Breakthrough: major discovery on planetary – solar connection

Posted: August 21, 2010 by tallbloke in solar system dynamics

People following this blog closely will know that Roy Martin’s excellent analysis of the tidal relationship of Jupiter, Earth and Venus alignments with the solar cycle has led me to test the possible electro-magnetic relationship using a modified copy of his original database, which he very kindly sent me earlier this week. The initial result was interesting, but still had the divergences in timings between the alignment cycles and the solar cycles.

I still need to find a good reconstruction of solar windspeed variation over the period of record under test which I can integrate into the database, but in the meantime, I have done a quick and dirty engineers approximation to test my hypothesis that the relationship is partly electromagnetic as well as tidal. Both are operative.

I realised that if the relationship is partly electro-magnetic, this would mean the alignments of the planets along the curve of the interplanetary magnetic field needed to be checked, in addition to the gravitational/tidal alignments in straight radial lines from the sun already covered by Roy’s analysis. This is because according to NASA, the flux tubes and magnetic ‘ropes’ which reconnect with the planetary magnetospheres are embedded in the stream of radiation emanating from the Sun.

The curvature of the IMF is affected by variation in solar wind speed, so I further realised that I needed to test the timings of the alignment cycles in relation to the solar cycles at higher and lower solar wind speeds and approximate the past conditions. This insight has proved fruitful. I ran the data twice, once at a solar windspeed of 450km/sec, and then at 350km/sec, and did a cut’n’paste of the two graphs produced to get a rough idea of the effect of variation in solar wind-speed on the viability of the hypothesis. Here is the result:

JEV solar composite-solar-windspeed-adjusted

I realised after I made this plot, that the rotation rate for the sun I used wasn’t correct. When corrected, that will improve the correlation further, when I integrate a time series of solar wind speed variation which has a higher average during the late C19th, early C20th, than the 350km/sec I tested.

I believe this represents a major step forward for the solar planetary theory and strengthens the case for the hypothesis that the motion of planets in the solar system has a strong modulating effect on the solar cycle.

Here is a reconstruction of solar wind speed from the aa index:

Here is Leif Svalgaard’s reconstruction from 1880 with observed data in red at the modern end. The ovals are at every other minimum where the reconstructed estimate may be high.

In my opinion, we now need to pursue, in parallel with refinement of this result, the possibility that the erratic and continually varying motion of the sun around the centre of mass of the solar system has a major periodic effect on the amplitude of the solar cycle, being the major cause, for example, of the grand minima events such as the Maunder and Dalton minima, and the extra high amplitudes seen in the second half of the C20th. This mechanism is currently being investigated by Geoff Sharp. Because of the strong harmonic connections between the inner planet alignment timings and the gas giant orbital cycles as noted for example, in the work of Gray Stevens, the two mechanisms are complimentary and linked through the biggest planet, Jupiter. I believe this will explain why the variation in amplitude of the inner planet alignment cycles shown above, more or less matches, but doesn’t fully capture the variation in solar cycle amplitudes.

Stay tuned, this is getting exciting! 8)

  1. Semi says:


    I’m now quite convinced, that the Sunspot cycle timing IS caused by planetary alignments and that the influence-path is mainly electro-magnetical, but it goes through the EARTH planet mainly… (I thought about this earlier, but only recently I found a proof – the “Butterfly diagram” itself) :

    The Earth pulses at 27.3 (or 29.5) days due to Moon orbit. When the Earth orbital energy (angular momentum) is well stable for some time (this happens during Sunspot minima), the Sunspots start to occur at the high-latitude layer, which is synchronous with the Earth pulse (27-29 days). (Also: during Sunspot minima, the energy of p-modes (width and height) – the waves on the Sun – is largest.) They further move toward ecliptic (not equator?!), being dragged there by magnetical planets. When the Earth orbital energy is more chaotic (due to drags mainly by Jupiter and Venus planets – this is the “planetary-alignment” influence), the synchronization is not that well to cause high-latitude Sunspots… The Jupiter, although it is magnetically more powerful, does not pulse anywhere near the Sun-spin frequency, having only cca 9hour frequency due to Jupiter spin and 12-year frequency of a very slow change due to Jupiter orbit.

