Leif Svalgaard: Is Solar Activity Modulated by Astronomical Cycles?

Posted: December 14, 2011 by tallbloke in Astronomy, Astrophysics, Solar physics, solar system dynamics
Tags: , , , , ,

I have been alerted to a presentation given by Dr Leif Svalgaard to the AGU Fall meeting by regular contributor Gerry. In it, Leif covers, from his own perspective, the history of attempts to find a link between planetary motion and solar activity.  He also includes tidal calculations and discusses gravitational considerations, but does not discuss electromagnetism, which is a shame.

The paper is available at Leif’s site here:

http://www.leif.org/research/AGU%20Fall%202011%20SH34B-08.ppt

I think there is a lot to criticise here, and I’m grateful to Leif Svalgaard for making a definitive statement which we will be able to refer to in the future.

A few quotes culled by Gerry:

“When Rudolf Wolf devised the sunspot number he noted [1859] that the length of the cycle was close to the orbital period of Jupiter.”

“From time to time since then, the idea that the planets create/control/modulate the solar cycle has been put forward”

“At the end of his life [1893] Wolf remarked that this research (by him and others) never produced any really satisfactory results”

“The astronomical cycles mimic a basic solar dynamo with period 10.81 yr which is amplitude modulated by a ~120 yr ‘grand’ cycle”

“Smallness of the forces is a general problem with all proposed mechanisms”

“So far, no star cycles synchronized with any exoplanets have been found”

Comments
  1. vukcevic says:

    I wouldn’t take it seriously. On page 12 the ‘old fox’ shows spectra for two blocks, before and after 1917, as two distinct oscillation periods.
    This indicates that the sun’s seductive ‘pole dancing’ around a central frequency strictly monitored by an outside governor.
    http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN-Vfspec.htm

  2. adolfogiurfa says:

    @Vukcevic: Is it that about 5 hz?.

  3. vukcevic says:

    A think it is bit less than that
    1/120 month =1/ [86400 sec x 365(days) x 10(yr)] = 3.17*10^-9 = 3.17 nHz

  4. Gray says:

    Hi tallbloke

    I note your interest in the electromagnetic aspect regarding this as I feel it is central to the issue. Although I probably shouldn’t have made a definitive statement in http://www.jupitersdance.com/thefinalwaltz , as an electromagnetic cause was closer to a guess/hunch than science, I’d hoped that someone else might have looked into the positional aspect of the planets relative to the solar peaks and the Parker Spiral.

    The electromagnetic positions seemed to have some mileage as a theory although I am at a loss as to how a method could be devised to present the positional data effectively. I would also accept that the ideas in the page are less well stated than I would have liked.

    Whilst Leif has put forward a sceptical viewpoint I feel that the proper riposte is to offer an alternative theory encompassing the electromagnetic aspect. Are you feeling brave?

  5. Ursus Augustus says:

    It may be difficult to establish a quantitative mechanism linking planetary motions and solar activity since my instinct is that the magnitude of the phenomena we observe is probably the result of resonance over many, many cycles. In other words the planets do their thing and gravity and whatever applies an influence to the sun. Over time the most noticeable residual manifestations will be those that happen to resonate with the excitation frequencies, all others remaining at first order ( i.e. direct influence ) magnitudes.

    The problem then becomes doing the maths to establish what might resonate at the observable excitement frequencies and what sort of resonant amplitude operator is likely.

    It is similar to Darwinian evolution in that only the successful models ( resonating mechansims) remain over time.

    Resonance may also explain some of the longer period variations as beats rather than resulting from some larger period excitation.

  6. Ulric Lyons says:

    @Ursus Augustus says:
    December 15, 2011 at 5:12 am

    “It may be difficult to establish a quantitative mechanism linking planetary motions and solar activity since my instinct is that the magnitude of the phenomena we observe is probably the result of resonance over many, many cycles.”

    We already have excellent correlation of planetary motions and the solar cycle itself, the one that Leif is aware of but avoided mentioning as he cannot rubbish it, the Ju/Ea/Ve cycle. I personally can track back through a few thousand years of records and identify precise configurations responsible for particular seasonal or monthly terrestrial temperature anomalies. Such observations are the best clues as what the mechanisms really are.

