The Terminator Theory and Implications for growth of Cycle 25

[Philalethes]

Thanks, that clears up very well what you mean, and from the graphs it also seems to indicate that that's what you meant. I assume you were referring to the crossing itself as opposed to when the field reversal slowly starts happening around the terminator. I guess we will see how the field reversal graphs will look like after the fact and compare then.

Also worth noting is that the fields have actually not crossed each other yet; the southern field went positive for a while, but is now negative again, and now in the latest reading the northern field has gone negative, but the southern field is still more negative.

9 minutes ago, Scott McIntosh said:

To me its absolutely imperative that we fly up there and measure this stuff directly...

You mean with a spacecraft of some sort? It would be great to have continuous polar field measurements from closer to Sol for sure, but I assume this is going to be a bit harder than e.g. having observatories in orbit near Earth itself, as we do now.

[Scott McIntosh]

1 minute ago, Philalethes Bythos said:

Thanks, that clears up very well what you mean, and from the graphs it also seems to indicate that that's what you meant. I assume you were referring to the crossing itself as opposed to when the field reversal slowly starts happening around the terminator. I guess we will see how the field reversal graphs will look like after the fact and compare then.

Also worth noting is that the fields have actually not crossed each other yet; the southern field went positive for a while, but is now negative again, and now in the latest reading the northern field has gone negative, but the southern field is still more negative.

You mean with a spacecraft of some sort? It would be great to have continuous polar field measurements from closer to Sol for sure, but I assume this is going to be a bit harder than e.g. having observatories in orbit near Earth itself, as we do now.

we're all over that!!!

[Philalethes]

1 minute ago, Scott McIntosh said:

we're all over that!!!

I think for further clarity, not just for you, but when discussing the Solar cycle in general, it would be beneficial to distinguish between the entire process of reversal itself, which starts when either or both the polar fields begin to weaken and move towards each other, and the "crossing", which would be the period of time when the fields near zero and each other and "teeter" around there for a while, as you mention (as seen from the dense criss-crossing for a little while in the graphs).

When doing this, one can then instead refer to the "start", "middle", and "end" of the "crossing" itself. I've marked in the graph you posted earlier where I mean the "start" and "end" of the "crossing" would be:

From this it becomes clear why I interpreted it to be the first red lines when the start of the crossing was mentioned in the paper, since this was the conceptualization I had in my mind. What was really meant, as I understand it now, is really the "end" of this crossing, when the fields start moving apart again in opposite directions. This seems to coincide very well with 0.2 of the terminator-scaled cycle length indeed; when we get a good look at this graph for SC25 after the fact I suppose we'll see how well it holds, but it sounds like it's right on course, since these "crossings" seem to span ~8-10 months on average from eyeballing the graph.

[Archmonoth]

4 hours ago, Scott McIntosh said:

Right now we're working on figuring out what is so damn important about 55 degrees latitude - have been for a decade - likely to do with internal geometry (https://www.dropbox.com/s/ji6oiflxhp3d61l/Screen Shot 2023-02-02 at 6.08.44 PM.png?dl=0)

Anything I would suggest would be speculation.  If it is internal geometry, I would guess that conservation of momentum would play a role. 

 

Have you seen or made any connections with the changes in the barycenter being inside or outside the radius of the Sun having an effect on the Terminator? 

[Scott McIntosh]

29 minutes ago, Archmonoth said:

Anything I would suggest would be speculation.  If it is internal geometry, I would guess that conservation of momentum would play a role. 

 

Have you seen or made any connections with the changes in the barycenter being inside or outside the radius of the Sun having an effect on the Terminator? 

We have issues relating barycenter to something that’s magnetic. I’m not being flippant - the energy density in the gravitational/tidal stuff is TINY compared to the rotational energy of the star.
 

If it is there, it won’t be a first or second order effect, maybe third/fourth which means you’d be looking for signatures of periods in the millennia and subtle - to the point where I don’t think we have accurate enough data to say for sure. 

[Philalethes]

2 hours ago, Scott McIntosh said:

We have issues relating barycenter to something that’s magnetic. I’m not being flippant - the energy density in the gravitational/tidal stuff is TINY compared to the rotational energy of the star.

If it is there, it won’t be a first or second order effect, maybe third/fourth which means you’d be looking for signatures of periods in the millennia and subtle - to the point where I don’t think we have accurate enough data to say for sure. 

Could it be that such external forcings could perhaps be sufficient to simply synchronize the cycle rather than cause it? Not sure if you saw the paper I briefly mentioned in an earlier post (this), or if you've seen papers like it, but from what I gather it's saying something similar, i.e. that the dynamo itself is primarily caused by differential rotation, and that the tidal forcing merely serves to synchronize the dynamo; you can read the abstract yourself, I suppose. Not sure how it would relate to the observed ~55 degree latitude anyway, that does sound more like a property inherent to the internal dynamics even if those particular forcings exist.

[Patrick P.A. Geryl]

6 uren geleden, Scott McIntosh zei:

We have issues relating barycenter to something that’s magnetic. I’m not being flippant - the energy density in the gravitational/tidal stuff is TINY compared to the rotational energy of the star.
 

If it is there, it won’t be a first or second order effect, maybe third/fourth which means you’d be looking for signatures of periods in the millennia and subtle - to the point where I don’t think we have accurate enough data to say for sure. 

