Next sunspot cycle

[iskender]

Hi guys,<br /><br />I have a question concerning the next sunspot cycle. I'd like to know if there is really something special about it. <br /><br />I've read somewhere that the sun now is most active since 8,000 or even 11,400 years. I don't remember the link. Also, I've read probably on National Geographic that the following cycle will be 30 - 50% more active than previous and will be peaking around 2012. Besides that, I've also seen an article that the possible super solar storm was discussed on Spaceweather meeting by a guy from NASA called Odenwald. He said that it will damage satellites and cost a lot.<br /><br />I'd like to know whether this sunspot cycle is going to be the most active (or whatever) in the recorded history, or even millenia. Probably I wouldn't even care, but I've seen some discussions on climate where people were absolutely sure that the incoming sun flares are going to kill 2/3 of population and interfere with the Earth's core and magnetic field and cause another ice age.<br /><br />Well, if it was so obvious, then the governments of all the countries would already know that I guess, and they wouldn't make any plans for future, especially for space exploration, because sun flares would destroy everything. The economy would not matter anymore, and I see no sign of it. Education would be reduntant and so on. From my understanding, countries are developing, science is developing, there are giant investments made in infrastructure and other fields.<br /><br />Again, if it was so obvious that we're gonna die and almost everything is going to be destroyed, the things would be different now, I guess. <br /><br />Oh, and don't tell me about Maya Calendar and 2012 and Orion Prophecy and all that rubbish. I respect Maya but I don't think all those pseudo scientists can understand their calendar. They didn't end the world on 2012, more dates after that have been found. What they could predict, though I don't know how, was in fact some sort of solar activity that

 

[CalliArcale]

New techniques have allowed scientists to predict the next solar cycle. The technique has been tested against historical data and seems to work well, but we'll have to wait and see if the next cycle lives up to the predictions. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> But yes, they have predicted it to be very active.<br /><br />I do not expect any extinction-level events as a consequence. Climate may change, but it is more likely to warm up than to cool down; sunspots are generally associated with warming trends, because though it may seem counterintuitive, the Sun actually puts out more energy when it has lots of sunspots.<br /><br />There was a period of time in the Middle Ages called "the Little Ice Age". The Little Ice Age was devastating, especially in Europe where people live at relatively high latitutdes, kept warm only by the contributions of the Gulf Stream. During the Little Ice Age, global temperatures fell dramatically. Crops failed, or did very poorly for years. Starvation was widespread. Europe's culture underwent a dramatic shift following the Little Ice Age as a direct result, mainly because serfs now had substantial bargaining power and land was comparatively cheap.<br /><br />There are records of sunspots dating back before this period; although astronomers of the time did not know what they were (frequently believing them to be planets passing in front of the Sun), they did record sightings. During the Little Ice Age, there were no sightings recorded, even in areas which were not so adversely affected. This is referred to as the Maunder Minimum -- a strange period of time when the Sun's cycle flattened out and it had no sunspots for nearly a century, and the Earth's climate cooled dramatically. There is some debate as to whether or not it is real; it is hard to know how accurate sunspot records were at the time.<br /><br />Even then, humanity did not die out, and even most royal lines and governments survived, more or less. This coming solar maxim <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[iskender]

Well, let's hope it will be like you said Calli. <br /><br />I just wonder how the ice ages began, and why they were so cyclical. Also, why did the glaciers form so quickly and if there was a mass extinction - for example why smilodonts and some other species died out. I am really far from believing those freaks who talk about Earth changing its rotation to opposite during one day, which results in ice ages. They don't realise that we would be bacteria if that happened before. But sun flares and geomagnetic events (like sudden freezing) theory scared me a bit, I must say <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> Anyway, I want to live my life.

