Spin–Orbit Coupling Between the Sun & Jovian Planets.

This Paper by I. R. G. Wilson, B. D. Carter, and I. A. Waite is now available free onliine. http://www.publish.csiro.au/?act=view_file&file_id=AS06018.pdf

wilson2008.jpg

Abstract:We present evidence to show that changes in the Sun’s equatorial
rotation rate are synchronized with changes in its orbital motion about the
barycentre of the Solar System.We propose that this synchronization is
indicative of a spin–orbit coupling mechanism operating between the
Jovian planets and the Sun. However, we are unable to suggest a plausible
underlying physical cause for the coupling. Some researchers have proposed
that it is the period of the meridional flow in the convective zone of the Sun
that controls both the duration and strength of the Solar cycle.We postulate
that the overall period of the meridional flow is set by the level of disruption
to the flow that is caused by changes in Sun’s equatorial rotation speed.
Based on our claim that changes in the Sun’s equatorial rotation rate
are synchronized with changes in the Sun’s orbital motion about the
barycentre, we propose that the mean period for the Sun’s meridional flow
is set by a Synodic resonance between the flow period (?22.3 yr), the overall
178.7-yr repetition period for the solar orbital motion, and the
19.86-yr synodic period of Jupiter and Saturn.
——————————————————————————————–

Some very interesting sections of this paper discuss changes in angular momentum and solar equatorial rotation change. I would like to see more work in this area, as there is scant amount of detail available on my searching. There must be someone working on comparing current solar differential rotation with other periods?

In another section the paper acknowledges the work done by Fairbridge & Shirley 1987 in using all of the Jovian planets to calculate angular momentum but unfortunately dont include Neptune & Uranus any further. I believe Fairbridge & Shirley were SO close in 1987 but failed to see the absolute importance of Neptune & Uranus…they had a graph like Carl’s but didnt cross check it against the planetary line ups. Incredible that they went so far but didnt go the extra step. Its now some 22 years later.

But the most important discovery by Wilson et al in this paper in my view, is their “phase locking” theory. Grand Minima type events (SSN less than 80) have happened in the past when the conjunction of Jupiter & Saturn happens before that cycle’s maximum, implying a mechanism of catch up, keeping the Jupiter/Saturn sysygies in line with solar cycles. I refer to this in other articles as “Wilson’s Law”. If SC24 peaks after March 2011 it will fit that criteria as well as SC25 if it peaks after Nov 2020. This phenomenon has always happened at or just after the “camel hump” disturbance on Carl’s graph, and begs the question: Does this phenomenon happen as a result of the major disturbance to the angular momentum or is that just coincidence? To test this I might plot all the sysygies and cycle max’s on Carl’s Graph.

UPDATE: below is a graph showing J+S sysygies with sunspot peaks, Note: pre 1700 solar cycle maxima is derived geomagnetic aa proxy figures, click on the graph for a larger image.

ssbscmax11.jpg
Ian’s work has answered some of my questions and explains why 1830 didnt invoke further Grand Minimum action, also why 1880 (SC12) was low during higher angular momentum, Its obvious if the aa records are correct that we have a higher frequency of early J+S sysygies with the higher angular momentum caused by N+U.
Black dots are J+S together, Blue dots J+S opposed, and Red dots are solar cycle maxima…..reduced solar activity occurs if we get a black or blue dot in between cycle minimum and before cycle maximum

Geoff.

Advertisements

14 comments on “Spin–Orbit Coupling Between the Sun & Jovian Planets.

  1. It’s definitely interesting. You would think that someone with a really big computer could put in all the planets orbits and do the math, compare the center of solar system mass to the solar cycles we have good data on.

    It may work like some giant sized gravity stirrer of the sun’s plasma.

  2. A question for Ian: In your paper you discuss the phase locking theory and the possibility of phase return required because of an 8:9 resonance between the J+S period and sunspot cycles. During the Sporer and Maunder minima, the length of grand minima suggests many occurrences of “phase catastrophe” along with many early J+S sysygies. This would suggest too many “corrections”. Could it be possible that these over corrections are due to the once in perhaps 7000 years occurrence of very high angular momentum happening during these minima?

