My Thanks to Paul Vaughan, who has sent me a plot he has made of the variation in the rate of solar rotation determined by Russian scientists A. G. Tlatov and V. I. Makarov in their 2005 paper ’22-Year Variations of the Solar Rotation’ and Jupiter-Earth-Venus alignment cycles. The J-E-V cycle and it’s close synchrony with solar activity indicators such as sunspot number and solar rotation has been a subject of investigation on this blog since it started in 2009. Many contributors have offered new insight to this fascinating subject, and there is now a substantial body of peer reviewed literature in this area, as well as many articles on this site from Astrophysicist 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 investigators.
I’ve asked Paul to tell us something about the derivation for the alignment cycle, and I’ll update this post with more info soon. In the meantime, here’s the intro to the Russian paper which is available here.
We have studied the rotation of the solar atmosphere on the basis
of synoptic charts for 117 years (1887 – 2003) and derived the latitude-time
diagrams for variation of the rotation periods in the interval of latitude +/-45 degrees.
We determined the periods within 8 to 12 year “windows”, subsequently shifting
the “window” along the data set, which makes it possible to reveal long-term
variations in the solar rotation. It has been shown, that within the interval of
latitude +/-20 degrees, the basic rotation period of the background magnetic field of the
Sun is 22 years. During odd cycles of solar activity, the rotation rate decelerates
while during even cycles, more rapid rotation is observed. When the sampling
“window” increases to around 17 years, the 55 to 60 year quasi – period of
rotation can be recognized. In this case, the maximum rotation velocity falls
roughly on years 1930 and 1990. We consider possible generation of the solar
cycle by 22-year period torsion waves interacting with relic magnetic field.
[Ian Wilson thinks they have the acceleration and deceleration reversed, see comment below. It appears to be an undecided issue, so I’ve removed his suggested correction from the abstract pending further discussion and data.]