Barycenter, momentum, and changes in the solar cycle.

[Archmonoth]

Over my time here on spaceweatherlive.com I have been drawn towards this idea which makes sense to me and have tried to find others to discuss this with. I am posting this in the  "other" section of the forum, since it is my speculation based on studies done. 

 

The premise: The position of Sun in relation to the barycenter of the solar system causes changes in the momentum of the Sun, and this conservation (slowing down) results in changes to sunspots, flares and CMEs. I will try and show there is a correlation between changes in momentum and solar activity. 

 

Here are the studies for the basis of my premise:

1706.01854.pdf (arxiv.org) This study shows changes in momentum and sunspots. Page 9 has an excellent picture to show this. Also, much of the angular momentum is balanced/shared with Jupiter and Saturn. My speculation on this, is that through flares and radiation, the energy from the conserved momentum is transformed into magnetic/spectral flux, radiated out, and absorbed by the planets adding to their spin. After billions of years, this is why Saturn and Jupiter contain so much angular momentum. 

 

1112.4168.pdf (arxiv.org) This study is on the measurement of the Sun's angular momentum. The study measured from 1999-2011 With changes from 1.9-1.63 appearing between 1999 and 2000. For reference this is the average angular momentum of the Sun: S⊙ = 1.92 × 1041 kg m2 s −1 .   (Any reference to the Sun's momentum will be referring to this.)

 

Lastly, 1999-2000 was a very active time. Here is a NASA article on this period: NASA - Top Story - Sun sheds magnetic skin 

This article discusses the flip in fields, and the activity during this time. 2 Peaks of sunspots are mentioned as being in July 2000 and October 2002, with a 2-year difference for when 1 hemisphere flipped and then the other. 

 

Because of Newton's Law of Motion, conservation of momentum takes time, and the rate of change in momentum equals the force. 

 

Here is a diagram of the barycenter, with a date and the lowest point of the Sun's angular momentum. 

 

 

My speculation based on these facts and studies is that the change of 1.9 to a lower momentum of 1.63 was conserved/transformed into the turbulence we see as sunspots and flares.

 

So how does the barycenter look currently and previous in relation to solar cycles?

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 needing to conserve less, since there is less distant to travel. 

 

SC 25 has the barycenter outside the Sun's radius in a similar arc to 1994 route, which would have similar activity to SC 23

 

I understand this is a limited SC set, but as illustrated in the 1st link/study, there is roughly a 2-year time lag between momentum and solar activity. There is roughly a 2-year lag from field flips for the other hemisphere/pole to change. My speculation is that this lag time of roughly 2 years is the time change of the momentum, from 

S⊙ = 1.90 × 1041 kg m2 s −1   --->  S⊙ = 1.63 × 1041 kg m2 s −1 

 

As with linear momentum the time it takes a semi-truck to stop is based on its mass. The Sun likewise turns corners around the barycenter, and the momentum is conserved through plasma and magnetic turbulence. 

 

Prediction: Solar cycle 25 will be very similar to SC 23 (overall) based on the arc/route around the barycenter. 

 

If anyone has any links or sites which monitor barycenter location or the Sun's angular momentum, I would be very interested. 

 

Edited February 10, 2023 by Archmonoth

[hamateur 1953]

Fascinating 

Fascinating and plausible!  

[David Silver]

It is highly likely this is the case, as the sun, Earth, and all bodies in our solar system and galaxy are electromagnetically interconnected to lesser or greater degrees, depending on a huge number of constantly changing factors. And - Our wobbly sun and solar system are not entirely isolated from outside forces, beyond the heliosphere…Just as we pass through the sun’s heliospheric current sheet often, the Earth also is probably affected by our position crossing through the current sheet of the Milky Way. Reasonable speculation, good hypothesis.

Edited February 10, 2023 by David Silver

[Archmonoth]

40 minutes ago, David Silver said:

It is highly likely this is the case, as the sun, Earth, and all bodies in our solar system and galaxy are electromagnetically interconnected to lesser or greater degrees, depending on a huge number of constantly changing factors. And - Our wobbly sun and solar system are not entirely isolated from outside forces, beyond the heliosphere…Just as we pass through the sun’s heliospheric current sheet often, the Earth also is probably affected by our position crossing through the current sheet of the Milky Way. Reasonable speculation, good hypothesis.

