Patrick Geryl: The Sun’s Eleven Year Magnetic Reversal

Posted: March 5, 2011 by Rog Tallbloke in Solar physics, solar system dynamics

This technical paper by Patrick Geryl from Belgium represents a long and careful investigation into the link between solar rotation speed at various solar latitudes and the length and strength of the solar cycle. English is not Patrick’s first language, but he has made a tremendous effort to make his paper readable for us all. Please take your time to digest and understand this work, this area of investigation has high importance for the integration of our understanding of planetary motion, solar activity and the solar surface motion which is the key to the link between them.

The Sun’s Eleven Year Magnetic Reversal
Copyright Patrick Geryl 2011

The presented theory in this draft document uses the speed of the rotating magnetic fields of the Sun in order to calculate the magnetic field activity of the Sun and the number of sunspots which appear on the Sun’s surface. A sunspot is a place on the Sun’s surface which is characterized by a very strong magnetic field. Therefore, the number of the sunspots on the Sun is a good indicator of the intensity of the overall Sun’s magnetic activity. It is well-known that the magnetic field of the Sun peaks every eleven years, a cycle known as the sunspot cycle. At the peak of magnetic activity, the sun records maxima of sunspot numbers on its surface. It should be noted that the length of the sunspot cycle is not always exactly eleven years, to the contrary, it varies as discussed by Mursula and Ulich (1).

The presented theory tries to achieve the following (non-exhaustive) goals:

- To successfully calculate the length of the sunspot cycle based on the variability of the speeds of the Sun’s magnetic fields as found by Callebaut (2)

-  To be able to calculate the speeds of the polar magnetic fields based on the sunspot cycle length and the equatorial speed

-  To successfully calculate the varying hemispherical number of sunspots during each sunspot cycle

-  To calculate the positive and negative polarity of the sunspots

- To depict the polar magnetic reversal event

A correlation between the intensity of the Sun’s magnetic activity and the variability of the speeds of its magnetic fields is presented in Long Term Variations of the Torsional Oscillations of the Sun (2). The authors state that the differential rotation of the Sun is least differential during the magnetic maxima and most differential during the magnetic minima. In other words, the speeds of the equatorial and the two polar speeds (North and South polar speeds of rotation) have the most similar values during the period when a maximal number of sunspots are recorded.  The presented theory tries to go along with this finding and tries to calculate speeds of the equatorial and polar fields which fit the behavior described in reference (2).

This draft document is structured as follows: In Section 2, the magnetic field theory is described, in Section 3 the calculated values are presented and finally this document is concluded with the essential findings of the new theory.

  1. 1. The Magnetic Field Theory of the Sun

As it has been previously stated, the theory bases its calculation on the variability of the speeds of the magnetic fields of the Sun. The theory uses the model depicted in Fig. 1.

Figure 1. The observer’s model

S marks the polar view of the Sun. Let Ae represent the angular rotation of the equatorial field, An the angular rotation of the north polar magnetic field and As the angular rotation of the south polar magnetic field. O represents an individual observer which travels around the Sun with constant angular speed of Aob. The observer travels the length of the mean of the north polar and equatorial field in one day.  Although aware that the speed and the length of the south magnetic field is slightly different from the speed and the length of the north field, we use the length of the north field only for simplicity. Practical evidence has shown that the obtained results do not differ to a great scale.  As a consequence of the polar fields change at the end of each sunspot cycle, we observe different travel lengths of the observer if two consecutive sunspot cycles are simulated. For instance, when the north polar magnetic field switches with the south magnetic field and the length and speed of the north magnetic field are lower than the length and speed of the south field, we observe shortened travel length and consequently increased travel time of the observer.

The object m represents the direction of the magnetic fields of the Sun. The angular rotation speeds are measured in degrees per day.

The number of sunspots is calculated at each equilibrium point of rotational position (degrees) between the equatorial field and the North or South polar field. Therefore, {fi} represents the position (degrees) of the ith equilibrium point recorded (for North or South polar magnetic field). The number of the sunspots is obtained from Eq. (1):

(1),

where Poseq is the position of the equatorial field (degrees) and Posob is the position of the individual observer. MSSNnorth|south is the number of sunspots on the North and South hemisphere of the Sun respectively. It should be noted that Eq. (1) is performed at each equilibrium point of position between equatorial and polar north field and between equatorial and polar south field, in order to calculate MSSNnorth and MSSNsouth respectively.