    The changes in Angular Speed of the Sun are most dominantly caused by the Venus planet with similar timing (due to same alignments). Again, although the large planets make the Sun swing more far from the center, the change is very slow, too far from any Solar frequency… Although the path curvature, caused by large planets, have some influence also: when the curvature is highest (during PTCs), there are deeper Sunspot cycle minima…

    These 2 effects combined cause the Sunspot cycle…

    One more note: the SC23 started really soon, and so we had to wait for SC24 “unexpectedly” long – to get in sync with the E-V-J cycle…

    The 27.3-day latitude layer (423nHz) on Sun is at cca 40°, the 29.5-day latitude layer (391nHz) is at cca 50°, on the surface (this is little different at lower depths)… The core is believed to be rotating arround 430nHz, just below the 27-days…

  2. tallbloke says:

    Hi Semi,
    Thanks for those thoughts and figures. Jupiter’s orbital period matches well with the longer of the two periods Timo Niroma found that solar cycle lengths cluster around. Jupiter also has a large degree of eccentricity in it’s orbit which means its distance from the Sun varies significantly over its orbital period. I think that given its large size and powerful magnetosphere, we shouldn’t dismiss it’s possible influence in addition to your observations regarding Earth.

    The power of tidal forces drops off with the cube of the distance whereas the electromagnetic forces falls off with the square of the distance, so we need to reconsider the relative influence the planets may have bearing that in mind too.

  3. johnnythelowery says:

    Well done Tallbloke. This is indeed exciting but it’s also getting pretty!

  4. vukcevic says:

    This could be an interesting project if you can tie it down. Had long arguments about it with Dr.S some 18 m0nths or so ago. He of course say it is an impossibility. You can find a reference to it on my old website: (page 1). Using NASA data I constructed short animation for period of 12 months showing relationship between heliospheric current and planetary positions (you can see eider from above pdf or directly on
    Good luck

  5. tallbloke says:

    Hi Vuk, nice to see you drop by again. Thanks for the pdf and the cool animation.

    Leif S just kindly emailed me with his solar wind reconstruction from 1880 along with some cautionary notes on how to use the data. Thanks Leif!

    I have asked him to take a look at Semi’s comments above about the solar rotation rate at various latitudes throughout the solar cycle where the sunspot production is occurring. This is something we might be able to factor into the database to tighten the correlation still further if we can parameterize it well enough as a function of sunspot data and evolve an algorithm. 🙂

  6. Zeke the Sneak says:

    Very exciting interrelationships you’ve got there.

  7. vukcevic says:

    I am currently a bit short of time, and have another project in the pipeline waiting for my attention.
    If you whish to look at the other planets magnetic connection (beside J & S), I would suggest, not that you need my advice, to start with E-J, particularly SC17 (I referred to it in my previous post .pdf link as a magnetospheric eclipse).
    see also:

  8. Really amazing. Correcting tides with the E/M field increases “correlation”, as some stubbornly would say. Truth is out there, the problem is that we reject it.
    Current celestial mechanics lacks an entire field, since it hasn’t incorporated the foundational E/M field into its equations
    Miles Mathis

  9. P.G. Sharrow says:

    Tallbloke; you may have found the thing that will prove EMF effects on the solar output.

    tallbloke says:
    August 21, 2010 at 12:05 pm

    “Jupiter also has a large degree of eccentricity in it’s orbit which means its distance from the Sun varies significantly over its orbital period. I think that given its large size and powerful magnetosphere, we shouldn’t dismiss it’s possible influence in addition to your observations regarding Earth.

    The power of tidal forces drops off with the cube of the distance whereas the electromagnetic forces falls off with the square of the distance,”

    The differences of effect may be large enough to see in your graphs of solar output.
    The leading, lagging or push, pull of SSN timeing to JEV positions due to feed back loads on the solar dynamo. If this is true the gravitation effects would be quite low from the outer gas giants and their magnetic effects larger then expected. The overall effects of the all the gas giants would be greater then expected from the gravitation only effects. EV effects from gravity would be greater then their size would indicate relative to the over all system. Perhaps this will help in separating gravity from EMF effects on the solar output. pg

  10. tallbloke says:

    Adolfo, Miles’ gravitational theory need some empirical testing. I like it, especially the idea in the Bode paper of the way the planets find their orbital balance points. I think his explanation of the equal apparent size of the Sun and Moon is very powerful.