Thanks for the observations, David! This means a lot coming from you. As far as the galactic sheet, I am not sure what the force/effect on the barycenter would be. The barycenter modeling with the planets/mass of the solar system is pretty accurate, although there is always room for more information/influences. 

 

In linear momentum terms, the barycenter is like the road, and the semitruck going down the road is the Sun. The road is formed by the surrounding environment. (planets/asteroids/interstellar masses) However the distance and mass of nearby solar systems are pretty distant, I don't think they would change the angle or arc of the Sun's path around the barycenter.

 

If the hypothesis is true, or at least orbiting truth, this solar cycle would have a couple of X5+ flares, or sunspot numbers similar to solar cycle 23.

 Solar cycle 23 - Wikipedia

 

This would mean SC 25 would be greater than current predictions. We shall see in 3 years.

Edited February 10, 2023 by Archmonoth

[MissNeona]

5 hours ago, David Silver said:

It is highly likely this is the case, as the sun, Earth, and all bodies in our solar system and galaxy are electromagnetically interconnected to lesser or greater degrees, depending on a huge number of constantly changing factors. And - Our wobbly sun and solar system are not entirely isolated from outside forces, beyond the heliosphere…Just as we pass through the sun’s heliospheric current sheet often, the Earth also is probably affected by our position crossing through the current sheet of the Milky Way. Reasonable speculation, good hypothesis.

I tried mentioning this in another thread, the connections seem to echo off of eachother a great deal. 

Either an under current or even a rippling in space, makes sense. Could be a coupled plasmapause, potentially. 

If there is an element that all the objects share it could be a reciever, too. 

[_00_]

 

Yes, that's the point of main sun cycles, this and the compensatory internal flows that give cohesion and prevent the collapse of the sun, its have frecuencies, amplitudes and resonances in a quasi-cyclically overlapping, & the system in forward swirling motion (one grade more on eqs)

 Some articles on the solar barycenter and the cycles (I will add more information that I have referenced or cited on the subject, I spent some time a while ago, but I do not have much organization, i have to to review )

 I.Charvátová (2000) - Can origin of the 2400-year cycle of solar activity be caused by solar inertial motion? (in spanish: http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Calen/charvatova_sp.pdf )

V. Zharkova (2020)  Modern Grand Solar Minimum will lead to terrestrial cooling

Robert Massey (2015)  Irregular heartbeat of the Sun driven by double dynamo

Miles Mathis (2014): The Cause of the Solar Cycle (more electromagnetic than gravitational, commented )

http://www.landscheidt.info

....

(I still have the doubt if the cycle of the sun should be considered of 11 years or double , the complete cycle of the dynamo ¿?)

Quote

If anyone has any links or sites which monitor barycenter location or the Sun's angular momentum, I would be very interested.   think

It seems to me that there isn't, all are approximations and inferences taking into account the major planets, we don't have doppler outside the solar system, maybe this could help you:

baricenter position 3D

2D plots of the radial distance of the centre of the Sun from the SSB for any timespan in the Horizons database. It also integrates the mean radial distance over the selected timespan

Edited March 29, 2023 by _00_
doubt

[_00_]

(to have a more accurate position or monitoring maybe you have to look for "Ephemeris time")

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_Propulsion_Laboratory_Development_Ephemeris

https://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/toolkit_docs/Tutorials/pdf/individual_docs/18_spk.pdf

 

you have the data here: https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/horizons/app.html#/ 

 

sun tangential speed relative to solar barycenter

Edited March 29, 2023 by _00_

[Philalethes]

1 hour ago, _00_ said:

Miles Mathis (2014): The Cause of the Solar Cycle (more electromagnetic than gravitational, commented )

I actually looked into the claims of this guy in great detail and found them to be completely erroneous, so I'd scratch that one off the list myself. I wrote a post about it here (and another a bit further down). I even sent him an email to give him a chance to explain, but he literally didn't even know where the galactic center is located in the software he'd been using himself to make his model.

I'm not saying there couldn't ultimately be some relationship between interplanetary and interstellar interactions and Solar activity, but his claims in particular have definitely proven to be faulty in my book.