Scott,

My algorithm between the equatorial magnetic field and the northern and southern polar field gives at least 12 basic functions of the sunspot cycle… Off course neglected because it doesn’t come from the inside… Almost everything from the sunspot cycle can be calculated…

(PDF) A New Mathematical (and Physical) Principle to Combine Gravitation with Rotating Oscillating Magnetic Fields. A unifying algorithm that solves the Sun's differential rotation problem


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329023855_A_New_Mathematical_and_Physical_Principle_to_Combine_Gravitation_with_Rotating_Oscillating_Magnetic_Fields_A_unifying_algorithm_that_solves_the_Sun's_differential_rotation_problem

[novaxformepal]

7 hours ago, Philalethes Bythos said:

Could it be that such external forcings could perhaps be sufficient to simply synchronize the cycle rather than cause it? Not sure if you saw the paper I briefly mentioned in an earlier post (this), or if you've seen papers like it, but from what I gather it's saying something similar, i.e. that the dynamo itself is primarily caused by differential rotation, and that the tidal forcing merely serves to synchronize the dynamo; you can read the abstract yourself, I suppose. Not sure how it would relate to the observed ~55 degree latitude anyway, that does sound more like a property inherent to the internal dynamics even if those particular forcings exist.

Curious if you are asking if an external unknown body is causing this?

[Archmonoth]

10 hours ago, Scott McIntosh said:

We have issues relating barycenter to something that’s magnetic. I’m not being flippant - the energy density in the gravitational/tidal stuff is TINY compared to the rotational energy of the star.

I appreciate your responses, and I am an only an enthusiast speculating, and curious about tidal influences, so no worries about being flippant.

 

In regard to the internal geometry/composition: With the Tachocline, and the convection zone, there is a slowing of plasma flow from the inner layers (you used a tachocline graphic from your previous post), and the conservation of momentum could perhaps be responsible for the expression of Sunspots; like Laminar flow, the interior fusion is cresting and rolling back like waves on a beach (if you will pardon the analogy). Here is a wiki of what I am talking about, but with the outer convection zone.: Laminar–turbulent transition - Wikipedia

 

Is there any slowing of the rotation of convection zone before/during the solar max? I understand different latitudes rotate at different speeds. Does the 55-degree latitude have any noticeable decrease in rotation? (I wasn't able to find the answer easily myself, and you might have a closer eye on these things.)

 

Thanks for being willing to answer questions Scott!

Edited February 3, 2023 by Archmonoth

[Scott McIntosh]

8 hours ago, Philalethes Bythos said:

Could it be that such external forcings could perhaps be sufficient to simply synchronize the cycle rather than cause it? Not sure if you saw the paper I briefly mentioned in an earlier post (this), or if you've seen papers like it, but from what I gather it's saying something similar, i.e. that the dynamo itself is primarily caused by differential rotation, and that the tidal forcing merely serves to synchronize the dynamo; you can read the abstract yourself, I suppose. Not sure how it would relate to the observed ~55 degree latitude anyway, that does sound more like a property inherent to the internal dynamics even if those particular forcings exist.

it's possible I think as third level kinda scale, but I would really have to dig deep to figure it out. On the face of it tidal stuff is really cool, but I don't think its a primary effect for the reasons you outline too. 

49 minutes ago, Archmonoth said:

I appreciate your responses, and I am an only an enthusiast speculating, and curious about tidal influences, so no worries about being flippant.

 

In regard to the internal geometry/composition: With the Tachocline, and the convection zone, there is a slowing of plasma flow from the inner layers (you used a tachocline graphic from your previous post), and the conservation of momentum could perhaps be responsible for the expression of Sunspots; like Laminar flow, the interior fusion is cresting and rolling back like waves on a beach (if you will pardon the analogy). Here is a wiki of what I am talking about, but with the outer convection zone.: Laminar–turbulent transition - Wikipedia

 

Is there any slowing of the rotation of convection zone before/during the solar max? I understand different latitudes rotate at different speeds. Does the 55-degree latitude have any noticeable decrease in rotation? (I wasn't able to find the answer easily myself, and you might have a closer eye on these things.)

 

Thanks for being willing to answer questions Scott!

I have no idea about the speeds up there because their hard to measure and/or infer from the ecliptic. We really need a mission to go up and look. We've been trying to draw our communities attention to 55 degrees for quite some time.... now I am writing a specific paper about it.

I really love the fact hat your digging in and trying to understand this - like/with us!

[Archmonoth]

6 hours ago, Scott McIntosh said:

I have no idea about the speeds up there because their hard to measure and/or infer from the ecliptic. We really need a mission to go up and look. We've been trying to draw our communities attention to 55 degrees for quite some time.... now I am writing a specific paper about it.

I really love the fact hat your digging in and trying to understand this - like/with us!

I agree on additional missions, perhaps a nice observation satellite on the far side

 

I have 1 more question about momentum, which is not related to tidal forces or other mass/bodies. Has there ever been any studies or investigation into the solar cycles and their position relative to the barycenter? (Inside or outside the Sun's Radius) I wasn't able to find any. 

 

SC 23 was 96-08 and the barycenter just outside the Sun's radius in 1994 and reentered the Sun's radius in 2006.

 

SC 24 was 08-19 and the barycenter was inside the radius until 2017. Which was a weaker Solar Cycle, perhaps due to being inside the radius of the Sun and having less momentum to conserve. 

 

SC 25 has the barycenter outside the Sun's radius in a similar arc to 1994 route. If there is a connection, would have similar activity to SC 23

 

So, there is a 2ish-year lag or variable if there is a connection. 

 

Here is a study which has some connections being made with momentum and how the cycles are connected to changes in momentum, which is related to the barycenter. 

1706.01854.pdf (arxiv.org)

 

Here is an excerpt from page 9 of the link:

 

I imagine the Sun is like a teacup on those teacup rides, with the outer edges spinning faster and the inner edges spinning slower. This is similar to a gearing system for cars, but with plasma. The conversed momentum comes out as different speeds of plasma rotation resulting in sunspots/flares etc.

