Cabrol, if the Earth was doing alone? Holocaust denial?

Warming and Climate Change: causes, consequences, analysis ... Debate on CO2 and other greenhouse gas.
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 01/07/08, 18:54

Remundo wrote:Well then more reason to do solar : Cheesy:


Ben no you saw how it will fall after 2012? : Cheesy:

Image

Otherwise I thought that predict was reserved for clairvoyance ...
For me a scientist does not predict but plans ... well I quibble ... : Cheesy:

The article is interesting and we must remember this:

Current geomagnetic activity tells us what the solar cycle will be like in 6 or 8 years "

(...)

According to their analyzes, the next solar maximum should peak at 2010, with a number of 160 spots, plus or minus 25. This would make it one of the most violent solar cycles of the last 50, one of the most powerful of all time.


Image
The peaks in geomagnetic activity (in red) predict the intensity of the solar maxima (in black) with more than 6 years in advance
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 01/07/08, 19:12

http://www.cidehom.com/science_at_nasa.php?_a_id=242

But a few years ago, Dikpati realized that the key to the mystery was a sort of treadmill on the Sun's surface.

We have an equivalent of this phenomenon on Earth, the great oceanic treadmill, made famous by the disaster movie the day after. It is a network of currents that carry water and heat from one ocean to another. The argument of the film is that the oceanic treadmill stops suddenly which plunges the earth's climate into chaos.

On the Sun, we also observe a current, but no water of course. Here, what is transported is ionized gas, that is to say electrically charged. It flows in a loop from the equator to the solar poles and so on. Just as the great ocean conveyor belt conditions the climate on Earth, its solar equivalent would be the key to "solar weather". In particular, it influences the sunspot cycle.

(...)

"Historical series show that intense solar cycles are growing faster than small ones," he points out. "I expect to see the first spots of the next cycle appear from the end of 2006 or during 2007, and the maximum reached between 2010 and 2011".

Who is right ? The future will tell. But what is certain is that a large-scale storm is getting ready.
0 x
User avatar
I Citro
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5129
Registration: 08/03/06, 13:26
Location: Bordeaux
x 11




by I Citro » 01/07/08, 21:06

Christophe wrote:http://www.cidehom.com/science_at_nasa.php?_a_id=242

"I expect to see the first spots of the next cycle appear at the end of 2006 or during 2007, and the maximum reached between 2010 and 2011".

Who is right ? The future will tell. But what is certain is that a large-scale storm is getting ready.


Do we know if his "predictions" for 2006-2007 have been verified? :?:

I'm a little scared when big heads lay this kind of postulate and no one has recalculated or checked them ...
It reminds me of cyclical financial analysis graphs ... which in use have proven to be as effective as "martingales" to win the lottery or the trifecta ... :frown:
0 x
User avatar
delnoram
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 1322
Registration: 27/08/05, 22:14
Location: Mâcon-Tournus
x 2




by delnoram » 01/07/08, 21:36

These cycles exist, they are in number of 3 (I think, am not specialist, that reader :D ).
the one we are interested in being the shortest, I guess the checks were done.

That said it is only one element among many others whose longer cycle, greenhouse gases that delay cooling by keeping the heat ... I've been good so far? :|

little link
0 x
"Thinking should not it be taught in school rather than to make learning by heart the facts that are not all proven?"
"It's not because they are likely to be wrong they are right!" (Coluche)
User avatar
crispus
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 401
Registration: 08/09/06, 20:51
Location: Rennes
x 1




by crispus » 01/07/08, 22:58

Hello,

But a few years ago, Dikpati realized that the key to the mystery lay in some sort of conveyor belt on the surface of the Sun. [...] Here, what is transported is ionized gas, that is to say electrically charged. It flows in a loop from the equator to the solar poles and so on. Just as the great ocean conveyor belt conditions the climate on Earth, its solar equivalent would be the key to "solar weather".

Funny as the terms are chosen: we speak of ocean current, but never of electric current, and yet what is an "ion flow"? Quite in tune with a recent reading: the theory of "the electric universe"
The universe can be shown to consist almost entirely of electrically active plasma. The electric force is 39 orders of magnitude greater than gravity. [^ 10 39]

Roughly a purely mechanistic approach to space, not taking into account the electrical interactions is doomed to failure. This is also my point of view on the Pantone phenomenon : Mrgreen:
Plasma cosmology does not require mathematical inventions, such as the Big Bang, dark matter, dark energy, and black holes.

My favorite extract:
As gravitation-oriented astronomers are familiar with moving masses, they rarely think about charges. What is not familiar, which has no conceptual framework for understanding, is often not even perceived. So :

they think of moving the charged particles of the Sun as a "wind" instead of an electric current.

They think of charged particles falling on a planet or a moon as a "rain" instead of an electric shock.

They think of charged particles moving along magnetic fields as "jets" instead of a field aligned on an electric cable.

They think of abrupt changes in density and velocity of charged particles as a "frontal shock" instead of a double layer that can absorb electrical energy and even explode.

They can not see the forest of electrical particles hidden by trees from the mass of particles. They are lost in a plasma universe, seeing charged particles in motion but thinking in terms of gas kinetics and gravitation.

It took a while for Galileo's vision to prevail, how long will it take for guys like Alton Harp to be rehabilitated? This researcher was denied access to any laboratory for blaspheming against the big bang, compromising clichés in support.(See towards the middle of the list of "heretics")

Halton Arp wrote:It is often better not to know something wrong than to know a lot of things right.
An unproven hypothesis disguised as a known fact will predispose a scientist to conceal any evidence to the contrary or to hide it behind a muddle of conjectures.

Slightly HS, but it's too good! : Lol:
0 x
User avatar
Woodcutter
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4731
Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
x 2




by Woodcutter » 09/07/08, 22:57

delnoram wrote:
Christophe wrote: we must distinguish 2 things in the problem of warming:

has his causes
b) its consequences

If the point a) can be the subject of controversies or countervailing (more or less become sterile since the time), the point b) seems to him indisputable: lThe planet is getting hotter ... and the CO2, if it is not the trigger, can only AGREE the situation.


The point a) does not seem to have become so sterile as that, the sun would have entered the cycle # 24, cycle seems well gone to be the most intense since 400 years.

See article
Solar cycles, OK ...

But what is the relationship with warming? From what I could read, no link causality...
0 x
"I am a big brute, but I rarely mistaken ..."

Back to "Climate Change: CO2, warming, greenhouse effect ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 106 guests