Patrick P.A. Geryl Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 5 minuten geleden, Jesterface23 zei: Solar minimum would be the easier one to predict early in theory. Typically there is one drop and when the solar activity picks up there would be a higher possibility the next cycle started. Right now we are likely in the lull between the 1st and 2nd peak of SC25. What the 2nd peak will be like, all we can do is wait and see. Right… "The worldwide community of professional astronomers is only about 10,000; most are located in the us (with about 1,000 in the UK and 250 in Australia)." From So You Want to Be an Astronomer by Duncan Forbes. Another source stated that the number of professional astronomers is about the size of a small town. So…. We did beat 10,000 astronomers. And that is not an achievement? And you still believe them? Well…. Put a poll on Twitter and ask who they will think will be right tis time🧐😊 Waiting… 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamateur 1953 Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 (edited) 8 hours ago, hamateur 1953 said: Edited April 8 by hamateur 1953 Errata Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tniickck Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 5 hours ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said: We did beat 10,000 astronomers. And that is not an achievement? lmao 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Jesterface23 Posted April 8 Popular Post Share Posted April 8 6 hours ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said: Right… "The worldwide community of professional astronomers is only about 10,000; most are located in the us (with about 1,000 in the UK and 250 in Australia)." From So You Want to Be an Astronomer by Duncan Forbes. Another source stated that the number of professional astronomers is about the size of a small town. So…. We did beat 10,000 astronomers. And that is not an achievement? And you still believe them? We could have a worse second peak or we could have a better second peak, we won't know until it actually starts. Keep making your predictions, and you will still want to use something like the word "prediction" in your predictions. Once you stop seeing it as "beat 10,000 astronomers", that will be your first achievement with more to come. 6 hours ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said: Well…. Put a poll on Twitter and ask who they will think will be right tis time🧐😊 Waiting… That's worse than a magic 8 ball. 4 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3gMike Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 Patrick, I cannot reconcile the values you posted for Jan-182 to Mar-182 (below) Year 2024 (10.7 sfu-64) ISN 2K 1K End January -182 93,0 123,5 270,6 178,4 End February - 182 93,4 124,6 268,9 177,3 End March -182 93,3 123,1 266,7 176,0 with the values posted as indicators in your earlier post i.e. 10.7cm 150, ISN 110, 1K 160, 2K 240 Can you explain that please? Does the subtraction of baseline value 64 apply only to the downslope, and does that mean that you use different factors for the downslope? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick P.A. Geryl Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 (edited) End March -182 days is almost the latest value you see on Solen. you got them right except 2K SN yes we use other values than the calculation to the maximum. We use now the factor 10.7/SSN-1... as explained earlier https://www.researchgate.net/publication/377064732_Calculating_the_Strength_of_Solar_Cycle_25_Using_365-day_Smoothing You need to compare this factor with the previous cycle! What do you see? It hit the last 10 days a factor in which the previous cycle started to drop rapidly! Can you check? Quite important finding So my formula is based on this Time from max 25 till same F10.7/SSN like cycle 24 Compare cycle 25 with 24 (time difference) Extend that in the future and adjust. Anybody can try. Edited April 9 by Patrick P.A. Geryl 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archmonoth Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 (edited) 18 hours ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said: We did beat 10,000 astronomers. And that is not an achievement? And you still believe them? Your attitude about knowledge and science is likely part of your difficulty navigating peer review. Edited April 9 by Archmonoth 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3gMike Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 10 hours ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said: End March -182 days is almost the latest value you see on Solen. you got them right except 2K SN yes we use other values than the calculation