[Archmonoth]

3 hours ago, _00_ said:

 

Yes, that's the point of main sun cycles, this and the compensatory internal flows that give cohesion and prevent the collapse of the sun, its have frecuencies, amplitudes and resonances in a quasi-cyclically overlapping, & the system in forward swirling motion (one grade more on eqs)

 Some articles on the solar barycenter and the cycles (I will add more information that I have referenced or cited on the subject, I spent some time a while ago, but I do not have much organization, i have to to review )

 

Thanks for the great links, especially with the Sage Math Cell. 

 

The barycenter being within the Sun's radius during the solar minimums was what I was suspecting. It's great to see some info on this. 

 

The various articles may take a bit for me to read through. However, I am marking the topic as solved, even though there is a limit in current information/measurements. 

 

Thank you _00_, I might have some more questions in the future after I digest some of these links/information. 

 

Again, my prediction if the barycenter and conserved momentum does have an effect on Sunspots/flares/CMEs it would result in a stronger solar cycle 25 than is currently predicted. Since the route of the Sun around the barycenter currently is similar to solar cycle 23, I would expect there to be similar activity. 

 

So, after hindsight, in the next 3 years I would be able to see if solar cycle 25 is stronger due to the momentum being conserved. My prediction was +/- 5% of solar cycle 23. Although after the Math Sage Cell link you provided, I might refine the prediction, now that I can see the routes clearer. 

2 hours ago, Philalethes Bythos said:

I actually looked into the claims of this guy in great detail and found them to be completely erroneous, so I'd scratch that one off the list myself. I wrote a post about it here (and another a bit further down).

That article defiantly seems like opinion and speculation. 

Edited March 29, 2023 by Archmonoth

[Philalethes]

1 hour ago, Archmonoth said:

The barycenter being within the Sun's radius during the solar minimums was what I was suspecting. It's great to see some info on this. 

Here's a plot I just made of Solar distance from the barycenter (using the DE405 ephemeris) against monthly smoothed SSNs from 1940-2030; I don't think any conclusions can be drawn from this alone, but it's always nice with some visualization.

[Archmonoth]

1 hour ago, Philalethes Bythos said:

Here's a plot I just made of Solar distance from the barycenter (using the DE405 ephemeris) against monthly smoothed SSNs from 1940-2030; I don't think any conclusions can be drawn from this alone, but it's always nice with some visualization.

This is very cool visualization, thanks!

 

In my first post of this thread, I reference a correlation with SSN and the changes in momentum, which is what I think is expressed via conservation. Distance from the barycenter isn't directly reflective of changes in momentum, but I appreciate any and all information. 

 

This evening I have been looking at the Sun's different barycenter routes during solar cycles, and found that the shape of the route is not reflective/predictive of higher or lower SSN. Solar cycle 22 for example was mostly within the Sun radius, and has an SSN of 233, and Solar cycle 23, which had lots of high magnitude flares, only had an SSN of 180 and a wide barycenter route outside the Sun's radius.

 

I will be watching over this solar cycle, but the idea seems to be dissolved/incorrect with access to Math Sage Cell/ DE405 ephemeris. 

Edited March 29, 2023 by Archmonoth

[dave]

This sort of thing goes back of course to the discussions in the now moribund Layman's Sunspot Count:

Layman's Sunspot Count. | Planetary Theory Moves to the Next Level (landscheidt.info)

'Movements' of the solar system's barycenter are simply another way of describing and summarising the slowly changing planetary alignments caused by the planets' orbits having differing periods.

Now it is not hard to find apparent regular cycles in the sun's behaviour tied to those planetary alignments.

Assuming, for the sake of argument, there is something real and deterministic in these cycles, the question is, could the cycles be mediated BY the barycenter.

Is there anything that could make the barycenter more than an abstract geometrical fact? Is the sun 'jerked' towards the barycenter?

There lies the problem. The sun is NOT attracted TO the nearby barycenter. It just  looks that way. While the sun is being attracted to Jupiter the pull originates hundreds of millions of miles away. The sun is indeed always falling towards Jupiter in some sense and the direction of the falling changing slowly.  But so long as the acceleration of each particle in the sun is the same, no strain in the sun can be produced. In other words we have to consider only the comparatively small errors arising from ignoring the size of the sun, that different particles are in fact at different distances from the pulling planet.  But, in any case, it seems to me that the energy production and the turmoil in the sun are so enormous that none of this is convincing. Tant pis.