  11. tallbloke says:

    PG, thanks, I think that there is a good chance some close correlation work on the modern observed record may put it beyond doubt. So much to do.

    Jupiter may well be having an effect even when on its own it is out of phase with the solar cycle. I need to start prioritiing a program of investigation. Regulars should beware that I’ll start handing out tasks. 🙂

  12. Tim Channon says:

    The solar system is not a flat pancake, it has Z axis.

    Jupiter is one of the object which bobs above and below the plane, as well a magnetically active. Magnetic polarity changes are likely and surprise, the sun switches too.

    There is more but I expect you know that.

  13. tallbloke says:

    Hi Tim. Yes, if you go back to my earliest posts on this blog, you’ll find some z axis work. Ray Tomes has an interesting hypothesis for a ‘barycentric motion in the z axis’ effect on solar activity. It involves a relativistic differential gravitational effect on the gradient of matter in the sun, causing an upward and downward motion of the core relative to the solar surface. This would cause a pumping action which might account for the solar magnetic reversals, as well as meridional flows which might affect sunspot production. If you are interested, you can read more about his idea here:

    I’d be interested to hear your insights on z axis motion too.

  14. vukcevic says:

    Hi Rog & Co
    Here is something you may whish to consider (I discussed this with Dr.S. in October of 2008 and as usual he declared it a nonsense).
    On this graph

    – Fig 1 is a Parker spiral followed by a magnetic rope (or cloud) which is attached to the source at solar surface. Important thing to notice is that J & S to be on the same spiral has to be more than 180 and less than 540 (360+180) degrees in the direction of the planet’s motion.
    – Fig 2 shows normal angular J-S displacement at minima preceding the N-th cycle. There is no particular regularity to it .
    – Fig 3 shows ‘magnetospheric’ J-S angle displacement at minima preceding the N-th cycle. Now there is much greater degree of regularity.

    On the subject of meridional flow:

  15. tallbloke says:

    Vuk, thanks for that. Saturn has too big an effect on Jupiter to ignore I think. We’ll need to factor it in. I’ll have to come back to this, as I’m having a very interesting time working with Leif’s solar wind data at the moment. Likewise meridional flow, but I won’t forget to take a look.

  16. tallbloke says:

    OK, I rolled my sleeves up and integrated the Svalgaard solar wind speed reconstruction into my copy of Roy’s database. This took a bit of doing as the datapoints were in Bartel rotations not months. Leif gave me some additional notes on changes in rotation rate at various parts of the cycle, and with Semi’s hints as well, I’ve made a couple of tweaks to rotation rate to generate this plot:

    solar wind speed adjusted

    Work isn’t finished here, I need to investigate solar rotation further and see if we can find a proxy to use to further improve the correlation. There is something strange going on around 1900-1910, but I already knew that from the work I did on using SSN and LOD to create a temperature proxy.

  17. P.G. Sharrow says:

    Tallbloke ; I see an anomaly 1875 to 1935 .Is there an outlier that might be sturring the pot and increasing the solar wind during that 50 year period. Lower then normal SSN and more wind is an interesting artifact to the suns’ activity. pg

  18. Ulric Lyons says:

    What this shows is that there is typically slower solar wind velocity around solar maximum, due to less coronal holes around maximum, and hence the occurrence of colder episodes, what`s new?

  19. tallbloke says:

    Hi Ulric,
    Changes in solar wind speed affect the alignment of planets along the curvature of the IMF. I’m playing with the data to see how much it matters in terms of the correlation strength between alignments on the IMF curve and sunspot numbers.

  20. Tenuc says:

    Things are looking better and better, TB.

    Another thought, could the polarity of the activity change the expected effect, with stronger coupling depending on the suns polar orientation each cycle? Here’s a graph showing the variance of the north and south components of the monthly smoothed sunspot numbers (five cycles 1954 – 2010). Data is from the Royal Observatory of Belgium up to mid 1992 and from the SIDC (International Sunspot Number) since then. Thanks go to SIDC for the graph.