 

This idea and question might not be connected to the terminator, but since we are looking at events or factors which signal cycles, this might be related. Thanks again for tolerating my questions. 

 

Edited February 4, 2023 by Archmonoth

[David Silver]

Welcome Scott, I’ve been following your work intently the past few years. Wow, the flare today…here on the East coast we’re in the polar vortex, and now we’re seeing the solar vortex.

[hamateur 1953]

I was really impressed by the “work arounds”   It read like something I saw in the old movie Apollo 13.  “ Well, what have we got on that spaceship that is actually working”.  Bravo!  

On 2/2/2023 at 5:30 PM, Scott McIntosh said:

Apologies - probably a bit of loose language. I think as we watch this develop in real time we'll know for sure..... its closer to the average and yet assured when the signal starts to move away from zero again....... you see how long the data teeters around zero...... so much of that is tied to the lack of resolution in the Wilcox measurements. To me its absolutely imperative that we fly up there and measure this stuff directly...... We have other indicators to look for - the bands of solar cycle 26 should start to reveal themselves about the same time.......

I mean we are testing a new theory directly against the 'prevailing wisdom' in real time for everyone to enjoy. I doubt we've got it all quite straight yet, but it looks like the gross behavior is working out (for now).....

l

[3gMike]

On 2/2/2023 at 3:30 PM, Drax Spacex said:

Does this theory propose the mechanisms or markers which might predict a single peak or a double peaked solar cycle?

I'm not sure that it does. However I found another article which offers some suggestions about this....

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11207-020-01615-1

[Drax Spacex]

1 hour ago, 3gMike said:

I'm not sure that it does. However I found another article which offers some suggestions about this....

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11207-020-01615-1

That's an interesting article - I have been looking into probability density distributions, focusing on Weibull, that can be parameterized to provide curve fits for the number of sunspots over time for various sunspot cycles.  A wide jagged peak / double peak / flat top (depending how you average it) could be the time-offset superposition of the pdf's of north and south latitude contributions.  I'll start a new topic for further discussion on the parameterization of sunspot cycle curves.

Edited February 5, 2023 by Drax Spacex
branch

[Philalethes]

4 hours ago, 3gMike said:

I'm not sure that it does. However I found another article which offers some suggestions about this....

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11207-020-01615-1

This would be the relevant part in this context, I assume:

Quote

Gnevyshev (1967) suggested that the solar cycle is characterized by two periods of activity and these lead to a double peak with the so-called Gnevyshev-gap (GG) in between (Gnevyshev, 1977). Feminella and Storini (1997) studied the long-term behavior of several solar-activity parameters and found that maxima occur at least twice: first, near the end of the rising phase and then in the early years of declining phase. Norton and Gallagher (2010) analyzed the sunspot cycle double peak, and the Gnevyshev gap between them, to determine if the double peak is caused by averaging of the two hemispheres that are out of phase (Temmer et al., 2006). They, however, confirmed previous findings that the Gnevyshev gap is a phenomenon that occurs separately in each hemisphere and is not due to a superposition of sunspot indices from hemispheres slightly out of phase.

 

[3gMike]

16 hours ago, Drax Spacex said:

I'll start a new topic for further discussion on the parameterization of sunspot cycle curves.

That sounds like a good idea. 

[Scott McIntosh]

On 2/3/2023 at 4:52 PM, Archmonoth said:

I agree on additional missions, perhaps a nice observation satellite on the far side

 

I have 1 more question about momentum, which is not related to tidal forces or other mass/bodies. Has there ever been any studies or investigation into the solar cycles and their position relative to the barycenter? (Inside or outside the Sun's Radius) I wasn't able to find any. 

 

SC 23 was 96-08 and the barycenter just outside the Sun's radius in 1994 and reentered the Sun's radius in 2006.

 

SC 24 was 08-19 and the barycenter was inside the radius until 2017. Which was a weaker Solar Cycle, perhaps due to being inside the radius of the Sun and having less momentum to conserve. 

 

SC 25 has the barycenter outside the Sun's radius in a similar arc to 1994 route. If there is a connection, would have similar activity to SC 23

 

So, there is a 2ish-year lag or variable if there is a connection. 

 

Here is a study which has some connections being made with momentum and how the cycles are connected to changes in momentum, which is related to the barycenter. 

1706.01854.pdf (arxiv.org)

 

Here is an excerpt from page 9 of the link:

 

I imagine the Sun is like a teacup on those teacup rides, with the outer edges spinning faster and the inner edges spinning slower. This is similar to a gearing system for cars, but with plasma. The conversed momentum comes out as different speeds of plasma rotation resulting in sunspots/flares etc.

 

This idea and question might not be connected to the terminator, but since we are looking at events or factors which signal cycles, this might be related. Thanks again for tolerating my questions. 

 

Wasn't aware of that work - will download and read. THANKS.

[Bry]

On 2/2/2023 at 5:05 PM, Scott McIntosh said:

Very cool but I haven't. Right now we're working on figuring out what is so damn important about 55 degrees latitude - have been for a decade - likely to do with internal geometry (https://www.dropbox.com/s/ji6oiflxhp3d61l/Screen Shot 2023-02-02 at 6.08.44 PM.png?dl=0). If you haven't seen the movie of todays polar eruption I'll post....

Awesome to get to ask you questions on this forum with more room to elaborate than on twitter! Thanks for taking the time, I'm so glad others have already asked some of the burning questions on topics regarding predicting solar cycle length, duration, and barycentric effects on active solar longitudes. Here's a list of some topics I also hope are covered:

1. How the Solar System's Tilt relative to Milky Way Galaxy (or "Shiva Hypothesis" from 1979) and wobble about its galactic rotation is related to Solar Cycle length and duration (or Sun's internal dynamics).

