New NASA prediction

[Lawn Boy]

Radio silence. Well Patrick they’ve had plenty of time to look it over. I can only think of two reasons why they’re not responding. Either they think it’s not worthy of responding to or they think you’ve nailed it and they don’t want to talk about it.

[tniickck]

1 hour ago, Lawn Boy said:

Radio silence. Well Patrick they’ve had plenty of time to look it over. I can only think of two reasons why they’re not responding. Either they think it’s not worthy of responding to or they think you’ve nailed it and they don’t want to talk about it

i didnt look at it but i am sure it doesnt really differ from any other Patrick's publications. you can never predict when solar maximum will occur, so Patrick's words of "solar maximum has passed" are 90% wrong. not accusing him of lie, but these are too early conclusions

Edited January 4 by tniickck
typo, grammar

[Philalethes]

32 minutes ago, Lawn Boy said:

Radio silence. Well Patrick they’ve had plenty of time to look it over. I can only think of two reasons why they’re not responding. Either they think it’s not worthy of responding to or they think you’ve nailed it and they don’t want to talk about it.

That would be a prime example of a false dichotomy, as there could be countless other reasons for why people aren't responding to it. For example, people could simply be busy, just to name the most general case I can think of. It also comes across as a bit of a childish way to try to provoke a response, at least in my eyes.

That being said, it could definitely also be that people no longer take it that seriously after Patrick's history of claims. Perhaps you'd like to read through this thread from when it was first posted and read some of them for yourself; this post on page 5 is a decent example:

Quote

Solar max is here!

As predicted the northern field is close to flipping on January 5!

If it flipped on January 15… we have seen solar max this January…

And not long after, reinforcing that belief:

Quote

BIG NEWS!

The northern polar field has also flipped!

Both fields were negative at the height of the cycle as I stated! Normally you can’t have a higher month then this, unless something totally abnormal happens…

And then:

Quote

Working on it. Probably new thread: Solar Max has Passed!

The highest 10.7 Solar flux month of cycle 25 was in January 2023. We have several reasons for this…

1. Flipping of the two poles

2. Calculation that cycle 25 would be around 10 percent lower then cycle 24

3. The 13 month smoothed high will be before the end of 2023

Conclusion:

January 2023 was the highest Solar flux month from cycle 25

I hear Scott grinding his teeth🤔

This flux was of course surpassed shortly thereafter, and by a considerable margin too.

And on and on it goes. You'll notice that lots of us have already spent considerable time addressing pretty much the exact claims made in the article he posted, which he has posted previous versions of earlier, except used to justify entirely different times as being the "100% certain time of the Solar maximum this time!", so with that in mind perhaps it starts to become a bit clearer why people are not scrambling head over heels to respond this time around.

Also, while I generally want to avoid making matters personal, the video Aten posted in the thread, and this old short documentary on YouTube (second part here), makes it clear that Patrick has previously been engaging in a caliber of crackpottery that would make people like Ben Davidson and Frank Hoogerbeets pale in comparison, which is actually quite an achievement.

All in all I can at least speak for myself when I say that he's cried wolf too many times for me to invest a lot of time into looking into his claims anymore. Could there really be a wolf this time? Sure. Will his prophetic apocalyptic visions come to fruition at some point? Doubtful, but maybe we're all just fools who can't comprehend the ways in which his extraordinary mind transcends time.

Personally I'll stick to discussing matters I deem reasonable, and suspend judgment about the timing of the SC25 Solar maximum until in a few years when it's clear that we're past the peak(s).

[hamateur 1953]

On 1/2/2024 at 4:48 PM, Lawn Boy said:

Patrick, I look at Solen.info all the time can you point to the link that you’re talking about. 

@Lawn Boy I went to STAR ( Jans site) or Solen today.  On Jan 3 he had posted his updated assessment of where we are.  I also was unable to find this link back to Patricks data that Patrick referred to.  If you haven’t looked in a few days, Jan makes it pretty clear that, like just about everyone else involved in studying solar cycles, any attempt to declare maximum before all data is in is premature.  SC candidate for maximum  certainly. But nothing more. 

Edited January 4 by hamateur 1953

[Jesterface23]

@Patrick P.A. Geryl

By chance, for solar cycle 24, if you only used values only up until March 2013 how would that prediction have played out?

[Patrick P.A. Geryl]

Op 3/1/2024 om 01:48, Lawn Boy zei:

Patrick, I look at Solen.info all the time can you point to the link that you’re talking about. 

