years.

Activity chartNote the change in the 30 Day Wolf Sunspot number–its about 50 now.

The final chart is a comparison of Solar Cycle 23 and Solar Cycle 24:

Solar irradiance was said to have dropped more than usual.  It will have to fall off for months before it is likely to an event of consider “very interesting”.

cbdakota

All charts  by Solen.info/solar

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The smoothed count is a 13-month averaged sunspot count using this Belgium’s formula:
Rs= (0.5 Rm-6 + Rm-5 + Rm-4 + Rm-3 + Rm-2 + Rm-1 + Rm + Rm+1 + Rm+2 + Rm+3 + Rm+4 + Rm+5 + 0.5 Rm+6 ) / 12

Rs = smoothed monthly sunspot count
Rm = One month’s actual sunspot count

The “-6” through “+6” appended to each Rm is the number of months before or after the month whose smoothed count is being calculated. The beginning and ending months in the formula are only given half the value of the others.

 

Dr Svalgaard Makes Preliminary Prediction Of Solar Cycle 25 Size


Solar science expert Leif Svalgaard of Stanford University, makes a prediction of Solar Cycle 25 size: “Preliminarily it looks like a repeat of Cycle 24, or at least not any smaller.”

Svalgaard uses a technique that is based upon the dipole moment when the preceding Solar Cycle reaches the minimum. He used this technique for his prediction of Solar Cycle 24 sunspot number that turned out to be very close to what actually took place. He predicted Cycle 24 Sunspot numbers would be much smaller than Cycle 23 when at the same time most of the other forecasters were predicting a rerun of Cycle 23.

Continue reading

12 Reasons To Be A Skeptic


James Delingpole is a Brit that writes for Brietbart.com. He has a sharp mind that he uses to take the obvious and throw it back at the pretenders often with good humor. Somewhat like Mark Steyn. They are a formidable pair and I am glad they are on our side.

The Delingpole posting that I want to discuss was written before the COP21 Paris meeting of the massive group of hanger-ons that go to these conferences on stopping global warming. But, the points he makes in this posting “Twelve Reasons Why The Paris Climate Talks Are A Total Waste” are essentially timeless within the current discussion of the catastrophic man-made global warming theory.

I may summarize the discussion in some of the twelve reasons. So I do recommend that you link to his original posting to read the reasons in their entirety. Don’t ignore the links that are included in this listing.

1   There has been no ‘global warming’ since 1997.

So, of all the children round the world currently being taught in schools about the perils of man-made global warming, not a single one has lived through a period in which the planet was actually warming

Continue reading

Club du Soliel Posts Supportive Studies For Solar Forcing Climate Change


The warmers contend that no one studies the role the Sun plays in global warming any more. It is true that measurements of the Sun’s electromagnetic radiation received at the top of the Earth’s atmosphere, hardly changes. There are annual variations in the Sun’s energy received because the Earth’s orbit around the Sun is elliptical rather than circular. We are further away from the Sun in June than in January. However the distance effect averages out as it is essentially the same from year to year.

earths eliptical orbit600px-Seasons1

Continue reading