to the maximum. We use now the factor 10.7/SSN-1... as explained earlier https://www.researchgate.net/publication/377064732_Calculating_the_Strength_of_Solar_Cycle_25_Using_365-day_Smoothing You need to compare this factor with the previous cycle! What do you see? It hit the last 10 days a factor in which the previous cycle started to drop rapidly! Can you check? Quite important finding So my formula is based on this Time from max 25 till same F10.7/SSN like cycle 24 Compare cycle 25 with 24 (time difference) Extend that in the future and adjust. Anybody can try. Patrick, you appear to be saying that your factor F10.7/SSN is more significant than the actual 365 day measurements. I will try to find some time to check what you are saying about the last 10 days but for now I would just point out that the current 365day smoothed flux, as recorded on Jan's website, is 156.95 - not significantly different than the current peak of 158.71 recorded in June 2023. I also note that in the table you show that the data for F10.7 and ISN has changed by 0.2 to 0.3% (between Jan-182 and Mar-182), with flux rising and ISN falling. Compare that with the data for 1K and 2K SSN, which have fallen by 1.35% and 1.5% in the same period. Surely that is having an influence on your factor, making it difficult to make any useful comparisons. Can you also please explain why you used F10.7 - 64 in the table when you say that you are using F10.7 in calculating the factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3gMike Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 22 hours ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said: You need to compare this factor with the previous cycle! What do you see? That depends upon exactly where I look. Bear in mind that I do not have access to raw data so I am taking values from the graph as accurately as I can. If I look at C24 max (I used max of F10.7) I get F10.7/2KSSN = 145/247 giving a factor of 95.87 Looking at C25 current max as marked on the graph I get 158/275 giving a factor of 95.75. That seems to be similar to the figure for cycle 24, but is it really significant? I am not yet convinced that it is. Choosing an arbitrary value of flux (124) and comparing with 2K SSN in different parts of each cycle C24 rising July 2013 2K SSN = 192 giving a factor of 96.46 C24 falling May 2015 2K SSN = 180 giving a factor of 96.89 C25 rising June 2022 2K SSN = 192 - identical to C24 rising This begs the question, why does C24 falling edge produce a different factor? Similarly I can identify a point in cycle 24 (April 2013) with F10.7 = 116 and 2K SSN = 168 producing a factor of 96.91 This is almost identical to the value for May 2015 (96.89) in a completely different phase of the cycle. The reasons for these variations need to be explained before the theory can be validated. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick P.A. Geryl Posted April 10 Share Posted April 10 20 uren geleden, 3gMike zei: That depends upon exactly where I look. Bear in mind that I do not have access to raw data so I am taking values from the graph as accurately as I can. If I look at C24 max (I used max of F10.7) I get F10.7/2KSSN = 145/247 giving a factor of 95.87 Looking at C25 current max as marked on the graph I get 158/275 giving a factor of 95.75. That seems to be similar to the figure for cycle 24, but is it really significant? I am not yet convinced that it is. Choosing an arbitrary value of flux (124) and comparing with 2K SSN in different parts of each cycle C24 rising July 2013 2K SSN = 192 giving a factor of 96.46 C24 falling May 2015 2K SSN = 180 giving a factor of 96.89 C25 rising June 2022 2K SSN = 192 - identical to C24 rising This begs the question, why does C24 falling edge produce a different factor? Similarly I can identify a point in cycle 24 (April 2013) with F10.7 = 116 and 2K SSN = 168 producing a factor of 96.91 This is almost identical to the value for May 2015 (96.89) in a completely different phase of the cycle. The reasons for these variations need to be explained before the theory can be validated. The F10.7/2K SSSN is the lowest at the maximum on 1 day and goes than almost uninterrupted up to the highest value on the day of the minimum! I saw that ont the maximum 10.7 flux date in cycle 24 a certain factor was reached. The same like I saw about 12 days ago. The interesting thing is that afterwards the 10.7 flux started to drop in cycle 24…. Just like I now see a drop… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamateur 1953 Posted April 10 Share Posted April 10 (edited) My advice to @Patrick P.A. Geryl ? Please contact @3gMike and @Parabolicvia pm and explain your theories to them. They appear to be interested. I am personally