Growth of Cycle 25

[hamateur 1953]

Hamster is just fine @Lawn Boy  he is awaiting the posting of the graph to be posted by Patrick in unproven theories.  Checkitout. 🐈‍⬛

[arjemma]

6 hours ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said:

Again, your chart is wrong. Basic mathematics. 
I learned in school when I was 13 years old that minus multiplied with minus is plus.

Astronomers use other math🤣🤣🤣🤔🤔🤔

Read the link before commenting again.

I'm sorry Patrick but this makes you sound very condensending and rude.
You make it sound that @Philalethes don't understand basic math which I'm 100% sure is incorrect.

A theory that works can be proven continuously without excluding situations that doesn't fit the model. If you exclude solar cycles that doesn't fit your model, then that model clearly has flaws. You argumentation is starting to sound like when flat earthers believes in gravity in some situations and then in other situations call it "electromagnetism".

You don't have a working model if it is only right in 50% of the times. You also don't have a working model if you have to correct it and blame a "typo" whenever the model isn't lining up with reality.

It's also strange that you say that you can't afford to get it published. If your model was solid, contained simple math and was clear as day, then you would send it to every astrophysicist out there. You wouldn't need money for that, emailing is free. 

Quote

 Astronomers use other math🤣🤣🤣🤔🤔🤔

 What do you mean by that? Do you mean that astronomers doesn't understand your "simple" math?

Please post your unproven theory in the topic with the same name as it is where it belongs. Also please don't insult people like this, not cool.

[Newbie]

9 minutes ago, arjemma said:

I'm sorry Patrick but this makes you sound very condensending and rude.
You make it sound that @Philalethes don't understand basic math which I'm 100% sure is incorrect.

A theory that works can be proven continuously without excluding situations that doesn't fit the model. If you exclude solar cycles that doesn't fit your model, then that model clearly has flaws. You argumentation is starting to sound like when flat earthers believes in gravity in some situations and then in other situations call it "electromagnetism".

You don't have a working model if it is only right in 50% of the times. You also don't have a working model if you have to correct it and blame a "typo" whenever the model isn't lining up with reality.

It's also strange that you say that you can't afford to get it published. If your model was solid, contained simple math and was clear as day, then you would send it to every astrophysicist out there. You wouldn't need money for that, emailing is free. 

 What do you mean by that? Do you mean that astronomers doesn't understand your "simple" math?

Please post your unproven theory in the topic with the same name as it is where it belongs. Also please don't insult people like this, not cool.

Well said @arjemma I am past  responding in this thread.

The sad thing is, it has all been said way too many times and fallen on deaf ears.

 N.

[Patrick P.A. Geryl]

Since several people are claiming my math is unproven, I can’t explain how I exclude cycle 23 and 24.

Anyway, the low 10.7 Solar flux sounds quite convincing🤗🤔😊

[arjemma]

3 hours ago, Newbie said:

Well said @arjemma I am past  responding in this thread.

The sad thing is, it has all been said way too many times and fallen on deaf ears.

 N.

Thank you and yes same. I hope that the mods can put an end to this behavior and move his posts to the unproven topic. 

This is starting to get very childish and I don’t think it is appropriate for this part of the forum. I would love to have proven science in here that has been disclosed outside of paywalls. I would love to be able to discuss the growth of this cycle without it.

I am going to stop responding in this thread as well.

[Philalethes]

7 hours ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said:

Since several people are claiming my math is unproven, I can’t explain how I exclude cycle 23 and 24.

You have already explained why you exclude them; you exclude them because they don't fit your failed attempt at a model. Let me quote you verbatim:

17 hours ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said:

We have only 4 cycles and 2 cycles point to the same mechanism (almost) as cycle 25. So we exclude the others.

This is the epitome of cherry-picking. It's an insult to the scientific method to intimate that what you're doing there is scientific. And no, your own chart (which is really just the exact same chart presented in a different way) doesn't explain that.

So once more: explain SC23. I'll keep waiting, but I won't be holding my breath.

Anyway, I just noticed the message Sam added to the thread now, so I guess this will be the last post about this here on my part. If by any chance you keep replying without explaining SC23, I will continue to reply in "Unproven theories" instead.

[hamateur 1953]

Thank you @Sam Warfel  two cookies!! 🍪🍪

Edited April 4 by hamateur 1953
Cookies ya can eat

[arjemma]

Thank you @Sam Warfel! I really appreciate it. You deserve a cookie 🍪 

[Newbie]

Also thanks for setting things right @Sam Warfel You deserve a whole pack of Tim Tams 😊

Aussie cookies incase you’re wondering!!

N.

[hamateur 1953]

Hey @arjemma started this if @Sam Warfel better half asks him  “ Who on earth is sending all of these cookies? And why Sam??”   Btw We do not have Tim Tams in the USA but they look pretty good.  Irresistible Real Chocolate.  European chocolate the best imho. But those aussie cookies look pretty darn good too!  

