Gerry Pease: Significant solar-planetary syzygies 1894-2013

Posted: January 16, 2012 by Rog Tallbloke in Energy, Politics, Solar physics, solar system dynamics

Continuing the theme of discussing issues censored and banned at WUWT, here’s an article kindly submitted by Gerry Pease on the subject of solar-barycentric motion caused by the motion of the planets and its relationship (along with tides and electromagnetism) with solar activity levels. I’ve added some additional links to previous Talkshop articles for those who are not up to speed with the field.

“““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““`

Significant solar-planetary syzygies, 8/18/1894 to 5/17/2013 by G.E. Pease

A couple of years ago, I examined Jupiter-resonant solar-planetary syzygies from 1894 to 2007, and was able to construct this plot:

It shows that Jupiter and the inner planets have a dual-track 10.4 year resonant periodicity, with a track separation of just 1.6 years, providing 31 conjunctions between 1894 and 2007 that are 1.6, 8.8, 10.4, and 12 years apart (the 1.6 year separations and separation pairs are the more nearly horizontal lines between the 8.8 to 12 year tracks). Syzygy number is shown as the plot abscissa. Perhaps not coincidentally, the solar cycle periodicity ranges from ~8 to ~14 years.

Throughout this post, I use the U.S. date format of month/day/year. The 28 Jupiter-resonant syzygies plotted above are a representative subset of this group of 31 syzygies: 8/18/1894, 9/13/1903, 4/29/1905, 6/8/1906, 9/16/1915, 5/7/1917, 1/26/1926, 9/20/1927, 6/14/1936, 1/31/1938, 6/16/1948, 3/18/1957, 11/7/1958, 6/21/1960, 4/18/1967, 3/25/1969, 11/8/1970, 12/27/1977, 8/15/1979, 3/28/1981, 12/31/1989, 8/21/1991, 3/30/1993, 5/9/2000, 9/19/2000, 1/2/2002, 7/21/2002, 8/21/2003, 3/4/2004, 4/1/2005, and 11/15/2006.

This year I decided to tabulate all the major solar-planetary syzygies that have occurred from 10/25/2008 to present as well as the ones that will occur through 5/17/2013. These syzygies each involve alignments of the Sun and at least three planets. I start with the last syzygy prior to solar cycle 23 peak in April, 2000 and end with a May, 2013 syzygy that is likely to occur after cycle 24 maximum. If there is a relationship, either gravitational or electromagnetic, between solar-planetary syzygies and solar activity, the hope is that this will be discerned in the form of some meaningful correlations with sunspot number behavior for the interval of interest, as plotted here:

The syzygies themselves can be readily examined graphically using
http://math-ed.com/Resources/GIS/Geometry_In_Space/java1/Temp/TLVisPOrbit.html

Tabulated below, striking characteristics of the alignments include the resonance periodicities between Jupiter and the inner planets. Four Saturn-resonant syzygies previous to cycle 23 minimum are also noteworthy, as is the absence of the latter alignments after Jan, 2006. Other interesting phenomena are the large gaps between syzygy groups seen between 10/25/1998 and 5/9/2000 (heralding cycle 23 max), from 6/14/2001 to 1/2/2002 (following cycle 23 max), from 11/28/2002 to 8/21/2003 (steep decline of cycle 23), from 4/1/2005 to 1/27/2006 (heralding the start of cycle 23 min and including the last Saturn-resonant syzygy in this series), immediately followed by the nearly 10 month gap between 1/27/2006 and 11/15/2006, followed in turn by the 9 month gap to 8/17/2007.

Then we see no less than 14 syzygies from 8/17/2007 through 6/8/2010, followed by a 10 month gap to 4/10/2011! In the first 4 months of 2011, cycle 24 activity suddenly ramped up rapidly, then declined to a low point at 8/16/2011. It then ramped up rapidly again to a peak at 11/6/2011 (2011.849), only to decline just as rapidly. Meanwhile, there will be no syzygies following the one back on 8/16/2011 until 5/24/2012, after which there will be another two this year, and it is anticipated that solar activity will increase again in early 2012.

If a consistent pattern can be construed from the syzygies preceding cycle 23 max and min to those preceding cycle 24 max and min, perhaps it might lead to some insightful comments by readers about what to expect between now and cycle 24 min. For the time being, I will refrain from speculation, but certainly welcome it from others. Finally, if anyone can make a convincing case that there is no consistent relationship between solar-planetary syzygies and solar activity, that too is welcome.