    The sun is really in the doldrums at the moment with no sunspots and a Earth facing coronal hole without much wind. This is a very interesting cycle indeed!

  21. Tenuc says:

    Interesting take on what SC24 will look like, with a prediction of cycle max April 2011 with a SSN of 40, available here:-

    Full info here:-

  22. tallbloke says:

    I thin k that would make it the shortest cycle ever wouldn’t it Tenuc? I can’t see it myself. A couple of years ago I predicted it would be long, low, and anomalous in many ways.

  23. Tim Channon says:

    Have fun folks

    Low fidelity but large. This is first art. The software doing the processing is in C so it does exactly what I say, alas. Lot more to do. Post processing is default gnuplot by hand, a pain.

    Bright moon tonight but at least the wind has dropped.

    Flowers are doing well.

    Oh, okay. What is it?

    A 3D spectra plot of the satellite mgii short wavelength solar data part cycle 21 through a good deal of cycle 23, left to right.

    Front to back is period 20 through 40 days (axis numbers are wrong) and involves solar rotation data. This is suggestive the rotation periods actually have a wider range, something I had already suspect from other analysis. A slight longer period has no explanation other than something is there. (this even has a second harmonic is the data)

    A contour map is also very interesting.

    Getting this right is tricky. It might be very wrong, certainly I am not sure what it is showing. If you could rotate it more sense would be possible. If you have gnuplot this can be arranged.

    The dataset is of considerable interest.

    If Leif is around I have reproduced his F10.7 vs. mgii compare at high resulution. I make it 10% not 1% and it raises some questions given the lack of confirmation and possibility the result matches the excess loss of artic ice, a curious co-incidence.

    There is a great deal more to do.

  24. Douglas DC says:

    Look at this: Stumbled across this on a geology website I lurk on:

  25. tallbloke says:

    Tim: very pretty, what is the vertical axis? The Stelab database isn’t working for me unfortunately, I just get blank plots.

    Douglas: Interesting! 33 day core rotation suggests at first sight the solar rotation is driven from the outside inwards rather than the inside outwards. Score a hit for the EU folks. More to come on this before we jump to any conclusions though.

    There’s a thread on this at WUWT

    One thought I had was that if there is a signal coming from the interior of the sun it means there is an inhomogeneity to the core. This could help explain the barycentric effect on solar cycle amplitudes.

  26. Tim Channon says:

    Not sure how to make that clear. New plot which might make more sense at the end. The connection with what you are doing is related but peripheral, may or may not be useful.

    Vertical is amplitude of short wavelength radiation at the specified solar rotation period.

    Putting this another way, the satellite was using a narrowband sensor to measure the brightness. Later on yesterday I checked the F10.7 radio noise data to see if it produced a very similar result. *see note at end of this posting*

    I have processed this to extract any ‘pulse’ at solar rotation period and plotted brightness of this period against time.

    If it is correct it means there is an intense solar rotation signal for periods around solar maximum.

    Given the solar rotation period is (we assume) related to latitude, the peaks moving shows the location of maximum radiation moves and is related to latitude.

    Displaying this kind of information is difficult and really is into the field of technical presentation. In this case the resolution varies on all axis, perhaps meaning log/log/log scaling would work, leaving time linear.

    *f10.7 data*
    Over the same period as the mgii data the result is very similar, which was expected but a major problem turned up which has to be resolved.

    Solar cycle 18 and 19 are so different in character it raises questions about data integrity.

    A have now grabbed the Penticon f10.7 data, adjusted, with the proviso adjustment is a can of worms.

    Scruffy plot by hand.
    Frequency axis is now accurate, forgot a /2 on a variable.
    Told gnuplot to put a contour plot on the projected base.

  27. Douglas DC says:

    Thanks Tallbloke- missed that thread.

  28. vukcevic says:

    Blue spiral is locked to the Earth, but as far as I remember the brown one is a Parker spiral linked to Mercury, but why that would be so, no idea.
    There is a normal slow solar wind and fast one from coronal holes, I think total energy is far more relevant than an approximated average speed. I superficially looked at data some time, failed to find much.

    P.G. Sharrow says: August 22, 2010 at 10:59 pm
    Is there an outlier that might be sturring the pot and increasing the solar wind during that 50 year period?

