Erratic Sunspots Smash NOAA Predictions
January 17, 2011, Submitted by: Ken Tweet
The current solar cycle (solar cycle 24) has confounded many observers, perhaps even the NOAA Solar Cycle Prediction Panel who had come to a consensus that the solar cycle presently underway would peak sometime during early 2013.
In fact, the current prediction model for this month of January, 2011, has it packed with between 50 and 55 new sunspots. The problem is… where are all the sunspots?
During early 2010 and again during mid 2010, it appeared as though the sunspot activity was rapidly increasing, even to the point of catching up with the current NOAA prediction model. During the last 4 months however, the sunspot activity has dramatically diminished.
Records indicate that only 14 sunspots (plus or minus depending on the chosen database) appeared during December 2010, while January 2011 has only produced 9 sunspots as of this writing (more than half way through the month), only 16 percent of expected!
Sunspot number prediction from http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov
If the current trend continues, we may be in store for some cold weather in our future. Many scientists agree that a decrease in sunspot activity will translate to cooler weather here on earth.
There is a lag effect with the cause-and-effect of low sunspot numbers and cool weather. That affect, coupled with the current ‘La Nina’ underway in the equatorial Pacific ocean – affecting North America with colder weather this January, could be signaling a very cool Spring and Summer of 2011.
Time will tell of course, but if this becomes reality, it could badly affect the already dangerous situation of the current world food supply disruption from recent weather-related damaged crops (Russia, Australia, Brazil, Pakistan…).
This weather related food crop damage coupled with the specter of higher inflation, all point towards much higher food prices in our future.
Solar Cycle Progression and Prediction – Current
If you enjoyed this, or topics of preparedness, geophysical – current events – risks, consider our survival blog RSS feed, new posts by E-mail, or bookmark us at Modern Survival Blog
Does this now mean there is a much less chance of the grid being affected or us being hit with a solar flare? if so it gives us a tiny breathing space ,for now!
@tjaty2, Good question. The risk of a given sunspot unleashing damaging flares is no less. However since there are only a small number of sunspots at this time, the overall odds are less, which I believe is what you are saying. A Carrington event (1859) could still happen, and surely will some day – could be next week – could be in another 20 years… It will be interesting to see if the current solar cycle catches up to predictions, or if the overall activity will simply be lagged in time, or if there will actually be less sunspots overall – when this cycle is through.
Since when has a decrease in sunspot activity correlated to cooler weather on Earth ? We have only been collecting detailed sunspot activity for a short period of time now and are slowly improving our understanding of any symbiotic link between the two. Mere speculation I’m afraid, in addition meteorologists struggle the most simple of weather formats anyway … !
Who made the current prediction model that says there should be a total of 50-55 new sunspots this month? I don’t know of any models that predict new sunspots. Instead, they use smoothed daily sunspot number, and a sunspot number is not the same thing as the number of sunspots.
The latest from NOAA is on page 11:
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/weekly/pdf/prf1844.pdf
The predicted smoothed sunspot number for January, at least from NOAA, is 39. You won’t know the ACTUAL smoothed sunspot number for January 2011 until around August, because the smoothed sunspot number is an average of monthly averages stretching over a year, six months forward and six months back. Sounds arcane, and it is, but this is the way they have always been counted, so it is still counted this way for consistency. I am sure when it was all done by hand it was easier to record the daily number, then come up with an average for each month, then average the averages, rather than have a moving average of 365 days.
The way sunspots are counted is each one has a value of 10 (what looks to us like a single sunspot is actually referred to as a sunspot group), and there is a value of 1 assigned to each of the elements that makes up that group. So the minimum non-zero sunspot number for any day is 11. But that’s for one, not eleven sunspots.
You might have two sunspots visible on a day, and get a sunspot number of 25.
Here are the recent daily sunspot numbers:
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/indices/DSD.txt
You can see that for January 17, the sunspot number was 36. But how many sunspots was it actually?
You can see from this report that there were actually two:
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/forecasts/SRS/0118SRS.txt
What about back on January 4, when there was a surge of new activity, sending the daily sunspot number to 54?
There were three:
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/forecasts/SRS/0105SRS.txt
Despite what you may have heard about low sunspot activity and cold weather, climatologists say that the link between sunspot activity and climate has been studied extensively, and it is weak.
For instance, the largest sunspot cycle in all recorded history was cycle 19, peaking in 1957-1959, which was not a warm period.
It is true that this cycle has been lower than many projections a few years ago, but there have only been 24 recorded cycles in history, averaging about 10.7 years each, but with a considerable variation. So predicting sunspot cycles is a young science. Also, the predictions for the sunspot activity at the peak and the months/year of the peak is much better a few years into the cycle, than at the beginning.
@Tad, Complete agreement with your statements. Trying to keep it simple – that’s why graphs often tell a story, such as the current ‘seemingly’ slow rise up the slope to cycle 24′s peak.
Counting sunspots, and reporting an official number is not straightforward, as you explained yourself. Yet another explanation can be found on spaceweather.com, which is excerpted here…
There are two official sunspot numbers in common use. The first, the daily “Boulder Sunspot Number,” is computed by the NOAA Space Environment Center using a formula devised by Rudolph Wolf in 1848:
R=k (10g+s),
where R is the sunspot number; g is the number of sunspot groups on the solar disk; s is the total number of individual spots in all the groups; and k is a variable scaling factor (usually <1) that accounts for observing conditions and the type of telescope (binoculars, space telescopes, etc.). Scientists combine data from lots of observatories — each with its own k factor — to arrive at a daily value.