[HalfFeralHuman]

On 2/10/2023 at 9:29 PM, Archmonoth said:

If anyone has any links or sites which monitor barycentre location or the Sun's angular momentum, I would be very interested. 

[EDIT: Just realised this had already been posted - sorry]

Weirdly I'd just been thinking about the barycentre's relationship to things. I came across this tool/sage script which takes horizon data and makes a 3D map of the barycentre for any given date range, including future.

I figured this diagram with the upcoming years included could also be useful to post here. 

Notably, We're just around the apoapsis of the barycentre about now and seeing a lot of activity. Hmm.... a barycentre's apoapsis? - sounds like an oxymoron /shrug

2 hours ago, dave said:

Is there anything that could make the barycenter more than an abstract geometrical fact?

I'm thinking that the barycentre also represents the directional concentration of gravitational influences on a body (in the distance of barycentre from the centre of the body). When the barycentre is far from the middle of the sun, the pull on sections of the sun is going to vary as it rotates. I figure that'd probably be enough to explain the effects talked of here.

Edited March 29, 2023 by HalfFeralHuman
Apology for repost.

[Philalethes]

4 hours ago, HalfFeralHuman said:

Notably, We're just around the apoapsis of the barycentre about now and seeing a lot of activity. Hmm.... a barycentre's apoapsis? - sounds like an oxymoron /shrug

Well, the point is to have a frame of reference whose rotation relative to distant objects ("the fixed stars", or in this case to "the fixed extragalactic objects") is negligible, so that you can meaningfully talk about the movement of Solar system bodies (and e.g. proper motion of stars too, turns out the stars are not so fixed after all) relative to it. Thus the ICRS and ICRF:

Quote

The International Celestial Reference System (ICRS) is the current standard celestial reference system adopted by the International Astronomical Union (IAU). Its origin is at the barycenter of the Solar System, with axes that are intended to "show no global rotation with respect to a set of distant extragalactic objects".

So in this case it's not the barycenter which has an apoapsis, just the graphic which keeps Sol fixed instead of the barycenter; in reality it is Sol which has the apoapsis around the barycenter, but even then it should be pretty obvious from the drunken swagger of this path that the dynamics of this many-body system is somewhat irregular, and that we're certainly not talking the kind of apsides found in more regular orbits.

I believe this 1987 paper should be of interest both with regards to this and this thread in general; here the long-term Solar movement around the barycenter is discussed at length, as well as its possible relation to sunspot cycles. With respect to the "apsides" of the shapes observed in the movement, they identify this movement as a series of cardioids and epitrochoids, and they refer to the closest and farthest points of each such cycle as a "peribac" and "apobac" respectively:

Quote

As noted earlier they plotted solar orbital cycles beginning and ending with times of the Sun's closest approach to the barycenter ('peribac'). The time of greatest separation of the Sun's center and barycenter for each orbital cycle was determined and labeled 'apobac'. And, in order to characterize the orientation of the orbit in inertial space, they defined an axis of symmetry ('axsym') by drawing a tangent to the two loops of the orbit which interesect near the barycenter, with a perpendicular through the intersection. The angular difference of this perpendicular and F describes the orientation of the orbit in space [...] The axsym bears a conceptual similarity to the line of apsides of planetary orbits (the line connecting the perihelion and aphelion of a planetary orbit, which is the major axis of the orbital ellipse). However, while the apsides of planetary orbits typically rotate slowly in space, the axsym of the solar orbit has a mean retrograde rotation of about 117.4° per orbit. This is linked with the Saturn-Jupiter lap cycle (SJL); each successive conjunction of these bodies takes place roughly - 117° from the previous one, returning to approximately the same part of the range in 3 cycles or about 59.6 yr. If the separation of successive conjunctions were 120° exactly, then the directions of the conjunctions would not change; however, the actual case gives rise to a slow rotation, where 900 yr is the interval between successive conjunctions of Jupiter and Saturn in the same direction in inertial space. In celestial mechanics this is termed the Jupiter-Saturn 'great inequality'.