Last major update issued on January 4, 2024 at 04:15 UT.

Charts (* = updated daily)		Data and archive
	Solar wind (*)	Solar and geomagnetic data - last month (*)
	Electron fluence (*)	Archived daily reports and monthly data since 2003.01 (January 1, 2024)
Solar cycle	Solar cycles 23-25 (January 1, 2024)	Historical solar and geomagnetic data charts 1954-2006 (April 5, 2007)
	Cycle 24-25 progress (January 1, 2024)	Noon SDO sunspot count 1K image / 4K (*)
	Solar cycles 1-24 (July 1, 2020)	POES auroral activity level [October 2009 - December 2012]
	Comparison of cycles 21-25 (January 1, 2024)	3rd SSN Workshop, Tucson, 2013
	Comparison of cycles 12-14, 16, 24-25 (January 1, 2024)	4th SSN Workshop, Locarno, 2014
	Solar polar fields vs. solar cycles (January  3, 2024)	Cycle 25 spots (final update December 25, 2019)
	Solar cycles 24-25 transition using 365d smoothing	Research: Solar Cycle 25 Started on November 17, 2019 with 365 Days Smoothing Calculating the Strength of Solar Cycle 25 Using 365-day Smoothing (new)

 

See the red NEW

44 minuten geleden, tniickck zei:

i didnt look at it but i am sure it doesnt really differ from any other Patrick's publications. you can never predict when solar maximum will occur, so Patrick's words of "solar maximum has passed" are 90% wrong. not accusing him of lie, but these are too early conclusions

My prediction from January is not that far out of line.

The observed 10.7 flux was at it highest and the high resolution almost.

above that I stated that the 13-month smoothed max would occur when the average polar field switches. That happened in May… very close to June!

8 minuten geleden, Jesterface23 zei:

@Patrick P.A. Geryl

By chance, for solar cycle 24, if you only used values only up until March 2013 how would that prediction have played out?

Answered on my website.

[Jesterface23]

13 minutes ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said:

Answered on my website.

We don't know your website.

[Sam Warfel]

30 minutes ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said:

The observed 10.7 flux was at it highest

Still grasping at straws, it will probably go higher when we actually reach the peak of SC25

[Patrick P.A. Geryl]

19 minuten geleden, Jesterface23 zei:

We don't know your website.

Push on link Solen

[tniickck]

i have a vague feeling that Patrick is here to advertise his site and research) 

[Jesterface23]

35 minutes ago, Patrick P.A. Geryl said:

Push on link Solen

Is that your website or just a place you can share your research?

 

Then I'll loop back around to the question at hand,

"By chance, for solar cycle 24, if you only used values only up until March 2013 how would that prediction have played out?"

[hamateur 1953]

4 hours ago, Philalethes said:

That would be a prime example of a false dichotomy, as there could be countless other reasons for why people aren't responding to it. For example, people could simply be busy, just to name the most general case I can think of. It also comes across as a bit of a childish way to try to provoke a response, at least in my eyes.

That being said, it could definitely also be that people no longer take it that seriously after Patrick's history of claims. Perhaps you'd like to read through this thread from when it was first posted and read some of them for yourself; this post on page 5 is a decent example:

And not long after, reinforcing that belief:

And then:

This flux was of course surpassed shortly thereafter, and by a considerable margin too.

And on and on it goes. You'll notice that lots of us have already spent considerable time addressing pretty much the exact claims made in the article he posted, which he has posted previous versions of earlier, except used to justify entirely different times as being the "100% certain time of the Solar maximum this time!", so with that in mind perhaps it starts to become a bit clearer why people are not scrambling head over heels to respond this time around.

Also, while I generally want to avoid making matters personal, the video Aten posted in the thread, and this old short documentary on YouTube (second part here), makes it clear that Patrick has previously been engaging in a caliber of crackpottery that would make people like Ben Davidson and Frank Hoogerbeets pale in comparison, which is actually quite an achievement.

All in all I can at least speak for myself when I say that he's cried wolf too many times for me to invest a lot of time into looking into his claims anymore. Could there really be a wolf this time? Sure. Will his prophetic apocalyptic visions come to fruition at some point? Doubtful, but maybe we're all just fools who can't comprehend the ways in which his extraordinary mind transcends time.

Personally I'll stick to discussing matters I deem reasonable, and suspend judgment about the timing of the SC25 Solar maximum until in a few years when it's clear that we're past the peak(s).