    Tenuc says: August 23, 2010 at 7:03 pm
    Another thought, could the polarity of the activity change the expected effect, with stronger coupling depending on the suns polar orientation each cycle?

    Yes there is about 52 year half period (104 year cycle) with some ‘important consequences’.

  29. tallbloke says:

    Tim, Beautiful plot, new thread going up in an hour for explanation and discussion.

    Vuk, thanks, that overtaking spiral had me confused. And thanks for the timely overview on hemispheric asymmetry of sunspot production, I played around with that last year. These two plots are connected with regime changes in solar wind, so your plot is going in the new thread too, please stick around for discussion.

    I’m busy recuing a bugged up giant spreadsheet, back soon.

  30. Vukcevic: You animation remind us, again, of the music of the spheres, hope none of them sings out of tune 🙂

  31. Tenuc says:

    Tim Channon says:
    August 24, 2010 at 3:43 pm
    “If it is correct it means there is an intense solar rotation signal for periods around solar maximum.

    Given the solar rotation period is (we assume) related to latitude, the peaks moving shows the location of maximum radiation moves and is related to latitude.”

    Perhaps this indicates a jet stream in the solar upper atmosphere, which creates turbulence at lower levels – when EM conditions are correct, this causes sun spots to form in the suns lower atmosphere??? Similar to the jet streams and tornadoes seen on our planet? A high energy safety valve?

  32. Tenuc says:
    August 24, 2010 at 8:13 pm
    That’s precisely what the experiment of Brikeland’s terrella was all about.!
    Tornadoes, hurricanes…we don’t need to go to the Sun to see a Sunspot from below. Now, if the sun has a solid core, what would it be the temperature on its surface?, we have a high temperature thermosphere and we are not burning up…

  33. Traditional knowledge (forbidden writings, rejected by official science) say that the Sun corresponds to the musical note C, and the solar system to a decreasing vibrations’ octave; then it would follow that its pitch is higher, its frequency higher, and, consequently its wavelength shorter, thus its real diameter could be calculated as smaller than the earth’s diameter.

  34. P.G. Sharrow says:

    I was taught that the sun was very much like a “Gas Giant” that was so massive the it went nuclear and that Jupiter was a bit too small to become a brown dwarf. A small solid core inside a massive hydrogen “ocean” that varies from semi-ridged to gas.
    Certainly could be a smallish bell that rings “C”. pg

  35. P.G. Sharrow says:

    Tallbloke; It looks to me that you are doing a good job of circling this herd.

    The solar output appears to me to be 3 forms,

    charge – as in photons, electrons, neutrinos
    EMF – as magnetic fields
    solar wind – ionized particals

    We have only been able to see sunspots for an extended period of time, kind of like seeing the tops of Tenucs’ tornadoes and hurricanes. These are effects not causes.

    I liked your above graphs above, too bad they have a lame solar wind “0” as the solar wind can never be “0”. I would think that sunspots are blow outs in a otherwise smoother output. Kind of like a spark off of a Tesla sphere is a lose of smooth energy outflow. More spots causes lose of lift to the solar wind.

  36. tallbloke says:

    Hi PG. I did include solar wind in both the plots, as it affects the curvature of the IMF. The second plot with the light blue curve uses Leif Svalgaards reconstruction of solar wind from 1882.

    Unfortunately, the spreadsheet has blown up now, but just before it did, I got a tantalising glimpse of a long run of accurately shaped cycles on the planetary alignment curve after I integrated a better rotation model to add to the solar wind series. I’m working on recovering it now, and hope to have the next interim result up later this morning.

  37. tallbloke says:

    OK, the spreadsheet is still a little flakey, but I managed to pull a copy of the latest curves from it. This uses longer term solar wind speed trends from 1846 to smooth things out a bit. After some consultation with Leif, it seems the rotation changes don’t make a big difference to the IMF (this makes sense to me), So rotation speed is fixed at 25.73 days sidereal.