Regarding the possible relationship between sunspot activity and climate, I’ve mostly come across articles that associate very low sunspot activity with cooler climate. For example the ‘Maunder Minimum’ during 1645 – 1715 when hardly a sunspot was observed, coincides with the ‘Little Ice Age’ that occurred during that time, coupled with many extreme cold winters during the period. Coincidence? Maybe…
I do hope the sunspot activity picks up again – they are fun to watch
NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center
NOAA’s Solar Cycle Progression
Excerpt from http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/predict.shtml
Current prediction for the next sunspot cycle maximum gives a smoothed sunspot number maximum of about 59 in June/July of 2013. We are currently two years into Cycle 24 and the predicted size continues to fall.
Predicting the behavior of a sunspot cycle is fairly reliable once the cycle is well underway (about 3 years after the minimum in sunspot number occurs. Prior to that time the predictions are less reliable but nonetheless equally as important. Planning for satellite orbits and space missions often require knowledge of solar activity levels years in advance.
Thanks Ken, will still stay ever ‘watchful’
There are other technical observations – besides sunspots – which give indications on the suns current behavior. e.g. AP index and the 10.7 flux level. Both of these are at very low levels at this point of time co related to the solar cycle progression. Also the current sunspots are not ” going about” their normal routine as to polarity and activity.
David Hathaway and his team estimate the solar cycle sunspot number from historical records. Interestingly to note they have revised their estimates for SC 24 a couple of times already. At least one Astro-physicist and solar physicist has stated that observations for SC24 are in unknown territory.
According to a recent paper TSI is down very slightly over the last couple of years. This allegedly affects the earths “energy budget” again very slightly – probably unnoticeable.
There are some theories that state it will take 8 years for the lower solar activity to affect the climatic conditions on the earth. We wait and see.
There are others who theorize that lower solar activity lessens the magnetic defences surrounding the earths atmosphere. These lower magnetic defences allow galactic cosmic rays to penetrate the stratosphere and troposphere and create more clouds which in turn creates a lower temperature. – more or less Svensmark.
Very large C.M.E.’s can occur at any time in a solar cycle. As the saying goes – it’s just a matter of time.
“It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future.”
Philosopher Y. Berra
Solar Cycle Predictions
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/predict.shtml
The solar cycle 24 predicted sunspot maximum has been reduced again – predicted peak down to 59 Max. (1/3/11)
This will be at the level of the Maunder Minimum of 1675-1715. This period of low sunspot activity had intense cold.
Previous NASA predictions below:
2011 Jan 3: Predicted peak 59
2010 October: Predicted peak 60-70
·2009 May 29: predicted peak: 80-90 range
·2009 Jan 5: predicted peak: 100-110 range
·2008 Mar 28: predicted peak: 130-140 range
Ever heard the old saying it’s always calm before the storm???……………
Charvatova’s prediction, one decade (or more) ago was that the solar activity would continue to decrease for the next 100 years. One prediction, long time ago, and still working. NASA has being changing their predictions almost weekly.
Consequences for world climate: Cosmic rays seem to be responsible for cloud formation.
Lower solar activity, weaker interplanetary magnetic field, more cosmic rays, an more clouds. Then probably more rain or, at least, lower temperatures.
Cosmic rays are particles which originated from the explosion of ancient large stars, long before our sun was born.
Where I live, ~35W ~5S, we are experiencing lots of rain, probably due to 15 days of very low solar activity and, consequently, lots of cosmic ‘rays’.
Keep in mind the Livingston/Penn observations. That means a SSN of appr. 10 in 2015, this month january 2011 it will be smoothed at around 20. Make your curve fitting, a maximum smoothed SSN of 35 and a Maunder minimum following with colder winters.
Actually, even though sunspots are less, I remember reading that they made up for the fewer by being more powerful, so same energy, just different delivery.
so where is the global warming?
Actually, we’re in a bit of a ‘La Nina’ cycle right now, where surface waters in the equatorial Pacific are cooler than average. This has been causing cooler and wetter weather in some parts of North America.
Piers Corbyn looks at the solar behavior, particle activity and the magnetic matters and how it’s effects on Earth is modified somehow by the moon. It sounds very strange, but he is hitting the target like no one else in weather predictions. Japanese climate science researchers tied various geological indicators together and proved a synchronicity between solar behavior and precipitation and temperature changes during the Maunder Minimum / Little Ice Age times. Unfortunately if these people with the most solid sounding basis to understanding climate are as right as it seems, we are looking at decades of colder climate ahead, at a minimum. The Earth is so tiny compared to the sun that it makes sense as the main climate driver with oscillations of ocean currents and matters in the atmosphere that mitigate or amplify, and volcanic activity modifying the results of the input for shorter or longer intervals. So far I haven’t seen anything that shows where the tipping point is that takes us from a Little Ice Age into something more serious. An interesting thing I read once has to do with a major ice age ending as if someone had thrown a switch.
Our ancestors correctly observed the effects of lunar cycles on the earth’s tides,even though they would have no understanding of the laws of gravity.Likewise with the sun,many have made a connection between lack of sunspots and a cooler climate,even though the cause of such a connection might not be understood.
Hello katesisco,
Truth be told not only are sunspots greatly Down their size has
been quite small also. Solar flares and solar activity have been
mostly none existent. Hence Three papers released in June 2011
I think this may be a dead thread indicate cycle 25 may not happen
I said may not. We are driving blind we only know Maunder saw this
6 or 7 hundred years ago and the medieval warm era ended so did
Frances Monarchy. No one wants Cold Cake with Cold milk?
Can I take a sunbath with relative safety ?
.
Thank you,
bill in socal
Thanks for the chuckle… “relative” is the key word. One could argue that any exposure to the sun presents risks. Like most everything else though – in moderation.