Buckling of the intensified field lines creates sunspot pairs as the intensified lines poke out of the surface in 'tiny' loops.
Ultimately the wrapped up magnetic field lines "unwrap" and a new cycle begins.
Or something like that...
.
Posted on 06/05/2019 4:54:27 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
Just dont suggest solar activity has anything to do with climate change. S/
I understand enough to know that the weak pull of Jupiter on our star has nothing to do with the solar cycle.
Jupiter's orbit is also slightly out of sync with the 2x11 year solar cycle.
So yeah, it's a wackadoodle theory becoming of the liberal brain trust.
For the real scoop, one needs to consider the findings and theories of Milutin Milankovitch. He outlined 3 main cycles, ranging up to 110,000 years that control the Earth's climate, its warming/cooling cycles, ice ages and warm ages.
With 1.3 MILLION earths that could fit into the Sun, the earth clearly has no influence on the 11-year sun cycle. For the record, 1000 Jupiters fit into the sun.
btt
It is not Jupiter alone; but Jupiter becoming collinear with Venus and Earth.
Buckling of the intensified field lines creates sunspot pairs as the intensified lines poke out of the surface in 'tiny' loops.
Ultimately the wrapped up magnetic field lines "unwrap" and a new cycle begins.
Or something like that...
.
These? Besides Earth?
5 Jun: UK Express: Climate change SHOCK: Solar minimum could help SLOW global warming
THE solar minimum could SLOW DOWN climate change in what might be a natural breakthrough in saving the planet.
By Sean Martin
Using computer simulations, scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, believe that a “grand solar minimum” could help slow down climate change – although not stop it completely...
NASA explains on its website: “All weather on Earth, from the surface of the planet out into space, begins with the sun.
“Space weather and terrestrial weather (the weather we feel at the surface) are influenced by the small changes the Sun undergoes during its solar cycle.”
https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1136578/weather-forecast-long-range-solar-minimum-climate-change-solar-maximum-space-weather-news
Oh! Gosh. My mistake.
I completely forgot to include Mars.
I don't know if a definite connection has been made to the sunspot cycles, but it would seem more likely that the sun is causing the droughts on earth rather than that the droughts on earth are controlling the sunspot cycles.
When the patriarchy is finally smashed, will the sunspot cycles go away?
30 May: WUWT: Scientists tackle a burning question: When will our quiet sun turn violent?
by charles the moderator
From Science Mag (LINK)
BOULDER, COLORADO—For all of February the sun is nearly spotless, a smooth circle filled in with a goldenrod crayon. It has been more than a decade since it was so lacking in sunspots—dark magnetic knots as big as Earth that are a barometer of the sun’s temperament. Below the surface, however, a radical transition is afoot. In 5 years or so, the sun will be awash in sunspots and more prone to violent bursts of magnetic activity. Then, about 11 years from now, the solar cycle will conclude: Sunspots will fade away and the sun will again grow quiet...
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/05/30/scientists-tackle-a-burning-question-when-will-our-quiet-sun-turn-violent/
5 Jun: The Hill: Trump dismisses Prince Charles’s climate concerns, says weather changes ‘both ways’
By Morgan Gstalter
President Trump during an interview broadcast early Wednesday said that he appreciates Prince Charles’s passion on climate change, but dismissed the British royal’s concerns on the topic, adding that the weather “changes both ways.”...
“I believe there’s a change in weather, and I think it changes both ways. Don’t forget, it used to be called ‘global warming,’ that wasn’t working, then it was called ‘climate change.’ Now it’s actually called ‘extreme weather,’ because with extreme weather you can’t miss,” Trump said...
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/447016-trump-dismisses-prince-charles-concerns-says-climate-changes-both
Sunspots may or may not be involved. How’s that? LOL
Solar winds crashing into the upper atmosphere don’t create heat. At this point, there seems to be no hard answer to your question.
But He did do it.
“Momma, why is it raining?”
“It rains when Jesus cries, dear.”
“Why is Jesus crying, Momma?”
“It’s probably something you did.”
I really doubt this. The planets are tiny specks compared to the sun. This is like suggesting that the weight of a few fleas can rearrange a horse’s mane.
If we assume that Jupiter's effect is gravitational, then it somehow has an impact on the magnetic environment on the sun. Let's hypothesize that the effect is to slightly increase the magnetic field magnitude.
This increase in magnitude would happen regardless of whether the polarity of the field is positive or negative, thus introducing a perturbation with a period of roughly 11 years. The effect on sunspots, for example, may not depend upon the polarity of the field.
Now let's turn to the slight difference between 11.05 and 11.86. I will describe a mechanism that I built as part of a lab experiment.
Consider a cylindrical mass suspended from a vertical spring with the axis of the cylinder aligned with the axis of the spring. If one displaces the spring downward, for example, the spring will stretch, storing potential energy.
If one then releases the spring, the spring force will accelerate the mass upward until it reaches the original equilibrium point. The mass will then continue upward until the compression of the spring decelerates the mass to a halt. Then the compressed spring accelerates the mass downward until the mass passes the equilibrium point. At that point, the spring starts being stretched and decelerates the mass until the mass reaches the point where it was originally released.
The period of the spring mass system just described can be calculated if one knows the mass and the spring constant.
Now we complicate things a bit.
Instead of initially pulling the mass down, we rotate it around its axis. This will wind up the spring and create a restoring force that can rotate the mass back to its equilibrium point. If we choose the diameter of the cylindrical mass and the stiffness of the spring just right, we can get the frequency of the oscillatory behavior of the torsional spring mass system to be quite close to the frequency of the vertical spring mass system.
For example, lets choose a mass and spring constant that results in a vertical oscillation of 12 cycles per second. Let's choose the diameter of the mass and the stiffness of the spring to get a torsional oscillation of 11 cycles per second.
What I have just described is a system of two, coupled oscillators consisting of one spring and one mass.
If we set this system oscillation by pulling downward on the mass and releasing it, we will see the result of the coupling. Initially, the system behaves as a vertical oscillator. But each time the mass moves up or down, it twists the spring a little bit. Eventually, all of the energy put into the vertical oscillator will be translated to the torsional oscillator.
At this point, each time the mass rotates clockwise or counterclockwise, it stretches or compresses the spring a little bit. Eventually, all of the energy that flowed into the torsional oscillator will return to the vertical oscillator.
The rate at which the energy moves back and forth between the two oscillators is called the beat frequency. It is the difference between the two frequencies of oscillation. In this example, the energy transfer would occur once per second.
The actual system I built had frequencies more like 1 cycle per second for one system and 1.1 cycle per second for the other. The beat frequency is then 0.1 cycle per second. This resulted in seeing the energy move from one system to the other and back again every ten seconds.
The point of describing this system is that the fact that the two frequencies differ does not mean that they cannot interact.
The only Climate Change caused by humans is called Geo-Engineering ... look up .... no one spends billions on planes, fuel, pilots and materials without a purpose.
I couldn’t find much on it,
so the jury may still be out.
The synchronization between Jupiter's orbit and the 2x11 year solar cycle is still off, regardless.
Your theory requires not just one, but three planets to be in a precise alignment every 11 years, to prove a causal relationship. That precision does not exist.
No evidence of that the decay of the earth magnetic field is one of the things that points to a young earth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.