    At first glance, this plot may seem like a step back from the previous one, but I haven’t monkeyed around with anything in an ad hoc way with this so I think it’s a step forward.

    planetary alignment plot

  38. Gray says:


    I have studied the positioning of the planets with reference to the IMF. The Parker Spiral is an Archimedes Spiral in that its coils radiate equally from the Sun. The planetary distances though are logarithmic containing a Fibonacci placement in their distance from the Sun. This is the crucial harmonic connection.

    The peak periods are then dictated by the placement of the planets on the Parker spiral going to the outermost planets and including Mars as a ‘bridge’ between the inner planets and Jupiter. This explains how Mars can be so influential despite its size in modulating the solar cycle. Surprising as it seems, the outer planets connection with the spiral are for Uranus about three coils out and Neptune about 4.66 coils out though these are rough estimates based on an average solar wind speed of 400km/sec and 26 day solar rotation period.

    The variations in orbital distance and latitude appear to influence whether the planets are within the field lines and potentially influence the polarity change in solar activity. It might be added that the solar wind speed may increase as the planets achieve ‘alignment’ allowing the field lines to ‘connect’.

    I have added an analysis on Jupiter’s Dance along with some illustrations:

    I do think that this calls into question whether a tidal force or barycentre effect is in operation or whether this is a purely electromagnetic and positional, latitudinal effect. I understand fully that this will be contentious however, and at this time it must remain an open question.

  39. Gray says:
    August 30, 2010 at 9:54 am
    That archimides spiral is developing to the apex, so resembling, if seen in the hundreds of years a rumkhorff coil, subjected also to outer influences which may vary the local system.
    Mosetti has observed, on the basis of Vercelli’s periodical analysis that a very great part of major natural phenomena, considered as functions of time, are subject to a general law. Their flutuations may be broken down into a series of periods whose lengths arranged in order of size,form a geometrical progression whose rate is √2.

  40. Gray says:

    Hi Adolfo

    Interesting articles. I note Miles’s use of the charge field to correct his distance calculations. You might like this look at Fibonacci Numbers and a table relating to Bode’s Law.

  41. Roy Martin says:

    Hi Gray,

    And some more about Phi in the Solar System:

  42. Gray says:

    Hi Roy

    Interesting link, I’ve seen the site before but it has expanded greatly over the years and obviously a very detailed analysis of orbital parameters (and a lot more reading). It then leaves the question is the arrangement of the planets within the Parker Spiral responsible for the solar cycle.

    My feeling here is that Mars in many ways holds the key to this, hence the interruption of tallbloke’s thread. Tallbloke is using variations in the solar wind to align the VEJ tidal values to the solar record with some success. However, it may be that the inclusion of Mars positional data enhances that process and may help explain the hemispheric distribution issue. When we were looking at the Timo Niroma bi-modal distribution the first thing that I noted was that the Mars Jupiter synodic period bracketed the two peaks rather neatly but was also central to the average solar cycle period.

    In this it may be the smoking gun.

  43. Tim Channon says:

    Tallbloke, one way or another your engagement with matching up was sidetracked by other activity, ambiguous language intended.

    Do you have any later news or thoughts blow’in on the solar wind?

  44. P.G. Sharrow says:

    Tallbloke; The planetary index vs solar output graph makes it clear to me that the index shows a signal being impressed on the energy output of the main energy dynamo. To me the solar system is like a electronic amplifier. Each part influences the behavior of the others and the sun is the power supply.
    The coupling is both gravitational and electromagnetic. The strength of the local coupling is influenced by the local density, a feature that changes with the material being driven off in the solar wind. While, according to Leif, the total output change is quite small. In a balanced system small changes are obvious. Each component in the system has its’ own internal systems that are both internally and externally powered. Once it becomes accepted that there is coupling then the causes can be determined. pg

  45. tallbloke says:

    Hi all, and apologies for being MIA over the last week. I have been tackling the neglected establishment which is Tallbloke Towers. I’ve been so concentrated on the puzzle I’d been neglecting the fabric of the building and my garden/allotment. I got the harvest in before the rain started last night. 🙂

    Tim, at the moment, I’m letting things sink in so I can work out a properly planned broad based research into this rich area. I think it would be easy to just pick a direction and follow it, and maybe miss the fatter seam.

    P.G. That’s a good overview, and I need help with that, as my understanding of big scale electricity is poor at the moment.