Apart from that, and more generally for the thread, they also address the lack of evidence for tidal forcings having any effect on sunspot cycles, but how the acceleration of the Solar motion itself due to its movement around the barycenter is far greater than any tidal acceleration, and could be much more likely to have an effect. Here's the entire "Previous Investigations" section, since there are a lot of interesting mentions there concerning this topic (citations removed for readability), including some shortcomings of the previous work at that point:

Quote

The question of a planetary influence on solar activity has a long history, beginning with investigations by Wolf and Carrington in the mid-19th century. A number of workers present evidence of a relationship of solar activity and the positioning of planets. Others note a close correspondence of sunspot periodicities and planetary orbital period resonances. The hypothesis of a planetary tidal influence on solar activity is understandably regarded with skepticism, as the tidal forces at the surface of the Sun are about 10^12 times smaller than the solar gravity there. While some investigators have reported correlations of planetary tides and solar activity, others have reported null results. The analysis by Okal and Anderson is particularly convincing; these authors computed the full tidal problem for the Sun, finding no relationship of solar activity and tidal potential. It is very important to distinguish between planetary tidal studies and studies relating to the solar orbital motion. The solar motion plotted in Figure 1 is a phenomenon bearing little or no relationship to solar tidal variations. The accelerations of the solar motion are orders of magnitude larger than the tidal accelerations. Arriaga, Wood and Wood, Jose, Pimm and Bjorn, and Landscheidt present evidence of a relationship linking the solar motion and solar activity. Of these the studies by Jose and Landscheidt are of particular interest. Jose studied the solar motion for the years 1653-2060, comparing this with the record of solar activity to 1964. He found a remarkable correspondence of curves of the rate of change of solar orbital angular momentum (dL/dt) and the rate of change of angular momentum about the instantaneous center of curvature (dP/dt) and sunspot numbers. In addition he noted a fundamental repetition period of 178.7 yr in the curves for R, p, dL/dt, and dP/dt; his curves for 1655-1833 are remarkably similar to those for 1833-2012. Landscheidt noted that the largest fluctuations of dL/dt take place when the Sun's center passes near the barycenter. He calculated the strength of these impulses and found a relationship linking successive strong impulses with the phase of the 80-90 yr secular Gleissberg cycle of solar activity since 1700. He noted in addition a correspondence in time of the strongest impulses and prolonged solar activity minima identified in the 8000-yr I4C curve published by Eddy. Landscheidt later employed the less cumbersome dT/dt to identify the times and amplitudes of impulsive changes in the solar motion. Cross correlation of yearly values of dT/dt and sunspot numbers yielded significant positive correlation at 11, 22, and 31 yr. Sunspot numbers lag the dT/dt curve by about 5.5 yr. And, the extrema of the smoothed curve correspond to maxima of the 80-90 yr Gleissberg cycle. The relationships of solar motion and solar activity described by Jose and Landscheidt are not perfect. Jose speculated that the polarity of cycles 20 and 21 might be the same; this was not observed. While he suggested that the period around 1978 might be anomalous, he failed to predict the strong activity maximum that occurred. Landscheidt's calculated AL shows no strong impulse at the time of the Wolf minimum (1281-1347) of solar activity. Perfect agreement of the calculated function and solar activity is only to be expected when all relevant physical interactions are accurately quantified. This is not the case in these studies, where no physical interactions within the Sun are considered. The degree of correspondence found linking the solar variation and the solar inertial motion is in this light remarkable.

Edited March 29, 2023 by Philalethes Bythos
typo

[Archmonoth]

7 hours ago, dave said:

Assuming, for the sake of argument, there is something real and deterministic in these cycles, the question is, could the cycles be mediated BY the barycenter.

That was my original idea, since changes in momentum and changes in the solar cycle are correlative. When the barycenter changes, whether inside the Sun's radius or outside might have an effect. So far it does not seem reflective of the shape/route it has on the barycenter. 

7 hours ago, dave said:

Is there anything that could make the barycenter more than an abstract geometrical fact? Is the sun 'jerked' towards the barycenter?

It's a center of rotation and moving further or closer to it will change rotational speeds of things orbiting it. Right now, Jupiter and Saturn account for 90%+ of the total angular momentum in the solar system. However, changes to the Sun's momentum don't need to be drastic, only enough to initiate some turbulence. 