2. How the gravitational effects of planets affect the Suns barycenter, considering the solar system tilt is also causing planets orbits to enter and exit plane of the Milky Way Galaxy & Oort Clouds (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva_hypothesis)

3. How can galactic tilt and barycentric effects of planets on the Sun affect what Solar Longitudes are most active?

4. How can we more effectively correlate Heliospheric longitudes (that rotate with the suns carrington rotation #) with a fixed Solar System longitude (plane of ecliptic) to monitor what direction active regions erupt on the backside/Not-Earth facing side relative to our solar system?

https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/solar-synoptic-map - This shows Heliospheric longitudes that rotate with the sun

https://iswa.gsfc.nasa.gov/IswaSystemWebApp/iSWACygnetStreamer?timestamp=2038-01-23+00%3A44%3A00&window=-1&cygnetId=261 - this seems to have Solar System longitudes fixed with relation to the Earth's location as 0degrees longitude, but not other planets

5. What can WSO's Heliospheric Current Sheet Tilt Angle tell us about our solar cycle length & duration or polar filament eruption location & if it reflects the change of tilt the solar system experiences as it wobbles about its rotation around the galaxy. Also, seems like it hasn't been updated since July which is crazy considering how important 55 degrees latitude seems to be on the sun.

http://wso.stanford.edu/Tilts.html - (thanks @Capricopia for sharing this!)

 

Regarding 55 DEGREES..

The polar eruption on 2/2 was definitely crazy cool, I've definitely never seen that before! I was curious about 55 degrees latitude too & ask you a question on twitter back in July last year and not sure if I got a response being new to the app pre-Elon days. I found & posted the old posts below to hopefully clarify & visualize what I meant:

To summarize:

I found it super interesting how you were able to track filament eruptions occurring primarily around 55 latitude, and its relation to the polar coronal holes disappearing around that time. To me it seemed somewhat similar to the polar jet streams location on Earth determining where the largest temperature and energy differentials are located.

Basically, I thought the 55 degrees latitude was important on our Sun due to the solar systems 60 degree tilt relative to the galactic plane.

The reason being: I assume +-55degrees latitude on the sun is equivalent to +-23.5 degrees latitude on the Earth due to the Earths's 23.5 degree tilt relative to the sun determining the latitude extent of greatest insolation between the tropics of Capricorn and Cancer. It also seems to be where the most extreme weather events on Earth tend to generate or intensify (hurricanes, tornadoes, volcanoes, subduction earthquakes, etc.).

I figured if Earths tilt is important enough to determine the latitude location of our tropic belt, horse latitudes, & polar jet stream... the Sun's tilt must be related to why polar crown filaments occur at its equivalent highest tilt latitude around 55-60 degrees.

Its interesting how the Sun is tilted more than the Earth relative to what its rotating around and thus, I would expect the Sun to have a larger "tropics belt" or active region than the earth. So if the Earth was tilted 60degrees relative to the sun instead of 23.5 degrees, I would expect our tropics region to expand north to 60 degrees latitude, and our polar region to shrink... making hurricanes and tornadoes more likely on most of the globe. 

Interestingly, I have noticed the Aurora Belt or Arctic Circle IS at 60 degrees latitude on earth, and wondered how the Sun's tilt/galactic plane relative to us might affect what latitude auroras are seen on Earth.

Thank you so much for taking the time to answer any of these questions, its really awesome to have Solar scientist publicly share their work and answer questions, especially on a forum that can handle this kind of discussion. Excuse me for only understanding some rudimentary Earth-based concepts as I'm a relative newcomer to Solar Physics.

 

Interesting that the Sun's surface turbulance near the poles experiencing differential rotation would not be affected by a spheres overall tilt relative to direction of incoming cosmic wind.. I'm very curious how the Sun's internal & surface dynamics might be influenced by the galactic center it orbits around & oncoming cosmic wind that comes from the galaxy center and outside the galaxy.

 

Here is the responses I'm still trying to understand to a question I asked in May this year about whether Planetary (Jupiter) Tidal Effects influnce the Suns Active Longitudes, (I didn't know about the sun's barycenter changing yet):

**

I guess I'm curious how changes to the Suns Barycenter can be effected by our planets gravity or tidal effect to influence active region eruptions... yet you are saying the energy overall is considered not dense enough to influence sunspot activity longitudes because a pattern would appear more regularly? I'm just confused about how we would monitor this fact if we don't record the Plane of Ecliptic azimuth of active regions erupting once they are on the backside to see if they are in the same longitude as certain planets? Sorry if this is confusing, I'm just not sure where to find recorded Solar system longitudes for large eruptions on the far-side of the sun I guess.

Thanks again for taking the time, apologies for making this post so long for how few questions there actually are!

Bry

[Philalethes]

24 minutes ago, Bry said:

1. How the Solar System's Tilt relative to Milky Way Galaxy (or "Shiva Hypothesis" from 1979) and wobble about its galactic rotation is related to Solar Cycle length and duration (or Sun's internal dynamics).

I think that one's going to be tough to measure, given that we cross the galactic plane roughly every ~35 million years.

The more interesting parts of that to me is the potential tidal synchronization; the paper you mention in that tweet is the one I brought up earlier in the thread, I believe. I've also come across quite a few other papers discussing various effects, including and old one I read recently where the author used a method he claimed would be deemed acceptable in the context of detecting a faint radio signal that showed a faint but measurable effect of Mercury's position on the sunspot number.

Not sure if that's really in line with the parts of terminator theory that are the topic here, though; perhaps we should make a thread for investigating tidal influences on Solar activity.

