Mechanics of the recent uptick in solar flares

[Deon Bakkes]

Hey everyone! I'm new here and I have a question regarding a personal hypothesis about the mechanics of the recent uptick in solar flares. I'm an evolutionary biologist by training and so I enjoy big picture macro-process thinking, but please do correct me if I'm wrong in my thinking regarding solar flares here.

Given the recent increase in solar flares which is outpacing official predictions (see screenshot), is it possible that over the last 2 or more cycles, which seem to have been getting 'weaker', that some residual tangles in magnetic fields have remained between cycles, by virtue of them being smaller and hence not being stressed enough to flare in the previous cycles? If so, is it possible that these small tangles have essentially 'built up' over a number of cycles leading to a greater 'load' of tensed magnetic fields today? I'm thinking of an analogy along the lines of forest fires in the fynbos (shrubland) of South Africa that only happen roughly every 10 years. But when it does finally burn, there has been so much organic matter which has built up that it really burns! I imagine that models for solar activity might not be able to account for such a subtle build up of residual tension? Hence, the possibility for the deviation shown in the screenshot.

Or alternatively, does the end of a cycle completely clear any tension in solar magnetic fields, forcing a total reset of tension in the magnetic fields between cycles? Which would mean the greater-than-expected activity we're seeing now, would be due to some other factor besides slow accumulation of residual tangles in magnetic fields?

Either way, I'm looking forward to following this fascinating phenomena.

Thanks!

[Marcel de Bont]

I moved your post to its own separate topic.

There is still so much to be learned and unknown about the inner workings of our Sun that your questions are impossible to answer. The solar dynamo drives the Sun's 11 year solar cycle and it is hard to predict in advance with accuracy how a solar cycle will evolve but scientists try their hardest. It is still a field where so much research is being one.

[Patrick P.A. Geryl]

Cycle 25 IS NOT STRONGER then expected! If you compare it with similar cycles, this is the result:

 

[Deon Bakkes]

@Patrick P.A. Geryl Oh that's interesting, and definitely gives some much needed context to the data. Cycle 25 clearly seems to be within the error range of those past cycles. How were these cycles selected as similar, and others (such as 17-23) excluded? Is there any defining feature that makes them more similar to justify grouping them together to the exclusion of the omitted cycles? What criterion was used? Or is this just a random sample?

[Patrick P.A. Geryl]

52 minuten geleden, Deon Bakkes zei:

@Patrick P.A. Geryl Oh that's interesting, and definitely gives some much needed context to the data. Cycle 25 clearly seems to be within the error range of those past cycles. How were these cycles selected as similar, and others (such as 17-23) excluded? Is there any defining feature that makes them more similar to justify grouping them together to the exclusion of the omitted cycles? What criterion was used? Or is this just a random sample?

We follow the sunspot cycle since decades. An article was published in Astrophysics and Space Science. In it you can calculate the upcoming strength if you know the start of a new cycle exactly:
 (PDF) A Formula for the Start of a New Sunspot Cycle
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342766380_A_Formula_for_the_Start_of_a_New_Sunspot_Cycle

We expect a weak cycle. This doesn’t rule out big flares. Here are some cycles presented with a similar strength.