7 hours ago, dave said:

There lies the problem. The sun is NOT attracted TO the nearby barycenter. It just  looks that way. While the sun is being attracted to Jupiter the pull originates hundreds of millions of miles away.

I get that, but the rotational speed of the Sun is not constant, and I'm looking for events/geometry or even a pattern in the changes of angular momentum. 

7 hours ago, dave said:

  But, in any case, it seems to me that the energy production and the turmoil in the sun are so enormous that none of this is convincing. Tant pis.

Agreed, and interior solar dynamics are probably the reason for change sin angular momentum changes, like a gyroscope or dynamo. In this case the barycenter, or the accretion disc acts like a gimbal, and the "wobble" or variation in the barycenter prevents gimbal lock.

 

6 hours ago, HalfFeralHuman said:

Weirdly I'd just been thinking about the barycentre's relationship to things. I came across this tool/sage script which takes horizon data and makes a 3D map of the barycentre for any given date range, including future.

Awesome, thanks for the link. I am very grateful for the links provided in this thread to explore changes and routes in the barycenter.

6 hours ago, HalfFeralHuman said:

I'm thinking that the barycentre also represents the directional concentration of gravitational influences on a body (in the distance of barycentre from the centre of the body). When the barycentre is far from the middle of the sun, the pull on sections of the sun is going to vary as it rotates. I figure that'd probably be enough to explain the effects talked of here.

I agree, I don't think gravitational forces are strong enough in this case. I am looking for how the shape of the barycenter (curve, tight circles etc.) would change the angular momentum. The reason is because changes in angular momentum are correlative with solar activity. So as the Sun spins within, it orbits the barycenter, and different parts spins at different speeds. The conservation of momentum occurs since the velocity is variable, the slowing down and allocating will result in some sort of turbulence. The possibility is that the barycenter simply is/isn't enough turbulence of initiating the solar cycles or causes flares. I am waiting to see how solar cycle 25 plays out, since the route around the barycenter is similar to solar cycle 23.

 

3 hours ago, Philalethes Bythos said:

So in this case it's not the barycenter which has an apoapsis, just the graphic which keeps Sol fixed instead of the barycenter; in reality it is Sol which has the apoapsis around the barycenter, but even then it should be pretty obvious from the drunken swagger of this path that the dynamics of this many-body system is somewhat irregular, and that we're certainly not talking the kind of apsides found in more regular orbits.

Thanks for the language on this, and the distinction between orbits and "wobble". 

3 hours ago, Philalethes Bythos said:

Apart from that, and more generally for the thread, they also address the lack of evidence for tidal forcings having any effect on sunspot cycles, but how the acceleration of the Solar motion itself due to its movement around the barycenter is far greater than any tidal acceleration, and could be much more likely to have an effect. 

Yeah, I am not suggesting tidal forces, but changes, events, or patterns in changes in angular moment. The barycenter doesn't seem to have an obvious pattern (in relation to angular momentum changes), but I still have some exploration to do, and to wait for solar cycle 25 to play out. Thanks for your links and such, it has been very helpful.  

[Philalethes]

Here's a plot of the Solar barycentric motion from 1600-2200 with the 179-year cycle mentioned in the paper above highlighted (the dashed lines):

Quite interesting to see the clear similarities from cycle to cycle.

[_00_]

That paper maybe help with that question, with calculus of tidal & angular momentum.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/352288641_Shaken_and_Stirred_When_Bond_Meets_Suess-de_Vries_and_Gnevyshev-Ohl/fulltext/60c2173a4585157774c46f10/Shaken-and-Stirred-When-Bond-Meets-Suess-de-Vries-and-Gnevyshev-Ohl.pdf

Quote

Shaken and Stirred: When Bond Meets Suess–de Vries and
Gnevyshev–Ohl
F. Stefani 1 · R. Stepanov2,3 · T. Weier1
Received: 19 June 2020 / Accepted: 13 April 2021 / Published online: 10 June 2021
© The Author(s) 2021
Abstract
We argue that the most prominent temporal features of the solar dynamo, in particular the
Hale cycle, the Suess–de Vries cycle (associated with variations of the Gnevyshev–Ohl rule),
Gleissberg-type cycles, and grand minima can all be explained by combined synchroniza-
tion with the 11.07-year periodic tidal forcing of the Venus–Earth–Jupiter system and the
(mainly) 19.86-year periodic motion of the Sun around the barycenter of the solar system.
We present model simulations where grand minima, and clusters thereof, emerge as inter-
mittent and non-periodic events on millennial time scales, very similar to the series of Bond
events which were observed throughout the Holocene and the last glacial period. If con-
firmed, such an intermittent transition to chaos would prevent any long-term prediction of
solar activity, notwithstanding the fact that the shorter-term Hale and Suess–de Vries cycles
are clocked by planetary motion.