[Scott McIntosh]

53 minutes ago, Bry said:

Awesome to get to ask you questions on this forum with more room to elaborate than on twitter! Thanks for taking the time, I'm so glad others have already asked some of the burning questions on topics regarding predicting solar cycle length, duration, and barycentric effects on active solar longitudes. Here's a list of some topics I also hope are covered:

1. How the Solar System's Tilt relative to Milky Way Galaxy (or "Shiva Hypothesis" from 1979) and wobble about its galactic rotation is related to Solar Cycle length and duration (or Sun's internal dynamics).

2. How the gravitational effects of planets affect the Suns barycenter, considering the solar system tilt is also causing planets orbits to enter and exit plane of the Milky Way Galaxy & Oort Clouds (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva_hypothesis)

3. How can galactic tilt and barycentric effects of planets on the Sun affect what Solar Longitudes are most active?

4. How can we more effectively correlate Heliospheric longitudes (that rotate with the suns carrington rotation #) with a fixed Solar System longitude (plane of ecliptic) to monitor what direction active regions erupt on the backside/Not-Earth facing side relative to our solar system?

https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/solar-synoptic-map - This shows Heliospheric longitudes that rotate with the sun

https://iswa.gsfc.nasa.gov/IswaSystemWebApp/iSWACygnetStreamer?timestamp=2038-01-23+00%3A44%3A00&window=-1&cygnetId=261 - this seems to have Solar System longitudes fixed with relation to the Earth's location as 0degrees longitude, but not other planets

5. What can WSO's Heliospheric Current Sheet Tilt Angle tell us about our solar cycle length & duration or polar filament eruption location & if it reflects the change of tilt the solar system experiences as it wobbles about its rotation around the galaxy. Also, seems like it hasn't been updated since July which is crazy considering how important 55 degrees latitude seems to be on the sun.

http://wso.stanford.edu/Tilts.html - (thanks @Capricopia for sharing this!)

 

Regarding 55 DEGREES..

The polar eruption on 2/2 was definitely crazy cool, I've definitely never seen that before! I was curious about 55 degrees latitude too & ask you a question on twitter back in July last year and not sure if I got a response being new to the app pre-Elon days. I found & posted the old posts below to hopefully clarify & visualize what I meant:

To summarize:

I found it super interesting how you were able to track filament eruptions occurring primarily around 55 latitude, and its relation to the polar coronal holes disappearing around that time. To me it seemed somewhat similar to the polar jet streams location on Earth determining where the largest temperature and energy differentials are located.

Basically, I thought the 55 degrees latitude was important on our Sun due to the solar systems 60 degree tilt relative to the galactic plane.

The reason being: I assume +-55degrees latitude on the sun is equivalent to +-23.5 degrees latitude on the Earth due to the Earths's 23.5 degree tilt relative to the sun determining the latitude extent of greatest insolation between the tropics of Capricorn and Cancer. It also seems to be where the most extreme weather events on Earth tend to generate or intensify (hurricanes, tornadoes, volcanoes, subduction earthquakes, etc.).

I figured if Earths tilt is important enough to determine the latitude location of our tropic belt, horse latitudes, & polar jet stream... the Sun's tilt must be related to why polar crown filaments occur at its equivalent highest tilt latitude around 55-60 degrees.

Its interesting how the Sun is tilted more than the Earth relative to what its rotating around and thus, I would expect the Sun to have a larger "tropics belt" or active region than the earth. So if the Earth was tilted 60degrees relative to the sun instead of 23.5 degrees, I would expect our tropics region to expand north to 60 degrees latitude, and our polar region to shrink... making hurricanes and tornadoes more likely on most of the globe. 

Interestingly, I have noticed the Aurora Belt or Arctic Circle IS at 60 degrees latitude on earth, and wondered how the Sun's tilt/galactic plane relative to us might affect what latitude auroras are seen on Earth.

Thank you so much for taking the time to answer any of these questions, its really awesome to have Solar scientist publicly share their work and answer questions, especially on a forum that can handle this kind of discussion. Excuse me for only understanding some rudimentary Earth-based concepts as I'm a relative newcomer to Solar Physics.

 

Interesting that the Sun's surface turbulance near the poles experiencing differential rotation would not be affected by a spheres overall tilt relative to direction of incoming cosmic wind.. I'm very curious how the Sun's internal & surface dynamics might be influenced by the galactic center it orbits around & oncoming cosmic wind that comes from the galaxy center and outside the galaxy.

 

Here is the responses I'm still trying to understand to a question I asked in May this year about whether Planetary (Jupiter) Tidal Effects influnce the Suns Active Longitudes, (I didn't know about the sun's barycenter changing yet):

**

I guess I'm curious how changes to the Suns Barycenter can be effected by our planets gravity or tidal effect to influence active region eruptions... yet you are saying the energy overall is considered not dense enough to influence sunspot activity longitudes because a pattern would appear more regularly? I'm just confused about how we would monitor this fact if we don't record the Plane of Ecliptic azimuth of active regions erupting once they are on the backside to see if they are in the same longitude as certain planets? Sorry if this is confusing, I'm just not sure where to find recorded Solar system longitudes for large eruptions on the far-side of the sun I guess.

Thanks again for taking the time, apologies for making this post so long for how few questions there actually are!

Bry

Bry, That's quite a salvo!!

So in 2011/2012 when we first identified the 'terminator' as it became known [for a bit of fun here is a paper that we submitted to Science that eventually took 10 months to be declined for publication.... https://www.dropbox.com/s/rct415mn230jjgl/McIntosh-Science-2012.pdf?dl=0 It is INCREDIBLY dense and eventually became 5 papers.....] we thought VERY LONG AND HARD about the orbital period of jupiter [primarily] as a driver in the system, not OF the system, more like something that MIGHT synchronize or de-synchronize the hemispheres.....