  7. vukcevic says:

    Electro-magnetic feedback loop
    L.S. Planetary influences would be stationary.
    MAV: No certainly it would not, if an electromagnetic effect is in the link. I am very familiar with something called ‘self exciting oscillation hunting’. Delay is esential, gravity has no delay, magnetic flux rope takes a year to hit heliopause.
    Here is definition as per wikipedia, a bit more accurate than mine would be:
    Self-exciting oscillations are a logical consequence of systems which are described by a closed loop of time-lagged differential equations, i.e. where a change in variable N (sun’ magnetic change) is driven by a change in variable N+1 (Jupiter magnetic link) but only after a time delay, a change in variable N+1 is driven by a change in variable N+2 (Saturn’s magnetic connection), but only after a time delay, …
    ‘self exciting oscillation hunting’ is common in the unstable systems susceptible to ‘random’ oscilations.
    As expressed in the ‘Vukcevic formula’ , Jupiter & (Jupiter+Saturn i.e. change in variable N+1 is driven by a change in variable N+2) and not as L.S. presented it Jupiter N+1 & Saturn N+2 acting independently.
    Wiki quotes some examples in electro & mechanical systems.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-exciting_oscillation
    I may come back to it after SC24 shows how close or far my formula cames to the reality.

  8. Leif Svalgaard: Is Solar Activity Modulated by Astronomical Cycles?
    Posted: December 14, 2011 by tallbloke

    I have been alerted to a presentation given by Dr. Leif Svalgaard to the AGU Falleeting by regular contributor Gerry. In it, Leif covers, from his own perspective, the history of attempts to find a link between planetary motion and solar activity. He also includes tidal calculations and discusses gravitational considerations, but does not discuss electromagnetism, which is a shame.

    Science has not to show what is not. Science has to show what IS. Moreover, science is the capability to recognize correlations of natural functions for that they can be fit in the laws of nature. If natural functions are not matched to a defined ‘xyz index’ this does not mean that there is no connection. I do not know what ‘solar activity’ is.

    I have some problems with units used in the community. I make use of the Julian or Gregorian calendar in years [a], of a frequency in [1/a] or [ a^-1]. Because the perpetual motion of the celestial bodies is mostly varying from its eccentric paths, I take always the very real path function from the NASA ephemeris. It makes no sense to make FFT analyse of climate spectra, because this selects only sinusoidal frequencies. A period say nothing. A Gleissberg cycle says nothing. What is a temperature proxy curve for one year in the unit BP? What is present?

    If we ask for possible connections between the triangle of terrestrial global temperature, planets and Sun in respect to frequencies or time spectra, we have to take the real eccentric motion of the planets, especially if we would like to argue on tidal effects.

    That there is a hard evidence of this triangle can be recognized from known facts:
    It would be great to simulate the hole dynamic solar system as perpetual motion using the physics of thermodynamic, heat currents and heat sources, and if this do not match with the size of a computer, we have to make it by Excel or by hand.

    The example may be the nature of the sea level profiles in time. The University of Colorado has published a graph of the global mean sea level with a linear fit of the rising level of about 3.2 mm per year since 1993.

    Beside some anomalies visible after a 60 day smooth a dropping of the sea level of 6 mm in the year 2010 was discussed in the science community. But a detailed view on the oscillations before the 60 day smooth shows that the frequency of the mean oscillation superimposed to the linear increasing sea level is about 117 maxima in 18.655 years or 6.271 periods per year.
    This is remarkable, because the synodic frequency of the planet couple of Mercury/Earth of 3.1519 periods per year [sf_me_er = 4.15194 – 0.99996 = 3.1519 a^-1] is exactly the half of the sea level oscillation frequency from Jason-2 data of 6.271 periods per year.

    It seems that there is no cause visible for a longtime linear sea level rise of 3.2 mm per year, but I think it makes sense to analyse the mysterious superimposed frequency of twice the synodic Mercury/Earth frequency for several reasons.

    The tidal effect on the Sun from the different bodies are, if Earth = 1.0: Jupiter = 2.26, Venus 2.15, Mercury at perihelion = 1.9, and Mercury at aphelion = 0.54.

    This means that the tide effects from the couple of Mercury/Earth on the Sun are varying depending on the distance of Mercury from its eccentric path.

