Congratulations! to Nicola Scafetta and Richard C Willson on the publication of their new paper: Planetary harmonics in the historical Hungarian aurora record (1523–1960). This is another excellent paper, published in Planetary and Space Science. Grabbitquick before I take it offline. Scafetta always makes papers available later if you miss this one. The Hungarian record goes back to a very early date and this makes the paper especially interesting to those of us eager to see more validation of the solar planetary theory, which is rapidly becoming the best show in town for matching paleo records. Geoff Sharp will be particularly pleased to see the strength of these Uranus-Neptune synodic correlations with solar activity levels.
Posts Tagged ‘planetary theory’
Nicola Scafetta and Richard C Willson: Planetary harmonics in the historical Hungarian aurora record (1523–1960)Posted: February 14, 2013 by tallbloke in Analysis, Astrophysics, cosmic rays, Dataset, Geomagnetism, Natural Variation, Solar physics, solar system dynamics
Tags: auroras, hungarian auroras, planetary theory, Scafetta
Tags: Abreu, planetary theory, Scafetta, Semi, solar-planetary, Wilson
University of Montreal physicist Paul Charbonneau has written a short review of the Abreu et al paper published by ‘Astronomy and Astrophysics’, and featured on the talkshop last October. This is a good step forward for the hypothesis we have been working on here for the last three years, with important contributions from published scientists including Ian Wilson, Nicola Scafetta, P.A. Semi and many other contributors. Although Abreu et al were not the first in modern times to publish in this area, the prominence they have achieved through publication of a review piece by Paul Charbonneau in Nature is helping to turn the spotlight onto an idea whose time has come. Hopefully the authors with prior publications in this exciting area of investigation will now receive more of the recognition they deserve for their pioneering work in the field, bravely withstanding the unscientific criticism and ridicule of certain members of the mainstream solar physics community. As Charbonneau observes at the end of his article:
To sum up, what we have here is a fit to observations unmatched by any other exploratory framework, buttressed by a conjectural explanatory scenario that is testable at least at some level. It may all turn out to be wrong in the end, but this is definitely not Astrology. This is science.