In the tabulation below, S,M,V,E,J denote Sun,Mercury,Venus,Earth,Jupiter.

1998.816 10/25/1998 Saturn&ESV ***
2000.355 5/9/2000 JMSE ****
2000.461 6/17/2000 Saturn&JSM ****
2000.521 7/9/2000 EMS&Mars ****
2000.718 9/19/2000 JSME ****
2001.452 6/14/2001 JSME&Mars****
2002.005 1/2/2002 JESV ***
2002.553 7/21/2002 JMSE ****
2002.909 11/28/2002 Saturn&VSM ****
2003.638 8/21/2003 JVSE ****
2004.174 3/4/2004 JESM ****
2004.754 10/2/2004 J&Mars&SM **
2005.249 4/1/2005 JMSV ****
2006.073 1/27/2006 Saturn&ESM ****
2006.873 11/15/2006 JVSE ****
2007.627 8/17/2007 EVSM ****
2007.841 11/3/2007 JSMV ****
2007.972 12/21/2007 JMSE ****
2008.437 6/8/2008 EMSV ****
2008.811 10/23/2008 JVSM ****
2008.912 11/29/2008 ESM&Mars *
2009.052 1/19/2009 JSME ***
2009.241 3/29/2009 EVSM ***
2009.460 6/17/2009 JVMS ***
2009.608 8/10/2009 Mars&VSM **
2009.794 10/17/2009 JSMV ***
2010.010 1/4/2010 EMSV ***
2010.282 4/13/2010 JSM&Mars **
2010.435 6/8/2010 JMSV ****
2011.273 4/10/2011 JSME ***
2011.419 6/2/2011 JVMS ***
2011.624 8/16/2011 EMSV ****
2012.396 5/24/2012 JMSV ****
2012.642 8/22/2012 JMS&Mars **
2012.775 10/10/2012 Mars&MSV *
2013.375 5/17/2013 JVMS ***

*** Imperfect alignment
**** Good alignment
** Weak tidal force from Mars, good alignment
* Imperfect alignment, weak tidal force from Mars

Web references:

Ching Cheh Hung: Apparent Relations Between Solar Activity and Solar Tides

http://ozwx.plasmaresources.com/wilson/Syzygy.pdf

https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2012/01/16/2010/01/15/what-is-the-solar-planetary-theory/

https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2011/05/12/gerry-pease-comparing-solar-motion-with-solar-activity/

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

Comments
  1. tallbloke says:

    Gerry says:

    It shows that Jupiter and the inner planets have a dual-track 10.4 year resonant periodicity, with a track separation of just 1.6 years,

    It’s also worth noting that Timo Niroma found that the two most likely solar cycle lengths to occur are 10.3 and 11.9 years.

  2. orkneylad says:

    Tallbloke,

    I have been candidly following the developments in ‘SPT’ here for some time, I feel this is essential research in the true spirit of discovery.

    I come at this from a different perspective, in that one is rediscovering ‘lost knowledge’ that has been hidden in metaphor and allusion down the ages, a case in point below:

    Newton and the ‘pipes of Pan’ from Notes and Records of the Royal Society, classical scholia:
    http://ls.poly.edu/~jbain/mms/texts/66McGuire%28Pipes%29.pdf

    Newton here asserts unequivocally that Pythagoras discovered by experiment an inverse-square relation in the vibration of strings; that he extended such a relation to the weights & distances of the planets from the Sun; and that this true knowledge, expressed esoterically, was lost through the misunderstanding of later generations.

    The neo-platonists [Ficino, Mirandola, Digges & Fludd et al] we’re essentially ‘on the right track’ concerning the unified nature of reality, microcosm & macrocosm, the planetary & solar influences on the Earth, all couched in a metaphorical language we dismiss as mysticism and ‘astrology’. Giordano Bruno too, inspired by Nicholas of Cusa, extended the boundaries to suggest an infinite universe with the center ‘everywhere and nowhere’. The only thing they lacked was all this fine empirical data.

    As Socrates said: “learning is remembering” and I am convinced that this is so.

    On a purely practical point, I feel there is much to be gained by modeling the SPT at some future point; by this, I mean a physical representation of the theory in a graphic form that the layman can understand & grasp visually. Since building & animating Euclidean geometry is my day-to-day, I would be happy to offer my expertise pro bono in this area should it be desired at some point in the future.

    My best wishes go with you on your continuing voyage!

    Best,
    Stu

    [Reply] You sir, are a star. I’ll be in touch. Thanks a million!

