NASA solar physicist David Hathaway, Nothing is wrong with the Sun
Russ Steele
The sun is behaving normally says NASA solar physicist David Hathaway in this NASA Science article.
"There have been some reports lately that Solar Minimum is lasting longer than it should. That's not true. The ongoing lull in sunspot number is well within historic norms for the solar cycle."
Hathaway has studied international sunspot counts stretching all the way back to 1749 and he offers these statistics: "The average period of a solar cycle is 131 months with a standard deviation of 14 months. Decaying solar cycle 23 (the one we are experiencing now) has so far lasted 142 months--well within the first standard deviation and thus not at all abnormal. The last available 13-month smoothed sunspot number was 5.70. This is bigger than 12 of the last 23 solar minimum values."
In summary, "the current minimum is not abnormally low or long."
Details here.
I wonder when we will know for sure that the Gore Minimum has started? Will it be Maunder or Dalton Minimum? Stay tuned, we are seeing science in action, although at the speed of drying paint.
Interesting. We now have a date when sunspot cycle 23 is different from historic norms. That is month 146. And month 146 is July 2008 if I read other web sites correctly. I'll be readung this blog closely next month.
Posted by: BillMcClure | July 11, 2008 at 05:38 PM
The good news is no one can fake the data.
Posted by: bill-tb | July 12, 2008 at 12:46 PM
I have been hearing two different things for some time. Now I have what I have been looking for.
The sun HAS exceeded its historical norms.
We should email NASA solar physicist David Hathaway and see if he wants to update his article.
David M
Posted by: David M | August 26, 2008 at 11:55 PM
Hi Russ...Great site. Just discovered it. I'm a planetary scientist (PhD, Univ of Arizona, 1977) not a solar scientist, but it seems to me the interesting issue here is not whether the current cycle is within "historic norms."
It's how the current cycle's length compares to other cycles when T's were lower, such as just before the Dalton Min.
That's what Hathaway will eventually have to comment on.
Posted by: Bruce Cordell | August 30, 2008 at 07:23 PM
Welcome Bruce,
Thanks for posting. Look forward to any contributions to the discussion. If you look at the David Archibald paper here, you will see a temperature reconstruction for the Dalton Minimum. Note it started getting cold when the spots diminished.
Posted by: Russell Steele | August 31, 2008 at 02:30 PM
Sorry Bruce, the paper link is on this page: http://ncwatch.typepad.com/dalton_minimum_returns/2008/02/archibald-paper.html
Posted by: Russell Steele | August 31, 2008 at 02:32 PM