Spotless Sun

[webolife]

Oh, I don't know... in terms of the Z-pinch effect, I would think more stars should appear like that half/half star... the vectors would still indicate a higher pressurization on one side than the other, as in the "north" pole of the star would differ from the "south" pole. Maybe it's a matter of analyzing different parts of the stellar spectra to see if this is so.

[junglelord]

Does anyone remember seeing an article about a star that was half-lit, half-dark? Like it had a sunspot over half of it's entire surface?
Basically it seemed to be halfway between a yellow star and a brown dwarf.

I think the existence of a star that has a sunspot over more than 50% of it's surface refutes the possibility that sunspots are 'pressure leaks', wouldn't it?

However, if it's like Prof. Scott says, and that half of this star is under stress and in glow mode, and the other half half is in dark current mode- that seems to jive with the observation better, if you ask me.

Mike H.

HD12545, That is the star in question.

[seasmith]

How this "spotless" cycle compares with historical data:

Out of the numbered solar cycles, #24 is now in 7th place. Only 5, 6, and 7 of the Dalton Minimum and cycles 12, 14, and 15 of the Baby Grand Minimum had more spotless days. Since we’ve now beaten cycle #13, we are clearly now competitive with the Baby Grand minimum.

Courtesy of Paul Stanko

~s~

[4realScience]

I vote for vukcevicon this topic. I admit I have not checked his calculations -only looked at his purported results. ( Page 1 on this topic.)

http://www.vukcevic.co.uk/graph1.gif

It looks like he has recognized and formalized the link between sunspot activity and the major planets orbital periods.

This makes complete sense to me in the because I understand the math theory, the Fourier transform, that shows the fundamental frequencies (in this case orbital periods) that combine (interfere and reinforce) to produce the overall resultant sunspot signal. Look at his post. His blue line( the predicted signal ( from orbital periods) follows the main contour of the sunspot signal. If his calcs are right, this is conclusive evidence that major planets are interacting in some way with the sun.

Who else has a predictive math model of sunspots?

For those who think he is mainly a dreaded curve-fitter, relax. This is not exactly curve fitting (main actors are fixed). Its Fourier analysis. In this regime we define a set of primary actors ( that supply fundamental frequencies at known phases (orbital periods and current locations of their associated planets) ) and run interference equations until we get a fit. What we vary, in the trials, is only the AMPLITUDE of the fundamental signals (planetary periods and locations remain fixed).

And secondly, we at EU already know the sun, planets, and moons are directly connected by the Birkeland grid. Here is a part of the physical means these distant objects affect each other (gravity need not apply)! It looks like the sun gets spots when the planets align in a certain way. Looks like the planets are starving the sun at that point.


Cheers!

PS: I'm and old geek who has worked since 1969 with Fourier related systems, mostly in audio and music.

[seasmith]

~
I also think highly of Vukcevics' work.

Given the recent observed correlation between low sunspot activity and increased 'cosmic ray' intensities,
what are the longer-term predictive consequences ?


~s~

[4realScience]

I also think highly of Vukcevics' work.

Given the recent observed correlation between low sunspot activity and increased 'cosmic ray' intensities,
what are the longer-term predictive consequences ?"

Since 1760 Vukcevics' blue-line has been right so I would expect it to continue. But I don't know about cosmic rays. In my EU-type view, the main power we are dealing with is the cosmic Birkeland power grid. Compare its power, our sun, to the little flashes of light our cosmic ray sensors pick up. The Birkeland grid appears to be stable, so far, over the last 249 years. My guess is that it probably confines our sun-system's motion within it even if it warps (left, right, up or down). (Just a guess.) From my readings of EU I expect cosmic rays (kind of an over general term don't you think?) are from random double-layer explosions that are not necessarily in our directly connected power grid. So I would not expect any a direct variance with our sun-spots. But hey, I only just got hot on this subject, what do I know? Good question.