    The question comes up, why the measured global sea level do rise and fall synchronous with the tide system of Sun, Mercury and Earth. But moreover, the oscillations of the global temperature measured from UAH fits in this tide profile:

    In the strong period of the sea level height variation of 6.271 periods per year are several phase jumps, and amplitude variations which suggest one or more similar frequencies as the synodic tide frequency of Mercury/Earth. And adding three more synodic pattern from the couples of Venus/Earth, Mercury/Jupiter, and Earth/Jupiter because of their expected high tide effects the blue line results as a sum of the solar tide effects corresponding in geometry with the sea level oscillations.

    This shows that here is a connection between the solar tide effects and the global temperatures on Earth, along with a time coherent global sea level swing of some mm.

    A rough calculation shows that a temperature change of 0.1°Cel of 1000 m deep ocean part results in a height change of ~23 mm because from the property of water. Whatever is the cause of this sea level dynamic of the substracted 3.2 mm per year function, solar tide effects of some planets play a role in this up and downs of as well sea level and SST. There are hints that other solar tide like couples beyond Jupiter can take a long term increase of the global temperature, which could explain the seeming ‘linear’ ocean height rise of 3.2 mm per year in the last 18 years.

    However, it will take good ideas from physics to explain the shown connection between solar tide geometries, the sea level change on Earth and terrestrial climate frequencies as a heat current from the Sun.

    Science has not to show what is not. Science has to show what IS.

    Remark: This is a hard time in 2011 AD for valid argued news. Two month ago my home page (8.8 million views) was blocked for 14 days from Tripod people. I could read a text in a Tripod screen window in red letters on a white background ‘Suspected abuse’. No any reason given. Last year I was blocked for ever in a German climate forum why ever. Seems not only published revolutionary ideas from real Nowhere Man must be crime, it seems also that justice has bend by VIP’s to a nonlinearity; it depends on the position in the important hierarchy whether one is free from causality (Karma) or not.

    Best

    V.

  9. pochas says:

    vukcevic says:
    December 14, 2011 at 3:02 pm

    “On page 12 the ‘old fox’ shows spectra for two blocks, before and after 1917, as two distinct oscillation periods.”

    1917 is the year of the first solar max of the most recent solar orbital trefoil. (Charvatova, 2000)

    Click to access angeo-18-399-2000.pdf

    Here is the most recent trefoil as computed by Carsten Arnholm (with permission) and annotated by me with the years of the odd cycle solar max marked. The cycle number is indicated.

    Note that the trefoil seems to synchronize the solar activity cycle, and of course this would account for the spectra shifting at exactly that point in time.

    I believe the most probable mechanism is indeed magnetic. It involves the sun wobbling about in the interplanetary magnetic field of its own creation which is anchored by the solar wind and which exerts a small influence on the near-surface toroidal fields, stretched close to the breaking point by differential rotation and causing reconnection events and hence sunspots.

  10. Geoff Sharp says:

    The link to the powerpoint didnt work for me, but it is available from here http://www.leif.org/research/

    That Leif wasted so much effort on this type of presentation at the AGU conference is quite amazing and shows the level of concern within the Babcock camp, the evidence is starting to overwhelm. The major weakness in Leif’s propaganda is his failure to understand FFT analysis does not work with planetary cycles. I have gone to great lengths to point this out to him but he still manages to ignore. I was invited to do a AGU presentation 2 years ago, finances and timing was an issue but would love to fire back at Svalgaard in a future opportunity if it exists.

    The exoplanet scene with its ever increasing data will no doubt prove the existence of planetary influence on stars, we just have to wait a little longer to gather data on the magnetic variance on distant stars. Our solar system is unique so far, most likely in regard to grand minimum type occurrences but we should be able to detect star spot activity eventually on some of the systems mentioned in the Perryman et al paper.

    The raid on tallbloke is outrageous, but at least the planetary profile will get another boost.

  11. Gray says:

    Interesting comments Ulric and Geoff.

    Ulric, do you have a link for the, “I personally can track back through a few thousand years of records and identify precise configurations”

    I would be most interested in the configurations. Thanks

  12. Carla says:

    Geoff Sharp says:
    December 16, 2011 at 12:00 am

    ..The exoplanet scene with its ever increasing data will no doubt prove the existence of planetary influence on stars, we just have to wait a little longer ..

