It has been almost a year exactly. With the recent NASA news on sunspots, do you have anything new to add to this article?

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/17jun_jetstream.htm?list1065474

Also, Stanford’s Dr. Leif Svaalgard (an eminently qualified ‘solar scientist’) addressed this specific press release, and he didn’t mince words, at (scroll down or search to the first “Leif” reference):

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/17/solar-cycle-24-lack-of-sunspots-caused-by-sluggish-solar-jet-stream-returning-soon/#more-8598

He comments regularly at that site to inject some objective science — and deserves credit for restricting his comments to the subject for which he’s most qualified.

I just wished our “Bad Astronomer” picked up on what that release was really about and gave it the proper credit due, and no more….

Looks like someone got up on the wrong side of the bed. You apparently didn’t read even the first line of the press release: “Scientists from the National Solar Observatory (NSO) in Tucson, Arizona…”

This came from the NSO not NASA. And after all it is a press release – not a textbook…

* What are these currents?
* What causes them to move?
* What causes them to reappeare every 11/22 years?
* What can cause a delay?
* Does the strength of the currents influence the number/power/size of the spots? Does it influence the strength of CMEs?

I guess one can think of a lot more questions. Many secrets to reveal – science will never run out of work That’s good news!

However, the detection of the currents is good news, too. Now we have a tool to say when the spots will appear. And the detection of the current will lead to a deeper analysis in the upcoming solar cycle. I guess, the current will be watched carefully to see how it is related to the sun spots. Probably they will be able to find a connection between the current and a severe CME. THAT would be really good news, since this could lead to warnings before the CME actually erupts. We could save our technology far better with such a tool.

I’m skeptical:

Why is the current going slower? And what makes “22 degrees” latitude “critical” (other than spots appeared there at the start of a recent solar cycle….NASA & others typically use 30 degrees lattitude as the upper limit for the appearance of new sunspots). NASA, for some reason, didn’t explain anything in this release.

By the way, here’s a NASA press release from 2006 noting the slow “conveyor” within the sun: http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/10may_longrange.htm

So what’s really new [as opposed to a new measure for the same thing] in this latest release? There may be something new there, but a real explanation of what it is isn’t provided.

As for the underlying physics, Dr. M. Dikpati’s solar dynamo model basically addressed the same thing years ago (2004)–with explanations (for one of many such news releases on the model & its predictions, not to mention a number of published papers also available online, see: http://www.ucar.edu/communications/staffnotes/0404/solar.html

also see [from 2006]: http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/2006/sunspot.shtml — where they mention that this upcoming solar cycle will be delayed due to the slower flow). There’s a lot to be found, and explained, readily available using Dr. Dikpati’s name in internet searches.

There are other very similar solar dynamo models are also published; their predictions & underlying physics are debated hotly (pun intended) by the folks that make & operate satellites — as that bunch of researchers try to prepare for solar activity in thier satellite designs & operations (this is big business — too much robustness designed in adds weight to the satellite & decreases capabilties, too little and it might fail in a solar event — ultimately this is money & profits — capitalism at work).

In other words, this piece from NASA is exceptionally lame. There’s no explanation for the underlying physics given, the phyics described are not really new insights or explanations of anything — which means NASA has ballyhood what is in reality a new proxy measure for the same thing. For my tax dollars I expect more.

And I’d expect the “Bad Astronomer” & JREF Pres. to see it for what it is: Nothing from NASA other than a puff piece of fluff to create the illusion that they’re on top of this scientific area.

This explains the recent lack of sunspots. But I can’t help but wonder: why is the torsional oscillation moving more slowly than it has in the past?

Obviously we’ve peeled one layer off the onion. But as it so often happens in science, understanding something poses even more questions.

Isn’t science great!

Phil Plait for President of the United Federation of Planets!!!

The telegraph also boggles my mind.

Smartass.

Good to know about the oscillation. Here all along I thought it was my fault for buying a PST… ;^)