Russian Scientists report another cosmic origination for cloud condensation nuclei: modulated by planetary motion

Posted: May 22, 2012 by tallbloke in Astrophysics, atmosphere, climate, cosmic rays, Cycles, Electro-magnetism, solar system dynamics
From the suggestions page submitted by Tenuc and translated by Tim C:
UPDATE: Ed Caryl adds a link to the relevant Stozhkov_2008 paper in comments. 
Submitted on 2012/05/22 at 9:19 am

Interesting article on a Russian paper here “Global warming is over, Russian scientists believe.”

“Thus the number of incoming cosmic dust to us must depend on the relative positions of the planets, explained the scientist. “After all, depending on their location changes the trajectory of comets and their number in the space between the Sun and the orbit of Mars, where the zodiacal dust cloud. Based on these considerations, a change in the concentration of cosmic dust and, therefore, the Earth’s climate must be periodic, similar to those observed in the arrangement of the planets, “- said Stozhkov.”

[mod: Google translated text follows: –
Global warming ends: in the years to come the temperature drop across the planet, although its nature and will be sparing. So the forecast today with a shared corr. Tass, scientists from the Physics Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences / LPI /.

Moreover, according to research conducted by employees of Dolgoprudny Research Station of the Institute together with colleagues from Central and Upper-Air Observatory Hydromet Institute of Nuclear Physics, Moscow State University, the process of global cooling has begun. After a peak in 2005, the year is now the average temperature on Earth has decreased by 0.3 degrees and returned to the level of 1996-1997-second period. By the year 2015, scientists believe, it will fall a further one and a half tenths of a degree, which corresponds to the climate of the early 80-ies. The year 2020 has already make the inhabitants of northern latitudes to remember the harsh winters of 1978 and 1979, years, and in 2040 th year of the planet will begin to “freeze.” However, only a relatively high temperature mark for the period from 1880 to 2006-th year. Then we can expect a decrease of temperature of 0.5 degrees Celsius compared with the current measure of “global thermometer”.

As it turned out during the research, the cause of climate change is not related to the activities of human civilization in general is … space. The fact that the Earth’s atmosphere is constantly get cosmic dust particles, the scientists explained. According to various observations, the amount of precipitated dust varies from 400 to 1000 tons per day.

In turn, the dust particles are effective condensation nuclei of water vapor. Thus, the more dust enters the earth, the greater the cloud cover of the planet, the more it reflects into space flux of solar radiation. Consequently, the climate becomes colder. It turned out that the warming and cooling periods coincide with periods when our planet is “rolled up” in a particularly dense cloud of interplanetary “dirt.”

“The main supplier of this dust – comets – told of the party, Chief Scientific Officer Lebedev Physical Institute, Doctor of Physical Mathematical Sciences Yuriy Stozhkov. – When approaching the Sun at a distance of less than two astronomical units, they shed themselves of the frozen them “coats” of gas and dust and gas form the tails. Then the dust enters the earth’s atmosphere, and eventually settles on the surface. ”

Thus the number of incoming cosmic dust to us must depend on the relative positions of the planets, explained the scientist. “After all, depending on their location changes the trajectory of comets and their number in the space between the Sun and the orbit of Mars, where the zodiacal dust cloud. Based on these considerations, a change in the concentration of cosmic dust and, therefore, the Earth’s climate must be periodic, similar to those observed in the arrangement of the planets, “- said Stozhkov.

To test these assumptions, the researchers compared the frequency of pairs of planets in the location and temporal periodicity of the Earth’s global climate change. It turned out that the global temperature data network of meteorological stations and a calculated cosmic dust scientists “traffic” is practically the same. The discrepancy is at most 1-3 per cent. Using the obtained regularities, scientists have made predictions of climate change over the next half century.

Work undertaken – not the first, claiming the periodicity of climate change and, accordingly, the incorrect predictions of global warming, experts say FIAN. One of the confirmations of the calculations of Russian scientists began a study of ice cores extracted from boreholes drilled above Lake Vostok in Antarctica. The longest core length of 3623 m allowed to conclude that changes in temperature over 420,000 years. During this time the Earth was at least four major temperature fluctuations in a big way at 8 degrees! So the upcoming cold spell can be considered gentle. In any case, a century ago, the planet was one degree colder than today. And for a lot of global climate change, say meteorologists.

ITAR-TASS, Alexander Tsyganov

Comments
  1. Edim says:

    It’s the space stupid.