The length of each sunspot cycle is calculated as sum of the periods (days) between the equilibrium points of position of the equatorial and the polar fields (the equilibrium points will be referred to as taking-over events further on).

Since the theory is based on an external individual observer, this theory is referred to as The Observer’s Magnetic Field Theory of the Sun.

  1. The Results

Two types of evaluation of the observer’s magnetic field theory were performed:

a) A static approach; the input parameter of the static approach is the average speed of the equatorial magnetic field. This approach is called static since the Aeq, An and As are simulated with constant values during the known length of the cycle. Considering the differential rotation of the Sun, An and As are calculated as in Eq. (2) and Eq. (3):

An = Aeq x FactPN (2)

As = Aeq x FactPS (3)

where FactPN and FactPS represent the factors of difference in speed of rotation between the equatorial magnetic field and the north and south magnetic fields respectively (see reference 3, The Internal Rotation of the Sun).

b) A dynamic approach; in this approach a more realistic scenario is simulated. The input parameters in this scenario are the length of the sunspot cycle and the monthly equatorial speed. Therefore, the value of the speed of the equatorial field is not constant anymore, it is changed every month. The values of the changing equatorial speed of the Sun in the period of the year 1920 till the year 1990 are depicted in Fig. 2.

Figure 2. The dynamic equatorial speed.

From Long Term Variations of the Torsional Oscillations of the Sun (2).

At each taking-over event, a speed of the North and South polar field is searched in the interval of 36 to 38 days for the North polar field, and in the interval of 36.5 to 38.5 days for the South polar field. The chosen polar speed for that taking-over event is the speed which gives a minimal difference between the real hemispheric sunspot number and the calculated hemispheric sunspot number according to Eq. (1).

The simulation efforts were made with specially crafted software application created for this purpose.

2.1. The Static Approach

The static approach is an approach which concentrates on the ability of the observer’s magnetic field theory to successfully calculate the length of the cycle, not the magnetic intensity. Hence, by the algorithm of the static approach presented in Section 3, it can be easily concluded that the simulation of constant averaged values of the equatorial and polar fields cannot successfully calculate the real hemispherical number of sunspots since the movement of the equatorial and therefore polar fields is certainly not constant (Fig. 2).

The intensity of a sunspot cycle (s) used for calculation of the length of the cycle only, is depicted in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, for North and South polar fields respectively. The calculated sunspot numbers are calculated from averaged equatorial speed of 25.75 days. On the Y-axis of both Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 are presented the sunspot numbers calculated at each taking-over event. On the X-axis a time scale is represented, where the time is measured in bits. One bit represents the time interval measured in days between each taking-over event. Since all fields of the sun have constant values, accompanied by the constant value of the observer, one bit for the North field has value of 83.78 days and 82.63 for the South field for equatorial speed of 25.75 days and values of FactPN and FactPS 1.443744 and 1.4527033 respectively.

As it has been stated earlier, the static approach of  this theory does not successfully present the numbers of sunspots on the Sun’s surface, it is merely used to successfully calculate and visually present the length of the sunspot cycle. Additionally, the sudden peaks evident in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 are also undesirable byproduct of the static unrealistic nature of the simulation and should be neglected for observation.

Figure 3. The static approach – Sunspot cycle of the North hemisphere

Figure 4. The static approach – Sunspot cycle of the South hemisphere

For several known sunspot cycles the static approach was deployed. For each year in the cycle the appropriate yearly equatorial speed was used in order to calculate averaged equatorial speed for the whole sunspot cycle. The averaged equatorial speed was used as input parameter to the static approach in order to obtain the length of the sunspot cycle.

Based on the calculations for many sunspot cycles, certain correlations between the FactPN and FactPS and the cycle length was found. We map the values of FactPN and FactPS for different average equatorial speeds in order to calculate series of lengths of sunspot cycles of 11 years in Table 1. Furthermore, in Table 2 we present the values of FactPN and FactPS when the average equatorial speed of rotation of the Sun is 25.75 days for lengths of sunspot cycles of different magnitude.