  3. This paper does not try to answer the grand minima question. We deferred to Fairbridge and Shirley on this one.

    However, there is one possible explanation that is mentioned in our paper that might go part way to answering the question.
    paper. Our basic argument is that solar activity is being driven by a phase-locked resonance. When the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn closest to solar maximum happens after solar maximum – the planetary driving mechanism is in resonance with the meridional flow in the Sun’ convective layer. When the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn closest to solar maximum happens before solar maximum – you have a phase catastrophe and solar activity dies down. We have speculated that this is because the planetary driving mechanism in no longer in resonance with the meridional flow an it is in fact disrupting that flow.

    We speculate further that when the Sun looses phase-lock with the planetary driving mechanism – it results in a lengthening of the period of the meridional flow (and hence a lengthening of the subsequent solar cycles) and that this lengthening in the period of the solar cycle continues until a phase-lock is reestablished – usually after after 1 Hale Cycle ~ 20 – 30 years).

    It is possible that, for reasons as yet unknown, that it may take two to three Hale Cycles to reestablish phase-lock – producing the grand minima. More details on this discussion can be found at the end of page 7 and and the start of page 8 of our paper.

  4. Really? How far away is Jupiter from the earth, or even the sun. Your argument seems that these big planets can have an influence upon the sun’s dynamics but I feel the distances are too great, even when the planet are in conjunction. Jupiter is a long way away.Like far . We’re not talking about a trip to the shops here. What about the ferocious winters of 1910,1911,1912 ? Where was Jupiter then? or even in the 1960’s when the sea froze in Britain? No, it doesn’t answer the whole question, its just a small part of the equation. I would think that one could make arguments for the influence of the whole solar system or even arms of galaxies , and where do you stop? If you see a galaxy turn, then it’s obvious .The butterfly effect.In the end, it’s chaotic.
    We’ve just come out of a grand maxima. Were Jupiter and Saturn and Uranus or Neptune at the beach? I think not. Gravity is a weak force. I would think magnetism would have more influence over these distanbces. This is more probable, given that Uranus was impacted by a comet not so long ago, and perhaps we are seeing the magnetic impact on the sun and earth now.The magnetic fields are all induced.

    REPLY: Not the most intelligent post, but from little things big things grow. But to answer your half serious questions…Its more about angular momentum not gravity, and in the early 1900’s there wasnt much of that around, N+U were at the beach as you quite rightly observed. But let me try to educate you, I am probably wasting my time, but the cooling off around SC20 was a direct result of N+U giving up their beach life and getting serious, but I suspect you might find that hard to grasp.

    I wouldnt call recent times grand maxima, that is still to come.

  5. Richard; Winters of 1910, 1911, 1912 in the UK had amongst the highest December temperatures for the last 100yrs, very ferocious! I do though suspect that electro-magnetic connections between the planets and the Sun could be of more importance and influence than gravitational factors. Partly because of the strength of the effect of Mars in certain configurations producing very pronounced positive anomalies in global temperature, which does not make much sense from a gravitational point of view, and strange positional relationships between the inner planets and the four large Jovian planets, that work clearly at `magnetic` angles, and suggest complete opposite polarity of Jupiter and Saturn. My very first post on this site suggests some of these positional relationship polarities.
    I will give another example here by means of the 5 most important bodies: with Saturn opposite Jupiter and Uranus, an Earth/Venus conjunct will have to be in line with J,S and U to produce a positive anomaly, while with J opposite S+U, the E/V conjunct will have to be square to J,S and U to produce a +ve anomaly. Curious!!
    An E/V conjunct square to J+S opposite U, produces one of the coldest conditions on the records and marks freezing of major rivers such as the Euphrates and Nile, as well as many Thames freezing`s
    Seeing this relationship between inner and outer planets, reveals what is really at play through the MWP and LIA, and the return periods of all bodies, rather than just the four Jovian, maps climatic and solar conditions ,and cycles, properly.

  6. this comment is from lgl….there is a problem when multiple web addresses are posted in a comment.