 

[pizzaguy]

<font color="yellow"><b>(1)</b> I'v read somewhere that the sun now is most active since 8,000 or even 11,400 years. <br /><br />(<b>2)</b>Also, I've read probably on National Geographic that the following cycle will be 30 - 50% more active than previous and will be <b>(3)</b> peaking around 2012.</font><br /><br />As an avid shortwave radio nut, I'v been watching sunspot activity for over 30 years. <br /><br /><b>1</b> - Most forecasters are saying it'll be somewhat active, the peak in the 50's was the biggy for the last 100 or so years, and the upcoming one is forecast to "mabye come near what we saw in the 50's". But I don't think any respectable researcher is predicting anything any bigger than that. The 11 year sunspot cycle has only been recorded since the late 1600's, and I don't know where this "thousands of years" talk is coming from.<br /><br /><b>2 and 3</b> - On these two points, I think you are right. We are at a minimum now, so a peak in 2011, 2012 or 2013 sounds right. And like I said, a 30 to 50 % increase over the last is predicted by many.<br /><br />But in any event, I don't know of anyone reputable who has tried to link ice ages to the sunspot cycle. Remember, the sunspot number is NOT an accurate indication of heat output of the sun. <br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1"><em>Note to Dr. Henry:  The testosterone shots are working!</em></font> </div>

 

[pizzaguy]

<font color="yellow">But sun flares and geomagnetic events (like sudden freezing) theory scared me a bit, </font><br /><br />They don't scare me - 'cept for what they both do to shortwave radio! (A high sunspot number is good for shortwave radio, but high geomagnetic activity or solar flares are a pain in the butt.) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1"><em>Note to Dr. Henry:  The testosterone shots are working!</em></font> </div>

 

[iskender]

Good to see there are some optimists (or realists) out there. It's a human thing to be optimistic, even if we were going to be killed by a sun flare. Anyway, I've seen websites that tell how and where to survive coming sun flares. I'm not going to browse them though, just to get to know that if I want to survive, I have to hide in secret labirynths beneath the pyramids <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[CalliArcale]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>But in any event, I don't know of anyone reputable who has tried to link ice ages to the sunspot cycle. Remember, the sunspot number is NOT an accurate indication of heat output of the sun.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Correct; there is more to the sun's output. There is a general correlation to heat output, but it's nothing you could use to predict number of degrees the Earth will heat up, for instance.<br /><br />It's not possible to link ancient ice ages (the true Ice Ages) to sunspots, because there is no record. Unlike continental drift, nothing preserves the history of sunspots unless somebody happens to observe it and write it down. It's been speculated, of course, but it can't go past that. The only one I've heard respectable astronomers actually get behind is the idea that the Maunder Minimum is associated with the Little Ice Age (which wasn't a true ice age; it was much milder).<br /><br />Of course, although our sun is remarkably stable compared to many other stars, there's no way of knowing whether it has always been so. Perhaps it used to make quite significant fluctations. Science cannot answer that at present, and I have my doubts that it will ever be able to unless someone invents a way of travelling into the distant past. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[iskender]

I've heard that Steven Spielberg is taking part in some time travelling exercises with scientists. I hope he's not going to get lost in the past, because I want to see Indiana Jones 4.<br /><br />I have the link to that article about sun activity in the past 11,000 years. Here it is:<br />http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/printer_most_active_sun_8000_years.html <br /><br />I don't know whether it's a respectable source nor method used.

 

[3488]

Your article is from the Max Planck Society. Yes, they are a very reputable source. Thank you for that link, it is fascinating reading.<br /><br />I firmly beleive that Solar Activity & global climate are linked to a very high degree (more so than so called Manmade Global Warming, which I think is a myth).<br /><br />Maunder Minimum is a good example (a largely spotless sun, cool Summers, freezing Winters, etc).<br /><br />Once again, thank you. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>

 

[pizzaguy]

<font color="yellow">It's not possible to link ancient ice ages (the true Ice Ages) to sunspots, because there is no record. Unlike continental drift, nothing preserves the history of sunspots unless somebody happens to observe it and write it down.</font><br /><br />Exactly. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1"><em>Note to Dr. Henry:  The testosterone shots are working!</em></font> </div>

 