    ~
    Carla says:
    December 15, 2011 at 8:37 pm
    Tallbloke when you get a chance check out “sun-like star,” following article and its spiral from the birds eye view. very very cool spiral structure emerges. Then check the movie and note the planetary bodies inside the helio current sheet.

    Spiral Arms Point to Possible Planets in a Star’s Dusty Disk
    10.19.11

    A new image of the disk of gas and dust around a sun-like star is the first to show spiral-arm-like structures. These features may provide clues to the presence of embedded but as-yet-unseen planets.
    ..”What we’re finding is that once these systems reach ages of a few million years, their disks begin to show a wealth of structure — rings, divots, gaps and now spiral features,” said John Wisniewski, a collaborator at the University of Washington in Seattle. “Many of these structures could be caused by planets within the disks.”..
    http://www.nasa.gov/topics/universe/features/possible-planets.html

    hmm our system has planets and some might hefty ones toooo..

    Geoff slide 4 and 7 of Leifs presentation concerning tidal waves and bulges you might want to consider relationship to helio current sheet. What I thought I was seeing the other day playing around with the rise and fall of helio current sheet and location of Jovian mass was while they are spread out in there orbits it is flat and when gathered within a hemisphere it is up. And it was most curious. That the rise of the helio current sheet isn’t dependent on sunspots or their size or their magnetic strength or lack of.

  13. Carla says:

    ..”What we’re finding is that once these systems reach ages of a few million years, their disks begin to show a wealth of structure — rings, divots, gaps and now spiral features,” said John Wisniewski, a collaborator at the University of Washington in Seattle. “Many of these structures could be caused by planets within the disks.”..
    http://www.nasa.gov/topics/universe/features/possible-planets.html

    The ring structures, mentioned in the article are very curious..
    hmm bulges and tidal waves, ring structures in the HCS, ring structures interacting with nearby ring structures, sounds wavy.

    Happy Friday and I’m not trying to crash your thread here.

    Just a quick thought question.

    Instead of trying to see a tidal influence of the Jovians on the Solar surface, look at the potential influence on the inner ring structure <1AU. I've seen some curious accretion models depicting a second bow shock and magnetic pause for a region nearer the sun. Maybe an extended corona heating a nearer to the sun corona..

  14. Carla says:

    Brain dribble..

    When we think about tidal influences of Jovian planets on their surroundings do we think inwards towards the sun or outwards away from the sun or both. I like to add upwind of the sun and downwind. And in this new dark age a flat polar region..

  15. kuhnkat says:

    I wonder if this, on planetary scale, would add a measurable amount of heating??

    http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-12-year-quest-isolate-thermoelectric-effect.html

  16. Volker Doormann says:

    kuhnkat says:
    December 19, 2011 at 5:59 am

    I wonder if this, on planetary scale, would add a measurable amount of heating??

    http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-12-year-quest-isolate-thermoelectric-effect.html

    …. http://doormann.tripod.com/physstatsol231871974.pdf

    V.

  17. P.G. Sharrow says:

    @Kuhnkat
    @Volker Doorman
    The creation of phonons and magnons is further technobabble for observations of the effects of Aether. See my positions at:

    http://pgtruspace.wordpress.com/pictorial-schematic-of-device/gravity-is-a-myth/electric-theory/

    http://pgtruspace.wordpress.com/pictorial-schematic-of-device/gravity-is-a-myth/aether/

    We need to simplify this pantheon to get a handle on cause and effect of EMF activities. pg

  18. adolfogiurfa says:

    @P.G.: You are right: We need to simplify this pantheon..