I had to laugh because crackpottery was a new one I hadn’t heard yet.  Bravo @Philalethes

Thank you @Philalethesfor reposting the link that @Atenprovided.  It gave me a deeper insight into his psychology.  Unfortunately painful lessons are a fact of life, thankfully most of us learn from those before rejoining the public arena of ideas…..haha Mike/Hagrid. 

[arjemma]

I just feel that this is a situation of "if you guess on enough dates you will eventually be right". It feels like guesses without good scientific data to back it up. Also there is no way for us to know in the middle of a solar maximum when the peak arrived. When we are studying solar cycles we always go back in time to analyze. Analyzing a cycle in the middle of it is really hard and currently we don't have good enough science to do that. It's therefore rather impossible to say that "today is the peak", cause you don't know how next week or month will play out.

I hadn't watched those youtube videos before so now when I have watched them I became even more skeptical. Patrick, how could you even sit there and tell people to take sui*ide pills or sleeping pills and make it seem like the end of the world is about to happen? Wow, I'm speechless honestly. I hope that you have grown and moved away from such behaviors. Fearmongering like that to create anxiety in others is not cool.

Either way, we don't know when the solar maximum peak is now when we are in the middle of it. We will know after a good while has passed so we can look back and analyze it. Jan has it as a candidate but he is not certain and therefore goes out in forums and media to say that solar maximum for sure has passed. When you cry wolf too many times people will stop listening and stop taking you seriously. Good scientists knows this and that's why they lay low. Good scientist is also labeling things as "theory/theories" for a reason, cause it is.

[Lawn Boy]

 I came here for the public arena of ideas. And that’s what I was encouraging in my previous post. And now that Phil has laid some heavy ideas on me about Patrick I’m ready to move on to my next question. Which ironically is on the same page that Patrick pointed out to me earlier. Jan’s graph of the progress of cycles 24 and 25 

The smooth numbers for the northern and southern hemispheres are very different in each cycle. In 24 there’s a lot of separation between the two. And they both peek along with the peaks of the cycle. Overlapping in between. Whereas in 25 they are running side-by-side and have overlapped once already. I wonder what this tells us about the difference in these two cycles.

Also, are there graphs like this for previous cycles that we can use for comparison?

Edited January 4 by Lawn Boy
Additional question

[hamateur 1953]

Excellent question @Lawn Boy!  I was in the process myself wondering about asymmetrical development in hemispheres. SC 20 was hugely lopsided btw. The butterfly diagram of it shows it very well.  There are cycles where one hemisphere will lag in 10.7 and spot development though.   There was a really in-depth diagram as well as several hypotheses as to what might be in operation on the STCE website under cycle 25 tracking.  I’d post a link, but that page is still unavailable or was two days ago.  Sander is Belgian, maybe he has friends there and can find out whazzup.  It’s definitely the best consolidation of relevant information regarding cycles that is readable for the average dude or dudette.   And we have a great tool you can use in the pulldown menu. Select “ historical cycles” and you can overlay etc all 25 cycles.  Have fun!  Mike/ Hagrid. 

Edited January 4 by hamateur 1953
SC pulldown

[3gMike]

On 1/4/2024 at 10:04 PM, Lawn Boy said:

 I came here for the public arena of ideas. And that’s what I was encouraging in my previous post. And now that Phil has laid some heavy ideas on me about Patrick I’m ready to move on to my next question. Which ironically is on the same page that Patrick pointed out to me earlier. Jan’s graph of the progress of cycles 24 and 25 

The smooth numbers for the northern and southern hemispheres are very different in each cycle. In 24 there’s a lot of separation between the two. And they both peek along with the peaks of the cycle. Overlapping in between. Whereas in 25 they are running side-by-side and have overlapped once already. I wonder what this tells us about the difference in these two cycles.

Also, are there graphs like this for previous cycles that we can use for comparison?

I found this representation, in a slightly different form, on the SIDC website. I think that you should be able to interpret it by comparing the cycle 24 data with the graph that you posted. As you can see, the two hemispheres behave quite differently in each cycle.

 

Fairly obviously, if the two hemispheres track each other closely this will lead to a faster rise in total sunspot count, and if the tracking is sustained throughout the cycle then we might expect to see a single peak at maximum. At present it looks like the hemispheric activity in this cycle is diverging and it is still possible that we will see two peaks.