[vukcevic]

Thank you for your support. Here is a direct example of Sun-planets connection being electro-magnetic (magnetic fields inducing solar currents the source of sun’s polar fields).

http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/PF.gif
If the image is truncated, see the link.
It is thought that polar fields are the driver of the next cycle and have direct correlation to it. If so than not only SC24 is going to be weak, but also SC24 might be one of weakest in last 200 years. This is in full agreement with the results obtained by Livingstone & Pen, some of you might be familiar with.

Contrast measurements suggest that sunspot may become invisible by 2020.
Recently there was some controversy about missing cycle (4a).
Again same formula accurately locates such cycle.

http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/LostCycle3a.gif

[seasmith]

~
Hi 4realScience

fyi:

High Energy Cosmic Rays
The sun does, however, also have an effect on high-energy cosmic rays. High-energy cosmic rays come from interstellar space and are sometimes called Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs), even though it is thought that some of them come from beyond our galaxy. The solar wind mentioned above consists of a continuous stream of plasma, loose protons and electrons. The region of space in which the influence of the solar wind is felt, called the heliosphere, extends far beyond the orbit of Pluto. Because the solar wind is a plasma, it is electrically conducting and transmits a part of the sun's magnetic field. When GCRs approach the sun they encounter the heliosphere and the magnetic field within it. Because of the shape of the magnetic field, the GCRs lose some of their energy, and the lower-energy ones never reach the vicinity of the earth. In times of high solar activity (high levels of solar wind) this effect is stronger and fewer GCRs reach the earth.

The sun has an 11-year cycle in its activity. One of the ways in which the cycle is made visible is in the number of sun spots that can be seen through telescopes. During a solar maximum the number of sun spots is high, and during a solar minimum the number of sun spots is low. During a solar maximum, the solar wind is also stronger and the sun is a tiny bit brighter (about 0.1%), even though sun spots are places on the sun's surface that are cooler than their surroundings - there are other features that more than compensate.

Measurements of cosmic rays go back to the year 1935 and show clearly that high solar activity corresponds to lower cosmic ray fluxes. At sea level, the flux is about 2% lower during a solar maximum than the average and vice versa.

http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/cosmicrays/crsun.html

All the best,
s

[Lloyd]

4realScience:

It looks like the sun gets spots when the planets align in a certain way. Looks like the planets are starving the sun at that point.

vukcevic:

Here is a direct example of Sun-planets connection being electro-magnetic (magnetic fields inducing solar currents the source of sun’s polar fields).

The graphs seem to say something significant about correlation between sunspots and planetary alignments.
* I think all of the planets have vortex tails, equivalent or comparable to Earth's magnetotail. McCanney says these tails are more conductive than interplanetary space. It's like meteors in Earth's atmosphere, which are more conductive than our atmosphere. Electric discharges tend to follow such conductive bodies. The solar wind plasma should be conductive too, I presume, but apparently less so than the planetary bodies and their vortex tails.
* I might be backwards. Maybe the vortex tails are less conducting. So when planets are aligned, less current reaches the sun. McCanney said there are more earthquakes after a new moon, because the moon briefly blocks much of the solar wind from hitting Earth, but as it moves out of alignment, extra solar wind hits the Earth and produces shocks that cause earthquakes.
* Anyway, the planets may act like switches in an electrical circuit, which reduce or increase current flow to [and from] the sun, by a small but significant amount.
* Resistors cause heat buildup in circuits. If something in the solar system acts as resistors, they might cause heat buildup too. But maybe the sun itself is the resistor, so extra current causes more heat buildup. That seems to correlate with sunspots.
* Since the sunspot cycle averages 11.1 years [i.e. 9.8 to 12.0] and Jupiter's period of revolution is 11.86 years, Jupiter seems to be the main switch in the circuit. If the solar system is revolving within the arm of the galaxy, maybe that is what extends the sunspot cycle a little beyond Jupiter's period.

[vukcevic]

Lloyd:
" Since the sunspot cycle averages 11.1 years [i.e. 9.8 to 12.0] and Jupiter's period of revolution is 11.86 years, Jupiter seems to be the main switch in the circuit. If the solar system is revolving within the arm of the galaxy, maybe that is what extends the sunspot cycle a little beyond Jupiter's period."