  3. Joe's World says:

    TB,

    How can it be a true and precise cycle when all of them are slowing down?
    Would that not mean that every moment is unique and only can show cycles that will expand in time?

  4. RACookPE1978 says:

    Note that the “average” 11 year solar sunspot cycle is (at best) only an approximation of the past 23 cycles of alternating positive and negative cycles: It may be instructive to compare various such barycentric plots against the actual peak cycle points of the 22 year negative-to-negative and 22 year positive-to-positive cycles. Irregular changes in the length of past solar cycles may show up when compared to such a stutter-step graph.

    That is, the effect of gravity from the planets on the high-altitude solar atmosphere currents (sunspots and CME’s) may be different in positive and negative cycles.

    Do we know in the past (since the 1600′s) when massive SME events happened? Do we know the extent, duration, and number of CME events over the past 75 years to compare?

  5. Gerry says:

    @RACookPE1978
    “Irregular changes in the length of past solar cycles may show up when compared to such a stutter-step graph.”

    I agree. In particular, I believe there is a wealth of information that should be extractable from dated sunspot drawings made in the 17th century – the century of the mysterious Maunder Minimum. See http://obs.astro.ucla.edu/resourceref.html

    I haven’t even scratched the surface for later times, but a little serious historical research could yield a bonanza of information. Also, a very complete and accurate syzygy ephemeris over the centuries could be compiled using
    http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/horizons.cgi#top,

    This could be a fairly large project. Before going back centuries in time, the next thing I suggest examining is the syzygy ephemeris for 2013 through 2035. I have a sneaking suspicion that this will be an especially exciting period for solar research:-)

  6. Brian H says:

    I can’t quite get the temporal POV of this sentence:
    “Meanwhile, there will be no syzygies following the one back on 8/16/2011 until 5/24/2012, after which there will be another two this year, and it is anticipated that solar activity will increase again in early 2012.”

    Isn’t “this year” 2012? WUWT?
    ;)

    Orkneylad;
    Candidly: In a candid manner, frankly.
    Candid;
    candid (comparative more candid, superlative most candid)

    -Impartial and free from prejudice.
    -Not posed or rehearsed.

    ?? Did you mean you’re being objective in your assessment, or that you’re frankly admitting to following the blog, or something else??
    ___
    TB;
    “There are no coincidences.” Notwithstanding Leif’s reliance on them.

  7. Gerry says:

    @Brian H

    My apologies for the temporal confusion. I should have written “It is anticipated that solar activity will increase again in early 2012. Meanwhile, there will be no syzygies involving three or more planets following the one back on 8/16/2011 until 5/24/2012, after which there will be another two this year.”

  8. orkneylad says:

    Brian – appologies for semantic confusion :-) I mean in an impartial, non prejudicial manner.

  9. markus says:

    “Joe’s World says:
    January 16, 2012 at 12:12 pm

    TB,

    How can it be a true and precise cycle when all of them are slowing down?
    Would that not mean that every moment is unique and only can show cycles that will expand in time?”

    All of them are slowing down and their barycenter remains. The barycenter is the attractor of sunspots not velocity. The Sun produces multivariate cycles of activity and yes she’s slowing down, like the missus.

  10. Brian H says:

    Gerry says:
    January 18, 2012 at 8:28 am

    Meanwhile, there will be no syzygies involving three or more planets following the one back on 8/16/2011 until 5/24/2012, after which there will be another two this year.”

    It’s the ‘this’ which confutheth. It’s an unnecessary reference back to a year which was never specified, except implicitly in the date of the posting. With the internet’s eternal memory, one can’t assume the comment is current.

    I suggest “… 5/24/2012, with another two during the year” or “with another two by the end of the year”.
    ;)
    —–
    orkneylad;
    be careful about claiming objectivity and impartiality. Better to let others make such judgments. Beware the man who loudly claims to be honest! He’s trying to sell you a pig in a poke.

  11. Brian H says:

    Joe’s World says:
    January 16, 2012 at 12:12 pm

    TB,

    How can it be a true and precise cycle when all of them are slowing down?
    Would that not mean that every moment is unique and only can show cycles that will expand in time?

    I think it just means they’re all on the downslope of an even longer, bigger cycle.

  12. [...] Solar physics, solar system dynamics 0 A Syzygy Pattern Emerges!  by G.E. Pease Follow-up to https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2012/01/16/gerry-pease-significant-solar-planetary-syzygies-1894-2013… For this follow-up post I decided to re-examine, edit, re-tabulate, and extend the previously [...]