 

and another sim: http://orbitsimulator.com/gravitySimulatorCloud/simulations/1606055500986_Solar Systen Barycenter.html

And that other paper, explain how "barycenter movement" induce oscillations on radial velocity & toroidal mode

https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/pdf/2019/03/aa34712-18.pdf

Quote

Sectoral r modes and periodic radial velocity variations
of Sun-like stars
A. F. Lanza1, L. Gizon2,3,4, T. V. Zaqarashvili5,6,7, Z.-C. Liang2, and K. Rodenbeck3,2
1 INAF-Osservatorio Astrofisico di Catania, Via S. Sofia, 78 – 95123 Catania, Italy
e-mail: *****@*****.com
2 Max-Planck-Institut für Sonnensystemforschung, Justus-von-Liebig-Weg 3, 37077 Göttingen, Germany
e-mail: *****@*****.com
3 Georg-August-Universität, Institut für Astrophysik, Friedrich-Hund-Platz 1, 37077 Göttingen, Germany
4 Center for Space Science, NYUAD Institute, New York University Abu Dhabi, PO Box 129188, Abu Dhabi, UAE
5 Space Research Institute, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Schmiedlstraße 6, 8042 Graz, Austria
e-mail: *****@*****.com
6 Abastumani Astrophysical Observatory at Ilia State University, 3/5 Cholokashvili Avenue, 0162 Tbilisi, Georgia
7 IGAM-Kanzelhöhe Observatory, Institute of Physics, University of Graz, Universitätsplatz 5, 8010 Graz, Austria
Received 23 November 2018 / Accepted 24 January 2019
ABSTRACT
Context. Radial velocity (RV) measurements are used to search for planets orbiting late-type main-sequence stars and to confirm the
transiting planets.
Aims. The most advanced spectrometers are now approaching a precision of ∼10 cm s−1, which implies the need to identify and
correct for all possible sources of RV oscillations intrinsic to the star down to this level and possibly beyond. The recent discovery
of global-scale equatorial Rossby waves in the Sun, also called r modes, prompted us to investigate their possible signature in stellar
RV measurements. These r modes are toroidal modes of oscillation whose restoring force is the Coriolis force; they propagate in the
retrograde direction in a frame that co-rotates with the star. The solar r modes with azimuthal orders 3 ≤ m . 15 were identified
unambiguously because of their dispersion relation and their long e-folding lifetimes of hundreds of days.
Methods. In this paper, we simulate the RV oscillations produced by sectoral r modes with 2 ≤ m ≤ 5 by assuming a stellar rotation
period of 25.54 days and a maximum amplitude of the surface velocity of each mode of 2 m s−1. This amplitude is representative of
the solar measurements except for the m = 2 mode, which has not yet been observed on the Sun.
Results. Sectoral r modes with azimuthal orders m = 2 and 3 would produce RV oscillations with amplitudes of 76.4 and 19.6 cm s−1
and periods of 19.16 and 10.22 days, respectively, for a star with an inclination of the rotation axis to the line of sight i = 60◦. Therefore,
they may produce rather sharp peaks in the Fourier spectrum of the radial velocity time series that could lead to spurious planetary
detections.
Conclusions. Sectoral r modes may represent a source of confusion in the case of slowly rotating inactive stars that are preferential
targets for RV planet search. The main limitation of the present investigation is the lack of observational constraints on the amplitude
of the m = 2 mode on the Sun.

