Anthony Watts from WUWT has been harping on about the AP index step change during late 2005 nearly as long as me in regard to my own solar theory. But there are other events and data that seem to correspond very closely.
I have commented on the solar Angular Momentum change that occurs at the same time previously, but today while researching the “L&P Effect” I came across some amazing graphs. The graphs come from a presentation from Nagovitsyn, Pevtsov and Livingston (Bill) that I think displays Russian CRAO spot data that shows all sunspot size groups also experience a step change around late 2005.
All four spot sizes reverse their current trends at late 2005 as if a flip was switched.
Now lets look further at the AM and solar path graphs of the same time frame.
Late 2005 the Sun enters its perturbed orbit about the SSB, this orbit is unusual and only occurs during solar slowdown. This has not happened since SC20 which was a weak cycle but the AM perturbation was late and weak. Before that we need to go to the Dalton Minimum cycles. If we look at Carl’s graph the unusual solar perturbation is also seen around late 2005.
The AMP event shown above is what caused the orbit change, too many coincidences going on here perhaps?
Landscheidt Cycles Research 
Pingback: Confirmation of Cold Grand Solar Minimum | Musings from the Chiefio
Pingback: Solar System: Holocene Lawler Events | MalagaBay
Hi Geoff,
Nice blog. I have a question.
In the weak solar cycles during the Dalton minimum (SC5 – SC7), the solar peak seems to have come unusually late, 6 – 7 years after the start of the cycle, rather than the more common 4 years (based on monthly smoothed sunspots data SIDC).
If the current cycle is similar than would we expect the same?
A solar peak is now predicted for 2013, but based on these examples it could be delayed by 2 years.
Did Landscheidt mention anything about this? Or any link where this has been discussed?
Thanks
Danny
Hi Danny, thanks for your interest. I am not sure the Dalton cycles were so long to the top, the records for SC5 are a bit scattered. It is possible the first cycle had an early peak if we look at the Group Sunspot Number (which had more observers) and SC24 could also do the same. SC6 doesn’t look all that different in timing but is low overall. I think the lower cycles in general tend to have flatter tops purely because they are not ramping up.
Landscheidt to my knowledge did not comment on this, perhaps the data from the last grand minimum is not quite reliable enough to form conclusions.
Geoff
Thanks for quick response. I already suspected that the data from 200 years ago may be a bit unreliable.
Basically I had taken all weak cycles with a max SSN below 100 (SC1, SC5, SC6, SC7,SC10, SC12, SC13, SC14, SC16) and found they averaged 137 months long, with an average peak after 63 months.
The strong cycles (max SSN above 100) averaged 129 months long with an average peak after 44 months.
The weaker cycles being longer may partially explain why they peak later, but we can see this later peak in weak cycles as recently as in SC16, so maybe there is something to it.
Anyway, with only 23 fully observed cycles it is hard to make any statistical conclusions, so I guess I’ll just have to watch and see what happens in SC24.
REPLY:We are approaching 80 months right now so it seems we may have passed cycle max??
Yes the data during the last grand minimum is weak, but the cycles that you have researched are mainly normal cycles. My research suggests that the first cycle of a grand minimum is “special” as it is the only cycle that experiences the AMP event or huge perturbation of Angular Momentum. All other cycles are likely to be different.
Pingback: Il ciclo di 1350 anni e gli eventi Lawler nell’olocene -2°parte- | New Ice Age
Great stuff, how did I ever miss this site over the last 12 years. I am an amateur, a science enthusiast. Here is my most important idea of the concept that the sun drives temperature shifts on Earth by causing shifts in the ENSO regions from warm to cool. … https://goldminor.wordpress.com/2020/01/17/sun-enso-atmospheric-temps-correlation/
Also of importance, as I put my mind into the climate debate back in 2008 I gradually arrived at the conclusion after several years that the shift points of the climate were cyclical, and about 30 + years in length. I arrived at this by studying multiple temperature/solar/ocean graphs. My eye saw the grouping of the cyclic pattern like this, from 1885/86 to 1915/16 cooling, from 1915/16 to 1946/47 warming, from 1946/47 to 1976/77 cooling, and lastly/currently 1976/77 to 2006/07 warming. I have been promoting this outlook for the last 9 to 10 years as that is what my mind saw when studying the best graphs produced by science. I read graphs very well despite my not completing my education.
I could not help but feel a bit of excitement to see how Landscheidt also sees that step change in 2005. My above estimation of the climate shift points was always an approximation. Thus my stating a shift point as several years in time, as a range of time. A better approximation for the shift points would be that the range runs in years ending in 5/6/7. Don’t ask me why. This is what I see when cross comparing the graphs of solar,ocean/atmosphere.
I made a successful forecast for the 3.4 region at the beginning of this year, 2020. That forecast was verified at the end of April when temps in the 3.4 region plummeted. I intend to prove this year that excess sunspots in a given hemisphere of the sun directly controls temp shifts in the 3.4 region/Pacific Ocean. I have always suspected that the likely driver for this solar phenomenon was based on planetary alignments, a subject of which I hold scant understanding; but I have read the thoughts of others who placed value in the idea. I think that they have always been spot on with the concept. So I hope that this concept of mine may prove useful to those who view the planets as being key to the puzzle of how/why solar phenomenon drives the climate of the Earth.