Table 1. Values of FactPN/FactPS for the same sunspot cycle length and different equatorial rotation speeds (separated in two sub-tables for clarity). Note that the same length is not always possible because the length of the bits is between 81 and 87 days (the mean of the length is calculated after 10 cycles)

Equatorial rotation speed (day) Length of sunspot cycle (year) FactPN North polar rotation  speed (day)
25.75 11.01 1.443744 37.17641
25.35 11.00 1.44458 36.6201
26.3 11.01 1.44259 37.9401
Equatorial rotation speed (day) Length of sunspot cycle (year) FactPS South polar rotation  speed (day)
25.75 11.00 1.4527033 37.40711
25.35 10.99 1.45342 36.84419
26.3 10.99 1.45173 38.1805

Table 2. Values of FactPN/FactPS for different sunspot cycle lengths and equatorial rotation speed of 25.75 days (separated in two sub-tables for clarity)

Length of sunspot cycle (year) FactPN North polar rotation  speed (day)
11.01 1.443744 37.17641
13.56 1.44458 37.19793
8.73 1.44259 37.14669
Length of sunspot cycle (year) FactPS South polar rotation  speed (day)
11.00 1.4527033 37.40711
14.02 1.45173 37.38205
9.49 1.45342 37.42556

Strange observation

As you can see there is something very strange with the south polar field.

When the factor is decreased this should lead to a shorter sunspot length.  We calculate the opposite…. And vice versa…

Based on the observations presented in Table 1 and Table 2, it can be easily concluded that even a small change in the equatorial rotation speed of the Sun (and consequently in the polar rotation speed) can result in considerable change in the length of the sunspot cycle. Additionally, we calculated that a difference of only 0.0807 percent in the speed of rotation of the north polar field causes change in the cycle length from 9.64 to 12.49. Generally, in Table 2 we present the interconnectivity between the hemispherical polar speeds and appropriate factors – in order to calculate the same cycle length (see 11.0 years, Table 2) we depict greater factor (1.4527033 vs. 1.443744) for slower polar speed (37.40711 vs. 37.17641).

In Table 3, the calculated values of averaged sunspot length are presented for six sunspot cycles. The average equatorial speed is calculated from the data presented in Long Term Variations of the Torsional Oscillations of the Sun (2). We use fixed values of 1.443744 and 1.4527033 for FactPN and FactPS respectively.

Before looking at this table, please remember that a difference of only 0.0807 percent in the speed of rotation of the north polar field causes change in the cycle length from 9.64 to 12.49.

Table 3. Calculated sunspot lengths by using the static approach

Sunspot cycle duration Average equatorial speed (day) Real sunspot length (year) Calculated sunspot length/Pole (years)
August 1923 – September  1933 25.70 10.1 N = 10.76 S = 11.22 

September 1933 – February 1944 25.77 10.4 S = 10.91 N = 11.11 
February 1944 – April 1954 25.78 10.2 N=  11.16 S = 10.87
April 1954 – October 1964 25.75 10.5 S = 11.00 N = 11.00
October 1964 – June 1976 25.88 11.7 N = 11.73 S = 10.50
June 1976 – September 1986 25.91 10.3 S = 10.35 N = 11.91

Conclusion:

If we flip poles in every new cycle, then we find the closest values for the length, except for cycle number 3. The 1964 – 1976 and 1976 – 1986 periods match with the calculated data.

Remarks:

1. In the timeframe from 1915 till 1990 the Sun’s equatorial rate declined from 14.05 to 13.95. This can lead to different fixed factors for the earlier calculated lengths.

2. We also note that the differences in speed from the equator field in the 1964 – 1976 and 1976 – 1986 periods are larger then in the previous four.

3. If we make the fourth cycle = 10.5 years for North and South, then we find the following fixed factors:  1.44350 and 1.45293.  If we use these new constants for the first 3 cycles we find the following:

Table 4. Calculated sunspot lengths by using 1.44350 and 1.45293 as new fixed factors

Sunspot cycle duration Average equatorial speed (day) Real sunspot length (year) Calculated sunspot length/Pole  

(year)

August 1923 – September  1933 25.70 10.1 N: 10.21
September 1933 – February 1944 25.77 10.4 S : 10.41
February 1944 – April 1954 25.78 10.2 N: 10.57
April 1954 – October 1964 25.75 10.5 S = 10.5

Conclusion:  The difference between the cycle lengths can be solved by using other factors for the fixed factors.

Calculation off New Polar Factors for Changing Length Sunspot Cycles

Use the constant values of  1.443744 and 1.4527033 of the 2 sunspot cycles for a speed of 25.75 days for the equator. Then increase the speed of the equator to 25.35 days, the fastest value found by Callebaut. This way we observe the maximal length for the southern field and the minimal length for the northern field.