sick of hyperbolic speculations that have zero relevance to any normal SC evolution in our solar system. And with that. I am off. Good luck gentlemen. Edited April 10 by hamateur 1953 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamateur 1953 Posted April 10 Share Posted April 10 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEh2vNBcJa0 one last caveat: always consider the source when evaluating an individual’s veracity. Heck I have never had a song sung on my behalf. I was impressed immediately. Your impressions may vary. Mike/Hagrid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post 3gMike Posted April 10 Popular Post Share Posted April 10 3 hours ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said: The F10.7/2K SSSN is the lowest at the maximum on 1 day and goes than almost uninterrupted up to the highest value on the day of the minimum! I saw that ont the maximum 10.7 flux date in cycle 24 a certain factor was reached. The same like I saw about 12 days ago. The interesting thing is that afterwards the 10.7 flux started to drop in cycle 24…. Just like I now see a drop… O.K. Patrick, I have now spent a fair amount of time evaluating your claims. Here are a couple of images which sum up the performance of your growth factor and I think it becomes clear that it has little in the way of predictive value. First an indication of the fraction of cycles 24 and 25 which have been evaluated(highlighted areas). Then a plot of the growth factors based on (F10.7/SSN)-1 x10 +100 for ISN, 1K and 2K It can be seen that the 2K factor, which seems to be your preferred indicator, is extremely insensitive - changing by only 1.5 counts for cycle 24 and 3 counts for cycle 25. Even the ISN factor loses any discrimination as higher SSN values are approached. 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Shriver Posted April 10 Share Posted April 10 2 hours ago, hamateur 1953 said: My advice to @Patrick P.A. Geryl ? Please contact @3gMike and @Parabolicvia pm and explain your theories to them. They appear to be interested. I am personally sick of hyperbolic speculations that have zero relevance to any normal SC evolution in our solar system. And with that. I am off. Good luck gentlemen. Really, it may be a lacking of other outlets and interaction with fellows on the topic. There isn't exactly a logic-based social media platform for anyone to flock to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamateur 1953 Posted April 10 Share Posted April 10 11 minutes ago, Christopher Shriver said: Really, it may be a lacking of other outlets and interaction with fellows on the topic. There isn't exactly a logic-based social media platform for anyone to flock to. A valid point @Christopher Shriver They have provided a section (UPT) for these discussions to take place, though. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3gMike Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 (edited) Given that the latest update from WSO indicates that the Filtered Average Polar Field crossed zero last August I thought it might be worth comparing this with earlier cycles. The WSO data only goes back to 1976 so I reviewed various points for Cycles 21 to25 (to date). It is worth noting that the filter is applied over approximately 19 months, so the Cycle 25 polar crossing point may shift slightly up until June this year. Cycle No. First Peak(mths) Dip (mths) Second peak (mths) Start of decay (mths) Polar zero (mths) 21 45* 58 61 66 46 22 38* 46 53 59 40 23 44 54 63* 66 42 24 39 52 64* 64 50 25 42 44 Note: * indicates cycle max I will leave you to draw your own conclusions. Edited April 21 by 3gMike Hit tab key in error! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomyyB Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 Hi yall I'm kinda new to this stuff can someone explain to me the very basics, or one bit, just a simplified version of how you're working out these predictions and what some things are. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3gMike Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 6 minutes ago, TomyyB said: Hi yall I'm kinda new to this stuff can someone explain to me the very basics, or one bit, just a simplified version of how you're working out these predictions and what some things are. Thanks! Welcome to the Forum. It is a big subject but a good starting point might be to take a look at the Solar Cycle section https://www.spaceweatherlive.com/en/solar-activity/solar-cycle.html. There you will find a record of all the previous cycles. If you go into the Historical cycles section you can then compare one cycle with one or several others. That will give you some idea of how the cycles vary in terms of duration and amplitude. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tniickck Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 (edited) 1 hour ago, 3gMike said: Given that the latest update from WSO indicates that the Filtered Average Polar Field crossed zero last August I thought it might be worth comparing this with earlier cycles. The WSO data only goes back to 1976 so I reviewed various points for Cycles 21 to25 (to date). It is worth noting that the filter is applied over approximately 19 months, so the Cycle 25 polar crossing point may shift slightly up until June this year. Cycle No. First Peak(mths) Dip (mths) Second peak (mths) Start of decay (mths) Polar zero (mths) 21 45* 58 61 66 46 22 38* 46 53 59 40 23 44 54 63* 66 42 24 39 52 64* 64 50 25 42 44 Note: * indicates cycle max I will leave you to draw your own conclusions. yeah i see that when there are two peaks polar zero happens a couple of months later after it and then the second peak happens after a few months. hopefully SC25 is the case. by the way we are having >200 spots 4 days in a row, i am curious to see final SSN for april Edited April 21 by tniickck 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3gMike Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 13 minutes ago, tniickck said: yeah i see that when there are two peaks polar zero happens a couple of months leter after it and then the second peak happens after a few months. hopefully SC25 is the case. by the way we are having >200 spots 4 days in a row, i am curious to see final SSN for april Yes, it is not absolutely consistent, and we have limited data, but there does seem to be a fairly close relationship. The growth in sunspots and solar flux is encouraging. The EISN current monthly mean is around 120. I suspect that will drop by month end but I will be surprised if it is not higher than the March mean. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamateur 1953 Posted April 21 Share Posted April 21 29 minutes ago, 3gMike said: Yes, it is not absolutely consistent, and we have limited data, but there does seem to be a fairly close relationship. The growth in sunspots and solar flux is encouraging. The EISN current monthly mean is around 120. I suspect that will drop by month end but I will be surprised if it is not higher than the March mean. Something also notable is the ISN recently exceeding F 10.7. I have seen this before when reviewing Jans historical data charts, but it is infrequent. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3gMike Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 10 hours ago, hamateur 1953 said: Something also notable is the ISN recently exceeding F 10.7. I have seen this before when reviewing Jans historical data charts, but it is infrequent. Yes, the EISN for today sits at 320 and we have 19 Active regions. F10.7 is doing pretty well too - sitting above 210 for the longest duration this cycle I think. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamateur 1953 Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 (edited) 43 minutes ago, 3gMike said: Yes, the EISN for today sits at 320 and we have 19 Active regions. F10.7 is doing pretty well too - sitting above 210 for the longest duration this cycle I think. 320? The ceiling on Jan’s chart ( STAR) was 250 for all activity unless I am mistaken. Gonna have a look to see if it is currently up to date. Edit. It currently goes to 300 anyway. Would be especially nice for us Hams if SFI tops 275 next solar rotation. Unlikely but possible. Edited April 22 by hamateur 1953 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3gMike Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 1 hour ago, hamateur 1953 said: 320? The ceiling on Jan’s chart ( STAR) was 250 for all activity unless I am mistaken. Gonna have a look to see if it is currently up to date. Edit. It currently goes to 300 anyway. Would be especially nice for us Hams if SFI tops 275 next solar rotation. Unlikely but possible. I think that the difference is due to Jan using NOAA numbers rather than EISN (from SIDC / SILSO) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamateur 1953 Posted April 22 Share Posted April 22 (edited) 10 minutes ago, 3gMike said: I think that the difference is due to Jan using NOAA numbers rather than EISN (from SIDC / SILSO) That makes sense. Especially If you are correlating SFI and Sunspot Numbers. Honestly there are so darn many ways of counting sunspots, it alone could start an international incident. The Europeans have a slight edge on us given we Americans are late to the party, by a few hours. Fortunately DRAO ( NRC) is still worldwide F 10.7. Haha. Thanks Mike. Edited April 22 by hamateur 1953 Oops 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now