Edited April 4 by hamateur 1953
Chocolate

[Sam Warfel]

What’s the best way to see when SC25 peaks? 

Wait. 

Boring, but beats all other methods hands-down.  Enjoy the ride in the meantime!

Thanks for the cookies! Allow me to share a little Wisconsin cheese with y’all: 🧀🧀🧀

[Lawn Boy]

You’re right, of course or throw darts blindfolded. Not that I know anything about it.
I have to say as someone from Alabama I never expected to see the word y’all in a sentence with Wisconsin. Don’t y’all enjoy brats too. I would choose both over the cookies.

[Christopher Shriver]

7 hours ago, Sam Warfel said:

What’s the best way to see when SC25 peaks? 

Wait. 

Boring, but beats all other methods hands-down.  Enjoy the ride in the meantime!

Thanks for the cookies! Allow me to share a little Wisconsin cheese with y’all: 🧀🧀🧀

Wait, SC24 is over? 😛 You all should try Wisconsin cheeses and beef goods, if you ever have the chance; speaking from experience, they have some of the world's best dairy/meat.

[hamateur 1953]

5 hours ago, Lawn Boy said:

You’re right, of course or throw darts blindfolded. Not that I know anything about it.
I have to say as someone from Alabama I never expected to see the word y’all in a sentence with Wisconsin. Don’t y’all enjoy brats too. I would choose both over the cookies.

Well @Lawn Boy y’all wouldn’t hear it from me if I hadn’t been married to someone from the heart of Dixie either  (little town called York not far from Meridian Mississippi) 

It is pretty common.  I miss Wispride soft cheese in those crock pot things. 
You would have to bring up brats.  🤣🤣. 

Edited April 4 by hamateur 1953

[Lawn Boy]

Hamster, my mother is from Eutaw just up the road from York and my father is from a little spot in the woods a little further north, Shiloh. 

[hamateur 1953]

Ok guess this caused Lawn Boy some confusion.  I don’t mind discussions at all. However sometimes ( and I should have known better). The individuals involved have another agenda ( whatever that may be)  In this particular individuals case it appears to be entirely monetary.  
I may be proven wrong but that’s how it seems at present.  The entire forum has suffered, I think and it isn’t the type of entertainment I enjoy anyway. CMEs and huge flares are more to my liking.  Hopefully this puts things more in perspective for ya.  Mike 

Edited April 5 by hamateur 1953
Clarity hopefully

[Patrick P.A. Geryl]

April 4

1K SN:  104

This implies 10.7 solar flux from: 110

It was 113.8

Stable

Forward looking indicators all down further🤪

[tniickck]

2 hours ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said:

April 4

1K SN:  104

This implies 10.7 solar flux from: 110

It was 113.8

Stable

Forward looking indicators all down further🤪

nuh uh

[hamateur 1953]

I’m waiting on NRC.  Should be interesting….  The adjusted flux at 20:00 hrs UTC.   Well looks as though we have some new regions. Anyway first call ( unofficial) From NRC is observed flux: 120.   Adjusted flux: 121.  Stay tuned. The official posting is next. 
Official SFI.  Observed flux 120.5. ( 121). Adjusted flux 120.6  (121).  
From Natural Resources Canada. 
April 05  2024. 

Edited April 5 by hamateur 1953
Adjusted SFI

[hamateur 1953]

 It appears that @tniickck was correct. Up seven points over yesterday.  Incoming limb looking brighter every hour also.  Good call.   All day long.  Like the song goes. “ My future’s so bright, I have to wear shades”. 😂  No earth based clouds in the eclipse path we hope!   

Edited April 6 by hamateur 1953

[Patrick P.A. Geryl]

The following indicators for future trends in March 2024 are available and will be updated on a monthly basis.

365-day smoothed

10.7 Solar flux: 150

SSN : 110

2K SNN: 240

1K SNN: 160

Edited April 7 by Patrick P.A. Geryl

[hamateur 1953]

Looking good for March.   April notsomuch.  Time will tell. 

[3gMike]

7 hours ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said:

The following indicators for future trends in March 2024 are available and will be updated on a monthly basis.

365-day smoothed

10.7 Solar flux: 150

SSN : 110

2K SNN: 240

1K SNN: 160

This post would be more appropriate in this thread https://community.spaceweatherlive.com/topic/2742-latest-sc25-predictions/page/3/#elShareItem_9997042_menu

I will be happy to discuss it with you if you move it there.

[Patrick P.A. Geryl]

1K SN on April 8 = 108

This implies a 10.7 Solar flux of around 118

It was 125.2

Slight drop today?

[Capricopia]

Stanford have released updates for the Heliospheric Current Sheet and the Solar Polar Field Strength that both indicate that we are at/have passed solar max with the latest reading on CR 2280  2024:01:18 06h  at  50.2.  It was last above 70 in October...

http://wso.stanford.edu/gifs/Tilts.gif

http://wso.stanford.edu/gifs/Polar.gif