  2. tchannon says:

    This has been suggested as a possible answer to the 100ky ice age problem, although more about galactic.

    Kind of echoes Svensmark too.

  3. tallbloke says:

    I’m going to see if a copy of the paper can be located. In the meantime, it does look interesting, and maybe another way planetary cyclic motions are affecting Earth’s climate. Solar system dynamics is where climate research should be heading, since Nikolov and Zeller have shown that albedo variation is a consequence rather than a cause of changes in surface temperature.

  4. tallbloke says:

    It looks like the lead Russian scientist is cited by Jasper Kirby et al in their Nature paper:

    CORRECTION : He’s a co-author!

    Role of sulphuric acid, ammonia and galactic cosmic rays in atmospheric aerosol nucleation

    Jasper Kirkby, Joachim Curtius, João Almeida, Eimear Dunne, Jonathan Duplissy, Sebastian Ehrhart, Alessandro Franchin, Stéphanie Gagné, Luisa Ickes, Andreas Kürten, Agnieszka Kupc, Axel Metzger, Francesco Riccobono, Linda Rondo, Siegfried Schobesberger, Georgios Tsagkogeorgas, Daniela Wimmer, Antonio Amorim, Federico Bianchi, Martin Breitenlechner, André David, Josef Dommen, Andrew Downard, Mikael Ehn, Richard Stefan Haider, Armin Hansel, Daniel Hauser, Werner Jud, Heikki Junninen, Fabian Kreissl, Alexander Kvashin, Ari Laaksonen, Katrianne Lehtipalo, Jorge Lima, Edward R. Lovejoy, Vladimir Makhmutov, Serge Mathot, Jyri Mikkilä, Pierre Minginette, Sandra Mogo, Tuomo Nieminen, Antti Onnela, Paulo Pereira, Tuukka Petäjä, Ralf Schnitzhofer, John H. Seinfeld, Mikko Sipilä, Yuri Stozhkov, Frank Stratmann, Antonio Tomé, Joonas Vanhanen, Yrjo Viisanen, Aron Vrtala, Paul E. Wagner, Hansueli Walther, Ernest Weingartner, Heike Wex, Paul M. Winkler, Kenneth S. Carslaw, Douglas R. Worsnop, Urs Baltensperger & Markku Kulmala

    Nature 476, 429–433 (25 August 2011) doi:10.1038/nature10343
    Received 09 September 2010 Accepted 24 June 2011 Published online 24 August 2011

    “Atmospheric aerosols exert an important influence on climate1 through their effects on stratiform cloud albedo and lifetime2 and the invigoration of convective storms3. Model calculations suggest that almost half of the global cloud condensation nuclei in the atmospheric boundary layer may originate from the nucleation of aerosols from trace condensable vapours4, although the sensitivity of the number of cloud condensation nuclei to changes of nucleation rate may be small5, 6. Despite extensive research, fundamental questions remain about the nucleation rate of sulphuric acid particles and the mechanisms responsible, including the roles of galactic cosmic rays and other chemical species such as ammonia7. Here we present the first results from the CLOUD experiment at CERN. We find that atmospherically relevant ammonia mixing ratios of 100 parts per trillion by volume, or less, increase the nucleation rate of sulphuric acid particles more than 100–1,000-fold. Time-resolved molecular measurements reveal that nucleation proceeds by a base-stabilization mechanism involving the stepwise accretion of ammonia molecules. Ions increase the nucleation rate by an additional factor of between two and more than ten at ground-level galactic-cosmic-ray intensities, provided that the nucleation rate lies below the limiting ion-pair production rate. We find that ion-induced binary nucleation of H2SO4–H2O can occur in the mid-troposphere but is negligible in the boundary layer. However, even with the large enhancements in rate due to ammonia and ions, atmospheric concentrations of ammonia and sulphuric acid are insufficient to account for observed boundary-layer nucleation.”

  5. Edim says:

    I agree tallbloke. Solar system dynamics is the right word. It’s all coupled and related. The pattern is clear, the forcing(s) not that much. (I’m roughly) reminded of this

  6. tallbloke says:

    Try cutting and pasting this string:

    http://scholar.google.co.uk author:Stozhkov

    Edim: Yes, the mass-debaters over at Deltoid were pooh poohing our research in this area last week (“When Saturn hides behind Jupiter”)

    Clueless tossers. 🙂

  7. This can be related to one of my findings in

    Scafetta N., 2012. A shared frequency set between the historical mid-latitude aurora records and the global surface temperature. Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 74, 145-163.

    http://www.duke.edu/~ns2002/pdf/ATP3507.pdf

    Figure 8 shows the historically recorded meteorite fall, which also shows a 60-year, 10, 30 and 60 year cycles.