    Gray, Mars is noted; a staging post for energy path conduction, and the last before Jupiter.

  46. Gray says:

    Cool tallbloke, sorry to labour the point!! Maybe we could set up a working party…

  47. P.G. Sharrow says:

    Tallbloke; this is an illistration of your EMF connection of the sun and planets. The CME is pulled / pushed along the connection. Can you see it? pg

  48. tallbloke says:

    Hi PG. Yes, the article discusses CME’s being pulled back into the solar equatorial plane by the heliomagnetic field. It doesn’t seem so definite about deviation of the CME pathways towards planets in the longtudinal direction though. Still interesting, because it is a recognition that the magnetic field is affecting the radiation’s direction.

  49. P.G. Sharrow says:

    You would most likely only see that deviation as the CME approches the planet. The angular momentum would tend to throw the CME as it flows into the magnetic plain. The magnetic field would be least deflected at its’ point of origin and the most deflected at the point of equality between the two. The solar magnetic field is in a spiral due to its’ rotation as is the planets’. The magnetic field flows through the aether flipping it to create lines of force. Energy flows along the lines of force, or I should say that the lines of force are energy in flow along the lines of force as the lines are traveling through the aether.
    When the wind causes waves to form and travel across the water the wind energy is traveling in the water but only a small amount of the water flows in that direction. The aether is a turbulent ocean with waves from all directions of various strengths along with current flows due to differences in local densities. pg

  50. Tenuc says:

    Perhaps CME’s are caused by the magnetic flux ropes, which connect the plants to the sun, are strengthened by certain planetary alignments which allows them to carry more electric current. As with lightening on Earth, this facilitates the discharge the CME from the coronal hole, and restores the solar electrical balance.

    Perhaps no surprise it changes direction to align with the planets.

  51. tallbloke says:

    I think it’s the case that the planets carry charge. The planets with the biggest eccentricities probably build up the biggest charges, and therefore the strongest solar reconnections in proportion to the strength of their magnetocperes. From the animations I’ve seen, CME’s are quite a ‘broadband’ event anyway, with the disturbance rippling outwards from the sun over a large sector of interplanetary space. So it would be difficult I thik to determine whether they are pulled sideways by planets.

  52. Tenuc says:

    tallbloke says:
    September 23, 2010 at 7:42 am
    “So it would be difficult I think to determine whether they are pulled sideways by planets.”

    I don’t think they are pulled Rog, rather they take the route of least resistance along the flux ropes connecting sun and planets. Energy flow always tend to take the easiest route through a medium and always try to dissipate the maximum amount of energy with turbulent flows (MEP theory).

    Just another thought regarding current flow, what work does the current do when it hits a planet? Resistive heating, lightening storms, powering the planetary dynamo???

  53. P.G. Sharrow says:

    I think the bottom line is both gravity and EMF fields warp the atomic dielectric and this causes the observed effects as the atoms try to return to equalibirum. That is both gravity and EMF cause the nucleus to be moved off center in its’ electron shell. This stores energy that will be discharged as the atom tries to equalize its’ condition pg

  54. Gray says:

    This video from Thunderbolts is interesting:

  55. tallbloke says:
    September 23, 2010 at 7:42 am
    I think it’s the case that the planets carry charge. The planets with the biggest eccentricities probably build up the biggest charges

    That´s the origin of eccentricities. Things normal , the harmonic field´s two forces work as the Sum of Sin y+ Cos y; anything else is interferrence. Thus a circular (rather a spiral) is the harmonic state.
    So Copernicus search for harmony was not wrong: Chaos is only in the mind of the beholder; or in those who preach it as their “ethos”.

  56. Don’t know where to post this observation, I’ll try it here…
    I had a forecast for hurricanes that was dependent upon the charge / discharge cycles of the MHD or homopolar generator effects on the earth.
    Charges build up as the outer planets come up to a heliocentric conjunction with the earth, which pushes the jet streams toward the poles, when maintained there due to multiple conjunctions like we just had with Jupiter, Uranus, and Neptune, with Mercury and Venus added in the mix this year.

    The areas between the polar jets and the equatorial jets fills with air mass with a neutral charge and little moisture, as a result of the blending of the ion charge differences in the recent past precipitation.