    1. The Sun’s velocity around the barycenter is not constant.
    2. When a body moving in an arc accelerates it’s rotation speed decreases. When it decelerates it’s rotation increases.
    3. If the body is plasma/liquid/gaseous this will give barotropic instability.
    This instability may start deep into the sun, then there will be a delay before it reaches the surface.

    http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/260/5115/1778
    http://einstein.atmos.colostate.edu/~mcnoldy/spintank/
    http://einstein.atmos.colostate.edu/~mcnoldy/spintank/btrop_instab.mpg

    brgds
    lgl

  7. I noticed that J opposite S January 1892 is slightly before C13 maximum, any comment?

    REPLY: Looks like I have the blue dot in the wrong spot…should be later, I will fix. That will comply with “Wilson’s Law” now and is about right with SC13 SSN being in the 80’s.

  8. The syzygy is 1892.1 and maximum is 1894.1, SSN smoothed monthly mean max. of 87.9 is not that low compared to say C5+6, and apart from a cold start to 1895, there is no climatic sign of cooling from this event, unlike C12.

    REPLY: SC5 & SC6 were part of a reasonable AM disturbance, so they are naturally low. Ian suggests a figure of below 80 SSN if the requirements are met, which is very close. SC12 looks to be affected by the remaining weak disturbance of the Dalton cycle (they come in three’s most times) with SC13 completing the usual 2 cycles of low SSN if following “Wilson’s Law”. Climate is a secondary outcome with its usual lags and compensating forces, I wouldn’t link them that closely.

  9. Some of the red dots (sunspot maximum dates) are way off on the graph, 1649, 1660, 1718. Why is there no yellow ring around 1892/4? (Jupiter opposite Saturn 1892, C13 max. 1894)

    ftp://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/STP/SOLAR_DATA/SUNSPOT_NUMBERS/maxmin.new

    Also the astronomical center of C25 is around 2026, and so is rather a long time after the 2020 Jupiter/Saturn conjunct.

    REPLY: 1718 looks about right on my graph, and as stated I have used aa records pre 1700. The sunspot records during this era are not reliable and basing an argument on this is pointless.

    Who knows what will transpire during SC25, more fun to come. The yellow ring will be updated.

  10. You could easily put in the red dots for sunspot cycle maximums around 1649 and 1660. We can tell were they are approximately by the J/E/V syzygies.

    REPLY: I prefer to use the aa records pre 1700. The syzygy method is still unvalidated theory.

  11. Can I see your aa data please?

    REPLY: I have had a disk crash unfortunately and I have lost the link. If you have aa data that does not agree feel free to post.

  12. Thanks for your taking the time to answer the comments by Richard this past January.

    He seems not to understand the mechanics very well, but it was kind of you to take the time to “educate” him in more simple terms.

    I teach Computer Science for a state technical college in Ohio, and use a number of technical, science related sites that are linked through http://www.icecap.us at the beginning of every class.

    Although my students are usually Freshmen, probably in an Audio/Visual program, I use sites like yours to open my class to the wonders of our universe, and the scientists that “lead the charge”.

    My goal is to provide career ideas and options that most of the students had never considered.

    When you take the time to provide a simpler explanation, it is easier for both myself and especially the class to follow your thoughts.

    They have become enthralled by the ideas of running video feeds from a Mars Rover, a Cassini or even the sunspot counts and Solar Cycles from satellites.

    Instead of Global Warming being blamed on Cow burps, they can see that science can indeed unravel the mysteries of life.

    Thanks again for being kind to those who have little interest in the truth, for those of us who enjoy the learning opportunities are also out there.

  13. Pingback: Ainda Tudo Normaç « Silfistelos – Blog

  14. I believe that there is pretty good scientific proof that the sun is headed to a quiet mode. It may be a grand minimum or a regular cycle minimum of shorter duration. I am curious if there is correlating data based on historical records either in observation (sunspot counts) or c14 from tree ring examinations, ice layer sampling or other data which would point to which type of minimum should take place based on the activity on the sun over the last couple of years. We have data for the locations of the large planets over time, so maybe there is a smoking gun that will point to what is likely to happen. Does the length of cycles 23& 24, give us clues? It seems that we should be able to observe phenominum on the surface of the sun which would match up with how orbital affects from the planets disturbs the currents on the sun. Bill

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s