The sun follows the rhythm of the planets

SpaceDaily.com ^ | May 30, 2019 | "Staff writers"

[dhs12345]

Moving charge creates a mag field. Faraday’s law. Or was it Maxwell?

[Alas Babylon!]

I believe the work of the famous Danish solar scientist, Professor Henrik Svensmark, in his seminal book, The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate, wrote of this.

He basically stated the lessening of the solar wind would mean more cosmic radiation reaching Earth, and thus causing cloud formation, which then enhances albedo, and less warmth from the Sun to the Earth.

https://www.amazon.com/Chilling-Stars-New-Theory-Climate/dp/1840468661

[dhs12345]

Faraday. Maxwell’s is the relationship between E and M fields.

[Reily]

Excellent book!

[dhs12345]

And in Earths atmosphere. The ionosphere. Charged particles flowing everywhere. Creating Mag fields and reacting to them. Would be interesting if someone modeled the whole system. Which is the cause and which is the effect?

[Wonder Warthog]

"For magnetic dipoles like the sun, field strength decreases as the inverse cube of the distance. This means that the sun’s magnetic field is extremely weak, almost nonexistent, at earth’s distance. Whatever effect it has on earth is negligible."

As a spectroscopist, I'm well aware of the inverse-square law.....BUT "extremely weak" is NOT zero, and without studying the possibility we don't KNOW that it is "negligible". Lots of things have been "assumed to be negligible", and later found not to be.

[Svartalfiar]

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.

Not at all. Earth is hitting the point every year. if Jupiter oscillates every 11 years, and Venus is every 5.5, that results in the same setup once every 11 years.
You can pick ANY setup of multiple bodies, and they will return to that setup cyclically. It may be shorter or longer, but eventually it will happen. And, it doesn't even have to be whole numbers. They can all add up to the same setup, just rotated 45° and it would have the same result.

[Windflier]

Earth is hitting the point every year. if Jupiter oscillates every 11 years, and Venus is every 5.5, that results in the same setup once every 11 years.

None of those planets' orbits are precisely divisible by 11 years.

In other words, they're all in somewhat different positions in relation to the sun every 11 years. They don't fall into the same alignment at either the solar minimum, OR the solar maximum.

The spatial relationships between these four bodies is going to be different every time Jupiter swings around.

[Svartalfiar]

Jupiter’s year is equal to 11.86 Earth years.
Venus’s year is 224.7 days, or .616 Earth years.
This means that Jupiter and Venus line up 19 times every Jupiter year. Earth, obviously, lines up with Jupiter 11 times. It’s not that unlikely that all these orbits will line up decently often (about every 11 years), especially with two of the planets having much faster orbits. Calculating the math is more of a pain than I really feel like doing. Plus it’s been a looong time for me.

Yes, they aren’t divisible by 11 years, but that’s just an approximation. I think the actual event is 11.05 years, so that would mean the event occurs 93% of the way through Jupiter’s year, so it would be at a different angle from the sun each time. Also, if you divide 11.05 by Venus’s orbit (.6156), you get 17.9499, which means Venus is pretty close to that position for the 18th time in that time frame. Earth the 11th time, and Jupiter the .93th time.

Now, I’m not saying this has anything to do with the sun cycle (and I rather doubt it), but the math does seem to work with the time frames for them to line up. Why they pick those specific planets though, who knows.

[Windflier]

Jupiter’s year is equal to 11.86 Earth years. Venus’s year is 224.7 days, or .616 Earth years. This means that Jupiter and Venus line up 19 times every Jupiter year. Earth, obviously, lines up with Jupiter 11 times.

The author contends that it's the positions of the planets that causes solar minimums and maximums. This is not possible unless the planets are in precisely the same spatial relationship every 11 years, which does not happen.

The positions of the planets have nothing to do with our sun's output. Nothing at all. The sun itself has a heartbeat (if you will).

[lizma2]

bkmk

[Reily]

No we have rotating iron core that does that.

[dhs12345]

So the suns mag field has no interaction with the Earth’s mag field? Including inducing a current in the earth’s core.

[Reily]

Didn’t say that!
Just that its not the source.

[dhs12345]

Flipping, moving Earths mag field = low sun spot activity?

[Reily]

Sunspots are a solar phenomenon!

[Reily]

Changes in the sun’s magnetic field by changes in internal physics and plasma movement create sunspots (Or seem to...they’re a big mystery!). Lies or low number of sunspots less solar window & weakened field strength.

The sun is a dynamic place it only looks placid!

[dhs12345]

But the Suns mag field envelopes the Earth.

[dhs12345]

Sun spots are indication of the Suns mag field. Fewer means a lower mag field.

[dhs12345]

Not unlike a transformer with the Earths metal core being the transformer core. Sun and the Earth. Don’t the Suns mag field lines envelope the Earth.