I worked with a colleague who is an expert in orbital dynamics and gravity in general. Rough order of magnitude calculates showed that the gravitational energy of the planets imposed on the Sun (IF all the planets are in a line and pulling together) was something  between 10,000 and 100,000 times smaller that than the rotational energy of the star itself. This doesn't mean that as a third/fourth order effect that it might not show up, but just very unlikely to see in only 400 years of sunspot data. We have learned that sunspot data alone is insufficient to solve the problem at hand.

We can trace the prevalence of 55 degrees in the observational record back to the 1860s and the very dawn of plate photography. Its remarkable, but only one of the signatures that stack up there!! The fact the extended cycle bands show up at ~ 55 degrees and theres an apparent bifurcation in flow would appear to be an X-marks-the-spot in the hunt for the Sun's dynamo. Why? We speculate that its geometric due to the robustness of the latitude and the vert cyclic nature of it. The magnetic cycle is far more robust than the derivative sunspot cycle. That does not mean that we've discounted any of the theories mentioned in this thread or others. Really working on an occam's razor style approach without more sophisticated observations to go on.

I know that I'm not going one by one through your list, but that's my summary.

-Scott

 

[Bry]

**I'll have to respond to Scott separately because I tend to write/reference too much otherwise.

 

6 hours ago, Philalethes Bythos said:

I think that one's going to be tough to measure, given that we cross the galactic plane roughly every ~35 million years.

The more interesting parts of that to me is the potential tidal synchronization; the paper you mention in that tweet is the one I brought up earlier in the thread, I believe. I've also come across quite a few other papers discussing various effects, including and old one I read recently where the author used a method he claimed would be deemed acceptable in the context of detecting a faint radio signal that showed a faint but measurable effect of Mercury's position on the sunspot number.

Not sure if that's really in line with the parts of terminator theory that are the topic here, though; perhaps we should make a thread for investigating tidal influences on Solar activity.

I'm glad to see more people reading about tidal synchronization despite doubt in that review we both shared.  I'd love to hear more about Mercury's position on Sunspot number as well. Its funny, the review of the article I mention in my tweet was posted in May of this year, which is about when I started writing essays wondering about it on this forum while the moderater was away I guess.. lol. Now these topics are considered pseudo-science and demoted to "other" yet here we are... asking about these topics to a famous solar cycle determinator now that we've got the chance! Check out these old, but epic Conversation Topics that happened all summer speculating about sunspot activity & longitude to effects of the planets on suns barycenter to wondering which way the heliosphere is facing ... This might have been most of my summer sadly.. would hate for all this treasure to get buried! All to figure out how the solar cycle is determined!

https://community.spaceweatherlive.com/topic/2446-why-so-many-limb-eruptions/?do=findComment&comment=22589

https://community.spaceweatherlive.com/topic/2483-place-sunspot-june-7/?do=findComment&comment=23359 - @Archmonoth first brings up barycenter!

https://community.spaceweatherlive.com/topic/2490-jupiter-sagittarius-the-barycenter’s-effects-on-sunspot-cycle/?do=findComment&comment=23562

Thanks for answering my first of maybe too many questions about whether the solar systems 60 degree tilt relative to the galaxy might contribute to why Scott and others think 55 degrees latitude is so important to the suns activity there.

You're right, the actual physical solar system does not actually cross the physical mass of our galactic "plane" except every 30-40million years and we are currently headed away from the galactic plane towards the galactic north direction so we won't for awhile... I guess I meant the galactic "equator" instead galactic "plane" according to this article which distinguishes between galactic plane and equator better than I just did:

Galactic Plane:

"When someone says galactic plane they are most often referring to the real Milky Way galaxy – home galaxy to our Earth and sun – spinning in space."

"The galactic plane is the actual mid-plane or center line of our galaxy’s huge spinning disk of stars. We are not located on the exact mid-plane of the galaxy. It’s this exact mid-plane people are speaking about when they speak of crossing something."

vs Galactic Equator:

"The galactic equator is an imaginary great circle that divides the equally imaginary celestial sphere into two equal halves. The celestial sphere is – of course – a fiction."

"When someone says galactic equator, they’re usually talking about the coordinate system of astronomers. On this coordinate system, modern astronomers tweak things a bit, to devise a sun-centered way of mapping the Milky Way galaxy. What’s tricky is that – when you look at the starry sky at night as seen from Earth – the galactic equator closely follows the plane of the Milky Way galaxy. Of course it does, because we’re talking about the real Milky Way in our sky."

As seen from the sun, the Earth crosses the galactic equator twice a year, every year.

As seen from Earth, the sun crosses the galactic equator twice a year, every year.

As seen from Earth, the moon crosses the galactic equator two (sometimes three) times a month"

Too many frames of reference lol! All these quotes are from:

https://earthsky.org/astronomy-essentials/will-earth-pass-through-galactic-plane-in-2012/

I guess my point is that although the solar system won't cross the galactic plane for many millions of years, it does cross the galactic equator which is an imaginary extension of the galactic plane that interacts with the tilt of the solar system twice a year at least. Seems like these "solstice points" change 1 degree every 72 years as well which might explain why solar cycles and planetary positions don't line up the same every year.

"Quite by coincidence, the great circle of the ecliptic – the projection of the Earth’s orbital plane onto the celestial sphere – intersects the galactic equator near the solstice points. According to the computational wizard Jean Meeus*, the solstice points were in alignment with the galactic equator as recently as the year 1998 – in other words, they were closer on the sky’s dome then. But in 2011 and 2012, these points – the solstice point, and the point where the sun crosses the galactic equator – are near each other on our sky’s dome."

"What is the ecliptic?"