    Thus, cosmic dust falling on the Earth should be regulated by the planets.

    In my papers I talk about two mechanisms: one the planets effect solar dynamics and this effects the climate; 2) the planets effect directly the climate through gravitational oscillations of the heliosphere.

  8. adolfogiurfa says:

    Planets´ dynamics or…planets´electromagnetics?. Nicola Scafetta´s last paper: Auroras-GMF-Climate?

  9. “Planets´ dynamics or…planets´electromagnetics?”

    very likely both, as I state in the paper.

  10. tallbloke says:

    Nicola, many thanks for taking the time to answer people’s questions here. A brief survey of Yuri Stozhkov’s 2000 paper suggests a decline in cosmic rays over an extended period in the C20th,
    from 1964 to 1997. What cycle do you think might be underlying that, and do you think the trend nay extend back to the end of the little ice age?

    https://tallbloke.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/stozhkov2000.pdf

  11. Tenuc says:

    The amount of dust reaching Earth will also depend on the solar activity cycle and strength of solar wind as well as position of planets. The solar charge field will tend to remove the dust from the plane of the ecliptic against the pull of gravity.

    So low solar activity – lots of dust, more cosmic rays, more cloud formation to cool Earth – and vice versa. Perhaps long periods of high cosmic dust and rays concentration, along with stage of Milankovitch cycle are responsible observed periodic NH glaciation?

    Some questions…

    Does dust become ionised and move in response to heliosphere current sheet and magnetic field?

    Is the density of galactic dust in spiral arms of our galaxy distributed by similar mechanisms?

  12. edcaryl says:

    This report might be based on this paper.
    http://ecrs2008.saske.sk/dvd/s1.11.pdf

  13. Harriet Harridan says:

    Fascinating. My Russian isn’t what it was, but have a look at the graph here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ft_ICUUjbI4&t=1h16m59s

    It seems to be a prediction of temperature anomaly from the good Prof. Stozhkov. We are going to have to bring out the winter thermals.

  14. tallbloke says:

    Ed: Good find thank you, I’ll add the link to the main post.

  15. tallbloke says:

    The Stozhkov Prediction:


  16. Roger Andrews says:

    Hmmm. Very similar to the Andrews prediction, published on this blog a year ago today. 🙂

    https://tallbloke.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/ra-fig6.png?w=600&h=434

  17. tchannon says:

    Surprisingly the dataset is still available here ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/anomalies/

    As some of you know this problem is trivial here but sorry to say their result is spurious. I can force some of it closer to what they used but this does not lock in on anything as short as 200 years. Based on that data, and as I have seen many times, plateau until another rise to 2060. Has nothing to do with CO2, terrible fit. (that is a tale untold)

    It is effort to show so I don’t.

  18. tallbloke says:

    Tim: Yes, I couldn’t see how they were going to generate that curve with sinusoids from the stated periods either. I wonder what is different. Perhaps they are not using pure sinusoidal functions?

  19. vukcevic says:

    Extrapolation (don’t do predictions) based on the CET 350 year long record
    http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET-NV.htm

  20. tchannon says:

    Rog,
    Conventionally the time resolution which can be obtained from a sampled dataset depends on the time length of the data and the spacing between samples, although there are other details.

    If you want to be fairly sure of 200 years a reasonable rule of thumb is you needs 800 years of data. Whether it is 199 or 201 depends particularly on the time between samples, so if that was 20 years, you ain’t getting much.
    Double edged, if you had 1 day resolution over 800 years, certain practical problems appear.

    The authors declared 200 years on 130 year length data.

    For strangers here, to try and get around this I invented a method which uses in effect shape matching, so that instead of driven by direct math on the data it uses an heuristic such as least squares fit and given part of a clean long period signal it correctly matches, including phase and amplitude, both are severe problems conventionally.

    The question arises of how reliable this is to which I have no answer, will depend on many things.
    Given the usually noise nature of climatic data this is very uncertain, the human has to make a call.

    I view this as more about giving a clue, now human go find cross confirmation but don’t fool yourself.

  21. […] Russian Scientists report another cosmic origination for cloud condensation nuclei: modulated by pla… […]