Results:

  1. The Sunspot cycle from 25.35 and  1.443744 decreases in length to 9.24 years
  1. The Sunspot cycle from 25.35 and 1.4527033 increases in length to 13.10 years

Then decrease the speed of the equator to 26.30 days, the slowest value found by Callebaut. This way we observe the maximal length for the northern field and the minimal length for the southern field.

Results:

  1. The Sunspot cycle from 26.30 and  1.443744 increases in length to 14.76 years
  1. The Sunspot cycle from 25.35 and 1.4527 decreases in length to 9.06 years

CONCLUSION

Both hemispheres need to have the same length. So one of them has to change the value of his factor!

Example:
North is the Dominant Field

Table 5. Calculated sunspot lengths by using new fixed factors for the Southern field

Average equatorial speed (day) FactPN Calculated sunspot length/ North FactPS Calculated sunspot length/ South
25.35 1.443744 9.24 1.454250 9.24 
25.75 1.443744 11.01 1.4527033 11.00
26.30 1.443744 14.76 1.450587 14.76

South is the Dominant Field

Table 6. Calculated sunspot lengths by using new fixed factors for the Northern field

Average equatorial speed (day) FactPS Calculated sunspot length/South FactPN Calculated sunspot length/ North
25.35 1.4527033 13.10 1.445287 13.11 
25.75 1.4527033 11.00 1.443744 11.01
26.30 1.4527033 9.06 1.441620 9.07

Study of the Known Solar Cycles

By studying the solar cycles we have following remarks:

  1. Solar cycle 4 is the longest. Therefore we choose it as the northern dominant field. This matches with our previous finding.
  2. Solar cycle 2 falls slightly out of our calculated lengths with the data from Callebaut.  There are 2 possibilities:
    1. The equator field was a bit faster
    2. The length of the cycle is not completely right

To have a length of 9 years for the dominant northern field we calculate a mean equator speed of 25.28 days (calculated length = 8.99 years). The southern field has then a length of 13.55 years.

Table 7 . Some properties of solar cycle 1–23

Solar cycle number Starting of solar cycle (mm/yyyy) Solar maximum (mm/yyyy) Ending of solar cycle (mm/yyyy) Dominant polar field Length of solar cycle (years)
1 3/1755 6/1761 5/1766 S 11.25
2 6/1766 9/1769 5/1775 N 9.00
3 6/1775 5/1778 8/1784 S 9.25
4 9/1784 2/1788 4/1798 N 13.67
5 5/1798 2/1805 7/1810 S 12.25
6 8/1810 4/1816 4/1823 N 12.75
7 5/1823 11/1829 10/1833 S 10.5
8 11/1833 3/1837 3/1837 N 9.67
9 7/1843 2/1848 11/1855 S 12.42
10 12/1855 2/1860 2/1867 N 11.25
11 3/1867 8/1870 11/1878 S 11.75
12 12/1878 12/1883 2/1890 N 11.25
13 3/1890 1/1893 12/1901 S 11.83
14 1/1902 2/1906 7/1913 N 11.58
15 8/1913 8/1917 7/1923 S 10.0
16 8/1923 4/1928 8/1933 N 10.08
17 9/1933 4/1937 1/1944 S 10.42
18 2/1944 5/1947 3/1954 N 10.17
19 4/1954 3/1957 9/1964 S 10.5
20 10/1964 11/1968 5/1976 N 11.67
21 6/1976 12/1979 8/1986 S 10.25
22 9/1986 7/1989 5/1996 N 10.0
23 6/1996 7/2000 9/2007 S 11.33

Table from Study of sunspots and sunspot cycles 1–24 (4)

3.1.1. Change of Polarity of Sunspots

It is well known that sunspots change their polarity at each new cycle of the Sun. With the observer’s theory one can successfully observe the change of polarity of the sunspots as one cycle ends and another one begins. The different polarity of the sunspots is depicted in Fig. 5.

Figure 5. Different sunspot polarities in North and South hemisphere

We observe the change in the speeds of the northern and southern polar fields. In Fig. 6 we observe the calculated intensity of the sunspot cycle using the static approach. However, since it is obvious that the static approach cannot produce realistic sunspot numbers, we only pay attention to the direction of the depicted magnetic intensity of the Sun, calculated using a modified version of Eq. (1). To differ between the positive and negative polarity of the sunspots, we eliminate the absolute function of Eq. (1).