    That “Aether” it is not other than the resistance of the medium, it is the force “out there” opposing the development of a wave, as in the simple and known phenomenon of diffraction of light in a glass filled with water.
    I will tell it to you the following way: Just imagine you have a force, make it equal to ONE (1), say a charged rubbed rod, then approach it to an empty Leyden bottle condenser; as it is empty then let us give it the corresponding value= ZERO (0). The force will discharge into the void, but how?:

    Do you see?: There is a “discharge” (a current!) going from 1 to fill 0, but why in a wavy manner? ( a Birkeland current)…because both forces (the one described as the development of a Sin and the one described as a Cos curve, both: an alternate current), however it does not go straight ahead as it is opposed by the medium “out there”: a bigger EM field (the interplanetary EM environment in the case of a solar CME), that resistance to it is the same as the one called in electricity electric resistance.
    That “opposing medium”, that external field, that “aether”, may be composed of planets, neutrons, neutrinos, whatever you wish. Reality repeats itself, so it is a maddening affair to keep on digging in for smaller particles: See?, there are several parameters in the three dimensions: X,Y,Z; X´,Z´,Y¨; X”,Y”,Z”, etc. which repeat themselves.
    Then reality becomes “reality” whenever a charge discharges, and it can be represented, in all its stages by the values taken in this process between 1 and 0 within defined parameters. But,because of the previous existence of a greater, bigger, external, field, no matter how empty-as the interstellar space, in our cosmos-it opposes its development, its trajectory, unless surplus energy is added to keep it straight. This is why sound development has turning points where it changes direction: the “gaps” or intervals.
    This is really Einstein´s breakthrough: The relativity of dimensions (=sizes of parameters), but he failed in viewing the analogy of everything, the unity of the field. Ask yourself: What would it be for us the earth if the observer (we) are of a size say of a hundred thousand light years?…How would we call it that a so tiny a particle?
    Thus, it happens also, that the most “economical” trajectory for a phenomenon to develop is the spiral, because it is the result of a moving current composed of two initial forces at an angle of 90º: Magnetism and Electricity, being opposed by the outer media, by a third force: resistance, that bigger EM out there.
    Now go to your piano keyboard a create a universe!

  19. kuhnkat says:

    Volker,

    I am unclear how the paper you linked answers my question. It appears that their results are partially based on the temp of the material and not on the change of temp due to the effect?

  20. kuhnkat says:

    PG,

    I am rather new to the Electric Universe theories, but, I would tend to agree with you from my somewhat ignorant position.

  21. Volker Doormann says:

    Hi all,

    I do not really know what is discussed here. Above in the thread I have shown the link in a graph between the solar tide functions of relevant planets, the terrestrial temperatures and the terrestrial sealevel oscillations as reply to the paper of Leif Svalgaard. There is no discussion yet. I have some hints about the physics of that link. In the years of 1970 to 1974 I have made measurements on the magnon drag effect using spin waves in YIG and InSb. I have no idea why this effect is connected to the link.

    Ludwig Wittgenstein said: “A philosopher who is not taking part in discussions is like a boxer who never goes into the ring.”

    V.

  22. tallbloke says:

    Hi Volker, welcome to the talkshop, and thanks for your support for the fighting fund.
    I’ve been training in a different boxing ring for the last few days, and it will be a little while longer before I get the opportunity to re-engage with the science I love discussing. Please keep an eye on the thread and we’ll have a good discussion in the quieter times around Christmas. You can make a small comment and click the “Notify me of follow-up comments via emai” button below the reply text box to get a nudge when new comments come along.

    Cheers

    Rog

  23. Volker Doormann says:

    adolfogiurfa says:
    December 19, 2011 at 6:11 pm

    That “Aether” it is not other than the resistance of the medium, it is the force “out there” opposing the development of a wave, as in the simple and known phenomenon of diffraction of light in a glass filled with water.

    Hi,

    the vacuum/Aether has a resistance of 377 Ohm or 377 V/A. A resistance is no force. A force has the dimension of [V A s m^-1].

    Just imagine you have a force, make it equal to ONE (1), say a charged rubbed rod, then approach it to an empty Leyden bottle condenser; as it is empty then let us give it the corresponding value= ZERO (0). The force will discharge into the void,

    A force has the dimension of [V A s m^-1]. A condenser has the dimension of [ A sec V^-1]. You can fill it with a load of [A sec].

    That “opposing medium”, that external field, that “aether”, may be composed of planets, neutrons, neutrinos, whatever you wish.
    Reality repeats itself, so it is a maddening affair to keep on digging in for smaller particles:

    ?

    There are several parameters in the three dimensions: X,Y,Z; X´,Z´,Y¨; X”,Y”,Z”, etc. which repeat themselves.