"It’s true that the sun on the December solstice doesn’t return to the same exact spot in front of the backdrop stars every year. The solstice point slowly but surely moves westward through the stars at about one degree per every 72 years. (For reference, the sun’s diameter equals about 1/2 degree.)"

"Therefore, the solstice point moves about 30^o westward every 2,160 years. By the year 2269, the December solstice point will cross into the constellation Ophiuchus. Then the solstices won’t happen so near the location of the galactic equator in our sky."

Thanks for commenting!

[Philalethes]

7 hours ago, Bry said:

I'd love to hear more about Mercury's position on Sunspot number as well.

I still think this should probably have its own topic, but the article I was talking about was this one by Bigg from 1967; therein he writes (bold highlights are mine):

Quote

The tests which have been applied to see whether Mercury influences sunspot numbers do not individually show any effect large enough to be entirely convincing. Considered together, it is difficult to believe that the effects could be due to chance. Positive identification of a weak radio signal of known frequency would normally be claimed if the analogous tests yielded comparable results. Although logically statistical tests should be regarded in exactly the same way, a curious bias exists against accepting their findings when confidence levels are not overwhelmingly high. It is for this reason that the relation between the statistics and familiar experimental concepts have been so much emphasized here.

He further writes:

Quote

Some remarks by Brier (1965) on the large effects produced by relatively small periodic forces are relevant to a consideration of the nature of Mercury's influence. He has shown that when some quantity is slowly approaching a critical point—for example, a "no sunspot–sunspot" transition—the timing of the transition event may be considerably changed by the application of a periodically impressed influence which is small compared with that actually producing the transition. Thus it may be more appropriate to suppose that the planet's position alters the timing of spot formation or disappearance than to regard it as a direct cause of these events.

This seems to be in line with what I was talking about earlier, i.e. as tidal forcings only serving to synchronize the Solar dynamo rather than cause it to any meaningful degree.

7 hours ago, Bry said:

Now these topics are considered pseudo-science and demoted to "other" yet here we are...

I'm not sure if categorizing this as "other" necessarily makes it pseudoscience, but even though similar suppositions have a long history it still remains somewhat speculative. I prefer erring on the side of caution rather than jumping to conclusions, but I'll gladly discuss it with an open mind as long as relevant data and at least somewhat plausible mechanisms are brought up. Still don't think this is the right topic to continue talking about it, but I guess we'll keep going for now.

7 hours ago, Bry said:

Check out these old, but epic Conversation Topics

Good to see that there are some old topic on it; maybe we should continue those instead of using this thread (at least until we find undeniable proof of the connection between planetary tidal forces and the terminator events, heh).

As for old conversation topics about it, I've got a pretty ancient one for you: in several papers about it I noted a reference to an old letter to Carrington by none other than Wolf, whom the Wolf numbers (sunspot numbers) that we are still using today are named after, and this letter was written sometime around the end of 1858 or beginning of 1859 I believe (I think the dating to January 12 might mean that this was when it was written, before being published two days later), published in 1859 if I'm not mistaken, shortly before the Carrington event. In it Wolf writes:

Quote

In my eighth communication on the subject of the solar spots now ready for the press, I intend partly to give in detail my observations during the year 1858, and partly to continue the researches commenced in the seventh number. I shall accordingly show, by employing, on the one hand, my own observations in the year 1451 to 1858; and on the other, extracts from the observations of Schwabe in the years 1826 to 1848, that the formula

[formula I can't quite make out due to the notation, see below]

in which t denotes the number of years elapsed since a period of mean spot-frequency, gives a curve very similar to the sunspot-curve; and therefore is very fit to be taken as the foundation of the more detailed research which I have now in hand. Now, as the coefficients of the four sines are the values which the fraction m/r^2 assumes, when for m and r are successively substituted the masses and mean distances of Venus, Earth, Jupiter, and Saturn; and the angles of the four sines are the values of (360 degrees)/t, when for t are substituted the periodic times of the same planets, the conclusion seems to be inevitable, that my conjecture that the variations of spot-frequency depend on the influences of Venus, Earth, Jupiter, and Saturn, will not prove to be wholly unfounded. The preponderating planet Jupiter will in such case mainly determine the length and height of the wave of the spot-period; Saturn will cause small variations in the length and height; and, finally, the earth and Venus will change the smooth wave-line into a rippled one. Further investigation may decide this important question either affirmatively or negatively; but sketched out merely as it now is, I believe it will be found to have considerable interest.

Here we can see that Wolf was already thinking along those same lines that we're discussing. As for the formula, I'm struggling a bit to understand the notation, but I believe it should be something like this:

M = 50.31 + 3.73 * (1.68 * sin (585 degrees * 0.26t) + 1.00 * sin (360 degrees * 1.00t) + 12.53 * sin (30 degrees * 0.35t) + 1.12 * sin (12 degrees * 0.22t))

However, I couldn't quite make sense out of the resulting curve, so maybe I've interpreted the notation wrong. If anyone who sees this finds a better interpretation that better fits the Solar cycles in general, let me know.

7 hours ago, Bry said:

I guess I meant the galactic "equator" instead galactic "plane"

Yes, that makes more sense. I still don't think this would actually affect the Solar system, though; in the case of tidal forcings there's a very real and measurable movement of and change in the gravitational influence of the planets, but the galactic equator as seen from Earth is just a projection. It's essentially just a plane that is parallel to the actual galactic plane.

7 hours ago, Bry said:

interacts with the tilt of the solar system twice a year at least

I don't think it makes sense to say that there's any "interaction" going on there due to the above. It's just Sol appearing to cross the galactic equator, which is a plane parallel to the galactic plane projected out from Earth, and the only reason this happens is because Earth orbits Sol, nothing else. As the article you're referring to mentions:

Quote

You, however, now know the reality that, as seen from Earth, the sun crosses the galactic equator twice a year. And the galactic equator on our sky’s imaginary astronomical coordinate system more or less corresponds with the plane of the Milky Way galaxy. So, in this sense, the sun crosses the plane of the Milky Way twice a year (as seen from Earth).