In Fig. 6 we depict a situation where the polarity of the sunspots is N-S. It can be detected by observing the positive values of the first calculated intensities, and by the trend of constant increasing of values (whether positive or negative). Moreover, in Fig. 7 we present the opposite situation. The polarity of the sunspots is S-N. It can be noted that the direction of change of the calculated sunspot numbers is now downwards.

Figure 6. Upward direction of the calculated magnetic intensity of the Sun. It marks N-S polarity of sunspots

Figure 7. Downward direction of the calculated magnetic intensity of the Sun. It marks S-N polarity of sunspots

The change of the sunspot’s polarity implies changes in the speeds of the polar magnetic fields of the Sun. We observe such change relative to a fixed value of equatorial speed of 25.75 days. We obtain N-S and S-N polarized sunspots on different hemispheres of the Sun, by calculated polar field speeds of 37.17641 and 37.40711 days respectively. To conserve the natural law of changing polarity of sunspots at each new cycle, we conclude that the polar speeds must also undergo change. If we assume that the average equatorial speed of the next is also 25.75 days, then the polar speed of 37.17641 days of the previous cycle will have to decrease to 37.40711 and vice versa.

3.1.2. Observing Very Low Sunspot Activity

The period of very low hemispheric sunspot activity during the change of polarity of sunspots can also be observed with the magnetic field theory of the sun. If we add on to the previous example and assume equatorial speed of 25.75, we conclude that change of polarity of the sunspots occurs at polar speeds somewhere around 37.3 days. The graph produced by the static approach shows indeed very low magnetic intensity (Fig. 7).  We conclude that change in polar speeds cause the almost-zero activity of the Sun. Therefore, we successfully model the difference in magnetic activity (and therefore the length of the sunspot cycle) of the hemispheres; we model the situation when there is almost-zero sunspot activity on one hemisphere while there is evident sunspot activity on the other hemisphere.

 

Figure 8. Low sunspot activity during sunspot polarity reversal

3.1.3. Polar Flip of the Sun

We also model the delay in the polar reversal of the poles of the Sun. Due to the well-known fact that the poles of the sun flip at the peak of the sunspot cycle, we observe the peaks of the sunspot intensity of the North and South hemisphere presented in Fig. 9a and Fig. 9b respectively. We used an equatorial speed of 25.75 days and North and South polar speeds of 37.17641 and 37.40711 days respectively.

Fig 9a)

Fig 9b)

Figure 9. Pole reversal moment of a) North magnetic field and b) South magnetic field

The marked interception between the arrows pinpoints the peak of the sunspot cycle and therefore the change of polarity of the appropriate hemisphere. To calculate the difference in the moments of polarity change for the both hemispheres, we use Eq. (4):

(4).

BitsN stands for number of bits for the North hemisphere and BitNL for the length of one bit expressed in days for the North hemisphere. The same applies for BitsS and BitSL, except they are values measured for the South hemisphere. So, in our experiment, the value of BitNL is 83.778 days and BitSL is 82.63. Moreover, according to Fig. 8, the value of BitsN is 24.5 and of BitS is 25.5. If we apply the obtained values to Eq. (4) we calculate a difference of 54.494 days. Therefore, the polar reversal of South hemisphere will happen 54.494 days after the polar reversal of the North hemisphere. The polar reversal of the Sun will be completed after both poles are reversed.

Differences in Flips

We note that we found large differences in polar flip lengths if the equator rate changes. These can go from several months to a year or longer. To be investigated.

The Dynamic Approach

In the previously explained static theory we use fixed values for the polar speeds and observer’s orbits. However, in reality this is not the case because both change. This is for another document.

Appendix:

Calculation Observer’s Loop see The Internal Rotation of the Sun (ref 3)

Circumference Sun: 4,373,000 km

Circumference Polar field

After studying the possibilities we came to the conclusion that the polar fields can have a maximum and minimum circumference from  300,000 to 1,300,000 km. The mean loop for the polar fields has to be found by further calculations. At the moment we took 2,586,5000 km for the mean value for the northern field. This gives us an observer’s loop of  29.936 km/sec or plus minus 360 days.

Theoretical calculations place the mean for the northern field between 350 and 370 days and 365 to 385 days for the southern. However, as the calculations show, the difference in the final result is small between an observer’s loop of 355 or 375 days.