You are only partially correct there, Jupiter is main driver but once in every two cycles (after 19.86 years) it gets ‘disturbed’ by its approach to Saturn. If you look at Y1 equation at
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN_amplitude.gif
you can see that cycles minima occurs when the Cosine functions are of the same value but of opposite sign. Cos functions are positive in 1st and 4th quadrant and negative in 2nd and 3rd .This makes it impossible to tie down either cycle minima or maxima to a particular J-S configuration. It is a phase relationship between synodic and sidereal periods.
If you feed two AC currents (of different frequency) in a resistor, it is their phase which controls the output; e.g. say each with RMS of 5V, but output will vary between 0 and 10V, and when 0 or 10V occurs is controlled by their phase relationship.

[webolife]

Isn't the sunspot cycle only a bit chaotic compared to the results you would get with a multi-body interaction like the J-S cycle? Isn't it more likely from an EU standpoint that the solar cycle is tied to interstellar birkeland current fluctuations instead? I'm not very impressed with the case for either scenario as yet. Show me cyclical terrella experiments that analogize the sunspot cycle...

[vukcevic]

[Lloyd]

vukcevic:

Jupiter is main driver but once in every two cycles (after 19.86 years) it gets ‘disturbed’ by its approach to Saturn. If you look at Y1 equation at http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN_amplitude.gif you can see that cycles minima occurs when the Cosine functions are of the same value but of opposite sign.
If you feed two AC currents (of different frequency) in a resistor, it is their phase which controls the output; e.g. say each with RMS of 5V, but output will vary between 0 and 10V, and when 0 or 10V occurs is controlled by their phase relationship.

* I think I almost understand your info, but here are a few questions that might lead to better understanding. Does Y1 represent the number of sunspots? Does the disturbance of Jupiter's effect by its approach to Saturn show up on the graph? I don't see it.
* The solar system doesn't have any AC, does it? If not, does the same statement hold for DC? Are the currents to or from Jupiter and Saturn of different frequencies? Is there a way to measure or calculate the frequencies? Is the Sun the resistor in question? What's RMS? What are the J-S phases when Y1 is at 0 and at maximum/solar cycle? Is zero reached when Jupiter and Saturn are in opposition?
NASA News:

A magnetosphere's tail is much shorter if at the front end of heliosphere, since it is pushed back by GCR.

* What is GCR? Galactic current?
* Do all the planets have magnetospheres, even when some don't have magnetic fields?
* Do you know in which constellations the head and tail of the heliosphere are? And how long it takes for them to move through 360 degrees? I guess there's no info on other star systems' astrosphere orientations, is there?
* Thanks for explaining, past and future.

[vukcevic]

Yes, Y would be SSN when the amplitude coefficient is normalised to such value. Since both planets move in elliptical (near circular orbits), any relationship will be represented by a ‘smooth’ waveform with no obvious judder.
Polarity of HC (heliospheric current) changes every 11 years (f = 1/T). Magnetospheres take power out of solar wind (aurora), hence modulation (reduction of strength) of HC.
AC electric circuit example is an analogy, it is valid for a mechanical, acoustic or any other oscillating system. GCR- usually denotes galactic cosmic rays. For RMS and rest see wikipedia or similar.

[4realScience]

Here is a website with a dynamic graphic model of the solar system. You can adjust the date to what you want, like the sunspot minimum (lately) then you can jump to 11 years in the future or past and see where the planets are/were.

http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/Solar

It's clear from vukcevic's work that the period of Jupiter (and Saturn, Neptune, and Uranus) is related and that shows that planetary alignment, from some viewpoint (which viewpoint?), is involved. Wonder what we would see if we put the images from fourmilab (link) into a 3D picture (Google Sketchup?) then add the Birkelund currents we suppose? Is it most likely they are passing through solar system as they head towards galictic center? Probably their general direction, so we could fake them in. I don't know how the sol system ecliptic is aligned with the disc of the Milky way, yet, or I would show these images. Any help?

Cheers! EU Rules!