    There are no three dimension in physics, because a length or space is no force. Space is not to be measured, it is a phantom. It cannot have and end and it cannot have no end, because the aether resistance is nonlocal. *)

    Then reality becomes “reality” whenever a charge discharges, and it can be represented, in all its stages by the values taken in this process between 1 and 0 within defined parameters.

    What is reality? Reality is not a term in physics. It is a state in the consciousness of a living body. No one can show reality.

    This is really Einstein´s breakthrough: The relativity of dimensions (=sizes of parameters), but he failed in viewing the analogy of everything, the unity of the field.

    Einstein?

    He had a belief in a velocity, but a velocity is not an observable in physics.

    Fields are good. V/m .

    A load is good. A sec.

    A ‘mass’ of: 1.7801 * 10-36 [V A sec3 m-2] is equal to an Energy of 1[eV].

    From this we can clean up the dimensions kg and Newton to the trash.

    A force F [N] has then the dimension [V A s m-1].

    The pressure P in [kg m s-2 m-2] has then the dimension [V A s3 m-3].

    The angular moment D [kg m2 sec-1] has then the dimension [V A s2] and is equal to Planck’s constant h. Multiplied by a frequeny [1/s] is is an energy [V A s].

    The gravitational constant g [m3 kg-1 s2] has then the dimension [m5 s-5 V-1 A-1].

    The gravitational force F [ g x m1 x m2 x r-2 ] has the dimension [V A s m-1].

    Because ‘mass’ m [kg] = E * µ0 * epsilon0 (permeability and permittivity of the universe) there is no need for a mass anymore {numbers are power numbers}.

    Now go to your piano keyboard a create a universe!

    There is nothing to create, because all IS (energy). One only can recognise the order of nature, which IS.

    I think it is senseless to do physics without using relevant dimensions.

    *) There is no time in physics. Time has no end. It is a social defined term.

    There is only a timeless present.

    If there is a resonance of the bodies of Jupiter to Saturn of 5:2 in the frequency, there is no (delay) time involved in the resonance. From that it is impossible to say, how a causality (as a following process) is working.

    Today’s physics is fixed on causality processes, a -> b. But if we make use of fields which ARE, it seems that something is easier to understand.

    Best

    V.

  24. P.G. Sharrow says:

    @kuhnkat says:
    December 19, 2011 at 7:00 pm

    I, as well, am fairly ignorant of this Electric Universe thing. I arrived at my view point by examining all the known facts and then put them together to fit my own satisfaction. I have been studying independent of main stream physics for nearly 60 years. Electricity has been a fascination since I was a child and I helped my electrician father wire a house. pg

  25. P.G. Sharrow says:

    @Volker Doormann says:
    December 19, 2011 at 7:51 pm ;

    Apologize for not reading both of your links of 10:50 am. Even though I am a fairly good speed reader I sometimes pass over links.

    The B.Schneider paper, Magnetostatic Wave Drag on Electrons, of 1973, that you assisted with. Appears to me to be an addition to the paper by Biefield, Brown that reported on electrostatic field effects on mass/inertia of matter. The most striking thing to me was the unexpected change around 80K. Super conduction effects of very low temperatures?

    Electrostatic (non current) effects show up as warpage of the dielectric atomic structure. That is, the center of mass, the nucleus, is pushed or pulled from it’s center of being, it’s electron shell. As the ac frequency is increased the wave form size gets to be smaller and therefor it’s effect changes in relation to the atomic size. pg

  26. Volker Doormann says:

    @P.G. Sharrow says:
    December 19, 2011 at 11:43 pm
    Electrostatic (non current) effects show up as warpage of the dielectric atomic structure. That is, the center of mass, the nucleus, is pushed or pulled from it’s center of being, it’s electron shell. As the ac frequency is increased the wave form size gets to be smaller and therefor it’s effect changes in relation to the atomic size.

    ?

    Why there is a current floating loading a condensor, if between the condensor plates are only a perfect vacuum an no electrons?

    >> Is Solar Activity Modulated by Astronomical Cycles? <<

    Context?

    V.

  27. Volker Doormann says:

    tallbloke says:
    December 19, 2011 at 8:20 pm

    Hi Volker, welcome to the talkshop, and thanks for your support for the fighting fund.
    I’ve been training in a different boxing ring for the last few days, and it will be a little while longer before I get the opportunity to re-engage with the science I love discussing. ..