4,373,000 + 300,000   Mean value: 4,673,000 : 2 = 2,336,500 km

2,336,500 : 86,400  = 27.043 km/sec

4,373,000 + 1,300,000  Mean value: 5,673,000 : 2 = 2,836,500 km

2,836,500 : 86,400 = 32.83 km/sec

Formula

a = radius

a = GM/ v2

v = speed

G = 6.67428 x 10 ((power -11) m kg

Mass Sun = 1.9891 x 10 power (30) kg

GM = 13,275,810

Long loop

a = 13,275,810/ 27.043 x 27.043  = 181,533,356  km

Circumference = 181,533,356 x 2 x 3.141592  = 1,140,608,807 km

Days needed for loop=

1,140,608,807 : 2,336,500 = 488.17 days

Short loop

a = 13,275,810/107.78  = 1,231,751 km

Circumference = 1,231,751 x 2 x 3.141592 =  773,931,842 km

Days needed for loop=

773,931,842 : 2,836,500 = 272.85 days

References:

  1. 1. Mursula, K and Ulich, T., A new method to determine the solar cycle length. Geophys. Res. Lett, 1998, 25, 1837-1840
  2. 2. Valentine I. Makarov, Andrey G. Tlatov, Dirk K. Callebaut, Long term variationsof the torsional oscillations of the sun. Solar Physics, 170:373-388, 1997
  3. 3. Michael J. Thompson, Jørgen Christensen-Dalsgaard, Mark S. Miesch, Juri Toomre The Internal Rotation of the Sun Astrophys. 2003. 41:599–643
  4. 4. A. K. Tripathi, Aka Tripathi and S. C. Dubey, S. K. Pandey1, Rahul Shrivastava, L. K. Borkar,   Study of sunspots and sunspot cycles 1–24 SCIENCE, VOL. 98, NO. 11, 10 JUNE 2010 .
Comments
  1. P.G. Sharrow says:

    I have read the above twice and I may plough through it again later. The one thing that keeps coming to me is that sunspots are effects of short circuits in the flow of the energies in the solar material circulations.

    In the sun we have a solid metal core surrounded by a deep and layered liquid metal “ocean” inside a mostly hydrogen “atmosphere”. This multilayer spinning mass is trying to drag the solar system to match its rotational speed. If the connection is simple then the equatorial surface would be slower then the core and the poles, this is not the case. The “atmosphere” travels faster at the equator then at the poles.

    In a induction motor or generator there must be slippage between the active layers to create output, as torque or electricity. If there is a short energy is lost as EMF pulse into the aether. While Tesla worked for Edison he redesigned the brush rigging of the DC motors to eliminate sparking and there by greatly improved the motors’ efficentcy.

    Sunspot is the result of a EMF blowout or short. As there are more sunspots there is a loss in circulation energies and the slow down in field rotation. Sunspots are not the cause but are an effect. Polar magnetic field flip is caused by the change in push to pull of the induced fields. Our motor circuit becoming a generator. The prime mover of this is the thermal circulations and radiation caused by the fission/fusion deep within the suns liquid ocean. pg

  2. Rossa says:

    Dear Tallbloke
    In conjunction with this article you may find the following of interest:

    [Snip]
    Kind regards
    JJ
    PS If you know how to pass it to Willis Eschenbach on WUWT I’d be grateful

    [Reply] Hi JJ. Sorry, but I’m not linking eschatological pieces from here. We are interested in Patrick’s solar work, and we won’t be discussing Terrestrial cataclysms. I’m not going to pass the link to Willis either, as I have enough difficulty trying to get him to engage with my work as it is. – Cheers.

  3. tallbloke says:

    “As there are more sunspots there is a loss in circulation energies and the slow down in field rotation. Sunspots are not the cause but are an effect”

    Hi P.G.
    Thanks for taking the trouble to study Patrick’s work closely. The field is wide open for new ideas and conceptual models of how the Sun works. It has become clear the mainstream solar scientists have several different models in mind, and so we are at liberty to put forward our own reasoning and see if we can get some facts to fit our guesses.

    NASA scientist Ching Cheh Hung in his paper ‘Apparent Relations Between Solar Activity and Solar Tides Caused by the. Planets.’ noted that flares from the solar surface often occur when planets pass overhead.

    http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2010/06/14/venus-earth-jupiter-alignment-and-the-solar-cycle/

    http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2010/08/21/breakthrough-major-discovery-on-planetary-solar-connection/

    Now Leif Svalgaard says that in the young solar system, there was a strong EM coupling between the solar rotation and the planetary orbits, but that the solar wind is now far too weak for this to still be operational. I’m keeping an open mind on that. Leif also recently gave me a hint that preliminary data from SDO inicates the ‘return meridional flow’ under the Sun’s surface may be a lot shallower than previously thought; around 20,000km. This gives added support to your ‘EM shorting’ possibility I think.