    Normally with a conjunction with a single outer planet there is a charge increase then a sudden decrease of pole to equator charge that produces surges in rapid condensation on the discharge side of the process, increases the amount of severe weather during that time period.

    In this link to a 48 hour loop (66meg a bit slow loading) it is easy to see the deionized air mass being absorbed as the polar and equatorial jets converge again in the mid-lattitudes, as we come past the Jupiter / Uranus synod focus of solar wind ion flux as the Coronal holes that poured out the magnetic fields close and rotate away from the earth.

    Watch as the dim orange dry areas just fade away as polar and equatorial air masses directly interact over New England and the eastern sea board, with regard to the closing speed of their interactions.

  57. Richard Holle says:
    September 28, 2010 at 9:04 am
    I wish to submit to your consideration the following ideas I have ordered in the following article, which has a closed relation with your “weltanschauung”:

  58. Richard Holle says:
    September 28, 2010 at 9:04 am

    Are those brown clouds, in the link you gave, less charged clouds,and the green-white ones charged? (If without charge they would fall to the ground as rain, after being discharged through lightning).
    Those green ones are young, full of life, and those brown one, like me, a bit discharged by now. 🙂

  59. The brown areas are clear air mostly devoid of charge carriers and as a result have NO clouds, are clear to solar radiation and do not reflect hardly any incoming SW radiation.

    The color of the white to green to red deep blue clouds are color coded to the temperature of the cloud tops which is relative to their height, and convective activity resulting in amount of precipitation output.

    The clouds on the more polar side of the brown dry air masses contain a net negative charge, the clouds more equator ward are more positively charged or lacking in free electrons.

    What I noticed most was the amount of clear cloud free area was decreasing rapidly over most of the globe since the 24th when the Jupiter Uranus conjunction peaked and is mostly due to the rapid equator ward movement of the polar jets globally.

    Ulric keeps going on about faster solar wind, clearer air = more warmth resultant on the surface, here it is in action as far as I can tell. Solar wind now slowing down and the total cloud coverage is growing, Point made and accepted.

  60. P.G. Sharrow says:

    Richard Holle says:
    September 29, 2010 at 12:09 am

    Richard; that is the best explaination I have heard about this concept.
    Thank you. pg

  61. Tenuc says:

    Richard Holle says:
    September 29, 2010 at 12:09 am ….

    Thanks, Richard, for a clear explanation of another way solar activity influences our climate – TSI is not the only important factor, as certain people want us to believe. I think UV atmospheric ozone chemistry is also changed by solar activity cycles, and with less ozone being produced and transported, a higher proportion of penetrating short wave radiation warms the oceans.

  62. @Tenuc says:
    September 30, 2010 at 1:50 pm As M.Vukcevic has shown us many times: The tempertura GMF connection
    All this, amd thanks to “Magister Ludi”:Tallbloke has led me to the electromagnetic connection:
    and as to how waves behave and self-support::

  63. […] between the motion of the planets which determine the Sun’s barycentric motion and the timing and magnitude of the solar cycles and activity such as flares and coronal mass ejections, but no physical […]

  64. Gerry says:

    Tenuc says:
    August 23, 2010 at 9:28 pm
    “Interesting take on what SC24 will look like, with a prediction of cycle max April 2011…”

    BTW: the two links provided both seem to be bad links.
    Yes, it certainly does look like the SC24 SSN and F10.7 peaks were back in April 2011:

    Even if there is a second peak later, as there was in SC23, it will most likely be lower, as it was then, because of the impending Grand Minimum of cycles 24 and 25. Cycle 23 peaked in April. 2000:

    So, it looks like it will be 10 years 11 years , SC23 peak to SC24 peak – Just about the only normal characteristic of these two cycles.

    -Gerry Pease

  65. Gerry says:

    Did I say 10 years? Hah! Exactly 11 years!

    -Gerry Pease

  66. […] inference is supported by an investigation I made independently of Vuk’s work (which I didn’t know about at the time), looking at the […]

  67. […] Ian Wilson, researchers Roy Martin, Ray Tomes, Jean-Pierre Desmoulins, P.A. Semi, and myself. If I missed anyone, shout up and I’ll add your name to this list of J-E-V […]