[iskender]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Thank you for that link, it is fascinating reading. <br /><p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />You are welcome. Sure it's interesting, but doesn't make me very happy. <br /><br />Actually, it seems to me that some groups of people link the ancient glaciations (those which had been happening about every 11,500 years) to tremendous sun flares. The sun flares are connected to sunspot cycle, as far as I know. But I don't understand the mechanism in which that would happen, how a sun storm can cause the sudden cooling. <br /><br />I don't know how that can affect the Earth's core, which part of the sun outburst can flow through the Earth's surface to get into the core, could it be x-ray? My tiny knowledge tells me that only neutrins from the sun can penetrate everything (I saw a program about a great bubble of heavy water under ground in America where they try to catch neutrins).<br /><br />Still, I'm not aware what exactly does the sun eject during a storm or CME, I know about solar flux and x-ray and that an ejection is related to changed magnetic filed in the regions of sun.<br />But can it really force some severe and deadly fluctuations in Earth's magnetic field? I don't mean a reversal.<br />Also, if the sun flare is able to get to the core, it would have to destroy or burn everything on the surface (and it doesn't seem as if it happened before). <br /><br />There has been a super solar storm in 1859, but besides affecting the telegraphs, it didn't do any bad to people. <br />This is a complicated matter, I guess. <br /><br />By the way I'm far from denying years of scientists' work and research about men causing global warming. Neither do I agree with some folks who claim that all scientists are paid to tell lies to public about us causing the global warming. I believe men have contributed to global warming. What interests me more is whether global cooling is a sudden effect or can it be prevented or mildened. I've read an inte

 

[CalliArcale]

It wouldn't affect the Earth's core (except by minisculing slowing the rate at which it cools), but it would have a significant effect on Earth's surface, which would in turn affect climate. Surface climate is not a property of the Earth's core.<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Still, I'm not aware what exactly does the sun eject during a storm or CME, I know about solar flux and x-ray and that an ejection is related to changed magnetic filed in the regions of sun.<br />But can it really force some severe and deadly fluctuations in Earth's magnetic field? I don't mean a reversal.<br />Also, if the sun flare is able to get to the core, it would have to destroy or burn everything on the surface (and it doesn't seem as if it happened before).<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Again, don't confuse the surface with the core. The core will be largely unaffected. But the surface is affected.<br /><br />What the sun ejects is a cloud of plasma -- charged particles, basically. Electrons and protons. Because they have a charge, they can also carry a magnetic field, which they do. This interacts with Earth's magnetic field. It doesn't cause the core to change, but it does affect things on the outside. The Earth's magnetic field is stronger than the CME's little magnetic bubble, so it'll win out easily. The charged particles usually end up funneled along magnetic field lines into the polar regions, where they interact with the atmosphere to produce the aurora. The magnetic field that they carry energizes a portion of the Earth's magnetic field. Between these two things (impacts of charged particles and the magnetic interaction), sensitive electronic devices can experience problems during a CME. Radios will pick up more static than usual, and if not properly protected, large transformers and capacitors at power stations may overload because this process can induce a current.<br /><br />The magnetic effects of a CME are dramatic, but temporary a <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[iskender]

Alright, thanks for the explanation. I'd just like to ask about one more thing without starting a new thread. I mean an article that I found recently:<br />http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q1372.html<br /><br />Since the article is probably quite old, I'd like to ask if we are entering this intense dust cloud now, or in following years. Or is it still thousands of years away. Does anyone know? And are the astronomers concerned much about that?

 

[3488]

I think that the dust cloud is so thin that the solar wind will keep the inner solar system free of it. I think though that much more research needs doing into the properties of the dust cloud (density, compostion, electromagnetic windows, etc).<br /><br />I had heard somewhere that Sun Spot activity may affect the magnetic properties of the Earth's liquid outer core, thus indirectly linking sunspot activity to geological activity on Earth. I do not think there is a link, but what do others think, particulalrly trained Geologists? <br /><br />The link between sunspots & climate however is not in any doubt. Do the core samples bought back from the Moon by the Apollo astronauts show a record of previous solar activity?? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>

 

[iskender]

I found that article on effects of the dust cloud on solar system:<br />http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/dust_storm_030814.html<br /><br />As for your two questions 3488, it would be indeed wise to ask Geologists and not rely upon doomsayers as I did. <br />Also, I guess that Max-Planck-Institute is capable of answering some questions about the link between sunspots & climate. But I didn't check that yet.

 

[3488]

I think that the link between sunspots & weather is well proven, but the exact mechanism behind it is poorly understood. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>