    The idea of the Sun as a homopolar motor/generator is intriguing. I think that given the sun’s reversal of polar magnetic orientation quite often coincides with Jupiter’s orbital period we need to be studying the motion of the planets above and below the solar equatorial plane more. This is the ‘z-axis’ stuff I keep talking about.

    Keep the ideas coming.

  4. Tenuc says:

    Thanks for posting this Rog, and thanks to Patrick Geryl for the very interesting paper.

    After a quick read through, it is apparent that there a link between changes to the differential speed of solar polar and equatorial rotation (both hemispheres) and number of sunspots and the magnetic field. However, understanding the mechanisms which produce the observed effects is difficult to see. As PG points out it is also difficult to know what is cause and effect.

    I need more time to study this paper and to think of some explanatory mechanisms. I think PG’s comment is giving some broad-brush good clues.

    “…In the sun we have a solid metal core surrounded by a deep and layered liquid metal “ocean” inside a mostly hydrogen “atmosphere”. This multilayer spinning mass is trying to drag the solar system to match its rotational speed. If the connection is simple then the equatorial surface would be slower then the core and the poles, this is not the case. The “atmosphere” travels faster at the equator then at the poles.

    In a induction motor or generator there must be slippage between the active layers to create output, as torque or electricity. If there is a short energy is lost as EMF pulse into the aether. While Tesla worked for Edison he redesigned the brush rigging of the DC motors to eliminate sparking and there by greatly improved the motors’ efficiency…”

  5. vukcevic says:

    Sunspot formation is one of the problems solar scientist have failed to explain. The old Babcock model http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/images/Babcock_model.jpg
    based on differential rotation is abandoned.
    Kenneth H. Schatten , Dr. Svalgaard’s companion (they’ve authored many papers jointly) promoted ‘percolation dynamo’ theory. Here is an interesting quote:
    Like sign attract, and unlike fields repel, essentially the opposite behaviour of magnetic fields in a vacuum, or subadiabatic atmosphere.”
    This is plainly nonsense, Earth and the sun happen to exist in the same universe, so they must have the same fundamental laws of physics.
    The problem is that most solar scientists are astrophysicist and do not understand electric currents. Recently I wrote this short article (reflecting on the Schatten’s theory), it shows that that the differential rotation and electric currents if put together show that formation, growth and disintegration of sunspots is a relatively simple process.

    http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSG.htm

    However, electric current is a taboo in any solar context .

  6. Tenuc says:

    I totally agree Vuk, there is no good explanation for the observed behaviour of sun spots and how they mysteriously appear and disappear from the areas of plage, like the grin of the Cheshire Cat from Alice in Wonderland.

    To my mind, sunspots are creatures of turbulence. These highly energetic spinning eddies function as a safety-valve to remove energy from lower layers of the sun. They appear when critical thresholds of temperature and turbulence has been reached and they become a self sustaining electromagnetic phenomenon. They are driven by the swirling ionised plasma which creates strong radio emanation, electrical currents and the ensuing complex magnetic fields (similar to how tornadoes operate on Earth).

    Regarding magnetism, Miles Mathis has come up with a perfectly acceptable explanation of how magnetism works from a purely mechanical perspective. Here’s the URL, and it is well worth a look…

    http://milesmathis.com/magnet.html

  7. Gerry says:

    tallbloke says:
    March 6, 2011 at 10:16 am
    “NASA scientist Ching Cheh Hung in his paper ‘Apparent Relations Between Solar Activity and Solar Tides Caused by the Planets.’ noted that flares from the solar surface often occur when planets pass overhead.

    http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2010/06/14/venus-earth-jupiter-alignment-and-the-solar-cycle/

    http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2010/08/21/breakthrough-major-discovery-on-planetary-solar-connection/
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    How about that? We did have a nice J, Su, V, Sa conjunction, with Earth at quadrature, on Feb 2, 2011. This coincides pretty nicely with the past week’s spate of flares and CMEs. This is easily seen by going back to Feb 2 on

    http://math-ed.com/Resources/GIS/Geometry_In_Space/java1/Temp/TLVisPOrbit.html

  8. Gerry says:

    What I should have said in my previous email is that last month’s build-up in solar activity coincides with last month’s J – V opposition. The nodes of inclination of the orbits of Jupiter and Venus to the invariable plane of the solar system are ~180 degrees apart.