    Hi Rog, thank you for the welcome on your talkshop. Since I have solved the climate code, in February 2010, I think I have done and published in the IN (+ WUWT) some hundred of GHI temperature proxy comparison graphs – the last one in this L. S. – thread on your blog – without any topic response.

    Must be my fate.

    Best

    V.

    Click to access ghi_solar_s.pdf

    [Reply] Hang in there Volker, I’ll be back when time permits. – Rog

  28. P.G. Sharrow says:

    @Volker Doormann says:
    December 20, 2011 at 7:09 am ; Warpage of dielectric

    In electronic engineering we are taught that the capacitance warpage takes place within the insulative dielectric between the “plates”. Actually the warpage takes place within all the material that is within the influence of the charge field, even the plate material. It is just a lot easier to do the calculations by ignoring the plate material and measuring the distance and quality of the space or material between the plates. Tesla taught that that we must consider both the inductance and the capacitance of the wires in a coil due to the charge difference and surface area between each of the turns.

    As to >> Is Solar Activity Modulated by Astronomical Cycles? << This is the point of much of the discussion on this blog. I would suggest you go through all the posts and comments of the last year to get an idea of the thought on this subject and then makeup your own mind. pg

  29. Volker Doormann says:

    P.G. Sharrow says:
    December 20, 2011 at 4:02 pm
    @Volker Doormann says:
    December 20, 2011 at 7:09 am ; Warpage of dielectric

    In electronic engineering we are taught that the capacitance warpage takes place within the insulative dielectric between the “plates”. Actually the warpage takes place within all the material that is within the influence of the charge field, even the plate material. It is just a lot easier to do the calculations by ignoring the plate material and measuring the distance and quality of the space or material between the plates. Tesla taught that that we must consider both the inductance and the capacitance of the wires in a coil due to the charge difference and surface area between each of the turns.

    Hi P.G., your words tell me you have studied the nature of the inseparable phenomena called electromagnetism.

    Because of this it waits that the two vacuum constants should be unified. All electromagnetic oscillators have a resistance nature – free from a dissipative or dispersive nature – for its center frequency as well as the aether/vacuum of 377 Ohm:

    377 [V/A] = (µ0/epsilon0)^-2 = (4Pi*1.0*10^-7 [V sec / A m] / 8.85416*10^-12 [A sec / V m]) ^-2 =

    141926.2 [V*V/A*A]^-2 = 376.7 [Ohm] .

    If this unification has done, there is no time [sec] and no space [m] needed anymore. Time and space are only appearing inseparable as one phenomena (the social definitions of time and space are silly).

    I think the alocal nature of a resistance of the aether/vacuum can lead to a new point of view without space and without time. And this seems to me necessary, because the old fashion causality of cause and effect has problems. If each cause must have a cause, when does start causality? Has causality and end? Is there a cause and no effect?

    From this problem we can shift to the conservation of energy as we know it from the angular momentum. It means that it is possible that there are motion exchanges in the solar system without loss in the angular momentum; but it could be possible that these motion act on the inner fusion process in the sun. And because there is a correlation between the Solar Neutrino Capture rate (SNU) and the solar tide function GHI 8, and the SST temperature, there must be a (hidden?) link.

    However, I think until there is a taboo on all this alternative climate research, it seems senseless to argue on.

    As to >> Is Solar Activity Modulated by Astronomical Cycles? << This is the point of much of the discussion on this blog. I would suggest you go through all the posts and comments of the last year to get an idea of the thought on this subject and then makeup your own mind. Pg

    Thank you. I have given my posting above.

    V.

  30. Ulric Lyons says:

    @Gray says:
    December 16, 2011 at 12:59 am
    “I would be most interested in the configurations. Thanks”

    Although some major aspects are straightforward, there are complexities and subtleties that I have been working through, by both hind-casting and forecasting land temperature deviations from normals. I recently got a better understanding of how ENSO responds to the solar signal, which enables a more coherent picture of global temperatures, as land and ocean temp`s often move in opposition. So I am closer to a full presentation that meaningfully expresses observations. There are a few examples I gave on this thread:
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/05/suns-magnetics-coming-alive-again/#comment-384919