 

[_00_]

usufull to calculate sun barycenter:

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/PSJ/ababa4

https://pypi.org/project/barycorrpy/

 

[Philalethes]

This is perhaps even more interesting, here I've used an even bigger ephemeris and plotted the Solar distance from the barycenter in 179-year intervals on top of each other from year 1 to 3000; the cycles become extremely obvious, but some of the subcycles display some peculiar changes over time:

2 minutes ago, _00_ said:

usufull to calculate sun barycenter

That's nice; I'm using Skyfield myself (e.g. to calculate the data for the plot above), it uses barycentric coordinates out of the box and is very practical in terms of abstractions.

[Archmonoth]

On 3/30/2023 at 3:44 PM, Philalethes Bythos said:

This is perhaps even more interesting, here I've used an even bigger ephemeris and plotted the Solar distance from the barycenter in 179-year intervals on top of each other from year 1 to 3000; the cycles become extremely obvious, but some of the subcycles display some peculiar changes over time:

 

My initial thought is the lag time, or delay between distance, and then the momentum being conserved. Maybe I'm not describing this accurately but I'm looking for a pattern from the distance of the barycenter and changes in momentum. 

 

Do you have this info/chart but with 1-year increments, rather than 25 years? It won't change the data, but we could see exactly how many years from peak to valley. From looking at this visual, I am guessing it takes roughly 10 years, which is suspiciously close to a 1/2 cycle. 

 

Regardless, this is a great visual! 

[Philalethes]

1 hour ago, Archmonoth said:

Do you have this info/chart but with 1-year increments, rather than 25 years? It won't change the data, but we could see exactly how many years from peak to valley. From looking at this visual, I am guessing it takes roughly 10 years, which is suspiciously close to a 1/2 cycle.

I could add in more ticks or a grid, but in this case it's probably sufficient to note that there are 9 distinct subcycles of each cycle, so the mean peak-to-peak period is ~179 years / 9 = ~19.89 years, which is clearly primarily due to the Jupiter-Saturn synodic period of ~19.86 years; this indeed makes the mean peak-to-trough period ~10 years (~9.95 years in this case).

[Archmonoth]

2 hours ago, Philalethes Bythos said:

I could add in more ticks or a grid, but in this case it's probably sufficient to note that there are 9 distinct subcycles of each cycle, so the mean peak-to-peak period is ~179 years / 9 = ~19.89 years, which is clearly primarily due to the Jupiter-Saturn synodic period of ~19.86 years; this indeed makes the mean peak-to-trough period ~10 years (~9.95 years in this case).

To me this seems like there is a strong correlation in distance from barycenter and solar cycles. 1-year ticks could also show relationships to solar max, min and what's up and coming a little easier than approximating the distance on the visual. 

Edited April 1, 2023 by Archmonoth

[Philalethes]

2 hours ago, Archmonoth said:

To me this seems like there is a strong correlation in distance from barycenter and solar cycles.

It does look like there could be a connection, and a lot of people have suggested something similar, but the challenge for those who have proposed it and similar hypotheses remains that it's still a mismatch (of ~10% in this case), so the Solar cycle drifts in and out of phase against it; it's the same problem as when positing Jupiter alone as the primary driver with its 12-year orbit. A lot of attempts have been made to make sense of this in the past decades from what I've read, but I still haven't seen any successful predictive model that manages to actually match the Solar cycles.

2 hours ago, Archmonoth said:

1-year ticks could also show relationships to solar max, min and what's up and coming a little easier than approximating the distance on the visual. 

Well, it would if there were actually a good match, but as per the above the Solar cycle doesn't match up with it, so it's not possible to plot a general Solar cycle in any meaningful way against the cycles above. You can make this out in the first graph I posted above (this), where you can see how the cycles drift apart, sometimes lining up and other times being diametrically opposed to each other.

In any case, here are some graphs with more ticks if you want to doodle on them:

All barycentric cycles from year -2999 to 3000 (legend removed, was rather pointless in this case):

Just the last two barycentric cycles ending in 2050:

Just the last barycentric cycle ending in 2050, with vertical lines drawn in where the Solar cycles begin (as per the smoothed minima based on SILSO data), the last one being the beginning of SC25:

[Archmonoth]

4 hours ago, Philalethes Bythos said:

In any case, here are some graphs with more ticks if you want to doodle on them:

Fantastic, thank you!

[cgrant26]

Somewhat related: https://utahgeology.com/is-the-orbit-of-jupiter-related-to-solar-cycles-and-how-gravity-waves-create-arms-of-universe/