    This week’s high activity coincides with a J, M, Su, Sa syzygy. This syzygy might be interesting to analyze because of Mercury’s eccentricity and its variable distance from Jupiter’s orbital plane. The variable distance from the Sun and variable distance from the Sun-Jupiter line results in a large range of possible solar tidal effects from one Jupiter-Mercury conjunction to another.

  9. Gerry says:

    Another correction/clarification: The nodes of inclination of Jupiter and Saturn (not Jupiter and Venus) to the invariable plane are exactly 180 degrees apart:

    http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1907Obs….30..310I/0000311.000.html

  10. tallbloke says:

    Hi Gerry, thanks for stopping by.
    This is strange. I was looking recently at a solar system plan which showed the orbits of the planets half in green and half in blue. As I understood it, these colours represented the parts of the orbits where the planets were above/below the solar equatorial plane. The sun is tilted at around 6 degrees to the plane of invariance. I would have thought the rising and descending nodes on that would have the same 180 degree difference for Ju and Sa, but they seemed nearer to 90 degrees out than opposite. I wish I could find the link again for you. It might have been Gray Stevens who provided it.

  11. Gray says:

    Hi tallbloke, I suspect the link was an online orerry, I’ll try and dig it out. Delving deep into the archives I found this piece by Fernando Sanford which offers a surface flow theory of sorts. Difficult to make a judgement as it is from 1950’s but interesting nonetheless.

  12. tallbloke says:

    Hi Gray,
    Thanks, but now I’m more confused. The offset between the blue an green parts of the orbits for Jupiter and Saturn is only small. I think I’m suffering a bit of information overload…

  13. Gray says:

    Hi tallbloke

    It looks as if it above and below the ecliptic as Earth is all in blue.

  14. Gerry says:

    Gray says:
    March 7, 2011 at 8:05 pm
    “It looks as if it above and below the ecliptic as Earth is all in blue.”

    Yes. The invariable plane is poorly determined and rarely used. It is, however, a more “natural” reference plane for working in barycentric coordinates. Jupiter and Saturn are the predominate planetary masses, therefore their orbits are inclined very little to the invariable plane. It would be “natural” to just constrain the nodes of inclination of Jupiter and Saturn’s orbits to the invariable plane to be exactly 180 degrees apart. Here is an old article about the invariable plane:

    http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1982A%26A…106..133B/0000136.000.html

    This article was a kick for me to read now because I worked with the following authors in the reference list: Clemence, when I worked at the U.S. Naval Observatory; Lieske, Standish and Keesey when I worked at JPL on the early interplanetary flyby missions to Mars, Venus, and Mercury as an Orbit Determination engineer and Celestial Mechanics Investigator. The old Development Ephemerides cited in the article were the ones I used!

  15. tallbloke says:

    Thanks Gerry, I’ll have a read of that and see if I can sort out my confusion.

  16. P.G. Sharrow says:

    Tallbloke;
    Maybe work in the garden. I do some of my best thinking while digging ditches. ;-) pg

  17. Gerry says:

    tallbloke says:
    March 6, 2011 at 10:16 am
    “The idea of the Sun as a homopolar motor/generator is intriguing. I think that given the sun’s reversal of polar magnetic orientation quite often coincides with Jupiter’s orbital period we need to be studying the motion of the planets above and below the solar equatorial plane more. This is the ‘z-axis’ stuff I keep talking about.”
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    I agree. The straightforward way to do this is probably to convert the Earth Equatorial or Ecliptic planetary coordinates directly to Solar Equatorial coordinates. This is the reference frame used by Patrick Geryl, and is the obvious choice for studying solar activity.

    As a good approxiimation, the invariable frame can be used in place of the exact orbit planes of Jupiter and Saturn, the advantage being that it is the “natural” reference plane for the barycentric motion of the Sun as well as for the motion of the giant planets.

  18. tallbloke says:

    Hi Gerry,
    on the cycles analysis thread I posted a spectra graph of z-axis motion done a few years ago by Ray Tomes. Some suggestive peak frequencies including a couple of significant ones which don’t show up in x-y planar studies, due to the differences in the nodal positions you were referring to.

    Tomes z-axis spectra

  19. [...]  Patrick Geryl: The Sun’s Eleven Year Magnetic Reversal [...]

  20. [...] researching, you can refer to the documents below, and also visit a previous guest post he made here, which due to other things which were happening at the time, did not receive the degree of [...]