The inclination of the Solar system itself (the invariable plane) to the galactic plane remains the same (or perhaps the Solar system itself has a certain rate of precession relative to the galaxy, but I haven't been able to find any conclusive information about this, and that's not really what's being suggested either).

7 hours ago, Bry said:

Seems like these "solstice points" change 1 degree every 72 years as well which might explain why solar cycles and planetary positions don't line up the same every year.

That is due to Earth's axial precession ("precession of the equinoxes"), so I really don't see how this could have any effect on Solar cycles or planetary positions.

I don't mind the inquiry at all, but I really don't think there could be any significant effects from variation in the angle of the Solar system relative to the galactic plane that we could measure over such short time; possibly with a few hundred thousand years of measurement we could start seeing something like that, or even a few millions so we could get a good measurement from farther out from the plane.

If anything galactic were to influence Solar activity in that manner, my best guess would be something like the galactic equivalent of the heliospheric current sheet, as speculated by Alfvén:

Quote

Hannes Alfvén and Per Carlqvist speculate on the existence of a galactic current sheet, a counterpart of the heliospheric current sheet, with an estimated galactic current of 10^17 to 10^19 amperes, that might flow in the plane of symmetry of the galaxy.

But that is most certainly not the topic of this thread either, and would probably be deserving of a third and separate topic altogether.

Edited February 8, 2023 by Philalethes Bythos

[3gMike]

2 hours ago, Philalethes Bythos said:

I still think this should probably have its own topic, but the article I was talking about was this one by Bigg from 1967; therein he writes (bold highlights are mine):

He further writes:

This seems to be in line with what I was talking about earlier, i.e. as tidal forcings only serving to synchronize the Solar dynamo rather than cause it to any meaningful degree.

I'm not sure if categorizing this as "other" necessarily makes it pseudoscience, but even though similar suppositions have a long history it still remains somewhat speculative. I prefer erring on the side of caution rather than jumping to conclusions, but I'll gladly discuss it with an open mind as long as relevant data and at least somewhat plausible mechanisms are brought up. Still don't think this is the right topic to continue talking about it, but I guess we'll keep going for now.

Good to see that there are some old topic on it; maybe we should continue those instead of using this thread (at least until we find undeniable proof of the connection between planetary tidal forces and the terminator events, heh).

As for old conversation topics about it, I've got a pretty ancient one for you: in several papers about it I noted a reference to an old letter to Carrington by none other than Wolf, whom the Wolf numbers (sunspot numbers) that we are still using today are named after, and this letter was written sometime around the end of 1858 or beginning of 1859 I believe (I think the dating to January 12 might mean that this was when it was written, before being published two days later), published in 1859 if I'm not mistaken, shortly before the Carrington event. In it Wolf writes:

Here we can see that Wolf was already thinking along those same lines that we're discussing. As for the formula, I'm struggling a bit to understand the notation, but I believe it should be something like this:

M = 50.31 + 3.73 * (1.68 * sin (585 degrees * 0.26t) + 1.00 * sin (360 degrees * 1.00t) + 12.53 * sin (30 degrees * 0.35t) + 1.12 * sin (12 degrees * 0.22t))

However, I couldn't quite make sense out of the resulting curve, so maybe I've interpreted the notation wrong. If anyone who sees this finds a better interpretation that better fits the Solar cycles in general, let me know.

Yes, that makes more sense. I still don't think this would actually affect the Solar system, though; in the case of tidal forcings there's a very real and measurable movement of and change in the gravitational influence of the planets, but the galactic equator as seen from Earth is just a projection. It's essentially just a plane that is parallel to the actual galactic plane.

I don't think it makes sense to say that there's any "interaction" going on there due to the above. It's just Sol appearing to cross the galactic equator, which is a plane parallel to the galactic plane projected out from Earth, and the only reason this happens is because Earth orbits Sol, nothing else. As the article you're referring to mentions:

The inclination of the Solar system itself (the invariable plane) to the galactic plane remains the same (or perhaps the Solar system itself has a certain rate of precession relative to the galaxy, but I haven't been able to find any conclusive information about this, and that's not really what's being suggested either).

That is due to Earth's axial precession ("precession of the equinoxes"), so I really don't see how this could have any effect on Solar cycles or planetary positions.

I don't mind the inquiry at all, but I really don't think there could be any significant effects from variation in the angle of the Solar system relative to the galactic plane that we could measure over such short time; possibly with a few hundred thousand years of measurement we could start seeing something like that, or even a few millions so we could get a good measurement from farther out from the plane.

If anything galactic were to influence Solar activity in that manner, my best guess would be something like the galactic equivalent of the heliospheric current sheet, as speculated by Alfvén:

But that is most certainly not the topic of this thread either, and would probably be deserving of a third and separate topic altogether.

I agree - can we please keep this thread for discussion on Terminator theory and likely effects on Cycle 25 - Thanks.

[Philalethes]

27 minutes ago, 3gMike said:

I agree - can we please keep this thread for discussion on Terminator theory and likely effects on Cycle 25 - Thanks.

To get back to what I was clarifying with Scott previously, I suppose the next thing to look out for with regards to the division of the terminator-adjusted cycle length into fifths would be when the fields start drifting apart after having flipped (i.e. actually passed each other, not just crossed zero); if I understood it correctly, that's what's expected to happen towards the end of this year (ultimately we would also have to look at the actual length after the fact when the next terminator occurs, but this length based on the previous one is also part of the prediction if I'm not mistaken).